Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Zelenskyy Defiant As War Enters Second Year; Biden Rules Out Sending F-16 Fighter Jets To Ukraine For Now; Winter Strom Slams West Coast, Blizzard Warnings In Southern CA; Alex Murdaugh Faces Tense Second Day Of Cross-Examination; Toxic Wastewater From OH Train Wreck Headed To Texas For Disposal; Republicans Set First 2024 Primary Debate; Fed's Key Inflation Gauge Unexpected Rises In January. Aired 11a-12p ET

Aired February 25, 2023 - 11:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:00:24]

FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN ANCHOR: Hello, everyone. Thank you so much for joining me this Saturday. I'm Fredricka Whitfield.

The war in Ukraine now in its second year. The world watched as Russian tanks rolled into Ukraine but Russia's expectations of a quick defeat and the taking of Kyiv were quickly dismissed as Ukraine fought back and reversed much of Russia's early gains.

In Kyiv on the anniversary a solemn ceremony.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY, UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT: Slava Ukraine.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WHITFIELD: Ukraine's President Zelenskyy remains the very public face of Ukraine's resistance and was defiant in his speech.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ZELENSKYY (through translator): If we all do our homework, victory will be inevitable. I am certain there will be victory. I don't think I won it this year.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WHITFIELD: Western allies this week pledging more military support for Ukraine including a $2 billion package from the U.S. and a new round of sanctions on Russia.

But Ukraine has suffered. Some 8 million people have fled the country and of those who stayed roughly 18 million are in dire need of assistance. That's nearly 40 percent of the country's population.

CNN's Christiane Amanpour looks at a year of war and its impact on Ukraine's national identity.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: Perhaps there is no more powerful sense of belonging than this, Yaryna (ph) and Sviatoslav (ph) deciding to marry in their Orthodox Church, the very day Russia invaded and tried to claim their national identity.

Instead of a honeymoon, they joined the territorial defense against the siege of their capital Kyiv. Today looking over their year of living dangerously, the young couple takes stock.

SVIATOSLAV FURSIN, FORMER TERRITORIAL DEFENSE VOLUNTEER: Only when you see death, you understand the value of life. And in my case, it's totally 100 percent.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes, it's empty.

AMANPOUR: This war is a tale of epic resistance but a whole nation and the civilians who became overnight soldiers.

YARYNA ARIEVA, FORMER TERRITORIAL DEFENSE VOLUNTEER: This one year of the war it really feels like 40 years of life. I don't feel myself so young again anymore, just because of all experience of all the things you have seen.

AMANPOUR: They remind us just how much has been lost. Everyone has family, friends killed or wounded.

When Ukraine broke that long siege around Kyiv revealing unimaginable horrors and crimes against humanity in Bucha it stiffened, not softened the people's resistance and their resolve.

Any peace negotiations would now have to include prosecutions and justice and an end to any Russian claims on their territory or their identity.

When we visited the newly liberated suburb of Borodyanka last April, even monuments to Ukrainian art and literature weren't spared. We witnessed the deliberate assault on their cultural heritage.

So this is Vladimir Putin's idea of liberating a fraternal, brotherly nation. So either he's doing all this because he loves Ukrainians or as many believe because he's motivated by a rising hatred and anger at their westward loving democracy at their resistance and at their refusal to come under Russian control.

From Kharkiv to Kherson, Odessa to Donbas -- museums, opera houses and art have been targeted, looted and destroyed. And yet a heroic effort to save and protect this heritage has been underway since the first missile struck.

Here at the National Museum of the History of Ukraine, an exhibit on this past year of war and especially reminders that so many Russian targets were clearly marked "Children, people live here". Former deputy culture minister Olesia Ostrovska-Liuta (ph) tells us that across the country many curators took shelter inside with their collections.

OLESIA OSTROVSKA-LIUTA, FORMER DEPUTY CULTURE MINISTER: -- that's the situation of virtually every Ukrainian museum, you can't have objects from the collection in the museum just on display. They have to be secured. They have to be cared for.

