Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Las Vegas Shooting Kills Two Cops; Tracy Morgan Injured in Car Crash; Do Wal-Mart Truck Driver Doze Off?; New Details on Bergdahl's Five Years with the Taliban; Debating the Merits of the Prisoner Swap

Aired June 09, 2014 - 09:00   ET

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

CHRIS CUOMO, CNN ANCHOR: A lot of news this morning. Let's get you right to the NEWSROOM with Miss Carol Costello. Don't take any joy in the fact that I'm in pain.

CAROL COSTELLO, CNN ANCHOR: You're not only in pain, but you're going to have to, like, you know what you're going have to do because your kids won't be doing it. I'm just warning you.

CUOMO: Thanks, appreciate it. Thanks, Carol.

COSTELLO: Have a great day. NEWSROOM starts now.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

COSTELLO (voice-over): Happening now in the NEWSROOM. Ambushed.

SHERIFF DOUG GILLESPIE, LAS VEGAS METRO POLICE DEPARTMENT: Two of my officers were killed in the line of duty.

COSTELLO: Two suspected white supremacists going on what they call a revolution.

SHEREE BURNS, WITNESS TO SHOOTING: And this man came in out of nowhere.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I saw the gun in their hand.

COSTELLO: Investigators raiding the cop killers' Las Vegas house overnight.

Tracy Morgan hospitalized after a horrific accident on the New Jersey turnpike.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He is in intensive care at Robert Woods Johnson Hospital in New Brunswick.

COSTELLO: A Wal-Mart truck driver in court this morning facing steep charges.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Two tractor trailers involved.

COSTELLO: Was the driver dozing off? MARIE HARF, STATE DEPARTMENT DEPUTY SPOKESWOMAN: What we -- we're

looking into whether it might be possible to release the proof of life video.

COSTELLO: The White House, Pentagon, State Department inviting all House representatives to see the Bowe Bergdahl video. Should you have the right to see it, too? This as the FBI investigates death threats against the Bergdahl family.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They have received both e-mail as well as phone threats.

COSTELLO: "Hard Choices." Brand new details on the new Hillary Clinton book. Will she finally talk about running for office?

And Silver and the sale of the Clippers.

ADAM SILVER, NBA COMMISSIONER: There's still a last issue to resolve.

COSTELLO: Rachel Nichols one on one with NBA chief Adam Silver.

SILVER: Until he signs that document, we still have a pending litigation with him.

COSTELLO: Let's talk, live in the CNN NEWSROOM.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

COSTELLO: Good morning. I'm Carol Costello. Thank you so much for joining me.

Three innocent lives gone in an instant. Now we're learning that two people blamed for killing two Las Vegas police officers and a woman at a Wal-Mart store held extremist views toward law enforcement. Police raided the couple's home overnight. The "Las Vegas Review Journal" reports police found swastikas in their apartment. Investigators now looking into their possible connection to the white supremacy movement.

The pair ambushed these two Vegas police officers as they were eating lunch at a pizza restaurant yesterday. Witnesses say the officers were caught totally off guard.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BURNS: I was having -- just sat down to have lunch. The officers were sitting in front of me at the table right next to me, and this man came in out of nowhere, I thought he was going to get a drink, the way we walked up and walked past them. And then he turned around, pulled the gun on his right and shot the bald officer behind me -- in front of me.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COSTELLO: CNN's Dan Simon live in Las Vegas this morning. I know you have new information for us, so tell us. DAN SIMON, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Carol, this seems to be a thought-

out and pre calculated attack on police officers. From what we understand, the suspects left behind a manifesto at one of the two shooting scenes. They also left behind some backpacks. We don't know the contents yet. But they also left behind some flags or insignias. We're not sure what they symbolized.

But what we do know, Carol, is these two suspects. They're a married couple, ranted online about law enforcement and it all came to a head at a pizza restaurant.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

SIMON (voice-over): Breaking overnight, a raid in an apartment in Las Vegas, possibly the home of the two suspects involved in Sunday's shooting spree. An area around the apartment was cordoned off. Local affiliates report an explosion, apparently by a flash bang grenade set off by police.

A law enforcement source tells CNN the suspects were a married couple with extremist views toward law enforcement.

GILLESPIE: It's a tragic day. It's a very, very difficult day.

SIMON: Around 11:22 a.m. on Sunday, about 10 miles from the Las Vegas Strip, two people, one male, one female, opened fire inside this pizza restaurant. Witnesses here declare the ambush a revolution.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They had a backpack and I saw the gun in their hand, they told me to tell the cops that it was a revolution.

