Return to Transcripts main page

Inside Politics

Some Ukrainian Agencies Hit By Possible Cyberattack; Special Counsel John Durham Alleges Clinton Campaign Lawyer Used Web Data To Raise Suspicions About Trump; Rep. Ocasio-Cortez: U.S. Risks Returning To Jim Crow. Aired 12:30-1p ET

Aired February 15, 2022 - 12:30   ET

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

[12:30:19]

JOHN KING, CNN HOST: Some breaking news now involving the President of the United States and it's related to the crisis with Ukraine. Let's get to our chief White House correspondent Kaitlan Collins. Kaitlan, what do we know?

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: We're hearing that President Biden is going to provide a status update basically, we're told on this ongoing situation in Ukraine this afternoon at 3:30 p.m. Eastern. It hasn't been added to the official schedule yet. But we are being told by a source familiar that the President will be speaking this afternoon.

And of course, that comes at a critical moment as there are big questions here in Washington about whether or not Russia is actually de-escalating, pulling back some troops, as they have claimed. There's been a healthy amount of skepticism for good reason on whether or not that's actually the case. And of course, this will also be a status update coming from President Biden after he's had several conversations with world leaders very closely involved in this. Today, he spoke with the French president. Yesterday, it was the British prime minister.

And of course, he had those very lengthy conversations on Saturday with President Putin of Russia and President Zelensky of Ukraine. So there'll be big questions about what the President's take on all of this is and of course, whether or not the United States has seen any evidence that Russia is actually de-escalating. And so some major questions, of course, for President Biden, who, John, we are told will be speaking this afternoon.

KING: Something very important to look forward to there. Kaitlan Collins, appreciate the live reporting. Adding to the urgency, this hour, the government of Ukraine, saying there's an apparent cyberattack underway targeting its defense ministry, and at least one of its largest commercial banks. Let's get straight to CNN's Alex Marquardt who's in Ukraine with the latest on this one. Alex?

ALEX MARQUARDT, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: John, we've been keeping a very close eye on anything on the cyber front because it would be expected that Russia would do something in terms of a cyberattack alongside a potential military attack. For now, what we know is that there was a cyberattack on at least two different entities. One is the Ministry of Defense's website, and the other is one of the country's largest commercial banks called Private Bank.

Now, for now, it appears that this was what is known as a DDoS attack or a denial of service attack. That means when you go to these websites that they don't work, but it does not appear to be that anything bigger than that.

KING: Alex Marquardt, appreciate the update on the breaking news. We know you'll stay on top of it. Let's get some perspective now from our CNN cybersecurity reporter Sean Lyngaas. Sean, again, we don't have fingerprints yet. We don't know who was responsible for this. When you hear Alex describe what is going on so far, obviously, we know this is a piece of the Putin playbook. What comes to mind? And what would you be looking for?

SEAN LYNGAAS, CNN CYBERSECURITY REPORTER: Well, John, it's a well-worn tactic to, you know, disrupt access to websites at a time of tension and potential conflict. And this has happened before in Georgia, the country of Georgia in 2008, you know, alongside an invasion there, and then, much more recently in Ukraine last month, with government websites also experiencing a distributed denial of service attack, as it's called.

However, we need to emphasize that it's way too early to tell who is behind this. It's a relatively cheap and easy tactic to use. And it doesn't necessarily preface any sort of military action. It is largely a psychological impact at a time of high tension. The world is watching. You can't access the Ministry of Defense website. Yes, that is a nuisance, and something that's annoying. No, does that does not necessarily mean that there's going to be a big impact from that.

However, as you indicated, cyber has been a very consistent part of the Russian playbook. So it's something we're watching closely. We're in touch with Ukrainian cyber officials on the ground who are responding to this incident. We're going to keep you updated on that.

KING: So help us walk through what I'm going to call the CSI and you can use better terms, because this is your wheelhouse. But so you're trying to figure out just to your point, who did this? Where is it coming from?

You know, there's Russian security agencies that do this, but they're also other actors within Russia that we always often assume, operate with the blessing of the Putin government, because you need it to be bad actors inside Russia. What will be -- being done now to find the digital fingerprints, trace it back to the source?

LYNGAAS: Well, this particular aspect of it is a little bit difficult because by definition, a distributed denial of service attack is meant to provide a level of anonymity. You know, it's -- like I said, it's easy to carry out. It floods the servers to computer servers with phony traffic to make them inaccessible. And there are ways to obfuscate who might be behind it so that part is difficult.

However, Ukrainian cybersecurity officials have been working alongside U.S. officials to gain more expertise on this and to study sort of the fingerprints. So they're going to be looking at, you know, what time this occurred, any sort of geolocation in terms of where it may have come from. However, you're going to need several pieces of the digital puzzle to make a definitive attribution as to who might be behind it. John?

