Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

San Bernardino Attackers Likely Used Encrypted Apps; Judge, Lawyers Discuss Post-Mistrial Options for Freddie Gray Case; Putin Praises 2016 Candidate Donald Trump. Aired 10:30-11a ET

Aired December 17, 2015 - 10:30   ET

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

[10:29:47] PETER BERGEN, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Well, I think the very -- one of the most significant things, Carol, is Telegram which is one of the applications they were using is based in Berlin. This causes a big problem for the United States, which is there's a big debate as you know, Carol, about whether or not who tech companies can be forced by the government to provide some kind of back door into encrypted communications but these tech companies don't want to do that. And the FBI, of course, is very keen for that to happen.

But in a sense that debate is irrelevant when you have companies in countries outside the United States creating these applications, which are basically, you cannot decrypt. In a way -- and ISIS, of course, is using Telegram all the time -- the Berlin-based application.

So, we're at a point where, you know, effectively terrorists and -- that use these applications, there's really not much you can do about it.

CAROL COSTELLO, CNN ANCHOR: Martin, is that true? Is there not much you can do about it? I mean What do the companies say, anything? Who make these apps?

MARTIN BOS, TRUSTEDSEC: I absolutely agree. So, the focus that the U.S. government has come out with is to ask companies like Twitter, Facebook, YouTube to create back doors into their direct messaging services which are end-to-end encrypted and just as was previously stated. I absolutely agree.

If that was U.S. legislation and applied to U.S. companies, you know, that would be one thing, but that doesn't cover, you know, software that's made in other countries or even open source applications where the code is freely available and anybody's able to download it, modify the encryption scheme into their needs and reuse it.

So, as far as I'm concerned, the encryption, it's true, can't be broken on this end-to-end phone encryption software. So what we need to do, you know, as a law enforcement community is focus our efforts on other ways to catch these people.

COSTELLO: Like?

BOS: Well, there is recently a couple of articles that I read. There's a whole lot of different ways around -- just because you can't see the actual message. Like in the case of Apple's iMessage which is encrypted end to end, just because you can't see the actually text doesn't mean that there's not metadata in the messages that go over all of the phones that it communicated with, where they communicated from. There's geo-tagging on pictures.

There's also the U.S. government with proper subpoena has the ability to force cell companies to turn on emergency 911 locating services. There are a lot of other things that we can do where we won't actually see the message that the people are sending back and forth but we can paint a picture of the activities of that person who they're talking to, when, and the frequency that they're talking to and that can aid us in these types of investigations.

COSTELLO: Peter, you know, during last night's debate Donald Trump said we just need to put brilliant people -- we need to put brilliant at work to solve this problem. But do we already have brilliant people? What's he talking about, do you think?

BERGEN: Well, you know, the NSA, the National Security Agency, has the largest group of leading mathematicians and cryptologists in the world. I mean the problem is -- I mean this is outside my area of expertise and I accede (ph) to Martin. I mean the point is that it's readily easy to find encryption, you know, anybody watching the show is basically not something that the government can really penetrate.

That's why the FBI keeps saying they're using the phrase going dark. They've been using this for two years. But, you know, easily accessible encryption is not something even the NSA can now, you know, decode.

COSTELLO: So I'm going to ask you something really controversial, Martin. What if the government would just ban, you know, WhatsApp and Telegram? We don't want people to encrypt messages. That would be illegal.

BOS: I mean that's obviously the crux of the problem, right? At what point do we, you know, throw out the constitution and the right to privacy in favor of people's safety? So, that's going to be the age-old question and there's lots of debates around that, of course.

But once again, if the government decided to start banning applications, there's enough smart people in the world that don't work for the government that I believe, you know, other ways would be found around that type of thing. And once again, I feel like we should be focusing our efforts elsewhere rather than, you know, trying to -- trying to weaken the security of the products that the American people are using.

Because that's really what the FBI is asking. Because if Twitter was to create a back door in their direct messaging system at the behest of the United States, what's to say that another nation state or another government that has smart people can't, you know, can't break into that back door or can't find a flaw in that back door?

So basically what we're doing is weakening the security that we're already using for our messaging here in the United States. And that's never a good thing. I think most people in the security community would agree with me.

COSTELLO: Would they, Peter?

[10:35:00] BERGEN: Well, I mean -- look, I mean Martin is absolutely right. If you put a back door into these technologies, it's no longer encrypted. And so that allows other people in.

