Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

NASA Scrubs Today's Artemis Launch; Intel Community Assessing Damage; Judge to Rule if Graham Must Testify. Aired 9-9:30a ET

Aired August 29, 2022 - 09:00   ET

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

[09:00:00]

POPPY HARLOW, CNN ANCHOR: Good Monday morning, everyone. Glad you're with us. I'm Poppy Harlow.

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN ANCHOR: And I'm Jim Sciutto.

A launch 50 years in the making will now have to wait at least a few days. The uncrewed Artemis 1 mission was scheduled to lift off this morning from Kennedy Space Center for a journey around the moon.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Launch Director Charlie Blackwell Thompson has called a scrub of the attempt of the launch of Artemis 1 and the space launch system with the Orion spacecraft.

The issue that came up was an engine bleed that couldn't be remedied, but the rocket is currently in a stable configuration.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HARLOW: When it ultimately does take off, the Artemis 1 will set the stage for NASA's goal to land the first woman and the first person of color on the moon by 2025, and eventually tackle human exploration of Mars.

SCIUTTO: Yes, and a lot of new experiments planned for the moon.

CNN's space and defense correspondent Kristin Fisher is live this morning at the Kennedy Space Center.

So, Kristin, a lot of stops and start, questions about whether this could be remedied but now they've scrubbed it.

Do we - do we know the full scope of the issue here?

KRISTIN FISHER, CNN SPACE AND DEFENSE CORRESPONDENT: We don't know the full scope. And we're trying to figure out right now - I'm not trying to figure this out -- about 91 NASA engineers are trying to figure out if this is a few day delay or if this is, perhaps, longer. We've got a backup launch attempt on Friday. A third attempt on Monday. If this is something that they can fix on the launchpad. But if it's not something that they can fix on the launchpad, then they're going to have to roll it all the way back to the vertical assembly building, which takes about three days. You're looking at a much longer delay there.

So, we are awaiting a press conference likely later today at some point from NASA to walk us through what exactly went wrong and how quickly they think that they can fix it.

But let me just kind of walk you through what exactly we know happened.

First, there was a lightning strike issue this morning. Lightning getting to close to the pad. They were able to move past that storm.

Then there was a hydrogen leak issue. They were able to fix that.

Then there was what they thought was a crack in the middle of the main tank or a line of frozen foam, essentially. They were able to clear that and continue with launch.

But it was the fourth problem that we encountered this morning that proved to be the reason for the scrub today.

And to explain exactly what the issue is, I'm going to show you this model. This is, obviously, not of the Artemis SLS rocket. This is of the space shuttle. But it really works here because the SLS rocket is kind of like a Frankenstein rocket in the sense that they just cobbled together all sorts of different parts from this space shuttle program, put it together to make the largest, most powerful rocket ever built.

So, this is the main core stage right here. And just imagine that this space shuttle is not on it. What they did all the way at the bottom of this main burnt orange core stage is where the rockets are. There's four rockets. They are called RS-25 -- excuse me, there's four engines. They're called RS-25 engines. The same engines, those cylinders right down here at the bottom of the space shuttle, they were taken from a shuttle, put on the bottom of the main core stage on the SLS Artemis rocket. And it was one of those rockets engines, RS-25 engine number three to be specific that's causing problems today.

And, specifically, those engines need to be cooled to a very precise temperature in order for the rocket to lift off. And for whatever reason, NASA officials were not comfortable that that one rocket engine had hit the precise temperature that they needed for lift-off.

So, that's why we're here today and that's why this first test flight has been scrubbed.

Jim and Poppy, I think it's very important to point out that this is a test flight. NASA officials have been stressing this from day one. We knew that this could be a very likely outcome today. They've never gotten this far in the countdown.

So, we know that they're going to try again hopefully on Friday or Monday, unless this is a very severe issue and then it becomes a much bigger problem after that, Jim and Poppy.

HARLOW: Yes, three days just to get it back, you said, if they can't fix it on the - on the launchpad.

FISHER: Yes.

