Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

Russia Security Service: Ukraine Behind Dugina Car Bombing; Top GOP Lawmaker Suggests Trump May Need Classified Documents for Memoir; Video of Police in Arkansas Beating Suspect During Arrest Draws Criticism. Aired 8-8:30a ET

Aired August 22, 2022 - 08:00   ET

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

[08:00:00]

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: -- a lot is still unknown about this, but what do we know at this point.

OMAR JIMENEZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: At this point, when you watch that video, it's ugly, for lack of a better term. And really at this point moving forward, the main question that I think a lot of people are asking, but of course investigators, is was this amount of force really necessary? It's a question now at the center of a state investigation into how an initial call to police for allegedly being spit on an threatened ended like this.

(BEGIN VIDEO TAPE)

JIMENEZ: Three Arkansas law enforcement officers have been removed from duty after this video showing them hitting a man outside a store in Mulberry, Arkansas, was posted on social media. The officers are seen punching the suspect repeatedly, and later arresting him. In the video, a woman not seen can be heard screaming to stop beating him, telling the officers he needs his medicine. An officer points and yells at her to back up. The person who posted the video says her sister witnessed the altercation.

The two Crawford County deputies were suspended and the Mulberry police officer placed on administrative leave while the incident is investigated. Police say the man in the video is 27-year-old Randall Worcester of Goose Creek, South Carolina. They accuse him of threatening and spitting on a gas station attendant in a nearby town. The clerk then called the police. Worcester then rode a bike to the County Express Convenience store in Mulberry where he was arrested outside the store. One witness tells CNN affiliate KHBS it looked like the man got up to run away to avoid arrest, but the sheriff claims he got up to attack an officer.

Worcester is being held at the county jail on multiple charges including first degree assault and second degree battery. It's unclear whether he has an attorney. The Crawford County sheriff's office released a statement, writing, "I hold all my employees accountable for their actions and will take appropriate measures in this matter." Arkansas Governor Asa Hutchinson tweeted, "The local arrest incident in Crawford County will be investigated pursuant to the video evidence and the request of the prosecuting attorney."

(END VIDEO TAPE)

JIMENEZ: Now, the local sheriff's office says a state investigation has been opened into this that will be limited to the physical use of force here. Only after that investigation is over could any potential charges be filed, or when the prosecuting attorney would look at things. But obviously this video continues to spread across the Internet, more people see it, and more people are upset at what they see as an overuse of force, Kaitlan.

COLLINS: Absolutely, major questions about this. Omar, thank you.

And here now to discuss is the former deputy director of the FBI and CNN's senior law enforcement analyst, Andrew McCabe. Thank you so much for being here, Andrew. And we are still trying to learn a lot of the details of this and what happened before this video took place, and of course what was in that. What is your assessment of what you have seen, though?

ANDREW MCCABE, CNN SENIOR LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST: So Kaitlan, it is important to remember that this video only catches a portion of the interaction between this individual who was arrested and the three officers. And importantly, those officers maintain that before the video that he attacked one of them, punched them in the head, pushed him to the ground. So there was obviously a scuffle that led to the use of force.

However, what we see on that video, it is very, very hard to argue that what you're seeing, the sort of punches and the kneeing him in the back and slamming his head repeatedly on the ground, that is not acceptable, normal, standard police use of force under really any circumstances. So what I see when I see the video is an incredibly violent assault seemingly on a person who is on the ground and currently under the control of three law enforcement officers. So I'm finding it impossible to justify what you're seeing on that video really in any way.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: Former Philadelphia Commissioner Charles Ramsey was with us earlier, and said what you have to ask is, was that level of force necessary and proportionate? How do you determine that level, Andy?

MCCABE: It's very hard, John. We're going essentially back in time and trying to understand what happened between these three officers and that subject before the video started rolling. And if we take them at their word that there was a violent encounter before the video, then you can assume that, yes, the use of force is going to be justified to a subject who has already attacked law enforcement.

However, you have strength in numbers here. You've got three law enforcement officers on one subject. There's no allegation that the subject was armed in any way.

[08:05:03] And you have to look at the techniques that are used in the video. If you saw three guys holding a subject down and using kind of understood control tactics to get the suspect's arms behind his back, to apply handcuffs, those sorts of things that you would expect to see when you're trying to get control of a violent person, that would be kind of in the realm of understandable -- unfortunate, ugly, yes, but understandable use of force.

That's not really what you see here. You see a guy getting punched in the head with a closed fist repeatedly. At one point it seems like one of the officers grabs his head and slams it on the ground. Those aren't normal trained uses of force, and those are indicators that these officers may have gone over the line here.

COLLINS: Before you go, Andy, if you're talking to these officers, if you're the one investigating this, what are your questions that you're asking them?

