Return to Transcripts main page

Wolf

Co-Pilot Tested Descent Setting; Tweets Link Texas Shooters to Jihadists; Feds Look at Ties to British and American Jihadists; Focus Turns to Gray's Knife. Aired 1-1:30p ET

Aired May 06, 2015 - 13:00   ET

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

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: Hello, I'm Wolf Blitzer. It's 1:00 p.m. here in Washington, 6:00 p.m. in London, 7:00 p.m. in Dusseldorf, 8:00 p.m. in Jerusalem. Wherever you're watching from around the world, thanks very much for joining us.

Up first, a chilling development in the crash of Germanwings Flight 9525 in the French Alps. A report says the co-pilot that flew the plane into the mountains rehearsed his plan on an earlier flight. The co-pilot Andreas Lubitz apparently practiced putting the plane into a controlled descent during that flight. That according to an interim report just released by French accident investigators. Lubitz is accused of deliberately crashing the fatal flight into the Alps killing himself and 149 other people on board.

Let's bring in our Senior International Correspondent Jim Bittermann. He's joining us from Paris. And our CNN Aviation Analyst Peter Goelz who's joining us from Dallas. Jim, walk us through exactly what the co-pilot did on that earlier flight, how investigators now came to the conclusion that it was a rehearsal for what he eventually wound up doing.

JIM BITTERMAN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Right, exactly, Wolf. Basically, the earlier flight was the outbound flight from Dusseldorf to Barcelona. And during that flight, at one point, the pilot left the cockpit leaving the co-pilot, Lubitz, in charge, and he dialed into the auxiliary (ph) setting on the autopilot. He dialed in the lowest setting, 100 feet. He had been ordered to descend according to air traffic controllers. He had been ordered to descend from 37,000 to 35,000. And so, instead of setting it at 35,000 he set it to 100 feet.

And then, just about a minute later, he again was ordered to descend by the air traffic controllers and they said to go down to 21,000 feet. And instead of setting in 21,000, he, again, set into motion the setting of 100 feet. So, it was either a rehearsal or perhaps he was, in fact, -- have -- was going to try to crash that earlier flight and lost his nerve. Unclear. But in either case, the pilot came back and was unaware, apparently, of any of these changes that were taking place in the cockpit, Wolf.

BLITZER: Very disturbing. Peter, when he selected that altitude to go down to 100 feet, shouldn't that have gotten the attention of air traffic controllers? PETER GOELZ, CNN AVIATION ANALYST: Well, it wouldn't have because he

was in a descent, an ordered descent, so unless he went below the ordered altitude, it would not have shown up. And the only way somebody would have picked up on that behavior was some time after the fact, downloading the data recorder and sometimes that occurs. But there was no way this -- that this could have been picked up at that moment.

BLITZER: What do, Jim, the investigators, the French investigators there who released this report, think that co-pilot was hoping to learn during that so-called dry run, that rehearsal, if, in fact, it was a rehearsal?

BITTERMAN: Well, they're not going to tell us. We just had an interview -- we just had an interview just a short while ago with the head of the DEA who was responsible for that preliminary report, and he said they just don't have an idea of what was going on in his head. But it's clear that he had gone through this pattern before and that's what makes this chilling was that if there was any kind of possibility that anybody was aware before the fatal crash, if there was any awareness that the -- that he had this intent, then that would really sort of change the sort of perspective on what happened in the crash. But there apparently is none of that -- Wolf.

BLITZER: And we know, Jim, that when he eventually did crash into the French Alps, he locked the door when the pilot went to the -- went to the men's room and left. And in the rehearsal, if you will, the door was not locked. Is that right?

BITTERMAN: It was not locked and the pilot came back. And just before, when the pilot buzzed the buzzer to say open the door, in fact, he dialed back the right -- the correct altitude into the copilot -- into the autopilot. So, in fact, he had -- he reset it so that the pilot would not be aware -- we assume that the pilot would not be aware that he had been playing around with it.

BLITZER: Does this suggest, Peter, that there should always be two people inside the cockpit? When one pilot or co-pilot has to leave, somebody else should go in there, based on what we've -- you know, based on the experience of this ill-fated flight?

