Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

Russia Claims Some Troops Returning to Bases; Accounting Firm Cuts Ties with Trump Biz Over 'Unreliable' Info; Durham Alleges Clinton Lawyer Used Data to Raise Trump Suspicions. Aired 6-6:30a ET

Aired February 15, 2022 - 06:00   ET

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

ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.

[05:59:41]

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: Good morning to our viewers here in the United States and all around the world. It is Tuesday, February 15. I'm John Berman with Brianna Keilar. And we do have breaking news: what could possibly be an important development in the crisis engulfing Europe and the world.

The Russians have announced that at least some of their forces surrounding Ukraine are returning to their bases, which is leading to questions in the diplomatic community about whether Russia is trying to deescalate the situation.

So what does this mean? What message are the Russians sending? How real is this? We have reporters on the ground and some of the best minds studying the region here to decipher it, because it happens at the same time as major military exercises continue; and there is new evidence of equipment buildup.

Right now, Vladimir Putin is meeting with the German chancellor, Olaf Scholz, in Moscow. We're going to hear from them both just a short time from now.

A Kremlin spokesman tells CNN the Russian president is willing to negotiate with the West.

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN ANCHOR: This all comes as new satellite images show at least 60 helicopters have landed in the past few days at a previously unused air base in Russian-occupied Crimea. They are said to be a mixture of transport and attack aircraft.

More than 130,000 Russian troops are already in position around Ukraine.

And then there's this chilling assessment from a source telling CNN that an attack by Russia sometime this week is more likely than not. The U.S. shutting down the embassy in Kyiv as an invasion precaution, relocating the remaining diplomatic personnel to a city in western Ukraine.

CNN's Jim Sciutto is live for us in Kyiv. Just set the scene for us today, Jim. JIM SCIUTTO, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT/ANCHOR: I will.

Listen, it's another beautiful, calm day here in Kyiv, as you can see. And again, a city that is still operating as normal.

We have heard in the last 24 hours for the first time the mayor here, for instance, talk about at least making preparations for evacuation, as well as taking people to shelters in the event that war happens, that the invasion happens, that the air campaign begins.

But as you mentioned, John, coming in, there is this news this morning Russia, at least, claiming that some forces arrayed along the border have begun to return to their bases.

Now, I can say this morning that Ukrainian officials, including the foreign minister, reacting to that Russian announcement with some skepticism, in effect saying, we want to see it to believe it.

I will tell you this, as well, that the most recent U.S. intelligence assessment, as of last night, was that Russian forces were moving forward, not back, into combat positions; and that they now have 105 what are known as battalion tactical groups, a Russian combat unit with all the capabilities necessary to wage war, from armor to infantry, to intelligence units.

So, it is still a highly-capable force along that border. And the most recent U.S. Intelligence assessment was that this gives Putin the option to invade any time he gives that order. He has not yet given that order. We'll continue to watch for evidence of what Russia is claiming in the south and the east.

KEILAR: So are you saying, Jim, that we should be cautious about this assessment on where troop movements are, because it seems a bit mixed?

SCIUTTO: A hundred percent. I mean, remember, this is -- this is modern warfare, right? It is about combat capability, but it's also about disinformation. This is an information war, as well.

And you've seen that, frankly, from both sides here. There's a reason why the U.S. has been very public with its intelligence assessments, far more public than, really, it's ever been in my experience; because in part, they want to message to Mr. Putin, Hey, we know what you're up to, right? I see what you're doing here. And let the world know. That's -- that's the U.S. side of this information space.

And the Russian side has included a whole host of what we now know to have been false claims. Right? Particularly as we've seen those forces grow.

So, I think as always, take these things with a dose of skepticism. Watch for hard action on the ground. But if you couple this announcement today with Putin and Lavrov speaking yesterday about at least a longer window for diplomacy, perhaps it's a pause.

But again, we'll know -- and I will tell you this. I know that the U.S. assessment continues to be we're taking this very seriously, and that's why we saw them take the step of closing the embassy here. BERMAN: To that idea that perhaps it's a pause, Jim, I think one of

the things people are saying skeptically, rightfully so is, Well, look, I mean, the Russians still have all these forces at the front.

But if the Russians were to intentionally try to open the window, they wouldn't pull 130,000 troops to the other end of Russia in one day. I mean, they might be dipping a toe in the water here. Say, Hey, there's this little, little opening here. Let's talk a little bit more. Everything, you would think, would be extremely incremental.

SCIUTTO: Well, and by the way, they're not -- they're not even claiming to be removing all the forces. Right? I mean, this is -- this is more than 100,000 troops. They're talking about some of them going home.

I mean, it's difficult to maintain a force of this size and capability forever around the borders of another country. So you know, again, take it a bit with a grain of salt. Look for the broader picture here as to how many forces remain.