HARLOW: Thanks very much, Kristin. We'll get back to you shortly.

Joining us now to talk about all of this, a morning that has certainly changed from what we all hoped it would be, retired NASA astronaut Dr. Mae Jemison, the first black woman to go to space, and Jonathan McDowell, an astrophysicist at Harvard and the Smithsonian.

[09:05:14]

It's wonderful to have you both this morning.

So, Dr. Jemison, let me just begin with you.

Had this proceeded as planned, talk to us about what would have unfolded in the next few hours.

DR. MAE JEMISON, RETIRED NASA ASTRONAUT: So, the incredible part of this is that we would have actually seen the vehicle launch, the slides come off, it continuing on. Eventually it kicks off the Orion capsule. And we end up going -- headed toward the moon. And then, over this 39 to 42-day period, the Orion capsule, the vehicle, would orbit the moon and would also go out some 40,000 miles further, which is really incredible. So that would be the furthest a human-rated vehicle has ever traveled.

And then it would come back in at something like Mach 35 and land. And all of the measurements that were done on the dummies that - or the mannequins that were -- the crew, that would be tested. There would be tests of radiation shielding. There would be tests of, you know, whether or not you have the navigation, the control.

So, this really was a test flight in every way. And I think that's what's clear is the logistics, getting here, getting to the point of a launch was really important. And so you're also testing out those logistics of a launch.

SCIUTTO: Jonathan McDowell, so as Kristin was explaining there, they were running through the checklist of potential issues prior to launch. And it was the fourth one, one of those engines that didn't cool sufficiently or they couldn't confirm that it had cooled sufficiently. Granted, there's a lot more digging to do here. I'm just curious, in your experience, would issues like this one indicate a larger - potential larger problem with the rocket or is it the kind of issues that often get worked out in test flights like this?

JONATHAN MCDOWELL, ASTROPHYSICIST AT CENTER FOR ASTROPHYSICS, HARVARD AND SMITHSONIAN: This is pretty standard. And, you know, the valves on these engines, we flew these engines on the space shuttle. This kind of problem cropped up before. So, you know, for some reason, even this far into the space program, valves still stick and can't quite work. And so, the real problem, I think, is that earlier in the year, when we did these wet dress rehearsals and things like where we practiced flowing fuel through the rocket, they didn't get all the way through that practice. And so really today turned into the practice that they never had earlier.

SCIUTTO: Interesting.

HARLOW: And, Dr. Jemison, I mean the - so I know folks watching - some may be asking the question of, we went to the moon decades ago. Why would we be going again? But the big picture here, right, of the Artemis program is not just to get to the moon. And, by the way, very significant that it will be a -- the first woman, the first person of color to step foot on the moon, but also this is about -- eventually this is about Mars, right, and getting to Mars. Could you explain how the two are tied together and how the moon helps with Mars?

JEMISON: Well, I want to separate it a little bit first.

HARLOW: Sure.

JEMISON: Going back to the moon in and of itself and establishing a permanent presence is something that's very important in and of itself. And that means that you're able to do observations, astronomical observations, see the earth. You could also do things that have to do with manufacturing. So, there's a lot to do just by being on the moon itself in a permanent way.

Now, it also gives you an opportunity to practice some of the things that it needed for long duration deep spaceflights, like going to Mars. And that is, understanding the radiation, understanding what happens to humans in these different kinds of gravitational environments.

It also gives you, the way this is set up, a gateway station for even constructing the vehicle outside of the earth's orbit.

So this is a really interesting mechanism to go to Mars. And then people might ask, why do you want to go to Mars? Well, you know, it's our closest neighboring planet. But the other part of it is, we have so much to learn about the geology of Mars. We have so much to learn about what happens to planets and their atmospheres. So, doing that is critically important as well. So, the moon is a base that's important in and of itself, but it helps facilitate going to Mars.

SCIUTTO: Jonathan, reading about the experiments planned for the moon, I mean technology has obviously advanced enormously in the last 50 years. I've been reading about things like they're going to cryogenically freeze some samples on the moon's surface to bring them back.

