Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Trump Sign New Tariffs On Mexico, Canada, And China; NTSB Gives Update On Deadly DC Plane Crash; NTSB: Air Traffic Control Made A Standard Runway Change For American Airline Jet Before Midair Collision; NTSB Offers New Details On DC Midair Collision; NTSB: Unclear If Five People In Control Tower At Time Of D.C. Accident Is "Typical"; Trump Signs New Tariffs Imposing 25 Percent Tariffs On Canada & Mexico; Ontario Premier Doug Ford Responds To Trump Tariffs; Ontario Premier Promises Retaliatory Tariffs Against U.S. Aired 6-7p ET

Aired February 01, 2025 - 18:00   ET

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


[16:00:40]

JESSICA DEAN, CNN HOST: You're in the CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Jessica Dean in Washington.

We are standing by for an update on the investigation into the deadly midair collision near Reagan National Airport. The onboard voice and data recorders recovered from the Potomac River are now in the hands of investigators.

A source telling CNN initial findings could be released as soon as today. This, as rescue crews continue to recover more bodies from that wreckage.

We are also following developments this hour in the deadly plane crash in Philadelphia. All six people on board a medevac jet were killed in that crash. At least one person on the ground was killed when it crashed shortly after takeoff.

Officials updating us within the last hour, saying they're now asking the public for help in finding the black box in that crash. We are going to have more on that story soon.

But first, we begin this hour with breaking news. As President Trump has signed aggressive new tariffs on some of America's biggest trading partners, 25 percent tariffs on goods coming into the US from Canada and Mexico, and an additional 10 percent on Chinese imports.

Most economists believe these tariffs will lead to higher prices for American consumers on a number of items. "The Wall Street Journal" Editorial Board calling it, "the dumbest trade war in history."

CNN's Alayna Treene is live in West Palm Beach, Florida. Alayna, President Trump promised this on the campaign trail. Americans voted him into office knowing these tariffs were likely to come down the pike. He is steadfast in believing this is going to get him what he wants. But do we know exactly what that is? ALAYNA TREENE, CNN REPORTER: Well, some of this is, of course, a negotiating tactic. The president has long believed that tariffs were very effective in trying to force countries to the table and get them to acquiesce in ways that he wants, and these tariffs, and including a White House fact sheet kind of breaking them down, that we have obtained, lays out specifically what his priority is, and that is specifically related to the tariffs that he is imposing on Canada and Mexico.

This, I want to read for you from the fact sheet. It says: "This tariff will remain in effect until such time as drugs, in particular fentanyl and all illegal aliens stop this invasion of our country." So that's really what a lot of these tariffs on our northern and southern borders are about. It is something that the president had said before, specifically when threatening to impose these tariffs. He said that it was in large part because he believes that Canada and Mexico are not doing enough to crack down on drugs and migrants from coming into the United States.

Now, Jessica, we did see the president post directly about these tariffs as well, just shortly after he signed them. I am going to read to you some of what he said. He wrote: "Today, I've implemented a 25 percent tariff on imports from Mexico and Canada." He notes, and this is something I want to note as well, that there is an exception for this from Canada. It is only 10 percent on Canadian energy.

But he goes on to say, "And a 10 percent additional tariff on China." He notes specifically in this post, "... because of the major threat of illegal aliens and deadly drugs killing our citizens, including fentanyl, we need to protect Americans and it is my duty as president to ensure the safety of all." So there you have it, the president being very specific about why he is doing this.

But to your point as well, just about the impact that this is likely to have on consumers, it is something we heard the president say yesterday in talking about this, noting that in the short term, Americans could feel some of the impact on their wallets -- Jessica.

DEAN: All right, Alayna Treene, thank you so much.

I want to pause on that breaking news for a second, because the NTSB is updating us right now on that plane crash from DC. Let's listen in.

J. TODD INMAN, NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD MEMBER: -- for those, we currently have opened 1,145 investigations in aviation. Last year, we had multiple accidents with six or more fatalities across all of our modes, which are primarily aviation, we dealt with 343 fatalities.

We currently have open 1,100 recommendations and in aviation, there are 283 that are still pending.

[18:05:07]

The team that is working on this crash at DCA collectively has over 350 years of tenure with the NTSB. We will find out what happened, and we will do everything we can to prevent it.

And I don't want anyone to think, because we are working two accidents, this is not what -- this is what we do, week in and week out. Just today, a lot more people are paying attention to it.

I want to take an opportunity to introduce Bryce Banning. He hasn't really spoken the last couple of times, but he has been working hard putting together a lot of information.

Bryce joined the NTSB in 2012 as a senior aircraft investigator. He has been the investigator in charge on hundreds of aircraft investigations. He is an airline transport pilot with commercial privileges for single engine land and sea, certified flight instructor, multi-engine instructor, and instruments instructor. He is also a certified airframe and power plant mechanic.

