Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

Police Officers Shot in Ferguson; Secret Service Under Fire Again; Kerry Leaves Sunday to Continue Iran Nuclear Talks; What's the Impact of the GOP Letter on Iran Negotiations?

Aired March 12, 2015 - 08:30   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MICHAELA PEREIRA, CNN ANCHOR: Breaking overnight, two police officers are in serious condition after they were shot during heated protests in Ferguson, Missouri. CNN's Sara Sidner, who's been in Ferguson for months reporting on all that's going on there, joins us with the breaking details.

Good to have you with us.

Any further word on the conditions of these two officers?

SARA SIDNER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: They're saying serious but stable. They are expected to survive all of this. So that's a relief to many people worried about what's going to happen with these officers.

We do know one shot in the shoulder, one shot in the face. And so there was a lot of people wondering, oh, my goodness, you know, what happened? Well, clearly they're going to survive this. Now the question is, who did this? Who was behind this shooting? And that's where the investigation is right now.

I know that they are looking -- sending out a number, Crime Stoppers, trying to get tips and leads from people. They are taking -- trying to take videos because there are a lot of people out there that are taking videotape of all that's going on. You are seeing pictures now from when the officers were crouched down after the shooting happened, after the officers were hit.

But this all happened as the protests were dispersing. It was around midnight and the protests were dispersing. And you can hear the sort of yelling and people running. And they're very concerned for their own safety. And you, of course, hear there the sound of the shots going off, which people thought at first were fire crackers and then realized, no, these are gunshots, get down.

PEREIRA: People get down. But there's cell phone video. They're now trying to work out where the shots came from.

SIDNER: Correct.

PEREIRA: They believe that it's coming from this hill. No idea of a suspect or anybody who's involved? Any leads so far? SIDNER: You know, if they have them, they're not telling us yet. But

they are certainly saying, we are in the midst of this investigation. A manhunt is underway. We don't know if it's one suspect or two or three or how many people might be involved. We do know from witness statements that there were at least three to five shots that went off. And we don't know how many, for example, hit the officers. So what we know right now is that they're still looking for a suspect or suspects and these two officers are expected to survive. But they're injured and, of course, their families are very worried for them too.

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: Sara Sidner, thanks so much for the update. We'll be getting them for the rest of the show from you. Thanks so much.

Well, did a Secret Service supervisor give two agents a pass despite accusations that they drunkenly drove into a White House barricade? Another scandal developing and we will speak to a former member of the Secret Service about it next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CAMEROTA: The Secret Service under fire once again this morning. Two senior agents under investigation for reportedly driving drunk and hitting a White House security barricade after a night of partying last week. Jonathan Wackrow is a -- he served as a Secret Service agent for 13 years, including five years during the Obama administration. He is now the president of i4 Strategies, a consulting firm that helps clients mitigate risk.

John, thanks so much for being here. You know these two Secret Service agents who are in trouble and accused of driving drunk.

JONATHAN WACKROW, FORMER SECRET SERVICE AGENT: Absolutely.

CAMEROTA: What are they like?

WACKROW: These two individuals are phenomenal managers. As I said to you earlier, both of them I saw as, you know, the future of the Secret Service. So I find it really, you know, disturbing that they would be caught up in an incident like this.

CAMEROTA: I mean obviously an unfortunate incident. It can happen after leaving a retirement party, which is what they did. But the real scrutiny here is on how the Secret Service has handled it. We're only finding out about it now. It happened last week. And reportedly they were not given a sobriety test, as you or I would be if this same thing happened to us, and they were allowed to go home.

WACKROW: Well, I think that, you know, one thing we need to remember is, let's not let the -- let rumor outweigh the facts. And, unfortunately, we don't know what the actual facts are in this case. But to your point, we need transparency. Joe Clancy needs to come out and he needs to get in front of this issue.

CAMEROTA: He's the director of the -- new director of the Secret Service. WACKROW: Correct.

CAMEROTA: And what do you -- I mean some people thought that he should not be named director because he was from the old guard. They thought that new blood should be brought in. What do you think he has to do to prove himself now?

