Return to Transcripts main page

Anderson Cooper 360 Degrees

Catherine, Princess Of Wales, Reveals Cancer Diagnosis; ISIS Claims Responsibility For Concert Hall Attack Near Moscow; House Sends Funding Package To Senate Hours Ahead Of Shutdown Deadline As Rep. Greene Warns Speaker Johnson Of Potential Ousting. Aired 9-10p ET

Aired March 22, 2024 - 21:00   ET




ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST: It is 9 PM, here in New York, late night in the United Kingdom, after a day that saw Catherine, Princess of Wales, make millions of people there, and many more millions around the world, a part of her cancer journey.

A day also marked by the murder of dozens of people at a concert hall, outside Moscow, the gunmen, apparently still at large, and ISIS claiming responsibility. We'll have the latest on that shortly.

But first, Catherine's announcement, and CNN's Richard Quest.


CATHERINE, PRINCESS OF WALES: It has been an incredibly tough couple of months for our entire family.

RICHARD QUEST, CNN BUSINESS EDITOR AT LARGE (voice-over): After weeks of speculation, the Princess of Wales dispelled the rumors, and gave us the facts.

PRINCESS CATHERINE: In January, I underwent major abdominal surgery, in London. And at the time, it was thought that my condition was non- cancerous. The surgery was successful.

However, tests after the operation found cancer had been present. My medical team, therefore, advised that I should undergo a course of preventative chemotherapy. And I'm now in the early stages of that treatment.

QUEST (voice-over): Suddenly, so clear why Kate's recovery, after leaving The London Clinic, had taken so long, and why she'd avoided the public eye.

PRINCESS CATHERINE: This of course came as a huge shock. And William and I have been doing everything we can to process and manage this privately, for the sake of our young family.

QUEST (voice-over): The diagnosis is still visibly raw. But CNN understands, the Princess is and has been in good spirits.

Kate and Prince William are focusing, on how to explain the diagnosis, to their young children, the three, last seen with their mother, in the now infamous and doctored Mother's Day photo. The many edits, fueling the rumors about the Princess' health, that all seems irrelevant now.

With King Charles, also recovering from cancer, the Princess' PR nightmare came at a delicate time, for the Royal Family. It left William and Queen Camilla, to hold the fort.

Now, as she heals, Princess Catherine is asking for privacy and time.

PRINCESS CATHERINE: My work has always brought me a deep sense of joy. And I look forward to being back when I am able. But for now, I must focus on making a full recovery.

QUEST (voice-over): Britain has seemingly rallied, behind its Princess.

Prince Charles saying he was proud, praising Kate's courage.

And the British Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak, wishing her a speedy recovery, promising the love and support of the entire country.

PRINCESS CATHERINE: I am well, and getting stronger every day, by focusing on the things that will help me heal, in my mind, body and spirits.

QUEST (voice-over): And now, the Princess of Wales hopes to be left alone, to focus on her family and her recovery.


COOPER: Richard Quest joins us now, from London.

What's been the reaction there, to her diagnosis?

QUEST: Oh, shock, absolute shock. In a sense, this relationship that people have, with the Royal Family, that I have, as a British citizen, and to the Royal Family, people you don't know personally, but a part of your everyday life.

And so, for someone like Princess Catherine, who's the future, with her children, the very epitome of modern royal life, more accessible, more ordinary, if you will. And now, to find out this news, and to wonder what the implications are, particularly Anderson, at a time, when His Majesty, the King, is also suffering from cancer. And the whole question of uncertainty, Meghan, and Harry, the whole, all the rumors and the conspiracy theories.

Well, now we have certainty, at least in what we know is happening with William and Catherine. And people are basically saying, give them the time, the space and the peace. But they're doing so, from a feeling of great sympathy and shock.

COOPER: Yes. Richard Quest, thank you.

Joining us now is Dr. Zeke Emanuel, former Obama White House Health Policy Adviser, Vice Provost of Global Initiatives at the University of Pennsylvania, and Author of "Which Country Has the World's Best Health Care?"

Also, Joanna Coles, former Chief Content Officer at Hearst Magazines, and holds the title of OBE, which stands for the Order of the British Empire.

So, Dr. Emanuel, from what you heard from the Princess today, I'm wondering, from a medical standpoint, what you took away from it.

DR. ZEKE EMANUEL, VICE PROVOST OF GLOBAL INITIATIVES, UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA, FORMER OBAMA WHITE HOUSE HEALTH POLICY ADVISER: Well, first of all, I haven't examined her. She's across the ocean. I haven't talked to her. I haven't seen the pathology of what they found. So, like many people, it's mere speculation.


But if they -- it's an abdominal cancer, she is not your classic case of any abdominal cancer. Most of them, like uterine cancer, or colorectal cancer, or pancreatic cancer, really occur in people much older. We have seen a rise in things, like colon cancer, in women, particularly under 50. It's the second leading cause of death. But it's going to be an unusual case, no matter what it is.

If it was found, incidentally, based upon previous surgery that was done for other reasons, we can only hope that it was pretty small. That does occur, with things, like pancreatic cancer, where it's an incidental finding, related to a previous cancer. But I have no idea, in her particular case.


EMANUEL: One thing I do know is a 42-year-old woman, otherwise healthy, with three young kids, is a shock. And I really understand why she has asked for privacy, and why she's been elusive, these last few months, just turned her whole life upside.

COOPER: Yes, I can only imagine.

Joanna, I mean, this announcement was very different, obviously, than the way King Charles announced his cancer. Both have said -- haven't specified what sort of cancer. I'm wondering what you made of how this came out today.