[11:04:52]

AMANPOUR: The installation hanging in this stairwell reminds us the war actually began in 2014 with Putin's annexation of Crimea, invasion of Donbas, an attempt to crush an independent nation calling this Ruskimiya (ph), Greater Russia. Olesia calls that absurd.

OSTROVSKA-LIUTA: And I don't think this is Ukrainian identity. There is a problem at all in the war. It's Russia's identity. If Russian identity is imperial, Ukraine is essential part of it.

But if you rethink Russian identity as a non-imperial identity, then you do not need Ukraine, Poland, Baltic States within your realm.

AMANPOUR: that of course is the point of Putin's war -- to crush this democracy who is now world-famous flag was first publicly raised in 1990 just ahead of independence. Before that, the Soviets would have jailed anyone caught carrying it. Today, Olesia says it remains a symbol of courage, resistance and statehood.

Nobody a year ago thought this country would still be standing. I mean we thought that that flag would not exist anymore. That this would be Russia again.

OSTROVSKA-LIUTA: We didn't think that at all. At all. They remember this.

AMANPOUR: Like Ukrainians across this country, newlyweds Yaryna and Sviastoslav will mark this dark year of war and their own first anniversary, remembering why they struggle and what they stand for.

Christiane Amanpour, CNN, Kyiv.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

WHITFIELD: And President Biden marked the one-year anniversary of the war by announcing $2 billion in new military aid and another $10 billion in humanitarian assistance for Ukraine.

CNN's Jasmine Wright joins us now from Delaware where the president is spending the weekend.

So Jasmine, the U.S. is sending more aid and weapons to Ukraine but the president said one weapon will not be part of the new military package. What can you tell us about that?

JASMINE WRIGHT, CNN WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Yes, that's right, Fred. Those F-16 fighter jets were noticeably absent from the series of actions President Biden laid out yesterday marking the first anniversary of the war in Ukraine.

President Biden started his day in D.C. yesterday. He first met with G-7 leaders, that group of western allies who have committed to helping Ukraine in the war as well as punishing Russia for its actions.

Now, Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy was also a part of that G-7 meeting that was virtual where President Biden pledged his enduring support for Ukraine for as long as it takes and also announced that massive $2 billion security assistance package.

Now, that package, Fred, contains a lot of things that Ukraine has already asked for especially when you talk about munition. Now it contains HIMARS rocket launchers as well as additional artillery shells, drones and counter drone activity.

But one thing, of course, that wasn't on there was those fighter jets that we know President Zelenskyy has personally lobbied President Biden for including on Monday when Biden made that historic unprecedented trip to Ukraine.

We know that he asked for it then. But President Biden in an interview with ABC on Friday, he said that he was ruling it out for now. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We're sending him what our seasoned military thinks he needs now. He needs tanks. He needs artillery. He needs air defense including another HIMARS but there's things he needs now that we're sending in to put him in a position to be able to make gains this spring and this summer going into the fall. He doesn't need F-16s now.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WRIGHT: Now, of course, President Zelenskyy would not agree with that sentiment so we are going to be listening to see if he makes any more requests.

But another thing that President Biden did announce yesterday to mark that one-year anniversary was a new round of sanctions. Something that the administration has called the most significant package of actions to date because it really tries to focus on nailing down companies and entities about 200 individuals that have helped Russia evade western sanctions.

And that of course, puts a spotlight on Chinese companies that are also going to be under this sanction package that have helped bolster Russia's war effort. So this is something that the Biden administration continues to tout throughout this weekend as they mark 366 days now of war, Fred/

WHITFIELD: All right. Jasmine Wright, thanks so much in Delaware. We'll check back with you.

All right. Let's bring right now Steve Hall. Steve Hall is a CNN military -- sorry, national security analyst and former CIA -- and former CIA chief of Russian operations, all in the same family. How about that?

All right. Steve, good to see you.

So is it your view that Ukraine can win without the air power that it continues to ask for?

STEVE HALL, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Well, that's what we're going to spend the next, I guess, year probably plus seeing, Fred.

[11:09:51]

HALL: You know, I am unfortunately not a military analyst but what I think the pattern, though, that we've seen over this past year, the first year of the Ukrainian war has been the West, you know, very slowly, very cautiously, I think probably not to overwhelm Ukrainian logistics capabilities and that sort of thing slowly ramping up the type of weaponry and ammunition that goes with that over the past year.

