Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Violations of Ceasefire; Harris Meets with NATO; James Clapper is Interviewed about Russia; McCarthy Endorses Cheney's Challenger; Michael Moore is Interviewed on a Judge Ordering Depositions from Trump and His Family. Aired 9-9:30a ET

Aired February 18, 2022 - 09:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:00:12]

BIANNA GOLODRYGA, CNN ANCHOR: An urgent push for peace. Vice President Harris speaking in Munich this morning at a critical security conference. This as Secretary of State Blinken says the United States is doing everything possible for diplomacy, but, quote, we are deeply concerned that this is not the path Russia has embarked on.

Good morning, everybody. I'm Bianna Golodryga in New York.

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN ANCHOR: And I'm Jim Sciutto reporting from Kyiv, Ukraine.

This morning, Ukraine says that cease-fire violations are surging in the eastern part of this country. Officials say Russian-backed separatists are using mortars, grenade launchers, and large caliber machine guns. These new images from the Donbas region just today.

Hours from now, President Biden set to speak with global allies on how to deter Russia's military action here. This as Vice President Kamala Harris prepares to meet with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky tomorrow.

So much happening right now. And we're doing our best to cover it. Our reporters and correspondents here in Kyiv and around the region.

We begin this morning with our senior international correspondent Matthew Chance, who's here with me in Kyiv.

First, let's talk about what's going on in the eastern part of Ukraine. A great deal of attention on that by the U.S. and NATO officials because they've been concerned that action there, escalation there might be used as Russia -- as a pretext for a further invasion. And now we're seeing a lot more fire going across that line of contact.

MATTHEW CHANCE, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, we are. In fact, it's a very unstable line of contact. And so, you know, if you look past it in recent months, you do see regular violations of the cease-fire. But we are seeing a dramatic upsurge right now. The Ukrainians saying, you know, dozens of cease-fire violations, artillery strikes, other, you know, smaller caliber, you know, artillery kind of missiles coming across as well. All in violation of the peace agreement that's meant to be, you know, a sort of weapons -- sort of heavy weapons-free zone up there. So it is a really serious escalation.

The Ukrainians are concerned that what's happening is that they are being provoked into being drawn into retaliation, into a much bigger sort of confrontation. It's easy to see how that could spark off into something much more, and they're desperately trying, they say, to void that.

I have to say, on the other side, the rebels are saying they're getting hit by the Ukrainian military in residential areas, in Donetsk and Luhansk as well.

SCIUTTO: And you can imagine the situation where one artillery shell lands and the other feels the need to respond and then one blames the other for the escalation.

I do want to ask about what -- and for folks at home who don't realize this, this is a part of Ukraine, part of a sovereign country, but that has been controlled by Russian-backed separatists for a number of years now -- word of evacuation of residents there.

CHANCE: Yes, and that's a really ominous sign. The fact that the rebels today in the Donetsk people's republic, part of that rebel- controlled area, the leadership of that area has said, look, we're calling for a mass evacuation from today of people, women and children. They are sending them, you know, to the east towards Russia where they've been in contact, they say, with the Russian authorities for reception camps to be built there in the Rostov region, which is in Russia, but close there.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

CHANCE: So, it looks like they're clearing away the vulnerable civilian population from that area. Obviously, bracing for some kind of attack, whether it's -- whether it's propaganda, whether they see a real threat, we don't know, or whether it's preparation from the other side that the Russians may, you know, kind of stage some sort of action there.

SCIUTTO: Let me ask you just quickly, you've covered this region for a long time, has there previously been an evacuation order like that during the many years of war that we've seen so far?

CHANCE: Well, I mean, I -- look, in the past couple of years, I would say no. But, you know, obviously, this was a scene of very, very fierce fighting back in 2014 and 2015.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

CHANCE: And so I think there would have been, you know, people, you know, leaving that area where it was acutely dangerous and moving into Russia and elsewhere as well. Obviously, there's been a lot of refugees created in this crisis of 14,000 dead.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

CHANCE: What we don't want to see, what no one wants to see is this region, is a repeat of that.

