Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsroom
CNN International: ICC Prosecutor Seeks Arrest Warrants For Hamas, Israeli Leaders; Michael Cohen Back On Stand For Contentious Cross-Examination; U.S. Defense Secretary: Russian Forces "Obliterating Ukrainian Villages" In Assault On Kharkiv; Iran: President Ebrahim Raisi Killed In Helicopter Crash; Prosecution Rests In Trump Hush Money Trial. Aired 3-4p ET
Aired May 20, 2024 - 15:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[15:00:37]
JIM SCIUTTO, CNN INTERNATIONAL HOST: It's 8:00 p.m. in London, 9:00 p.m. in The Hague, 10:30 p.m. in Tehran, 3:00 p.m. here in Washington.
I'm Jim Sciutto. Thanks so much for joining me today on CNN NEWSROOM. And let's get right to the news.
We are following two major stories today.
First, charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity during the war in Gaza. Exclusive reporting from CNN on the International Criminal Court now seeking arrest warrants for three Hamas leaders for terror attacks on October the 7th, but also, and this is critical, key Israeli leaders, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
The ICC is accusing Israel of forced starvation in Gaza and intentionally targeting and killing Palestinian civilians. Never before has the top court charged a U.S. ally. The news has sparked some outrage from the U.S., Israel, and we should note from Hamas as well. We're going to have more on what this means, what's next in a moment.
First, we do want to go to that courtroom in Manhattan where former U.S. President Donald Trump back in court today for his ongoing criminal hush money trial. Testimony continuing from his former attorney and fixer, Michael Cohen.
This afternoon, prosecutors were working to restore the credibility of their key witness after an extensive and bruising cross-examination from Trump's defense, which portrayed Cohen not just as a liar, but as a thief.
CNN's Katelyn Polantz has been following all this.
So, first, let's begin with the defenses attacks on Cohen and attempts to undermine his credibility. They've already done this with lying and he's admitted on the stand to lying under oath before today. It was about theft from the Trump Organization. How exactly and win.
KATELYN POLANTZ, CNN SENIOR CRIME AND JUSTICE REPORTER: Yeah. He's a liar. He is a cheat and he wants revenge. Those are the three points the defense is hitting on the cheat part. That is a scenario that they were able to get out of Michael Cohen under their cross-examination today where he admits that at a moment in time where he had to reimburse a company called Red Finch, a tech services company, he reimburse them less than he expected to, and then he told the Trump Org that he still needed the amount you originally expected and then some.
And so, he pocketed the difference to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars. Michael Cohen admitted that. He admitted it as stealing. He was asked, you stole from the Trump Organization this money and Michael Cohen said, yes. So the jury heard that. They're going to factor that into what they think of him, but, of course, we're still in the course of this redirect examination from prosecutors and they're trying to point out to the jury that he never was fully paid for his working, ever felt like he was fully whole.
SCIUTTO: OK.
POLANTZ: He was doing a lot out of loyalty.
SCIUTTO: That's part of an ongoing effort to undermine his credibility. I want to talk about another instance because last week, a lot of attention paid to this phone call in 2016, I believe, in which Cohen had testified this was a phone call in which I informed Donald Trump that the payment had been made to Stormy Daniels. Defense comes back and says, well, actually weren't you talking in this phone call about a 14-year-old who prank-called you. Long story there, regardless, the defenses case was, how could you have also informed the president the phone call was like 90 seconds?
POLANTZ: Get your story straight. That's right.
SCIUTTO: Now the prosecution comes up with a photo which we may or may not have, which shows that Trump was indeed with Keith Schiller, has head of security, who was on that phone call just minutes before that phone call took place.
Tell us the significance of this photo and what the prosecutions intention is, what the prosecution's intent of this here.
POLANTZ: Yeah. So, what the cross examination the defense attorneys wanted to do was they wanted to sow doubt before the jury that Michael Cohen actually talked to Donald Trump on the phone on October 24, and that it was about Stormy Daniels. Two things Cohen said initially that he testified to.
There was some doubt introduced in his cross-examination. He said he was possibly about stormy, but it was about this other thing, and it was actually a call to Keith Schiller, not directly to Trump. But what has happened now in the redirect is that the jury has seen a photo of Donald Trump standing shoulder to shoulder with his bodyguard, Keith Schiller the man on the phone with Michael Cohen --
[15:05:01]
SCIUTTO: Literally minutes before that call was recorded.
POLANTZ: Right. The photo is from 7:57 p.m., October 24 at a rally. The call them Michael Cohen testified about, was it 8:02 p.m., five minutes later.
So, what the jury makes of that?
