Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Tomorrow: FBI Deadline to Give Details About January 6 Investigators; Judge Warns Attorneys for Baldoni, Lively to Stop Fighting Case in Public; NTSB Looking at Discrepancy Between Plane, Helicopter Altitudes. Aired 3:30-4p ET

Aired February 03, 2025 - 15:30   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


[15:30:00]

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: So, FBI officials have until tomorrow to tell the DOJ about everyone in the Bureau who investigated January 6th. That includes current and former employees. The DOJ is also demanding FBI personnel fill out a questionnaire detailing their specific roles investigating what happened that day.

Thousands received it and some believe the info could be used against them. But it's all happening as law enforcement -- a law enforcement group tells agents, quote, do not resign and that their removal is not voluntary.

Dan Brunner is a retired FBI special agent and the president of the Bruner-Sierra group. Also with us is John Dean, CNN contributor and former Nixon White House counsel. Thank you both for being with us.

Dan, I'm curious to get your reaction to this. I know Republican Senator Lindsey Graham said that FBI agents assigned to these J6 cases shouldn't be punished for doing their jobs. Individual agents don't get much say over what cases they work on, right?

DAN BRUNNER, RETIRED FBI SPECIAL AGENT: You're absolutely right, Boris. Individual agents on the streets, which I was a street agent for 20 years, you don't have any say. You get your orders. You get your leads. You get your investigation, your interviews from your supervisor and the supervisor will get that from the chain of command above them and thus the tasking from FBI headquarters.

So to come in after the line agents, the street agents who are just conducting their work, including the analysts, the operations specialists, those who are supporting the agents because it's not just agents who are being scrutinized here, it's FBI employees.

To do that with a broad brush, I think, is irrational. If you're going to look at executive management, that's one thing. And, you know, to -- but they need also to have a fair investigation into what happened.

If something was illegal, if something was improperly conducted, absolutely, I believe those individuals, whether they be agents, executives on the streets, if something was illegally conducted, if somebody's civil rights were violated, they should be punished appropriately. But just to blanket punishment and blanket dismiss, which is the rumors, and again, this is all rumors, if that is the way this is to be conducted, I think it's a very dangerous precedence in what could happen to the bureau as a whole in the future.

SANCHEZ: John, what do you think?

JOHN DEAN, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: I certainly agree with that analysis. We know that some of the people at the higher ranks have been told to pack up, either retire or pack up and leave. And I understand that a number of them are contemplating lawsuits, which I think are excellent.

First of all, there are procedures and they must be followed. There is due process. They're entitled to it. And I think they'll keep their jobs because all they were doing were their jobs. And I don't think these are people who were cutting corners, doing anything improper, but rather pursuing a criminal investigation of a man who ended up becoming reelected as president.

So the output of the lawsuits, it's ironic, is the very information that Donald Trump didn't want to ever have become public could very likely become public in civil lawsuits. So that would be one thing. That's my take on it.

SANCHEZ: Dan, I'm curious what you make of Donald Trump earlier today saying that only Kash Patel could restore the reputation of the FBI, not just restore it, but take it to places it'd never been before. What did you make of that?

BRUNNER: Well, I don't quite agree with that. And President Trump has made a lot of moves, which I agree with, in restructuring and, you know, bringing new blood into the government.

[15:35:00]

But bringing Kash Patel, that's one move. I don't agree with it. I think there were other candidates who were better suited. Former agents who become -- who worked for President Trump. And there were also some attorneys who would be very well qualified for the position.

Mr. Patel was before the Senate. You know, I don't quite agree with a lot of the things he said. I do agree with some things he said. But that's the question, is whether he makes -- he makes good with the statements that he made in front of the Senate and follows through with those. That's the question.

I really am concerned when Senator Booker asked him if there were going to be any repercussions, anybody getting fired or dismissed. And he quickly answered that no, nobody was going to be. And I'm obviously paraphrasing here. But, and then the very next day begins this movement by the, you know, the Department of Justice against the FBI.

I find it very difficult to believe Mr. Patel was not involved with this in discussions. So I find that, I find that difficult to believe. But hopefully he follows through with a lot of things he said to restructure the FBI. SANCHEZ: To that point, John, should a president have the ability to put people in management positions that ultimately share their view of how certain agencies should act? Are these changes part and parcel of the start of a new administration?

