Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsroom
Transformative Leader of Soviet Union Dies at Age 91; 33 Million Impacted by Pakistan Flooding; Justice Dept. Opposes Trump's Plea For Special Master; Justice Dept.: Documents Were Likely "Concealed And Removed" From Mar-a-Lago To "Obstruct" Investigation; Ukraine Claims Early Success In Offensive In Occupied South; Zelenskyy Warns Of Nuclear Catastrophe Risk In Zaporizhzhia; E.U. To Deliver 5.5M Potassium Iodide Tablets To Ukraine. Aired 1-2a ET
Aired August 31, 2022 - 01:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[01:00:26]
JOHN VAUSE, CNN ANCHOR: Hello everyone, I'm John Vause. Ahead here on CNN Newsroom. He will suffer no injury, no basis for court relief, shows no basis for court relief at all, not likely to succeed. U.S. prosecutors push back on Team Trump's legal demand for an independent third-party review of evidence taken by the FBI from the former president's home.
A four-day mission by international inspectors to secure Europe's biggest nuclear power plant, just as the Ukrainian offensive targets Russian forces in the South. And the death of the lost leader of the Soviet Union, Mikhail Gorbachev lost an empire but changed the world forever.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Live from CNN Center. This is CNN Newsroom with John Vause.
VAUSE: Damning new details this hour about the FBI search of Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago state. The Justice Department says confidential documents were likely concealed and removed from storage to obstruct its investigation. The revelations are part of the department's court filings against Trump's request for a special master to review evidence seized from Mar-a-Lago.
The Justice Department also argues that Trump likes standing to intervene in a federal investigation because the documents belong to the government, not to him.
More now from CNN Political Correspondent Sara Murray reporting in from Washington.
SARA MURRAY, CNN POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: The Justice Department weighing in with its side of the story of what happened in the run up and in the aftermath of the search at Mar-a-Lago. This is all part of the core battle that's playing out over whether there should be a special master, an independent third party appointed to review the documents that the FBI seized when they searched Mar-a-Lago. Now the Trump team has argued they want this special master.
The Justice Department in a late-night filing said they didn't believe it was necessary. They said the government has already completed its work and going through these documents. It's segregated any attorney client privilege information, and they also said that Donald Trump doesn't have the standing to intervene in this.
These are not his documents. These are the property of the government. But they also laid out their clear rebuttal to what the Trump team has been saying. The Trump team has been saying the former president was cooperative with the Justice Department. They suggested that this search at Mar-a-Lago was over the top.
In this filing, the Justice Department lays out what they found in this August search. They say there were over 100 unique documents with classified markings. And this is important because they say this is twice as many documents as what the Trump team produced after they had been subpoenaed.
So they had an opportunity. They said that they handed over everything as a result of this subpoena. And what the Justice Department is saying is, no, we found 100 unique documents with classified markings. They also included a photo that showed the cover sheets, the classification sort of a sample of what they found.
And in this filing, they also said that there were documents that were likely concealed and removed from Mar-a-Lago from a storage room there in an attempt to obstruct the Justice Department's investigation. Now this court fight is going to continue. Donald Trump side has until Wednesday evening to respond and there is going to be a hearing on this matter on Thursday.
Sara Murray, CNN, Washington.
VAUSE: Let's get back to Los Angeles now. Civil Rights Attorney and CNN Legal Analyst Areva Martin is with us. Areva, thank you for staying with us. If we look at this in total, it just adds to what has already been a fairly damning story since it first broke. Not only do you have this FBI filing now that outlines this -- the number of documents which were recovered, that adds to earlier statements, which came from the Trump team themselves that they knew that these documents were classified. I mean, this just goes to bed worse, it seems.
AREVA MARTIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Yes, absolutely, John. You have to question the reasoning and logic behind the Trump's teams even filing of this request for a special master. There is no winning position for Trump at this point. Even if a master is appointed, it's not going to stop this investigation into Trump and potentially others who were involved in concealing documents from the Department of Justice at best it may slow down the investigation but it will not end that investigation.