SCIUTTO: Did the defense -- exactly. I mean, it's a constant battle back-and-forth. Does the defense have any response to that? Because they could have called in, could they not, a C-Span archivist to make sure this photo actually was what it said it was, but they in effect accepted the photo as existing and --
POLANTZ: It's there. It's now on the record. The jury's seen it. It does look like Todd Blanche, the defense attorney, is getting another round at Michael Cohen. But he seems to be just right now in these broader questions that they're doing. He's not going to un-saw that just yet, if he is going to at all. It's much more of this broader you're blaming Donald Trump --
SCIUTTO: Right.
POLANTZ: -- for what was going on here.
SCIUTTO: Well, listen, we're going to be quite close to the jury making a judgment about who it believes in all this because were quite close to the defense resting, prosecution resting and the jury getting this case. Still not clear, possibly next week, but it's going to be soon.
Katelyn Polantz, thanks so much.
Joining me now to break it all down, criminal defense attorney Janet Johnson, and defense and trial attorney Misty Marris.
Good to have you both on.
You've both been in the courtroom a lot.
Misty, perhaps I'll start with you. Did the prosecutions score a blow -- score points with this admission by Cohen that not only had he lied before, including under oath, but that he also stole from the Trump Organization. Does that add to the litany of questions about his credibility?
MISTY MARRIS, DEFENSE AND TRIAL ATTORNEY: Yeah. The defense did a great job of getting that out there on the record. And, Jim, I would argue that it goes even a little bit further than just questioning his credibility. Remember, this reimbursement for the payment to Red Finch is part of the entire $420,000 that is the subject of this case. So not only did he admit to stealing from the Trump Organization, but from a defense perspective, you're going to extrapolate that. We've heard a lot about how there's a tight, tight leash on expenditures, a tight, tight leash on keeping track of every dollar that goes in and out. Well, clearly, at the time, Cohen thought that he could get away with
pocketing about $30,000. So from a defense perspective, not only are you couching him as, you know, a liar and a cheat and a thief. But you also can extrapolate that into something more about the knowledge that others in the organization had about what Michael Cohen personally was doing with money.
SCIUTTO: Okay. Janet Johnson, I wonder. Do you agree that this instance as well as previous instances of lying, which have really been the defense strategy as it relates to Michael Cohen, that they've succeeded to some degree?
JANET JOHNSON, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: You know, I don't agree, Jim, because somebody who would still $50,000 is not someone who would out of his own pocket pay Stormy Daniels this hush money, which I think is what the defense would have to suggest. So here's a guy who's nickel and diming Donald Trump for every chance he gets, he's not going to just on his own write this check.
Now, he is a convicted liar and he is a thief and a cheat because he's been to prison and, you know, the prosecution is going to own that and say all of those things are true. Donald Trump hired this guy. He did this at his service, but he's also cheat and trying to get money at a Donald Trump.
One thing, the prosecution has to do is make sure that it's clear that they didn't agree not to prosecute him for this theft in exchange for his testimony. I don\t think they've done that yet, but I think they will have to hit that.
SCIUTTO: That's on the theft thing because we should note Cohen has already gone to jail for his involvement and pled to it. And frankly, for his involvement in the payments, although that was a federal crime we should note that. I mean, he's gone to jail for his involvement in this.
There's been this other issue because we discussed this last week which was questions about a phone call that Michael Cohen testified to in 2016 in which Cohen testified under oath at this was the call that he let Trump know and Trump's chief bodyguard, Keith Schiller, was on the call as well. Defense comes in and says, wait a second, you had all these text messages prior to that call speaking about something totally different, which was a 14-year-old trying to prank call you now, you have the prosecution showing some video and a clip from a video so minutes before that phone call, that indeed show that Trump was with Schiller at that time leaving the stage of a campaign event.
Misty, in your view, was that a successful -- if rehabilitation is the right word -- rehabilitation of Cohen's testimony as to that phone call?
MARRIS: Yeah, that's what the prosecution had to do because keep in mind that the problem situation did not talk about that 14-year-old in Michael Cohen's direct testimony. He didn't even bring it up. He said he had a phone call with Keith Schiller where Donald Trump was on speaker phone. And so then when these text messages about the 14-year-old harasser
come out on cross-examination, that seriously diminishes Michael Cohen's credibility as to what the sum and substance of that call was.
[15:10:05]
So, here are the prosecutors are showing this picture to say, okay, in accordance with Michael Cohen's testimony, which this is again in the rehabilitation stage, they could have talked about both. It's not mutually exclusive. They could talk about the 14-year-old.
Now, you see that Donald Trump was with Schiller. So its possible jury for you to conclude that this phone call happened even if the 14 year- old was part of it, still the conversation relating to Stormy Daniels occurred.