SIMON: When police arrived they discovered that two of their own were murdered. They've been identified as 41-year-old Officer Alyn Beck and 31-year-old Igor Soldo, both leaving behind wives and young children.

GILLESPIE: What precipitated this event, we do not know. My officers were simply having lunch.

SIMON: Authorities say one officer was able to fire back before being killed. The assailants then grabbing the officers' guns and their ammunition.

BURNS: The man that shot him was hugging him like this, but I think he was going for his gun, trying to get the officers' gun.

SIMON: The duo then headed across the street to this Wal-Mart killing a woman near the front entrance.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I saw a whole bunch of people start running towards the back.

SIMON: Police converged on the scene exchanging gunfire inside. But before they could apprehend the pair, the female attacker shot the male suspect, she then turned the gun on herself.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SIMON: Well, CNN is not naming the suspects until they're identified by law enforcement.

But, Carol, I can tell you a little something about these two police officers. Between the two of them, they had more than two decades' experience. One had a wife and six children. The other was also married and just had a baby.

Just a heartbreaking situation. And Carol, this one appears to be politically motivated. We'll send it back to you.

COSTELLO: Dan Simon reporting live from Las Vegas this morning.

Also this morning comedian Tracy Morgan is responsive and showing signs of improvement after being critically injured in a deadly car crash over the weekend. The actor's limo van was hit by a tractor- trailer on Saturday on the New Jersey turnpike. Police have now charged the man they say is responsible for that accident, the 35- year-old Wal-Mart truck driver Kevin Roper.

Roper is expected to appear in court later today. He faces one count of death by auto and four counts of assault by auto.

Morgan's fellow passenger, comedian James McNair was killed in the collision. Three other people remained in the hospital.

Listen to what Morgan's limo driver told TV station WCAU about the accident.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TYRONE GALE, LIMO DRIVER: I saw traffic, and I stopped, and I was upside down in the vehicle.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COSTELLO: This morning there are new questions about whether Roper may have fallen asleep behind the wheel. The crash hits close to home for those trying to change the rules about when truck drivers are allowed to take breaks on the road.

So let's bring in CNN aviation and government regulation correspondent Rene Marsh. She's in Washington. She has more for you on that side of the story.

Good morning.

RENE MARSH, CNN AVIATION AND GOVERNMENT REGULATION CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Carol. You know, this situation regarding this accident over the weekend really highlighting the debate happening here right here on Capitol Hill. It specifically looks at truck drivers' rest rules. And we do know that here on Capitol Hill some Republicans and Democrats say they want to see a portion of the current rules changed.

This is all about preventing sleepy truckers from driving 80,000 pound trucks on the roads we all drive on. And the debate all boils down to how many hours and which hours truck drivers are allowed on the road.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

RON WOOD, CRASH VICTIM'S RELATIVE: That's a picture of her husband, Mike.

MARSH (voice-over): Ron Woods' mother, sister, and three nephews killed in a fiery crash in September 2004.

WOOD: Out of the blue, this truck driver of an 18-wheeler fell asleep, crossed the median and crashed into my sister's SUV, flipping it upside down, landing on top of it.

MARSH: The debate on Capitol Hill over truck driver rest rules cuts close to the heart for Wood.

WOOD: If they think that these rules are inconvenient for them, this is inconvenience, you know, having your family wiped out.

MARSH: The Department of Transportation says in 2012, nearly 4,000 people died in collisions with large trucks. In July, it implemented rules aimed at curbing fatigue among truck drivers. Now truckers can't drive more than 11 hours in one day and they have to take 30 minutes off in the first eight hours of a shift. Once drivers hit 70 hours, they are required to take at least 34 hours off. That must include two mornings between 1:00 and 5:00 a.m.

DAVE OSIECKI, AMERICAN TRUCKING ASSOCIATION: Essentially it's the government telling people, professional truck drivers in this case, when they have to rest, what time of day they have to rest.

MARSH: The early-morning rest restrictions are what the Senate Appropriations Committee just voted to roll back. Those calling for the change say forcing truckers to take their time off in the early morning means they'll be driving during the day.

OSIECKI: The riskier proposition in having truckers drive in hours where traffic isn't there. The motoring public isn't there. So what these rules have done is raise risk and when you raise risk, you end up raising the number of crashes.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

MARSH: All right. Well, the issue now goes to the full Senate for a vote, but we should point out other parts of the rules would remain in place, including the 11-hour driving limit as well as the 30-minute break during a shift. The industry says they don't have a problem with those issues, Carol. Really the only part that's being debated is this rule that says from 1:00 a.m. to 5:00 a.m. on two consecutive nights they would have to essentially take a time-out, get some sleep before starting their shifts again -- Carol.

