tv CNN Newsroom With Brooke Baldwin CNN March 22, 2017 12:00pm-1:01pm PDT
approached. the attacker walked towards him with an out stretched weapon, i didn't know whether it was a gun or a knife, and then a few seconds gunfire, an that's when it was all panic, i assume it was the armed police who patrol parliament and taking out the attacker. >> people ran for cover of course as the sound of gunfire was erupting as prime minister theresa may was evacuated from parliament. president trump has been informed of the situation, has been on the phone with the prime minister. let's go to christian amanpour and nick, let me go to you, the metropolitan police just held a conference, four dead including
the attacker. what more do we know? >> reporter: we know one of the dead was a police officer, a police woman. we don't know who the other two dead are at this stage one would have to assume that they were innocent passers by at the time. also of the 20 people, the police have now reported injured, they tell us among those three were police officers -- >> sorry nick, got to go house intel chairman devin nunes just talking about in front of the white house. >> today i briefed the president on the concerns that i had about incidental collection and how it relates to the president-elect trump and his transition team and the concerns that i have. as i said earlier, there will be more information hopefully by friday. the nsa is cooperating very, very well and lastly i'll say that the reports that i was able to see did not have anything to
do with russia or the russian investigation or any tie to the trump team. with that, i'll take a couple of questions. >> why is it appropriate for you to brief president trump given it is his own campaign or associates -- >> because what i saw has nothing to do with russia and nothing to do with the russian investigation. has everything to do with possible surveillance activities and the president needs to know these intelligence reports are out there. and i have a duty to tell him that. >>. [ inaudible ] >> i'm not drawing nik any conclusions. >> it appears i don't want to get too much into the details but these were intelligence reports and it brings up a lot of concerns about you know
whether things were properly minimized or not. but i will tell you, i've only seen some, it's in the dozens. but we don't have the full scope of all the intelligence reports that were produced. or, who ordered the unmasking of additional names. >> are you saying the surveillance if it wasn't related to russia or anything like that, are you saying then it was political surveillance of political opponents as what the president suggested in his tweets? >> what i have read bothers me and i think it should bother the president himself and his team because i think some of it seems to be inappropriate, but like i said until we get all the information to the committee, it's hard to really say until we see it -- >> mr. chairman, we knew there was some incidental collection
because lieutenant general michael dpl michael flynn was caught up talking with kislyak. does this go beyond that and qualify that what the president was tweeting about wiretapping? >> it definitely goes beyond what happened to general dplfly. we don't officially know what happened to general flynn, that was one of the things we asked for in the march 15th letter was for the nsa, cia, and fbi to get done, so far the fbi has not told us whether or not they're going to respond to our march 15th letter which is now a couple weeks old. >> again does this seem to describe what the president was talking about quote wiretapping which they then said was broader surveillance? >> what i've read seems to me to
be some level of surveillance activity, perhaps legal, but i don't know that it's right and i don't know that the american people would be comfortable with what i've read but let us get the all the reports. >> chairman was the president personally involved? -- >> [crosstalking] >> the president said that president obama tapped his phones -- >> that did not happen. i've said this a couple weeks including a day after in front of the press, that never happened. >> did president obama order any kind of surveillance of the president-elect? >> well, we don't know who send the taskings, if they were changed into what went into these intelligence reports but we're going to try to find that out. >> chairman was the president
personally involved? >> did the justice department give you the okay to talk about this? >> the justice department doesn't have anything to do with this. this is information that was brought to me that i thought the president needed to know about incidental collection where the president himself and others in the trump transition team were clearly put into intelligence reports in this white house and across a whole bunch of other agencies and i thought it was important for the president to know that that's why i reached the speaker, and came down here as soon as i could. >> how many people are you seeing in these reports? and do any of them currently work at the white house for mr. trump? >> yeah -- well i don't want to get into the specifics of it because i was only able to see a few dozen. of which i think a lot of it does have foreign intelligence value. >> reports of people? >> there were dozens of reports
