Return to Transcripts main page


Witness Breaks Down Watching George Floyd's Final Moments; Police And Chokeholds; Source Federal Probe Of GOP Congressman Involves Allegations Of Sex Trafficking And Prostitution; Two Injured Capitol Hill Police Officers File Suit Against Trump In Wake Of Riots; Quality Issue At Plant Delays Some Of J&J's Vaccine; NYPD Arrest Suspect In Violent Attack On Asian American Woman Caught On Tape. Aired 8-9p ET

Aired March 31, 2021 - 20:00   ET


ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST: Ripping off someone's pants might be the final straw.

All right, thanks so much for joining us. Don't forget. You can watch OUTFRONT anytime, anywhere, just go to CNN Go.

"AC360" starts now.


JIM SCIUTTO, CNN HOST: He told George Floyd he could not win as police tried to get Floyd into a squad car. Today, on the witness stand, Charles McMillian's memories of that day and the video of it brought him to tears.

Jim Sciutto here, in again for Anderson tonight.

Day Three of the Derek Chauvin trial saw witnesses haunted by their helplessness as a man was slowly killed right in front of their eyes. We watched a juror experience what she later called a stress related reaction to those proceedings.

We saw for the first time, body cam video of George Floyd's confrontation with police.

CNN's senior national correspondent, Sara Sidner has our report, and we must give you this warning, some of this video is just tough to watch.


SARA SIDNER, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice over): Sixty-one-year old eyewitness, Charles McMillian took the stand breaking down in sobs after prosecutors played this body camera video of George Floyd interacting with police.

GEORGE FLOYD, VICTIM: I can't breathe. I can't breathe.


FLOYD: Mama. Mama. Mama.

CHARLES MCMILLIAN, SAW GEORGE FLOYD BEING DETAINED: I feel helpless. I don't have a mama either, and I understand him.

SIDNER (voice over): McMillian is the man you hear on the video begging Floyd to give in to police before Floyd is taken to the ground.

MCMILLIAN: Just, I have had interaction with officers myself, and I understand once you get in the cuffs, you can't win. You're done.

SIDNER (voice over): McMillian told the jury he regularly walks his neighborhood. In fact, he bumped into Officer Derek Chauvin there five days before Floyd's arrest.

MCMILLIAN: Five days ago, I told you the other day, go home to your family safe, that the next person goes home to their family safe, but today, I got to look at you as a maggot.

SIDNER (voice over): On this day in court, the jury also saw George Floyd alive, watching not seen before surveillance video from inside the Cup Food Store. Nineteen-year-old former cashier Christopher Martin took the stand to explain what was going on leading up to police arriving.

QUESTION: Do you recall what it was that you sold to him?

CHRISTOPHER MARTIN, FORMER CASHIER AT CUP FOOD STORE: A pack of cigarettes. He seemed very friendly. Approachable. He was talkative. He seemed to just be having average Memorial Day, just living his life.

SIDNER (voice over): A scene from everyday life, but the jury knows they are watching a dead man walking. In less than an hour, Floyd will be struggling for his life under then Officer Derek Chauvin's knee.

Martin says Floyd seemed high.

MARTIN: When I asked -- asked him if he played baseball, he went on to respond to that, but it kind of took him a little long, so it would appear that he was high.

SIDNER (voice over): And paid for cigarettes with an odd looking $20.00 bill.

MARTIN: I assumed that it was fake.

SIDNER (voice over): He testified the store policy is if a cashier accepts counterfeit money, it comes out of their paycheck.

MARTIN: I took it anyways, and I was planning to just put it on my tab, until I second guessed myself and as you can see in the video, I kept jamming it and then I eventually told my manager.

SIDNER (voice over): The manager of the store asked another employee to call police on Floyd after the teenage employees confronted Floyd at his car twice.

When police eventually detained Floyd, Martin heard a commotion and went outside.

MARTIN: George was motionless, limp and Chauvin seemed very -- he was in a resting state.

QUESTION: What's going through your mind during that time period?

MARTIN: Disbelief, then guilt.

QUESTION: Why guilt?

MARTIN: If I would have just not taken the bill, this could have been avoided.

SIDNER (voice over): And for the first time, we hear Chauvin explaining on his body camera why he restrained Floyd.

VOICE OF DEREK CHAUVIN, FORMER MINNEAPOLIS POLICE OFFICER: I am going to control this guy because he is a sizable guy.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, get in the car.

