Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

U.S.: Russia Is Adding, Not Removing, Troops Along Ukraine Border; Historic U.S. Inflation Could Worsen Under Russia-Ukraine Conflict; Biden Orders National Archives To Give Trump Visitor Logs To 1/6 Panel. Aired 3-3:30p ET

Aired February 16, 2022 - 15:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:01:06]

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN HOST: It's the top of the hour on CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Alisyn Camerota.

VICTOR BLACKWELL, CNN HOST: I'm Victor Blackwell. It's good to be with you.

The U.S., Ukraine and NATO all say that they have not seen evidence that Russia is pulling troops back from Ukraine's border, despite the claims from Moscow. The Russian ministry of defense released this footage of military equipment crossing the bridge from Crimea back into Russia. It says tactical exercises are done and the armor is heading back to its permanent deployment. But minutes ago, the State Department said that Russia continues to add forces.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NED PRICE, STATE DEPARTMENT SPOKESMAN: In fact, we have seen the opposite. In recent weeks and even in recent days, more Russian forces, not fewer, are at the border. They are moving concerningly into fighting positions. This is caused for propound concern. Over the past several weeks, we've also seen Russian officials and Russian media plant numerous stories in the press, any one of which could be served to elevate as a pretext for an invasion.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: Well, today, Ukraine announcing a day of unity. That was called for the Ukrainian president there. And meanwhile, CNN has exclusive reporting about the latest Ukrainian intelligence assessment, which says that Russia does not have enough troops near its border for an effective full scale invasion.

Let's bring in CNN's Erin Burnett. She is live for us in Lviv, Ukraine. So, Erin, what more is Ukrainian intelligence saying about the Russian troop levels?

ERIN BURNETT, CNN ANCHOR, "ERIN BURNETT OUTFRONT": So, they are saying that the Russians are not pulling back at all. They concur with what you heard Ned Price say from the State Department, that the Russians are continuing to build up. They are making the point they don't believe that the Russians have enough forces for both an invasion and a full scale occupation.

They are also giving a lot of details though. There's exclusive reporting here at CNN that they're saying that they count 148,000 troops along the border, 126,000 of them are ground troops and also that there are 87 battalion tactical groups. They compare to what Russia would ordinarily have along these borders. They say that they have 53 more of those battalions that they would ordinarily have. So, obviously, that's what they see.

And also, important, you know, when you look at the north of here and the Belarusian border, there's been a huge build up, right, with President Lukashenko, that tight all of Vladimir Putin's, that the Ukrainian intelligence says that they see a creeping full Russian occupation of Belarus, and that Belarus is now a full pledge theater of Russian operations.

So, you've seen that build up, but it's interesting the words they using to describe it. The implication it's less and less of an independent state, and more and more a vassal state of Putin's.

BLACKWELL: Erin, we're learning more about just how destructive this massive cyberattack was and still is still is, because Ukraine says that they're still feeling the effect. What more do we know about that?

BURNETT: So, they are now saying its' the largest cyber attack of this sort, that they have experienced in Ukraine's history. They're also saying that it's ongoing. We understand right now that it's targeted against military websites. It's unclear how much further it goes than that, but they are saying it's the largest such attack that they've had.

Obviously, it could be a precursor of something else. It could be the beginning of more cyber attacks, and that's the whole point, we don't know the instability. But one thing I'll say, it's important, today we went to a recruitment center and we were talking to people who were signing up to basically defend their homes, fight in the streets if it's necessary, if all of the Ukrainian forces are at the front. That you would need to have sort of local sort of guerilla type forces on the ground here.

So, we're talking to the people signing up. And one thing they were saying, all of them, this word hybrid.

[15:05:02]

I've heard it from every one we've spoken to here. Every one is acutely aware of hybrid warfare, right, that it's not just military. It's also cyber and the disinformation like Ned Price is referring to, putting false stories out there.

The Ukrainian government has done a good job at raising awareness here that you don't believe everything that you read and everything that you hear and everything that you hear. And that's actually been a significant thing to hear, so many people talking about hybrid warfare and its significance.

CAMEROTA: Yeah, that's really helpful context. Erin Burnett, thank you very much.