i was able to see that we're hoping that the nsa, fbi, cia will provide because i know they exist so i want them to provide them to our committee so all members have an opportunity to see what i've been shown. >> what did the president tell you after you briefed him about this? >> i think the president is concerned, and he should be and he would like to see these reports and hopefully when we get them they'll get them to the white house also. >> do you believe the president appropriately used the word wiretapping? was it used correctly in his tweets based on the information that you have seen? >> i think the wiretapping if you use it generally like the path has said he clearly used it differently than what i think a lot of people took it was did obama wiretap the president, which clearly didn't happen. >> do you see anything -- >> no, and i said that on day
two. >> can you rule out the possible that president obama an senior officials were involved in this? >> no, i cannot. >> a fisa warrant approved by a judge are you saying that -- they were in contact with a target of a counterintelligence or some form -- >> no, i think you're reading too much into that. this is normal intelligence reporting, just normal intelligence reporting. the question is you know should he himself or others, should they have been put into these reports? and i don't know the answer to that yet, but we're going to try to get to the bottom of it. >> so the unmasking not that there was this monitoring? >> well, there's two issues here. there's additional unmasking of names which i think is totally inappropriate but i don't know
how many names were unmasked but i know there were additional unmaskings that occurred and then the issue of the names that were put into these intelligence reports that we have to get to the bottom of and this is why we sent the letter two weeks ago we need a response to it. >> are you suggesting that mr. trump's communications are in those reports first. second, are you saying you're concerned enough that this will trigger a different separate investigation? and third, why did you not discuss this with a ranking member before you came to the white house? >> yes. no. and i'm going to be meeting at some point to talk about where to go with this investigation, but i had to brief the speaker first and then i had to talk to the cia director, nsa director, and i'm waiting to talk to the fbi director because we're still
waiting to find out how we're going to get this, i went and voted and talked to the president. >> to be clear mr. trump's communications are in a reports, you're not concerned enough about it for an decisional investigation? >> we are investigating it. we're not opening a new investigation. >> you said it has nothing to do with russia. >> it has to deal with the unmasking of names. >> so an on going investigation you thought it was appropriate to come out and talk -- >> just remember, we have had an on going investigation into russia for a very, very long time and all of their activities, so we have the scoping document of the russian investigation, an we will continue to investigate anything and everything else that might be caught up in this because clearly we are concerned about what ends up in intelligence products, why, and whether or
not there was unmasking. >> can you say what he was communicating about or who he was communicating with? >> no, i can't get into that i'm sorry. >> can you tell us who brought you this information and why they brought you -- >> i can tell you we've been asking for people to come forward and they came through the proper channels, they had the proper clearances, and i'm just going to leave it at that because we have to protect people who came forward in the right manner. >> can you describe the person in the intelligence -- >> i'm not even going to say it was one person. >> you said it has nothing to do with russia, but are you suggesting it could be collected as part of a criminal investigation, a criminal warrant? >> no. >> how -- >> because in the dozens of reports i was able to see i was
able to determine it looks like it was legal collection, incidental collection but then made itself into intelligence reports, so it has to deal with fisa and multiple fisa warrants out there but nothing criminal involved. hold on, i've going to take one more question. >> was it's information looked at in realtime or information collected, held, stored and allowed to be looked at later? >> it was fairly quickly from what i've seen but once we get the reports then we can ask more questions of the agencies that produce the reports. >> -- legal collection what is it that you find inappropriate about it and are you attempting to give the president political cover for his wiretapping claims? >> because we -- the reason that we do this and we have all these procedures in place is to protect american citizens
incidentally collect ed so ther are certain things that have to be met into foreign intelligence products. if something else happens -- it appears there were things that maybe they didn't meet the minimum qualifies. there are things to me that don't reach the level of foreign intelligence value. and if that's the case, you have to ask yourself why did those end up in reports? >> just to clarify, this is not intentional spying on donald trump or anybody in his -- >> i have no idea. we won't know that -- >> well you said this is incidental -- >> we won't know that until we get to the bottom of did people ask for the unmasking of additional names within president-elect's transition team. >> but you said legal and incidental that doesn't sound like a proactive effort to spy. >> i would refer you to -- we had a similar issue with members of congress that were being picked up in incidental
