Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

Lead Prosecutor Speaks As Scrutiny Intensifies On Suspect's Family; Pilot Dodges Traffic And Makes Emergency Landing On Highway; Biden White House Slams "Out Of Step" Liberal Activists On Abortion. Aired 7:30-8a ET

Aired July 11, 2022 - 07:30   ET

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

[07:30:00]

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: And again, I don't want you to tell me the inside workings of the case that you can't. But in theory, are there other forms of criminal liability possible for a parent here?

ERIC RINEHART, STATE'S ATTORNEY, LAKE COUNTY, ILLINOIS (via Webex by Cisco): Yes. So by itself, there's not something that says if something happens terrible like this then the signer of that document is directly in trouble.

But we're looking at a lot of different -- we're looking at a lot of different -- we're looking at a lot of different ways to understand what was going on in the days, weeks, and months before this attack. What everyone's knowledge was -- not just family members but beyond. So, there's a lot of work still to be done. There are lots of ways to look and think about what people knew and should have done or could have done.

I was looking at some of the terrible -- the terrible list of mass shootings this morning. So many of those are committed by people that are 21 or under. Atlanta and the racist attacks there on Asians. The El Paso shooting in 2019 was committed by a 21-year-old with an assault rifle against Latinos. And obviously, the Buffalo shooting. That was an 18-year-old with an assault rifle.

We have to work together as a country and as a community to just look at some common-sense rules and some common-sense reforms that would say don't let young people or anyone get these assault weapons.

BERMAN: Are you looking at possible charges for anyone besides the shooter himself?

RINEHART: I don't want to comment on that directly.

BERMAN: You know, there's the case in Michigan where Michigan officials did charge the parents of the suspect accused of killing four at the Oxford High School. The parents have been charged for issues relating to that. How is that case different?

RINEHART: Well, right now, we're still investigating everything so that case is a different -- a different point in terms of understanding it. I understand they were charged -- I understand they were charged relatively close to the -- to the attack.

That's certainly something to consider. We're looking at all options and all possibilities. There's -- you know, I don't want to comment on the difference between the two cases because we haven't concluded our investigation.

BERMAN: Have you learned anything new about what drove this shooter to do this?

RINEHART: I wish I could say more about that. I wish I could tell you that there was something sort of definite that we had seen similar to the El Paso, Buffalo, or Atlanta shootings. And they're really -- I can't really comment on it too much. I don't want to comment on his motivations. But we are where we are in terms of trying to understand everything he did.

BERMAN: Eric Rinehart, again, thank you for being with us. We appreciate the update.

RINEHART: Thank you so much.

BERMAN: So, a former spokesperson for the Oath Keepers is set to testify before the January 6 committee. This, as we learn more about their alleged plot.

Plus --

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It's horrible. What the hell? Why aren't they letting us out?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN ANCHOR: A frightening scene for passengers aboard a Spirit Airlines flight as the landing gear caught fire. We're going to tell you what happened next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:37:02]

KEILAR: Just revealed, former President Trump's attorney, Justin Clark, was interviewed by FBI investigators two weeks ago, according to a Department of Justice court filing released overnight. This involving the DOJ's response to Steve Bannon's sudden about-face that he's willing to testify before the January 6 committee. Justin Clark says that Trump never invoked privilege over information from Bannon.

Joining us now is Jeffrey Toobin, who is our CNN, of course, chief legal analyst and former federal prosecutor.

You know, in effect, Jeffrey, it's really interesting because you have Trump's lawyer here basically throwing Bannon's lawyer under the bus because it seems like Bannon's lawyer was not forthcoming with the committee -- or with the DOJ. JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN CHIEF LEGAL ANALYST, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR (via Webex by Cisco): Yes. Well, what a shock that Steve Bannon's associates are not cooperating with the Justice Department in a good- faith way. But this is all part of Steve Bannon's last-ditch effort to avoid trial or throw his trial into chaos because he's about to go on trial for criminal attempt for failing to cooperate with the January 6 committee.