And by the way, we've talked about this before. There are a whole host of options for Russia short of a full-scale invasion, right? There are parts of this country that it can advance further into that it already occupies in the east and from Crimea in the south.

So again, I think, you know, with all these developments over the last several days and weeks, the best advice is take a breath and believe it when you see it.

KEILAR: All right, we'll be watching with you, Jim Sciutto. Thank you. Live for us from Kyiv.

Let's bring in retired Army General Mark Hertling, former commanding general of Europe and the 7th Army; and also Nina Khrushcheva, professor of international affairs at the New School and also the great-granddaughter of former Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev. She's also co-author of the book "In Putin's Footsteps: Searching for the Soul of an Empire Across Russia's 11 Time Zones."

OK, first to you, Nina. Right now as we're hearing about this potential window for negotiation, the Kremlin said Putin is willing to negotiate. What is your read on this and the kind of changing factors with the possibility of some movements when it comes to assets?

NINA KHRUSHCHEVA, PROFESSOR OF INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS, NEW SCHOOL: Well, thank you very much.

I think that when we say Putin is willing to negotiate, Putin never said he was unwilling to negotiate. In fact, that has been in the kind of Russian presentation that has been the story all along that we're talking. We want diplomacy. We don't want to invade, but we have to prepare for all this ratcheted up American rhetoric, and therefore, we have our troops to make sure that nothing had -- nothing happens on that border.

So, for me, this is just something that the Russians have been getting to when all these rounds of negotiations are over. And today, in my view, all of Scholz's conversation with Putin would be sort of the second step in how to handle the crisis.

And from now on, it seems -- and also as Jim Sciutto said, we'll see if when we -- we believe it when we see it. From what it seems is that now that window continues. But I don't think we should really say that before it was closing on the 16th and now suddenly it's getting open. I think it is that part of a process.

BERMAN: General Hertling, these troops that are said to be returning to their bases, we understand, are the ones that were closest to Ukraine anyway. So they're not going very far. They're not going very far from the border. The troops that were moved in from the other side of the country are staying put.

How do you read this purported military movement?

LT. GEN. MARK HERTLING (RET.), CNN MILITARY ANALYST: One word, John. It's a Russian word. It's maskirovka. It is part of the Russian doctrine. And it means deceive in all things. Strategically, operationally and tactically.

If what Russia says is true this morning, that's great news. It's the beginning of the process of negotiation. But the smart military person is going to always tell you let's see if the video matches the audio. Then we'll know they're serious.

The point that Jim Sciutto brought up about 105 battalion tactical groups, that's the equivalent of about four or five U.S. Army divisions. Now, that's half of the entire active force in the United States army. You just don't move those in a nano-second. It will take literally weeks to get those back to their bases. And as you just said, you know, this could meantime for new developments, new activities.

And I'd also watch very closely for what the next thing Putin is going to say. Because in his meeting with Lavrov yesterday, you could tell by his facial expression he was not happy. Let's see if more information comes out when he says, See, we told you it was just an exercise. This is just NATO and the U.S. trying to ramp up the dogs of war.

I'd say one more thing, too. Yesterday the Duma, Russia's parliament, announced the formal annexation of the two Russian provinces in the Donbass. That doesn't sound to me like someone who's backing off. That sounds like someone, to me, who's doubling down, still.

And as I said at the very beginning, if what he says is -- if what Putin says is true, that's great news. But we'll believe it when we see it.

KEILAR: Can he get, Nina, can Putin get what he wants without military action?

KHRUSHCHEVA: Well, I mean, as we say in the United States, you need means, motive and opportunity. I see the means. We see the means. I don't see the motive. I mean that whole kind of story that he's going to go into Kyiv, it just doesn't gel with anything we know about Russia. So that's -- the motive is not there.

And the opportunity is not there, precisely because the United States has been so vocal about what it knows, what it thinks it knows, what it perceives as to be the truth and so on. So there is really no opportunity.

I think it is -- the army may -- some troops may be moving, but I don't think that Putin's troops are not going anywhere from the border of Ukraine, at least partially for -- for maybe years even to come. Precisely because Putin is not going to get what he wants today.

But what he really wants is Ukraine either to be completely politically neutral, or he's still thinking that some parts of Ukraine continues to belong to Russia, and therefore, he's going to wait until his moment. But this moment is not going to be now.

So negotiations and kind of reading the signs and continue talking is a very, very important diplomatic military political or any other -- not even a solution, but at least some ways to resolve tensions that are there because Ukrainians are the ones that suffer from this, more than obviously the Russians, more than anybody else. And that's something that -- and this is the country that my heart goes to.

BERMAN: Yes. The Ukrainians are caught in the middle, pure and simple. I mean, every day that passes, they suffer more, at least psychologically.

