Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Biden To Hold National Security Council Meeting Tomorrow; Pelosi Pushes Diplomacy But Warns Of Unprecedented Sanctions; GOP Continues To Push The Big Election Lie; Judge Rules Trump Could Be Sued For January 6th Capitol Attack; Judge Rules Trump Could Be Culpable For January 6 And Lawsuits Against Former President May Proceed; Ukrainian Civilians Train For Possible War Amid Russia Threat; Nearly 6,500 Cases Of Unruly Passengers In 2021. Aired 7-8p ET

Aired February 19, 2022 - 19:00   ET

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

[19:00:32]

PAMELA BROWN, CNN HOST: I'm Pamela Brown in Washington. The top stories, the world waits as Russia moves more troops and equipment to the Ukraine border. And the Ukrainian president urges any sanctions against Russia be made public now. Plus we get a firsthand look at how hundreds of Ukrainian citizens are learning to protect themselves ahead of a potential war.

And former President Trump's really bad, no-good week. Two major legal setbacks, and wait until you hear what was found at Mar-a-Lago after he left the White House.

You're in the CNN NEWSROOM.

And we begin this hour with the Russia-Ukraine crisis. Minutes ago we learned that President Biden will convene a National Security Council meeting tomorrow to discuss the troubling developments and escalating violence.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Go faster. Go, go, go.

(END OF VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: Ukraine's Interior minister and the CNN news crew came under mortar fire today in eastern Ukraine. This is one of at least 70 violations of the ceasefire reported today. No one was hurt in this incident fortunately, but Ukraine says two of its soldiers were killed elsewhere.

And this is all part of the escalation that has convinced the White House that Russian President Putin has decided to attack Ukraine. Today Putin oversaw a strategic weapons exercise from the Kremlin situation room as did his ally, the president of Belarus. Ukraine is now surrounded by Russian forces on three sides. Russia is denying any plans to invade.

Vice President Harris and other Western leaders met with Ukraine's president today in a global security summit in Germany.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KAMALA HARRIS, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The United States takes seriously the importance of the integrity and the territorial integrity of Ukraine and your sovereignty. And the United States stands with Ukraine.

PRES. VOLODYMYR ZELENSKY, UKRAINE: We do clearly understand what is going on. This is our land and the only thing we want is to have peace and bring the peace back to our country.

(END OF VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: Ukraine's President Zelensky stressing his desire for a diplomatic solution to avoid bloodshed. Even as U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin described Russia as, quote, "uncoiling and now poised to strike," end quote.

Right now let's get the U.S. perspectives, CNN's Arlette Saenz is at the White House and Suzanne Malveaux is on Capitol Hill.

Arlette, let's start with you. The White House put out the statement a short time ago. What exactly are they saying?

ARLETTE SAENZ, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, Pamela, the White House remains on high alert as U.S. officials continue to warn that Russia could invade Ukraine in the coming days. President Biden spending the weekend here at the White House over this Presidents' Day holiday, and White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki released a statement saying that tomorrow the president will reconvene a meeting of the National Security Council to discuss Russia and Ukraine.

I want to read you a portion of her statement where she said that the president continues to monitor the evolving situation in Ukraine and is being updated regularly about events on the ground by his National Security team. They reaffirms that Russia could launch an attack against Ukraine at any time. Tomorrow the president will convene a meeting of the National Security Council on the situation in Ukraine.

That meeting comes as several top administration officials have spent the past few days meeting with allies and strategizing over in Europe. Secretary of State Antony Blinken is currently on his way back to the United States and Vice President Kamala Harris was also on hand for the Munich Security Conference where her main goal was really trying to rally allies together to have this sign of unity regarding this crisis in Ukraine.

Harris also met one-on-one, face-to-face with Ukrainian President Zelensky where she talked about the swift repercussions that Russia would face if they move forward with an invasion including sanctions. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HARRIS: If Russia further invades your country and as I mentioned earlier today, we will impose swift and severe economic sanctions. And we have remained open to a diplomatic path to resolution.

[19:05:01]

However, if Russia takes aggressive action against Ukraine, we are prepared to implement, and to do that work in a unified way with our allies around the world.

(END OF VIDEO CLIP)

SAENZ: Now the U.S. has been working with its allies for several weeks now crafting that sanctions package. But one thing President Zelensky pointed to today is that he wants to see an actual list of what these sanctions would look like before an invasion. That is something that the White House has been hesitant to do saying that these sanctions are instead set to act as a deterrent.