collection a little over a year ago, we had to spent a full year working with the dni for members of congress to be notified which comes through the gang of eight and i would refer you to that because it looks very similar to that would be the best way i can describe it. >>. [crosstalking] >> was his name unmasked. >> i'm not going to get into that but have ever indication it's clear who is in these reports. >> who has access of the unmasked names? just people in intelligence community? >> we don't know yet. because we don't know who it would have been dissimilar nated to -- >> all right. they're letting him go now. that's devin nunes, he's significant for a number reasons
but first and foremost the chairman of the intelligence committee. it made news as going through some of the intel reports he discovered that the president himself is what he initially said that through surveillance some of the president's personal communications had been picked up and incidental collection and then so manu raju you're up with me now, saying he had just come out of the west wing, just briefed president trump an said the president is concerned. we just heard a lot. can you just tell me what was the headline of all that that jumped out at you? >> that he said some of donald trump's campaign contacts between trump officials after the elections and with foreign officials were picked up incidentally by the u.s. intelligence community. that is the upshot of what devin nunes is saying those
conversations, contacts were actually picked up incidentally by the intelligence community. now we don't have a lot of details, devin nunes is not revealing anything more he discussed in a press conference i was at a couple hours ago where he said these communications had nothing to do with the issue of russia which is what's part of the broader investigation that both the fbi is conducting and the house intelligence committee is conducting. now he also would not say specifically whether the president of the united states himself whether those communications from him with the foreign official were also picked up. now what is alarming, mr. nunes what he believes is the quote unmasking of individuals who are having these conversations with people overseas, the reason why that's a concern for mr. nunes is those people should be protected as part of the broader
surveillance efforts and instead being unmasked and potentially their identities revealed and leak tod leaked to the press when they are classified which is why he believes these are ties to the investigation on going right now, but two things jump out, this does not back up what president trump tweeted march 9th on that sat morning saying that president obama ordered wiretaps, nunes once again saying that's not true, this is broader surveillance efforts as well as he did not talk to democrats on the committee before he briefed the president of the united states, so watch for democrats to really go after him after they do this bipartisan investigation. >> manu, thank you so much for that. and bob bear, let me pick your brain, former intelligence cia, i can assume not everyone understands unmasking an
incidental collection means. explain that for me? >> well, let's say you call putin and ask for an interview, you say you would like to come to moscow and talk about whatever subjects you get picked up by the national security agency. there will be a transcript rather than identify you it will say a u.s. person. the unmasking would be if the national security agency inserted your name and disseminated around the government. the fact that trump tower was picked up in incidental intercepts doesn't surprise me at all. it's absolutely certain whether he's talking to russian partners, whether talking to foreign countries that you get picked up. most of these intercepts are just thrown away. they're not disseminated, they're ignored the people who read them that's it. one or two people. what the president is objecting
to is the demasking of general flynn, that normally he shouldn't be. it should have been left as a u.s. person, called the russian ambassador, had the following conversation, so he does have a legitimate grievance, the person who leaked it probably was worried this would be buried covered up. >> this is chairman nunes saying this has absolutely nothing to do with russia, this could be any kind of world leader and because this is a man who just got elected the president of the united states this is the sort of surveillance? >> no, it's the russian telephone, not trump's it's when he makes the call, the tap will pick up trump instead of putin or you or anybody else. i have seen incidental collection on cnn where a cnn correspondent has been asking for an interview and we picked
