Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsroom
Iran Admits To Shooting Down Passenger Plane By Mistake Following Tumultuous Week In The Middle East; CNN Reporting Exclusively From Air Base Targeted By Iran; Trudeau Speaks After Iran Admits To Shooting Down Passenger Plane By Mistake; Trump Says He'll "Invoke Executive Privilege To Block Bolton Testimony; Impeachment Trial Could Impact Democratic Candidates; Is Race A Factor In Harry & Meghan's Surprise Decision?; Husband Charged With Murder Of His Wife In Connecticut. Aired 1-2p ET
Aired January 11, 2020 - 13:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[13:00:00]
FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN HOST: All right. Very comprehensive. Jonathan Wackrow, thank you so much.
JONATHAN WACKROW, FORMER SECRET SERVICE AGENT UNDER PRESIDENT OBAMA: Hey, thanks a lot. Appreciate it.
WHITFIELD: All right. We've got so much more straight ahead in the newsroom. And it all starts right now. All right. Hello again, everyone. Thank you so much for being with me. I'm Fredericka Whitfield. All right. We begin with a tumultuous week now ending in a stunning admission. Iran confesses to shooting down a Ukrainian passenger plane killing all 176 passengers on board. The country is calling it a mistake. But world leaders are now demanding answers.
The extraordinary confession comes just one week after we learned that President Trump ordered a U.S. drone strike killing Iran's top military commander Qasem Soleimani. Days later this past Wednesday, Iran vowing harsh revenge attack to Iraqi military bases that were housing U.S. troops and coalition forces. However, there were no casual -- no U.S casualties and then now for the first time, we're getting a firsthand look at the damage at those installations.
CNN's Senior International Correspondent, Arwa Damon is the first journalist to gain access to the Al-Assad Airbase. She's on the ground there with this exclusive look.
ARWA DAMON, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: These were living quarters, sleeping quarters, the troops that lived here lost everything. There was very little if anything that was salvageable because there was also a fire that ended up raging here for a few hours after the missile impacted in this particular area.
The reason why no one was killed, not here, not in any of the other locations of impact is because there was advanced warning. We don't know what, we don't know how that is very sensitive information. But we are told that hours before the attack even began, they knew something was happening. They just did not know specifically what it was going to be. So precautions were taken by 11:00 p.m.
Troops who could hunker down or hunker down in bunker, some of them in Saddam-era bunkers. Others who had to man their posts because of the security situation. They were still out there. And then the strikes began at about 1:34 in the morning. This is the crater left behind by one of them. There are so many stories that we're hearing of heroic, so many stories that we're hearing a really extraordinary close calls.
Those who lived through this say that it's clear that Iran wasn't that concerned with trying to save us lives. A lot of these impacts did happen in places where they could potentially have caused significant U.S. casualties and this is Lieutenant Colonel Staci Coleman we've been speaking all day. And I mean, you were telling us what was that night like? How do you even begin to describe it?
LT. COL. STACI COLEMAN, U.S. AIR FORCE: It's very hard to describe it. I will tell you, it was extremely scary. Some of my team and myself were hunkered down and one of those bunkers. And when the first wave started hitting you could feel the shockwave. And even inside the bunker, the pressure was so strong that we watched our bunker doors sinking towards the inside of the bunker and then escape back out.
About seven of the impacts were in very close proximity to where we will hunker down and like I said, you could feel every last one of the shockwaves it was extremely scary.
DAMON: And very lucky or was it the training, the precautions that were taken that there were no U.S. casualties?
COLEMAN: I'd say it was all of -- I say it was a combination of God looking out for us. It was a combination of, you know, the little bit of Intel and advanced warning that we got. And then it was the smart commanders on the ground making on-spot decisions to get people out of harm's way.
DAMON: And how do you begin to describe or I mean, what this was like? And then, of course, what kind of security precautions you're having to take now given the situation?
COLEMAN: This was -- like I said, we knew something was happening, but we didn't know exactly what. As the time grew closer, we kind of thought we had an indication of what it might be, but we still weren't certain. So we had advanced warning that there may be some rockets followed by a base incursion. And so we had to keep our security forces out to make sure that that we were safe from that.
So there were a good number of folks out along the perimeter and within the airfield keeping it secure.