Now even as the U.S. is warning that an invasion could be imminent, they are still stressing that that window to diplomacy is still an option. Secretary of State Antony Blinken is set to speak with his counterpart, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov on Thursday but only if Russia does not invade. President Biden has made clear that if an invasion does occur, that that is Russia shutting the door to diplomacy. And it does appear that that window is quickly narrowing -- Pamela.

BROWN: It certainly does. All right, Suzanne, I'm going to bring you in. Key members of Congress from both parties, they were in Germany today. Tell us more about that.

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Pam, certainly a sense of urgency, a sense of unity, clarity and purpose and mission if you will, not the normal kind of NATO security bland policy statement that normally comes out of these meetings here. But about 40 Democrats and Republicans meeting with those key figures, the chancellor of Germany, the mayor of Kyiv, as well as the Secretary of State Blinken.

The message being very clear here. That they stand by NATO, they stand by the Ukrainian people as well as U.S. Ukrainian allies that there still is a window of opportunity here for diplomacy, to play out here that war can be avoided. But a clear message to Putin saying that if in fact he does invade, there will be crushing sanctions.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA): We want to remove all doubt in anyone's mind including the president of Russia that the U.S. is here fully committed in a unified way to work with our European allies in the interest of diplomacy.

We are not for any war. And the diplomacy, diplomacy, diplomacy, and that's why we are talking about sanctions in the event of an invasion. And these are sanctions you've never seen before in terms of the intensity and the timing.

(END OF VIDEO CLIP) MALVEAUX: So Pelosi there is saying that the timing of all of this is what is really debatable here. Republicans and Democrats agreeing that sanctions are necessary. Earlier in the week they talked about the mother of all sanctions that would crus Putin, his friends, his companies and banks, economically here, but Republicans agree with the president of Ukraine, Zelensky. They believe that it should happen before a Russian invasion, to give a taste of what could happen if indeed Putin crosses the red line.

We heard from Senator Lindsey Graham tweeting he is also in Germany, saying, I could not agree more with his assessment that we should put preinvasion sanctions in place now so Putin can see for himself the consequences of his actions. Without clarity, Putin will assume weakness.

Now Democrats including Speaker Pelosi, as well as the Biden administration, saying hold off on the sanctions, wait until he invades, because it is damaging to U.S. as well as Ukrainian allies in Europe if that happens. So ultimately they didn't come up with a sanctions bill, really just non-binding statement, if you will, a warning to Putin.

So a lot of this, Pam, is really symbolic, although they feel that the president does have the executive authority to move forward on sanctions without Congress. That is what he's going to have to do.

And finally, one very important note coming out of this presser, we heard from Congressman Adam Schiff, he is the chair of the Intelligence Committee, he said he has intelligence that confirms what the president said which is that Putin has already made up his mind to invade Ukraine -- Pam.

BROWN: All right, Arlette Saenz, Suzanne Malveaux, thank you so much.

And now let's turn to William Taylor for analysis in all that reporting. He was U.S. ambassador to Ukraine and was a special adviser to the U.S. ambassador to NATO. He is also vice president for Russia and Europe at the United States Institute of Peace.

Ambassador Taylor, we just heard Suzanne talked about this intelligence that Adam Schiff talked about. We heard the president say yesterday that help them to get to a place believing that Putin has made up his mind, they are convinced that Russia will invade Ukraine. How convinced are you?

WILLIAM TAYLOR, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO UKRAINE: Pam, I heard the president said two things yesterday. One, exactly what you just said. That is, he's convinced that President Putin has made up his mind. But I also heard him say that there is still a chance for diplomacy. I heard that from your reporters as well. They are talking about that in Munich.

The Ukrainians are obviously still pushing for diplomatic, and it's still possible, so I am of the view that President Putin in looking at all these deterrents, in all these things that would happen to him, including possible unrest in Russia, if he were to pull that trigger and go across.

[19:10:07]

I think it's still possible, if he's made up his mind, as the president says, he can change his mind until they go across the border.