MCCABE: That's a great question, Kaitlan. You want to start from the very beginning. And first of all, you want to have these conversations with the officers individually. So you want to understand what facts did they observe that led them to the point where they made the decision that they had to use physical force. And then after the fact you want to compare those observations and those stories about what they saw, what they did, how they reacted, what they thought about their own safety or the safety of others that may have been nearby.

And then you want to understand what sort of tactics and techniques were they trained on as officers through the department. Did anyone ever train them to punch someone repeatedly in the head with a closed fist? I can't imagine the answer to that question is yes. But those are the kinds of questions you want to ask.

COLLINS: Yes, absolutely, big questions. And people are going to be wanting answers to all of those and more. Andrew McCabe, thank you for joining us this morning.

MCCABE: Thanks.

BERMAN: This just in. The Russian security service -- this is what the Russian security service says -- they say Ukraine is behind the car bombing that killed the daughter of a well-known Putin supporter. This is according to TASS, the official Russian news agency. Let's get the latest from Russia right now. Frederik Pleitgen is in Moscow. Fred?

FREDERIK PLEITGEN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Hi there, John. Yes, this literally dropped just a couple of minutes ago, and you're absolutely right, the Russian security service, the FSB, now blaming Ukraine for the murder of Darya Dugina. I want to read for you just one line from the statement that the FSB put out literally a couple minutes ago. They said, quote, "The murder of journalist Darya Dugina has been solved. It was prepared by the Ukrainian special services, by a citizen of Ukraine." They then in their statement go on to detail that a little bit. They name a Ukrainian, or allegedly a Ukrainian woman who they say remotely detonated a bomb that was attached to the car of Darya Dugina and claim that that woman then fled to neighboring Estonia, I would that's at least probably about a 12-hour drive from here in Moscow.

They also say this Ukrainian woman allegedly rented an apartment in the same apartment complex that Dugina lives in as well. Of course, we have to point out that the Ukrainians already yesterday said that they were absolutely not behind any of this, that they have nothing to do with all of this. But of course, this could have major reverberations, especially with the war going on in Ukraine, with what Russia calls its special military operation.

And if you look at the sphere here in Russia, it's really charged up right now. There have already been several senior Russian media figures from Kremlin media calling for further strikes on Kyiv, calling for tougher action against Ukraine. So this could really have a big effect. And right now the Russians claiming Ukraine is behind it, where, again, the Ukrainians are saying it wasn't them, John.

BERMAN: Frederik Pleitgen for us in Moscow, Fred, thank you very much for your reporting.

Again, we heard the Ukrainians say already yesterday they had no connection to this, but how will they respond to this new development?

Also, a new warning from Ukrainian President Zelenskyy that Russia could be planning for a major attack.

And did Donald Trump take classified documents from the White House to Mar-a-Lago so he could write his memoirs? A new explanation being floated by a top Republican lawmaker.

COLLINS: And this video is just in to CNN showing water rescues on a main interstate in downtown Dallas overnight. Cars submerged by devastating floodwaters as people are having to be rescued right in the middle of the highway.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:13:14]

BERMAN: Just in to CNN, Russia's security service says the car bombing murder of journalist Darya Dugina, the daughter of a top Putin ally, was prepared by the Ukrainian special services. Again, this is the Russians speaking. They claim it was carried out by a woman before she fled to Estonia, that is according to Russia's TASS news agency.

Joining us now, veteran foreign affairs correspondent Reena Ninan, and CNN senior global affairs analyst Bianna Golodryga. And this is a new part of this story. This happened. We don't know who did it, despite the fact that the Russians are saying the Ukrainians did it. The Ukrainians deny any responsibility for it. But now there's an official statement, Bianna, from Russia saying it was the Ukrainians. So how does that change the dynamic now?

BIANNA GOLODRYGA, CNN SECURITY GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: How quickly this investigation was opened and closed in less than 24 hours, so take that with a grain of salt as we would any investigation by this Kremlin.

Look, I think it was an obvious given that the Russians would blame Ukraine for this. We saw the precipitation of this over the weekend and the hours following that attack. Their logic, their explanation that this is a Ukrainian national who traveled to Moscow and shared an apartment building with this woman, with Darya, and not only that, but brought her 12-year-old daughter with her and somehow managed to plant a car bomb underneath the car and detonate it. Anything is possible. I think this is at least worth questioning.

And the fact that Ukraine, from the get-go, knew this would be Russia's route is to blame Ukraine and said we are not a terrorist state, that is not how we operate. I'm not trying to give Ukraine the benefit of the doubt either. I just think there's a lot of history worth questioning, at least, the FSB's logic here.