Joining us now is retired Army Brigadier General Peter Zwack. He served as the senior defense official and attache to the Russian Federation from 2012 and 2014 when Russia invaded Crimea, and he wrote the book, "Swimming the Volga", about his time in pre-Putin Russia.

General, what do you think? Are 150,000 Russian troops on the border enough for a full scale invasion?

BRIG. GEN. PETER ZWACK, U.S. ARMY (RET.): Good afternoon, Alisyn and Victor.

No, Not for a -- not for an offensive that's designed to, if you will, take all of Ukraine or frankly all of Ukraine up to the river, which is kind of their Mississippi. That would be a huge hunk of land. And as was reported, then comes the challenge to hold.

Now, a force can do other very, very significant operations, whether it is the Donbas, Eastern Ukraine, or trying to connect with Crimea. I think it would be -- what we all think would be a crazy mistake that they've tried, the capability is there.

We hear about withdrawal. These are the things we want to be looking for as military guys. One, if they have smaller and middle range artillery in the eight mile, the 14 range. If they are down that way, are they packing up and going back? Other things would be just major formations. Not just snippets and picture of withdrawing especially if they are part of the farther military districts.

What makes this troubling for me is when we talk about major exercise, I believe this is a throw on. The Russians have their major exercise just three months ago. The west, that was the big deal. This is something beyond that.

I just teemed in to the Black Sea a couple of days where five or six landing craft, I saw those in Kaliningrad. They're menacing. A lot going on to convince me that their set is pulling back.

BLACKWELL: So, let me ask you, General. We heard from the secretary general of NATO who says there are signs Putin still wants to continue along the diplomatic route. Let's say that he does not further invade Ukraine.

Should that be the end of it? I mean, there has been the destabilization in the region. It certainly has hit the Ukrainian economy. Should there be an all's well that ends well or should there be some consequences for what has already happened and maybe a deterrent that it won't happen in five or ten years from now?

ZWACK: Well, I think what the Russian Federation has done, the regime, by the way, truth in lending, I like the Russian people on a human and culture level but this is beyond the pale what the government is putting them into. So, I just wanted to say that. So, I don't know what the end state is. But what Russia has done I

believe, near to midterm, major damage, is so far if you will, cementing the reputation as being rambunctious, as being a disrupter, being deceptive.

And they don't need that. They need to break out. Work this trust deficit. They have -- one reason all these statement are being made is because they have an enormous credibility gap now. In 2014, we saw the invasion, the first invasion of Crimea, and right through most of it, we aren't there, we are being told to our face something that wasn't true. And then, of course, what happened there.

Last thing, Ukraine cried. Modern Ukraine born in the battles of 2014 and 2015 when they stood up and it was an ugly fight. It's now continued.

And what the Russians have done inadvertently is they not only have galvanized NATO and the United States, and it isn't just an Anglo- Saxon alliance, what the Russian say, this is a constellation of 30 nations, plus a bunch of neutrals.

[15:10:05]

That's one.

And two, they have certainly put a grim determination in Ukrainians who don't want this.

And the last, last thing is when we talk about Russian tropes, if you will about, oh, there are 100,000 Ukrainian troops. Stop, your correspondents, other correspondents along these borders, these Ukrainian soldiers are in defensive bunkers and trenches and waiting for potentially the worse, they are not in any type of offensive mode.

BLACKWELL: All right. Retired Brigadier General Peter Zwack, always appreciate the insight and perspective -- thank you, sir.

The crisis between Russia and Ukraine could cost you a lot of money and drive up an already high rate of inflation.

CAMEROTA: The potential economic impact of a Russian invasion could mean you'll be paying more to drive your car or your heat or power up your home.

CNN's Matt Egan is here to break down the numbers and the impact on U.S. consumers.

What does it look like, Matt?

MATT EGAN, CNN REPORTER: Well, Alisyn and Victor, this crisis is taking place thousands of miles away from the closest U.S. city. Yet, millions of Americans here in the United States could actually feel the economic impact. I'm going to give you a few examples.

The big one, the obvious one, gas prices. Russia is the number two oil producer in the world. And J.P. Morgan has said if any Russian oil flows are disruptive by this crisis, we could see oil go from around $94 barrel today to $120 a barrel. That, of course, would drive up gasoline prices which are already high.