BROWN: But, so you clearly on that hope that there could be diplomacy, but frankly we are not really hearing anything new and yet troops continue to build up there at the border. So at this point, I mean, what could cause a breakthrough in diplomacy? What more needs to be done, do you think, that the list of sanctions should be put out there? I mean --

TAYLOR: The list of sanctions could be put out there. That would be a good idea. Don't have to put them on in advance, but they could list them. If they got an agreement among the allies, that's the other important component there. But what else could happen? President Putin could decide -- President Putin has said he doesn't intend to invade. He could tell his people, and he said that. You know, he could tell his Russian people, the folks, he never intended to invade and he could say he's finally gotten the Americans to listen to his security concerns.

He can build this as a win. Diplomacy can be for him a win. He could say they've never listened to me before. I've been telling them to take me seriously with my security concerns for 10 years, they haven't. Now they have. Now they are listening to me and they're going to sit down in Geneva and Vienna, and they're going to negotiate treaties that they will have to abide by that will mean that Russia is better off. Russia is more secure.

That the B-52 bombers, that they can fly close to our borders, won't be able to fly within 12 -- they can -- so he can tell them that. And that would be a win.

BROWN: Because we know so much of this, right, is about the information wars, and Russia, it's so interesting the dichotomy of what folks in Russia are being told, what we're hearing from Jill Dougherty there and elsewhere.

Do you think that Putin has a concern that if he -- if Russia invades Ukraine, that he would lose the support of his people? I mean, if the sanctions are on place, a lot of his allies there would be severely hurt by that.

TAYLOR: And that's exactly right. His allies would be hit by the sanctions. He might be hit by the sanctions, probably does not bother him too much, probably not worried about traveling to. But the other big thing is, as you say, the sanctions will hit across the Russian society, these financial sanctions on the top three Russian banks, the three biggest Russian banks. That will affect all Russian -- 90 percent of Russians who have credit cards and mortgages and pensions.

That will affect them right away because they use dollars. They use dollars. These banks use dollars. So that's -- but even more important than that, I think, is President Putin knows that if he pulls a trigger and he sends his forces into Ukraine, many Russian soldiers will die, sad to say, more Ukrainian soldiers and civilians will die, sad to say. But when those Russian soldiers go back to Russian towns and villages, for burial, the parents, the mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers, will be asking why are our sons and daughters dying in Ukraine?

Most Russian people, Pam, have a pretty good attitude about Ukraine. They think President Putin has said that they are all one nation and now he's going to attack them, he's going to invade them, he's going to kill them? They're not going to understand that.

BROWN: But isn't the information they're being fed or what the U.S. intelligence is indicating is that they're planting these false flag operations to basically as a pretext that they were provoked by the Ukrainians? So I mean, do you not think that they would buy that?

TAYLOR: And that's exactly what they're looking for. You're right. They don't now have an excuse, a rational, that will give them the ability to convince Russians or the rest of the world that they've got a reason to invade. They don't have a reason so they have to try to provoke one with these false flags or other kinds of things that we've been hearing from our intelligence services. So that's why they need some kind of rational.

Let me say one other thing, that is, if there is a negotiation, if President Putin walks back and walks away from the precipice or whatever metaphorically, and he decides not to invade and he decides to negotiate, that won't be the end of the story.

BROWN: Mm-hmm.

TAYLOR: He will be back. He will be back in another way in another time to try whatever he can to destabilize Ukraine so that he can get Ukraine back. He wants Ukraine back.

BROWN: As you said, that is his obsession.

TAYLOR: His obsession.

BROWN: And he clearly is not giving up on that obsession. So that is a whole another conversation. If war doesn't happen this go around, looking forward what else can be done? What else should the West do?

What an interesting conversation, Ambassador William Taylor. I hope that you're right. I hope diplomacy prevails.

[19:15:07]

Well, nearly 500 days after voters picked Joe Biden to be the president, there are new signs that the big lie is not going away any time soon. Plus former President Trump wanting a judge to dismiss severe lawsuits over the January 6th attack. The judge had other ideas. We're going to break it down for you.

And a shocking crash caught on camera, as a sheriff's deputy narrowly avoids getting hit during a traffic stop.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BROWN: In the 13 months since President Biden was inaugurated, claims of the big lie have not slowed down. "For the Record," the Texas midterm primaries are less than two weeks away, and Republican candidates are still spouting lies that the 2020 election was stolen or votes were fraudulent. Here are three House candidates from the same Texas congressional debate earlier this month.

[19:20:06]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JONATHAN HULLIHAN (R), TEXAS CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATE: I do believe the election was stolen. 81 million votes for Joe Biden, I just don't believe it.