You know, basically, Carol, you have a big debate between two of the most powerful forces in the United States. The U.S. government and the FBI on one side and U.S. tech companies, which are, after all, leading, you know, the great American recovery we're seeing in the economy, who do not want these products to be, you know, easily accessible with a back door. You know, there's a fundamental disagreement on this issue.

COSTELLO: We'll have to see how it plays out. Peter Bergen, Martin Bos -- thanks to both of you.

Still to come in the NEWSROOM, a hung jury in the trial of a Baltimore police officer. What's next in the Freddie Gray case for prosecutors, the defense and the community?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COSTELLO: One of the most high-profile legal cases of the year goes behind closed doors this morning; prosecutors weighing their options in the police custody death of Freddie Gray. Just hours after deadlock jury forced a mistrial, the judges met with Lawyers to discuss whether Officer William Porter should face a new trial for manslaughter.

CNN's Jean Casarez, live in Baltimore to tell us more. Good morning.

JEAN CASAREZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Carol. It was about 9:30 this morning when attorneys for both sides met outside of the chambers of the judge in this case, Barry Williams. And Gary Proctor, attorney for the defense, just sort of said off the cuff to a clerk that was in the hall, yes, we all had to get together for a photo album, a picture together.

And then they went into the judge's chambers for about 30 minutes. Came out, they spoke a little. They walked away. We have heard nothing at all on the record publicly about what was decided in that meeting.

Judge Barry Williams, he's on the bench today. A completely brand-new trial. So we have no word that there is any hearing today at all. But there are many issues because the defense doesn't have a choice if the prosecutor wants to retry this case.

[10:40:00] The judge will determine most likely the date but the defense has a lot of options that they can consider to change venue or try to stall this trial. A family attorney for the Gray family says they knew that this wasn't going to be easy.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JASON DOWNS, ATTORNEY FOR FREDDIE GRAY'S FAMILY: Well, the Gray family was prepared since the very beginning of this case understanding that this is going to be a marathon not a sprint. They understand that there would be at least six trials. They understand that that could take as much as a year or more, because they understood that hung juries were a part of the process. So they did not expect quick justice. They were not looking for quick justice. All they want is justice.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CASAREZ: Meanwhile this community is back to work today. It's a drizzly, rainy December day but obviously everyone wants to know when and if this retrial will take place -- Carol.

COSTELLO: All right. Jean Casarez reporting live from Baltimore -- thank you.

The declaration of a mistrial reverberated across Baltimore, a city rocked by protests back in April and now uneasily awaiting word on whether this officer will face a new trial.

So, let's talk about that with Faraji Muhammad, he's co-host of "The Larry Young Morning Show" and director of Peace by Peace in Baltimore. And Ed Davis joins me, too former police commissioner of the Boston police department. Welcome to you both.

FARAJI MUHAMMAD, PEACE BY PEACE: Good morning -- Carol.

ED DAVIS, FORMER BOSTON POLICE DEPARTMENT COMMISSIONER: Good morning.

COSTELLO: Faraji, how is the community reacting to this?

MUHAMMAD: We're not surprised at all, Carol. At this point we knew that something was going to happen that really wasn't going to be in the pursuit of justice. This particular mistrial is not surprising. However what is surprising is the fact of our response and our reaction to it, the city and all across the country.

There was an expectation that folks were going to go out into the streets and go into some violent outbursts, unrest. What we saw last night, certainly there were some protesters, there were some young leaders on the ground. But essentially, there wasn't the violent protests and outbursts folks had expected.

COSTELLO: Interesting. Ed, what do you attribute that to? Community leaders came out and urged for calm. The Gray family, they came out and issued a statement through their attorneys appealing for calm. And the new police commissioner just in place, he came out, appealed for calm and welcomed the protesters to the streets.

DAVIS: I thought -- COSTELLO: Well, wait a second -- let Ed first. And then I'll

get back to you Faraji.

MUHAMMAD: Sure, sure. Go ahead, Mr. Davis.

DAVIS: Right -- Carol. People like Faraji and the Gray family themselves have been incredible in stepping up and making sure that people stayed calm. The new police commissioner, Kevin Davis, has played a much more out front role right now and has been teamed up with the mayor in asking for calm.

So I think there's a more coordinated response this time and cooler heads are prevailing, which is really great to see.

COSTELLO: Faraji -- do you agree?