[09:10:03]

They're going to test in areas that are not -- that don't encounter the sun. You know, things that they weren't able to do in the late '60s and early '70s.

Does that have scientific -- or how much, I should say, scientific importance does that have?

MCDOWELL: Yes, I think it's very interesting. And really it all ties into learning to live off the earth. So, I think the real implication is, as Dr. Jemison said, you know, we want to go to a future where there are humans throughout the solar system.

The moon is like, if anything goes wrong on the moon, you're only a few days from home. So, it's a lot better to practice there than to go to Mars right away. And the early -- the Apollo missions could only land in a very few areas of the moon. Near the moon's equator. This time we're going to go back and land near the lunar south pole, which is a very exciting area scientifically and a very exciting area for future moon bases because we think it has the frozen water locked up in the rock.

SCIUTTO: Fantastic.

JEMISON: And I'd like to add something else to the whole idea of what happens. So, I think that there's a timeline that actually connects Apollo much more to Artemis than perhaps has been told. So, the engine that you're speaking of that was on the space shuttle, it was actually a modified Saturn V engine. So, there is this continuity. We added the solid rocket boosters, which is part of the shuttle program. And I always feel that it's important for us to understand, for example, we did not complete all the Apollo missions that were set up to go to the moon. So, this idea of actually having a permanent presence on the moon is really a step forward.

HARLOW: It just -- it's remarkable, like, where my little kids are going to see us be, and it's like, to imagine a permanent residence on the moon in their lifetime, pretty amazing.

Thank you both very much. Too bad about this morning, but we'll see it - we'll see it soon.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

HARLOW: Thanks -- thanks very much.

SCIUTTO: And we'll bring it to you as we learn about the next steps.

HARLOW: Yes.

SCIUTTO: Well, today's launch was meant to be the first step, as we were mentioning, towards sending humans back to the moon for a permanent presence, and even beyond, to Mars as well.

HARLOW: Right. Although there were no people on board of this one, the spacecraft not empty at all.

CNN innovation and space correspondent Rachel Crane is live also at the Kennedy Space Center with more this morning.

Good morning, Rachel.

I know it's got to be disappointing for you and for everyone there, but it will happen soon. Talk to us about who NASA was planning to bring along for the ride. RACHEL CRANE, CNN INNOVATION AND SPACE CORRESPONDENT: That's right,

Poppy. You know, while there were no crew on board, there were actually a few living organisms on board. That's because inside of this capsule there's several scientific experiments. And, also, they have ten CubeSats on board. CubeSats are these mini satellites. They weigh about 25 pounds and there's 10 of them.

Now, some of those CubeSats were intended to study the ice that's on the moon. But one of them actually had single cell yeast on them and was -- the intention was to study how that yeast is impacted by deep space radiation.

Another one of these CubeSats, you guys, intended to make a hard landing on the moon. That CubeSat out of the Japanese space agency. So, a lot of science is hitching a ride on board this SLS rocket behind me, whenever it takes flight.

But also inside the capsule itself, inside the Orion capsule, there are biology experiments, there are seeds on boards, there is algae, to see what kind of impact deep space environment has on those living organisms.

And also the thing that's getting everyone's attention here is Moonikin Campos. It's a pretty good name there. Pretty catchy. I think that's one of the reasons everyone's catching onto this so much. But it's essentially - it's a mannequin that will be wearing the full flight suit that the astronauts will eventually wear on Artemis II and Artemis III part of this program. But it's to test that flight suit. Also, he's wearing a bunch of different sensors to measure the acoustics, the vibrations. And, also, there's two other what they call phantoms, which are just torso mannequins. One wearing what's called the Astro rad vest to see what kind of protection that provides for the phantom or potentially astronaut against radiation in space, Poppy and Jim.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

HARLOW: Rachel Crane, thank you very much. We'll get back to you in a little bit.