CHRISTIAN COLLINS (R), TEXAS CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATE: Absolutely the election was stolen. Does anyone in this room think that Joe Biden got 81 million votes? No.

MORGAN LUTTRELL (R), TEXAS CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATE: I believe there is enough nefarious activity going on across the country that there should have been a forensic audit. But I do believe that it was taken from us.

(END OF VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: Where's all the evidence for that? So there are 143 Republicans running for Congress in Texas. And the "Houston Chronicle" asked them all if they think the 2020 presidential election was legitimate. Of the 87 who shared their stance, only 13 said they believe it was. 42 thought it was outright stolen and another 12 said there were enough irregularities to cast doubt over the election.

But this isn't just a Texas problem, it's nationwide.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. BILLY LONG (R-MO): I'm running for Senate to stop the insanity, stop the wokeness and stop the Democrats from stealing another election. So I need your help and then we'll help Donald Trump make America great again, again.

JIM LAMON (R), ARIZONA SENATE CANDIDATE: If you want to keep corrupt politicians from rigging elections, let's go.

MIKE COLLINS (R), GEORGIA CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATE: We Georgians are sick and tired of weak-kneed, spineless politicians that won't fight for Trump, get to the bottom of 2020, and fix our elections. Well, if they won't do it, Mike Collins will.

(END OF VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: Those are just some of the many ads running nationwide. The ramifications of the big lie extend far beyond the ballot box. It's even becoming a legal defense in court. Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes still claims the 2020 election was illegitimate. And according to "Politico," his lawyer says this shouldn't be counted against him. Why? He's pointing to the public leaders still pushing this false narrative.

Last month NPR found that at least 20 Republican candidates running for secretary of state across the country questioned the validity of Biden's 2020 win. As a reminder, many secretaries of state, they are the ones responsible for administering elections and maintaining official election results.

We should note that not all Republicans are propping up the big lie. Last month South Dakota Senator Mike Rounds had this to say about the 2020 election.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. MIKE ROUNDS (R-SD): The election was fair, as fair as we've seen. We simply did not win the election as Republicans for the presidency.

(END OF VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: This, no surprise, drew the ire of Trump. He lashed out and said, "Senator Mike Rounds of the great state of South Dakota just went woke on the fraudulent presidential election of 2020. Is he crazy or just stupid? I will never endorse this jerk again." Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell came to Senator Rounds' defense saying that he told the truth and that he agrees with him.

It seems as though publicly, leaders in the GOP standing up for the truth are losing the battle against the election deniers.

"For the Record," the big lie continues to be the litmus test for GOP loyalty. And come election day, many ballots at all levels of government are poised to be filled with election-denying Republican candidates who have a decent chance of winning in a fair and free election.

Well, lawsuits against Donald Trump over the January 6th riot are moving forward. Some lawmakers and police officers are suing the former president claiming he urged his followers to attack the Capitol. We'll take a closer look at the case up next with law professor Kim Wehle.

We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:28:19]

BROWN: A federal judge has ruled that civil lawsuits seeking to hold former President Trump accountable for the January 6th insurrection can move forward. Democratic members of the House and police officers who defended the Capitol sued Trump last year claiming he prompted his supporters to attack. In the 112-page opinion, the judge said that Trump's statement to his supporters before the riot, quote, "is the essence of civil conspiracy."

Kim Wehle is a former assistance U.S. attorney, now a law professor at the University of Baltimore.

Hi, Kim. Thanks for joining us. So tell us, what is the significance of this ruling that former President Trump can now be sued for his role in the Capitol riot, that that can go forward?

KIM WEHLE, LAW PROFESSOR, UNIVERSITY OF BALTIMORE: Pam, this is a really huge issue that I have no doubt will go all the way to the United States Supreme Court. And it's an important one, and I'm glad that it's one of the few frankly that I'm glad is being teed up. And that's because it gets to the question of what we call absolutely immunity. That presidents, members of Congress and judges cannot be sued for actions that they take in office.

So if the president decides, for example, Joe Biden decides to take some action with respect to Ukraine, he can't be sued when he's making that decision because if that were the case, the president would be paralyzed and not actually be able to function.

Here however the judge said we're in this gray area where it's not within the president's authority and power to try to get the January 6th vote to be swayed in his favor against the electoral college victory for Joe Biden.

[19:30:00]

And so in that case in that case, there is no absolute immunity. Again, this is going to be appealed, but I think he's spot on that there has to be a boundary around absolute immunity.