[12:35:07]

KING: Sean, appreciate that important perspective very much. Let's get some more now from Susan Glasser, our CNN national affairs expert and analyst. Susan, so again, we have to be careful. We don't have fingerprints here. We do not have confirmation of where the cyberattack are coming from.

But we do know, people you talk to every day, the experts in this field, number one, have said Putin has done this for years. Number two, that if Putin is trying to poke Ukraine in some way there would be cyber assets involved, right?

SUSAN GLASSER, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: Well, I think that's certainly the case. And it is a part of the Russian playbook. No question about that. Today is a, you know, one of those days in the middle of the crisis where we're getting by design conflicting signals. And, you know, we hear from Putin de-escalation. At the same time, we hear diplomacy.

At the same time, we hear him calling it a quote unquote, genocide, what's happening in eastern Ukraine, which could certainly be the pretext for Russian involvement. At the same time, that we have massive numbers of troops on the border and NATO official saying no sign of actual significant de-escalation yet in terms of the military footprints.

So, you know, it's one of those days, it'd be very interesting to hear what President Biden has to say, I'm sure he'll be encouraging an actual diplomatic track, really being open, because right now, they've just been talking in some ways about talking without actually doing so in a meaningful way.

KING: Let's bring in our senior international correspondent Matthew Chance, Susan is going to stand by. Matthew, again, someone who spent considerable time in Moscow watching Vladimir Putin and those around him over the years, I'm guessing this is, A, not a surprise to you, but B, what does it tell you?

MATTHEW CHANCE, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, a lot of time in Moscow watching Vladimir Putin's moves. And also a lot of time here in the Ukrainian capital, Kyiv, waiting and watching to see what Russia's next move might be. And, of course, I think we have to remember about this latest cyberattack, as it comes against the background of, you know, more than 100,000 Russian troops gathered at mass near the border of Ukraine, poised potentially, if they're given the order by the Kremlin, to move in.

And, you know, it's often said that this kind of cyber warfare could precede an actual military strike or military invasion. So there's a particular sensitivity to that taking place at the moment. There's been no finger have been pointed when it comes to this latest cyberattack.

But of course, there was a similar attack, although I think probably on a much bigger scale that took place in Ukraine, just in January, just last month, not affected something like 70 official government websites. This time, it was just the country's largest commercial bank, which is bad enough, but also the website of the country's defense ministry as well.

In January, there was some very menacing text messages put alongside the distributed denial of service attack, reading something like, you know, be afraid and wait for the worst. That was what the message was in many of those websites last January. I haven't heard any reports that there was a similar kind of messaging this time.

But, you know, John, it's really interesting, because, you know, this cyberattack, it isn't anything to do with Russia, which it could well be, although officials haven't made any pronouncement on that yet. It comes as these mixed messages coming out of Russia about what their intentions could be.

On the one hand, you know, we're seeing Russia pulled back for the first time, some of its forces that have been gathering near the Ukrainian border, and that's a sort of withdrawal of some of those forces back to their base is also the Kremlin saying they're not prepared to negotiate further. And so it kind of adds that sense of confusion about Vladimir Putin intends to do, John.

KING: Confusion and uncertainty. Matthew Chance, appreciate.

[12:38:38]

We're going to take a quick break and continue our reporting on the story again, cyberattacks underway in Ukraine, targeting the Defense Ministry and at least one large commercial bank. And we know we will hear from the President of the United States in three hours with less than three hours on the Ukraine crisis, stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: Donald Trump calls it the biggest story of our time. Bigger he says than Watergate. Donald Trump of course is also a serial liar. So hold on a second. But the it here is a new court filing by the Special Counsel John Durham whose job it is to investigate the origins of the Mueller probe. Durham's new filing includes allegations, a Democratic lawyer with ties to the Clinton campaign shared information with the CIA.

That information is suggesting Trump or people close to Trump may have been using Russian phones around Russian made phones around the White House. The Durham brief is very, very carefully worded and because it's complicated, it's also very easy to twist the story. CNN's Evan Perez is here to help us understand, it's -- what is this, Evan, and what is not? EVAN PEREZ, CNN SENIOR JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Well, what it is, is a very vaguely worded filing that was dropped Friday night by John Durham as part of this case against a former Clinton campaign lawyer. And what it says is that Michael Sussmann, the lawyer met with the CIA in 2017 and presented some data from some researchers, again, pro Clinton researchers that appeared to show odd activity, Internet activity between these Russian made phones in the vicinity of the White House, the Executive Office of the President is what is mentioned in the filing.