Will that also be the case for F-16s? I mean you remember a couple of months ago the administration was also saying, well, we're not going to send tanks. So that has shifted. Will this be another thing that shifts? Perhaps some of it will depend on what happens on the ground this year during the war. I guess we'll have to see.

WHITFIELD: Yes, because Biden did say they don't need it now. He did use the word "not now".

All right. So have a listen to what the U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said yesterday in his United Nations address.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANTONY BLINKEN, U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE: In this war, there is an aggressor and there is a victim. Russia fights for conquest. Ukraine fights for its freedom.

If Russia stops fighting and leaves Ukraine, the war ends. If Ukraine stops fighting, Ukraine ends. The fact remains: one man Vladimir Putin started this war. One man can end it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WHITFIELD: So Steve, do you see that potential scenario that Putin ends it perhaps after running out of resources or soldiers?

HALL: Well first, I have to agree with the secretary's very clear formulation on that. I mean, really, I think most commonsensical, straight thinking people in the world, if you look it say ok, nations are built with this idea of sovereignty, other people don't get to come in and invade you. And that's precisely what Russia did unprovoked into Ukraine. So that much -- that basis for all of this is certainly true.

As to whether or not Putin will run out of something -- will power, you know, ammunition, men that it wants to send into the meat grinder -- I would be surprised if Putin found a way just to say ok, no, this is a big mistake or I've gone too far or we don't have enough resources.

This is one of the significant problems with this is where does Putin go from here. I mean if he somehow gives up and surrenders, that's going to have negative implications for him back in Russia. But he doesn't win, that will too.

And it looks like he's not going to win certainly not in the short and the midterm. So I'm glad I'm not in Vladimir Putin's position right now because he doesn't have a whole lot of space to work with.

WHITFIELD: Is this perhaps an effort of buying time then for Putin that, you know, China, President Xi Jinping is planning a visit to Moscow. China, you know, has proposed a peace plan for Ukraine and now Zelenskyy says wait a minute, you know, there needs to be a summit, you know, involving Ukraine and China. Who perhaps might have the greatest leverage over China here?

HALL: You know, the Chinese position is really interesting and very complicated. So I think the Chinese have very -- they've stated they have very long term goals. They want to be, you know, the primary super power economically, militarily, you know, in the next 50 years in the future.

But by the same token, they share a certain ideology with Russia and that is democracies worldwide are a threat to them because China is an authoritarian nation.

So how is China going to play some sort of neutral moderating position in this when it's pretty clear they're coming down on Russia side? So clearly that helps Russia but China has already been warned by the United States and by the west, you shouldn't be giving them weapons or that's going to be a bad thing.

So China is walking a really, really fine tight rope. Certainly it's true that China needs Russia much less than Russia needs China at this point.

WHITFIELD: And as you mentioned, economics is the real incentive for China, so perhaps China could be looking at a sort of partnering with Ukraine because look, so much of the country has been decimated. China might be able to, you know, offer assistance or see it as an opportunity to help rebuild that country so economically it gains.

HALL: Yes, and that's kind of the role that China has been playing, you know, for the past 20 years. It's trying to use its growing economic influence to, you know, reach out to nations that are not in as good a situation economically and try to help them. It can benefit from a relationship with Ukraine but I think more importantly, Fred, geopolitically China -- if it's going to have the future it wants to have it has to have really good economic relations with the west, with the E.U., with the United States and other developed countries.

A relationship with Russia at this point, those are mutually exclusive. You can't have both of those things. And so I think if I'm Russia and I'm thinking over the long term I think the Chinese are probably not necessarily going to be on our side if we stay on the current course and continue the war in Ukraine.

WHITFIELD: All right. Powerful stuff. Steve Hall, great to see you. Thanks so much.

HALL: Sure.

WHITFIELD: All right. Right now, blizzard warnings are in effect in southern California. The first time in Los Angeles in 34 years that something like this has happened. It's a rare winter storm blanketing the region. Up to 8 feet of snow is possible in some areas.