We don't have a system where there are kings and queens in charge, even presidents have to be accountable, and he is basically saying, here, Donald Trump was acting as a candidate, trying to sway an election, not taking an action as President under his Article II authority.

BROWN: So how do you expect this to play out for Trump?

WEHLE: Well, I think it'll, as I said, it'll be appealed whether that would have to wait to the end of the case, because normally you have to wait until a case is over, or as we've seen many times with this Supreme Court, allowing well, this is kind of issue that will hop up to the appellate court and then to the Supreme Court, we will have to wait and see.

This Court has been very aggressive about snatching cases from the lower courts. We saw it with Alabama and the decision on gerrymandering. Last week, a three-judge panel, including two Trump appointees found that Alabama's gerrymandering map violated the Voting Rights Act. The Supreme Court in a one-paragraph opinion said nope, we're going to go back to the potentially illegal map.

So I think, we're probably going to see more litigation before Donald Trump potentially would have to sit for a deposition. But I'll say, the lawyers on the side of the plaintiffs here are some of the best in the business in the country.

So if Donald Trump ends up sitting in a deposition, or for him, I think the worst case in front of a jury on this, he is in for a rude awakening. He could be potentially demolished on cross examination because these lawyers have that kind of reputation.

BROWN: I want to turn to something else that's kind of brewing right now.

The National Archives confirmed finding classified documents and boxes taken from Mar-a-Lago after Trump left office. Now, I know that this -- they have been in touch with the Justice Department about this, and this is a little tricky, because technically, as President, you can declassify anything, right?

I mean, so these were records he took with him from the White House, but do you think he could have legal exposure here? Should he be concerned at all on that front?

WEHLE: Yes, I do. I mean, there are two pieces, two laws here. One is the Presidential Records Act that says that the records in the White House don't belong to the President, they belong to the people and that they have to be preserved. But there is no enforcement mechanism for that. That is there's no penalties for violating it.

Like many things around the presidency, presidents up until Donald Trump just went along with the rules out of respect for the office and respect for the populace, frankly. However, there is a criminal statute that makes it a crime to conceal or destroy evidence.

But honestly, Pam, I think the third piece here that we've got to ask ourselves is who else saw this information? We also know he destroyed documents. He flushed documents down the toilet. And we also know he was tight with Vladimir Putin who as we speak, is I think, by most experts account unlawfully as a matter of international law for provocation invading Ukraine, which of course, was the subject of Donald Trump's first impeachment.

So whatever the outcome of this is, for Donald Trump personally, I think we, as Americans need to understand the extent to which that that kind of sort of taking documents out of the White House and being chummy with some of the biggest dictators on the planet might have exposed us to some serious National Security problems.

So that's really the immediate issue in my mind, less so than whether Donald Trump will be held accountable, as you say, he has a very strong argument within his Article II presidential power to say: Listen, I'm in charge of classified documents. I declassify them before taking them out, you know, this is, I think disqualifying for a second term as a logical matter, but it wouldn't necessarily expose him to personal legal liability.

You have stronger argument there, I think, to sort of -- to skirt that, but we just don't know the facts right now, Pam, that's the problem. BROWN: Yes, we don't know. We know that some of the materials were

classified, but we don't know exactly what they were. We know they were relating to national security. But there's still a lot more to learn on that front.

Kim Wehle, thank you so much.

WEHLE: Thanks, Pam.

BROWN: CNN is on the ground in Ukraine as the threat of war with Russia looms. Hear from a Ukrainian surgeon with young children who says she will stay as long as possible to help.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ERIN BURNETT, CNN ANCHOR, "ERIN BURNETT OUT FRONT": You want to stay here. Why?

NATALYA, SURGEON, PREPARING FOR POSSIBLE WAR: Because I'm a doctor and I think I can help people when war will come to our home.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:39:22]

BROWN: While the world watches and waits for Russia and Vladimir Putin's next move, civilians in Ukraine are bracing and in some cases training for possible war. CNN's Erin Burnett is in Lviv and hearing from Ukrainians about what life is like for them right now.

BURNETT: Pamela, people we've talked to over the past several days do say they feel more unsettled both because of Biden's comments that Putin has decided to invade and also because of what they're seeing right now in the Donbas.

One young man telling me that Putin is not a balanced man, and another woman that I've been speaking to throughout the week, tonight said she is scared. Before, she was worried, but now she feels actual fear.