CHAUVIN: It's like -- it looks like he is probably on something.

SIDNER (voice over): The jury then saw the excruciatingly close video from several angles, all of it from officers' body cameras.

FLOYD: Mama, I love you.

SIDNER (voice over): It takes several minutes before you hear an officer, just one, question Chauvin's tactics.



LANE: I just worry about the excited delirium of whatever.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That's why we have an ambulance coming.


SCIUTTO: Sara Sidner joins us now. Sara, there's so many moments in there. I mean, just heart stopping to watch. How surprised were court watchers? How were they affected by this? Because a lot of us, not only were we seeing it for the first time, but they were seeing it for the first time.


SIDNER: Yes, I think what you just said that your heart is almost stopped as you're watching these moments that are just excruciatingly painful because it feels like you're there. It is from the perspective of the officers, that surveillance video, when they are so close.

You can hear him struggling to breathe. You can hear him begging for his breath, begging for his mother, thinking about the woman who would care for him. And by the way, his mother has long been dead. But at that moment, he just wanted the one person he knew would care for him.

It was really hard to watch. I know a lot of people have been writing to me, calling me saying, "I couldn't watch the whole thing. It was too much." And I'm sure that the jury, some of them certainly felt that same way.

One of the things that really stuck out to me was almost a one-two punch when you heard from Charles McMillian, and you saw him completely break down on the stand, unable to finish his sentence as a 61-year-old man who normally walks the streets, he began his testimony. He was jovial, he was funny, saying that he was just nosy and he heard some commotion, so as a nosy guy in the neighborhood, he went over and he went to see what was going on.

We all know a guy like that in the neighborhood, right? We all know somebody who goes and tries to check out what's happening. But then what he saw broke him, and you saw that on the stand.

That was followed by video after video after video of George Floyd begging, begging with all his might and you can hear the fear in his voice for his life. And guess what? The jury is leaving with that image and those sounds of a sobbing 61-year-old and a sobbing George Floyd. They left the courtroom with that in their minds. That was the last thing they heard.

SCIUTTO: Yes. The cries for his mother, the cries for his mother. Sara Sidner, thanks so much.

Joining us now Catherine Flynn. She defended Baltimore Police Officer Garrett Miller in the death of Freddie Gray. Also with us, CNN legal analyst and former Federal prosecutor Laura Coates.

Laura, describe, based on your experience, if you can, the impact on a jury. It's a jury of 12 human beings, right? When they see this up close through that body camera footage, right. This is a man dying slowly. When they hear him calling for his mother in that instance there. How do juries react to that kind of thing?

LAURA COATES, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, remember, during the voir dire process, Jim, some of them actually said they'd never even seen the original eight minute 46-second video that we all thought. It was confined to that close universe.

They are seeing that for the first time.

Just two days ago, you're seeing all of this. You're hearing the testimony of teenagers, somebody as young as nine. Imagine if the 61- year-old was breaking down like that on the stand, what is the trauma that is being associated with the nine-year-old? With the now 18 or with the 19-year-old that also talked about this? The firefighter as well? The mixed martial arts fighter who spoke about these issues? All of this is the culmination of so much and these words are going to

be churning around in jurors' minds, and the question that's going to come out of this is, looking towards Derek Chauvin, the defendant in this case, why didn't you move? Why didn't this move you the way it obviously moved so many other people?

It really is almost forcing the hand of the defense counsel to try to consider whether he will have to take the stand because the prosecution is doing no favors to try to answer that question for him and obviate the need for him to take the stand.

SCIUTTO: Yes. Christopher Miller describing Derek Chauvin being, in his words, "resting state" as he had his knee on George Floyd's neck. Remarkable testimony there.

Catherine, every time the prosecution introduces more video of Floyd's death into evidence, whether it's body camera footage or other footage, including from bystanders. I mean, in effect, they are re- showing, right, the alleged crime here that puts the defense in a tough position. Is that automatically bad for the defense? And how do they push back?

CATHERINE FLYNN, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Well, something I was struck by is that the defense doesn't seem to be objecting to what some of the civilian witnesses are testifying to.

When the state asked the witnesses: how did this make you feel? That's not really relevant, and the defense certainly could have objected to that. And one of the things you can do as a defense attorney is interrupt the flow and sort of try and knock the state off their game and interrupt things.