GOELZ: Well, that's certainly the most obvious first step, Wolf, is you got to have two people in the cockpit. But one of the indications that the investigators are taking a new look at cockpit security, they indicate that as part of this investigation of this tragedy that they are going to look at the post-911 procedures about, how do you secure the cockpit? How best to protect passengers should the procedures be revised. And that's going to be part of this investigation when it comes out over the next year.

[13:05:05] BLITZER: And it certainly strengthens those, Peter, who have called for cameras inside the cockpits, video cameras, live streaming if you will, at all times. That's been on the -- that's technically -- they're technically capable of that but pilots have resisted, right? GOELZ: That's right. It's been a recommendation from the NTSB for

years. Pilots have resisted it. The pilots continue to resist it, although I think there's going to be some real dialog in the next six months about this.

BLITZER: What happens, Jim, next in this investigation?

BITTERMAN: Well, it's just about what you were just talking with Peter about, the fact that the head of the VEA here, the accident investigation authority, said, basically, they are going to be picking in all the -- bringing in all the details they can about the pilot's mental health, the co-pilot's mental health and his background and all that, so, I think, what kind of drugs he was taking. They don't think there's going to be change in the major parameters of the crash.

What we know about the crash now is what apparently happened. But they do want to have all the background information and then they are going to come up with a set of recommendations about what should be done, the two pilot rule in the cockpit, all sorts of other -- change in the locking mechanism, for example, or other kinds of things that might be done to prevent this kind of thing from happening again -- Wolf.

BLITZER: And Peter, Andreas Lubitz, the co-pilot, did suffer, as we now know, from bouts of depression. Has this tragedy -- this ill- fated flight, what happened? The 149 people killed and the co-pilot himself, apparently committing suicide, has it affected the way airlines around the world are handling the issue, a sensitive issue, of mental health of pilots?

GOELZ: Well, there have been no changes yet, but there are dialogs taking place. Both -- you know, the pilot community is deeply concerned about this. They want to make sure that they're protecting their members. But at the same time, they know they have a special obligation. And how that's addressed in the coming months will be critical because people have a right to know that the people who are in command of their aircraft are of sound mind, sound body, that they're going to do everything they can to get the flight there safely.

BLITZER: And as you know also, Peter, we've discussed this over the years, there is the technologies available right now, all the information that goes into those two so-called black boxes, the flight data recorder, the cockpit voice recorder. All that information that winds up there, then they have to search for the two black boxes, they are capable of streaming all that information some place so that you don't have to worry about finding those black boxes but there's been resistance on the front as well. Tell us why.

GOELZ: Well, the -- I mean, the air carriers worldwide are resistant to change. Particularly, when you have an accident like this that they view as, well, it's a one in a million, you know, it's a one off. The reality is you could have streaming. You could set up parameters in which the streaming only begins when the plane is out of its flight parameters, out of its approved flight plan, then it starts. It sends out alerts. I think it's overdue. It ought to be done. BLITZER: Yes, the technology is clearly there and I think the

pressure is going to intensify. Jim Bittermann and Peter Goelz, guys, thanks very much. Still ahead, the investigation into a terror attack in Texas now zeroing in on a series of tweets between one of the gunman and the man, an ISIS recruit from the United Kingdom. We're going to take a closer look at how big of a role he may have played in Sunday's attack.

And later, new polls on the 2016 presidential race here in the United States. They're showing good news for Hillary Clinton. Some challenges ahead for Jeb Bush. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:12:16] BLITZER: Now to the Texas terror attack and the investigation. It's a links with ISIS. The terror group took responsibility but that's not yet been confirmed by investigators. The investigation is now centered on two individuals who tweeted with one of the shooters, Elton Simpson. One is in Syria, the other one in Somalia.

Joining us now from London, our Terrorism Analyst Paul Cruickshank and our Correspondent Atika Shubert. Let's start with that British jihadist, Junaid Husain. Atika, what do we know about him and his past?

ATIKA SHUBERT, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, what we know is that he's a convicted hacker and he's really the only established hacker who's gone -- who claims to have gone to Syria to fight for ISIS. He was convicted of computer offenses in 2012, specifically for publishing basically the address book of Tony Blair, but also for hacking into the anti-terror phone lines of MI6, the U.K. secret service.

So, it's -- so, he's an established hacker. But what makes him unusual is his on-line presence. Is that he's always on-line. He's popped up numerous of times under a number of different accounts and he's sort of always cheering on these attacks, including this most recent attack in Garland, Texas. And this, apparently, is why U.S. investigators are now looking into what degree he may have had in either inciting or instigating that attack.