SCIUTTO: Yeah, it comes down -- I mean, as it does in so many trials, it comes down to who you believe in, what do you believe, and what they said.
So, Janet Johnson, we're coming to the end of the case here. The real question is when the jury begins deliberation. There was some talk that might happen this week before the holiday weekend, but the judge seems like he might want to give the jury some time to rest and then hey, pick up the case next week. Regardless, we're close to the jury taking up these questions here.
Who in your view, Janet Johnson, has the upper hand, the prosecution or the defense right now?
JOHNSON: I think the prosecution obviously were in the middle of this very devastating seeming cross-examination, although jurors apparently aren't responding to it the way that pundits, like us are.
But I think that the prosecution has certainly proven the misdemeanor. I mean, the record keeping was obviously a sham. And even, you know, the fact that you could have this theft allegedly and its not accounted for and the whole tax question. So the misdemeanor has been proven. I think the felony has been proven as well, that it was in a cover up, an effort to cover up for the election.
And that doesn't have to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The actual predicate for the felony is just more likely than not. So if I had to bet, I would say the prosecution is ahead. I don't know if they're going to come up with something great in the defense case, but they said it's probably going to be done by today. So I don't think we anticipate any bombshells from them.
SCIUTTO: That should -- I did not know that for that connection what effect, in effect, elevates this from misdemeanor to a felony, which is to influence the election and therefore violating election law that the standard for that is more likely than not as opposed to reasonable doubt.
JOHNSON: Right.
SCIUTTO: And write that puts the defense on that piece of the case that something of a disadvantage I imagine.
JOHNSON: Yeah. And it's one of the things that the judge actually said to the state when they were thinking about flying in the C-Span witness to basically prove this collateral matter. He said, listen, you're basically trying to patients with the jury over something that, you know, I don't think you have to, and the jury obviously is getting impatient and the state agreed and they said, yeah, we're not going to go into another day just to bring this C-Span guy in because essentially the aggregator, you know, that's really the whole case. And I think they're there.
SCIUTTO: Misty, before we go quickly, what do you think has the advantage?
MARRIS: Yeah. I think this case lives and dies on the jury instructions, which is going to meet the battle royale this week. And it's going to be about how that's presented to the jury to fulfill the prosecutors burden. And specifically, what constitutes that underlying crime, because remember, hush money payment alone is not de facto criminal. So it depends on what those jury instructions say. And I think that's really going to move the needle as to who has the upper hand in this case.
SCIUTTO: Fair enough. And we're going to see pretty soon. Misty Marris, Janet Johnson, thanks so much to both you.
Please don't go too far because we will have an update from inside the courtroom later in the program.
First, though, when we do come back, the International Criminal Court now seeking arrest warrants, not just for leaders of Hamas, but also four Israeli leaders. We're going to have exclusive CNN reporting coming up.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[15:16:48]
SCIUTTO: This just in to CNN, the prosecution says it has rested its case in the criminal hush money trial of former president Donald Trump. We're going to have more updates later this hour. Quite a moment, and a consequential case here.
Onto other news, we are following this morning, and historic day, the International Criminal Court is seeking arrest warrants for five leaders of Hamas and Israel. This includes the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, as well as the leader of Hamas and architect of the October 7th attacks, Yahya Sinwar. Chief prosecutor Karim Khan alleges that both countries have committed war crimes and crimes against humanity since the October 7th attack -- so Hamas and Israel.
This is the first time the ICC has made such a request for the leader of a state backed by the West and ally of the U.S.
Here is Netanyahu's response to today's news.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BENJAMIN NETANYAHU, ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER (through translator): With what audacity do you -- they compare the monsters of Hamas to the soldiers of the IDF, the most moral army in the world? With what audacity you compare between the Hamas that murdered, burned, butchered, raped, and kidnapped our brothers and sisters and the IDF soldiers who were fighting a just war that is unparalleled in morality, that is unmatched?
As the prime minister of Israel, I reject with disgust The Hague prosecutor's comparison between democratic Israel and the mass murderers of Hamas.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCIUTTO: Well, the court has drawing condemnation from not just Hamas, but Israel, its allies, including the U.S. President Biden called the application, quote, outrageous and said, quote, there is no evidence or no equivalence rather between Israel and Hamas.
U.S. Secretary of State Blinken added that this could jeopardize ceasefire negotiations.
Karim Khan sat down for an exclusive interview with CNN's Christiane Amanpour.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: We're here at the ICC. You are today announcing that you are applying for arrest warrants for top military and political leadership in the Israel-Gaza war since the October 7 events. First and foremost, explained to me exactly what you're asking for and who you are charging.