And it gave the Justice Department an opportunity to lay out its facts and to refute those misstatements and just plain lies that have been told by Donald Trump and many of his supporters. If Donald Trump had not made that motion for special master, we would never have this information.
[01:05:03]
We wouldn't know that there were 100 classified documents recovered from Mar-a-Lago. We wouldn't know the documents were stuffed in Trump's private office and desk in his office. We wouldn't know that documents were moved around by a members, you know, inside or individuals inside Mar-a-Lago. So so much of this information, the DOJ had not revealed and would not have revealed but for being forced to file this response. I think this is a huge misstep on the part of Donald Trump and his legal team.
VAUSE: Something was struck me about it, it was all sort of written in very plain easy to understand English, not a lot of legal jargon. And that was all very straightforward, which seems very much unlike the Justice Department, in some ways.
MARTIN: Yes, I think -- you know, John, I think this was a statement by the Justice Department. This was -- its way up, you know, this will be the equivalent of holding a press conference, of getting in front of an audience, in front of a camera, in front of a microphone and laying out the facts of this case and refuting so many of the misstatements that have been made by Trump and others throughout the last couple a few weeks.
We've just heard, you know, excuse after excuse that Trump didn't know the documents were there are, that documents were planted by the DOJ. That Trump had somehow declassified all of these documents. We've just heard this ever-evolving story on the part of Donald Trump and now we get the facts.
And as you said, in very plain, easy to understand language, and they aren't good. They show a Donald Trump taking classified documents that belong to the U.S. government, away from the White House and handling them in such a cavalier and negligent fashion. And literally putting, you know, top assets and other secrets of the U.S. at risk.
And it's really kind of that the Justice Department is investigating not just, you know, as a mishap, but as potential criminal conduct that could lead to an indictment of Donald Trump and potentially even the lawyers who signed off on statements saying that they had turned over all of the classified documents, which we now know that was a false statement.
VAUSE: Just with respect to the need for an independent review of the third party to look at all this evidence, the Justice Department makes this point. "In any event, the government's filter team has already completed its work of segregating any seized materials that are potentially subject to attorney-client privilege. The government's investigative team has already reviewed all of the remaining materials."
In other words, they know that it's -- they're saying it's already been done. It was done weeks ago, you know, several days ago, rather. The Trump team would have known that. Is this part of a frivolous, you know, application of misuse of law which we've seen over and over again by Team Trump.
MARTIN: Absolutely, John. We've seen this tactic used by Donald Trump over and over again. He files frivolous lawsuits, he has oftentimes some of the worst lawyers in the country representing him. And we know he has struggled to find quality, legal representation. And this case is no different.
And in fact, the judge in this case who was a Trump appointee, has had to literally walk the legal team through this process of even, you know, properly requesting this special master. And we know he does things to just delay and to deflect, because that is part and parcel of how he continues to perpetuate what is a big lie. And in this case, the big lie that somehow he was harmed, that he was treated unfairly.
And also, John, I think what's been so revealing to me about this 36- page response is the efforts, the repeated efforts of the Department of Justice to work with Donald Trump to, you know, negotiate the return of these documents, and the repeated lies, the repeated efforts on the part of Trump to conceal these documents, and we still don't know.
John, why does he have those documents? What purpose does an ex- president have? You know, what possibly could be his motivation for taking over 100 declassified documents from the White House?
VAUSE: If it wasn't a former president who had, you know, these classified documents, it was just some ordinary Joe citizen, how would they be treated?
MARTIN: I think we'd already see an indictment. Everything that happens with former President Donald Trump, because we have no precedent in this country for President behaving in the way that Donald Trump behaves. We have no precedent for a president who believes he is somehow a king that he's above the law, that government property belongs to him, who doesn't recognize that he was an employee of the U.S. government, and when that job was over, you know, all the rights and privileges ended at that moment.
So it would be -- it's very clear to me that if this were someone other than Donald Trump, we would not be engaged in this extensive, you know, negotiation that's happening with the Department of Justice. I don't think they would have taken 18 months before executing a search warrant, had this been anyone else other than the President of the United States.