And so knowing that there's going to be this avalanche of video testimony, it certainly would be an option just to try and break that up and then at some point, potentially object to it because it's redundant and it simply isn't adding anything, any more evidence to the case, and so that's something that I was struck by today.


SCIUTTO: Laura, you and I discussed this last night. Yesterday, there were some contentious interactions between the defense and some of the witnesses. We didn't see that today, even in the midst and to Catherine's point there, right, of them playing this over and over again. Do you see a course correction there from the defense?

COATES: I think we are and to Catherine's point, too, they could have stipulated to having all these things admitted at some point and not have the need to have the repetition. But of course, it inures the benefit of the prosecution to keep playing it, to have this repetition, the primacy and recency all part of the actual process control strategy.

But there was a course correction, because I don't think they -- I don't think the defense counsel understood when they began to be confrontational or to try to scapegoat the witnesses as if somehow this seemingly to them, unruly crowd, somehow precipitated the conduct of officers that the crowd was reacting to. They realized, I'm sure quickly, that the juice was not worth the squeeze.

And if you're not moving the needle in the direction in favor of your client, then perhaps it's best simply to redirect your efforts in something else.

And remember, it's going to ultimately come down to the second factor, the second question, Jim, which is whether the kneeling was a substantial causal factor in his death. They are probably going to set up and reserve a lot of their gunpowder in this case for that battle of experts as opposed to wasting it trying to undermine really some of the most pure, credible witnesses, like nine-year-olds, or 18-year- olds or 19-year-olds, disinterested parties.

SCIUTTO: Yes. Catherine, a question for the defense, a big one. Would you put Derek Chauvin on the stand?

FLYNN: I would certainly want to try and do that. I mean, one of the real benefits of being able to put your client on the stand is to be able to humanize him to the jury. And if he can come across as personable and human, that can be very effective.

And I certainly think all of the jurors are going to want to know what was going on in his mind. I mean, the defense, obviously, is going to be focusing on the fact that this was all in compliance with the training that he received. That seemed to be what they were suggesting in their opening is that they are setting this up, that this was -- that what the officer was doing was perfectly reasonable and in line with his training.

And I certainly think having him testify as to exactly what was going through his mind. I mean, obviously, there was some suggestion that there's a perceived threat from this crowd. And I think that might have been undercut by quite a few of these civilian witnesses, who didn't really seem all that threatening, and the worst they did was swear at the officers.

So I think having the officer testify from his perspective to establish the reasonableness of his decision making would be helpful if he can be successful as a witness.

I mean, obviously, the cross examination has to be pretty withering.

SCIUTTO: I mean, one member of that crowd, he was crying on the stand there, right, overcome by emotion. It doesn't seem to think that that profile.

Laura, you do hear in this body cam footage something of testimony, right, from Derek Chauvin where after the fact, he is explaining to a member of the crowd saying, in effect, we had to use that force because he's a big man. Right?

I mean, that his initial defense, if you can call it that, in the moment, important to that, in your view, Laura? COATES: The idea of trying to suggest this was some kind of a "David

and Goliath" moment is absurd because whatever power dynamic may have been at issue, this was an unconscious, not breathing man who was not resisting arrest.

There is a timeline and an expiration time for when you're able to continue to use lethal force when your suspect or the person you're trying to subdue has been completely neutralized and rendered unconscious.

So any argument in the contrary, he has not proven. His statements today that we heard did not move the needle.

SCIUTTO: Listen, Laura Coates, Catherine Flynn, so good to be able to draw on your experience tonight. Thanks for joining.

FLYNN: Thank you very much.

SCIUTTO: Next, to the point of Officer Chauvin's training, a closer look at police and chokeholds in particular and whether what was done to George Floyd should ever be done to anyone in any circumstances regardless of how well-trained an officer is. A former top cop will join us.

And later, the strange -- very strange saga of Congressman Matt Gaetz, and how the Feds came to investigate him as part of a broader probe of sex trafficking allegations involving another Florida politician.



SCIUTTO: All week, prosecutors in the Derek Chauvin trial have put video of George Floyd's death front and center, repeatedly, not merely for the emotional punch it certainly packs. We've seen that in the courtroom. Also, for what it shows, to an expert eye and they hope to jurors.

One witness who is skilled in mixed martial arts has already testified to what he saw in what Chauvin did.