DAMON: Out there on the perimeter, keeping it secure while these missiles are coming in.
COLEMAN: Yes, they were outside during every last one missile strikes.
[13:05:04] DAMON: Well, it would seem that it was very fortunate. And also as we've been saying because of this advance warning that exist, because of these precautions that were taken, there is this sense that -- well, this phase of what is unfolding has concluded. Everyone here is still very much on high alert. Arwa Damon, CNN, Al-Assad Airbase, Iraq.
WHITFIELD: All right, thank you so much for that exclusive reporting Arwa and her team. All right. Back now to the apology from Iran which is admitting that it mistakenly shot down a commercial airplane, killing all 176 people on board. CNN has obtained new video of that deadly crash which happened last Wednesday and I'm warning some viewers might find this disturbing.
In the video you can see the fiery wreckage as Ukrainian Airlines Flight 752 crashes just outside of Tehran. There is a wall of fire and a burst of debris as the plane hits a field. CNN's Senior International Correspondent, Fred Pleitgen now joining us from Tehran. So Fred, you know, just as a reminder of just what a tumultuous week, I mean, that airline going down happened to be the same day that the Al-Assad Airbase was taking those missile strikes that Arwa was showing us the debris field after the fact.
And now, we're talking about days later, after that airline went down and admission coming from Iran, Fred. Why did Iran change all of those denials over a period of days to finally saying, OK, yes, we are responsible?
FRED PLEITGEN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, yes. Fredricka, you're absolutely right. It's absolutely interconnected to that place that Arwa was just there at there -- at there right now. The Iranians at the beginning, indeed, said that they hadn't taken the plane down.
In fact, the head of Iran Civil Aviation Authority told us personally that he didn't think the plane had been hit by a missile at all. He said he believed that because the plane was able to maneuver after it seemed to have an emergency to him indicated that it couldn't have been hit by a foreign object, couldn't have been hit by explosives because otherwise he thought that it wouldn't be able to maneuver anymore.
Now, the Revolutionary Guard Corps coming out and saying, yes, they did hit that plane with a missile unintentionally. And now that they're admitting it, they're actually coming forward with a lot of details as well. They said that after the strike on that base that Arwa was just at, they feared that there would be retaliation from the U.S. They said at some points, they believe that there were cruise missiles flying towards Iranian territory and flying towards what they call sensitive installations, mostly bases from the Revolutionary Guard.
And that's where that Ukrainian airliner comes at. It took off in the morning from Imam Khomeini Airport. That's the sort of main international airport here around Tehran. At some point they say the plane made a turn in a direction and it was at an altitude and going in a direction where they believe that it might be a cruise missile heading towards one of their bases.
Now the people who believe that were the people who were operating a surface to air missile battery, apparently, the commander of that surface to air missile battery misidentified that plane as a cruise missile, tried to check or tried to alert his higher ups to it couldn't get through to them. And then the head of the Revolutionary Guard Air Defense Forces says that that person had exactly 10 seconds to make a decision on whether or not to fire at that object.
He obviously tragically did. And that's what's then they said, led to -- led to the tragedy that we see which is obviously causing a lot of anger here in Iran as well, Fredericka.
WHITFIELD: All right, Fred Pleitgen, thank you so much. So onboard, people from Iran, from Afghanistan, Germany, and many people from Canada. So many were killed. In fact, right now, Canada's Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is giving a press conference following Iran stunning admission that indeed it took down that plane. Let's go straight to CNN's Paula Newton in Toronto. So, Paula, what is the response like from Trudeau?
PAULA NEWTON, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Listen, as this described to me it's all hands on deck as far as Canada is concerned in terms of trying to get to the bottom of it. In terms of what happened there on the ground in Tehran. Prime Minister Trudeau has just announced that he had a call with President Rouhani and Iran. Fred, I can't tell you how rare that is and unprecedented.
Just a reminder, Canada has not had diplomatic relations with Iran for several years. Really extraordinary for the fact that for those families, they now understand that Trudeau and Rouhani are in contact and will do what they can. I want you to listen now to the Prime Minister.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JUSTIN TRUDEAU, PRIME MINISTER OF CANADA: I want to end by sharing with you a bit of what I did yesterday. I had a chance to sit with some of the families of the victims. They are hurt, angry and grieving. They want answers. They want justice. But Iran has admitted to is very serious.