According to Durham this was all part of an effort to smear Trump and to have the intelligence community believe that Donald Trump was in cahoots with the Russian. Again the largest Part of what was happening in 2016 that because the filing is so vaguely worded, a lot of people took it and went in the directions that you talked about.

[12:45:11]

KING: So Trump says it's spying. And he says, he says that if this were him, if he were doing this, they would take the electric chair out of retirement he -- this is what he does. This is what he does. He turns every, you know, every little thing mountain into the molehill, if you will. What does it say? Does it suggest, does Durham suggesting perhaps some sort of a dirty trick here, does he suggests spy?

PEREZ: Well, Durham is making this larger point that there was this operation by the Clinton campaign to smear Donald Trump. It was opposition research, and it was being used to go after Donald Trump in 2016. This, again, is part of an investigation to look into the origins of the Russia investigation that has gone on longer than the Mueller investigation. It does not show the actual spying that Trump and others are saying it does.

KING: And Sussmann is still charged. He's under indictment. Is this material to be used at a trial assuming there is one or?

PEREZ: Right so he is scheduled to go on trial later this year. This is -- he is charged right now with lying to the FBI in a meeting that was separate from the CIA meeting. By the way, one of the things we were looking for, John, last week was to see whether Durham was going to bring new charges, because the statute limitations was running out on anything tied to the CIA meeting.

He did not do it. Instead, what he did was he dropped this into a filing on Friday night. Again, you know, Sussmann is charged with making a false statement. It's all hinging on the shaky memory of a former FBI General Counsel. We'll see whether he's able to do. This is very unusual for the Justice Department at this point, given the fact that again, this is something looking back at 2016. And here we are in 2022.

KING: Still in 2022, unusual to say the least. Evan Perez, appreciate your -- if people can spin these things. But there's something there's something curious there, we'll stay on top of it. Appreciate very much

When we come back, a landmark settlement for the families of the victims of Sandy Hook against the gunmaker.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:51:44]

KING: Today, a major landmark settlement, Sandy Hook families announcing a $73 million settlement with gunmaker Remington. The agreement also includes the handover of internal company documents. Remington was the manufacturer of the AR15 style rifle used back in 2012. And that massacre that left 20 children and six adults dead in Newtown, Connecticut. CNN's Erica Hill joins us now live. Erica, tell us more. It's a big deal.

ERICA HILL, CNN ANCHOR & NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: It is a very big deal, John. And I think one of the things just pointed out there yes, the $73 million, that's going to get people's attention, but it is these documents that now must be handed over, thousands of documents. Nicole Hockley, who of course, many of us know as the mother of Dylan Hockley, who was murdered on that day saying just a moment ago, these internal documents paint a picture of a company that lost its way.

This is how the lawsuit moved forward, that they were going after essentially one exemption in a law that they believe, they believed that this company that Remington had violated Connecticut's rules when it comes to marketing. This is where we are today. This has been a long, long road for these families.

They first filed this lawsuit in 2014. Remington, the manufacturer went into bankruptcy twice. So now that money is coming from the insurance companies, which now own and control the company. They're paying the max out of those policies, which amounts to that $73 million for the nine families of the students and teachers who were murdered, who are here today.

In terms of this being a big deal. It's the first time, John, a gun company has been held legally accountable. And we kept hearing that word accountability over and over again this morning from the families and from the attorney who was leading this lawsuit that this is about accountability.

It is also as we know, a very painful day because this is in no way as one family just said this isn't no way justice. It doesn't bring their son back. Francine and David Wheeler lost their son, Benjamin, on that day, they said real justice would be having their 15-year-old son standing beside them, but he will always be six because he was murdered when he was just six.

But they said this is a stepping the right direction. And today they say is about right and wrong. What comes next, seeing what's in those documents, as you point out, it's not just the money, it's documents and the ability to make those documents public. So a lot of people want to see what else is in those documents. It'll also be interesting to see, John, if we see more lawsuits of this type moving forward.

KING: That's fascinating, fascinating to see how the documents play out and obviously painful, painful to hear how the families talk about that their sons still six. Erica Hill, grateful for the live report on this very important settlement.

Strong words from the Democratic Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio- Cortez about what she calls serious threats to our democracy. In a new interview, the Congresswoman criticizes new voting restrictions and other steps she says are, quote, a very raise a very real risk to democracy. And listen here, she believes a return to the Jim Crow era.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ (D-NY): What we have is the continued sophistication and takeover of our democratic systems in order to turn them into undemocratic systems in order to overturn results that a party in power may not like.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And your concern is that we will look like what nation, any nation in particular?

