Return to Transcripts main page

NEW DAY

The Donald Trump Interview; Doomed Flight Slowed Dramatically Before Crash; Should U.S. Consider Sanctions Against Russia? Aired 7:30-8a ET

Aired November 4, 2015 - 07:30   ET

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


(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:31:00] ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: Welcome back to NEW DAY. Chris just wrapped up what can only be called a wide-ranking interview with Donald Trump. Here to discuss it all, our CNN political commentator and host of CNN's "SMERCONISH," Michael Smerconish, and CNN contributor and author of the "War for Late Night," Bill Carter.

Gentlemen, great to have you here. Bill, you're nodding. What did you hear?

BILL CARTER, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: I heard a colorful guy displaying his usual personality.

CHRIS CUOMO, CNN ANCHOR: What about Trump?

CARTER: Yes, that, too. You know, I didn't hear a whole lot about what was going on in the campaign. It's all about personalities and I think Donald is very effective when he's punching. He punches from the hip and that's what he does. And does it score with people? It obviously makes people think he's very authoritative. That's what he's selling.

CUOMO: What we try to do in these interviews, he and I come from a similar back ground, right. I understand his vibe and where he's coming from. What we're trying to do is show Mr. Trump at his most full some self.

Retail politics is what, I'm better than you because you're a bum. You want something I know how to get it for you. Somebody says I'm wrong, they are wrong themselves. These are basic rules he has made this game about those rules and I think that's the key to his effectiveness.

MICHAEL SMERCONISH, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, what's indisputable is his ratings value, whether it's here on "NEW DAY," or "SNL." Who could take their eyes off the last half hour of television? I wish you had a split screen on me and could have seen my facial reaction because I've been sitting here howling for 30 minutes. But I have to make one serious point --

CUOMO: Were you mad at me like my mother, Michael?

SMERCONISH: Not at all. I was wanting more, I wish you would have gone for another 30 minutes. He conflates entertainment and leadership and he evaluates everything by how long the line was.

I'm sitting here and thinking to myself, when I was a teenager, I used to sleep out in my car for Yes tickets. It doesn't mean I think keyboardist, Rick Wakeman, should be elected president of the United States. Who wouldn't want to meet him?

CAMEROTA: Let's dive into some of the things he said because as we all know, he often has a lot more style than substance, but he did talk about things. One of the things he talks a lot about is how he built an empire, a real estate empire.

CARTER: Yes.

CAMEROTA: From what he considers sort of meager means, his father helped him a bit.

CARTER: A little bit.

CAMEROTA: But despite that, I mean, despite what he started with, you cannot deny that he has built -- that he talked about his massive real estate holdings.

CARTER: Right.

CAMEROTA: He says that's what he wants to do for the country and voters believed somebody who can do that in New York City can do that for the country.

CARTER: He may think that's true. I think it's just sort of him boasting about it. There's no substance to that claim.

CAMEROTA: But he has his track record. Why doesn't that count for something?

[07:35:01] CARTER: It does count for something. If he was bulling something in Washington, it would be direct comparison. He has a right to say that. It's absolutely valid to say he's been a successful businessman. That's absolutely valid. I don't want to criticize that. I think it is fine. I do think it's just bluster, though, what's the rest of the message?

CAMEROTA: The rest of the message is I can make great deals in Washington. I've made great deals in New York.

CARTER: He's talking about other people's personalities. He's not really getting to the substance of it. I think he's not really giving the voters more than the surface right now. It's difficult. I have to say this. He's on the phone.

CUOMO: The phone is a great tactic. Phone is a great tactic. It gives him a huge advantage.

CARTER: It does because he doesn't have to really look you in the eye. It's very hard to stop him. It's very hard to -- he can go off on a tangent. CUOMO: It works very well, but I have to tell you, I wonder if you have too high a bar for politics. I do not mean this cynically, right. I was raised by a politician.

CARTER: Yes, a very good one.

CUOMO: What it is about that is most fundamental? First of all, Michael, I'LL direct this to you. Just so you know, I investigated Donald Trump for a very long time in terms of his net worth. It is not fair to say his daddy made him. It's not true.

He had political kecks with Kerry that helped with commodore, may have guaranteed some loans, but Donald Trump did some things that his father never considered doing. It's fair. No question. It was not just his daddy.

But I have to tell you, Michael, it is always style over substance, you politic in poetry, you govern in pros. That's what sells now, Clinton, Reagan, Obama, they want to hear what you say and we'll see what you do later. Why should Trump be held to a different standard?

SMERCONISH: Very famously, Roger Ailes gave advice to Ronald Reagan before a debate that he was having. It was in the '84 cycle, and he said, remember, you didn't get elected on details. It's all about vision.

I agree with the point that you're making and I would also say he's providing exactly the level of information that American voters -- Republican American voters are demanding.