[11:15:00]

WHITFIELD: But snow is just part of the problem. Heavy rain is causing flash flood watches as well, impacting 20 million people.

CNN's Camila Bernal is live for us in Leveque, California -- a very snowy, it looks great but it can also be very hazardous. What's happening?

CAMILA BERNAL, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Hey Fred. Can you believe that I am --

WHITFIELD: No.

BERNAL: -- in southern California still in L.A. County. I know no one can believe it. I mean many of the roads are closed at this time. If you can take a look here behind me, that's the sign that's supposed to tell drivers that the road is closed. I'm standing in the middle of the street here.

We are a little bit close to the I-5. This is the highway that connects Los Angeles to San Francisco. We're on the Grapevine essentially. and it is shut down at the moment.

It opened for a few hours overnight yesterday and it is closed again. So as it was closed, many of the drivers were stranded here in this area. You could see the semi truck here behind me. They cannot leave.

Yesterday, there were many more semi trucks, I think they learned their lesson so now we're only seeing one this morning.

So it is dangerous. It is inconvenient for a lot of these drivers. There were residents who essentially were just stuck here because there was nowhere to go.

You're seeing the snow here. In higher elevations areas, we're expecting six, seven, eight feet of snow. In the lower elevations, we can expect three to four feet of snow. I mean this could be historic for this area when it comes to a single

event snowfall. We're expecting all of that in a two-three day period. So it is just almost unbelievable, Fred.

WHITFIELD: Well, I hope you have a tent because something tells me that you all are going to be immobilized as well, you know, within minutes if not hours.

BERNAL: Yes. We're stuck here. We have a hotel room so we'll walk over to the hotel or just drive -- a two-minute drive thankfully. So we'll be safe but it is again, just so unbelievable to be here.

WHITFIELD: It is unbelievable. Hard to believe I'm talking to you from -- you know, to southern California. But hey, folks are moving behind you so they're somewhat prepared as are you with your long coat. I'm impressed.

All right. Camila Bernal, thanks so much. We'll check back with you.

BERNAL: Thank you.

WHITFIELD: all right. Coming up Alex Murdaugh, he took the stand for hours in his double-murder trial and admitted to lying about where he was the night his wife and son were killed. Where does the prosecution go from here? We'll discuss straight ahead.

Plus, millions of gallons of toxic waste water from the Ohio train derailment and apparently moving all of that might take place but to other states. But officials say they weren't even given a heads up about that. The latest, next.

[11:17:47]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: Accused double-murderer Alex Murdaugh admits to being a serial liar. He admits he was at the scene, the dog kennel just minutes before his wife and son were brutally slaughtered but he insists he is not a killer.

The disgraced former attorney was back on the witness stand Friday, facing a second round of tough questioning.

CNN's Dianne Gallagher has been following this case from Walterboro, South Carolina and has this report.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

CREIGHTON WATERS, PROSECUTOR: So you, like you've done so many times over the course of your life, had to back up and make a new story that kind of fit with the facts.

DIANNE GALLAGHER, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Alex Murdaugh under cross-examination for a second day, several times getting heated.

ALEX MURDAUGH, ACCUSED OF MURDERING WIFE AND SON: You dang right I'm consistent about that because a very short time before that, David Owens is asking me questions and telling me I'm a suspect in the murder of my wife and my child and asking me about my clothes. You're dang right it was important.

WATERS: Because the only thing you're concerned about is yourself. You're not concerned about giving accurate information to law enforcement.

GALLAGHER: As he tries to convince the jury he did not kill his wife Maggie and son Paul.

MURDAUGH: You mean like did I shoot my wife and my son?

WATERS: Yes.

MURDAUGH: No.

GALLAGHER: Prosecutor Creighton Waters pushing Murdaugh hard over his admission of lying about being at the family dog kennels where the bodies were found the night of the murders.

WATERS: Pretty much all of that was lies, wasn't it?

MURDAUGH: Everything about me not going to the kennel was a lie.

WATERS: And you're able to do that so easily and convincingly and so naturally, don't you?

GALLAGHER: And hammering Murdaugh on what the prosecution is calling his new story.