KARIM KHAN, CHIEF PROSECUTOR, INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT: Today, Christiane, we've applied for warrants to the pre-trial chamber of the International Criminal Court, in relation to three individuals that are Hamas members, Sinwar, who is in charge on the ground.
AMANPOUR: That's Yahya Sinwar.
KHAN: Absolutely. Deif, who's in charge of the al-Qassam brigades, and Haniyeh, who's one of their political bureau based in Doha.
AMANPOUR: What are the charges?
KHAN: The charges are extermination, murder, taking hostages, rape and sexual assault in detention. So these are the key crimes that are alleged to have been committed by these three individuals.
The world was shocked on 7th of October when people were ripped from their bedrooms, from their homes, from the different kibbutzim in Israel.
[15:20:08]
And people have suffered enormously. And we have a variety of evidence to support the applications that we've submitted to the judges.
AMANPOUR: You have also issued warrants against the top political and military leadership of the government of the state of Israel.
KHAN: We've applied for warrants. Of course, the judges must determine whether or not to issue them, but we've applied today -- will apply for warrants for Prime Minister Netanyahu and also Minister of Defense Gallant for the crimes of causing extermination, causing starvation as a method of war, including the denial of humanitarian relief supplies, deliberately targeting civilians in conflict.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCIUTTO: You can watch the full interview online at CNN.com.
We should note that while Israel is not a member, a signatory of the ICC, the court claims it has jurisdiction over Gaza, East Jerusalem, and the West Bank because the Palestinian leaders that they signed the court statue back in 2015.
CNN's Nic Robertson breaks down the scope of the court's power and its limited reach.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
NIC ROBERTSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL DIPLOMATIC EDITOR (voice-over): Russia's ruthless Vladimir Putin, Sudan's former dictator, Omar al- Bashir, the now dead Libyan tyrant, Moammar Gadhafi, leaders who claimed innocence, but with blood on their hands, had arrest warrants issued by the ICC, the International Criminal Court.
Set up in 2002 a court of last resort located in The Hague, the Netherlands, established to hold to account individuals accused of some of the most heinous crimes, genocide, crimes against humanity, crimes of aggression, and war crimes.
The first verdict came in 2012 against Thomas Lubanga.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The charges of conscripting and enlisting children.
ROBERTSON: Former leader of a militia in the Democratic Republic of Congo, convicted of war crimes for using child soldiers and sentenced to 14 years in prison.
But the ICC's reach is limited. So far, be it Putin nor Bashir delivered to The Hague.
DONALD TRUMP, FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT & 2024 PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: As far as America is concerned, the ICC has no jurisdiction, no legitimacy and no authority.
ROBERTSON: its jurisdiction isn't limited to the near 125 countries that are signatories to the Rome statute that establishes it but non- signatories is like the U.S., China, India, Russia, are not obliged to turn over alleged criminals.
KHAN: I perform my duties.
ROBERTSON: The current chief prosecutor, British lawyer Karim Khan, appears proactive in his attentions, making an unannounced visit to the Rafah crossing between Egypt and the Gaza Strip not long after Israeli troops began their months-long deadly Gaza offensive.
KHAN: I want to underline clearly to Israel that there must be discernible efforts without further delay. To make sure civilians receive basic food, medicine.
ROBERTSON: In November, he followed up with a visit to Israel, including sites ravaged by Hamas during their brutal October 7 attack, followed by the occupied West Bank. He had a warning: comply with the law or my office will act.
It appears Khan's biggest challenge as his predecessors found, not legal, but physical.
Putin, the embodiments of that, still at large, still president.
Nic Robertson, CNN, London.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ROBERTSON: All right. So lets talk about the law here, not just a significance, but how it applies or how the ICC is arguing it applies in these cases.
Joining us now is Adil Haque. He's a law professor at Rutgers University.
Thanks for joining.
ADIL HAQUE, LAW PROFESSOR, RUTGERS UNIVERSITY: Thanks for having me.
SCIUTTO: So first let's talk about the charges against Israel here, because I think folks viewing will not be surprised that a terrorist organization that carried out deliberate attacks on civilians on October 7th would face such charge charges Israel is a different -- is a different story.
So, help me understand the charge they are facing in this arrest warrant is extermination -- obviously a powerful word we should note for Israelis, given the Holocaust. But tell us how the ICC justifies this specific charge against Israeli forces for their conduct of the war in Gaza.
[15:25:01]
HAQUE: So, the core allegation is the war crime of starvation, using the starvation of civilians as a method of warfare the other charges essentially branch out from that core crime for example, the killing of civilians is focused on the killing of civilians seeking humanitarian relief.
