Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Law Enforcement Source: Arrest Expected Soon In Leaks Case; DOJ Asking Supreme Court To Intervene In Abortion Pill Case; Feinstein Asked To Be "Temporarily" Replaced On Judiciary Committee; GOP- Controlled AZ House Votes To Expel Republican Lawmaker. Aired 1:30-2p ET

Aired April 13, 2023 - 13:30   ET

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

[13:30:00]

ABBY PHILLIP, CNN HOST: Shawn, I want to start with you.

As I said, this story is moving very quickly. First, last night, "The Washington Post" reporting a lot of details about this online Discord group where there were about two dozen members of the group. But this individual is believed to have been the leader of the group.

Are you surprised to see the speediness with which this investigation is moving? A potential arrest could happen as soon as today.

SHAWN TURNER, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Well, not terribly surprised, Abby. I you know, the Pentagon and the Department of Justice, there was a need to relate to try to triangulate and identify where these documents may have been coming from, based on the nature of the documents and based on sort of where these documents were being discussed.

So when you take all of the facts with regard to the fact that this was on Discord, and you look at that community, when you look at the type of documents, you can sort of narrow down where these documents may have been posted in our government system and who may have had access to them.

You take all of those details, and there was enough information for officials to be able to sort of narrow down the universe of people who may have had access.

I also think that this reporting that we've got certainly helped in this -- -- in this effort. But I think that this is a really great example of once these documents were realized of officials moving quickly.

The bigger question that I have is why it took so long to realize that these documents were floating around online. I think that's got to be part of the after action here.

PHILLIP: Absolutely, a major question. According to the reporting, it seems that they were being posted online in the small group for months before they were posted to a wider audience. General Hertling, the report -- the reporting that what they are

looking at the person they are looking at, is a member of the intelligence wing of the Massachusetts Air National Guard. So a military member who may have had access to those documents.

What questions does that raise for you?

LT. GEN. MARK HERTLING, CNN MILITARY ANALYST: Well, the first couple of questions -- first of all, I'd like to say Shawn is exactly right. These are not mastermind criminals. These are gamers online passing information in a small group that suddenly got out of control, allegedly, according to @The Washington Post@ article.

And it's easy to then zoom in on those I.P. addresses and capabilities to find the individuals who do it. That's what occurred today.

The questions I had, Abby, are the ones that everyone's going to ask, what kind of security clearance did this individual have? If he's handling top secret, no foreign documents, that tells me he probably had a security clearance.

But that might not be the case. Because he's assigned to the 10 2nd intelligence wing of a Massachusetts Air Guard air unit that could mean he's either an intelligence analyst, but "The New York Times" is reporting that he was an I.T. specialist.

So these kinds of documents are passed over computers, to different commands.

You know, there's a lot of questions about, why do so many people have to see this?

Well, but because our military communicate with one another. We have to get a coordination and cooperation between commands.

And unfortunately, it's not the colonels and the generals that are always, you know, printing things off and putting things out there. They have members of their staff that are doing the intelligence analysis.

And some even doing the things like -- they call Power Point Rangers, the guys that and gals that actually make up the Power Points. There's a lot of people that see these things.

And unfortunately, young Mr. Teixeira, if he is the one that's implicated in this, he's violated the Air Force values of integrity first, service before self, and excellence in all we do.

And that's just really unfortunate. Because that's all part of being cleared for classified information.

PHILLIP: It's -- all of this just raises the question about how the federal government, the military can protect these documents from getting in the wrong hands.

Because in all of the reporting, it seems to indicate that the motivation here may very well have been clout within a relatively small group of people, Shawn.

I wonder, what do you make of what is driving some of this and how it can be addressed?

TURNER: Yes, well, you know, if I can just address this issue of clout. You know, as I looked at the reporting about this individual, I -- you know, the general will remember this.

You know, what we had -- we had two major leaks in the past decade. You know, we had Chelsea Manning and we had Edward Snowden. And when we look at those individuals, I think that what we're going to find with this individual is that there are some really interesting similarities here.

You know, both of those previous individuals, Snowden and Manning, they were sort of disillusioned with some aspect of our government or the state of affairs in in this country, what we were doing.

And so, you know, that when we think about why, what's the what's the reason, what's behind this, this is very similar to those sorts of things.

With regard to what we do here, you know, we talk a lot about this issue of over classification and who has access to these documents.

[13:35:05]

But as the general said, you know, we have to balance that with our needs to communicate and our need to share information so that we can give our leaders that decision advantage they need.

Right now, what I see is I think that balances is maybe a little off. Maybe we do need fewer people who have access to these classified documents.

I would -- maybe we need better systems in place to tag the data and tag the people, as we used to say, so that we know so that we can follow sort of follow the track of who's handling these documents.

But again, we can't have a knee-jerk reaction and overreact because we still have to run military and government organizations so that we can protect the national security.