QUESTION: Did you draw on your training and experience in wrestling and mixed martial arts to get an idea of what this officer was doing physically there?

DONALD WILLIAMS, PROSECUTION WITNESS: Correct. Yes. So like, I'm standing here and observing everything. Before I even spoke, if you have you seen a video. I watched what was going on.

And as he is positioned here before I even spoke to an officer, I watched the position, one, of where the position of the knee was on the neck, you know; two, what body movements was going on while the knee was on the neck; and then three, what was the condition of George Floyd while he was going through this torture. [20:20:14]

WILLIAMS: One, was that the neck was diagonal across the throat, which on a blood choke, you would attack the side of the neck, you know, in which you're going to come over or a side choke or things like that. You want to attack the side of the neck to cut the circulation or the breathing from a person and then to get the choke tighter, you hit different shimmies which I felt the officer on top was shimmying to actually get the final choking while he was on top.


SCIUTTO: So, was this a misuse of a proper technique or just flat out wrong? In a moment we're going to speak with a former big city Police Chief, but first some useful background on chokeholds specifically from our Gary Tuchman.


GARY TUCHMAN, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: This is the Pro Edge Boxing and MMA Gym in Phoenix, Arizona and with us right now is a black belt in Brazilian jujitsu, this is Coach Mario Lujan. He works here. He is a trainer.

Chokeholds --


TUCHMAN: And why do you teach them? What is the purpose of teaching chokehold?

LUJAN: A chokehold is one way to end a fight without any serious violence and you can do it without serious injury.

TUCHMAN: Okay, but you have to do it ethically.

LUJAN: You have to be responsible.

TUCHMAN: You have to be responsible. Just tell me what you teach

LUJAN: One basic chokehold we do is called a rear-naked choke. When I'm behind my opponent, I bring my forearm in front of his throat underneath the chin. My hand grabs onto my bicep to lock the position. I bring my other hand behind his head.

From here, I slowly start to squeeze. When my opponent taps, I need to release.

TUCHMAN: What's another one you teach?

LUJAN: Another basic choke is called a front guillotine, so I want to have my opponent's head in a down position, I get him in a basic front headlock. Grab my other hand, I slowly start to squeeze. Again, my opponent taps.

TUCHMAN: But that's legitimate?

LUJAN: And I've got to release.

TUCHMAN: That's ethical.

LUJAN: These are all ethical.

TUCHMAN: You've trained with police officers. You know what they go through.


TUCHMAN: They're taught to do it like this. They're not taught to do it like what was done in Minnesota.

LUJAN: No, definitely not.

TUCHMAN: With one of your associates here, the manager in this gym, I want you to show me what not to do.

LUJAN: Okay. Definitely.

TUCHMAN (voice over): When Coach Mario looks at the Derek Chauvin videotape, this is what he sees.

LUJAN: He had his knee here on his arm, his other knee was right across his neck here. I'm being light. You can see where I'm on my toes, right here because I'm being light. I'm being nice to him.

But once I change my toe position. Now you can see his face squirming. If I'm like this, his face is fine. He is fine.

But what I believe the officer should have done was this here on the shoulder blade, ham control, right, and he's here. George isn't going anywhere especially with three other officers here. He is stuck in this position.

I keep the head control so he can't move in certain directions, but as you can clearly see, once I change my foot position and I start to put the pressure.

TUCHMAN: So I take it, you were horrified when you saw that video, too?

LUJAN: I was like, "Oh my god." It was completely unnecessary. He didn't have to have his knee on his neck.

TUCHMAN: What do you teach your students never to do?

LUJAN: Hold the choke. As soon as somebody taps, you need to release the choke.

TUCHMAN: Gary Tuchman --


SCIUTTO: That clearly did not happen in George Floyd's case. We know the result.

Joining us now, CNN law enforcement analyst, Charles Ramsey, former top cop in both Washington, D.C. and Philadelphia.

Chief Ramsey, always good to have you on. You heard the trainer there.


SCIUTTO: He is not just a trainer, he helps train police and he described what was training right and what was completely unnecessary and describing Chauvin's use of force there as unnecessary. Of course, as it turned out possibly deadly here, right, that's the allegation.

Do you agree with his analysis that was unnecessary?

RAMSEY: I do. You know, many departments have banned a chokehold, outright banned it. Others have put it into a category of deadly force, the same as using a firearm because of the potential for bodily harm or even death if it's not done properly.