Similarly, the crime against humanity of extermination essentially involves the death resulting from the denial of humanitarian relief, death from starvation and lack of medical care. So the core is really the war crime of starvation, which from the very first days of the conflict was the concern of the entire international community.
Israel's leaders, within days announced a complete siege on Gaza and for seven months have severely restricted humanitarian relief. The prosecutor has warned repeatedly that this sort of impeding if humanitarian relief is unlawful and he warned that if nothing changes, he would be compelled to act. And today, he acted.
SCIUTTO: Okay. We should know that the panel recommending these charges said, quote, they, and I'm quoting here, have nothing to do with the reasons for the conflict, but instead concern, quote, waging war in a manner that violates the long established rules of international law.
So they're making a distinction saying, Israel in effect has a right to defend itself to target Hamas for these attacks on October 7, but they're saying the conduct of that war is such that crimes have been committed so explain to me, you say, for instance aid has been restricted going into Gaza. There's a lot of evidence for that. And by the way, we should note the U.S. has criticized Israeli leaders for not allowing enough aid to go in.
That is different, I imagine in a courtroom room, Israel will argue then deliberately making people starve. I just wonder what is the -- what is the legal standard to establish extermination by starvation?
HAQUE: Sure. So the prosecutor is alleging that Israel not only restricted or withheld humanitarian relief, but did it for particular purposes, One was to pressure Hamas to release hostages, essentially using the entire civilian population of Gaza as a bargaining chip in hostage negotiations and further, the prosecutor alleges that Israel restricted humanitarian relief with the intent to collectively punish the people of Gaza as a whole for the crimes committed by Hamas on October 7th, and afterwards.
So its really that intent, not simply with restricting humanitarian relief arbitrarily and without legal justification, but doing so as a method of warfare to advance its war aims. That's really the core allegation here.
SCIUTTO: Okay. So let's talk about how the charges are different for Hamas in this case. And we should say that when pressed on this by Christiane Amanpour about a false equivalence, equivalence as us leaders have argued here, Khan said to her that nobody is above the law in effect, his argument is they're both being charged. We're not saying they're the same, but they're both. We are charging both of them here.
How to the charges differ in these proposed arrest warrants for Hamas?
HAQUE: Well, of course, they differ quite a bit. Hamas leaders are being charged with war crimes and crimes against humanity involving murder, torture, rape, and sexual violence. Not only the taking of hostages, but terrible abuses inflicted on hostages, including even now, the prosecutor alludes to the fact that many of the hostages still in captivity, maybe victims on an ongoing basis. So these are extremely serious charges that are being leveled against Hamas and against Hamas' leaders.
With respect to this idea of equivalence, it's important to understand that international law does not compare individuals with each other. It compares each person's conduct with their legal obligations. So the standard is not am I worse than my adversary? The standard is the law. Am I living up to my legal obligations?
According to the prosecutor, Israel has not been living up to its legal obligations. So let's then get to a question of jurisdiction here because we should note Israel has not signed to the ICC. By the way, nor has the United States we should note, but Israel is not. So, the argument the ICC is making here, it has jurisdiction over Gaza because Palestinian leaders, they sign the court statute in 2015.
From a pure -- purely legal question of standing here, does that argument holdout?
HAQUE: Absolutely. This is the same basis of jurisdiction that the court uses to bring arrest warrants against Vladimir Putin. Russia is not a member of the court, but Ukraine consented the courts jurisdiction therefore, any international crime committed in Ukraine falls within the court's jurisdiction. And it's the same here. Any crime committed by a Palestinian national or on the territory of Palestine by the national of any state, falls within the court's jurisdiction.
[15:30:08]
SCIUTTO: Before we go, there is a question of precedent here because yes, the ICC has, for instance, issue charges against Vladimir Putin for the progress of the war in Ukraine, crimes against civilians, et cetera, for which there's a great deal of evidence. Now it has charges against Hamas and Israel, but it has not charged, for instance, Bashar al-Assad for the progress of just a brutal war enormous evidence of a long litany of crimes there, or for instance, Iranian leaders, for crimes not just in the progress of war outside their borders, but, but even treatment of Iranians themselves and dissidents.
So is there a question of who -- who they're charging and who they're not, right? And does it drain credibility that they're charging Israeli leaders here, but they seem to have hesitated or forgotten about Assad and the leaders in Iran?
HAQUE: So not at all. Unfortunately, the court does not have jurisdiction in Syria or in Iran. So, unless, Syrians or Iranians commit international crimes on the territory of an ICC member state, or another state that has consented to the court's jurisdiction, unfortunately, the court cannot act.