PHILLIP: And General Hertling, you raised the prospect that this individual could have had a security clearance. We're also learning that this group, they shared, you know, racist memes and things like that. There's a video allegedly of him making racist and anti-Semitic comments.

I wonder, does and -- does all of this put together point to potential problems if he did have a security clearance with that clearance process that would allow someone like that to have access to this kind of sensitive information?

HERTLING: Yes, it certainly does, Abby. But truthfully, we've talked about this many times in the past, where you can't be 100 percent zero defects.

You know this is an individual -- Shawn just said -- I think this implicates truthfully part of our culture, too, the desire to be famous, the desire to be bigger than everybody else.

This was a young man, 21-years-old. He's evidently been doing this for several years with a group of teenagers. And he's the big guy in the scene.

Somehow, he has access to this kind of information, and that makes him even larger. There's been a lot of articles written about that cultural dynamic.

So you know, it's problematic because when you go through an intelligence clearance process, background checks are part of it, vetting or part of it. All of these things play a part in whether or not individuals should see information.

You can't be 100 percent perfect all the time. Sometimes individuals that have these kinds of personality defects get through and, unfortunately, caused these kinds of problems.

PHILLIP: All right, General Mark Hertling and Shawn Turner, both of you, thank you very much for all of that analysis.

And up next, more breaking news. The battle over the abortion pill could be going to the Supreme Court. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:41:37]

The Biden administration isn't wasting any time. The Justice Department says it will ask the Supreme Court to intervene after an appeals court ruling overnight effectively made the abortion pill Mifepristone harder to obtain.

The appeals court did say that the drug will remain available for now but with some restrictions.

CNN justice correspondent, Jessica Schneider, is joining us now.

So, Jess, what is the DOJ saying about this appeals court ruling?

JESSICA SCHNEIDER, CNN JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, so, Abby, the attorney general just announcing that the Justice Department is preparing right now to ask the Supreme Court to step in on this issue.

So Merrick Garland just releasing a statement, saying, not only that DOJ strongly disagrees with the Fifth Circuit's decision overnight, but also saying this:

"We will be seeking emergency relief from the Supreme Court to defend the FDA's scientific judgment and protect Americans' access to safe and effective reproductive care." So what's the timing on all this? It looks like DOJ could file today

or tomorrow because they want the Supreme Court to weigh in before midnight Friday night. Because that, of course, is when this new Fifth Circuit decision would take effect.

So right now, though, it's crucial to remember that there is this continued access to the abortion pill. It's the same access as it was before this legal fight was all set into motion by the Texas judge last Friday night.

However, crucially here, the clock is ticking. If the Supreme Court doesn't step in to pause the effect of these rulings in really the next two days, we will see those restrictions on Mifepristone take effect late Friday night into Saturday.

So what that means is that Mifepristone will still be available. But the FDA, they've been allowing it to be used up to 10 weeks.

That, however, will be wiped out and approval will only be up to seven weeks of pregnancy -- pregnancy. So shortening the time women have the opportunity to use this.

And in-person pickup of this drug, it will be back in effect. Over the past several years, in the wake of the pandemic, women were actually allowed to be prescribed this via telehealth, over the phone or on video, and they were able to get Mifepristone by mail.

But those to ease-of-access benefits, they will be removed if the Fifth Circuit decision goes into effect. Because, Abby, really that part of it, the in-person part is significant here.

Because my colleague, Tierney Sneed, has actually reported that, since the Dobbs decision last June overturning Roe v. Wade, which, of course, made abortion access more difficult and even nonexistent in certain states, 9 percent of abortions have been done over telehealth.

Meaning, these women went online to talk to their doctors. They got their prescription by mail.

So this -- if this Fifth Circuit decision goes into effect, this could really create difficulty for women when it comes to accessing this drug.

So a lot will play out in the next 24 to 48 hours here. We'll keep an eye on the Supreme Court -- Abby?

PHILLIP: Yes. Another critical period. And, as you pointed out, this is how the majority of abortions are conducted right now in this country.

Thank you very much, Jessica Schneider.

[13:44:36]

And up next for us, California Senator Dianne Feinstein is asking to be temporarily replaced on the powerful Judiciary Committee as health issues delay her return to work. Why some of her fellow Democrats are now calling for her to resign.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

PHILLIP: Over on Capitol Hill, 89-year-old Senator Dianne Feinstein is asking to be temporarily replaced on the Judiciary Committee as she recovers from the shingles. The key word here is "temporarily."

But some of her fellow Democrats, they want her to step down from the Senate because her absence has slowed their party's push to confirm judicial nominees.

CNN's Lauren Fox is joining us now.

So, Lauren, what would need to happen in order for Feinstein to actually give up her seat temporarily here?

[13:50:01]

LAUREN FOX, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, I mean, so there's not really a precedent for this, which is part of the reason that it's complicated.

One of the ways that you get your committee assignments at the beginning of the year is the Senate has an organizing resolution. And usually, it is so easy to do that members just agreed to do it by unanimous consent.