[13:10:01]
TRUDEAU: Shooting down a civilian aircraft is horrific. Iran must take full responsibility. Canada will not rest until we get the accountability, justice and closure that the families deserve going flat. You'll see that for the note --
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Once again, thanks for being here.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NEWTON: You know, Fred, extraordinary comments again because it is the uranium Canadians that we speak to here on the ground in front of this for more memorial who tell us they believe Iran would have never admitted to this if countries including Canada had not really forced them by taking a look at that intelligence and saying there is no way you can deny this. What's that issue now, Fred, are things like trying to get to the bottom of what happened. Who is to blame?
How will this not happen again, you've been heard there are discussions as well but whether or not that airport should have even been open and also now there are the loved ones, some of them we've heard from, Fred, already brought back in Iran trying to figure out how to get the remains of their loved ones and either bury them in Iran or repatriate them back to Canada.
What is going on though here in Canada is they've been trying to push everyone very forcefully to say Iran needs to come clean. They have now done that. They're saying they now need to open up the black boxes and all the evidence they have for a full and transparent investigation, Fred?
WHITFIELD: And so Paula, is Canada, is Trudeau saying anything about the kind of cooperation it's getting from Iran, you talk about, you know, transporting the remains of bodies, you know, personal possessions, you know, from the crash site. Do Canadians feel like they're getting that?
NEWTON: Not yet. In this press conference, we just had an update, Fred, that more visas have been issued. Again, incredibly rare for officials from Canada be even be dealing with officials from Iran, let alone to be given permission to go into a lot and actually deal with this. It has been slow from what I'm told from officials but pick up literally by the hour. And it's only then that Iranian Canadians have that confidence to know that perhaps they will find help in Iran through what is just extraordinary grief to really do what needs to be done in order to -- as the Prime Minister says, have that closure.
I can't stress enough, Fred, how rare these kinds of negotiations are between Canada and Iran, relations string for several years. And the fact that this is not the kind of posture that Prime Minister Trudeau usually takes to be this forceful. You said three press conferences in the last few days. And it's really adamant, his office tells me absolutely focus that he knows that it's on his shoulders for him to do this now.
And as we've heard from so many people here at this memorial, Fred, they do not believe that Iran really would have admitted to this, had it not been from pressure from several countries.
WHITFIELD: All right. Paula, thank you so much. Appreciate it. All right. Iran submission comes after harsh denials that it had nothing to do with the downing of the Ukrainian jet. CNN's International Diplomatic Editor Nic Robertson is in Abu Dhabi. So Nic, you just heard, you know, the Canadian Prime Minister there, you know, talking about demanding of answers. And you heard Paula say, very rare for the leaders of those two countries to be speaking.
So how should all of this be assessed in terms of whether any of the countries involved, these passengers died will ever get the full picture, full answers? NIC ROBERTSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL DIPLOMATIC EDITOR: Trudeau has been very clear here, just as Paula says, saying that he is going to continue to shine a light on this. Again, very focused talking about accountability, talking about the fact that Canada must be part of the investigation process. He did say that more visas had been granted that the lead elements of the investigative team would be able to get to Tehran, he said that they should be there 4:00 p.m. Toronto time East Coast time today.
That was a good thing he said that he hoped more would be able to follow. I think it was Interesting that the Prime Minister's press conference was a little delayed because there would have been the potential had these visas not been granted, he would have been standing there saying Iran is not giving us this cooperation. So it is clear, rare as it is to have -- to have this political contact, this diplomatic contact between Canada and Iran.
It is very clear that Trudeau is not going to let up and I think when we try to interpret as the prime minister will be, as many leaders will be right now trying to interpret why Iran knowing from its own military commanders that it had shot the aircraft down, waited two days conveniently saying that the Revolutionary Guard Council didn't tell the supreme leader or the country's president for two days about this.
It beggars a little bit of belief, partly because the supreme leader is the ultimate military commander and it's hard to imagine his subordinates not reporting up to him. It certainly gives the supreme leader and the president to cover for what's being said over the past couple of days that they -- Iran hadn't shot the aircraft down.