And General Hertling, to an extent, every day that goes on, no matter what happens, isn't Putin getting a little bit of what he wants here? Which is for the world's focus to be on him, for him to be seeming to pull the strings somehow for Ukraine and the rest of the world; if not directly, at least whispering, Ukraine is not about to join NATO anyway.

HERTLING: Yes, exactly. If I can just add one thing, because Nina brings up a very good point.

a loss for Putin is if Ukraine remains neutral. A win is he has to maintain a -- they have to maintain some sort of subservience to the Russian president.

And that is what he's really concerned about. There's going to be continued presses toward that.

And yes, as you said, John, he certainly wants the attention of the world on him. But he's been getting a very negative attention here lately, because the entire world has told Mr. Putin, with the exception of China and a few other authoritarian regimes, that he'd better back off. That this could be the start of a world war. And that he will be known as an international pariah, which is something he has already has proven himself to be, except it's been blasted on the world screen, even his attempts to take over a sovereign nation.

KEILAR: General Hertling, Nina Khrushcheva, thank you so much to both of you for being with us this morning.

We have some bad news for former President Trump, his business and his adult children as his long-time accounting firm says they can no longer stand by a decade's worth of financial statements. So what it all means for the investigation into his finances.

And it was all just a simple mix-up with her grandfather's medication. How Russia's teen ice-skating star is now explaining her doping violation.

BERMAN: Yes. The dog ate the doping.

Plus, a brazen assassination attempt against a mayoral candidate in Louisville. The suspected shooter, a local activist. We have new details ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

[06:17:09]

GEORGE CONWAY, ATTORNEY: The worst thing that can happen to an impeached president is they be -- they're removed from office, and they go back to doing what they did in private life.

This is his private life. This is what he had to go back to. This is about as calamitous a thing that could happen to a business that you could imagine.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: That is lawyer George Conway, reacting to the news that the accounting firm Mazars has announced it is cutting ties with Donald Trump and the Trump Organization, calling into question nearly ten years of financial statements.

In a letter to the Trump Organization, Mazars wrote, "While we have not concluded that the various financial statements as a whole contain material discrepancies, based on the totality of the circumstances, we believe our advice to you to no longer rely upon those financial statements is appropriate."

Joining me now is "EARLY START" anchor and attorney at law Laura Jarrett; and CNN chief legal analyst, Jeffrey Toobin.

Jeffrey, very quickly, is this common for an accounting firm to dump a client like this?

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN CHIEF LEGAL ANALYST: It's super -- it's super uncommon. And you have to understand, remember why -- like, how accountants deal with clients.

Basically, the way it works, whether it's an individual or a company, is the accountant goes to the company, the client, and says, Give me the financial records, and I will prepare a financial statement, a tax return based on the information you gave me.

What that legal mumbo jumbo in that letter, in English, means is that, We don't trust the material that our client, the Trump Organization, gave us for ten years, so the product we came out with -- the tax returns, the financial statements -- are not reliable. Garbage in, garbage out. We got garbage from the Trump Organization, so we don't know what the truth is.

LAURA JARRETT, CNN ANCHOR, "EARLY START" And the reason we know it's garbage is because of the attorney general's court filings. And they say they have been doing their own internal investigation and have received information from external sources. Who knows what that is? but it's a bread crumb, and it sounds juicy.

BERMAN: They say they have a conflict of interest.

JARRETT: Yes.

BERMAN: What else does that mean?

JARRETT: Well, it -- Go ahead.

TOOBIN: Well, but I mean, the potential conflict of interest is that the Mazars accountants are now witnesses against the Trump Organization. That they are putting --

JARRETT: Against their client.

TOOBIN: That they're in a position where they are testifying, either in the civil investigation or the criminal investigation or both, where they are providing information that's damaging to their client. And you can't represent a client when you are presenting damaging information about them.

JARRETT: And we know that they have been before the grand jury.

TOOBIN: Yes.

JARRETT: And also, just to nerd out for two seconds, because something that George Conway flagged on Twitter, in the corner of the letter that was produced by the attorney general's office, the one from the accountants, you'll see a stamp in the corner. That stamp is what you use in litigation to show -- there it is. It shows how many pages have actually been produced.

You see that? That means that over 525,000 pages have been produced by Mazars. They've been cooperating in a substantial way. That is a ton of documents that they've turned over.

[06:20:10]

TOOBIN: And in a further nerd point, there is no -- everybody knows there's an attorney/client privilege. Your attorney, except in very rare circumstances, can't testify against you.

There is no accountant privilege in the same way. So that's why an accountant can testify in the grand jury.

BERMAN: And again, just to note, this is an accounting firm saying, We cannot stand by our client. We cannot trust what our client has been telling us for ten years.

The legal implications of this are obvious, if you say Mazars could be testifying against the Trump Organization. What about the business side of this? I mean, you heard George Conway say this is calamitous for the Trump Organization from a business standpoint.