But -- and the but matters so much here, Pamela, she says she's not changing what she does every day. She's still going to work, so are her friends, and some people here are actually training to fight.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BURNETT (voice over): This weekend in Lviv, Ukraine, a few hundred civilians gathering to prepare to do defense training sessions.

People of all ages, but most of them young. The youngest for us, the most jarring to see.

Natalya was here with her daughters, Kalina (ph) and Hafia (ph). She tells me she talks to them all the time about possible war with Russia. NATALYA: Yes, we always talk about this about, about war, and we have

a plan. That's why we're here.

BURNETT (voice over): The training organized by a far right political party and overseen by the Ukrainian government's Territorial Defense Forces. People today learning hand to hand knife fighting with sticks using wooden guns to practice shooting around corners, shooting rifles in group tactical target practice, and listening to how to handle bazookas, detonators, and mines.

Four-year-old Kalina, paying close attention. Her mother tells me she is most worried they won't leave in time if there is a full Russian invasion, but Natalya says she stays because she's a surgeon.

BURNETT (on camera): And I know you want to stay here. Why?

NATALYA: Because I'm a doctor, and I think I can help people when war will come to our home.

BURNETT (voice over): Natalya's patriotism, a powerful symbol to Putin, up here on a windy hill above the city of Lviv, she and other Ukrainians taking this literally, "Don't panic. Prepare."

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BURNETT (on camera): Natalya says if she leaves with her children, her husband will stay behind to fight.

And Pamela, spending time at that practice was eye opening because on the one hand, it reflects what we've heard from everyone we've seen, everyone we've talked to here, and that is that people are deeply passionate and patriotic.

But on the other, when you watch what you saw there, you realize what a full invasion could look like in terms of the incredible civilian suffering that we would see -- Pamela.

BROWN: Erin Burnett live for us from Ukraine. Thank you.

Well, a number of airlines want to ground unruly passengers and put them on the no-fly list, but some Republican senators are against it.

Aviation expert, Jeffrey Price joins me next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:47:03]

BROWN: Well, buying a plane ticket these days could also mean buying a front row seat to mayhem.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Sit down now.

(END VIDEO CLIP) BROWN: Eighty cases involving unruly passengers have been referred to

the Justice Department, but they account for just one percent of the nearly 6,500 incidents reported last year.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SARA NELSON, PRESIDENT, ASSOCIATION OF FLIGHT ATTENDANTS: The flight attendants who are working these flights have been punched, kicked, spit on, disrespected, and constantly under assault.

Until we have people actually landing in jail and understanding that there is real consequences for acting out on a flight, we are not going to see these incidents go down.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: Joining me now to talk about this, aviation security expert Jeffrey Price.

Jeffrey, welcome to the show. I want to start with some airlines calling for the Justice Department to create a federal no-fly list. Eight G.O.P. senators disagree with that. They claim that since most incidents relate to disputes over wearing masks, creating a federal no-fly list for unruly passengers who are skeptical of this mandate would seemingly equate them to terrorists. What is your response to them?

JEFFREY PRICE, AVIATION SECURITY EXPERT: I think that there is some merit to what's being said on both sides here. First off, the flight attendants should not have to put up with this behavior at all.

Flight crews, flight attendants, gate agents, they do not deserve any of this at all. I think the challenge is using the federal no-fly list, which was meant for terrorists, known terrorists, suspected terrorists, and those that are an open threat to aviation itself, opening that list or adding those names to that list I think that's where the big point of contention is.

But then if you create a second list for just unruly passengers, you're going to put some infrastructure in place with that in terms of what level do you have to attain in terms of egregious behavior to get on that list? And then what's the process for getting off that list?

BROWN: Right. Those are some very valid questions, but it really is insane what flight attendants are having to go through. I mean, just this past week, an American Airlines flight attendant had to repeatedly hit a man in the head with a coffee pot to keep him from trying to open an exit door during flight. So, why shouldn't that man be banned from flying and put on a list like that?

PRICE: I think for that particular incident, there possibly could have been some mental illness involved. Who knows? That's for other people to decide. But that's exactly the point of all of this is there needs to be a process in place to determine was this an incident where there were some extenuating circumstances? And yes, it was severe and I agree with what the flight crew had to do -- the flight attendants had to do to stop that and passengers completely agree that that's not behavior that's acceptable. It posed a risk to the safety of the flight potentially.