SCIUTTO: Yes. This artillery fire has often been deadly.

Matthew Chance, thanks so much for bringing us the latest on this.

Also this morning, Vice President Kamala Harris, she is in Munich for a series of high stakes security talks with European leaders in the midst of tensions here in Ukraine.

CNN's Natasha Bertrand, she is live in Munich.

Natasha, we have new reporting this morning about what has been moving the Biden administration in recent days, particularly the public words and warnings we saw from the president, Antony Blinken before the Security Council yesterday, and that is a bleak new intelligence assessment about Russia's intentions, Russia's continuing preparations for an invasion of this country, and the potential timing for that. Tell us details of what we found.

NATASHA BERTRAND, CNN WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: That's right, Jim. So, we're reporting this morning that the U.S. has a new intel assessment that suggests that Russia is in fact preparing for a potential invasion. Although caveated that they still don't know whether Russian President Vladimir Putin has actually made the decision to invade.

[09:05:03]

But they are taking all of the steps necessary to do so, if, in fact, that decision does come down. And they are saying that it could happen within the next few days.

Of course, President Biden did say as much earlier this week, telling reporters that he expects something to happen in the coming days.

We're also told that the U.S. has intelligence suggesting that that Russian announcement earlier this week about a troop withdrawal was actually a ruse, it was actually a deliberate attempt by Russia to deceive the world and to make them think that these Russian forces were withdrawing, when, in fact, they were actually moving more forces back into the region.

So, taken together, these intel assessments paint a very bleak picture of what Russia's intentions actually are.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken has said he is open to meeting with the Russian foreign minister, Sergey Lavrov, next week. But, of course, that will only happen, Jim, if Russia does not, in fact, invade.

SCIUTTO: Natasha Bertrand in Munich, thanks very much. I'm also told, as part of this reporting by a senior U.S. official,

that the U.S. is now watching very closely for signs that Russia's invasion preparations are in the final stages. Among those possible signs would be the loading of amphibious ships and other sea craft. Also the possibility of a pretext, manufacturing further pretext for invasion. They're watching very closely for those final preparations.

Joining me now to discuss, former director of national intelligence, James Clapper.

Director Clapper, good to have you on this morning.

JAMES CLAPPER, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Thanks, Jim.

SCIUTTO: I imagine you, given your decades in intelligence, including of watching Russia very closely, have been watching events in recent days very closely. First, I want to -- want to ask you about what you see when you see the increased contact along what's known as the line of contact, this artillery fire here, as well as the growing claims by Russia, both in state media and public statements, that ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine are under threat. Is that the kind of false flag or false pretext that the U.S. is looking for right now?

CLAPPER: I think so, Jim. I don't know that this is the provocation, but it certainly fits the bill. And, of course, what Russians can justify is that they have to move into eastern Ukraine, the Donbas region, to restore stability and protect the separatists. And so we've been looking for a provocation, the intelligence community, and I think correctly so, dimed out the Russians on some previous, potential false flags. So, this could well be it. And there just aren't too many things left to be done before they actually invade.

GOLODRYGA: Director Clapper, you know better than most that after the investigation into the 2016 medaling from Russia into the U.S. election, there had been concerns about a blind spot potentially into the Kremlin for U.S. intelligence here, especially after a top source close to the Kremlin had to be ex-filtrated to the U.S. for that source's safety. Given the array of information that has been released publicly by this administration the last few weeks, are you surprised that the level of intel that the U.S. seems to have regained inside the Kremlin?

CLAPPER: And it -- it appears -- it appears, Jim, that we -- you know, this is what happens with technology. It appears we lost Director Clapper.

But it is interesting, and you and I have talked about that, this new tactic from U.S. intelligence here, laying everything out, especially over the past few years when there was a concern that we may not have the insight into the Kremlin.