Bryce has accumulated over 8,000 hours of flight time in all types of aircraft, ranging from Pipers to Navajos, King Airs and Lear. He served in multiple management positions for multiple airlines, and he has been leading this team since the inception.

He is going to brief you on some details that we have, and then we will come back with some additional details.

BRYCE BANNING, NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD AIR SAFETY INVESTIGATOR: Thank you.

The flight data recorder and the cockpit voice recorder from the PSA aircraft were recovered on Thursday in the late afternoon by the FBI dive team.

The CVR and the FDR were provided to engineers at the NTSB vehicle recorders division immediately after recovery. Both the FDR and the CVR were an L3 Harris Communications FA 2100 type. Both recorders are solid state memory digital recorders.

Both the CVR and the FDR were downloaded successfully. The FDR contains about 400 parameters and is currently being analyzed by an FDR working group consisting of the NTSB, FAA, and PSA.

The CVR contained about two hours and four minutes of good quality audio. ADSB and FDR time were correlated. Timing will continue to be refined. Times are in Eastern Standard Time and are preliminary.

The FDR captures the entirety of the accident flight. The CVR audio, because it is only two hours in duration, starts mid-flight.

Prior to initial descent, the crew briefed the arrival for the troops five arrival, followed by an ILS approach to Runway One at DCA.. Around 8:15, the aircraft left 37,000 feet for an initial descent. At eight 8:39:10, Potomac approach cleared the crew for the Mount Vernon Visual Runway One approach.

At 8:43:06, the crew made initial contact with the DCA Tower. The tower controller then asked if the crew could switch to Runway Three- three. After a brief discussion between the crew, they agreed to Runway Three-three.

At 8:45:27, the autopilot was disconnected. At 8:46:01, a radio transmission from the tower was audible, informing PAT 25 that traffic just south of the Wilson Bridge was a CRJ at 1,200 feet, circling to Runway Three-three. At 8:46:29, the crew received a 1,000 foot automated callout.

At 8:46:47, DCA Tower cleared other jet traffic on Runway One for departure with no delay.

[18:10:05]

At 8:47:29, the crew received a 500 foot automated call out. At 8:47:39, a radio transmission from the tower was audible, asking PAT 25 if the CRJ was in sight. One second later, the crew received an automatic -- automated traffic advisory stating traffic, traffic.

At 8:47:42, a radio transmission from the tower was audible, directing PAT 25 to pass behind the CRJ. AT 8:47:58, the crew had a verbal reaction and FDR data showed the airplane beginning to increase its pitch. Sounds of impact were audible about one second, later, followed by the end of the recording.

A CVR group consisting of party representatives from the NTSB, PSA, ALPA, and the FAA has been convened. The group is currently working to transcribe the entirety of the CVR recording verbatim. Thank you.

INMAN: We will take some questions at the end, but we have some additional details, we definitely want to brief you on today.

I want to clarify something that was, I think, presented by NTSB in some form, specifically around air traffic control.

The Washington DCA Tower was communicating out any transmission on a VHF and UHF frequency. They would -- any transmission would come out on both bands. The Black Hawk was transmitting out with a UHF band while the CRJ jet was transmitting out with a VHF.

To put that in context, both the airplane and the helicopter would hear any air traffic control, but they would not hear the other aircraft or helicopter, conversely, if they were transmitting out.

I bring that up because we are now working through the transcript of the air traffic control, and many people have heard online different recordings. Those do not -- those do not contain the UHF radio transmissions. What they are hearing is the VHF recorded on certain software programs.

As we synchronize the timing on that, we hope to be able to release it tomorrow. We do have it. We are working through the synchronization because the specific time will be very critical.

A few updates in regard to the Black Hawk helicopter. We can verify it was on a training flight that would utilize night vision goggles. We do not know at this time if the night vision goggles were actively being worn, nor what the setting may be.

Further investigation should be able to let us know if that occurred and what it factor it may play in the overall accident.

We do know that the -- and we announced the combination CVR and the flight data recorder was extracted last night from the aircraft. When it was brought to our lab and opened, there was water intrusion. Again, this is not uncommon.

If you recall, in the CRJ, that cockpit voice recorder also had water intrusion, it is going through the same process of ionized water until it is put into a vacuum oven. We still are very confident we will have that data.

On the Black Hawk, we can confirm that we are looking into a Priority Air Transport, and that's where you hear PAT, that on the prior day, PAT 11 was in close contact with a Republic Air Flight. The Republic Air Flight rejected the landing and did a go around.

The reason we are bringing this up is our data currently shows there is over 1,000 feet of separation between those two aircraft, 1000 feet is a good safety barrier. Obviously, the pilot made its own decision in rejecting the landing. We just wanted to bring that fact out. It will be considered in the overall evaluation of this accident..

[18:10:10]

So now, let's go to the controllers.