[13:15:08]
ROBERTSON: It doesn't -- it doesn't -- now in this context appear that they were lying to the international community. But I think that that statement from the IRGC really deserves a lot of scrutiny and questioning.
WHITFIELD: Uh-hmm. All right, Nic Robertson, we'll leave it there for now from Abu Dhabi. Thank you. All right, still ahead. Changing narratives. The Trump administration claims the U.S. was an imminent danger of an attack from Iran but offers zero proof. Was there really an imminent threat before taking down the Iranian's military general?
And a crack in the GOP, Senator Susan Collins of Maine says she's working with a small group of senators on a possible deal to call witnesses in the impeachment trial of President Trump.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[13:20:03]
WHITFIELD: The Trump administration continues to shift its explanations on the decision to target Iran's top general Qasem Soleimani. President Trump is now claiming Soleimani was planning to attack four U.S. embassies, posing a so-called imminent threat. However, the White House is struggling to provide proof or a clear and consistent definition of what exactly that means.
CNN Kristen Holmes joins me right now from the White House. So, Kristen, how are the administration officials explaining all of these mixed messages or are they?
KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Freed, they're not explaining it well. Now keep this in mind, there are two big questions here. How eminent was the threat that Soleimani posed? And the other question is, what exactly was that threat? And we haven't gotten a consistent answer on either. So let's talk about eminent first. We have heard from these top officials who have consistently said that this was an imminent attack.
Well, when they're asked what exactly the imminent threat was, what does eminent mean? There is a huge variety of what imminent means. Some people saying -- some of these administration officials essentially saying, oh, imminent is days, other saying hours, other saying that there was really an undefined timeline. Why does it matter? If we know the exact hour that they were going to strike?
We knew that it was imminent. The other side here is what exactly was the threat? Now we've heard from President Trump, who on Thursday offered three -- two different explanations on Thursday. And then one last night, the first being that Soleimani was going to blow up the embassy in Baghdad. Then later on Thursday, the President saying at a rally that Soleimani was targeting multiple embassies, including embassies outside of Baghdad.
And then last night in an interview, President Trump saying that there was four embassies targeted later kind of stepping back saying, couldn't -- wasn't necessarily all embassies. It could also have been military bases or U.S. personnel that are overseas. So very differing approaches here, very differing narratives. Why is this so important? Everyone agrees Democrat and Republican that Soleimani was a bad guy.
But this goes to the necessity of taking on a strike, of conducting a strike that knocked out the second most powerful man in Iran and led the country and really the world that region to the brink of a very dangerous situation. We know that President Trump did not consult Congress. He didn't brief any of the leadership in Congress. He briefed some of his closest allies like Lindsey Graham.
But he also didn't get congressional approval and the entire reasoning being that the administration said that they didn't have time, this is an imminent attack. That is why you are seeing so much focus on what exactly imminent means. And if it doesn't mean immediately, then why didn't they briefed Congress or get congressional approval, Fred?
WHITFIELD: All right, Kristen Holmes, thank you so much at the White House.
So the President's Republican line of defense might be cracking. Senator Susan Collins says she's working with her GOP colleagues to include witnesses in the upcoming impeachment trial of President Trump. Live report, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[13:27:24]
WHITFIELD: The Senate impeachment trial is moving closer to reality and the battle over the rules for the trial is intensifying. How speaker Nancy Pelosi says she will send the articles of impeachment over to the Senate next week. She has been withholding the articles while her fellow Democrats have been pressuring Republicans to include witnesses and new evidence at the Senate trial.
GOP Senator Susan Collins of Maine says she is now working on a deal with other Republicans to consider witnesses at the impeachment trial.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. SUSAN COLLINS (R-ME): I am working with a group of Republican Senators and our leaders to see if we can come to an agreement on some language that would be in the initial resolution. Setting now the parameters of the trial in the Senate that would include an opportunity for the House to call witnesses and the President's council to also call witnesses.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WHITFIELD: All right. Democrats have submitted a list of four witnesses, they would like to testify at the trial. One of them is John Bolton, the President's former national security adviser who says he will testify if subpoenaed by the Senate.
CNN is Jeremy Herb joining us right now. So Jeremy, what is the President saying about Bolton and perhaps the conditions in which the White House would not allow him to testify?