it up not because we're listening to cnn but because we're listening to the foreigner who is of concern to us. again, the cnn correspondent was identified as a u.s. person i only knew who it was because i called up the u.s. national security agency and so if somebody from the kgb calls advicer in the white house they're going to be picked up and there will be a transcript. it's just a given. >> i got it. >> i'm sure there's incidental collection with me all the time because i'm always talking to international foreigners. >> so is it appropriate to have mr. nunes briefing the president, the white house as he is with this subject? >> i think the president could call the national security agency and order them, say give me all incidental collection on
the trump tower in these years and it would have been done. the national security agency works for the president. it's unclear to me why the president would go through the house intelligence community, it makes no sense at all. he's the president. he can ask for the stuff and it can be given to him. i look at this as a diversion. they're going to drag out this incidental collection and people who don't understand it are going to say oh, the president was spied on, which is not the truth. >> i have cedric lateen who knows all about intelligence and bob cusack, editor in chief at the hill. in front of the west wing he was asked can you rule out whether or not senior obama administration officials were involved in that, he said i cannot. he was asked whether there was evidence that members of the intel community who would have done the surveilling were political opponents of trump and his answer was i'm bothered by
what i see. what did you make of that? >> a couple things. i think that's the big question. was this political? was this a back doorway. obviously as nunes stressed this has nothing to do with exact wire tap wiretapping -- >> with that let's get going, thank you all very much. appreciate it. >> have you been vindicated by chairman nunes. >> i somewhat do. i very much appreciated the fact they found what they found. but i somewhat do. [crosstalking] >> thank you very much. >> that's kind of jumpy, but to hear what the president said in the wake of devin nunes briefing
him in what he says he heard in the surveillance, but talking to manu and listen to devin nunes, bob, he said this doesn't actually back up the president's tweet of wiretapping from a couple saturdays at all, he's talking about broader surveillance. >> definitely it's not wiretapping. >> so he shouldn't feel vindicated. >> right, unless he totally got the wording backward. >> that wasn't -- >> the intel committee to look into this as opposed to trump ordering the nsa to give him information because then it could look like he's bullying them, there was something not wiretapping but a back doorway they surveilled trump and his people right before obama left a
very secret executive order that gave the intelligence community more power, but the big question is whether this was political and the fact that nunes saying he's bothered, but i'm interested in what adam schiff the acting intel. >> you were listening to this, even devin nunes saying this is premature, this is premature, how do you mean? >> brooke, basically what we're talking about when you do intelligence collection you're always going to get extra stuff. there's always going to be extra material that may not pertain at all to an investigation that's being conducted or any other intelligence targets you're looking for and that's the stuff you have to get rid of when you're the nsa or other agency like that for chairman nunes to go up to the white house and actually brief the president on this a president who has not spent very much time with the
intelligence community, that really creates a situation where this snip pit of understanding becomes a greater misunderstanding. >> misunderstanding between whom. >> the snippet of understand of how the intelligence community works that gets changed by revelations like this where the information is not complete, where the information is in the process of being collected potentially an it may not be completely accurate so you're going into the president with look what i've got here, and it is a very strange situation for the white house to be in, for the house select committee on intelligence committee to be in and certainly for the nsa to be in, it happens a lot because there's a lot of stuff out there and that's because they have to find the preverbal needle in a
haystack. >> you're not a politics guy but intel and sniffing out politics how much of this might be -- one of the questions was about political cover for the president's tweet, what is your sense? >> my sense is this could potentially provide political cover for the president and the reason is it gives them just enough information that something was going on, that something can be interpreted. >> thus the vindication. >> exactly. and that's why he says i feel somewhat vindicated because it's fairly accurate in his mind, okay i've been talking about this aha, i knew something was up and i therefore can go in and in essence mold the intelligence community in the way i want them to be molded. >> wow. i'm sure this is just the beginning of the fallout.
thank you so much. but don't go too far please, sir, we have so you hamuch incl the breaking news out of london, parliament still on lockdown after this car plowed over the bridge, on his way to parliament, he had a knife and taken down by the police officer. in total four people have been killed including the attacker. dozens more injured. what we know. live from london. when we come back.