JARRETT: It's his namesake company. Right? This is something he has a personal investment in. His children have a personal investment in.

Now, does it mean the company is going to collapse? No. A lot of people have walked away from this company, by far. This is now one in a long line.

TOOBIN: But -- but this -- But this is a big, immediate practical problem. This is a company that needs to borrow money.

JARRETT: Yes.

TOOBIN: They need to go to banks and say, We need money to sustain our operations. Many of the resorts have done poorly during the pandemic.

When you go to a bank to borrow money or renegotiate a loan, you have to present financial statements from your accountant that shows what your business is really doing. They don't have an accountant any more.

Who's going to go to them as an accountant now, in light of this statement? How does the Trump Organization keep functioning as a business without an accountant verifying their statements? That to me is the immediate business problem that they face.

JARRETT: There's also just huge leverage here now for the attorney general's office, I think. Because remember, the whole reason this has come out is because she wants to get the depositions of Trump and the children, and she's trying to show the court, Look, see. I have evidence. I have a smoking gun here.

TOOBIN: I think they're all going to be taking the Fifth anyway.

JARRETT: Well --

TOOBIN: I don't think -- you know, I don't think she's ever going to get the testimony of President Trump and the -- you know, his children. I just think they're --

JARRETT: I think she'll at least get them in the room.

TOOBIN: Maybe.

BERMAN: And again, just very quickly, Laura, if you're the defense attorney here, or you're the attorneys for the Trump Organization, you see this and you say -- JARRETT: You say, look, we already disclosed -- we already provided a

number of qualifications in those financial statements. They already -- I think Mazars said on more than one occasion, we know that these do not conform with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles.

So they're trying to say, Look, this is nothing new here. I think that's -- I think that's a tough road to hoe in the middle of a financial investigation.

TOOBIN: You're going to -- I'm sorry. You're going to have a conflict between the criminal defense lawyers and the business lawyers.

The criminal defense lawyers are going to say, Shut up. Don't say anything. You are under serious investigation.

The business lawyers are going to say, Look, we need to keep functioning. You need to get an accountant. You need to, like, start. So that's a difficult problem to resolve.

BERMAN: Look, I think it's getting a little bit hotter in these -- in these meeting rooms that they're in right now. I don't think there's any question about that.

Laura Jarrett, Jeffrey Toobin, thank you both very much.

KEILAR: In a new court filing, Special Counsel John Durham is accusing a Democratic lawyer of subjecting former President Trump to a smear campaign by sharing data with officials to raise their suspicions against him.

Durham alleges that Michael Sussmann told the CIA about Russian-made phones being used near the White House. CNN's Katelyn Polantz is joining us now to explain this.

It's a little bit complicated. But these are very important details. Can you walk us through this?

KATELYN POLANTZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes. So the big picture here, Brianna, is that John Durham has been saying for a while that the Democrats took Internet data they believe tied Trump to Russia to federal agency, including the FBI and CIA, in 2016 and 2017.

What we knew from the original indictment that Sussmann had gone to the FBI and CIA about an Internet connection that they believed tied Trump Organization to a Russian bank.

This new wrinkle -- it really is just a wrinkle and it's very vague. In this one Durham is saying Sussmann was speaking to the CIA about Russian-made phones that were being used in certain places, including around the White House, the executive office of the president.

So Michael Sussmann hit back last night. Because this is something that really inflamed right-wing media, is the spying of Donald Trump. But Sussmann last night in a court filing pretty late called this something that Durham was putting in his filing to politicize the case, to inflame media coverage, and to taint the jury pool. He said even some of the information was wrong, that this data about the phones being used around the White House was actually about the Obama years, not about the Trump years in office or the Trump month in office in 2017.

So this is something that, really, we're still trying to get a sense of what the facts are here. Durham's focused on this meeting. But, Sussmann right now is saying it really is misleading, and it's taken out of context.

KEILAR: That timing is huge, if Durham is aware that this is actually not during the Trump administration times. Is he aware of that?

[06:25:05]

POLANTZ: Well, what really matters here is what Michael Sussmann said to the agencies when he spoke to them. I mean, the only charged conduct in this case at this time is a meeting that Michael Sussmann had with the FBI.

He's accused of lying, not about what he shared with them about the data, but what he said who his clients were at the time. He didn't tell them he was representing -- he was representing the Democrats, allegedly.

KEILAR: Yes. That is an important detail. Katelyn, thank you. Great reporting. Appreciate it.

And file this under the dog ate the clean drug test. How Russia is explaining its latest doping scandal, hours before its ice-skating star is set to return to the ice.

BERMAN: And historic new crackdown measures enacted in Canada in response the the ongoing trucker-inspired protests. We'll take you there.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[06:30:00]