The national average hitting 3.51 a gallon today, up 20 cents from a month ago. Now inflation, as you mentioned, is already an issue at 7.5 percent today. RSM put out an analysis that said if oil goes to 110, we could see inflation at 10 percent. We haven't seen anything like that since 1981.

Also, we're talking about turbulence in the stock market. The markets have been kind of living and dying in all these different headlines and Ukraine crisis. Earlier today, the Dow was down 350 points on concerns about Russia and Ukraine. Since then, we've seen the market bounce back. There's a been a lot of turbulence in the stock market, all related to this crisis.

And then we also have to talk about the economic recovery, because if there's more uncertainty about the geopolitical situation, inflation, that could slow down the recovery, slow down main street.

Also the Fed, the Fed may have to step up its fight against inflation. That could mean higher borrowing costs, credit cards, mortgages, car loans.

And then cyber. President Biden mentioned this yesterday. We saw that, you know, a year ago, the shut down of the Colonial Pipeline was really disruptive to people. We had shortages of gas in southeast. If there's a cyber intrusion, that would be a big deal.

Listen, obviously, people in Europe will feel the brunt of this. They are closer. They rely on Russia for energy. I think COVID has shown us events on one side of the planet can impact people on the other side.

CAMEROTA: Yes, great point. Matt Egan, thank you.

BLACKWELL: Thank you, Matt.

EGAN: Thank you, guys.

BLACKWELL: The National Archives says it has now informed former President Trump that it plans to hand over the White House visitor logs to the House committee investigating January 6th. Those lawmakers also continue to dig in on the fake electors plot. We'll discuss that.

CAMEROTA: And several Senate Republicans ask the Department of Justice to not include unruly passengers on the no fly list. Why?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:17:59]

CAMEROTA: President Biden has rejected former President Trump's efforts to withhold information from the January 6th committee. He ordered the National Archives to turn over the Trump White House visitor logs to the committee within 15 days. BLACKWELL: The committee has also issued new subpoenas for six people

who helped to organize the slates of fake electors who will challenge President Biden's 2020 victory.

Let's bring in CNN senior legal analyst Elie Honig and CNN senior political analyst John Avlon, the author of a new book.

CAMEROTA: Oh, yeah.

BLACKWELL: "Lincoln and the Fight for Peace".

AVLON: I love it.

BLACKWELL: Congratulations on the book. Welcome to you both.

Let me start on this visitor log. Hasn't the former president lost this fight or since this is a different set of documents, it's a new fight?

ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: So, it's the latter, Victor, but here we go again, right? We spent three months going from the federal district court, to the court of appeals, the Supreme Court, on the first batch of National Archives documents, all those levels of federal court said you lose, Donald Trump. You do not have a legitimate indication of executive privilege here.

If Donald Trump wants to be litigious --

BLACKWELL: He does.

CAMEROTA: He does.

HONIG: And Lord knows he is litigious. He can go back to court and say, OK, I lost those but these are different documents. Let me spoil the ending. He's going to lose.

JOHN AVLON, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: He can go through the motions but it gives kabuki a bad name. We know the outcome here, he's lost his fight.

What makes this more irritating than normal is that White House visitors logs were public under the Obama administration. Trump after all those promises about draining the swamp, one of the first thing he did, he said, you know what, public is not going to see who comes to visit me in the White House.

So, this not some over turning of precedent that we force him to release the logs. This is information that should be public in first place.

CAMEROTA: And very quickly, John, we show about their shoddy recordkeeping. What makes us think that those record logs were actually kept up to date?

AVLON: You're probably not going to get a water tight record from Trump staffers. The Secret Service is a different business. They have a higher obligation. They have a responsibility to protect the president and protect the republic.

[05:20:01]

So, there will be records getting into the White House grounds that should be solid.

CAMEROTA: Okay, great. Let's talk about the no fly list and whether or not unruly passengers should be on there. So, the incidents of unruly passengers and we see them. I mean, they're so frightening like in 2021, 5,981 unruly passenger incidents. Just this year alone, 499.