been making with regard to intel reports he was going through and essentially saying that he says that it was the president's personal communications that were picked up and incidental collection. we just heard from the president himself saying he feels somewhat vindicated now by chairman nunes, do you see this as a distraction from the president's original tweet or do you think this is just political cover? >> brooke, no. i'm at a loss because i have not seen the report, we've been involved with other meeting, but if devin nunes says that, i believe that, and if he says the president's personal communications were picked up i only have to think that happened and then we need to investigate how that came about, who authorized that? and the way i see this town working so often is that there's this layer of plausible
deniability, but people feel that the buck stops at the top that president obama, him or below him knew about this. >> but it's not actually the same thing what nunes is saying versus what the president tweeted. >> okay. i'm going to weigh out of this because i know nothing of the report. >> okay. let's move on to the health care, you say you cannot support the health care bill as it stands right now. i know you met with the president. take me behind the doors? >> we wanted to know where we stood on this bill. the affordable care act is a disaster. it's going to collapse on its own so the president's mindset
was where are you, what can we do to help bring you along and it was a very productive meeting, i came into the meeting being a no and i left being a no, but i can tell you there's a lot of negotiations going on and i truly believe and i've got to give credit to our leadership because they have been working tirelessly promoting this, and there's a lot of great reforms in it, but i know we will get this right, we have to get this right. the people that sent us up here number one they're counting on it and deserve it. >> so i'm clear you said you left the meeting still a no, as of 3:34 current time, you still are a no? >> yes, ma'am. >> can you tell me about the arm twisting, or whether it's from the speaker or the vice president trying to change your
mind? >> well, we had a meeting with vice president pence today i had one with him at the end of last week, we met with some of the team of leadership today. we're probably going to have more meetings. we're going to have a freedom caucus meeting an there's a lot of negotiating going on and a lot is getting rid of the title one funding on that. >> help me congressman understand, what's the magic phrase if they say we change in you're a yes? >> well, the magic phrase for me is to do 100 percent repeal of the affordable care act. that's what we came up here to do, i came up here to do the president came up here to do and again this bill done do that and that's an option to bring up a 100% repeal bill and so what i see is going to happen is there will probably be more negotiations possibly a pause on the vote tomorrow until we
negotiate this a little bit tighter to get these things up here, if we did rid of the essential health benefits in the affordable care act insurance companies can go out now and start drafting new unlesstoday. >> if there was negotiation and one key piece of this to change to get you to flip, can you put your finger on that for me? >> we put in a bill called the hold harmless bill, the other thing is 100% repeal. >> how confident are you that you have the no votes to sink this bill? >> i don't want to say i'm sinking the bill. i think we're going to make the bill better. i'm feeling very confident that
we have enough people not willing to support this that we can get a better deal out of this for the american people and this is not winning the vote or that, this is fixing health care for the american people. to put health care back into the hands of the individual. open up free markets. get government out of this, there's too much governmental involvement and it will turn into a large government funded program that won't ever go away an we have seen too many of those. >> explain this to me, congressman yo hyoho, secretary price would not have agreed with this, would you agree? >> no, i don't agree, i have the utmost respect for tom price, he's very credible. i had a conversation with him this morning. you would have to ask him where he would stand on this. >> okay.