And as soon as they had information that there were documents that were taken from the White House that did not belong to this person that were top secret, classified documents, you know, they asked for them back, the person refused to return them, I'm pretty certain they would have gone in with a search warrant, retrieve those documents, and we would be looking at indictments rather than having a fight over, should some third party be appointed to review documents that have already been reviewed by the investigation team.
[01:10:23] VAUSE: Yes, and the pixie dust magic of declassifying information which doesn't exist. Areva, thank you so much for being with us. We appreciate that. Thank you.
MARTIN: Thanks, John..
VAUSE: We will take a short break. And when we come back, U.N. inspectors on their way to access the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plants. As safety concerns continue to grow, the latest on their mission in a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
VAUSE: U.N. nuclear inspectors are now on the way from the Ukrainian capital Kyiv to the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, which remains under Russian control amid escalating fighting in the region. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said their mission is urgent. He met Tuesday with the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency in Kyiv.
Zelenskyy is calling for the immediate withdrawal of all Russian troops from the nuclear plant. Ukraine and Russia blame each other for shelling around the planet in recent weeks.
[01:15:02]
But the Ukrainian President says Russian forces pose the greatest risk. That warning from Zelenskyy comes as Ukrainian ramps up its counter offensive to retake Russian occupied territory in the South. Ukrainian officials say troops have broken through Russia defenses in several areas in the Kherson region. CNN's Sam Kiley is there.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SAM KILEY, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): A lightning advanced by Ukraine against Russia leaves a winded landscape almost emptied of people. Ukraine claims to have broken through Russian front lines close to here, capturing several villages in a new counter offensive.
(on-camera): We've been stopped at a roadblock about a kilometer short of where they say there have been incoming fire in the last 24 hours. But we can see very clearly here that in these tree lines, these tree lines were all occupied by Ukrainian forces until 24 hours ago with the beginning of this counter offensive.
This has clearly been a location where there's been pretty heavy fighting. The fighting is now concentrated, we understand, from soldiers we've spoken to here, close to the front line, 5 or 6 kilometers beyond. And beyond that lies the ultimate goal of Kherson.
(voice-over): The regional capital captured by Russia in March was rocked by fighting, Russia said today. Its forces claimed to have wiped out a Ukrainian participant (ph) sell in a firefight. Who actually won the skirmish is unclear, but the city has been the center of Ukrainian resistance for months. Ukraine says that it has damaged the bridges connecting it to the Russian held left bank of the Dnieper River, cutting of key supply lines for the Russians.
NATALIA HUMENIUK, SECURITY AND DEFENSE FORCES OF SOUTHERN UKRAINE (through translation): They may continue to try to set up a ferry open soon crossing, but the whole area where it can be deployed is also under our fire control and will be hit.
KILEY (voice-over): Russia's claimed to have held off and offensive in which it lost at least four villages in 48 hours, according to Ukrainian military sources. Maria and her husband Kustiy (ph) a stayed on her farm and Ukraine's frontline throughout the war to feed their livestock.
But months of shelling have left her shaking. This week, she's endured jet streaming overhead as Ukrainian fighters attacked Russian targets.
MARIA POKUSAEVA, FARMER (through translation): I hid inside the house, my heart was jumping out every time. I was screaming so loud when the planes were flying over. I was so scared. God save us.
KILEY (voice-over): For now, though, survival means getting the harvest in. This may be a long war and winter is close at hand.
Sam Kiley, CNN, in southern Ukraine.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
VAUSE: Joining us is hour, Pulitzer Prize winning journalist David Sanger. He's also a CNN Political and National Security Analyst as well as White House National Security Correspondent for The New York Times. It's good to see you.
DAVID: Great to be back with you.
VAUSE: OK. So Ukraine's push to liberate Kherson began with strikes on Russian command posts as well as heating supply lines and escape routes for the Russian troops. So far, this does not look like the Battle of the Bulge. It's a lot more precise, a lot more strategic it seems.