WATERS: You also looked at this jury and tried to tell them that you had been cooperative in this investigation?

MURDAUGH: Other than lying to you -- them about going to the kennel, I was cooperative in every aspect of this investigation.

WATERS: Very cooperative except for maybe the most important fact of all that you were at the murder scene with the victims just minutes before they died.

GALLAGHER: Also revealed, astonishing details we've never heard about just how serious Murdaugh says his opioid addiction was.

WATERS: So you're taking 60 a day or something like that?

MURDAUGH: There were days where I took more than that.

GALLAGHER: But the majority of the cross examination Friday focused on what happened June 7th, 2021.

WATERS: So what you're telling this jury is that it's a random vigilante.

MURDAUGH: That's your statement. WATERS: The 12-year-old 5'2 people that just happened to know that

Paul and Maggie were both at Mozdel (ph) on June 7th, that knew that they would be at the kennels alone on June 7th, that knew that you would not be there but only between the time of 8:49 and 9:02, that they show up without a weapon, assuming that they're going to find weapons and ammunition there, that they commit this crime during that short time window and then they travel the same exact route that you do around the same time to Alameda.

That's what you're trying to tell this jury?

MURDAUGH: You got a lot of factors in there, Mr. Waters, all of which I do not agree with but some of which I do.

[11:24:55]

GALLAGHER: After more than a dozen hours on the stand, Alex Murdaugh is done with his testimony but the trial continues. In fact, the defense has yet to rest its case. We're told they plan to call additional witnesses on Monday when court resumes.

Dianne Gallagher, CNN -- Walterboro, South Carolina.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

WHITFIELD: All right. I want to bring in defense attorney Misty Marris for her perspective on this week's developments. Good to see you, Misty.

So Murdaugh is a former attorney. He seemed very careful in his word choice. Did he do a convincing job in his own defense?

MISTY MARRIS, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: You know, I actually think his first day on the stand in his direct testimony, he did maybe ingratiate himself to the jurors and did come off as human. One of the reasons to put the defendant on the stand or to take the stand is to humanize. Remember, if you have some jurors may be looking at him as a cold- blooded killer, others might be looking at him as a victim who lost his wife and son.

So for that purpose, I think his direct was good. I personally believe that he fell apart in the cross-examination. He was parsing through the questions. He was using his lawyer skills to reframe questions. I believe that came off completely evasive. That is what liars do.

WHITFIELD: Oh so you --

MARRIS: People that are not able to answer those questions without the qualifiers that he was using in almost every situation.

WHITFIELD: So you see that as, you know, as a former attorney, he's using that to his advantage? I mean, because sometimes he tried to put the prosecutor on his heels.

MARRIS: Totally. I completely agree. And I think the prosecutor gave him a lot of leeway to do that. He was reframing the questions to the question that he wants to answer on the stand. That's not what you want to do when you're doing a cross-examination.

The questions are as important as the responses. It's to get the story out there. But at the end of the day, where he really, really faltered on the financial stuff, he was trying to weasel out in front of that. The guy is an absolute liar. Nobody has to prove that. He told you himself on the stand.

But where this really came to the detriment of Murdaugh is the timeline. That timeline that he is now locked into, he's at the kennels. He's at the kennels 8:44 - 8:45. He then takes the chicken out of the dog's mouth, puts the chicken on the crate. This is all his testimony, right.

The prosecutors really pinned down that timeline to place him at the scene by his own timeline now, right, minutes, less than a minute before the murders occurred.

So that's where the prosecutor really boxed him in and showed that his version, his new version just isn't feasible under the circumstances.

WHITFIELD: And by that same token, was able to establish the pattern of lies. You know, while sometimes Murdaugh would say well I don't really recall, I'm not really sure and the prosecutor was, you know, pretty adept at being able to say but you lied at the very beginning.

As soon as police arrived, and then he articulated a string of people, getting Murdaugh to admit that he lied to those people. So how effective might that be for any jurors who are on the fence about well, wait a minute, you know, yes, he's been humanized here with the addiction and everything else. It's his family. He's conveyed how much he loves.

But you know, it's been established that he's a liar. But is that enough to believe that he killed them? And lied about it.