Now, I've actually spoken to a former hacker who was part of his hacking team in 2012, and he described Junaid Husain as a sort of volatile individual, a bit of a prankster. And -- but he grew increasingly worried when he had his last phone conversation with him in Syria and he fired off several automatic weapons. He just described him as a dangerous individual.

BLITZER: Paul, what else do you know about this guy, Junaid Husain?

PAUL CRUICKSHANK, CNN TERRORISM ANALYST: Well, we know, Wolf, that he went to Syria in early 2013, that he connected with ISIS there. We know that he's helping them try to hack ISIS's enemies overseas. We know that he was linked to that sort of death list they put out in March where they listed all those United States personnel. We know he -- we know he was linked to that, Wolf, because he posted that from his Twitter account.

CROWD: Who we do, who we do, who are these people?

BLITZER: We're hearing a lot of extraneous noise over there. Atika, what's going on?

SHUBERT: Basically, I mean, we're in the middle of Carnegie Street which is an area with quite a lot of people. And as you know, there's also an election happening here in the U.K. So, I think that's attracting a lot of attention. And so, that's where that extraneous noise is coming from. But as the election continues, this is going to be a concern but also security issues and this is why things like Junaid Husain's Twitter account is being closely followed by investigators.

CRUICKSHANK: That's right, Wolf. You know, ISIS British fighters have called for attacks in the U.K. against polling stations here. There's a certain amount of tension here in various forms and sizes obviously leading up to the election.

[13:15:12] BLITZER: All right, we're going to leave you guys alone for now. We'll get back to you. Obviously, there's a lot of excitement in the U.K., the elections coming up in the next day or so. So we're going to be having an update on what's going on in the elections. That's coming up a little bit later this hour. Atika Shubert, Paul Cruickshank, guys, thanks very much.

Coming up, the new controversy in the Freddie Gray case here in the United States. One of the police officers charged in this death challenging the prosecutor over the knife Gray had when he was arrested. Was that knife actually illegal? The answer may come down to a single spring.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: We go next to Baltimore, Maryland, where emotions are still raw after the death of Freddie Gray. The big question today centers on the knife Gray was carrying at the time of his arrest. Was it illegal? Two of the six police officers charged in the case insist it was and they're challenging the prosecutors' claim that Gray was arrested without just cause.

CNN's Athena Jones is joining us now live from Baltimore.

Athena, lawyers for the officer, Edward Nero, the other office, Garrett Miller, they've requested to see the knife. What's the distinction between how the officers and the state's attorney, Marilyn Mosby, are describing the knife, whether it was legal or illegal for Freddie Gray to be carrying that knife at that time?

[13:19:58] ATHENA JONES, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Wolf.

Well, of course, the question of whether the knife was legal or illegal is important because if it was a legal knife, as Marilyn Mosby is arguing, then the officers didn't have a right to arrest him. And so these two - the lawyers for these two arresting officers say, look, this was actually an illegal switch blade, illegal under the law here in Maryland. They are demanding that the state's attorney, that the police department, present this knife, produce this knife, so that they can examine it and so that they can prove that, in fact, it was - he was not allowed - Freddie Gray was not allowed to carry - be carrying this knife.

Of course, I spoke with a former prosecutor here who told me that if it turns out that knife was illegal, it could certainly complicate the case, at least against these two officers. So that's the issue that they are bringing up. Of course it could take several weeks, if not longer, to get a word back from that judge, a response, I should say, on whether they'll get to see that knife.

BLITZER: Are there different rules because we had - we had been told, I don't know if this is true, that there's one set of rules for that kind of knife in the city of Baltimore, another set of rules in the state of Maryland or in the county of Baltimore? Have you looked into that?

JONES: I did ask a former prosecutor for the state's attorney's office about whether there was a disparity and she said she had not yet examined the law. We haven't examined the law. But she suggested that there are sometimes different rules that are applied to the city versus the state. And that what's interesting here if that if that's the case in this particular case, then the state's attorney chose what rules to follow. So she was able to select the rules governing Baltimore City.

It's a little complicated there in terms of the weeds, but the bottom line is - here is, there are a lot of questions about the knife and whether or not it was legal. We, of course, haven't seen it and so we're not going to know the answer to that until that knife is produced.