In the coming days so, there will be an expectation of air and ground operations wrapping up. When that happens, will the Ukrainians be able to hold on to those early wins, but also continue to make new gains? And what does the Russian fight back look like? How messy and how brutal could this potentially get?
DAVID SANGER, CNN POLITICAL & NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Well we don't know yet because we don't really have much visibility into the actual fight that's going on in Kherson. And while the Ukrainians have talked a lot about the preparations for this, we don't know whether or not they actually have the capability of gaining land and then holding it.
Some of the Ukrainian gains in recent times, particularly in the past three months, had been temporary. In other cases, they've gotten the Russians to turn around. I think the big question that American commanders had was whether or not the Ukrainians were ready for this. There was some concern that they may have been moving too quickly, that they didn't really have a plan fully set up yet. But of course, you never know what the level of Russian resistance is going to be, especially after their humiliating retreat from Kyiv, just five months ago.
VAUSE: In the coming days, as this counter-offensive goes on, U.N. nuclear inspectors are expected to be about 150 miles by road from Kherson to the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, which has already been hit with artillery fire. We've seen chances of some kind of catastrophic strike increases as the fighting ramps up.
The E.U. crisis commissioner made this demand on Tuesday, "No nuclear power plant should ever be used as a war theater. It is unacceptable that civilian lives are put in danger or military action around the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant must stop immediately."
[01:20:00]
While military actions only going to increase it seems but beyond a military strike on the plan, if this Ukrainian counter-offensive gains traction, you know, a nuclear meltdown and one of the six reactors would be a good way for Putin and Russia to sort of reset that battlefield at away. Is that something that the U.S. and NATO would be preparing for or are prepared for? Can they respond in any way without an escalation?
SANGER: You know, it's a really tough question because this is a use of a nuclear power plant that we have never really seen before. We have seen attacks on nuclear facilities, you'll remember the Israelis bombed the Iraqi reactor in 1981, and then a Syrian reactor back in 2007. Both of those, though, were when the reactors were not full of fuel, and therefore couldn't cause a radiation incident. And what the Israelis were trying to do at that moment was stop those reactors from producing fuel that could be used for a weapon.
This is completely different. In this case, the Russians have occupied the reactor or six reactors really at the facility, and they're using it at a minimum as a shield. But then also, in some ways to intimidate the West tried to get them not to support Ukraine or send additional forces and to intimidate the Ukrainians with the potential for turning this entire facility into what essentially would be a giant dirty bomb.
VAUSE: Yes, in case there is that, you know, giant dirty bomb, if you like it, or some kind of nuclear disaster, CNN is reporting the E.U. to deliver over 5 million potassium iodine tablets to Ukraine to protect against potential radiation exposure. Do those fields actually do anything, if there is a core breach?
SANGER: They do one thing, which is they help fill up the thyroid and thus make the thyroid less likely to absorb radiation. So it doesn't determine much, but it certainly gets rid of what has been one of the most common cancers or cuts down on that. But let's face it, if there is a breach of one of the cores, the radiation flow immediately in the area is only going to be part of the problem.
The U.S. has now called for a orderly shutdown of the reactors so that if they are struck, there isn't a nuclear accident of that kind that couldn't be melted down if already the cores are cooled. So the interesting issue is that the Ukrainian so far have declined to do that. Now, partly this could be that they get 20 percent of their energy from this complex, the largest nuclear complex in Europe.
But part of it may also be that they're sort of daring the Russians to trigger such an incident. So it's a pretty dangerous situation. And I'm not really sure that when the IAEA, the International Atomic Energy Agency, inspectors make it there, if they make it there, that they're really empowered to solve what's the core problem there.
VAUSE: Because the Russians aren't controlled, the Ukrainians is still the technicians there. And it is a messy --
SANGER: That's right.
VAUSE: -- situation to say the least. David, as always, thank you so much. Appreciate you being with us.
SANGER: Thank you. Great to be with you.
VAUSE: Short break. When we come back, as more details emerge about the confidential government documents found at Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate, what are the possible legal consequences facing the former U.S. president and those around him?