Meaning that no one objects to it. They don't really have to have a formal up-or-down vote where they count the votes.

Here though, you have a question of whether or not Republicans are going to go along with a request by Chuck Schumer, the majority leader, next week to go ahead and temporary replace her on the committee.

And the reason that they may not agree to that is because this is about lower-court judges and whether or not Republicans are going to allow Democrats really to advance some nominees out of committee in an expeditious way that really benefits Democrats politically in the lower courts, not Republicans.

Given what is happening on this abortion case right now in Texas, it really underscores the reason why these lower-court nominations are so important.

So we have reached out to Republicans. We've reached out to leadership. No word yet on how Republicans are going to deal with this next week when they get back from their recess -- Abby?

PHILLIP: All right, Lauren Fox, thank you very much.

And joining us now is CNN political analyst, Seung Min Kim, a White House reporter for the Associated Press.

Seung Min, you also spent a lot of time on Capitol Hill. So you know the players here and also the game as well. What do you think is going to happen here? Is it possible that Schumer

can allow Feinstein to be replaced temporarily? And would that satisfy Democrats who are very much unhappy with Feinstein, perhaps slowing down the judicial nomination process?

SEUNG MIN KIM, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, I think it's pretty clear that Chuck Schumer just can't unilaterally replace Senator Feinstein on the Judiciary Committee.

And I think you saw that with a very careful wording, from Senator Feinstein from Senator Schumer's office, that he you will ask the Senate. Basically, that means you need Republican support.

So like, Lauren said, will Republicans go along with something that will help Democrats speed up that judicial pipeline that has been such a big accomplishment for the Biden administration, for Democrats in the Senate.

And that's the big question right now. There has been a lot of agitation growing in the last couple of weeks, mostly whispers, but obviously, as it spilled out into the open yesterday among Democrats, among outside groups who work on judicial issues, that Senator Feinstein's prolonged absence was really stopping their work.

So you know, the procedures have to be worked out, but it doesn't seem like they can be satisfied anytime soon.

PHILLIP: I also noted that former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, she defended Feinstein yesterday. Saying, "I've never seen them go after a man who was sick in the Senate in this way."

And it's also worth noting Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell is out because he had an injury as well.

What do you make of her -- her comments there?

KIM: I think there are a couple of interesting elements there. One, the reason why all this aggravation, all this frustration is coming out about Senator Feinstein is because there's a direct correlation between her absence and their ability to get things done.

You know, sometimes a lot of the elder men in the Senate didn't necessarily halt, you know, their respective party's agendas, which is why perhaps other members, other Senators kept it a little bit more -- kept their concerns a little bit more quiet.

But you know Dick Durbin, other Senators have been pretty blunt about the fact that Senator Feinstein's absence was really impeding their work on the Judiciary Committee.

And now one other wrinkle that we must add is that, you know, Ro Khanna was the first House Democrats to say this, backs Barbara Lee, Nancy Pelosi. Backs Adam Schiff in the race --

(LAUGHTER)

PHILLIP: Yes, so there's a lot of politics going on here.

Seung Min Kim --

KIM: A lot going on there.

PHILLIP: -- thank you very much.

[13:53:51]

And we'll be right back in a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:58:19]

PHILLIP: In the Republican-controlled Arizona State House, we just saw something extremely rare. State lawmakers punishing one of their own for spreading election conspiracies, choosing ethics over party loyalty.

And 46 Arizona representatives voted to oust newly elected Liz Harris. The resolution to expel her says that she brought, quote, "disrepute and embarrassment to the state legislature" when she invited a conspiracy theorist publicly testified before lawmakers.

When the resolution passed, you could hear a voice off camera screaming in protest.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED ARIZONA STATE LEGISLATOR: For the motion, all in favor vote aye.

LAWMAKERS: Aye.

UNIDENTIFIED ARIZONA STATE LEGISLATOR: All of those opposed, vote no.

Ayes have it. So ordered. The House is adjourned.

(SHOUTING)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIP: CNN's Kyung Lah is following this extraordinary story.

So, Kyung, what happens now?

KYUNG LAH, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, the Maricopa County board will now select a temporary replacement until there can be an election.

But let's take a step back, Abby, and look at what all of this is coming from. Because there's been a lot of attention out of what's been happening in Tennessee. This is a similar process, but a totally different story.

We're talking about a Republican. Her name is Liz Harris. She was elected in November of last year, so in the midterm election.

And before she became a lawmaker, she was a well-known conspiracy theorist through the partisan lead "Battle Review" in Arizona, known as the so-called Arizona Audit. She spread all kinds of outlandish lies.

[13:59:51] Once in office, she held a hearing where she invited a conspiracy theorist, Abby, to testify. And this person spread lies, like the governor of Arizona is laundering money for the Mexican drug cartel.

So here, the Republicans said, that's out of line, you are out -- Abby?