I believe we have Director Clapper back.

Are you back?

There you go. CLAPPER: Yes, I am.

GOLODRYGA: Did you -- were you able to hear my question?

CLAPPER: Yes, I did. I think it -- what it revolves around is what I call the elusive holy grail for intelligence, which is plans and intentions. And this really boils down to the plans and intentions of one man, Putin. And that's always difficult, particularly in his case, since he plays pretty close to the vest and doesn't talk to too many people, best I can tell. So, that is a challenge for the intelligence community, always has been, particularly with denied countries like Russia and China, what's actually on the mind of the leader.

SCIUTTO: Director Clapper, we took notice to Russia's response to U.S. diplomatic proposals yesterday, a letter delivered yesterday to the president and the secretary of state, and Russia did not soften at all its stance on Ukraine's potential membership in NATO, but seemed to broaden it to say that it opposes any further expansion of NATO, which might include other countries that have, at times, been considered or considered interest, a Sweden or a Finland.

[09:10:09]

That is certainly not a softening and it's on something that NATO and the U.S. has said is a non-starter, and say that it's up to NATO countries and NATO allies.

When you look at that statement, that response, do you see any path for a diplomatic solution to this or do you see Russia's positions hardening?

CLAPPER: The latter. I don't see a path ahead here. And I have trouble envisioning a Venn diagram where you come up with some silver bullet solution that everybody is pleased with.

The Russians contrived this whole crisis in the first place by making what they know to be impossible demands. And this latest manifesto, this 11-page response, just reinforces that. So, I don't see much hope here for a diplomatic solution.

GOLODRYGA: How long can you envision -- assuming that we don't see an imminent attack, which very well could happen, U.S. intel and the president himself have relayed that -- how long do you envision -- though, if we don't see one, the sort of rope-a-doping back and forth where we keep on hearing this same words out of the Kremlin and out of the United States and then one, you know, you could argue, suffering the most right now is Ukraine -- how long is this sustainable for?

CLAPPER: Well, I don't know. That's a -- that's a great question, Bianna.

One thing that is on the calendar here is the weather.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

CLAPPER: As the winter freeze ends, that's going to be harder and harder for a Russian military, which is very dependent on vehicles, particularly track vehicles, at least to move cross country. They can -- they'd, you know, be restricted to roads. So they have that factor.

And just keeping these troops leaning forward in the foxhole, literally and figuratively, they can only do that for so long. So, there's a time limit. I don't know what it -- what it -- what it is. But there is one.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

Before we go, Director Clapper, this has been a very public effort by the U.S. to declassify and share its intelligence. Sometimes day by day on what it sees of Russian movements here. Of course, Russia makes its own claims, many of them false as well, but it's an information war going on.

Who do you think is winning that facet of the war, the U.S. or Russia, the U.S. and NATO or Russia?

CLAPPER: Well, I think we're -- I think it's kind of a draw right now. And I, for one, am a supporter of using intelligence as an information operations tool. We have to do that given the way the Russians occupy that information operations space.

There's a downside if you use intelligence and go public with it. Are you losing a valuable source and method? And so there has to be a risk versus gain assessment. But I think it's the right thing to do and right now I think it's kind of a draw because I do think it's useful to dime out the Russians whenever you can and to forewarn people of what the Russians are going to do.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

GOLODRYGA: Yes. Maybe useful to stave off an invasion right now.

But, Jim, as you and I spoke about yesterday, Russia and the Kremlin is really spinning this to their benefit, at least domestically with Russians there, with state-run media, calling the United States and the west alarmists.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

GOLODRYGA: James Clapper, thank you so much for joining us and bearing with the technological issues we had.

Thank you.

CLAPPER: Thanks, Bianna.

GOLODRYGA: And still to come, former Vice President Pence defending the RNC after its censure of Representatives Cheney and Kinzinger. What he said about January 6th, up next.