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[01:28:02]
VAUSE: Welcome back, everyone. We are following breaking news about the Justice Department's filing on why a special master, an independent review of evidence seized by the FBI from Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago is not needed. This is a response to a filing by the Trump team.
Let's go back now to CNN National Security Analyst Juliette Kayyem, former U.S. Attorney Harry Lippman. Thank you for staying with us. And Juliette, to you, the prosecutor has included a photo of the front cover of the documents with markings classified. What was your initial reaction when you saw that? And do you have an example of what sort of intelligence or information in a general sense would be marked that way?
JULIETTE KAYYEM, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: So OK, so, I mean, we don't know what those documents were laid out for the picture. But what we do know is that they're not in a protected facility or in any ways protected, the way it's described is that these documents are essentially just just lying around. It's really the technical term to put it. So those documents just from my experience, so the red ones, and they're careful to protect what the markings on would be the sort of top secret in colloquial terms, there's different markings.
But the information that would disclose sources and methods, why is that important? Because a lot of information that's classified, lower classifications levels might be about sort of intelligence concerns or generic fears about, you know, there's a rising terror threat or we're concerned about China X, Y, and Z. What these documents contain, is information that would be relevant for President to know that say things like, you know, we have 12, you know, human assets that have infiltrated al-Qaeda or ISIS, they are doing this and telling us that, right?
So in other words, it gets to the sources and methods or it my describe an intelligence gathering method we have were able to capture the telephone communications of Putin or whatever it is, right? These are the things that you don't want to disclose to your enemies or even to us, even to the the public because they go to sort of how are we collecting this information.
[01:29:44]
So, that is what those documents are, just to tell you this -- you wouldn't see those documents in the light of day at any stage. You wouldn't see them in a way in which they could be duplicated, which is a primary concern. You wouldn't see them with your phone. In other words, you have to give up your phone to see information like this.
And then the rest of the stuff in the picture is somewhat redacted. You really cannot to see its classification level. But the picture is -- you know, you certainly can't justify it, right.
The information does not belong to Donald Trump. He is a private citizen. He does not retain this this information. The information contains the highest levels of secrecy about America's sources and methods in our intelligence gathering capabilities.
And here they are at a hotel that is open to the public, being held by a former president whose lawyers had already told us that they retained none of this information. It is a narrative they will try to get out of. But that is basically what the what the DOJ is saying.
JOHN VAUSE, CNN ANCHOR: And Harry, there are a range of reasons, we can speculate all day long as to why these documents would end up at Mar-a-Lago. But in terms of prosecutions and crimes, which have been committed, what is on the far end of seriousness and what is on the low end of maybe not so serious in terms of prosecution?
HARRY LITMAN, FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY: It's all serious once he knows that he has them and refuses to return them. Yes, it would be even -- your head spins to see this in the first place and maybe it spins two times, if he is actually trying in some way to parlay this into an advantage or sell it, you know.
But it is absolutely unnecessary in terms of the crime. The crime is just what Juliette said. I want to make one point about a skiff, anyone who is ever been in them sees this picture and like have a heart attack.
You have to leave your phone out. You can't bring it in, not simply so you don't take pictures. A skilled adversary potentially, if you bring your phone in, can themselves take pictures or overhear things. I mean, we are talking about very wicked and ingenious adversaries and you know, documents strewn around on the floor, just -- leave you in a complete cold sweat thinking about it.
But to get to your question, it doesn't matter, the crime here, the obstruction is. He took them. He knew he didn't have a right to take them. He lied about having given them all up. That is when he knew there was an investigation afoot. That is serious enough. That is obstruction in actual 20-year maximum in the federal code.
That is -- whether or not there is a further like crazy Manchurian candidate scenario here or not doesn't matter.
KAYYEM: Yes.
VAUSE: Harry Litman, Juliette Kayyem, thank you both for staying with us.
LITMAN: Thank you, John.
VAUSE: He was the last leader of the Soviet Union who chose peace over confrontation, lives over empire. When we come back, and remembering the incredible life of Mikhail Gorbachev, who Margaret Thatcher once described as someone you could do business with.