congressman yoho, good luck. >> thank you, ma'am. >> we're watching that web count very closely. thank you so much. >> thank you have a great day. >> same to you, let's move on to the breaking news out of london. an attack being investigated as an act of terror, british parliament still on lockdown, at least four people have been killed, a police officer, including the attacker, and others described as catastrophic injuries. we're getting all this new video in, this is westminster bridge looking up toward parliament showing people who were just there out and about walking along who were hit, plowed down by this car that came kareeming across the bridge, in addition to the people treated on the ground we're told one victim was pulled out of the water out of the river nearby, this is the car that smashed now into this fence. this is the perimeter of u.k.'s
parliament. and it was right here that witnesses say the attacker got out of the car, stabbed a police officer before being shot by police. so let's go to cnn's phil black who is live in london this evening. phil, you know, so bizarrely quiet where you are. normally it's the hustle and bustle especially around midday, tell me what you know right now? >> reporter: brooke, you're right. it is eerily quiet in london, but it is calm. it appears that the police are pretty confident that the threat has passed. they're not saying with absolute assurety just yet because they're still carrying out a search of the medimmediate area the parliament building is only a few minutes walk behind us the distance includes downing
street, the prime minister residence. all the other key departmental buildings, this is the very heart of britain's government. this is the area where the incredibly panicked scenes took place in the middle of the afternoon, of exact opposite of what you see over my shoulder right now. hundreds of thousands of people here every day, where government workers, tourist, take tours even to go into the parliament itself. we understand this man in a car drove over the westminster bridge, ran over people there before slamming into the gate and got out of the car and attacked a police officer. the police officer was one of three victims today and the fourth attacker was killed there. what we are hearing from the
police and their pastuosture, g every sense that the immediate threat has passed but no doubt it has been an incredibly dramatic afternoon. the job of the police is to determine just who this person was and what motivated him to carry out this attack. >> just one of the worst scenes to see bodies around one of the most beautiful places in london. >> our special coverage on cnn continues in a moment.
including a police officer, and the attacker and people injured including some french kids on a trip, so with that and as getting more information, tommy t teg is a chief uk correspondent for politico. tom, take me back, where you were and what you saw? >> so, i was at my desk in parliament which overlooks parliament square where the attack took place. we heard a loud bang of a car crash, so we sort of naturally went to the window to have a look of what was happening and we her screams and angry shouting and then we saw crowds of people sort of surging past the entrance gate into the past
the westminster where the house of commons is. at that point you saw a man run through the gates towards a police officer and start to attack him. also a stopping motion. i wasn't clear where i was whether he had a knife or not but you certainly saw his arms flashing around and saw the police officer fall to the floor and saw him run further into the parliamentary estate towards westminster hall toward the -- of the palace to armed police officers and they started to shout at him making warnings of some sort. i couldn't hear what they were, but he ignored them and they shot him two or three times. >> for people who aren't familiar, this is all incredibly
frightening. anyone can drive over westminster bridge toward parliament. so it appeared to you this was the same individual who came crashing down the bring into the gate and then got out a knife and was attacking the police officer? >> yeah, absolutely, westminster bridge is a road that runs over the bridge and next to the house is the parliament. parliament has sort of a big wrougt iron fence that has protection but you can drive near it and turn on the parliament square where the famous statue of winston churchill is, and they are mandated by police officers and shut at night and there are sort of metal barriers to get -- so
the cars can't get through and there are armed police at the side, so it is very secure, but of course it's very hard to defend yourself against one man in a car carrying a knife. >> hmm. tom mcteg i'm so glad you're okay, thank you for calling in. i can't imagine how people in london are feeling tonight. kernel cedric clayton was good enough to stick around. -- paul cruickshank is with us, let's turn to you first, this is like someone driving up constitution avenue crashing his car, jumping out with a knife and trying to run into one of the house or senate buildings. that's exactly what happened in london today and this whole notion of using a car, it does lead to questions as far as what