At the time of the accident, there were five controllers in the air traffic control tower cab at DCA. One was a local controller which was handling not only helicopter, but fixed wing aircraft. Another -- and the local controller also would be handling arrivals and departures, closing airspace, and the use of the runway.

There was a ground controller which was handling all aircraft and vehicles not on the runway. In addition, there was a local assist controller. This person is responsible for assisting the local controller in any type of actions that are needed, reviewing data, scanning the field, a multitude of different things.

You will not hear the assistant controller on any of the ATC's tapes, but we can confirm that person was in the cab.

In addition, there is an operations supervisor who has direct oversight over the tower. This is someone who manages everyone that is involved in the operation, along with an operational supervisor in training. That leads us to confirm there were five people in the tower at the time of the accident.

At this time, we have interviewed the local controller, the ground controller and the local assist controller. We anticipate having the interviews with the operations supervisor and the supervisor and training conducted no later than Monday evening.

And for a little bit of context, this is a controller's worst nightmare. It hits everyone that works in that cab and knows them very hard. These interviews take a long time, not because there is that much talking, but there are several breaks that occur for emotions, just to be able to compose themselves, to talk about what happened.

We want to be thorough. If we need to go back for additional information, we absolutely will. We are getting full cooperation and access to those individuals we need, and we hope again, to have them completed no later than Monday.

Now, we are going to talk a little bit about altitude, and I am going to preface this and we are going to try to work through your questions. But I want to be very clear, our team has had some internal debate on releasing one part of this and whenever I explain it, I hope you will understand why.

When we received the recorders from the CRJ, we were able to define an altitude of where it was very close to the time of impact. That is a data point we feel very comfortable with. We also have an initial set of information in regard to what was being seen on the cab in the control tower.

We have not finalized that and need to get more granularity to it, and we currently don't have the readout from the Black Hawk. I put all that into context for you in that whenever I give you some altitude information, one part of the three pieces we have defined, the other -- another part we feel fairly confident but need to get more information. And a third, we don't even have.

Currently, the CRJ, based upon the data recorder at the time of impact was at 325 feet, plus or minus 25 feet. This is from the belly of the CRJ. The CRJ itself is 20 feet and eight inches from the wheel to the top of the tail. So from the belly, the CRJ at the time of impact was 325 less or minus 25 degrees.

And for those who follow this closely, that is a corrected altitude. It is based on the ADSB data and the flight data recorder.

Our preliminary review of what the tower cab was showing on the data screen that would have been in front of the controllers, was 200 feet near the time of the accident. Again, this data is preliminary. Tomorrow, we feel very comfortable that we will be getting the additional data sources that will confirm precisely what it would have been on the screen at the time, and I would also caution you, there is typically in the cab on that screen, it may be a four to five second refresh rate.

[18:20:07]

But obviously this is something that we are going to be looking at very closely.

The third prong of that is the helicopter recorders. Between those three, whenever we have those data points finalized, we feel that we will be very comfortable in saying exactly what altitude this occurred at. And I know there has been a lot of speculation. You may have a few questions on it, but I want to caution. We are trying to give you what information we have, and we verified at that time.

With that, we will take some questions. Just one second.

Ma'am --

REPORTER: So you said that the altitude in the recorder recorded the altitude of the CRJ, was it trying to pull up before the collision? Was that what you were saying?

INMAN: The question was, the altitude that was read from the ADSB and the voice recorder was trying to pull up? I can tell you at one point, very close to the impact, there was a slight change in pitch, an increase in pitch. That is something that we will get you more detail on. But it was an indication of an increase in pitch.

GRADY TRIMBLE, FOX BUSINESS NETWORK GENERAL ASSIGNMENTS BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT: Thank you, Todd, Grady Trimble with Fox.

So are you also saying that there was a 100 foot discrepancy between what the air traffic controller was seeing on the screen in front of them, and what the height, the altitude of the plane -- there is a hundred feet difference?

INMAN: So the question is, was there a hundred feet difference between what we found the plane to be operating at and the air traffic control tower?

I am saying the initial data we have on the control tower cab says 200 feet would have been visualized. This is a fairly good estimate, but it needs to be finalized and I shouldn't say estimate it is a fairly good initial read. It needs to be finalized. And again the CRJ was operating at 325 feet plus or minus 25.

TRIMBLE: And how common is it that the two aircraft would be operating on different frequencies with the same control tower?

INMAN: The question is how common would it be that the two aircraft would be operating on separate frequencies?

It is completely common. Military operates on one frequency, civilian on another. We are just trying to clarify that because you're only reading something or hearing some things online. So we are trying to get out and dispel some myths.

Yes, sir.

REPORTER: -- with DC News Now. At this point, you've given us the CRJ, but can you speculate on the altitude of the PAT at this point?

INMAN: We cannot speculate -- the question is, can we give any information on the altitude of the PAT? We cannot at this point.