[01:33:18]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
VAUSE: Welcome back everyone. 37 minutes past the hour.
The last leader of the Soviet Union, Mikhail Gorbachev, has died at age 91. His policies at the time were radical, like glasnost, meant to increase openness and transparency in society and government, and perestroika, to structure and reform the stagnant Soviet economy. He also engaged with then U.S. President Ronald Reagan, among Soviet satellites and Republics to break away, setting up the fall of the iron curtain and an end to the Cold War.
U.S. President Joe Biden paid tribute to the late Soviet leader, writing this. "Few high-level Soviet officials had the courage to admit that things needed to change. As leader of the USSR, he worked with president Reagan to reduce our two countries nuclear arsenals, to the relief of people worldwide, praying for an end to the nuclear arms race.
The late Soviet leader enjoyed popularity around the world. His relationships at home were far more complex. He was despised by some. In particular, the current Russian leader was never a fan.
CNN's Phil Black explains.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
PHIL BLACK, CNN CORRESPONDENT: As Vladimir Putin in delivered his third presidential inauguration speech in may 2012, one of his predecessors was seen, briefly, making a few comments of his own.
"We don't know what Mikhail Gorbachev said, but it's unlikely they were kind words about Mr. Putin."
After 12 years under Putin, Gorbachev wanted change. He wasn't alone. The months leading up to this ceremony saw unprecedented opposition to Putin's rule, with tens of thousands of people regularly on the streets, calling for him to go.
Gorbachev supported them publicly, and from that point, he didn't hold back as a critic of Russia's political direction and leadership.
MIKHAIL GORBACHEV, FORMER SOVIET RUSSIAN PRESIDENT (through translator): We have now reached a stage where we interrupted perestroika. But there will no turning back, even as Vladimir Putin and others return to those old mirrors of control with force and fear.
BLACK: Over time, Gorbachev's views on Putin had flipped. When Putin first took over as president, Gorbachev backed him. And he kept backing him for a long time.
In this 2008 interview with CNN, Gorbachev defended Putin's leadership and his commitment to democracy.
[01:29:51]
GORBACHEV: Putin has been a successful president
DMITRI TRENIN, CARNEGIE MOSCOW CENTER: Gorbachev's view of Putin -- and Putin's policies have changed with Putin's policies. With And clearly with Putin's own changing and his own evolution. And clearly, somewhere in the mid 2000s, Putin started to become much more (INAUDIBLE)
BLACK: Gorbachev supported Russia's annexation of Crimea in 2014. Two days after Russia's invasion of Ukraine February 2022. Gorbachev's foundation issued a
call for a cease-fire and peace talks.
But Russia's modern political leaders didn't care whether they had Gorbachev's political support or not. To them, he would always be the man who allowed the USSR to collapse. Gorbachev sometimes expressed regret.
GORBACHEV: I thought the best I could to defend the Soviet Union. But I failed.
BLACK: But in later years, he spent a lot more time defending his actions as Soviet leader.
GORBACHEV: Perestroika achieved a lot. Inside Russia we had democracy, freedom of action, freedom of conscience, private property, freedom to travel abroad, everything.
BLACK: He gave people freedoms but struggled to feed them. More than 20 years later, many Russians still blame Gorbachev for the Soviet Union humiliation and the hardships they endured.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I remember the jump of prices. Bread became more expensive. Inflation was huge.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I called for the trial of Mikhail Gorbachev.
BLACK: Gorbachev's and popularity at home was rivaled in intensity by his star status abroad, where he was celebrated as a great statesman.
This was his 80th birthday gala in London in 2011.
SHARON STONE, ACTRESS: We have an opportunity to thank someone for being such an extraordinary example of good citizenship.
What democracy really can mean and what it means to be a beacon of light and hope in the world. BLACK: Gorbachev spoke candidly about AIDS and poor health catching up with him. But he kept working.
TRENIN: He managed to stay intellectually active in Russian political life, 20 years after his departure as president something which was totally unprecedented in this country.