COLLINS: It's weird how quickly they solved this murder while the murders of Putin's opponents go unsolved for --

BERMAN: That's a great point.

COLLINS: Forever.

[08:15:00]

But I do wonder now that they are pointing the blame at Ukraine, which obviously, as John noted, Ukraine has denied having any involvement with this.

One question I would have about what they are saying is, she wasn't the super prominent figure. She was well-known, but she wasn't as prominent. She doesn't seem like an intended target of something like this being carried out.

So, what do you read into that? And the idea that maybe she got into the car that her father was supposed to get into. He got into the other car. What is your assessment of that?

REENA NINAN, FORMER ANCHOR, ABC NEWS AND CBS NEWS: You know, it also seems a little bit sloppy to me. You know, the fact that yes, of course, the cars can change at one point. But you're right, Kaitlan, she wasn't this prominent figure. And also access, everyone keeps saying this, is Putin's brain, Putin's brain. I don't buy that. I really don't.

Yes, there is this idea --

COLLINS: Her father.

NINAN: The father. There is this ideology that you can see the expansionism in foreign affairs in Russia, expanding the turf of Russia and the territory. Yes, there's a lot of language and lingo.

But did to this family have access to Putin? It doesn't seem like it. Was this father advising Putin on a regular basis? It doesn't seem like it. We do know that they were sort of amassing more star power in the

ultra-nationalist movement. He was critical of Putin. You know, in the lead up to this current invasion, he felt like Putin didn't do enough in the last go round and that was something that, you know, we're seeing highlighted.

BERMAN: I mean, if the Russians are going to say officially, it was the Ukrainians, do they then have to do something about it? Does this make it more likely there will be some kind of escalation?

BIANNA GOLODRYGA, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: I mean, one would think but if you look at the turn that this war has taken over the past six months, which we're about to mark now, I mean, there have been red lines that Ukraine has crossed that Russia said that they would retaliate for that we haven't seen a major retaliation on their front, not for lack of trying, perhaps, but even going beyond the frontlines there into Crimea, as we've seen happening over the past couple of weeks. That, of course, would have been a red line. That would have been too far for Putin to -- for Ukraine to have crossed and we haven't seen Russians were really able to recalibrate and respond aggressively.

I think that like Reena said, this was not Putin's brain, her father, Alexander Dugin. I think he espoused some of these nationalist ideas that Putin embraced and sort of creating this pan-Eurasia empire and bringing Russia back to its empire glory days, and thus taking in Ukraine.

There are many possibilities and many conspiracy theories. Russians love conspiracy theories as to who could have been behind this attack, not just Ukraine, but if you think internally, even within some of the factions within Russia. There is already accusations going that he was pushing Putin to do even more, and that he didn't even -- this hasn't been announced officially as a war, right? And, he was pushing Putin and the Kremlin to go ahead and cross that line and go further into Ukraine.

So, there are some that are suggesting perhaps this was from within the KGB, the FSB, who knows? But there's a lot of different scenarios at play right now.

NINAN: And keep in mind, there's $775 million of arms coming into Ukraine, and the Defense Department has already said, there's more, there's more coming.

So if you're Putin, at this point, you're getting back up from the West in incredible artillery, and you're sort of at this stalemate in this war. Where does that leave you? And this is -- as Bianna mentioned, this is coming up to a very critical week.

You know, Zelenskyy has already said that they're worried that something "ugly" could take place.

GOLODRYGA: The only thing I would notice is very circle, like 1990s gangster, crime-ridden country where you would have these sorts of car bomb assassinations on a daily basis, and the real threat could be just within the country itself, whereas Russia has been able to this point say that that Russians are safe and that there are no attacks coming their way.

Now, you're going to have Russians being concerned that perhaps they walking down the streets of their own country are not safe, and could perhaps be targets as well. That changes the calculus a bit.

BERMAN: I mean, this isn't the Tony suburbs basically, of Moscow, and there could be a reaction to it just along those lines of Russians saying, "Hey, we're not safe here."

NINAN: Right.

GOLODRYGA: Which is why you made this may be a false flag. Again, going back to the myriad of theories out there, it could be a false flag operation on the part of the Russians to say, "Oh, see. They're coming after our own. Now, we've got to aggressively go back into Ukraine."

COLLINS: And we have seen Russian TV commentators already saying, calling for strikes in Kyiv as a response to this.

NINAN: They want Kyiv to shake with missiles.

BERMAN: We have to watch this very carefully.

Reena Nina and Bianna Golodryga, great to see both you. Thank you very much.

NINAN: Thank you.

BERMAN: So effective immediately, Walmart, the nation's largest private employer is expanding abortion coverage for its workers and their families.