MUHAMMAD: Yes. I mean I think that the police commissioner, Kevin Davis, has made some efforts to reach out to community leaders. But I think on the other side of it that this particular trial for William Porter is a smaller trial in the sense of the bigger trial that's still waiting. More folks tend to say, what about the white officers that we saw on the videotape of Freddie Gray? What's going to be the outcome for this?

There's been some discussion, Carol, saying that, you know, this trial is going to set the tone for other trials. That's not my hope and that's certainly not my expectation, but I think the larger picture that we're seeing is not necessarily the six officers on trial but more so the culture of policing that continues to prevail within the black community and all across the country, not just in Baltimore.

So the culture policing is on trial. So the culture policing that we saw exhibited in this particular case has gotten off with a hung jury.

COSTELLO: So, Faraji you made a distinction --

DAVIS: You know, Carol, I have to -- I have to strongly --

COSTELLO: Wait one second, Ed.

I just want to get Faraji's take. You made a distinction between this black officer and the white officers that have yet to go on trial. What did you mean by that?

MUHAMMAD: Simply being -- you know, we didn't see Officer William Porter. When those charges came up about reckless endangerment and the role he played, certainly we want justice on that.

But we saw the officers that were in that video, Carol. That's what the -- this issue of police brutality as much as it is about culture, it's certainly about race. And so, you know, the folks that are on the ground, they say that those white officers are really the ones that they saw handling brother Freddie and others.

So at this point you know,

COSTELLO: So they're sort of excusing -- I'm sorry -- Officer Porter's role in -- alleged role in this?

MUHAMMAD: No, not at all. The culture of policing at this point, and Mr. Davis can certainly speak on it, the culture of policing at this point is regardless of whether you're a black officer or white officer, you're making the -- the officers are allowed to make decisions that are based on what they've always done. Not necessarily based upon what's right.

[10:45:06] And we certainly -- we want to see some justice come because Officer Porter had a responsibility to either seat belt brother Freddie Gray in. He had a responsibility to address brother Freddie's cry for medical attention. And so when you have a cry like that, a cry for justice and help, then it's only your responsibility as a police officer to ensure life and preserve life while in the custody of police.

COSTELLO: Ed, I'm sorry to interrupt. I just wanted to clarify that for our viewers. You were going to say?

DAVIS: I appreciate that, Carol. Here's the problem. It's really improper and irresponsible to conflate the race and police culture issue with a trial where these officers have due process rights. They are before a jury, and they're facing very, very serious felony charges.

There's a process in our country of justice that is guaranteed by the bill of rights. And I understand that people are upset. There are a lot of questions police have to answer about the culture of the organizations and how we have to change. But to join that issue with a criminal offense and criminal charge and to say that this is about police culture is absolutely the wrong way to look at this.

A jury is not looking at police culture when they look at this trial. They are looking at the charges and the elements of the crime and the judge is instructing them as to the differences between probable cause, proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is a high standard. And this is a political prosecution. Everyone has agreed with that. Every one of the people that have talked -- that understand anything about prosecution understands that this was done too quickly. It was overcharged. And it was a shotgun approach, I mean by charging six different people.

Get the facts out, boil the case down, hold the people accountable and responsible that should be held accountable and have the conversation about race and police culture at a different point. This is not the place to have that conversation.

COSTELLO: All right. I Have to leave it there. I have to leave it there -- Faraji Muhammad and Ed Davis -- thanks so much.

Still to come in the NEWSROOM: the Russian President Vladimir Putin doesn't get a vote, but he is backing one presidential candidate. I bet you know who it is.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:51:17] COSTELLO: It is not often the Russian president offers praise to any American, but today he did. He gave a shout out to Donald Trump. Here's some of what Putin said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

VLADIMIR PUTIN, PRESIDENT OF RUSSIA (through translator): he is a brilliant and talented person, without a doubt. But it is not our right to identify his virtues. It is the prerogative of the U.S. voters. He is the absolute leader in the presidential debate, as we see it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DOBBS: Ok. So there you have it. Donald Trump on his part has praised Putin's leadership more than once. Here's what he told Fox News back in October.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BILL O'REILLY, FOX NEWS HOST: Did Putin go up and say, you know, you say you and Putin are going to be close. Did Putin go up to your office and did you guys like bond or anything this week? He's in town.