COSTELLO: All right. So, Rene, stick with me because I want to dive deeper. CNN legal analyst Danny Cevallos is with me, too.

Welcome, Danny. DANNY CEVALLOS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Thank you.

COSTELLO: Thanks for being here. So the charges against this driver are quite serious, death by auto and four counts of assault by auto. Are they surprisingly harsh charges?

CEVALLOS: Not in New Jersey. And here is why. New Jersey's statute on death by auto specifically provides that where there is evidence that either a driver fell asleep or was awake for 24 consecutive hours prior, that gives rise to an inference, in other words, that's like an assumption that the driver acted recklessly. So consider if it is true that initial reports said that he was dosing off, then you have to assume that came only from his own mouth because he probably was the only one in the cab of his truck.

But consider what a different direction this case takes because of that one admission saying he was dozing off. In New Jersey it automatically bumps up and creates that inference that someone acted recklessly. And reckless, again, that kind of conduct means you acted with a conscious disregard of a risk. Contrast that with negligence which says, hey, I may not have known I was being dumb, but I did something dumb.

Recklessness means you were aware you knew what you were doing was wrong. And in New Jersey the statute specifically provides for this bump up to the inference of recklessness.

COSTELLO: So, Rene, the reason that the charges are probably so harsh in New Jersey comes, too, because this particular stretch of highway is so very dangerous. And we know that there's a huge problem in this country with truck drivers driving while they're sleepy. So why weaken the law at all in the Senate?

MARSH: Well, you know, it depends on who you talk to because these lawmakers who are calling for this change in the rest rules, they actually don't think that it's weakening the law. They would argue that by putting those early morning restrictions saying you can't drive -- and to be clear, that would only apply to people who reach a certain amount of driving time.

If you've gotten to the 70-hour mark, this would apply to you. If you had not, then this would not apply to you. So for those drivers who have been on the road for a really long time, the rules now say that you have to take two nights off and that has to include those early morning hours, 1:00 to 5:00.

But those who are arguing against it say, you know what, that's going to put a lot more trucks on the roadways during the daylight hours when you and I are on the road and a lot of other people. And that, they say, would create even more crashes. So there are arguments on both sides here. And what they're saying is we want to study this a little bit more. And while we study it, we want to roll it back.

COSTELLO: It took them 15 years to get this into place. And now they want to study it all of a sudden? Just saying. MARSH: And the Department of Transportation says that they've studied

it. There's been extensive research. But it seems the other side doesn't think there's been enough. So that's where we are now.

COSTELLO: OK. All right. Danny, another question for you. Wal-Mart came out right away and it apologized and says, you know, if we're at fault, if our truck driver is at fault, we'll take full responsibility.

We were kind of surprised that Wal-Mart came out so soon. Why do you think they did?

CEVALLOS: Well, let's start with the statement. It's not that much of a statement of commitment. Notice the magic word "if." And that if means that if legally this driver is determined to be at fault, it could also mean that Wal-Mart would take -- responsibility if it's determined that they were responsible. So I wouldn't look at that as a huge commitment.

However, at these early stages, it does appear at least from the reports, if he made an admission, the driver, that he was dozing off, then I think that's going to be a compelling factor in Wal-Mart's liability. But at least it is a good start. They are coming out and stating that, if it's determined that they're responsible, they'll be responsible. How much of a statement of commitment that is remains to be scene.

COSTELLO: All right. Danny Cevallos, Rene Marsh, thanks so much.

Still to come in the NEWSROOM, Bowe Bergdahl's agonizing years in captivity, interrupted by a few terrifying days on the run.

CNN's Nic Robertson has details of what life was like in the grip of the Taliban. Hi, Nic.

NIC ROBERTSON, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Hey, Carol. Well, details that include how Bergdahl was able to celebrate Easter and Christmas while in captivity. More on the other side of the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COSTELLO: This morning, there are new details of the anguished captivity of Bowe Bergdahl and the firestorm over the deal that convinced terrorists to free him. Today, on Capitol Hill, all members of the House will meet behind closed doors with three main points of those negotiations: the White House, the State Department, and the Pentagon.