BLACK: He wrote books, launched political parties, toured and gave speeches. He raised money for his own foundation as well as the cancer-fighting charity named after his late wife.
Raisa Gorbacheva (ph) died of leukemia in 1999. Ten years later, her husband recorded an album of love songs he used to sing to her.
(MUSIC)
BLACK: Only one copy was ever released and it was sold at a charity auction for more than $160,000.
GORBACHEV: TRENIN: This is something I did for Raisa. In memory of Raisa.
BLACK: This was another fundraising job and it became one of Gorbachev's most famous images. The ad for designer luggage shows him pensively looking out of the remains of the Berlin wall.
Its destruction remains the most iconic achievement of Gorbachev's time in power. And a key reason why he was so respected by the international community. Some Russians believe one day he will be equally admired by his own people.
IGOR ZEBELE, POLITICAL ANALYST: I think that 100 years for now, he will be judged more favorably in my country than when he is judged today.
BLACK: A towering international hero, branded a domestic failure. A man who changed the world and spent his life working for his country.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
VAUSE: Jill Dougherty is an adjunct professor at Georgetown University, as well as a CNN contributor and a former CNN Moscow bureau chief. Good to see you. JILL DOUGHERTY, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Hey, John.
VAUSE: So, you were in Moscow, you were in Russia as bureau chief and as a reporter for the Gorbachev years, for the collapse of the Soviet Union, for the rise of Putin -- you know, all up in 20 years or so, a period of time in which Gorbachev's policies of perestroika and glasnost were meant to save the empire.
Instead, he triggered the collapse of the Soviet Union, an event which won him admiration around the world, but at home there was some who despised him for it. And notably, the current Kremlin leader is a man who is quoted as saying, the collapse of the USSR was the biggest geopolitical catastrophe of the century.
This is (INAUDIBLE) turn around at the very top of a country in essentially a very short period of time.
DOUGHERTY: It was John. You know, I mean Gorbachev was in power for only six years. When you think of what he did, you know, domestically with perestroika, glasnost -- both of those opening up and perestroika was really kind of changing of the economy.
[01:44:59]
DOUGHERTY: And then internationally, in only six years. So yes, he definitely clearly transformed Russia.
VAUSE: And one of the most memorable and impactful six words ever said during the 20th century, possibly were these. Listen to this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RONALD REAGAN, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
VAUSE: Ronald Reagan there. And in a way Gorbachev did because he chose peace over confrontation and with that in mind, here is part of a statement from former U.S. secretary of state James Baker who dealt very closely with Gorbachev over the years.
"History will remember Mikhail Gorbachev as a giant. He steered his great nation towards democracy, He played the critical role in a peaceful conclusion of the cold war by his decision against using force to hold the empire together.
I found him to be an honest broker who could count on his word despite domestic pressure in Moscow. The free world misses him greatly.
So clearly the differences between Gorbachev and Putin are obviously on sort of a policy point of view. But also their personal values, their qualities also seem to be very far apart, at least, you know, from a western perception.
DOUGHERTY: Yes, they are very different people. He would have to say, Gorbachev, I met him, I interviewed him a number of times. A very vibrant person with so much energy. And also a very nice, fun person. He really was.
He was a very natural politician and very natural person. And remember you know, when he came to the United States, people were ecstatic to meet him.
And in Russia, certainly people really felt that this was a breath of fresh air. I remember that period very well, John. You know, when people under glasnost were able to read and discuss things that they've never been able to read and discuss in the Soviet Union under the communist control.
And as he moved on, then you had the domestic part. And internationally there he was, especially with arms control and taking that extremely brave step at that point along with Ronald Reagan to get rid of, or at least try to control, not get rid of the nuclear weapons which both countries were absolutely bristling (ph) with.
VAUSE: And ten years ago, CNN's Christiane Amanpour asked Gorbachev about Putin and the direction he was taking Russia compared to his time as the leader, here he is.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: Do you think that President Putin is committed to any kind of reform and will the peoples' voice be heard under his presidency?