Well, moments ago, turning the page here, the deadline passed for the final court filing in Senator Lindsey Graham's efforts to try to fight a grand jury subpoena to testify. He's also making headlines for saying there will be, quote, riots in the street, close quote, if former President Trump is indicted.

[09:15:06]

So, we'll talk about all of that.

Also ahead, a terrifying scene at an Oregon grocery store after a man opened fire with an AR-15 style rifle. At least two people are dead this morning and the witnesses are also speaking out.

SCIUTTO: Also coming up, I have some new reporting from senior U.S. officials that Ukraine is now shaping the battlefield, as it's known, for a potential significant counteroffensive. A look at what's happening on the ground already.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HARLOW: Welcome back.

A judge will hold a hearing tomorrow on whether to appoint a special master to sift through the documents taken from former President Trump's Mar-a-Lago home in that FBI search a few weeks ago. In the meantime, though, the Director of National Intelligence is conducting a damage assessment about the classified records found in the previous set of boxes, as I understand it.

[09:20:02]

That's according to a letter obtained by CNN.

SCIUTTO: CNN security correspondent Josh Campbell is following all of this.

So, Josh, we know some of the -- well, the degree of the top-secret documents and others contained in that first batch picked up in January, including some of the very highest levels. How would a damage assessment work here?

JOSH CAMPBELL, CNN SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Well, this is important and it's important to note that this is separate from the ongoing DOJ criminal investigation into those documents at the former president's home.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

CAMPBELL: Now, the U.S. intelligence community, particularly the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, this is the entity that oversees the 18 components inside the U.S. government that cover intelligence, they have now launched this damage assessment. Their goal is to try to determine what was in these documents that was located and recovered by the FBI and also what potential harm could there be to U.S. national security if that information was disclosed to people without a need to know, without authorization.

Our colleague, Jeremy Herb (ph), obtained a letter that was sent from the DNI to Congress recently. I'll read you part of that letter. She says that her office and the Department of Justice are working together to facilitate a classification review of relevant materials, including those recovered during the search. ODNI will also lead an intelligence assessment of the potential risk to national security that would result from the disclosure of the relevant documents.

And just to remind our viewers, what was in this material that was previously recovered by the FBI, according to the search warrant affidavit, we're talking about items that included top secret information, items that included information that had the control markings of human source intelligence. This is among some of the highly -- most highly classified information in the federal government. And, you know, I can tell you, having worked in the intelligence community before, overseas, doing joint source debriefings with the CIA, whenever you gather information from a source and you send that to CIA or FBI headquarters, you pray that that information will be properly handled based on these protocols that are put in place.

Here, the question is, how was that information there at Trump's residence? Why was it there? We now know that the intelligence community is conducting that damage assessment to see if there was a threat to national security with those documents being located there in Florida.

Jim an Poppy.

HARLOW: All right, Josh Campbell, thank you for those updates.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

HARLOW: This morning, the district attorney in Fulton County, Georgia, has one final chance to file an argument in the battle over whether Senator Lindsey Graham should be compelled to testify before that grand jury. The South Carolina Republican is leaning on the Speech and Debate Clause of the Constitution to try to get out of answering any questions before the grand jury about attempts to overturn the 2020 election results in Georgia.

Let's begin there with CNN legal analyst Elliot Williams. He's a former federal prosecutor and the former deputy assistant attorney general.

Good morning. I should note for folks, this is a completely separate probe in Georgia, but this grand jury has heard from a lot of key folks. And Lindsey Graham is saying, no, I don't have to answer questions before this grand jury because the calls that I made to Brad Raffensperger about, you know, any ballots and being tossed out, et cetera, was part of my job as a lawmaker, right? And if you look at the Speech and Debate Clause of the Constitution Article 1 Section 6 says, for any speech or debate in either house, they, meaning the lawmaker, shall not be questioned in any other place.

But that's in civil suits. Would that hold up here, do you think, in this grand jury probe?

ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Yes, it's sort of like everybody's kind of right on this, and it's a complicated legal issue. Look, the Speech and Debate Clause really does protect much of what members of Congress do. It was started, or put in place to prevent members of Congress from being sued for things like defamation, for things they say on the floor of the House of Representatives.

And, Poppy, it's gotten expanded beyond that. It really protects anything members of Congress are doing when they are doing their jobs. The question is, are you doing your job as a member of Congress when you're placing phone calls on behalf of another political candidate? And it's a little bit of a stretch to say the least, to say that any single thing a member of Congress does, simply because they're a member of Congress, ought to be protected. Now, they're going to have to go back and forth on that. My guess is

that the court would probably say there are some statements of Lindsey Graham's that would be protected, or some actions that would be protected, but most of it he'll have to testify.

HARLOW: OK. So, listen to this from Lindsey Graham over the weekend.

WILLIAMS: Yes.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): If there's a prosecution of Donald Trump for mishandling classified information after the Clinton debacle, which you presided over and did a hell of a good job, there will be riots in the streets.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HARLOW: What is the significance of saying something like that at this moment, Elliot, when, you know, the heat is already so elevated? Something even, by the way, President Trump acknowledged, remember, when his lawyer called the DOJ just after the Mar-a-Lago raid.

WILLIAMS: That's exactly the point, that acknowledgment. You know, Poppy, sadly, that's an unremarkable statement at this point following January 6th, where the nation saw wide scale political violence, for lack of a better way to put it, in the form of a riot tied to an election.

[09:25:07]

And it's hard to see how there would not be a similar result. Now, look, that can turn into crimes beyond just the acts of rioting if people engage in acts of violence to obstruct the justice process. That's obstruction of justice in its purest form. It's very sad that we're here, but that's where we are.

HARLOW: So, the other issue at hand here is one of former President Trump's requests, and that's that a special master be appointed to basically sift through these new boxes that were taken from Mar-a-Lago on the August 8th search and decide what is privileged, attorney/client privilege between the president and his counsel. But you make a great point that I had not thought of that's sort of like the duh, obvious, why this might not work here for this specific request.

Can you explain?

WILLIAMS: There's a lot of reasons why, Poppy, this could not work for a specific request. But, to be clear, it's never been done before because we don't usually have cases where former presidents are accused of having sensitive documents in their house. Think about all the different reasons why.

Number one, the FBI has had these documents since August 8th. So right there they've already gone through the documents and claiming privilege of them might be moot.

Number two, who actually asserts executive privilege? Is it the current president or the former president?

Number three, these are executive privileged documents, as he's saying. Most of the cases that have dealt with this before have been attorney/client documents, which is something totally different.

HARLOW: Right.

WILLIAMS: Yes, it has a privilege as well.

Number three, who are you even going to get to be a master -- a special master here? It would have to be somebody who, number one, has a very high security clearance. Number two, understands these arcane and complicated legal issues. And, number three, isn't seen as politically tainted. That's literally nobody in America who could, I think, effectively do this job well. It couldn't be a former attorney general of the United States, they'd all be seen as too political. It couldn't be most former senior government officials. How would you get anybody to do it. So there's just a lot of problems that would have to be litigated.

HARLOW: Yes.

WILLIAMS: It's sort of surprising that the judge went there.

HARLOW: Well, it might have to happen, right, because the judge did say that she's got preliminary intent to say yes here. So, we'll see.

WILLIAMS: Yes, she left open the door to it, yes.

HARLOW: Elliot Williams, thanks, as always.

WILLIAMS: Thanks, Poppy.

SCIUTTO: Coming up next, an urgent warning from the mayor of Jackson, Mississippi, ahead of a potentially dangerous flooding there. He's telling residents to, quote, get out now.

And we're moments away from the opening bell on Wall Street. Futures pointing slightly lower this morning. The Dow, you'll remember, plunged on Friday, falling more than 1,000 points. This after Fed Chair Jerome Powell warned the fight against inflation far from over. Investors weighing the prospects of more aggressive rate hikes and what that may mean for the economy.

We're watching all of it. Back in just a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:30:00]