JEREMY HERB, CNN POLITICS REPORTER: Yes. That's right, Fred. The white -- President Trump threw some cold water on the idea of having Bolton or any other witnesses testify at the trial, the Senate trial. But of course, the key question is whether the center will even consider witnesses. The Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has said he wants to get this trial started which could happen as soon as next week with opening statements with the presentations and then the Senate should consider whether or not to call witnesses.
Now moderates like Susan Collins, they're going to be key in this fight. And as we heard from Senator Collins there, she is talking to some of her colleagues about whether to find a way to consider witnesses. But it's important also to note that Senator Collins is still with McConnell on his approach to this trial on starting with opening statements and then making a decision on witnesses.
She hasn't yet said whether she would support for instance, subpoenaing John Bolton and having him testify. She says she's told reporters this week, she wants to hear the opening statement of the trial, and then she will make that decision. The bottom line, the important thing here is you need four Republican Senators to join with the 47 Democrats, you need 51 votes in order to get any witnesses and that's going to be a key question as we go forward. Now the president through -- potentially add an additional obstacle to the Senate if they do decide to have witnesses saying that he wanted -- he could invoke executive privilege if they tried to call John Bolton.
[13:30:07]
HERB: Listen to him here on Fox News yesterday.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LAURA INGRAHAM, FOX NEWS HOST: Why not call Bolton, allow him to testify. This thing is bogus --
(CROSSTALK)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATE: I have no problem other than one thing. You can't be in the White House as president in the future -- I'm talking future, many future presidents -- and have a security adviser, anything to do with security and legal and other things.
(CROSSTALK)
TRUMP: Well, I think you have to, for the sake of the office. I would love everybody to testify. I like Mick to testify, I like Mike Pompeo to testify. I like Rick Perry to testify. I want everybody.
But there are things you can't do from the standpoint of executive privilege. You have to maintain that. So we'll see where it all goes.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HERB: Speaker Pelosi plans to send articles to the Senate potentially Tuesday or Wednesday of next week, meaning the trial could begin on Thursday. And at that point, these questions with the Senate witnesses will come to the forefront -- Fred?
WHITFIELD: Jeremy Herb, thank you so much.
One key factor in the impeachment proceeding is timing. Look at the calendar. The next six weeks are crucial for the Democratic presidential contenders. And the impeachment trial could upend some of the early momentum or some of those candidates.
Joining me now to discuss, Aisha Moodie-Mills, a CNN political commentator and a Democratic strategist, and Karen Finney, a CNN political commentator, who worked in the Clinton administration during the last presidential impeachment.
Good to see you both.
(CROSSTALK).
Karen, you first. What kind of impact do you think the impeachment trial would have on
the presidential race, particularly for Democratic Senators on the campaign trail who would have to return to D.C.? I mean, help me fill in the blanks if I am missing anything. Senator Booker, Sanders, Klobuchar, Warren, all would have to be in trial. What kind of disruption would it be?
KAREN FINNEY, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: No question. Talking to the campaigns, they all started to make plans to accommodate how they will, whether it is having surrogates -- Amy Klobuchar talked about having her husband on the trail while she has to sit there.
I'm sure they're thinking of creative ways, whether through the magic of the Internet to having a virtual presence where needed, but it is a problem, let's be honest. It is a real challenge for them.
The person I think that exemplifies that, if you look at the fact that one of our billionaires, Mr. Steyer, made his way to stage, and that he is moving up in polls, that's a real advantage for him. He will have all that time while Senators are off the trail to campaign and be out there and be one of the few voices people are hearing from and seeing from in person.
WHITFIELD: At the same time, Aisha, perhaps a powerful display during this trial for any number of Senators on the campaign trail could bode well for them?
AISHA MOODIE-MILLS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: It is opportunity to see them in action. At the end of the day, all of the candidates are attempting to get Donald Trump out of the White House. Here's their opportunity to have narrative around the impeachment hearing and to be there in the room where it is happening and reporting back to the field to supporters around that.
I think that while it is a challenge for them not to be able to knock doors and be in Iowa caucusing with folks, it is an opportunity for them to constantly rail against Donald Trump, which, at the end of the day, is who they're running to defeat.
And to be able to have the backdrop of the hearing where they can parrot and pull out all of the facts or receipts on why this guy is a bad president for America, I think it bodes well for everyone.