And so, what you saw Chauvin do was totally inappropriate on a variety of levels, but certainly, you know, the fact that he sustained that kind of pressure for the length of time that he did, it's just inexcusable and I can't see anybody saying that that was justified.


SCIUTTO: You know, what stood out to me of many things today was one of the witnesses there describing Derek Chauvin, it was Christopher Miller, as being in a resting state. And as he had his knee with that pressure that that trainer was showing was unnecessary pressure.

As a police officer who served so many years, how did that strike you? I mean could you imagine yourself in the same position applying that level of force and being in, you know, resting state?

RAMSEY: No. Listen, I've been in a lot of situations where force was necessary, but just like you train, you use only that force necessary to affect an arrest. Once the resistance stops, the force stops.

It is no more complicated than that and you know, when you look at that video, there was a point in time when there was some resistance on the part of George Floyd getting in the car. He said he was claustrophobic or whatever.

When they got him in the car, why they pulled him back out of the car? That's a different issue. I really don't understand that.

But when they first get him down on the ground, he is kicking his legs around and they get control of that. Well, once that's over, the force is over. There's another five or six minutes where they're continuing to hold him down, apply pressure and that's just totally inappropriate. It is no longer needed.

SCIUTTO: Yes. Well, Chief Ramsey, thanks so much for helping us understand. I know we're going to be keeping up the conversation in the days ahead.


SCIUTTO: Straight ahead --

RAMSEY: Okay, thank you.

SCIUTTO: An update on the Federal investigation into Republican Congressman Matt Gaetz and some new information on what the allegations concern. Gaetz has denied the allegations, but it's a story with some new bizarre twists and turns. Details, next.



SCIUTTO: Diehard supporter of former President Trump and conservative firebrand Congressman Matt Gaetz is under federal investigation, this according to a source familiar with that probe. The probe centers around allegations involving sex trafficking and prostitution including allegations involving a minor.

Gaetz, we should note has denied the accusations says separately he's a victim of extortion is a story first reported by The New York Times and today appearing on fox News House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy had this to say.


REP. KEVIN MCCARTHY (R-CA): Those are serious implications if it comes out to be true, yes we would remove him if that was the case. But right now as Matt Gaetz says is not true and we don't have any information. So let's get all the information.


SCIUTTO: We should know that this pro began under former Attorney General Bill Barr. A source familiar with the matter tells CNN that Barr was briefed multiple times on the investigation into Gaetz. "360's" Randi Kaye has the latest.


RANDI KAYE, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): At the heart of the investigation into Congressman Matt Gaetz, questions about an alleged sexual relationship with a 17-year-old girl. The New York Times reports federal investigators began looking at Gaetz in the final months of the Trump administration, zeroing in on alleged encounters dating back around two years.

The paper reports investigators are trying to figure out if Gaetz a top ally of former President Donald Trump had sexual relations with a girl and if he violated federal sex trafficking laws by paying for her to travel across state lines.

REP. MATT GAETZ (R-FL): We are in a battle for the soul of the Republican Party.

KAYE (voice-over): Gaetz who is 38 has not been charged with a crime and denies any wrongdoing. Though according to a person familiar with the case, Gaetz was shopping for a lawyer a few weeks ago approaching at least one major criminal defense firm in Washington D.C.

After news of the investigation broke, Gaetz denied any wrongdoing saying in a statement to CNN over the past several weeks my family and I have been victims of an organized criminal extortion involving a former DOJ official seeking $25 million while threatening to smear my name.

And later on Fox News talking to Tucker Carlson --

GAETZ: The person doesn't exist. I have not had a relationship with a 17-year-old that is totally false.

KAYE (voice-over): But as Gaetz rattled on even Carlson was taken aback.

TUCKER CARLSON, FOX NEWS HOST: That was one of the weirdest interviews I've ever conducted.

KAYE (voice-over): During the interview Gaetz expanded on the extortion claim naming a David McGee as the former Department of Justice prosecutor behind it.

GAETZ: They're merely intended to try to bleed my family out of money and this former Department of Justice official tomorrow was supposed to be contacted by my father so that specific instructions could be given regarding the wiring of $4.5 million as a down payment on this bribe.

KAYE (voice-over): David McGee's law firm telling CNN in response the allegation by the Congressman is both false and defamatory. Adding, while he was with the DOJ he would never have entertained a scheme such as what Congressman Gaetz suggests nor would he today.