He's still leading the polls although we can talk about how his margin has shrunken and may continue to shrink, but to the extent people are frustrated with his lack of detail, they should probably be frustrated with what the demands are that are being made of him.

I don't mean by the media because you've asked for the detail. I mean, by the public that are still willing to support him without that concrete plan on any issue.

CAMEROTA: Michael, Bill, great to get your follow-up to the Trump interview. We also want to hear your take out there. You can tweet us using #newdaycnn or post your comment on facebook.com/newday. Chris looks forward to reading all of those.

MICHAELA PEREIRA, CNN ANCHOR: He's looking forward to reading your tweets. She's looking forward to reading his tweets.

Back to the top story, the crash of the Russian airliner is still such a mystery. Could new information about the flight's final moments give insight into what went wrong? Our experts weigh in on the latest.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:42:05] PEREIRA: Still no clear answer this morning about what happened to that doomed Russian jetliner. There are new clues, though, about the flight's final moments and the wreckage.

Let's unpack is all with David Soucie. He is CNN aviation analyst and former FAA accident investigator and inspector. David, so many new details to crunch through with you so let's tick through them one by one if you'll indulge me.

So we understand the reports from the data recorders say that unexpected and uncharacteristic sounds were heard just moments before that doomed plane disappeared off the radar. Give us an idea of these unexpected, uncharacteristic sounds. What could that entail and what does that mean to you?

DAVID SOUCIE, CNN AVIATION ANALYST: Well, the unexpected part means, of course, that there was nothing that led up to it at all. The uncharacteristic can be one of two things either it's a sound outside of the normal operating range of the aircraft that you hear through these microphones.

The other thing it could be, if the sound is loud enough, then it will actually limit or cap the amount of sound that the microphones can hear and it will cause what we call either digital clipping or clipping of the sound.

PEREIRA: We also learned there were details about this flight that the flight -- when the plane reached its target altitude, it veered up briefly and then it lost speed very, very quickly before plunging to the ground. What does that tell you? Was that something --

SOUCIE: Well, when you --

PEREIRA: Go ahead.

SOUCIE: What you mentioned before, let's not de-emphasize that. We're talking about a severe, severe up. It went by my calculations about 8,000 feet per minute kind of a climb when normally you'd be about 1,800 to 2,000.

So it quadrupled its clip upward. If we're talking about the tail coming off of the airplane, it's counterintuitive to me because the weight of the tail coming off the airplane, it would typically go down, not up.

So if this is where the problem is, Michaela, is that flash that we talked about, I might jumping ahead here a little.

PEREIRA: That's OK.

SOUCIE: The infrared flash, by looking at the time and the data of when that occur with be that occurred at the top of the climb, not at the bottom. It wasn't the flash or explosion or whatever it might have been would have caused the climb, the peak of that climb is where the flash occurred according to the information we have today. So it makes me question, did the tail come off, chicken or the egg, did the tail come off first, causing the aircraft to climb? It doesn't make sense. It makes sense that the aircraft climbed first and then the tail came off.

PEREIRA: Let's talk about that tail because the reason we're talking about the tail is that Russian state media is reporting that it was found some three miles away from the rest of the debris.

So in terms of on-site investigators when they're trying to literally piece and figuratively piece together what happened here, is that more of an indication of what happened than what we're seeing on the data recorder?

[07:45:04] SOUCIE: The data recorder is a key piece of information, but knowing that all they heard was brief sounds, I'm not sure we're going to get a whole lot of information off of those flight data recorders.

The cockpit voice recorder, it seems like it was sudden and instantaneous. So I don't think the cockpit crew had any time to respond. They're not going to get anything from there.

The flight data recorder is cut off immediately as soon as the electricity is cut off. It being in the tail would have been of no use at that point as far as going down.

The only thing we can hope for from the flight data recorder is there's some kind of information that would tell us what happened leading up to the moment that the aircraft cracked.

PEREIRA: In the hours after this, I remember that we reported that the maintenance records show this plane. This exact airplane had some sort of other incident involving an accident with its tail section but that had been repaired. Does that cause you concern given fact of what we see with the debris, any questions arise?

SOUCIE: Whenever there's a tail strike that causes a major repair to be done, it raises a lot of concern because of the fact that it's so sensitive. These aircraft are assembled in a factory, in a manufacturing facility.

That's how they're intended to contain the pressurization and all the different stresses that get transferred throughout the aircraft. When that's broken, and you put some kind of repair in there, that can transfer those energy, all that energy to the different place.

It's supposed to be in certain places. It flexes, transfers that energy out the airplane through the keel beam or some beam throughout the aircraft. When that gets changed you're moving that flexible area, stiffening it, saying it needs to be harder here.

That can transfer all of that energy to a place where it's not supposed to be that can take years to propagate itself, and that is in line with the type of repair that could cause this down the road.

PEREIRA: Such a mystery still, the investigation continues. We'll keep watching this. Thanks for joining us, David Soucie -- Alisyn.