we've seen calls from isis. >> absolutely. and one of the key things brooke is the fact when you compare washington to london the one big thing is in 41 to hafront of th house you can't drive anymore, and you can't get in there unless you have special permits so one of the big issues with protecting big institutions like the parliament building in the u.k., there are so many points of vulnerability. especially when you're in a crowded area like that, you find that it becomes very, very difficult to protect it with an ironclad degree of protection. >> paul crook shank, let me just bring you in next here. of course, immediately when you think of a car plowing down innocent people i think of standing next to a niece last summer when that atrocity had happened. when you hear -- we're starting
to hear the details of what happened. how do you interpret this? >> well, i think it's an attack that has many of the hallmarks of these isis inspired, isis linked truck attacks that we've seen, as you and i and brooke were reported on, 86 killed in niece, an attack at a higher state in november. the attacker got out of the car in november and waiving at people. was shot dead by police. after that obviously then the berlin attack which wasn't just isis inspired, we now understand, but actually that individual an is was communicating with isis in libya before the attack and was part of an isis recruiting network in germany. what isis are telling their recruits in europe, in the west also here in the united states, is to launch these kind of truck attacks, car attacks because they're a way to create a lot of
casualties and headlines for the group. in a country like the u.k., very difficult to get weapons, much more difficult in the united states, much more difficult even than in europe. not many far around circulating in the u.k. so they're having to resort to knives, to vehicles to get attacks through. but the casualty count can just be truly horrific. i mean, if this guy had been driving a truck rather than a car, this could have been on a whole different scale in london today. >> right. and, chris, you know, this was for people who are familiar with how parliament works, what is today? >> wednesday. >> wednesday, forgive me. this is prime minister questions day. members of parliament can ask the prime minister questions, all of parliament there, staff, hustling and bustling on a wednesday afternoon midday. >> absolutely, brooke. as you said in the initial, this could happen here. we need to take this seriously.
london, these are allies, our friends. it's an icon of democracy. they're practicing democracy, icon of peace. it's not lost on those dealing with this. the irony that this sort of attack would take place. we have strong security measures here, but as we look at unconventional attacks, using ways, using vehicles, we need to be, is that right and stay smart and look at ways to stief l these things and hopefully more information will come in relating to who were they speaking with, where did this attack come from, what generated it because we need to keep those intelligence assets out there to prevent these in the future. >> if was a they, really, we don't know. it could be one individual who had a knife, who took a car and decided he wanted to commit this sort of atrocity in london. and essentially shut the city down, shut parliament down. one person potentially here. >> absolutely. and it shows, as chris was mentioning, there are so many points of vulnerability and, you know, one person could decide at a spur of the moment to go ahead and do something like this. and there would be no intelligence warning whatsoever that that would happen.
so, that is really the biggest risk right there. if it is a group, there is more chance that you would be able to find out through intelligence means, law enforcement means, something was going to happen. but you just don't know, depending on the case. you just don't know how it's all going to work out from an intelligence per spec picspecti. >> colonel, thank you so much. i'm brooke baldwin in washington. a quick break, we're back after this.
colleague jake tapper, at this hour it is 8:00, just about 8:00 local time in london. four people have been killed in what's being called -- investigated as a terror attack. there along west minute ter bridge and parliament. power people killed including the attacker along with a police officer. 20 other people have been injured, some of whom have been described with catastrophic injuries. also among the 20 we know a couple of french students who were there on a trip. they were injured as well. there was a car that sort of came out of nowhere across westminster bridge which is an open area to, of course, the public and just ultimately according to scotland yard, plowed through innocent bystanders walking along taking the iconic photo with big ben in the background, plowed them down is how it's described by scotland yard and ultimately crashed into the fence, had a knife, and tried to injure a police officer and that's when ultimately he was taken down.
again, he is included among the four dead. thank you so much for being with me. i'm brooke baldwin. "the lead" with jake tapper starts right now. >> announcer: this is cnn breaking news. >> thanks, brooke. welcome to "the lead." we are following the breaking news in london an attack police are treating as an act of terrorism at the british parliament. we know four people are dead, that includes a police officer as well as the attacker. 20 at least are injured. it's a full counter terrorism investigation that is underway right now. the attack began when the assailant hit multiple people with his car on westminster bridge. several people were seen down on the ground there and a woman was pulled from the water. the attacker then rammed his car into parliament gates. he exited the vehicle, stabbing a police officer, a short time ago police in protective gear were seen investigating the vehicle. let's get right to cnn's nick robertson. he was in london for us, on the en