DEAN: There's no question a president has the executive power to get the people in the high posts that he wants. Most of these are controlled by statute. They create the agency and the position and give the president the right with the advice and consent of the Senate to make the selections.

There are about 400 political appointees in the Department of Justice and the FBI combined. It's not a lot when you figure there are about 100,000 employees there. But there is no question there is the right of the president to have management.

What is not contemplated, though, is such extraordinary changes in the thrust of the agency. Richard Nixon, the president for whom I worked, tried to politicize the FBI.

J. Edgar Hoover had been running it almost since its inception, or if not from its inception, until he died. When he died in May of 1972, Nixon put in a political crony, followed by L. Patrick Gray, first as acting director and then tried to get him confirmed.

Well, the FBI didn't like Pat Gray, didn't want to be politicized, and wasn't ready to have all of the Hoover cronies and associates booted out, if you will. So they leaked, and they leaked very effectively. In fact, they destroyed Richard Nixon with their effective leaks, all the way up to the level we know today of an assistant director leaking to The Washington Post and getting the moniker Deep Throat.

SANCHEZ: Yes. That's a fascinating historical perspective. John Dean, Dan Brunner, appreciate you both. Thanks so much.

DEAN AND BRUNNER: My pleasure.

SANCHEZ: Still to come, the drama continues. Lawyers for It Ends With Us co-stars Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni go face-to-face in court for the first time. What happened in this high-profile Hollywood case?

[15:40:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: A stern warning today from the judge overseeing the legal battle between actress Blake Lively and actor- director Justin Baldoni. During their first court hearing, the judge told their lawyers to stop making prejudicial public statements about the case. Lively is accusing Baldoni of sexually harassing her during the production of the film It Ends With Us. Baldoni has denied the claims and has filed his own lawsuit against Lively.

CNN's Elizabeth Wagmeister is with us now from Los Angeles. And Elizabeth, this hearing comes after weeks of public back and forth between Lively and Baldoni. ELIZABETH WAGMEISTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: That's right, Brianna. So this has now escalated from the court of public opinion to an actual court of law. Today, the first hearing in this incredibly public celebrity feud.

And I can't tell you how rare it is, Brianna, for two co-stars to go head-to-head like this. We typically see settlements in celebrity cases because they don't want their dirty laundry to air. They want to avoid this all for the exact reason that we have seen this play out in the public and across TikTok.

But today, the judge telling both sides, yes, you can speak to the media, but you can't make prejudicial statements. And if you do, I am going to move this trial up. So, Brianna, right now, this trial is set for March of 2026. So it is a ways of way.

But the judge today, you know, warning them and giving a stern warning that do not make prejudicial statements on either side or else there could be consequences.

KEILAR: And what is next? I mean, that's a ways off. Is there anything else before March?

[15:45:00]

WAGMEISTER: Well, look, I think the big question is, are we actually going to see these stars on trial, right? The trial date, again, has been set. But are we going to see Blake Lively and her husband, Ryan Reynolds, and Justin Baldoni take the stand and actually go through with this? And as of today, Brianna, the answer is yes.

Both attorneys for both Blake Lively and for Justin Baldoni, they have said they are ready to move full steam ahead. Today, outside of court, our colleague Nikki Brown, who was covering for us, she caught Bryan Freedman. And this is what he said.

He said, quote, my clients are devastated financially and emotionally. And he is saying that is the reason why they want to move quickly with this.

Now, I have received a statement from attorneys for Blake Lively. Here is what they tell me. Quote, The court granted our request that all attorneys in the matter actually follow the rule of law and not make any statements that could prejudice a jury. This case deals with serious allegations of sexual harassment and retaliation. We will hold the defendants accountable. And we are confident that once all the evidence is submitted in this matter, Ms. Lively will prevail.

Now, her attorney is also telling me they are ready for discovery. So both sides, Brianna, ready to go, ready to go to trial.

KEILAR: All right. Elizabeth Wagmeister, thank you so much for that.

Still to come, we're awaiting an update on salvage operations on the Potomac River. Teams are now raising pieces of the American Airlines jet that collided with an Army helicopter last week. We'll have the latest.