MARRIS: So yes. So great question. And I think a lot of people are asking that question. So being a liar is one thing. All of these financial crime (ph) pattern of habitually lying for his own self- gain, right.

But what really matters? The lie about being at the kennels. It's maybe the most important fact in the case and as a lawyer he knows this. And the prosecutors brought this up.

The last person to see the victims is going to be one of the most critical things investigators are going to need to know. And that is him.

So his story completely changed. He lied about something that is so fundamental. And not only that, he continued to lie to friends, to family, to law enforcement over a period of time in a calculated way.

So the fact that he's now falling on the sword and I think he kind of had to because he was backed into a corner, how is he going to explain that away? He's on tape. I think he was trying to say well, I'm taking accountability but now

you're asking the jury to believe you. Now you're telling the truth with this he self-serving story and everything else was the truth but it was just this one thing that was a lie, otherwise I was cooperative.

I got to tell you Fredricka, I'm personally not buying it and I think a lot of jurors are probably looking at it through that lens. Why would you lie about that one most critical fact? And a lot of people are going to say, you wouldn't lie about it unless you had done something wrong.

[11:29:52]

MARRIS: And there was some admission in the testimony on that front when he talked, he blames the lie on his opioid addiction. He says that was the reason he was paranoid earlier in the testimony and I think we'll see this weaved back in at the end in closing.

He said I was -- when I would see a police officer I would get paranoid. I was usually able to talk myself out of it because I knew I didn't do anything wrong.

So you know, take his own words and weave that into the closing argument I think (INAUDIBLE) are going to be connected.

WHITFIELD: All right. We'll all be staying tuned. It is riveting. I think it has everyone, you know, on the edge of their seat for sure.

All right. Misty Marris, thank you so much.

MARRIS: Thank you.

WHITFIELD: All right. Tons of toxic dirt and water from the Ohio train disaster now heading to other states and officials in those states claim they didn't even know about it. Details straight ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:34:58]

WHITFIELD: Welcome back.

Right now, water from the train wreck in East Palestine, Ohio is being shipped to Texas for disposal. About 2 million gallons of toxic water are expected to be disposed of in Harris County, Texas, according to officials there.

Around six truckloads of contaminated soil were headed to a hazardous waste disposal facility in Michigan but according to Michigan officials, the EPA paused those shipments as of last night.

The catastrophic derailment has crippled the small town of East Palestine since it happened earlier this month. At a town hall there last night, environmental activist Erin Brockovich was there.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ERIN BROCKOVICH, ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIVIST: I hope this community, like I've seen others across this country over and over again, are going to stick together, they're going to band together, they're going to protect each other.

You'll be the citizens' alliance (ph). Nobody knows you better than you. You're going to hold to those instincts. You know what's happened and you continue to speak up and rise up. That's how things will change.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WHITFIELD: CNN's Polo Sandoval joins us now with more on this story. So Polo, what are officials in Texas and Michigan saying about these plans of sending water and soil from the derailment right to their states?

POLO SANDOVAL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: And Fred, to be clear, after hearing from officials in both Texas and Michigan, so far there aren't any signs of any sort of wrongdoing when it comes to the disposal of this hazardous material. But it absolutely does has potential to widen the controversy that we've seen in light of that February 3rd derailment.

Let's start in Texas in Harris County, the most populated state -- rather county in the state, county seat of course being Houston. Lina Hidalgo (ph), the chief executive there says that she first learned that 2 million gallons of contaminated firefighting water were as being shipped to her state on the news last week.

She added that she later learned that the shipments had in fact arrived the week before. So she's concerned there obviously, nothing at this point indicating that the material is not being disposed of properly, according to officials there on the ground, or that there is any sort of nefarious reason why it's being selected but.

But to her it just doesn't seem right. Again, this coming from Lina Hidalgo. Officials in Wayne County, Michigan -- Detroit there being the county seat -- insisting they were not notified about this contaminated soil that was shipped to a licensed facility in their community. We have heard as recently as yesterday from Ohio officials that some 4,800 cubic yards of contaminated soil have been removed there from East Palestine, Ohio.