WACKROW: Well, this is -- this is his first litmus test. So, you know, all the critics before that said that, you know, they needed to go outside for a director, you know, that's in the past. Joe Clancy is driving this bus right now. So he needs to get in front of this issue and other issues that -- that plague the Secret Service with management and really come up with a comprehensive program on how to right the ship of management at the Secret Service.

CAMEROTA: Well, this is not the first embarrassing incident. Let me just show you the latest, greatest hits. In April of 2012, nearly a dozen agents, as you know, solicited prostitutes in Colombia. They got in trouble. In March '14, three of them were drunk in Amsterdam on an overseas visit. September, there was a White House fence jumper that wasn't stopped until an embarrassingly late time. Also in September, an armed man on the elevator with President Obama that they didn't realize until after the fact. And then now what appears to be a DWI crash into the White House. You worked there for 13 years.

WACKROW: Correct.

CAMEROTA: I mean what is the culture there?

WACKROW: All right. Those are -- those are incidents that, you know, are embarrassing, you know, quite frankly. They are -- they are -- they're inexcusable. But that is not the culture of the Secret Service. And that's why I'm here today is to let everybody know that that is not indicative of a Secret Service agent and it's not indicative of a Secret Service -- of a uniformed division officer.

These are the most dedicated men and women every single day and incidents like this really distract from their job. I mean the agency was formed in, you know, 1865 and since then they have had dedicated men and women protecting presidents, foreign dignitaries every single day. And it -- these incidents that you've pointed out, they're an embarrassment. They're a black mark on our agency. And hopefully Joe Clancy will be able to bring the agency and let them rise above all these issues.

CAMEROTA: Look, I mean the majority of the Secret Service are brave men and women and we value all of their work for the president. However, what I hear you saying is that there is a common thread to all of these embarrassing incidents and it's bad management.

WACKROW: Correct. Correct.

CAMEROTA: So what does that mean? Meaning that they just sweep things under the carpet?

WACKROW: Management issues have plagued the service for a little while. What the -- what Joe Clancy and his team should be doing right now is looking at really the three tenants, looking at your people, your process and your technology and really compartmentalizing, what are the issues with each of them. With your people you have your -- it's your manpower. How are you managing them? How are you training them? Are -- do you have sufficient staffing? That's one issue.

The process. Is the process of being a Secret Service agent and a Secret Service officer, is it right in today's world? We have to look at our dual mission as being investigators and providing protection. So how are we doing those processes? And then, fundamentally, are we keeping up with technology to do -- to support the people and support the process?

CAMEROTA: Look, it's not a good sign -- it's not a -- this is not a good sign that this happened a week ago and that we're only finding out about it now. So it suggests that the transparency, the calls for transparency are not necessarily being heeded.

WACKROW: Well, you know, again, we don't know the facts of this case and we don't know -- you know, this is only being reported after, you know, "The Washington Post" article. So it's going to take a little bit of time. And I think Joe Clancy did the right job. I mean he made the right call going to DHS and saying, hey, because of the severity of this accusation, DHS OIG needs to take a look at this.

CAMEROTA: Should these two agents lose their job?

WACKROW: No.

CAMEROTA: They can stay -- they can survive, even if it was a drunk driving incident?

WACKROW: This -- this was a mistake on their part, but they should not lose their jobs.

CAMEROTA: John Wackrow, thanks so much. We appreciate you talking (ph).

WACKROW: Thank you very much.

CAMEROTA: Chris.

CHRIS CUOMO, CNN ANCHOR: Another situation, the letter Republican senators sent to Iran. All sides say it will affect negotiations. The question is, how? We have new developments ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CAMEROTA: Secretary of State John Kerry heading to Switzerland on Sunday for the next round of nuclear talks with Iran. Kerry did not mince words when reacting to the letter that 47 Republican Senators sent to Iran's leaders. He said that he is in, quote, "utter disbelief".

CNN's Dana Bash Joins us now. Good morning, Dana. Thanks so much.

DANA BASH, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Good morning.

CAMEROTA: Great to see you here on NEW DAY.

BASH: You, too.

CAMEROTA: It seems like you were in utter disbelief in terms of the letter because it was unprecedented.