TRUMP: No, I didn't know anything about him coming to my office. But I will tell you that I think in terms of leadership, he's getting an A and our president is not doing so well. They did not look good together.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COSTELLO: So, let's talk about this with Ron Brownstein. He is CNN's senior political analyst and editorial director for the "National Journal". Welcome.

RON BROWNSTEIN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Good morning.

COSTELLO: Ok. So, Putin's comments are interesting in light of the fact that many Republicans admire Putin's toughness. Do Putin's comments matter?

Well, first of all, there's really no one in the American political context anywhere on the spectrum who is comparable to Putin. He's a repressive autocrat, who jails his opponents, who violates due process, who confiscates private companies.

But look, I mean I think, you know, it's not necessarily an endorsement you would want. But where there are similarities, they are probably stylistic and thematic. I mean Putin, also like Trump, kind of advances the theory of the great man of history who kind of bends big global forces through the force of their own personal will. Also I think offers a kind of defensive nationalism, which is

what we see from Trump. This kind of very muscular and belligerent kind of posture toward the world but one that views the world as fundamentally hostile to our interests, duplicitous, dangerous and needing this strong man to defend the nation against that.

So, in that way, they kind of overlap a little, but no one is really comparable to Putin in the American political context.

COSTELLO: You know, I separated it out, I said Republicans admire Putin's leadership, but really many Americans of all strides do. A Quinnipiac poll back in March showed the majority of Americans thought Putin was a strong leader. When asked who was stronger, Putin or Obama, it was tied. So I don't know. I don't know what to make of it.

BROWNSTEIN: No, Putin is -- Putin is a strong leader in the sense that he has essentially destroyed the democratic buds that were there in Russia in the 1990s and has asserted kind of one-man control of a giant country. So, in that sense he's a strong leader but that's not necessarily an admirable model of leadership or one that is in any way comparable or applicable to the American context.

But really, you know, we have really the opposite problem, right? We have this enormously diverse, divergent country and as we are seeing on so many fronts this year, Carol, the essence of the Presidential race is the challenge of how do you knit all that together? You don't knit it together simply by trying to roll over at the way Putin has done to the democratic institutions of Russia.

COSTELLO: Well, I will say this Ron, I have to say the whole Putin thing brought to mind what George W. Bush said back in the day about Putin. Listen.

BROWNSTEIN: Yes.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE W. BUSH, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I looked the man in the eye. I found him to be very straightforward. I was able to get a sense of his soul.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COSTELLO: So we all know how that turned out. It turned out to be wrong. So, could Trump be wrong in the long run, too?

BROWNSTEIN: Sure, absolutely. John McCain famously said, later, I looked in his eye and I saw three letters, KGB. In fact, if you read the -- there's a great new biography of Putin by Stephen Lee Myers of the "New York Times", he was never really that important a figure in the KGB.

[10:55:06] You know, Nations have interests, right, and Putin is pursuing a line of foreign -- of Russia's interaction with the world designed to restore their prominence, he believes, as a global power. That puts him in conflict with the U.S. on a whole series of fronts.

And a personal relationship or not with the U.S. President is only going to marginally change that. I mean the trajectory of what Russia is trying to achieve in the world and the trajectory of what we want the world to be I think are inherently in conflict in most but not in all places. There may be places where their opposition can work together and that really isn't going to change a lot, whether the next president is a Democrat or Republican.

COSTELLO: All right. Ron Brownstein, thanks for playing this morning. I appreciate it.

BROWNSTEIN: Thank you.

COSTELLO: I'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COSTELLO: President Obama goes wild. His survival instincts will be featured tonight in the NBC series "Running Wild Alaska". Obama and British survival expert Bear Grylles brave nature to see what life would be like dealing with the effects of climate change.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BEAR GRYLLES, SURVIVAL EXPERT: So, I think the President looked a little surprised when I pulled out this sort of bloody carcass of half-eaten salmon.

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: It would have been nice if we had a cracker to go with it.

Bear's a mediocre cook, but the fact that we ate something recognizable was encouraging. Now, the fact that he told me that this was a leftover fish from a bear, I don't know if that was necessary. He could have just left that out.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[11:00:06] COSTELLO: Oh, yes. At one point President Obama's food inspector tried to exchange some raw salmon with something pre- cooked. But Obama braved it. He went with the raw fish.

Thanks for joining me today. I'm Carol Costello.

"AT THIS HOUR" with Berman and Bolduan starts now.