Now, that deal is igniting outrage, as you know, both in Washington and in the Idaho hometown of Bergdahl's family. The FBI now investigating death threats against Bergdahl's parents, who have stayed out of view in recent days.

And today the Obama administration will face tough questions from lawmakers worried about those five Taliban commanders who were released in exchange for Bergdahl's freedom. Secretary of State John Kerry defends sending those Taliban detainees to Qatar.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOHN KERRY, SECRETARY OF STATE: I'm not telling you that they don't have some ability at some point to go back and get involved. But they also have an ability to get killed doing that. And I don't think anybody should doubt the capacity of the United States of America to protect Americans.

SEN. DIANNE FEINSTEIN (D), CALIFORNIA: I heard John Kerry this morning say, you know, don't worry about them in Doha. You can't help but worry about them in Doha. And we have no information on how the United States is actually going to see that they remain in Doha.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COSTELLO: CNN's Nic Robertson is in Doha with the latest. Actually, I understand you have new information about Bergdahl's captivity. Fill us in.

NIC ROBERTSON, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Sure, Carol. This comes from a Taliban source who's familiar with some of that period of Bergdahl's captivity and has been accurate on information held by the same group, westerners held by the same group, in the past.

What he says is that when Bergdahl was first captured, he was put in a house run by an old man. The security wasn't good. Bergdahl escaped. He was on the run for three days. But because the Taliban controlled the whole area, he says Bergdahl wasn't able to get away. They eventually rounded him up, put him in another location that was much more secure.

Over the period of almost five years in captivity, he learned to speak the local language, was able to communicate effectively with the Taliban, told him at one point he didn't like the food he was being given -- they were giving him lamb every day. He said he didn't like the smell, that he said he wanted fruits and vegetables. They said that they gave him those fruit and vegetables. They gave him reading material in English, also Islamic reading material.

Perhaps very significantly, he stuck to his Christian beliefs. The Taliban say that they allowed him, their words, allowed him to celebrate Christmas and Easter. So very clear he wasn't going to be influenced by them; sticking to his faith. They also say he was able to get exercise and at times even playing soccer with those Taliban. But they're very clear that they moved him around house to house because they were afraid of drone strikes, but that his captivity was very, very closely controlled. Carol?

COSTELLO: We've also heard allegations that the Taliban tortured Bergdahl while he was in captivity. Can you tell us that part of the story?

ROBERTSON: We're certainly hearing this from the United States, from sources there, that he -- when he was on the run, then recaptured, that the Taliban punished him by putting him in a small cage or small box as punishment.

What the Taliban source told us was that there was no cage involved. Again, we have to stress that he didn't know the entire period of Bergdahl's captivity. And he did say the security around Bergdahl made it very, very clear to Bergdahl that there was no way that he was going to get away from that situation and, essentially, he needed to figure out a way to deal with it and get on being held captive by the Taliban, that there was going to be no chance of freedom after that first breakout, Carol.

COSTELLO: Nic Robertson reporting live for us. Thanks so much.

As I said, this week in Washington, administration officials will try to soothe lawmakers' concerns about Bergdahl and the Taliban prisoner swap that led to his release. One of the things likely to be discussed is this proof-of-life video that the White House says forced it to act and whether the American public should be allowed to see the video.

David Gergen is a CNN senior political analyst and former adviser to several presidents, including Reagan and Clinton. And Stephen Biddle is an adjunct senior fellow at the defense policy of the Council on Foreign Relations. Welcome to both of you.

DAVID GERGEN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Thank you.

COSTELLO: Thanks for being with us.

STEPHEN BIDDLE, ADJUNCT SENIOR FELLOW, COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS: Thanks.

COSTELLO: David, do you think the public should get to see this proof-of-life video?

GERGEN: Yes. It's been shown already to members of the Senate, it's now going to be shown to members of the House. We're going to have conflicting views of what it means coming from two different parties after this is over tonight. And I think that ultimately the American public should have a right to do that.

I know there's an argument for his privacy but we've seen now a number of different clips that have come out about him in captivity. If this film was so decisive, let's see it. It could be well compelling. I mean, he apparently looks drugged, he looks like he's not in good shape. But it's also true, as the critics point out, that the film was taken in December. And if there was an emergency, it's awfully strange it then took until June to get him out.

So -- and he apparently lived on pretty well. There's so many murky questions about this, I think it's better to get things on the table.

COSTELLO: I can't think of a good reason itself not to release the tape. As far as national security is concerned, Stephen, would that be a factor at all?