BASH: It was. You know, I've covered Congress for a long time. And when I saw Republicans were sending a letter to another country, like Iran, to specifically say they were intending to undermine the president, I really was in shock. And it seems to me that Republicans, even those who signed it -- not all of them, most of them are standing by it -- but some are saying we should have thought about this a little more. Even John McCain.

CAMEROTA: Oh, is that right? So in other words, they are expressing to you some regrets. Because we haven't heard publicly --

BASH: A little bit. A little bit. A little bit. I think the regret is not so much in writing the letter; it's because the fallout has been so stark. And it really has politicized a lot of traditionally bipartisan issues.

CAMEROTA: I mean, you say the fallout has been stark. Such as? Are there some sort of issues that they're trying to deal with on Capitol Hill that are not getting done because this has poisoned the well?

BASH: Well, one example is even on Iran itself. There has been a real bipartisan effort to do exactly what these Republicans were saying in the letter, but do it legislatively, to say to the president, in a piece of legislation, we are going to not approve this or we're going to have to approve or disapprove this.

Again, pretty bipartisan. Democrats were on that. Some Democrats are pulling back now saying, wait a minute, you're making this partisan. A human trafficking bill is on the Senate floor, very bipartisan to fight human trafficking. Who's not for that? And it's sort of devolved into some partisanship and it's because the well has really been even more poisoned. I know it's hard to imagine.

CAMEROTA: It is hard to imagine.

BASH: Because of this letter.

CAMEROTA: Wow. Dana Bash, OK, thanks so much for all of that background. Great to see you.

BASH: Thanks, Alisyn. You too.

CAMEROTA: Let's go over to Chris.

CUOMO: All right, let's bring in Robin Wright, Middle East analyst and a joint fellow at the U.S. Institute of Peace and Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars She's also the author of the "Islamists Are Coming: Who They Really Are". Robin, thank you for being on the show. The letter, what do you

believe the impact is on the perception of the United States around the world?

ROBIN WRIGHT, AUTHOR, "THE ISLAMISTS ARE COMING": Well, I think one of the big questions is what will our allies, who are part of this diplomatic process, going to think about the letter and what impact it might have two years down the road? They may be getting a little bit nervous about the potential for the deal unraveling.

Then of course there's always what the Iranians are thinking. And the problem has always been what the Supreme Leader might think about doing a deal. Would he be willing to go that ultimate step and do a deal, to trust the United States? And he has said today that this was a backstabbing letter that undermined the diplomatic process.

We'll know a lot more over the weekend, when the next round of talks began, but there are some serious questions, I think, about is this deal durable if we get one?

CUOMO: What does it mean to you that Khamenei, who hadn't really said much about this, once being mentioned in the letter, now comes out and says he doesn't trust the United States? What do you think that means?

WRIGHT: That's always been the issue, whether he trusted the United States. He has always said that the United States was duplicitous, that it would promise one thing, say one thing and then do another. And that's happened actually throughout recent history with -- between Washington and Tehran.

But I will say that the diplomatic process is actually fairly sturdy. We're now 18 months into it. And what's been very striking is that nobody has leaked the details. We know only by deduction from some vague statements by whether it's the President of the United States or the Iranians, what it might look like in terms of ten years as an outline, but these are people now who know how to deal with each other. They've developed a dialogue and I think everyone is intent on trying to see where they can get.

Now the big question obviously is, even if you get a deal, is it enforceable because there is such opposition inside the United States? And that's where it puts this extraordinary diplomatic effort, unprecedented really, since the 1979 revolution at stake.

CUOMO: So you say the letter was a destabilizing force. The senators say -- too bad. You cut us out of this process. This deal stinks. Iran is too dangerous. We need to be included. You won't do it the easy way, now you have to do it the hard way. Is that justifiable?

WRIGHT: Well, obviously not. The Congress has been a part of this process. The United States -- the administration has briefed Congress over and over and over. And it is clear that the president did not intend down the road to exclude Congress from this process. In fact, some of the sanctions -- not all of them, some are by the White House executive order -- some are by laws imposed by Congress, that eventually down the road Congress would have to repeal some of the sanctions. So Congress is not being excluded at all. That's what makes this whole process so baffling.