[19:50:11]

PRICE: And so they have to do what they have to do. But now we have to take that to the next step and determine, okay, was their mental illness involved? Was there a reaction to medications involved? Or was this person just completely being a jerk, and just trying to disobey the orders, the lawful orders of a flight attendant, a flight crew member?

So that process needs to happen after the fact, to determine does this person really belong on a list, maybe temporarily, just in terms of -- it's really a case by case basis, because you don't have a right to fly in this country, you do have a right to travel, but to tell somebody, you're going to be on a no fly-list for the airlines for some indeterminate amount of time really can affect them severely.

And again, not excusing any behavior by any stretch of the imagination, but I think there needs to be a process for what level gets me on this list? And how can I ever get off this list if possible? And right now that infrastructure is not in place.

BROWN: Do you think the Justice Department is acting swiftly enough on these cases?

PRICE: I don't. I think they need to act much, much quicker on this, and that might be something that keeps us from having to have a multi- airline wide no fly-list is more severe punishments and faster punishments and criminal charges and higher civil charges because one of the things a lot of people don't realize is it is costing the airlines money, of course for these delayed flights, these canceled flights, these diverted flights that everybody on that plane has an interest in getting somewhere and some of them are losing money by the minute because they can't get their there.

They're missing their cruise. They're supposed to be on the airplane to catch the boat. There's a lot of other things that are at play here.

BROWN: Yes, it is a huge ripple effect. It impacts so many people.

Jeffrey Price, great to have you on and hearing your perspective. We appreciate it.

PRICE: Thanks, Pamela.

BROWN: So this is something that you have to see to believe, a Colorado State Patrol Trooper conducting a traffic stop almost gets run over.

Watch this Trooper after he pulled over a Kia for speeding. He heads back to his car to write a citation, when a minivan crashes into the back of that stopped Kia. The two cars fly down the highway while the Trooper runs to help. Both drivers were hurt but will be okay. The driver of the minivan got a citation for careless driving causing injury. Wow.

Get off your phone and watch where you are going or you may find yourself falling through a hole in the floor as this boy did in Istanbul. Watch the security footage as a mall worker prepares to drop packages into a storage hole, the boy approaches, glued to his phone as you see right here, he falls through and instead of breaking a leg is cushioned by a stack of cardboard boxes.

A lucky break and a stark reminder to always be aware of your surroundings. How about that?

Well, President Biden will meet with his National Security Council tomorrow because of the situation in Ukraine. We're going to go live to Moscow in just a few minutes. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:58:09]

BROWN: This Presidents Day weekend, the new original series on the life and Presidency of Lyndon Baines Johnson premieres on CNN. Here's a preview.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LUCI JOHNSON, DAUGHTER OF LYNDON B. JOHNSON: There was always that sense that he was no John Kennedy. And indeed, he wasn't.

LYNDON B. JOHNSON, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: ... anything that I did that someone didn't approve of, they would always feel that President Kennedy wouldn't have done that.

My conduct to the office being contrasted with President Kennedy's conduct, Phil, with my accent and his accent, with my background and his background.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: His style was 180 degrees from John Kennedy. Kennedy was polished Harvard; LBJ was a hill country, cowboy hat and boots.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Washington at that time was disproportionately influenced by the Ivy League elites, and LBJ was not from the Ivy League, nor was he ever elite.

RUSSELL LONG, FORMER UNITED STATES SENATE (via phone): You stand still, they'll screw you to death if you run they'll eat your ass out.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You've never had to guess where Lyndon Johnson was coming from. He was coming from that growing up in the hill country of Texas.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: "LBJ: Triumph and Tragedy" premieres tomorrow night at nine on CNN. And new tonight, the former Miami Dolphins head coach suing the NFL

and three teams for racial discrimination has a new job in the league. The Pittsburgh Steelers announcing today that Brian Flores will be their senior defensive assistant and linebackers coach.

In a statement, Steelers head coach, Mike Tomlin, who is now one of just two Black head coaches in the league said that he is quote, "... excited about Brian Flores joining our coaching staff given his history of developing and teaching defense players during his time in the NFL. Brian's resume speaks for itself and I look forward to him adding his expertise to help our team."

Flores recently told CNN he was going forward with his lawsuit despite it possibly costing him a coaching job, and his lawyer say Flores's suit will still continue.

The next hour of CNN starts now.

[20:00:21]