And a new lawsuit with familiar allegations. A New York state trooper suing former Governor Andrew Cuomo, alleging he inappropriately touched and groped her, saying that she, quote, felt violated. And trapped overnight in freezing temperatures, a winter storm

blanketed parts of the Midwest with reports of some drivers being stranded in cars for eight to nine hours. We'll have a live update straight ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:18:27]

GOLODRYGA: Former Vice President Pence is defending the Republican National Committee, even after it voted to censure Representatives Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, just because of their roles in the select committee investigating January 6th. Now, that resolution described the events of that day as, quote, legitimate political discourse. Pence argued yesterday the RNC was not referring to the people who engaged in violence at the Capitol.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MIKE PENCE, FORMER U.S. VICE PRESIDENT: I just don't -- I just don't know too many people around the country, including my friends at the RNC, the chairman of the Republican National Committee, who have any different view than it was a tragic day. And the people that ransacked the Capitol were wrong and should be held to account in the law.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GOLODRYGA: And in an escalation of the simmering feud between House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy and Congresswoman Cheney, McCarthy just announced his support for her Trump-backed opponent in the Wyoming GOP primary.

CNN Capitol Hill reporter Melanie Zanona joins me now.

Melanie, what more are we hearing exactly from McCarthy on this endorsement?

MELANIE ZANONA, CNN CAPITOL HILL REPORTER: Well, it's no secret that Kevin McCarthy has had animosity toward Liz Cheney ever since she voted to impeach Donald Trump. He supported the effort to remove her from GOP leadership last year. And now he's putting his political muscle behind the effort to defeat her in Wyoming, essentially taking their feud to the next level.

Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. KEVIN MCCARTHY (R-CA): Wyoming deserves to have a representative who will deliver the accountability against this Biden administration. Not a representative that they have today that works closer with Nancy Pelosi, going after Republicans, instead of stopping these radical Democrats for what they're doing to this country.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[09:20:06]

ZANONA: And Kevin McCarthy is not the only one getting involved in this race. Elise Stefanik, the number three House Republican, who replaced Cheney in leadership, also announced this morning that she is endorsing Cheney's primary opponent, Harriet Hageman.

Now, none of this is entirely surprising, but it is still an extraordinary moment in Republican politics right now. GOP leaders typically do not get involved in primaries. But Kevin McCarthy was under immense pressure from his right flank to take some sort of action against Cheney and he had been resisting calls to remove her from conference. So, instead, he has now settled on trying to kick her out of Congress entirely.

Of course, this could win him major points with Trump world, and that is a crucial constituency if he wants to become speaker one day. But it is also a bit of a risk, Bianna. That's because he has members in his own conference who don't want to see their leadership involved in this messy sort of interparty warfare.

And not to mention, if Cheney does come back, it would be pretty embarrass for both McCarthy and Trump.

GOLODRYGA: Yes, really uncomfortable for them.

Melanie, any indication as to what Liz Cheney's response is to this? I can't imagine that she's overly surprised.

ZANONA: Yes, well, there's clearly no love lost between the two camps. We haven't heard from Liz Cheney herself, but a spokesman, Jeremy Adler, did tell us of Harriet Hageman, the opponent, wow, she must be really desperate.

GOLODRYGA: Enough said there.

Melanie Zanona, thank you.

Well, a New York judge has ruled that former President Trump, as well as his children, Ivanka and Don Jr., must sit for depositions in the New York attorney general's civil investigation of their business practices. It's a ruling Trump's lawyers have already indicated that they plan to appeal.

So, let's bring in former U.S. attorney for the Middle District of Georgia, Michael Moore.

Michael, great to have you on.

MICHAEL MOORE, FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY, MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA : Thank you.

GOLODRYGA: So how big of a game changer, if any, was this ruling yesterday by the judge in New York?