BIDDLE: I don't think so. The tape was created by the Taliban and sent to us by them. So there are no issues of sources and methods and intelligence collection involved here. I think if there's any argument for not releasing it, other than partisan politics, it would be the privacy of Bergdahl and his family. And that's been well and truly violated quite thoroughly by now.

COSTELLO: David, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel will testify on Wednesday. He'll try to explain why Congress was not notified before the swap of prisoners was made. Can he possibly make a case and do you think we'll hear the word Benghazi?

GERGEN: Ha ha, I do not think we'll hear the word Benghazi from his mouth unless he's forced to. But I think it may well come in some of the questions.

Look, it's going to be a rocky week for the administration because they went up last week and briefed the Senate and even there they met some resistance among Democrats. The House is notably more partisan and more hard line on this. Mike Rogers, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Republican, has already made it clear his deep unhappiness.

And the argument is now shifting, Carol, from when -- as Dianne Feinstein, a Democrat, argued yesterday on "Face the Nation," when the administration came to them back in 2011 to brief them on the possibilities of a deal somewhere down the road, they said the deal would be part of an initial effort to seek reconciliation with the Taliban, and that this would bring peace, the deal would help to bring peace to the area. And they haven't been briefed since.

Well, Dianne Feinstein and the others didn't like the deal they were putting on the table. They thought that there should there should be no swap until the reconciliation had preceded far down the road, otherwise the Taliban didn't have incentive to keep going and seek peace. And then, here, what's been done, of course, is any prospect of getting a deal has dropped -- getting a long-term reconciliation has been dropped. And all we have is an exchange, which will tick off these House Republicans, and, by the way, has upset the Afghan officials who think that the Taliban has emerged from this sort of victorious and looking stronger than they would like.

COSTELLO: So, Stephen, you studied these things. Was it worth it?

BIDDLE: Well, I think the right way to answer to the question of whether it's worth is exactly the David Gergen was suggesting -- in the context of some larger plan for ending the war. If the war is going to end on any terms that we can live with, it's going to have to be through a negotiated settlement, what people call reconciliation.

We don't have a lot of leverage, at this point, for negotiating settlements with the Taliban. Five Taliban detainees that the Taliban, for a variety of reasons, wanted back are a potential source of leverage. We don't have a lot of leverage to be giving away easily.

I think in many ways the most important way to think about the question of whether releasing Bergdahl was worth it is whether or not it could play some role in bringing about a negotiated settlement to the war. The administration has apparently given up on at least the prisoner swap element of that. They haven't given up on a larger strategy for negotiating a settlement.

I think that's the right question here. Personally, I would prefer that we husband what little leverage we've got until we can make progress in actually ending the war.

COSTELLO: David?

GERGEN: Carol, can I make one other quick argument?

COSTELLO: Sure.

GERGEN: There is one piece of good news for the administration here. And that is General Mathis, who was central command, now retired, has been arguing the last 24 hours that, in fact, by getting Bergdahl out, we now have more leverage to go after the Haqqani network that we couldn't attack them in the way we would have because we didn't want to have Bergdahl killed. Now we have a free rein to go after them. And he thinks that's very good news for us.

COSTELLO: Yes, so what David is essentially saying, Stephen, is there's no -- there's no threat there any long. Bergdahl is free so the Taliban can't come back and say, if you attack us -- or al Qaeda can't say you can't attack us or we'll kill this guy we have in captivity. That threat is gone and that's a good thing, right?

BIDDLE: I don't personally think the odds were very good that they were going to deliberately kill him in captivity. They viewed Bergdahl as a source in leverage, just as we viewed the five Taliban detainees as a source of leverage. Killing their hostage wasn't going to get them very far in talks.

Moreover, we've been striking the Haqqanis for years and years. I'm perfectly prepared to believe that, at the margin, our ability to strike those targets might go up some now that we don't have to worry about catching Bergdahl as collateral damage in the strike. But I think, for a long time, we failed to integrate into a negotiating strategy our targeting plans against the Haqqanis or other elements of the Taliban coalition.

I doubt very much that Bergdahl was the limiting constrained on our ability to use targeting of the Haqqanis as part of a conscious negotiating strategy. I think the problem is that our targeting and our negotiating strategy have been on completely separate tracks for years.

COSTELLO: David Gergen, Stephen Biddle, I have to leave it there. Thanks so much.

GERGEN: Thanks, Carol.

COSTELLO: Still to come in the NEWSROOM, it may just be the most talked about story in the upcoming race to the White House. Hear what Hillary Clinton is now revealing about her future. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)