SOUCIE: Thank you, Michaela.

CAMEROTA: OK, Michaela, Russia escalating its aggression in Syria. Is there a viable way for Russia to actually end the bloodshed or are there actions making it worse? We will ask a member of Congress who recently went to Moscow and was briefed.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:51:12]

CAMEROTA: The conflict in Syria continues to escalate. A human rights group says rebels are using captured Syrian soldiers as human shields to ward off government attacks. This as Russia appears to change its support of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

Joining us now is a member of the House Subcommittee on Intelligence, Democrat Congressman Eric Swalwell. He has recently returned from a trip to Moscow.

Congressman, thanks so much for being here on NEW DAY. Tell us about your trip to Moscow and your meetings with the foreign ministry leaders.

REPRESENTATIVE ERIC SWALWELL (D), RANKING MEMBER, SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE CIA: Good morning. Thank you, Alisyn. I was in Moscow about three weeks ago on an intelligence trip and I met with folks from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. My goal there was simple.

First to make sure that we have no midair incidents between Russian jets supporting the Assad regime and the U.S. jets that are trying to take out ISIS fighters with our coalition partners, that is my first concern.

Secondly, I conveyed to the Russians that they are complicit in the slaughtering of innocent people on the ground in Syria. They are causing this refugee crisis to continue to escalate.

And that there are no military victories to be found in Syria on behalf of the United States or Russia and that we should do everything we can to find a way to find new leadership there, rather than just see the death toll get higher and higher.

CAMEROTA: Well, Congressman, that is a strong message you issued to the leaders of the foreign ministry there. What was the response?

SWALWELL: Typical of the Russian propaganda machine, what they say and what they do are often the difference between daylight and darkness. So they assured that they only have an interest in fighting ISIS. However, what they are doing shows that they are clearly trying to support the Assad regime and part of the bombing of innocent civilians in Damascus.

CAMEROTA: Right. Let's talk about that, how is what Russia is doing in Syria affecting the U.S. policy and how should the U.S. be responding?

SWALWELL: The U.S. I believe needs to work internationally to remove Assad from power. We should not be sending additional U.S. forces on the ground to Syria without a clear mission.

I believe that, you know, the president's plan to put more individuals into the Syria is very dangerous. I believe he's doing so without the authorization of Congress and that he should go to Congress and ask for the use of military force so that we can define the scope of just what our role there is going to be.

Otherwise, I do fear that we could have a mission creep and pretty soon we could see hundreds or thousands of U.S. soldiers on the ground mired in this mess that is a Syrian conflict.

CAMEROTA: Congressman, look, you are in Congress. What do you think Congress' appetite is or willingness is to vote on a measure in Syria?

SWALWELL: We should be guided by lessons from the past and we know whether it is in South America or Vietnam or other conflicts in the Middle East that working with our international allies to find political solutions is always better than trying to go in and do it ourselves especially with boots on the ground in uncertain areas where religious strife seems to predominate everything else.

So I'm very concerned about this and I think Congress should define how many people we're sending in there, how long they are going to be there, and if that doesn't happen, I'm afraid of what could come next.

CAMEROTA: Congressman, very quickly, I want you to comment on our top story and that is what happened with this Russian Metrojet. Are you confident now having dealt with the Russians that we will get real information from them about what caused this crash? It's been suggested that they might engage in some sort of cover up.

SWALWELL: There are three propaganda machines here at work. First the Egyptians, they don't want it to be terrorism. So without much of an investigation they are ruling that out.

The Russians don't want it to be an airliner mechanical failure so they are suggesting terrorism, and then of course, ISIS is claiming responsibility without much evidence.

[07:55:10]There is only one version of the truth. Hopefully for the sake of the traveling public everywhere we can get to the bottom of it.

CAMEROTA: Absolutely. Congressman Eric Swalwell, thanks so much for being on NEW DAY.

SWALWELL: Thank you, Alisyn.

CAMEROTA: Let's get over to Chris.

CUOMO: Well, it wasn't the election everyone has been talking about, but it matters. How could those state and local issues decided last night give Republicans a boost in 2016? That's the question. Remember, politics often follows culture.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

CAMEROTA: Trump and Carson neck and neck.

DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I have the ultimate temperament. My temperament is great. I have ninety days left. I want to win.

JEB BUSH (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I have to get better at debating or performing I guess whatever that's called. I'm the best qualified to be president.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Are you comfortable with Donald Trump as commander in chief?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Uncharacteristic sounds on the cockpit voice recorder.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The U.S. satellite detected this heat flash while the plane was still in flight. ISIS has given no proof it was responsible.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: There are many ways to put a bomb on the plane as there are people in the airport that touch that plane.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

CUOMO: Good morning. Welcome to your NEW DAY. It is Wednesday, November 4th, 8:00 in the east. Republicans hope election night 2015 is a sign of more good things to come. Why?