And so, he's saying that the president has now -- the former president has now allowed him to testify. But what Trump's lawyer is saying is that Trump never stopped him in the first place, which means that this whole charade is nothing more than that. It's just an attempt to throw sand in the gears of this trial, which is coming very soon.

BERMAN: Yes. It's hard to wrap your head around this because there are plenty, including the committee, who argues there was no executive privilege here to begin with. It doesn't apply. Add to that the fact that Trump's lawyer is now saying we didn't even invoke it. So they didn't invoke something that others say doesn't apply.

Could Bannon be on the hook for perjury now, also, by saying -- I mean, what's going on there?

TOOBIN: I don't -- I don't think that there will be additional charges. But, I mean, I do think it's important to focus on the difference here -- I hope this isn't too nerdy -- between civil contempt and criminal contempt. Because civil contempt is basically when they lock you up until you agree to do something. You know, lock you up until you agree to do something. And once you agree -- that is, let's say agree to testify, then the civil contempt is over.

That's not what this case is about. This case is criminal contempt, which means he is being charged for defying the grand jury's -- the congressional subpoena he received earlier this year. When he refused to testify, he had committed the crime. If he later agrees to testify, that's irrelevant. That's the difference between civil contempt and criminal contempt. It doesn't matter if he agrees to testify now.

[07:40:00]

Now, the fact is he's not agreeing to testify. He's not agreeing to produce all the documents he was called on to produce. But Bannon is trying to use this as a way of saying look, why are they charging me when I'm agreeing to testify? When, in fact, that's legally irrelevant.

KEILAR: Jeffrey Toobin, thank you so much for explaining it to us.

TOOBIN: My pleasure.

KEILAR: So, the Biden White House fending off criticism for the pace of its response to the abortion battle, taking aim at, quote, "out of step liberal activists."

BERMAN: And incredible video of a plane dodging oncoming cars to make this just insane emergency landing on a highway. We're going to speak to the pilot ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:45:00]

BERMAN: So, incredible video of a single-engine plane making an emergency landing after its engine failed three times. Not once, not twice, but three times. This landing in the middle of the mountains. The pilot avoided power lines, all kinds of cars, and incoming traffic, and landed this thing on the highway in western North Carolina -- not even a perfectly straight part of the highway.

And joining us now is the man who flew and, most importantly, landed that plane, pilot Vincent Fraser. Vincent, thank you so much for being with us.

I should add you were in that plane with your father-in-law. You were flying your father-in-law there. The engine fails three times. What's going through your head?

VINCENT FRASER, PILOT WHO LANDED PLANE ON HIGHWAY (via Webex by Cisco): Right, yes. I was just -- the only thing really going through my head was I needed to keep my father-in-law safe and I needed to keep the people on the ground safe. And I was just trying to do it the best that I can without hurting anybody.

KEILAR: So how did you pick where you were going to land? Did you have options? I mean, what did you see as you're looking around?

FRASER: So, originally, there were no options. When we -- when we began -- when we began to have some engine failure we were over Fontana Lake, so there really isn't any roads out there. It's very rural. And if there are roads they're blocked by the trees, by the mountains, by the valleys.

But we did see a bridge in the distance and I told my father-in-law that is our best and only chance right now besides a water ditching. So we started aiming for the bridge and by the time I got to the bridge we were -- we were too low to make the bridge and then there was -- there was too many vehicles on the bridge to even attempt it without possibly hurting or killing somebody.

And then our next option was the river right in front of the bridge. And I don't know that I told my father-in-law this but I was committed to putting her down in the river just because I knew that bridge would probably have killed us.

And so, when we started to overfly the bridge to go into the river -- I don't -- by some miracle that highway -- highway 19 just showed up to my left because you couldn't see it before because of the mountains and valleys and trees. And there it was -- there was highway 19 right there to my left. So I started -- I had enough altitude to turn the aircraft towards the highway at the last second.

BERMAN: What's so crazy about the video is you see the oncoming cars coming right at you even as you're landing the plane. What do you think must have been going through those drivers' minds when they see you coming down?

FRASER: Oh, they had to have been terrified. I -- they had to have been so terrified because you just don't know what that person is doing and what's going on with everything going on on the road. They had to be terrified, yes.