(on-camera): CNN has learned the investigation into Gaetz is all part of a broader probe of another politician here in Florida. Federal authorities began taking a look at Gaetz as they investigated Joel Greenberg a former county official in central Florida. He was arrested last year on charges which include harassing a political opponent and sex trafficking of a minor.

(voice-over): Greenberg seen here in photos with Matt Gaetz has pleaded not guilty and is awaiting trial.

The FBI in Jacksonville refused to comment to CNN on the existence or status of the investigation, directing us to the Department of Justice which also refused to comment.

Randi Kaye, CNN, Palm Beach County Florida.


SCIUTTO: As Randi noted, Representative Gaetz almost immediately went on Fox News to defend himself.

Perspective now, from Maggie Haberman, a CNN political analyst and White House correspondent for The New York Times. And Andrew McCabe, former deputy director of the FBI and a CNN contributor. Thanks so much to both of you tonight.

Andrew, so CNN has confirmed the existence of the investigation as reported by the New York Times. And it's also CNN's reporting that Barr then Attorney General was briefed on this multiple times, based on your experience years in the FBI. If you have an investigation like this underway for that period of time, and the Attorney General is briefed on it, it's a substantial investigation.


ANDREW MCCABE, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Yes, it is, Jim, it's substantial. It's very serious. You know, 21 years of opening and overseeing conducting investigations, I can tell you that nobody opens a sex trafficking investigation, in which the subject is a sitting member of Congress without having a significant, you know, degree of information.

In this case, it's likely that some of that information came from the prosecution of this associate of Congressman Gaetz, Joel Greenberg. But that's hard to tell at this point. But in any case, I can assure you the FBI doesn't open these cases lightly. And they don't get briefed to the Attorney General without some significant momentum behind them.

SCIUTTO: Maggie, it can be confusing, right to follow this, right. Because you have the investigation, and it shows that at this point investigation into the possibility of sex trafficking here, and underage girl. But now you have this allegation. Gaetz saying that, after this investigation was started, we should be clear that the extortion story is separate from the investigation.

It's the information about the investigation existing right? He's claiming that he was extorted to the tune of many millions of dollars here. Tell us about that what that means, what's at the basis of it? How credit -- because some of the some of that is, it's an outlet, somewhat outlandish claim.

MAGGIE HABERMAN, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Look, Gaetz has said all of this publicly, he has said that it's related to him and his father, that this was about, you know, potential help involving locating or fraying or something related to an ex-FBI agent who was taken captive overseas and who officials have been looking for some time.

Gaetz, in his comments appears to be linking these two, I don't know of information that suggests that these are related, at least in the reporting that we have or the reporting that other people have. But that is what he is saying publicly. Again, it is, as you say, very confusing to follow the threads of this. And just to confuse it a little further here, Jim.

The thing Gaetz has not talked about that I have, as far as I know, he hasn't been asked and maybe he hasn't, he just has avoided it. But he has not yet talked about his relationship with Joel Greenberg, this other official who is under investigation, and that is still something of an open question, as all of this is playing out.

SCIUTTO: No question. Andrew, as you heard in Randi's story, Congressman Gaetz, he went on Fox News, right, and an interview that Tucker Carlson described as one of the strangest he's ever done. As a former investigator, first of all, is that a good idea given the seriousness of the charges to go out there and speak in that way in a public forum?

MCCABE: No, no. I think any attorney would advise you not to go on television and talk about cases that you are currently the subject of or potentially the victim of. So, you know, as you've mentioned, in both these are two very different things, the sex trafficking investigation, which apparently started many months ago, and the alleged extortion, which Mr. Gaetz indicates start happening this month.

In either case, if you know if these are, you know, you face great peril in the sex trafficking case as its subject. And of course, if there is an extortion, you would want the FBI and the department to be able to work that to a, you know, a good conclusion. And you're certainly not helping that by going on Tucker Carlson show and talking about and exposing the fact that your own father world wire against one of the subjects.

So, it's all quite bizarre.

SCIUTTO: Maggie, Congressman Gaetz, has certainly been a staunch and very vocal ally and supporter, former President Trump, is there any sense of how this news is being received by the former president, by those in his orbit?