There is one other way the court could act which is if the United Nations Security Council referred a situation to the court, even one involving a non-member state. But as we know, U.N. Security Council is paralyzed by the veto of Russia on the one side, and the United States on the other. So that is the structural problem. So it's not a question of the prosecutor being selected. It's a question of the court's jurisdiction of being incomplete, unfortunately.
SCIUTTO: Yeah, sometimes trying to using its veto power similarly.
Adil Haque, thanks so much for joining and helping us understand this better.
HAQUE: Thanks for having me.
SCIUTTO: Well, we mentioned Russia's war in Ukraine and we're going to go now to the situation on the ground there. Following a briefing from Ukraine's defense leaders, U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin said that Russian forces are, quote, obliterating Ukrainian villages, killing innocent civilians, bombarding civilian infrastructure repeatedly, as Russia attempts to push closer to Kharkiv in the northeast. This is Ukraine's president said in an interview that decisions to send military aid to Ukraine. Well, they came too late.
CNN's Oren Liebermann joins me now from Pentagon.
I wonder, as you listened to U.S. military leaders and also asked a question to the chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff about Ukraine using American weaponry to target Russian forces across the border, which is something that Ukrainians have been pushing for, and Ukraine -- many of Ukraine's allies have said, listen, Russia's coming in. We -- Ukraine has to be able to strike Russian forces just on the other side of the Russian border, which we should note it's quite close to a city such as Kharkiv.
Is there any movement on the U.S. side on that question?
OREN LIEBERMANN, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: So I asked this question of the chairman of the Joint Chiefs General CQ Brown, and he wouldn't get into the recommendations he has made. He said those are essentially private conversations, but he did say that the focus for the U.S. right now is on making them use the equipment they have from the U.S. effectively and in the short range. But as you point out, in the short range is what we're looking at right now, because Russia's offensive in Kharkiv is not over enormous distances, which means Russian forces can mass inside of Russian territory, believing they are safe from us weaponry and then go the short distance into Ukraine to carry out their offensive and make progress here.
You saw Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin talk about the progress they were making, the obliteration of Ukrainian villages, both in the open or earlier this morning and then it was in his opening remarks at the press conference. This is clearly something the U.S. is concerned about. Nevertheless they gave no indication that U.S. policy has changed in any way. The U.S. has essentially forbidden Ukraine from using U.S. weaponry outside of Ukraine's own borders, so they're allowed to use them in occupied territory in Crimea as well.
But Austin and Brown give no indication that U.S. policy has shifted. It is worth noting that Secretary of State Antony Blinken said just a few days ago, while meeting with Ukrainian leaders that the us has given the weapons over and advised on how to use them and ultimately it's up to Ukraine to decide how they use that weaponry as they're in a fight for their own sovereignty. So, an interesting choice of words there from Blinken.
SCIUTTO: Interesting. I mean, are you saying that Blinken was leaving the door open? It seemed to the possibility of Ukraine making its own decision to strike inside, you Russian territory with those weapons?
LIEBERMANN: Well, he didn't definitively say, look, we have forbidden this here. We don't know if it's a change in policy. I'm just noting that there was an interesting -- interesting language there, and this is certainly worth keeping an eye on with the level of concern were seeing from Austin and from the U.S. on this Russian offensive.
SCIUTTO: No question. Oren Liebermann, thanks so much.
[15:35:00]
Still to come, Iran's president killed in a helicopter crash. We're going to have a details and what follows, coming up.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[15:38:30]
SCIUTTO: Now to developing news from Iran, Iran's chief of staff of the armed forces has ordered an investigation into the cause of the helicopter crash that killed the Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi, as well as the foreign ministers, seven others on Sunday.
Earlier today, the country's acting president, Mohammad Mokhber, held an extraordinary meeting with the heads of the country's legislative and judicial branches. He is responsible for now organizing elections for a new president, which must take place within the next 50 days, they remained questions over how President Raisi's death we will impact not just Iran, but the entire region at a very dangerous time.
CNN's Fred Pleitgen, recently reported from inside Iran and joins me now.
Fred, quite a moment here. The president, other senior Iranian leaders, I wonder given your recent trip to Iran and the folks who keep in touch with there what is the situation like on the ground in response to this?
FREDERIK PLEITGEN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, I think there's two things that we have to keep an eye on, Jim. On the one hand, of course, there's big morning that's being in some cases organized by those who are in power. A lot of people going out into the streets and obviously grief, grieving the loss, not just the president, but also of course, the foreign minister as well.
And I think you're absolutely right to point out that this could be a pretty big moment for the entire region, not just because Iran's president was killed in that helicopter crash. But of course also because Iran's foreign minister was someone who is extremely influential for Iran in forming their foreign policy not just vis-a- vis the United States, but, of course, that entire region as well.