The Congresswoman Debbie Dingell saying that she was not notified or given the heads up that this was being disposed of in the state of Michigan. And like Texas, county officials there in Wayne County saying that they have no reason to believe that this was done improperly but they say that it highlights disconnects.

We have heard time and time again about the lack of information, not just among members of the community there but now folks in Michigan and folks in Texas concerned that they are not being told about how the disposal process is going on when it comes to some of this hazardous material. We are currently reaching to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

to see what next actions could potentially come when it comes to the shipment of some of the hazardous materials that have been removed from the site, already over three weeks ago, Fred.

WHITFIELD: All right. Keep us posted. Polo Sandoval, thanks so much.

SANDOVAL: You bet.

WHITFIELD: All right. Still ahead, it's already time to mark your calendars for the first 2024 Republican presidential debate set for August. So far only two major candidates are in but several more are expected to put their names into the hat. We'll discuss, next.

[11:38:40]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: All right. This is hard to believe given what the calendar says but the Republican National Committee has scheduled its first presidential primary debate for August of this year. The debate will take place in Milwaukee, the same city that will hold the GOP's 2024 convention.

So far Donald Trump and former South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley are the only major candidates who have announced that they're running for the Republican nomination.

Joining me right now to discuss this and more is Ron Brownstein. He is a CNN senior political analyst and is senior editor for "The Atlantic".

I say it's a surprise because you kind of forget where we are in the calendar. But this makes a whole lot of sense. We're talking about the 2024 presidential race.

So we're only about six months away now, Ron, from the first Republican primary debate. I mean surely there won't be just those two major candidates who will be dueling. How soon before the others throw their hat into the ring?

RON BROWNSTEIN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: It's kind of a forcing event, isn't it, Fred? I mean having that first national audience kind of -- you know, people will feel pressure to be in the race by then.

Of course, the first Republican debate in the 2016 race was also in August of the year before, nationally broadcast on Fox. At that point, people were unsure whether Donald Trump was a serious candidate or just kind of a, you know, amusing distraction. And he had a very pugnacious, belligerent performance including a very memorable kind of take down of Megyn Kelly when she recited all of his misogynistic comments over the years and that was part of what allowed him to take off in that race.

So this could be another important moment in the Republican field. Look, Ron DeSantis has the same excuse George W. Bush did in 1999. He can delay his announcement until after he finishes his legislative session. And I don't think many of the other potential candidates are looking to spend one more day in the cross hairs of Donald Trump as an official candidate than they have to.

So this is unfolding late but this I think will be a forcing event in August. People will want to be on that stage.

WHITFIELD: So is there a feeling that some candidates might say wait a minute, I don't necessarily need to be on that stage. I'm going to concentrate elsewhere and then perhaps later in the year reveal that they are in the race or would that be a great disadvantage?

[11:44:59]

BROWNSTEIN: Well, you know, we've seen that sometimes. I mean in the 1992 Democratic race, people did not get in until very late. But no, I do think that -- I think people are going to want to be on that stage.

And look, the dynamic that -- there are some dynamics that are already developing. You know, we don't know how big the field is going to be but we already see in polling a reprise of the core dynamic that drove the 2016 race. I mean whether you're looking at national polling. The Republican pollster Chris Wilson put out a national poll this week. State polling in states like New Hampshire and California that have come out recently.

We see very consistently, Fred, that Donald Trump as in 2016 is much stronger among Republican voters without a college degree than he is among Republican voters with a college degree. And that was the pattern in 2016, even in a very crowded field of 11 or more candidates, he won about half of all the voters in the primary without a college degree.

He only won about a third of the college educated Republicans in 2016 but the rest of them never could coalesce around a single alternative.

The polling this time is already showing a somewhat -- a very similar pattern and the question I think will be whether anyone particularly Ron DeSantis who looks like the strongest challenger has the capacity to unify that big block of white collar Republicans who are dubious of Trump more effectively than anybody did in 2016.

WHITFIELD: And as for President Biden, he said just yesterday it is his intention to run for reelection. He's said that before. But this time he says, you know, he's got too many things to finish before he starts a campaign.

So for the president, the sitting president, how long can you wait?