GORBACHEV: I think it will be hard for him, given his nature. To do this. But there is no other way for him but to move towards greater democracy and real democracy in Russia because there is no other way for Russia to find a way out of its dead end, in which it is now.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
VAUSE: Things that he said, he writes about Putin's nature and sort of accurate prediction made about, you know, where Russia is headed today under Putin's leadership.
ACOSTA: I was thinking of that today, in fact that, you know, Gorbachev was all about opening up the country. There was investments coming in and opening up to the world and having Russians kind of move in to the outer world and get to know Europe and the United States.
And unfortunately right now, it feels that Russia is closing down, there is a lot of control over the media. At the very point where we are remembering Gorbachev for opening up the media.
And a lot more closing off and really becoming more isolated from Europe and certainly from the United States. So, it is quite striking I think how things have gone backwards.
VAUSE: Yes. It is good to have your perspective on all of this Jill. I guess at the end of the day, you know, leadership knows.
Good to see you. Thanks for being with us.
DOUGHERTY: Yes.
VAUSE: After the break, Pakistan's climate change emergency, deadly floods now impacting the lives of tens of millions of people. Those least responsible for producing the carbon emissions warming our planet.
[01:49:16]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
VAUSE: The U.N. secretary general making an urgent appeal for aid as Pakistan struggles with what he calls a monsoon on steroids. Pakistani officials say extreme flooding has killed more than 1,100 people. Almost 400 children and impacted about 33 million others.
The U.N. chief is asking for a $160 million dollars in humanitarian assistance for Pakistan, but he is also calling for a global response to climate change.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ANTONIO GUTERRES, U.N. SECRETARY GENERAL: The Pakistani people are facing a monsoon on steroids. The relentless impact of levels of rain and flooding, let's stop sleepwalking towards the destruction of our planet by climate change.
Today,
Tomorrow, it could be your country.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
VAUSE: CNN's Anna Cohen now reporting on Pakistan's climate catastrophe.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ANNA COREN, CNNCRPD: The endless monsoon rains may have eased for now, but the deluge across Pakistan has left carnage and destruction on and unprecedented scale.
Up to one third of the country could end up underwater. Countless townships are already submerged, leaving millions of Pakistanis destitute and homeless.
"We are poor people," says this woman, our home was destroyed, our belongings disappeared in the big flood. Our children are waiting on the banks with no food, no shelter."
[01:54:49]
COREN: The government says the historic floods across Pakistan that have claimed the lives of more than 1,100 people are estimated to have caused more than ten billion dollars in damage. For a country that already received a bailout from the International
Monetary Fund, this calamity could push its fragile economy to the brink.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Until water completely recedes, they will not be able to go and physically do the survey, but my hunch is that this is going to be 2 to 3 times higher than what we had estimated.
COREN: The prime minister has set up a national flood response and coordination center. And the military has been mobilized to help with evacuations. Tent cities have sprung up and humanitarian aid is slowly trickling in.
But it is a drop in the ocean considering the magnitude of this climate change induced catastrophe.
PETER OPHOFF, IFRC: I have been in the Red Cross Red/Crescent for the last 29 years. I have not seen anything like this. It is a serious situation. Pakistan is in dire need. The damages are here and we will be in this for a long time if not months, but years that we are talking about.
COREN: A timeframe unfathomable to these desperate people whose only priority right now is survival.
Anna Coren, CNN, HONG Kong
(END VIDEOTAPE)
VAUSE: I'm John Vause. Please stay with us, the news continues here on CNN with my friend and colleague Rosemary Church after a very short break.
See you tomorrow.
[015618]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
Covid was something from the movies. Asia was much more draconian with it. And so, we hardly did any flying for two years. Imagine an airline with 21,000 staff, 250 aircrafts at the time. It's a nightmare scenario. But I think the worst is over now. It has given us a chance to do things we probably couldn't do before.
One of the benefits was enabling me to pivot the ship and start looking at our data and brand in a different way. The internet has made pricing transparent and so anyone, it's not going to come directly, they're going surround. So I said to my team, let's be a travel agent. Separated the company, created super app.