COLLINS: And the actor, Gary Busey is facing sex offense charges after an incident at the Monster Mania Horror Film Convention. We have more details on those accusations, ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:23:47]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ED O'KEEFE, CBS NEWS: What use could a former President have for classified or top-secret information once he has left office? Why bring it home with him to Florida?

REP. MIKE TURNER (R-OH): Well, I don't know. I mean, you have to ask him. But certainly we all know that every former President has access to their documents. It's how they write their memoirs.

They don't have -- you know, great recall of everything into what occurred in their administration.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: That is Republican Congressman Mike Turner, the top Republican in the House Intelligence Committee floating this new theory about why former President Trump may have taken classified documents to the White House -- from the White House to Mar-a-Lago and had them at Mar-a-Lago.

Joining us now is former Republican Congressman, Will Hurd of Texas. He is also a former undercover CIA officer.

Congressman, thanks so much for being with us.

Congressman Mike Turner there said maybe the former President had it to write his memoirs. Does that clear things up for you having Sensitive Compartmented Information in his basement?

WILL HURD, FORMER US REPRESENTATIVE: Of course not. It doesn't clear things up and the excuses of why he had this information is changing every single day, which causes some concern.

The reality is, we know that President Trump and his lawyers knew they had information they shouldn't have. They had given those boxes back, claimed that they didn't have anything more and that was the reason why the FBI conducted the search in Mar-a-Lago.

[08:25:10]

HURD: Now, I would also say that because of the FBI and DOJ's past mistakes that when you do something you've never done before, you have to have a level of transparency that they've never shown before and so, I think DOJ needs to be making sure that everything that they're doing, that they're able to provide as much information and details as possible, because of the political sensitivity of the search.

BERMAN: You talk about -- and I think you used the word "ridiculous" some of the defenses for having the documents there.

I remember you asking very hard questions about Hillary Clinton's e- mails and the classified information that was in that. Why is it important to not just write off having classified or Sensitive Compartmented Information in a private residence?

HURD: Let's be honest, when I left Congress, if I would have went to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence SCIF, the special compartment location where you can store classified document, and took 15 boxes of classified information and brought it to my house in San Antonio, Texas, and had it in my personal office, guess what, I wouldn't be sitting here talking to you because I'd be in prison. And so I said something similar about the server with Hillary Clinton.

Protecting our information and protecting classified information is important. Not only is it about the information that we have, the people that are potentially going to work with us to share information with us, they need to feel like when they do something that they're not going to get in trouble and that the information that they're providing to you is not going to get out in to other's hands. I couldn't imagine, if I was still in the CIA today, handling an asset

who is risking his or her life and the lives of their family to give us insights on something like a terrorist cell or nuclear weapons proliferator, and then to be able to have to explain, "Don't worry, the information I'm collecting from you may not end up in somebody's basement or a hotel."

And so there's a broader issue of trust within the US government and within our Intelligence Services when you have situations like this.

BERMAN: Now, you say that the DOJ should be as transparent as they can be and there is a different expectation, you say, for transparency here, some of your former Republican allies or Members of Congress or friends in Congress have gone much further than that.

They say that somehow law enforcement has weaponized search warrants to go after Donald Trump. What do you say to that?

HURD: Look, saying that DOJ is being weaponized by going in and investigating a crime is like saying, the fire department is being weaponized to stop a fire.

This is they had probable cause, they went through a Judge, they went through the process, but because of the significance of this, because they are going into a former President's residence, they should have a higher level of transparency.

The folks that are talking about -- the Republicans that are talking about defunding the police, that's just crazy, right? Like this notion that we can criticize the Democratic Party for talking about defunding the police, but then you could do the exact same thing because the FBI, there is no question, the FBI and DOJ has made mistakes in the past.

But here's the benefit of our system in the United States, that's why we have civilian oversight of Federal law enforcement, of oversight of our Intelligence Communities and we should be asking these questions about, you know, the information that the FBI was using to do these kinds of things.

And so, they should not -- the FBI and DOJ should not shrink from their responsibilities and talking about what they're doing and their level of transparency.

BERMAN: So if I can shift the politics now. You're a young man, a former Member of Congress. As you look to 2024, how satisfied are you with the choice that voters seem to have right now for candidates?

HURD: Well, the fact that we're talking about potentially two octogenarians as our choice in 2024, we're better than that, America. We can do better.

And one of the things that we have to do is we have to get more people voting in primaries. I think, we're seeing this play out when it comes to the Senate map in this 2022 election. Even Mitch McConnell says, you know that the likelihood that Republicans could take back the Senate is decreased because of candidate quality.

Candidates matter. Ideas matter. And unfortunately right now, there is this fight within the Republican Party between ideas and personalities when we have a competition of ideas, we can win and we can have conservative government from more than just one election cycle.

[08:30:18]