(CROSSTALK)
WHITFIELD: Go ahead.
FINNEY: I was going to say, quickly, the second part of that is also it is one of the most dramatic contrasts that we'll have up until the moment we have our nominee versus Trump, right? Our Democrats are there trying to defend the Constitution. As you know --
(CROSSTALK)
WHITFIELD: -- power and your pledge to duty --
(CROSSTALK)
FINNEY: Do you want that kind of person in the White House or do you want this guy in the White House?
WHITFIELD: Wow.
Let's look at the new CNN poll, showing the likely Democratic caucus goers in Iowa are most interested in a candidate that can beat President Trump in November.
Aisha, do you think voters are willing to support a candidate that they don't love, even if they feel like that candidate has a better chance at beating Trump?
MOODIE-MILLS: Well, what's interesting about that poll is that contrary to the national fervor about what Democrat can beat Trump, people are saying Joe Biden is the only person that can take on Trump.
But in Iowa, you have a poll, that says people care about getting rid of Trump. And Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren are top two in terms of polling in Iowa.
WHITFIELD: And Buttigieg on the rise.
MOODIE-MILLS: And Buttigieg on the rise. Again, it's among the top.
WHITFIELD: Yes.
MOODIE-MILLS: But the fact that two progressives are constantly top of Iowa is telling about who the Democratic base supports and who they think they can beat Trump and why.
[13:35:10]
So I think that, to me, gets into this conversation about can a progressive take Trump to task, at the end of the day, on the national stage in Iowa, and seem to think so.
WHITFIELD: Wow.
So, Karen, what do you see about the viability of progressives?
FINNEY: Look, I think it will be for Senator Sanders and Senator Warren to make that case on Tuesday during the debate.
Here's the other thing we have to remember that people are likely having in their minds. Given what's happened over the weekend and this week with Iran, the sort of commander-in-chief test, that comes in around this time every cycle anyway. But we know Americans were afraid about what happened and concerned.
In addition to, can you take on Trump, I suspect Tuesday night for people watching the debate, what they're looking for is that person going to be the right person to lead our country when we talk about Iran. So I suspect Senator Sanders may bring up the Iraq vote. I think we'll
have not just a conversation about taking on Trump with regard to domestic issues but also when it comes to foreign policy, keeping America safe.
And frankly, there's an opportunity to layout a vision for what America's role in the world should be now that it is in tatters because of Donald Trump.
WHITFIELD: Voters have to ask themselves as they try to make a selection, who is most presidential, who seems to be the temperament of being presidential. And you see that sometimes on display in the debates. We will all be watching Tuesday.
Thank you so much, Karen Finney, Aisha Mills. Appreciate it.
MOODIE-MILLS: Thank you.
FINNEY: Thanks.
WHITFIELD: So it will be that last debate before the first vote, and it is only on CNN. The top Democrats heading to Iowa for the live CNN presidential debate in partnership with "Des Moines Register." It is Tuesday, 9:00 p.m. Eastern, here on CNN.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[13:41:04]
WHITFIELD: All right. The House of Windsor is in uncharted territory and still reeling from Harry and Meghan's shocking announcement they're stepping back as senior members of the royal family. But many are blaming Meghan for the royal split. Some say it all comes down to the color of her skin.
My next guest writes, "As a black woman, it has been in fewer rating to watch how Meghan has been treated, not just because racism hurts, but also because there was the sense that we weren't allowed to even enjoy the fairy tale."
CNN Entertainment Reporter, Lisa Respers France, joins me to discuss.
Lisa, good to see you.
LISA RESPERS FRANCE, CNN SENIOR ENTERTAINMENT REPORTER: Good to see you.
WHITFIELD: Your column touches a lot of stuff, from how personally people are taking this to the journey they have been on. And now is this an indicator of independence or is this running away?
RESPERS FRANCE: I feel like if you have been treated badly, why wouldn't you want to step away. I feel like their 2020 goals, I want to get away from toxic situations, be financially independent. I feel like a lot of black women see themselves in Meghan because of how harshly she has been treated. Also because, when you say race plays a part, immediately walls go up,
people say it is not racism, it is because she's American, an actress, that she's divorced. When in reality, if there was a white American actress who was divorced, would anyone have made a joke about her baby being a chimpanzee? Probably not.