KEILAR: So you dodged -- you were flying in between power lines, to be clear. We see one passing over in this video just here. And we see --

FRASER: Yes.

KEILAR: -- sort of like shrapnel from truck tires that you're bumping over there as well.

In the end --

FRASER: Right.

KEILAR: -- after a mechanic fixes your plane, you have to take off to get it out of there, and we have video of that as well. What was that like?

FRASER: Correct.

KEILAR: And is that your last flight?

FRASER: So, that was -- that was -- honestly, that was terrifying -- the take-off part. But yes, I had A&P come out and they checked the plane out. And -- so then, they towed it up the mountain to a higher road and a longer road. And, you know, at that time, I just kind of made it into like a Marine objective. I went back into when I was in the Marine Corps and made it my mission to get off that mountain.

And so, I knew the plane was safe. I knew the plane has been checked out. I knew I had the training. But honestly, when I got in that aircraft and I taxied -- there is a video of me taxiing up the mountain to the top of the hill to take off. I sat there. I turned the aircraft, I did my runup and I was getting ready to do my short field takeoff.

And I held that brake for a good -- if you watch the video, I held that brake for a good 10 seconds because I was just wanting to turn it off, get out, throw up, and just like -- I just can't -- you just can't believe this is actually happening but I knew I had to do it and I knew -- I knew I was going to be safe. I knew I had the training so I just released the brake and launched off the mountain.

BERMAN: I feel like someone was punking you -- making you go fly the plane after the plane broke on you before.

Vincent Fraser, we're so glad you and father-in-law --

FRASER: Yes.

BERMAN: -- are doing well and this all turned out well for you, and we wish you the best going forward.

FRASER: Thank you. Thank you -- appreciate it.

BERMAN: So a new book says that former Republican speaker Paul Ryan sobbed as he watched the Capitol attack unfold.

KEILAR: Plus, polls show the governor's race in Texas is tightening. And Harry Enten is here with the numbers.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:54:46]

BERMAN: So it's been 2 1/2 weeks since the Supreme Court overturned Roe versus Wade. Has there been a perceivable political impact already as the country heads toward the midterm elections?

Here now, Harry Enten, CNN senior data reporter. What do the numbers say?

HARRY ENTEN, CNN SENIOR DATA REPORTER: What do the numbers say? So, this is perhaps not the easiest answer to try and get across. There has been some movement -- not a ton -- some.

So, the choice for Congress by when the Supreme Court overturned Roe -- post-decision. We look on the generic ballot and we see here Republicans are still ahead. They're up by a point. If you look pre- decision, Republicans were up by three points.

So that, for those at home, is a 2-point movement. It's small but it is noticeable in the average. Now, why has there been perhaps a small but noticeable move?

So, take a look here. This is the percentage of Americans who disapprove or oppose the overturning of Roe v. Wade. This is according to the Pew Research Center.

Back in 2019 -- back in July -- look at that. It was 70% of Americans who opposed the overturning of Roe v. Wade. Now that percentage is lower. It's 57%. So you still see the clear majority of people disapproving of the decision but not by nearly as much as you might have expected before the Supreme Court ruling came down.

[07:55:00]

So I think this kind of jives, right, with the idea that there's been small movement but not a ton of movement.

BERMAN: Some, not huge -- although you averaged a ton of polls there, so the movement is happening.

ENTEN: Yes.

BERMAN: Let's talk about Texas -- the governor's race there. Greg Abbott running for reelection. There's been some slippage. ENTEN: There has been some slippage. So, you know, another major event and the idea is OK, has this major event changed the trajectory of the race?

So this is the choice for Texas Gov. Greg Abbott versus Beto O'Rourke. Post the Uvalde shooting -- look at that -- Greg Abbott is ahead still but he's up by six points. Pre-Uvalde shooting, Abbott was ahead by 13 points. So Abbott's still ahead but that margin has shrunk. It's shrunk by half. So again, another event in which we've seen some movement but the Republicans still ahead.