Obviously, an impact occurred, and I would say when an impact occurs, that is typically where the altitude of both aircraft were at the moment. But again, when we have the data from the recorder, we will be able to give you more specific. REPORTER: And just to follow up, if I may, sir, there have been reports, can you comment on reports that PAT may have flown above its max limit for that airspace?

INMAN: So the question was, can I comment on reports that PAT may have flown above its max limits? No, because I haven't heard that and I don't try to look at the media that much.

So by not saying that, I am not denying, but I just haven't heard it. We haven't discussed it. I will ask the investigator in charge. Do you have any information on that?

BANNING: Yes, I can provide just a little bit of context. The PAT-25 was within the lateral boundaries of a helicopter route. The ceiling of that route was 200 feet.

As Member Inman said, we have not got the data out of the FDR for the Black Hawk at this time, but that's what we know.

INMAN: Okay, were going to go down here.

DAVID KAPLAN, FOX 5: David Kaplan with Fox 5 here in DC. You mentioned as you walked through the timeline that there was a broadcast over the cockpit of "traffic, traffic, traffic." Can you talk about what indications, if any, you have that the planes anti-collision system was working?

It is my understanding that that broadcast goes out if the system has been activated. Can you comment on what you've learned about the anti- collision system?

INMAN: The question is about the "traffic, traffic, traffic" that was heard on the cockpit voice recorder. I can say this, we are defining what is inside of each system and what was their outputting.

[18:25:08]

Because of the unique nature of military aircraft, we need additional specialization, which we have. But for right now, we are trying to present you with what we've heard. So we need further information to be able to define why it was indicating "traffic, traffic, traffic."

Yes.

REPORTER: The night goggles. How will you determine if they were wearing the night goggles or not?

INMAN: Question was how will we determine if they were wearing the night vision goggles or not? Part of that will be based, and we already know during the extraction of the bodies, how they were presented and what was around them.

I can say that impact was very significant and so it will take additional analysis of their helmets. The attached areas, we are looking to find if the night vision goggle bags, whenever we extract the aircraft, are they empty? Are they found in the debris field? There is a lot of different variables we need to find out before we determine that.

Yes.

CHASE WILLIAMS, FOX BUSINESS NETWORK CORRESPONDENT: Thank, Chase Williams from Fox Business.

I know that at four minutes before impact that there was a runway switch. They switched to 33. How routine is that and is that enough lead time for pilots and other traffic in the area to be aware of, you know, a change in the patterns?

INMAN: Okay. So the question was in regard to -- the term you used was "runway switch" and we briefed this yesterday.

The CRJ was on approach to Runway Three-three. They had been brought in that way. As they were coming in, they were asked by the air traffic control, could they accept or sorry, let me reverse that.

They were coming in on Runway One. As they were on approach, the air traffic controller said, can you accept Runway 33. That is not an uncommon occurrence at DCA. It creates an arcing of the flight path, so it is very -- it is very normal. Pilots were actually able to discuss it. They accepted it. They appeared to be on a proper at least line up at that time.

So right now, we are evaluating, with all the other facts and data, but it is what it is at this point, I guess.

Yes, sir.

DOMINIQUE MOODY, NBC WASHINGTON: Yeah. Dominique Moody with NBC Washington.

I just have a question about the staffing in the air tower. Can you tell me if that is common for it to have that level of staffing? Or is it traditionally more people inside of the cab?

INMAN: The question was the staffing at the time of the actual accident with the five individuals. I have not gotten an update from the air traffic control people. I know the primary thing we wanted to give was exactly that and there has discussions because again, typical can change based on the day of the week, the time, the weather.

So we will not categorize anything as typical right now until we can present it in a better fashion.

Yes, sir.'

AARON GILCHRIST, NBC NEWS: Aaron Gilchrist with NBC News. If I heard you correctly, you said that the tower was able to see the airplane at 200 feet. The tower instruments read it at 200 feet. Did it not read where the helicopter was at the same time?

INMAN: The question was, what was -- it was reading the airplane and could it not read the helicopter? It could read the helicopter. And the reason why I am saying it could and this is, again, getting into more specific information, the definition that is needed for us to evaluate that further will be downloaded tomorrow.

Do you want to answer a little bit on how those control towers or I am happy to continue. Okay.

Those monitors obviously assimilate different pieces of information. So our initial read was showing that. We are giving you the 200 feet as indicative on the CRJ. I don't want to speculate specifically on the Black Hawk.

Sorry. It is reversed, right?

BANNING: So as previously stated, we know that the FDR and data provided indicated that the CRJ was at 325 feet plus or minus 25 feet. We also, initial preliminary data right now indicates that on the tower's radar scope that was available to the controller, initial data indicates that that would -- indicates that he may have seen 200 feet. That needs to be verified. Our ATC group is working it. We will have more data available, but those are the initial indications.

REPORTER: Any indication for the for the Black Hawk on that screen at that same time?