[15:40:06]
We saw that when we had that near war between Iran and Israel and Iran's foreign minister, then toward the region and gave Iran's perspective. So that could be something I could have a big impact on that region.
But at the same time, you're also correct to point out that right now the Iranians really want to know what exactly happened to that chopper and there is indeed an investigation ongoing. Here's what we're learning.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
PLEITGEN (voice-over): Iran's presidential helicopter completely destroyed after crashing into a mountain in the remote north of the country. Dense fog, frigid conditions, making the recovery efforts even harder.
President Ebrahim Raisi, along with Foreign Minister Hossein Amir- Abdollahian and seven others were killed in the crash. Rescuers having to carry the bodies away through the rugged terrain.
A CNN Turk journalists showing how challenging the conditions are.
FULYA OOZTURK, CNN TURK CORRESPONDEN (through translator): This place is a very difficult terrain with dense trees, deep valleys, and steep mountains. We can say that this is the most challenging terrain of Iran.
PLEITGEN: Raisi inaugurated a dam with the president of Azerbaijan and was traveling to nearby Tabriz. The chopper, a decades-old American made Bell 212, a model developed for the Canadian military in the 1960s.
The chopper crashed in poor visibility. Iran, under heavy sanctions, has been unable to acquire more modern helicopters.
President Ebrahim Raisi was rumored to be a possible successor to Iran supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who's 84 years old.
As the chopper went missing, the supreme leader of taking the reins, chairing a meeting of Iran Security Council, and vowing the country's government will continue to work.
AYATOLLAH ALI KHAMENEI, IRAN SUPREME LEADER (through translator): Be assured that there will be no disruption in the country's affairs.
PLEITGEN: Black flags have been hoisted across Iran as the country's leadership has ordered five days of mourning, canceling most public events. Also deeply mourning the country's foreign minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian, who was instrumental in the past months as Iran and Israel came to the brink of full-on war and traded missile strikes. Abdollahian also challenging the U.S. in a recent interview on CNN's "OutFront" with Erin Burnett. HOSSEIN AMIR-ABDOLLLAHIAN, IRAN'S FOREIGN MINISTER: I do think that America must pay closer attention and focus on the adventure seeking regime in Israel, so that such a crisis will not happen in Gaza because Netanyahu showed he will not respect any of the red lines.
PLEITGEN: Tehran has launched an investigation into the crash that killed two key figures of the Islamic republic's leadership, while vowing that the nation will carry on.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
PLEITGEN (on camera): And, Jim, the leadership of the Islamic Republic has ordered five days of mourning and then, of course, the president will be laid to rest in the eastern Iranian town of Mashhad on Thursday -- Jim.
SCIUTTO: Fred Pleitgen, thanks so much.
Joining me now to discuss the significance of all this, what's likely to happen now, Negar Mortazavi. She's a senior fellow at the Center for International Policy and host of the "Iran" podcast.
Good to have you on. Thanks so much for joining.
NEGAR MORTAZAVI, SENIOR FELLOW, CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL POLICY: Thanks for having me, Jim.
SCIUTTO: So lets begin with Raisi's role in Iran because he was not a particularly strong or even highly visible president elected in a low turnout election after many -- well, moderates, if you can call them, refuse to participate in after the candidate list was pared down by the supreme leader. I wonder how jarring is his loss to the current Iranian leadership?
MORTAZAVI: That's correct, Jim. So he came out of a presidential election actually followed by the previous one. He ran against Hassan Rouhani in the previous presidential election before the last, and he lost with a big margin. And then in the last presidential election with the lowest turnout, he essentially came out of that by -- with the help of the disqualification of any viable competition.
And so, he was really seen as a shooting candidate. And then at the same time as someone who was being prepared for the potential succession to the supreme leader in the case of the supreme leaders that whenever that happens so both of these essentially projects have not now there needs to be a replacement for the presidency within 50 days.
And then after that, a longer project by at least that function of the hardliners to find someone to try to prepare and get him ready for a succession to the supreme leader.
SCIUTTO: We should note that he was known by the moniker from his critics as the "butcher of Tehran", responsible -- and I've spoken to Iranian dissidents who held him responsible for just brutal and bloody crackdown on dissidents and any really dissent in the country. [15:45:17]
Is there a candidate that stands out to replace him? And is it likely that that replacement is more or less hard line than Raisi is who was already quite hard line by, well, the very hard line standards of that country today.
MORTAZAVI: Yes, Jim, so he not only oversaw the crackdown, the woman life freedom movement in 2022, but also had a track record since the 1980s, the early times are there as part of essentially was a long time for a long time into the running judiciary system. He oversaw that as you said, also dissidence have been pointing out to that. The replacement will most likely as an who is allowed to run even will most likely be another regime insider, another political hardliner.