BROWNSTEIN: Yes, he does seem to be pushing it back, doesn't he? I mean originally there was a lot of anticipation that it would be coming this spring. Now that still seems possible but it's moving back.

Presidents generally like to be seen in a campaign -- in a governing mode rather than a campaigning mode and his approval rating has been ticking up somewhat. You know, I don't know that it matters that much exactly when he announces.

I think there is a little nervousness among Democrats about -- we saw that piece in Politico, for example, about whether -- some people are sort of wondering whether he's starting to have second thoughts.

But when you're the incumbent president, Fred, I mean you are really riding on big, big currents. I mean his fate is likely to be determined by whether voters are more satisfied with the economy than they were -- than they have been now; what they think of the Republican alternative and whether they think he's physically capable of another four years.

One thing we saw in 2022 was that to a remarkable and even unprecedented degree, voters who were dissatisfied with Biden's performance, a larger number of them voted for Democrats anyway because they thought the Republican alternative was too extreme. And that's a dynamic that could benefit him again in '24 even if his approval rating doesn't recover to 50 percent, which is usually considered the make or break line for a sitting president.

WHITFIELD: All right. Super fascinating as always. Ron Brownstein, great to see you. Thanks so much.

BROWNSTEIN: Thanks for having me.

WHITFIELD: We'll be right back.

[11:48:03]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: All right. Some unexpected inflation news has some economists worried about a possible recession. One of the Feds go-to inflation gauges, unexpectedly rising in January, abruptly ending months of a downward trend.

Here to help us understand what all this means, professor of economics and public policy at the University of Michigan Justin Wolfers. Professor Wolfers, good to see you.

JUSTIN WOLFERS, PROFESSOR, UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: Always a pleasure.

WHITFIELD: So we went from December's price index at 5.3 to January's 5.4 percent, only a 0.1 percent increase. So why is this so concerning?

WOLFERS: Let me start with good news and then let's get to bad news.

WHITFIELD: Ok.

WOLFERS: The good news is that the underlying rate of inflation, so there's a lot of one-off crazy things happening at the moment. Things like Putin and the recovery from COVID and so on. So economists tend to look at the core rate of inflation and that was 4.7 percent.

So that's down from -- you know, some of your viewers have heard of inflation measures running at 7, 8, 9 percent, really crisis levels. So inflation is not at a crisis level. It's at 4 point something percent. So that's the good news.

The bad news, while it's not a crisis, it's not the sort of number that satisfied the Fed. The Fed wants to see inflation down closer to 2 percent. And the biggest question is how do we get from where we are down to there?

And some of what we've seen is there's been a lot of optimism over recent months, we're on that downward trajectory, but some of that downward trajectory may be starting to stall out right now.

WHITFIELD: So also on Friday, a new report came out by a leading economist at a conference organized by the University of Chicago Booth School of Business and the study found, quote now, "no instance in which a significant central bank-induced disinflation occurred without a recession."

So is the Fed, in raising rates to bring down inflation, actually leading us closer to a recession?

WOLFERS: Well, raising rates will definitely bring us closer to a recession, there's no doubt about that. But what would actually cause one is the real question here.

And one of the best things about our current economy is we spent all of 2022 talking about is the economy in recession. And it turns out it just wasn't.

[11:54:51]

WOLFERS: People were somehow feeling it but in the real data and in their real lives, the economy kept motoring along pretty well in 2022.

What that means, and this is the really good news, is that we're hitting 2023 with a lot of momentum. So the Fed is going to try and slow that momentum, but the more momentum we have, the more likely it is that the economy is going to keep on moving on.

And in fact the number of economists forecasting recession has started to go down. So there's actually a bit more optimism that this new year that we're in is going to be a little better.

WHITFIELD: All right. We're going to keep that engine going. Professor Justin Wolfers, great to see you. Thanks so much.

WOLFERS: Thanks back.

WHITFIELD: All right.

Some fierce fighting reported overnight in Ukraine as they enter a second year of Russia's relentless war. But President Zelenskyy is vowing that this is the war Ukraine is victorious. We're live in Kyiv straight ahead.

[11:55:47] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)