BANNING: The data that I am talking about, the 200-foot data that would have been available on that radar scope, that was the Black Hawk. The 325-foot that we've given you is ADSB data, FDR data, other data combined to get an accurate altitude of the CRJ, 325 plus or minus 25.

The radar data where that helicopter is down at 200 feet has less fidelity. So we are -- our team is looking into that. But I think it is important to note that this is a complex investigation. There is a lot of pieces here. Our team is working very hard to gather this data, make sure we, as Member Inman has said, understand why this happened.

[18:30:47]

(CROSSTALK)

TODD INMAN, NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD MEMBER: Hang on, I'll call on people.

Yes, ma'am.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Can you just confirm what your colleague just said (INAUDIBLE) 25 feet and the Black Hawk was showing at 200?

INMAN: So, the question again, and I'm going to try to say this one more time, the CRJ at the time of impact, based on ADS-B data and there was - and the data - and the flight reporter, shows that that airplane was positioned at 325 feet plus or minus 25 feet. On the radar scope in the cab, our preliminary review shows that the Black Hawk helicopter would have visualized at 200 feet. It's not as defined, that is preliminary. We will get more significant information. We wanted to present the 325 plus or minus because we knew that we have good certainty with it, but without presenting it with the radar scope information or with presenting that, it could cause some conflict. So I'm going to be very careful to make sure we still have a lot more work to do.

These are one of thousands of data points and will be hundreds of thousands of pages. We're trying to release the information as we know it and make sure we're giving the best information that's accurate and learning from it. Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Mr. Inman, yesterday you talked about spending time with some of the victims' families. Can you describe (INAUDIBLE) ...

INMAN: The question is about spending time with the victims' families. Yes, I spent several hours with them today. There's more - some new, some that have been there for three days, some that want to give us hugs, some that are just mad and angry. They're just all hurt and they still want answers and we want to give them answers.

And the most devastating thing, I guess, today was they watched the news last night. They know their loved ones were recovered. They're thinking: Is it going to take longer? Am I not going to be finding my loved one? How will this affect it? That's hard. I mean, it's horrible. It's horrible. And no one has to suffer this.

So, yes, it is hard on them. They have a lot of questions. They haven't been through this. Unfortunately, we have a lot of experts. We've got a thousand, but that doesn't mean it's not completely new to them. What's really horrible though is that these things are happening. You know, that keep challenge going.

When I first got to the NTSB, you know, it's a challenge when you hand to people - as a sign of gratitude and respect, the front of it has the seal and name. I said, "What do you want to put on the back?" This was on the front door of our training center where the TW 800 was for many years. From tragedy, we draw knowledge to improve the safety for us all.

That's what we're doing right now. We're dealing with tragedy, but we need to improve safety. We need 200 plus recommendations fixed. We need people to take action. Unfortunately, at some point, all of you are going to be gone. We're still going to have the investigation open. We're going to make recommendations. We'll go to East Palestine, a community that gets devastated, still nothing's happened.

We have several hundred recommendations open for aviation. You want to do something about it? Adopt the recommendation of the NTSB. You'll save lives. Get off and do something. I don't want to have to meet with another - parents like that again. It's not fair. It could be your family.

Sorry, I didn't mean to take it out on you. It's just hard, sorry. Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I have some questions. I have two and I just want to follow up because I want to make sure I understand the elevation question correctly. The flight data recorder on the CRJ is showing 325 plus or minus 25. That's correct, right?

INMAN: The question is - and I apologize, I've said this three or four times, on the CRJ, the flight data recorder that has been localized from the ADS-B data and other is showing the time of impact.

[18:35:11]

It was at 325 plus or minus 25 feet.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The 200 feet inside of the air traffic control cab was for the helicopter, is that ...

INMAN: The question, again, the - what - the preliminary data that we have not validated yet and are still trying to verify was that the radar scope was showing the helicopter at 200 feet. Now, again, you can have - we're not saying plus or minus, because we don't really know that. It's not as granular. We will have the exact data set tomorrow, tomorrow evening.

We knew you would have some questions, so please be responsible in reporting this. We need more info, but we know that some of that information is coming out and we're trying to provide it. No more. Sorry, I've answered the same question several times. Sorry.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Next question.

INMAN: Go ahead.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is just a clarification point on this topic. I understand what the radar scope within the ATC cab was showing and what the black box showed you from the CRJ. I guess the question is what would explain the discrepancy, which appears to be a hundred feet when clearly they hit each other.

INMAN: So the question is what would explain the discrepancy? That's what our job is, is to figure that out. That's what we're doing. That's the reason we're giving you information to dispel some information that may be out there. We're the gold standard across the world because we tell the facts and sometimes we have to give a little bit something preliminary so that you don't have an improper picture. That's what we're trying to do. Thank you.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thank you very much. Thank you.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What about the delay that you described ...