WHITFIELD: Right. All of that did happen. They, as a couple, have endured horrible tabloid criticism, images, all of that.
However, isn't there a feeling that they can't really escape ugliness, right?
RESPERS FRANCE: No.
WHITFIELD: And they may not be able to really change the ugliness that they're going to confront, but is this the answer, you know, trying to leave the monarchy, or trying to strike some independence? Because aren't they even in greater public view now because they're trying to separate themselves from the monarchy, the royalty?
RESPERS: Sure they are. But why not control the parts of the life, of their life that you can?
(CROSSTALK)
WHITFIELD: Can they really? I mean, that's the question.
(CROSSTALK)
RESPERS FRANCE: That is the question. But they appear to be trying to, at the least. They're trying to set up the life that they want to have. And Harry has been independent. Like, let's not forget --
(CROSSTALK)
WHITFIELD: He started Invictus.
RESPERS FRANCE: He started Invictus. He married a woman of color. How independent is that in the royal family?
WHITFIELD: Correct. Right.
RESPERS FRANCE: That's hugely independent.
So he signaled from the onset he won't be the regular royal. People were excited when they got married because they thought, oh, my goodness, a person of color in the royal family, this marks progress.
WHITFIELD: And people thought that was emblematic of significant change for the monarchy.
RESPERS FRANCE: No more so than when President Obama became president.
We are not post racial. That's not what's happening here.
What's happening is we're getting to see, if not more so, peoples' biases being uncovered. People are extremely uncomfortable with what's happening. People are extremely uncomfortable about having the race conversation.
But you cannot escape racism, no matter how much money you have. If you're a royal, you can't escape racism. But you can control what you can control.
(CROSSTALK)
WHITFIELD: Does their move, is it an indicator that perhaps they thought, whether it be as a couple or individually, that perhaps they were escaping it?
And is this now the very hurtful reminder that, just like the invisible man, no matter how high you get, no matter how far you get, there may be efforts still, people may denigrate you based on race, trying to put you in your place, and this is exemplary of that?
RESPERS FRANCE: I can't pretend to be in the minds of Meghan and Harry. What I do know is Harry is the only person in this relationship who knows what it is like to grow up as a royal. He and his brother know what it is like. They know how ugly and difficult it can be.
[13:45:02]
He now is a father. Wouldn't you want better for your child? I think a lot of their decisions are being driven by the type of life they want to carve out.
And people were super excited when they thought her coming marked a modern royal, so maybe this is a more modern royal family. What you're seeing is he knows he will never be king, so why can't he step back if that's what he so chooses to do?
(CROSSTALK)
WHITFIELD: Is there any hypocrisy in the whole branding, the Royal Sussex, a departure from the monarchy but, at the same time, trying to make money off the trademark that includes the name Sussex and royalty?
RESPERS FRANCE: I don't think it is any more hypocritical than people saying, how can they take money from citizens. They have to make money some type of way. They're choosing how they make money.
If you don't want them to make money off the U.K. citizens, this is how they're choosing to do it. It is not hypocritical if you realize they don't want to be destitute. Not that they would be. They have plenty of money.
But someone will make money off them as a couple. So why shouldn't it be them, is the question I would ask.
WHITFIELD: All right, Lisa, good to see you.
RESPERS FRANCE: Good to see you. WHITFIELD: Thank you so much. Appreciate it.
RESPERS FRANCE: Thank you.
WHITFIELD: Coming up next, a crime of passion. The estranged husband of a missing Connecticut mother charged with her murder. The twists and turns in the case straight ahead.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[13:50:46]
WHITFIELD: The estranged husband of Jennifer Dulos, the missing Connecticut mother of five, is out of jail after posting a $6 million bond. Fotis Dulos was charged with murder, felony murder and kidnapping in connection with his wife's disappearance.
His ex-girlfriend and his former attorney were also arraigned on conspiracy to commit murder.
Jennifer Dulos vanished nearly eight months ago after dropping her kids off at school. In her divorce filing, she said she feared for her life. Police say they found a shallow grave, a tarp, and lime to dissolve a body a week before her disappearance but have not found her body.
To talk more about this case, I want to bring in Avery Friedman, a civil rights attorney and law professor, and Richard Herman, a criminal defense attorney and law professor.