MOORE: You know, I think -- glad to be with you this morning. I think it was really an expected ruling. There's nothing particularly unusual about having subpoenas issued in a civil case where there are criminal investigations ongoing. And that's really the crux of the objection that we hear from the Trump team, and that is that somehow this puts me in jeopardy of whether or not I can adequately protect my rights in my criminal case. And the courts have a way to deal with this, and that is that, if the president and his children wish to take the Fifth Amendment, they can do it. But that likely means there would be a negative inference against them in the civil case.

So, again, there's nothing particularly unusual except that this involves a former president of the United States. And I expect they will appeal it. And I expect the New York courts will follow the law that they have been following for quite some time, and that is to enforce a subpoena.

There may be one option, and that is to essentially stay the civil case until the conclusion of the criminal case. Sometimes judges have done that in cases that I've been involved in. So, we'll see where they go.

GOLODRYGA: And we know the Trump family and their lawyers are very familiar with this process and the process of delaying rulings, right, by continuing to appeal. How long can an appeals process last?

MOORE: You know, I really think that you'd likely see an expedited appeal here. I don't think the courts will take it and take, you know, six or eight months to decide the case. I think they'll move rather quickly given the investigation and the clear urgency by the attorney general to move forward.

But you're right, I mean, if there's anybody who's been great at manipulating the court system to his advantage in the last few years, that's been the former president.

GOLODRYGA: And I'm just curious to get your analysis, because it's one thing to plead the fifth, and to just listen to your attorneys, it's quite another thing for former President Trump to just plead the Fifth and not say anything more. He's known to continue talking, even at the advice of his lawyers to not say any more.

Do you ever think that that could be a possible scenario here?

MOORE: Absolutely. I mean I think more than 50 percent of his problems, while his administration was running maybe 90 percent of the problem, the fact that he couldn't keep his mouth shut. And I just think he has an inability to do that and to not listen to good, legal advice.

You know, what he's going to be facing -- and his lawyers will be good lawyers and what they're be telling him is that, look, if you take the fifth, that negative inference may be used against you. In other words, it would be presumed that what you would say would be negative to your case.

So, a jury would be authorized to consider that, well, if you took the Fifth, you must have had something to hide. That's in the civil context. And he's not going to like that. He's going to want to say, well, I'm going to explain myself and, you know, typically that's like giving him a shovel, and he's just going to keep digging the hole deeper.

GOLODRYGA: One could be forgiven for being confused with all these investigations and lawsuits going on at the same time in multiple states, but which one do you think is more legally potentially damaging for him, what's going on, whether it's a civil or a criminal case here in New York, or the ongoing investigation in Georgia into election interference?

MOORE: I think that the clean (ph) case, a very easy case, is the money case in New York. Following the money, that's always something that seems to catch people. And if you think about Al Capone, there you go.

[09:25:01]

You know, he was -- he had plenty of a criminal organization, but what got him was tax problems.

If you think about the Georgia investigation, that is a -- that could be a very clean criminal investigation. The question is whether or not the district attorney wants to broaden that to sort of have a wider net to catch more people in a possible conspiracy, or RICO case, or whether or not she ultimately decide, if she's going to charge the case, to move in a more targeted fashion toward Trump, sort of looking at the phone call and whether or not that call was enough to be -- to cause criminal liability. I think that could be a very clean case.

So I like the money case. I think those are always cases that prosecutors can prove, and juries can understand. And I think that the Georgia case has some interesting ramifications, but, again, if the DA moves forward and if they DA in Georgia gets a conviction, that conviction has to survive in some appellate courts that are primarily controlled by Republican appointees.

GOLODRYGA: Yes.

Michael Moore, great to have your perspective and analysis on. We appreciate it. Thank you.

MOORE: My pleasure. Thank you.

GOLODRYGA: Up next, a new lawsuit filed against former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo over inappropriate touching and groping. We have new details involving an unnamed state trooper.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)