[12:55:04]

OCASIO-CORTEZ: I think we will look like ourselves. I think we will return to Jim Crow. I think that's what we risk.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: Our very patient reporters are back with us. Tia Mitchell, we will look like ourselves, a returned to Jim Crow. This is a giant debate in the country is the debate that divides the parties. Republicans say what we're doing at the state level is not what Democrats say of it. But she is saying there that she views this as a return to essentially legalized segregation, where states pass laws that punished people of color.

TIA MITCHELL, WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT, THE ATLANTA JOURNAL- CONSTITUTION: Yes. And, you know, she's not the first person to use that terminology. We heard Jim Crow 2.0, when Democrats were criticizing states like Georgia, for passing new restrictive election laws. And, you know, I know that conservatives like to quibble with that phrase, Jim Crow, because it does evoke a very dark time in American history.

But the truth is, you know, eventually, the history books, will call this era, something, they may not call it Jim Crow 2.0. But if our democracy continues to allow laws to be put in place that undermine our election system that undermine equal justice for all, the way our country was supposed to be built upon, then it will lead into an era that may be a dark time that is, again marked in our history books.

KING: And the giant challenge, because we're in an election year, for those who oppose these laws is they have to deal with what happened. They saw that 19 states, 19 states have passed 34 different laws that restrict voting acts essentially roll back the way people were able to vote in 2020. And so listen here, this is Judge Lina Hidalgo, Harris County, Texas to Houston area, saying, you know, I don't like this, I don't like this. But there's an election in my state this year, we got to figure our way through it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JUDGE LINA HIDALGO (D), HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS: All of this is premised on the same idea that inspired people to storm the Capitol on January 6th, that the election was stolen, that elections are rampant with fraud, and that weakens the core of our democracy. And of course, will educate, it's just that this is part of a bigger problem. And it has to do with suppression and with weakening democracy.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: So you have bigger, big arguments about this is wrong about what are the elements in our society that are trying to chip away at our democracy or even attack the United States Capitol if you don't like the outcome of an election. But then you have the real here and now that if you're making it harder for people to vote, and the Democrats believe, make it hard for mostly voters of color, who would vote Democratic to vote, what do you do this year?

SEUNG MIN KIM, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: I mean, this is why there was an urgency among Democrats on Capitol Hill, even you know, as early as middle of last year to pass of measures in Congress that would basically overturn some of these state level restrictions. Obviously, we saw these efforts go into as recently as January when those efforts failed in the Senate.

Now, if any action is coming from Washington, it's mostly going to settle or focus on executive actions by the Justice Department by the Biden administration. But there is a certain -- there is certainly a challenge here for Democrats ahead. And I've had Democrats tell me quite privately, that, you know, that they may not be able to organize these laws.

And they are concerned that kind of the rhetoric about how restrictive these measures are may depress their own voters. And they're trying to get out beyond that. But certainly, as the nominating contest began, and we get into election season, officially starting next month, it's certainly going to be a major hurdle for Democrats here.

JACKIE KUCINICH, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: But they're voting in Texas already for the primary. I mean, and they're already seen record rejections of those ballots based on some of the new voter I.D. laws. And I mean, our reporter Ursula Perano had a story yesterday about this, how the activists are saying this is a nightmare, because -- and they're trying to educate but, you know, these things are already, it's already happening. And you're absolutely right, it starts March 1st is when the first primary election is in Texas.

And we're going to see this unfold state by state because every so many states, it depends on where you live, as to how accessible the vote is.

KING: Right. And you mentioned the nightmare as mad as hell. This is Pam Gaskin, is a woman in a CNN story about this news organizations we're looking into it. You know, she grew up watching her father pay poll taxes for himself and other African Americans in Galveston County. These are the things we fought 60 years ago, 50 years ago, and we're

still fighting. It's not right. In her case, she said she downloaded a form. It was an old form. Then she filed the new form, and was told she had the wrong driver's license number because she had moved at one point. This is the challenge.

MITCHELL: Right. And the question is why, you know, again, going back to Georgia, when Republicans were changing the law in journalists at my paper and others would ask why are you doing it? They really didn't have a clear reason, you know, and it often seemed to go back to misinformation and disinformation by people who did not want to accept that Donald Trump is no longer president.

So we're making it harder for people to vote and a lot of times the people who are most affected are voters of color. They're younger voters. They're newer voters. They're less frequent voters. But why? And that is I think what the question will be and what history will judge us on.

KING: Right, the history will judge. But to the why part there is zero prospect now, right, of Washington passing any legislation before this year's elections to change any of this. There's a smaller Electoral College Count Act maybe but nothing else, right?

KIM: Right. And that doesn't affect -- that doesn't go into effect until the actual counting of the electoral votes so.

[13:00:09]

KING: Appreciate your time today in INSIDE POLITICS. Appreciate our patient reporters. Ana Cabrera picks up right now.