CUOMO: Yesterday, Senators Rand Paul and Marco Rubio protested the idea that Iran could have any nuclear capacity at all at these ISIS hearings that were about the authorization of use of military force. It just shows how the letter is bleeding over into everything.

Do you think that that is a realistic outcome? That's the pushback. They can't get a nuclear weapon. Any deal that allows them to get it is a bad deal. Is that realistic?

WRIGHT: Well, look, there may be a sunset clause in this deal; that's what we -- one of the little things we do know. But that doesn't necessarily mean that the day after a deal expires that there won't be an extension of the deal, that a lot of things politically may not have happened on the ground, and that the Iranians are going to race to try to pursue a bomb.

The fact is that it is in their interests to comply, because that lifts sanctions and allows the economy to reintegrate with the international global market. And that's in their interests long term. They know if they tried this process again that new sanctions would be slapped on them.

So I think, you know, we're jumping to a -- the Congress, anyway, was jumping to an awful lot of conclusions about what might happen ten years down the road without giving this diplomatic process a chance. It's really opting for a war and that doesn't solve the core problem of preventing Iran from getting a weapon.

CUOMO: I get why there's round criticism of what the senators did. But has a good enough job been done on selling the proposition to the American people and Congress about the premise of this deal? Because when you deal with Iran, not only do they have obvious and nefarious intentions, but they got plenty of gas, they got plenty of oil. What do they need nukes for except to build a weapon? So why isn't that a legitimate starting point for people to say, you know, they want a weapon. They want a weapon. That's what this is all about.

WRIGHT: Well, remember, the uranium enrichment process, which is what is at the core of the dispute, really is also the way to get nuclear energy, peaceful nuclear energy. And the Iranians are now at the point, because their population has grown so much, that they will run out of oil by 2025.

So they actually do need nuclear energy. That's a legitimate concern. The question is how do you make sure they don't have a capability that can also be used for a bomb?

Now, the president will have to do a major selling job if they get a deal. The challenge, of course, is that because the terms are secret, he can't do much of a selling job until we know actually what it may involve.

CUOMO: Last question. The idea that now the U.S. looks fractured, that makes you lose credibility at the table, how big an impact, how big a factor do you believe this letter is in the message it sent to these negotiations?

WRIGHT: I think it's a very powerful message, but I think what's really interesting as well is the, as Dana Bash pointed out, the pushback, whether it's the editorials across the United States, including in many of the states of the Republican members of the Senate, that public sentiment in a poll this week shows that the majority of Americans do support a deal. That the final word on this letter has not been played out yet, but I think there are distinctly two sides emerging and the tragedy is that those two sides have been deeply polarized and politicized.

CUOMO: There may be another book in this for you, Robin Wright. Thank you very much for your perspective this morning. Appreciate it.

WRIGHT: Thank you.

CUOMO: Mick.

PEREIRA: All right, after all of this day, I think we need some Good Stuff right? You won't believe what a middle school basketball team did for one of their own. You'll find out ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CUOMO: It's time for the Good Stuff. Hooray for the boys basketball team at Lincoln Middle School in Wisconsin. Hooray for their cheerleader named Desiree. Why? She's beautiful and she just happens to have Down syndrome. The other night at a game, the boys are playing, they hear awful things from the stands being directed at Desiree.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The kids in the audience were picking on Dee.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: When I heard that they were talking about her, like it kind of like made me mad.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's not fair that other people get treated wrong because we're all the same, we're all created the same. God made us the same way.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CUOMO: Amen, little man. You know what the boys did? They walked off the court, went to the bullies, and made them stop it. They're only in the eighth grade.

CAMEROTA: That's so beautiful. I want my kids to go to that school. I'm going to move to Wisconsin so they can go to that school.

CUOMO: And most importantly, it didn't just teach the bully something; it made Dee feel good about herself.

PEREIRA: That's right.

There's a lot of news to get to this morning. We'll end on a great note. Let's toss it over to "NEWSROOM" with Carol Costello. Good morning.

CAROL COSTELLO, CNN ANCHOR, "NEWSROOM": Thanks so much.

Good morning. "NEWSROOM" starts now.