DEAN: All right. You were listening there to Todd Inman, the NTSB board member, giving an update on the deadly crash that happened here in Washington, D.C. on Wednesday night. I want to go out to Brian Todd, who is at DCA.

And Brian, we got a lot of really nuanced pieces of information. At times, Todd Inman getting really frustrated because he tried to really impress upon everyone.

BRIAN TODD, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes. DEAN: And I think this is important that this is preliminary information, but also that they're giving it out because it sounds like they're trying to combat misinformation, disinformation that might be out there. Give us what really stuck out to you listening there to that update.

TODD: Well, Jessica, you're right that he's trying to give out as much information as possible. But this was a bit confusing by Todd Inman at certain points. And, you know, we're going to try to kind of unpack some of this and give it more clarity. But the whole last part where he got a little bit frustrated was regarding the altitude of the very - of the two aircraft that collided. And he said clearly that the CRJ - now for everybody out there, when he talks about the CRJ and the PAT - the CRJ is referring to the passenger plane with 64 people on board. The PAT is the military helicopter.

He said at impact, the CRJ, the passenger plane was at 325 feet above the ground, plus or minus 25 feet. He then gave other information as to the height of the helicopter that seemed to be different. And, of course, they couldn't have been really different because they hit each other and that's what the reporters were asking him about. And he was not able to necessarily provide clarity on that, so let's just go with the fact that at impact, he said the passenger plane was at 325 feet, plus or minus 25 feet.

I think, also, a couple of other salient points there, he was asked - this was important, he was asked if the crew of the passenger plane attempted to pull up, if they attempted to make any kind of movement to evade the collision. He said at one point there was an increase in pitch.

Now, what that really means, I'm not an expert in aviation. I don't really know. But he did say that, indicating that there may have been an attempt by the passenger crew, passenger plane's crew to evade the collision. But, of course, it all unfolded so fast that it was unavoidable, apparently.

A couple of other things, Jessica, he gave timelines that really - I mean, I - you could go over every second that he outlaid there. But basically, this unfolded in just a matter of a few seconds. A couple of things that we took note of here at about 8:47:39 PM on Wednesday night, the control tower asked the military helicopter if the plane was in sight. Just a couple of seconds later at 8:47:42, the control tower told the military chopper to pass behind the passenger plane.

And this is crucial, this timepiece here, at 8:47:58, they heard a verbal reaction from the crew of the passenger plane and then detected an increased pitch in the plane at that point.

[18:40:08]

There was a sound of impact one second later. Again, I'll say it. At 8:47:58, the crew had a verbal reaction of some kind. And then, there was an increased pitch of the passenger plane. There was a sound of impact one second later and then the end of the recording. So, Jessica, that was a pretty dramatic sequence of events, obviously, unfolding in just a few seconds. And again, I think what we can take from this, the real headline here is that there may have been a very quick and sudden attempt to evade the collision by the passenger plane because he said there was an increase in pitch of the plane.

He was asked specifically, did the plane try to pull up? And he said - he didn't answer the question directly, but he said there was an increase in pitch. Now, again, aviation experts, pilots are going to be able to tell you better than I can what an increase in pitch means at that last second. But there may, Jessica, may have been an attempt by the passenger plane's crew, the pilots, to evade that collision.

A couple of other things, he said at the time of the accident, there were five controllers in the tower at the time, including - this is what CNN has been reporting as well - there was one controller that was handling both helicopter and fixed wing aircraft traffic. There was one ground traffic controller. There was an assistant controller. There was an operation supervisor and an operation supervisor in training. All of those controllers have been interviewed.

But again, the crucial piece of that is that one air traffic controller was handling both helicopter and airplane traffic. We were told by experts and former controllers that that is not uncommon. However, that's not necessarily the way it's supposed to be. The supervisor can make that call to have one person in the control tower handle both sets of traffic at their discretion. They did make that call that evening, but that's not necessarily how it is supposed to be at a given moment. There's supposed to be two controllers handling both of those things.

I guess a couple of quick other things they did determine that there was a training flight going on with the Black Hawk helicopter. It was a training flight utilizing night vision goggles, but they are not able to determine right now whether those goggles were actually being used at the time of the crash. Jessica, that's what we have.

I think, again, the increase in pitch at the last second there may have been the salient point that they were trying to make here. Again, the big question, were they trying to evade the collision at the time? It appears now with this information that they may have been trying - they may have made one quick - very quick attempt to try to evade the collision, but of course they were not able to.

DEAN: Yes. And when did they become aware of it and then put all the pieces together. Okay, Brian Todd, thank you so much at Reagan National Airport.

Brian mentioned aviation experts and we have two of them here with us to help us kind of sort through some of this.

Mary Schiavo, our transportation analyst and former inspector general of the U.S. Department of Transportation is here with us. Dr. Hassan Shahidi is the president and CEO of Flight Safety Foundation.

Thank you both for being here. Mary, I want to start first with you. You sat through and listened to all of that. Brian, noting the information about that slight increase in pitch, what that might have meant. Walk us through what you heard.