Wolf.

BLITZER: The mayor also requested, as you know, a new investigation by the Department of Justice here in Washington. They're already looking into whether Freddie Gray's civil rights were violated. What does the mayor want? What is her request from the federal government right now as far as the Baltimore Police Department is concerned?

JONES: Right. This is a big deal, Wolf. As you mentioned, the DOJ is already investigating the specific case of Freddie Gray. The mayor wants to see the Justice Department investigate the entire Baltimore City Police Department, to look into the patterns and practices of the police department, to determine if police have been violating the rights of residents. For instance, violating the - their Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable search and seizure. That's, of course, an important civil right. She wants to have them look into that.

This is similar, you'll remember, to the patterns and practices investigation that the DOJ conducted in Ferguson, Missouri. The officer in that case wasn't indicted, but the Department of Justice did investigate the entire Ferguson Police Department and, of course, the municipal courts there and found that there was a pattern of civil rights violations. So if the DOJ decides to go forward on this, they are actively considering whether to open that investigation, it will be a big deal. It will also, though, take a long time. This is a much bigger police department, of course, than the one in Ferguson, Missouri.

Wolf.

BLITZER: It certainly is. And the mayor also made an announcement regarding body cameras. What's her plan?

JONES: Her plan, she said, was to have body cameras implemented here in the Baltimore City Police Department by the end of the year. Now, I, of course, asked how soon would body cameras be on every single officer. She said she didn't want to set any false expectations. She's ordered her people to cut through any bureaucratic red tape that there could be to try to fast track these body cameras. But it's unclear at this point how wide reaching it will be by when. She said it would be the biggest program of body cameras of any department in the country. They want to study it and do it right.

I should mention that next week, next Tuesday, the governor of Maryland, Larry Hogan, plans to sign a bill that would allow study of these body cameras. So this is something they want to move on, not just here in the city of Baltimore, but across the state.

Wolf.

BLITZER: All right, thank you very much, Athena, for that report. Athena Jones reporting from Baltimore.

So what a difference a day makes. A brand new poll shows Hillary Clinton's growing more popular despite the controversy over the - controversies over the last few weeks. We're standing by. We'll explain what's going on when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:27:46] BLITZER: Welcome back to our viewers in the United States and around the world. I'm Wolf Blitzer reporting from Washington.

The book "Clinton Cash" has caused quite a stir. It alleges that foreign donations to the Clinton Global Initiative had undue influence on Hillary Clinton's decisions while she was secretary of state. In an interview with CNN's Christiane Amanpour, the former president, Bill Clinton, says those accusations just won't fly.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BILL CLINTON, FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT: We had a policy when she was secretary of state that we would only continue accepting money from people that were already giving us money. And I tried to recreate that policy as nearly as I can now during the campaign, with minor exceptions of our health care work, which we can talk about if you like. And I think they all - people know that. People - they understand that

enormous percentage of health and development work around the world is funded by governments and multinational organizations and they fund us because they think we're good at solving problems and taking care - taking advantage of opportunities. But we also have 300,000 other donors and 90 percent of them give $100 or less. So there's no just evidence.

Even the guy that wrote the book apparently had to admit under questioning that he didn't have a shred of evidence for this. He just sort of thought he'd throw it out there and see if it would fly.

CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, CNN: Well, he did actually -

CLINTON: And it won't fly.

AMANPOUR: He did actually - it won't fly, is that what you say, it won't fly?

CLINTON: Yes, it won't fly.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Stay with CNN throughout the day to hear more of Christian's interview with the former president, Bill Clinton, from questions about the financial practices from her family's foundation, to scrutiny of about her private e-mail account when she was secretary of state. Hillary Clinton's campaign is watching the polls right now, but sometimes the information from these polls can send out some mixed messages. For example, the latest "New York Times"/CBS polls shows 48 percent think Hillary Clinton is honest and trust worthy, 45 percent do not think he's honest and trust worthy.

Meanwhile, a "Wall Street Journal"/NBC News poll asked a similar but not exact question, only 25 percent of the people think she is honest and straightforward, that's down from the 38 percent last summer.

[13:30:03] Let's talk a little bit more about all of this with our chief political analyst, Gloria Borger, and our chief congressional correspondent, Dana Bash.