[15:50:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KEILAR: Officials are about to give an update on that salvage operation that's now underway by Reagan National Airport, where an Army helicopter collided with an American Airlines plane last Wednesday, killing all 67 people on board both aircraft. So far today, crews have salvaged some of the largest pieces of the regional jet. You see one of them there, an engine. They also pulled out a section of the fuselage.

SANCHEZ: Also today, U.S. Figure Skating released a tribute video underscoring the devastating toll this crash has had on their community. Twenty-eight of the 67 victims were athletes, coaches, or family members associated with U.S. Figure Skating.

Joining us now is CNN aviation analyst Peter Goelz, a former managing director of the NTSB. Peter, thank you for being with us.

There's been a discrepancy on just how high the aircraft were when this crash happened, right? The plane's data recorder showed 325 feet roughly, but air traffic controllers said they never had an indication that the helicopter went above 200 feet, and the head of the NTSB says investigators pulled data to help understand the discrepancy. What could it be?

PETER GOELZ, FORMER NTSB MANAGING DIRECTOR: Well, first, it's preliminary data, and this is -- all accident investigations are complicated, and they take some time to make sure that every piece of data that you get from the recorder, from the flight controllers is accurate and, most importantly, synced up second by second. If the helicopter could very well have been at 200 feet sometime before the accident, but we won't know until probably later this week, early next week, when they get the synchronization done and they examine all of the available information that they've got, which includes the data recorder from both aircraft and the information from the control tower.

KEILAR: Talk to us, Peter, about the data recorder or maybe the voice recorder from the Army helicopter. We're not exactly sure what it is going to show. What are the possibilities, and are we necessarily going to learn something incredibly helpful or not?

GOELZ: Well, I don't think it's going to be incredibly helpful. I think everyone has a pretty good idea that for some reason the helicopter was out of its flight control pattern, was above 200 feet. The data recorder should show us precisely how high it was, but we will know from the PSA recorder at what altitude they were, and that will be incredibly precise, and that will tell us, because the impact took place, that will tell us what the altitude of the Black Hawk was.

So I'm not sure that the information from the Black Hawk will be all that revealing. What it will show also is how the flight had been progressing. Had they been, you know, following the appropriate flight plans, had they been following the appropriate checklists.

SANCHEZ: Peter, I do wonder, as we've watched pieces of the plane get removed from the Potomac today, if you've noted anything, if you've had any thoughts or questions about what you've seen, parts of fuselage coming out of the water there.

GOELZ: No, it's just, it is -- I've been involved in a number of open water recoveries, and this kind of recovery in a river, even though the depth of the river is relatively shallow, eight or nine feet, it has real challenges. The visibility is virtually zero.

[15:55:00]

It has this silt-laden bottom, which means that it gets stirred up and the visibility goes to absolutely zero, and it's cold, and there's a current and there was a tremendous amount of dangerous torn wreckage to deal with. I mean, I don't -- I admire the divers enormously who are taking part in this recovery. It's going to take some time, but there's nothing I've seen from the lift so far that breaks with any of the narrative that we've heard so far.

KEILAR: Yes, it's incredible what we're watching, to think that they were able to get those tethers underneath this part of the fuselage to get it up. They've got a lot of hard work to do. Peter Goelz, thank you so much. We really appreciate it.

GOELZ: Thank you.

KEILAR: And we'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: This next story could use the expertise of someone like Maury Povich. A mystery is unfolding in Louisiana, an immaculate shark conception, if you will.

[16:00:00]

This is a shark pup, Yoko, and the Shreveport Aquarium says it was born inside a tank with no male sharks, zero males, just two females, but it's a bizarre birth that could have been a case of delayed fertilization or a phenomenon called parthenogenesis, which happens when an embryo develops from an egg without fertilization.

KEILAR: The aquarium says it plans to do genetic testing to get to the bottom of it, but either way, in the famous words of Dr. Ian Malcolm in Jurassic Park, life finds a way. Or more accurately, he says life, uh, finds a way.

SANCHEZ: Yes, the great Jeff Goldblum.

KEILAR: "THE LEAD" with Jake Tapper starts now.

END