MARY SCHIAVO, CNN TRANSPORTATION ANALYST: Right. Well, that slight indication in pitch is that the pilots pulled back. They pulled the plane to an increase and an increase in pitch means they're putting the nose up towards the sky and trying to climb.

But it came literally within, you know, a second at the time of the impact. So that tells us that they did not see the helicopter until just, you know, a second at impact. But they had that one second to try to pull up, which is not - I mean, a CRJ couldn't climb out of there.

DEAN: It's that fast.

SCHIAVO: Right.

DEAN: Right.

SCHIAVO: I mean, a military fighter jet couldn't climb that fast.

And the other thing, I mean, there were a lot of nuances about the discrepancy in the altitude. But I heard them to say that they were firm, that they were - that they believe is correct, that the aircraft, the CRJ, the American Airlines flight was at 325 feet, plus or minus 25 feet. And he said that, I thought, very affirmatively.

And then, the discrepancy in the air traffic control screens saying that the helicopter was at 200 feet, that is going to be the source of a lot of investigation. Was all the - when was the equipment calibrated? When was the helicopter equipment calibrated? When's the last time that people looked at the air traffic control equipment in the tower to have that calibrated?

So the - this - the equipment and who took care of it, and what they did, and what it saw and all that will now become a big issue. However, you know, the one thing we didn't hear is what was displayed - and we will hear that - what was displayed in the helicopter. That's going to be very important.

[18:45:05]

But still, it comes down to - they also reiterated that well before the collision, they were told about the traffic and to make sure they saw it and that they followed behind it. And that's highly significant because that says that they were responsible, and that'll be a big debate, is this the proper way to run air traffic control at the nation's busiest runway, not the nation's busiest airport by saying, hey, look for this light and follow this plane. But those instructions were given.

And from the way they described it in great detail on the time of the plane ...

DEAN: Yes.

SCHIAVO: ... making descent, it was a controlled and stable descent by the aircraft. I did not hear anything that suggested that they were trying to make last minute maneuvers until they saw this helicopter tried to pull up.

DEAN: That very last second.

SCHIAVO: It was a controlled and stable approach.

DEAN: Okay.

And Dr. Shahidi, talk to us, too, about what you're taking - what you kind of took away. I know you were listening as well. What stood out to you?

DR. HASSAN SHAHIDI, PRESIDENT AND CEO, FLIGHT SAFETY FOUNDATION: Not to repeat what Mary has just summarized, this airspace is a complex airspace, is an unforgiving airspace and it does not leave room for margin for any error. And what we are now going through with the investigation is to pinpoint exactly the position as well as the elevation or the altitude of both aircraft and understand the dynamics of this and how much time was there for any possible maneuver by the CRJ, which really there isn't any maneuverability.

It is on its way to land and so the pitching up - the slight pitching up really means - indicates that perhaps he was trying to take a evasive action, but it's really late at that time.

DEAN: So late. I want to thank both of you for being here. And again, that that teeny bit of information we're getting just from that press conference that the pilot of that American Airlines flight trying to make potentially that move at the - literally, the last second with one second before impact. Thank you both. We really appreciate it.

And the other major story we are following this hour, President Trump signing aggressive new tariffs on some of America's biggest trading partners, 25 percent tariffs on goods coming in from U.S. and from Canada, 10 percent on Canadian energy and an additional 10 percent on Chinese imports.

Joining us now, the Premier of Ontario, Doug Ford.

Thank you so much for being here with us. These tariffs brand new, just signed within the last hour. I first just want your initial reaction, because you have said you plan to rain down economic punishment on America in response to these. What do you think comes next?

DOUG FORD, ONTARIO PREMIER: Well, first of all, Jessica, I just want to send our prayers and thoughts to the family that lost loved ones in the aviation accident. It's a tragedy.

As for the tariffs, it was unjustified. It's unfair. And frankly, it was illegal breaking a deal that we had with the USMCA deal, and it's disappointing. You know, Canada and Canadians love the U.S., I love the U.S., I love the American people. We're your closest ally and trading partner, your largest export destination in the entire world. This is going to hurt Americans. It's going to hurt Canadians. We're going to see inflation happen down in the U.S. and in Canada, and it's unjustified.

DEAN: And so what steps will Canada take next? I mean, we are expecting to hear from your prime minister. He was supposed to speak within the hour. Obviously, we have been monitoring this - the NTSB update. But what do you think happens? What does Canada do now?

FORD: Well, we'll have retaliatory measures. It's unfortunate. We don't want to do it. We'd rather have a strong trading partner with the U.S., build an Am-Can fortress. We want to ship down more products, more critical minerals, more oil. That's what we want to do. But I can assure you what President Trump underestimates, the resilience of the Canadian people, the strength of the Canadian people. No matter what political stripe you come from in Canada, we're united. We're a united country and we're a proud country.