HABERMAN: Sure. Again, I do want to say one thing just to what Andrew McCabe just said. The only other person that I can think of that I have seen handled an investigation this way is Donald Trump when he was under investigation by the Mueller team, but he was president and it's a little different the protections you have as president versus anyone else.

In terms of how Trump and his folks are handling it, look, they're still processing the information. There's some people around President Trump and President Trump himself who really like Matt Gaetz a lot. There are others who are quite wary of him in the former president's orbit.

The former president's first impulse is going to be to want to defend him and to suggest that this is political, despite the fact that it was Bill Barr, who under whom this investigation started, there are others around the former president who are cautioning him to wait and see what if anything else comes out.

SCIUTTO: Understood. Maggie Haberman, Andrew McCabe, thanks so much for joining news toight.


(voice-over): Well two injured Capitol Hill police officers have now filed suit in the wake of the January 6 insurrection. Perhaps most eye catching is who they are suing. The details and their attorney, when we come back.


SCIUTTO: It is the first lawsuit of its kind. Two Capitol Hill police officers who were injured during the interaction on January 6, are now suing former President Trump for inciting that crowd. His speech they allege leading to their injuries. The two say they suffered both physical and emotional damage directly because of the former president's words. So far, no word from Trump's lawyers.

Patrick Malone is the attorney representing those two officers. Mr. Malone your clients, they're the first Capitol Police officers to bring a lawsuit against the former president over the events of January 6. And I wonder, can you explain to us why do they hold the president -- the former president responsible?

PATRICK MALONE, ATTORNEY REPRESENTING INJURED CAPITOL POLICE OFFICERS: You know, Representative Cheney said he was the one who assembled the mob. Let the match fanned the flames. And our guys are just regular police officers who were not just physically hurt but just were stunned at this whole thing when they were attacked over and over and over by people who told them hey, we came from the President, and you should join us.


So, it's very weird, weird circumstance for them. And they think that there should be some legal accountability for what Trump did wrong here.

SCIUTTO: Why, can explain us why this civil court action? It's a civil case, of course, is so important to that?

MALONE: Well, you know, our civil justice system is a powerful weapon for truth and for accountability. You can get a lot of discovery in a civil case that does not happen in criminal court nearly as well. The facts get laid out, we take depositions, we find out exactly what was going on in the White House when all these events were happening at the Capitol and why it was that the rioters were not called off until they had hurt so many people.

So, there's just a lot that the civil justice system can do. And the whole idea of the lawsuit is called compensation. Compensation just means balancing it out. So, you balance out the harm that happened to somebody with money. And money is the language that this former President knows how to speak.

SCIUTTO: I want to play some videos that Chronicle what happened to several Capitol Police Force officers.




SCIUTTO: Now, I don't believe we were seeing your clients specifically in the footage we showed, but it does demonstrate the overall situation they and other Capital Officers -- police officers faced. Let me read one part of your lawsuit describes Officer Hemby's injuries which speak to that and I'm quoting here, Officer Hemby was crushed against the doors on the east side trying to hold the insurrection is back over and over.

He tried to tell the insurrectionist that the doors open outward, and that pressing him into the door would do no good. But the insurrectionists continued to scream Fight for Trump.

As you're aware of Mr. Malone, there's been something of historical revisionism since that day by some Republican lawmakers saying well, they weren't really armed. It wasn't really violent. Tell us in fact, what Officer Hemby endured that day.

MALONE: Just relentless assault over and over and over both Officer Hemby and Officer Blassingame, the other plaintiff in this case, just describe literally hours of assaults. What you saw was just a tiny little snippet in those clips of what these fellows endured. It wasn't just the body blows with all sorts of weapons, flagpoles, all sorts of other devices and fists. But it was also hurling very violent and offensive language with them.

You probably saw in our complaint, how Officer Blassingame was called racial slurs so many times that, that he couldn't even count them.

SCIUTTO: And as the suit mentions, you know, the insurrectionists were mentioning Trump by name as they did that. I want to describe you mentioned Officer Blassingame, the other plaintiff in this. I'm going to quote from the suit now as to what he says happened to him that day. Insurrectionists threatened him, they would F you up if you don't get out of our way and to get down or I'll put you down. The insurrectionist struck Officer Blassingame in his face, head, chest, arms and what felt like every part of his body.

As you say, they also hurled racial slurs against him. Tell us --


SCIUTTO: -- what damage that did.