I don't think the regime is going to let this become an opening a moment, for unification, allowing any moderates or hardliners to run are risking another moment for uprising. I think they want this to be uneventful and get it done with as soon as possible to replace the president and continue without disruptions.
However, the hardliners that potential contenders may not be as conservative because I assume is also an ultra conservative, essentially, religious clergy from the list city of mug shots. So, the contenders maybe somewhat different on that sense, in a social and cultural sense in the police piecing of the lifestyle, not just the attire, but the lifestyle of younger Iranians and new generation.
So we could see a little bit of opening and shift when it comes to that side of the drastic politics.
SCIUTTO: And we should note any opening like that is an opening, perhaps a tiny opening in the midst of what has been a long -- a long decline in terms of personal freedoms in the country.
Negar Mortazavi, thanks so much for joining and helping us understand this.
MORTAZAVI: Thanks for having me.
SCIUTTO: And still to come, the cross-examination of Michael Cohen is continuing in that Manhattan courtroom. We're going to have the latest from inside coming up.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[15:50:33]
SCIUTTO: The prosecution has now rested in the criminal trial of Donald Trump in New York, that after 17 hours of testimony from a key witness, Michael Cohen, who detailed the alleged payments Trump made to cover up an affair with the adult-film star, Stormy Daniels. Now in just the last half-hour, Trump's defense has called one and then another witness to the stand. This is the beginning, we should note of the defense's case here after the prosecution rested.
CNN's Jessica Schneider is here to update us.
So, Jessica, tell us about the witness Robert Costello. What is the defense's intention with him?
JESSICA SCHNEIDER, CNN JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: The defense wants to have Robert Costello really testifying and abroad manner, but the judge just ruled that Robert Costello can only really testify limited degree.
So to refresh everybody, Robert Costello was mentioned by Michael Cohen. Robert Costello was a lawyer to Rudy Giuliani, who got in touch with Michael Cohen in April 2018 after the FBI raided Michael Cohen's hotel room, and he was going to act as this go-between between Michael Cohen and Donald Trump because the president then at that time was no longer talking to Michael Cohen's.
So, Costello and Cohen apparently had what the defense is saying, 75 phone calls over the course of several weeks. Now, the defense wants Cohen or Costello to testify, first of all, because Costello has repeatedly called Michael Cohen a liar. So they want to get that idea about credibility, specifically.
And then specifically, I guess Costello is going to be asked about two interactions with Michael Cohen. First of all, apparently, Cohen doesn't remember these. That's why they want Costello to testify. First that Costello apparently told Michael Cohen, hey, you should cooperate, you should flip on Trump --
SCIUTTO: Okay.
SCHNEIDER: -- to which Michael Cohen apparently said. But I don't have anything on him.
Those are the two ideas that the defense is going to be able to get out here from Robert Costello.
So like I said, its going to be very limited questioning here, but they want to get out this idea that Michael Cohen had said to Robert Costello, I don't have anything on Trump. Yet, years later, here he is testifying, saying he has all this.
SCIUTTO: Is this likely to be the last witness or perhaps one more from the defense that we had?
SCHNEIDER: So, we have the paralegal from Bove's office. We have --
SCIUTTO: Right, Costello.
SCHNEIDER: We have we have Costello now and they want to call one more witness, the election law expert, who is also going to be limited in testimony then that could be it. There have been no mention of Donald Trump.
It's likely he won't testify, but, of course, the defense could really pull anything out of their hat at any moment. SCIUTTO: A lot of lawyers have said that might be damaging to his defense will see Jessica Schneider. Thanks so much. And we'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[15:55:47]
SCIUTTO: Welcome back.
This weekend, people in Spain and Portugal witnessed the night sky light up as what turned out to be a piece of a comet passed by streaking through the night sky as you see their according to the European space agency, the burning comments fragment reached a speed of 28 miles per second, about twice as fast as a meteorite before burning up over the Atlantic Ocean.
Spectators across the two countries took to social media to share just spectacular pick pictures of a blue, green light, almost otherworldly.
Well, before we go today, we want to let you know that we lost a valued colleague and beloved friend over the weekend. It was a shock. Alice Stewart, a longtime political commentator for CNN, and before that, a prominent aid for several Republican political campaigns, died suddenly.
You saw her many times on our air, often alongside her friend and counterpart from Democratic politics, Maria Cardona, the segments were often my favorite on this show.
In a time of deep political division in this country, Alice consistently rose above it with grace. She was always kind with a warm and generous spirit, a truly special person when we need such people more than ever. Stewart died too young, 58, and we greatly miss her.