There are now eight Republican senators, we can put up their faces who are asking the Department of Justice not to include these passengers on a no fly list. OK, I understand, you don't want to be labeled terrorist. That carries a lot. However, these are terrifying episodes that we see that passengers have to deal with on planes.

HONIG: Who is in favor of unruly passengers? Who wants to give leniency to unruly passengers? Yes, of course, there has to be a no fly list for terrorists, but anybody who threatens the safety or causes a flight crew or a flight itself, or causes a flight to turn back around, I think there's a very good basis for DOJ, DHS, TSA, the various agencies that would be in charge of this kind of list, to say we need this. Now, if they do try to come out with this list, it absolutely will be challenged in court. There were challenges to be terrorists no fly list in court.

AVLON: But this is probably the kind of thing that should be done by the private company themselves rather than the federal government.

CAMEROTA: Well, they are. The airlines do it but they don't have one big directory.

AVLON: That may be too much to ask. I think the real issue is how come we're having this collective freak out of incivility. What's driving this? It's not just the masks. We have sent a signal to society it's okay to be a selfish screaming jackass on an airline and you're being empowered while doing it. You're being a fool and in inconveniencing everybody else. But, I mean, look at the drivers of this is interesting and troubling.

BLACKWELL: John let me ask you about the fund raising effort from Senator Josh Hawley. He is selling a mug of all the pictures taken of him on all the days. He has emblazoned on this the fist from January 6th. Now, he says he didn't support the insurrection and the insurrection hasn't started, but he chose that image for a reason.

AVLON: Look, who are you going to believe? It's a perfect segue to what we're talking about. You know, you're encouraging that behavior for memorializing it on a mug. You know, don't listen to what he says. Look at what he does and look at what he fundraises off of, and it's part of this overall tied of incivility and fetishizing bad behavior. It's pathetic attempt for him to look tougher than he really is.

CAMEROTA: John, tell us about Lincoln and the fight for peace and why it's so relevant today. AVLON: Look, we have a lot of talk about the second Civil War now.

It's dangerously reckless. We lost 750,000 Americans the first time. We need to learn from the lessons of history. We need to apply the lessons of history so we're not condemned to repeat it.

And I think looking to Lincoln's leadership are particularly critical, the way he didn't demonize people. He disagreed. He believed Americans have more to unite them than divide them. It's a very high bar.

Let's be honest. Our empathy has been stained in this country. With a lot of fake attackers and we're dealing with a low level insurrection that denies the legitimacy of a duly elected president right now. But we need to learn those lessons.

We're not going to find another Lincoln. I think we can have a path away from this violent polarization we're dealing with today, and we can remember that defending our democracy is a cause at least as honorable and heroic as pointing it in first place.

BLACKWELL: Yeah. All right. John Avlon, Elie Honig --

AVLON: Thank you, guys.

BLACKWELL: Thank you.

CAMEROTA: Great to see you.

The teenage Russian skater at the center of the Olympic doping scandal is about to compete again. Now, new reports reveal she has three different heart drugs in her system.

BLACKWELL: We'll speak to an Olympian who came in second. He lost the gold to a Russian athlete who then tested positive for steroids. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLACKWELL: The second half of the Olympic women ice figure skating competition is set for tomorrow and 15-year-old Russian super star Kamila Valieva has been cleared to skate, despite testing positive for banned heart medication known to help endurance.

CAMEROTA: Valieva's team says the medication belonged to her grandfather but it ended up in her system. But "The New York Times" now reports she tested positive for two additional heart drugs. Those drugs are not on the banned list but they do add to the controversy.

BLACKWELL: Joining us now is former U.S. Olympian Erik Kynard.

Are you former Olympian?

CAMEROTA: No, no, once an Olympian, always.

BLACKWELL: I think once you go and get the medal, you're an Olympian forever.

So, the medal he won in 2012 for the high jump was upgraded to gold because the original winner took part in the Russian steroid program.

Eric, good to see you.

That was in 2012. Later he was found to have participated. Do you have in gold medal yet?

ERIK KYNARD, FORMER U.S. OLYMPIAN: No. I actually don't have the gold medal yet. It was a long arduous process. It's been nine years since this event took place. I was informed I believe in 2019, about the case. It went to CAS arbitration, like all of them do.