MALONE: You know, it's not just that it's some stranger coming up to you calling you bad language. But the bewildering part about it is these are people who said I said to them to both our guys, we're on a mission were sent here by Trump, you should be on our side. We're here to attack Congress. Get out of our way.

SCIUTTO: Well, Patrick Malone, thanks so much for taking the time tonight. We appreciate hearing your and the officers account to these events.

MALONE: Yes, good to talk to you Jim.

SCIUTTO (voice-over): Just ahead, breaking news about a major quality control issue at a plant involved with the Johnson & Johnson vaccine. The implications for the national vaccine rollout, when we continue.



SCIUTTO: Breaking news tonight, a big snag for the one and done COVID vaccine from Johnson & Johnson the company, telling CNN that quality control measures identified a problem during a test run at a plant in Baltimore, which makes one of the vaccines ingredients.

"The New York Times" is reporting that as many as 15 million vaccine doses could be affected. J &J does say this will not hurt its goal of delivering 20 million doses this month. The FDA tells CNN it is aware of the situation unable itself to comment further.

Let's get perspective on exactly what this means from Dr. Celine Gounder, she's an infectious disease specialist and a CNN medical analyst who served as a COVID adviser to President Biden's transition team.

Dr. Gounder, good to have you back. You know, we've had really only good news with vaccinations right in recent weeks and months and real acceleration to get Americans vaccinated, what impact will this have?

CELINE GOUNDER, CNN MEDICAL ANALYST: So, Emergent Bio Solutions is this manufacturing company in Baltimore, that is a partner with Johnson & Johnson, they had an issue with mixing up vaccine ingredients at their plant, and that has compromised some estimated 15 million doses of the vaccine. Now, up until now, all of the doses have been coming from a manufacturing plant in Europe.

And so, yes, they are on target to meet their current delivery estimates for the month. But beyond that is in jeopardy.

SCIUTTO: How unusual is this kind of thing with such a sensitive product? And will it be difficult to fix a quality control issue like this?

GOUNDER: Look, many of us have actually been quite surprised pleasantly surprised that things have gone so smoothly over the last couple of months with the rollout of the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines and we were really anticipating more problems with production of the vaccine.

So, you know, I think to some degree this was to be expected and it's surprising that we didn't have a hiccup until now.

SCIUTTO: Listen, and by and large, it's working. I got my first shot today and I'm impressed with the whole process. I hesitate to say this because I don't want to inadvertently add to vaccine hesitancy but it is an existing problem with some Americans and I wonder if you see something like this, what do you say to folks so they can understand, you know, the importance of this and what it means for them?


GOUNDER: Look, I think this really speaks to the fact that the U.S. process for reviewing drugs and vaccines is the world gold standard. And it's the way we review clinical trial data, the way that we vet the manufacturing plants.

So, the plants that are producing the Johnson & Johnson vaccine up until now they're based in the Netherlands in Europe, they have received that stamp of approval from the U.S. government regulators. And so, whatever makes it to people here on the ground in the U.S. is fully vetted, vaccine.

SCIUTTO: Understood, that's why you have quality control. Finally, on the good news side, we learned this week that the Pfizer vaccine is 100% effective for young people between the ages of 12 and 15. It's amazing to say that impact there because of course that brings up the idea of vaccinations before the start of the new school year.

GOUNDER: This is incredibly important because these vaccines are shown to be effective, not just in preventing disease and death, which are pretty rare in younger people, but also in preventing infection. So essentially that carrier state where you have no symptoms. So this means that if you vaccinate young people, they're highly unlikely to be transmitting onwards to adults. And that's great news.

SCIUTTO: Absolutely. Dr. Celine Gounder, thanks so much.

(voice-over): Just ahead, the NYPD has now arrested a suspect in a vicious attack on an Asian-American woman caught on video. Alarming to see. We'll have the details of that arrest when "360" continues.


SCIUTTO: Police in New York have now arrested a suspect in a vicious assault on an elderly Asian-American woman. They say it is the man you see here Brandon Elliot and are now recommending he face two counts of assault as a hate crime. The attack was caught on video outside a building in midtown Manhattan. It is difficult to watch.


Today building owners released a new statement saying the two lobby workers remain suspended pending investigation. And the company is committed to strengthening internal training. You see them just standing by there.

The news continues. Let's hand it over now to my good friend Chris, "CUOMO PRIME TIME."