Now, why has there, in fact, been that movement? I think this gives you an idea why. The University of Texas poll -- gun laws. Should they be more strict or should they be less strict or no change? Before the shooting, the plurality of Texas voters said there should -- it should be less strict or no change. Now, the majority say, in fact, they should be more strict.

So not a big surprise that Beto O'Rourke, who has been running very hard on gun control -- and last night he was at a rally -- he's gaining because Texas voters want gun laws to be more strict.

BERMAN: Overall, what are they saying the most important issues are to them?

ENTEN: Yes. So, I think that this gives you an idea of why both in Texas and nationally we've been seeing some movement but not a ton.

The most important or urgent issue to voters nationally, inflation. It's not, in fact, abortion.

In Texas, what's the most important voter -- most important problem facing the state of Texas? It's, in fact, the situation at the U.S.- Mexico border. It's not, in fact, gun control.

And who do voters trust on these issues? On inflation, nationally -- look at this. Republicans with the runaway. They're trusted by a margin of 19 points. And the border situation -- voters in Texas -- they trust Greg Abbott by 15 points.

BERMAN: It will be interesting to see where these trends are in a month.

Harry Enten, thank you very much.

ENTEN: Thank you, sir.

BERMAN: Brianna.

KEILAR: President Biden facing criticism from some in his own party for not acting more urgently on abortion rights. And now, the White House is pushing back on those critics.

White House communications director Kate Bedingfield telling The Washington Post Biden's goal isn't to "satisfy some activists who have been consistently out of step with the mainstream of the Democratic Party. It's to deliver help to women who are in danger and assemble a broad-based coalition to defend a woman's right to choose now."

Joining me now is The Washington Post's Yasmeen Abutaleb, who is one of the journalists behind this reporting.

Yasmeen, tell us why the White House -- and let's just start at the beginning with this. It took the White House a while to come up with a response. They were not expecting this ruling when it came out. Why were they unprepared, initially?

YASMEEN ABUTALEB, NATIONAL HEALTH POLICY REPORTER, THE WASHINGTON POST (via Webex by Cisco): Well, like you said, they believed the ruling was going to come about a week later at the end of the term. They thought it would be the Supreme Court's final decision or one of its final decisions.

So, President Biden was getting ready to leave for Europe for the G7 and NATO. He thought his speech was signed off on and ready to go, so that's the speech he delivered the day the ruling came out. But they thought he would deliver that speech upon returning from Madrid.

And so, the day of the ruling, people were not prepared for it to come down. They thought they would have an extra week to prepare. And so you saw some kind of scrambling that day. The president did deliver the remarks that they had -- they had settled on.

But then, it took a few days for other policy proposals and support of different proposals that were coming from all wings of the Democratic Party to come out, like President Biden's support of a filibuster carveout to codify Roe v. Wade which, of course, they don't have the votes for. And then you just saw this weekend, President Biden now saying he wants his administration to look at the idea of a public health emergency.

KEILAR: So how has that statement about liberals -- these out-of-step liberals -- being received by those liberals who are out of step, according to this White House official?

ABUTALEB: It's not been received well. I think there are a lot of liberals who feel like they make up a big part of the base of the Democratic Party and the administration has fallen short on responding to this historic ruling that they say that they had two months to prepare for since it leaked in early May. That they want to see more bold action, more creative reaction in response to this.

There was a bit more support and some Democrats were cheered by President Biden's tone on Friday when he signed this executive order bolstering some abortion access and abortion rights. He had a much more forceful tone in his speech. It was a bit more of the kind of fighting spirit that Democrats have been calling for.

But I think they still say it's not enough. This is such a historic overturning of rights. And while they appreciate and recognize the fact that the Executive Branch is limited in what it can do and ultimately, only Congress can reverse the ruling, which is just not going to happen right now, I think they just want to see more of the visceral anger that they feel reflected in the president's statements and some of their actions and to just think outside of the box in terms of what else the administration could do to help protect women, especially in states where these bans have already gone into place.

KEILAR: Yasmeen Abutaleb, thank you for sharing your reporting with us. We appreciate it.

And NEW DAY continues right now.

[08:00:00]