Good to see you both.
AVERY FRIEDMAN, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Hi, Fredricka.
RICHARD HERMAN, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Hi, Fred.
WHITFIELD: Richard, you first.
I guess, you are surprised, that he would be out on bond, given the magnitude of this case, and these charges would come with no body found yet?
HERMAN: A murder charge, and then to be released on bail is kind of unique. Even though he's got an ankle bracelet, and he's going to be confined to his house, it is still pretty amazing.
FRIEDMAN: Yes --
HERMAN: This whole case is pretty amazing. And it's a circumstantial case, not direct evidence, but circumstantial. And sometimes circumstantial is more powerful than direct.
But the government, the district attorney is going to ask this jury to make a leap and buy into their theory, which is, again, circumstantial.
However, the smoking gun here -- and there's no smoking gun, there's no weapon, there's no body.
(CROSSTALK)
HERMAN: But the problem here is that the truck that he borrowed from his friend --
(CROSSTALK)
HERMAN: -- that he told, take the seats out, he took those seats and gave it to the police --
FRIEDMAN: That's right.
HERMAN: -- and her blood was on those seats. That's the biggest piece of evidence --
WHITFIELD: You have physical evidence?
HERMAN: -- the prosecution has, yes.
WHITFIELD: In addition to that physical evidence, cell phone records.
Avery, what will it take to kind of mount, build this case?
FRIEDMAN: Well, remember, there are a couple of co-conspirators, according to the charges. And one of them is the lawyer friend of the defendant here, who got himself into the -- you referenced that in the opening -- got himself under this gun club area. And guess what, you've got a six-foot hole with tarp and lime. Now that's probably why he's in there.
But there's such, such a serious amount of substantial evidence, Fredricka, I think we're looking for a conviction here.
WHITFIELD: Oh, my goodness.
So, Richard, what about motive? I mean, you know, trying to establish motive is very important in trying to seal a case. Yes, there were these papers in the divorce proceedings, which said she feared for her life, but is that enough?
HERMAN: Right.
Well, you know, Fred, and in this particular case, a criminologist is going to say, because of the amount of blood that they found, that this was really a killing, a passion killing, like they knew this person, and they wanted to hurt them.
FRIEDMAN: Right.
HERMAN: And these two were going through a very contentious divorce, Fred. And 300 motions were filed between the parties during this divorce proceeding. So I think it's fair to assume that the relationship was not very good.
But, again -- FRIEDMAN: And, and --
HERMAN: -- the defense is going to stand up, Fred, and tell the jury, any second now, this person could walk through that front door, and that's reasonable doubt.
(CROSSTALK)
HERMAN: And they will say that, because there's no body. They're going to say that, Fred.
WHITFIELD: Avery --
(CROSSTALK)
FRIEDMAN: The prosecutor says motive is everything and the motive is right here. They have the evidence. They're going to get that conviction. This guy was reportedly almost $7 million in debt. There's overwhelming evidence. I think it looks like a slam dunk for the prosecutors.
WHITFIELD: Wow, so sad.
HERMAN: Not a slam dunk.
WHITFIELD: That is sad. Terrible.
WHITFIELD: A very sad situation.
HERMAN: Very sad.
WHITFIELD: We're talking about parents of five kids.
FRIEDMAN: You bet, yes.
(CROSSTALK)
HERMAN: Five kids. Five kids.
WHITFIELD: Avery Friedman, Richard Herman, always great to see you. Thank you so much.
FRIEDMAN: Take care.
HERMAN: All right, Fred, take care.
FRIEDMAN: Take care.
[13:54:54]
WHITFIELD: We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
WHITFIELD: Hello, again, everyone. Thank you so much for joining us. I'm Fredericka Whitfield. We begin with a tumultuous week in the Middle East, now ending in a
stunning admission. Iran has confessed to accidentally shooting down a Ukrainian passenger plane, killing all 176 passengers on board.
[13:59:58]
The extraordinary confession comes just one week after we learned that President Trump ordered a U.S. drone strike, killing Iran's top military commander, Qasem Soleimani.
Days later, just this past Wednesday, Iran, vowing harsh revenge, attacked two Iraqi military bases that were housing U.S. troops and coalition forces.