DEAN: And when you say retaliatory measures, is that retaliatory tariffs, you believe?

FORD: Yes, there'll be retaliatory tariffs.

[18:50:00]

And the Prime Minister will announce that shortly.

DEAN: And is there any sense - would you have any more details on those before I move on from that?

FORD: I'll leave that up to the Prime Minister to speak for the country. But what I can tell you, we're the number one export destination for 28 states across the country. Ontario alone, we're the number one trading partner, number one customer, per se, for 17 states and number two to 11 others. We do $500 billion of trade on both sides of the border, split equally down the center. And 9 million Americans wake up every morning, Jessica, to produce products for Ontario alone, not to mention the rest of the country.

What's really disturbing when President Trump is using fentanyl as a reason, lumping us in with Mexico and China. The figures from U.S. Customs is very clear. There's over 9,600 kilos coming - fentanyl coming from Mexico. Ours is 19 kilos, which is too much, which is 0.001 percent of fentanyl compared to Mexico coming into the U.S., compared to over 25,000 kilos of narcotics, be it heroin or cocaine, opioids, coming from the U.S. into Canada.

We have a strong relationship with the U.S. Customs. Our customs officers work collaboratively with them, working with the DEA or RCMP is working collaboratively. I can tell the American people, Canada is not the problem. The problem is the Mexican border and China. That's where the problem is.

DEAN: And do you have any sense yet of timing? Do you, as the - as a member of the Canadian government know when the U.S. tariffs on Canadian products will take place, will go into action?

FORD: Well, what I understand, what I've heard, that they're going to be very soon, almost immediate. And why President Trump would want to attack his largest customer, per se, largest trading partner, closest ally, that this goes back to - all the way back to 1867, we have stood shoulder to shoulder with Americans during World War I, World War II, 9/11. We sent our troops over to stand shoulder to shoulder with American troops. We lost soldiers standing up for our family and we consider the U.S. part of our family.

DEAN: And I am curious what you think the relationship will be like going forward between Canada and the U.S. And if you all have any sense, because the sense that we've gotten from our reporting is that, especially for the Canadian representatives, it's a bit nebulous. In fact, a lot nebulous as to exactly what you're supposed to do to get rid of these tariffs. What is the marker for - I mean, it's very wide, it's no fentanyl deaths in the U.S., but what does that practically look like?

FORD: Oh, that's just not realistic when, you know, we're responsible for 0.001 percent compared to Mexico. I think the president has to look at the southern border. He has to work with the Mexican president. He has to work with his DEA to stop the flow of drugs and the precursors that are coming up from China into Mexico, up through the United States and into Canada.

As I said, we have over 25,000 kilos that has been apprehended coming from the U.S. into Canada, 95 percent of all illegal guns are coming in to Canada that are being used in heinous crimes, and illegals are coming up.

My point is, let's work together. Let's work collaboratively together and protect our borders on both sides of the borders. But we can - we're the two strongest nations in the world if we work together. The U.S. is reliant on our crude oil, on our uranium, on our potash, on our high-grade nickel, on our electricity.

Ontario powers 1.5 million homes, keeps the lights on in New York, in Michigan, in Minnesota and many other areas. We need to work together. We're stronger together.

DEAN: And how do you expect this to go in terms of the effects on your economy, the American economy, but, you know, these two border nations, how - what do you think the effect is going to be in the short-term?

FORD: Well, it's going to be terrible. It's going to make Americans poor. It's going to create inflation. It's going to make Canadians poor. It's going to really hurt both economies. And all we're saying is, let's work together. Please do not lump us in with Mexico and China.

[18:55:02]

We're your closest ally, your number one customer and we stood shoulder to shoulder on many, many different fronts. We love the Americans and we love the U.S.

DEAN: And, you know, it's interesting because I hear what you're saying. And if you look at the numbers, you're right. There is a false equivalency between Canada and Mexico and what is coming in from the southern border and what is coming in from the northern border with Canada. And I hear your frustration.

And so, my question to you is what's the alternative here? Do you think that it should just be tariffs on Mexico, no tariffs on Canada? What would you suggest?

FORD: Oh, that's up to the President to decide. But we are no Mexico. We're Canadians. We're strong. We're resilient. We're proud. And we're going to stand up for what's right. And what's right is making sure that we protect our economy, protect the people, protect the families and protect the communities right across this great country of ours. And again, we have no animosity towards the American people or the U.S. as a whole. We love them. And a lot of Americans live in Canada and a lot of Canadians live in the U.S.

DEAN: All right. Doug Ford, we are expecting to see now tariffs on American goods going into Canada. Thank you so much for being here with us. We really appreciate it.

FORD: Well, Jessica, thank you so much. And God bless Canada and God bless America.

DEAN: Thank you.

FORD: Thank you.

DEAN: We'll be right back.

FORD: Thank you.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)