JOANNA COLES, FORMER CHIEF CONTENT OFFICER, HEARST: Well, first of all, I mean, is there anything more frightening, as a parent, than learning that you have cancer? You have two small children. I have small children, I mean.


COLES: Well, actually, they're older now. But it was my absolute fear. So very, I feel very much for Kate.

COOPER: I feel for -- I think about the kids, at age 10, or five or eight, being told that your parent has cancer.

COLES: Oh, so scary.

COOPER: And the terror that they must feel about that.

COLES: So scary. And also, all their friends at school will now know, too.

And then, of course, you've had all the frenzied speculation, of what's wrong with her, because people realize that something was not right.

I do think though, that when you are a public figure, it's very, it's almost easier to just come out, say what it is, and then retreat, rather than to have this sort of half-knowledge for the public.

I mean, if I were to call you and say, Anderson, I've got some news, I've got cancer? The first question you would ask me is, well, what kind of cancer? So now, everybody's speculating about what kind of cancer. And of course, people are immensely sympathetic to her.

But I almost wonder if it's not just easier for Kensington Palace, who manages her and Williams' press, to just say, this is what we're dealing with, we're going to take some time out now, to recover or have our treatment. And then, I think people would leave them alone.


COLES: But of course, this half -- half-managing it unleashes another layer of speculation.

COOPER: We should point out King Charles has also not said what sort of cancer he has.

COLES: Absolutely.

COOPER: That he went in for an enlarged prostate.

COLES: And I think that the Palace are used to dealing with media issues, by dealing with the tabloid press. And in a way, they're fighting the last war. And obviously, that was an issue around Princess Diana. But it's much harder for them to manage social media, because everybody's a journalist now.


COLES: As we saw, when Kate released her photo, and then everybody turned into an armchair detective, and realized the photo had been tampered with.


COLES: And I think also, everybody is so excited about Kate, it's hard to -- it's hard to overstate how popular she is. Because after Princess Diana, and the Duchess of York, known as Fergie, Kate really seemed to have a grip on it.


COLES: And she really seemed to enjoy it, was very popular with people. So, this is a real setback, I think.

COOPER: Dr. Emanuel, Princess Catherine mentioned, trying to resume public duties, to some extent, in terms -- obviously, because we don't know what kind of the cancer, there's different forms of chemotherapy.

What kind of -- I mean, what does chemotherapy look like? What sort of -- what can -- what is the range of things that a patient going through chemotherapy would expect?

EMANUEL: Well, again, Anderson, you've nailed it on the head. We have no idea what kind of cancer she has. And the chemotherapies will be very different for different types of cancer. And the intensity of those will be very different. Whether she loses her hair or not, how many cycles she has to go through. So, I think, we just can't tell.

If it's actually relatively small? They got the cancer. This is a sort of four cycles of something, just to make sure that they got everything. She, you know, that's you can count four months. But who knows? It's very hard to tell without a real diagnosis.


COOPER: Joanna, do you think that she will get the privacy that she has requested? I mean, it seemed, when we talked to Max Foster earlier, who said he thinks that the major publications in England will -- in the U.K. will abide by that.

COLES: Yes. I mean, the major publications, in England, have been pretty good about leaving her alone actually, until recently. And that's because, of course, they've got to try and compete with social media. But also, they have a sort of uneasy alliance with the Palace. They need the Palace. The Palace needs them. So, it's a sort of tricky detente, if you like. But I do think -- I do think so.

I mean, cancer is one of those words that strikes fear into everybody. And yet, there's 18 million cancer survivors, living in America, at the moment.

The prognosis from what she said in her -- in her video sounds good. It's preventative, the chemo that she's having. And I think people are enormously sympathetic to her, and to Poor William, whose father of course, has got cancer. So, he's between the two of them.


COLES: And I think people long for William and Kate to take the throne, at some point, too. They are modern. They are younger. She's funny. She so obviously enjoys being Princess of Wales. She's very good at it. She doesn't complain. She turns up. She joins in. People really like her. And so, I think people will be rooting for her.

COOPER: Dr. Emanuel, just finally, this is an opportunity, for when Prince -- when King Charles, his diagnosis led to many people going for prostate exams.

We've mentioned colorectal cancer. And again, we don't know what Kate has. But I learned today that the screening guidelines for that were lowered to age 45. What kind of screening -- what actually is that screening? I'm not even sure if I've done that. What do people do, for screening of that?

EMANUEL: So, colorectal cancer, the screening guidelines have declined, because we have more cases. And the typical screening is a colonoscopy, where you prepare.


EMANUEL: You basically clean out your bowel. And then, they put a small camera in to look and to make sure there's no cancer.

I should say one other point. If there is a positive light? We have seen the number of cases among young people, particularly young women, as I mentioned, going up. But we've seen the amount of mortality going down, because we have better tests, better surgeries and better, in particular, chemotherapies.

And I think that is the best evidence that we've -- that we can marshal, at this point, again, without knowing the diagnosis, et cetera. Just in general, the mortality rate, from cancer has gone down.

So while, as noted, it still strikes fear, in people's heart, and especially for a 42-year-old woman with three kids, the prognosis of cancer, in general, among younger people, has been getting better and better.

COOPER: Dr. Zeke Emanuel, appreciate it.

Joanna Coles, as well, thank you very much.

Today's announcement came just days after a scandal ballooned at the hospital, where she had her surgery.

For more on that, here's CNN's Anna Stewart.


ANNA STEWART, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): It's a private hospital, with a feel of a luxury hotel, with a number of high-profile patients, including Royals.

But this week, the hospital's reputation is on the line.

STEWART (on camera): Up to three hospital staff members are being investigated, for trying to illegally access the Princess' private medical records. It's unclear whether the attempt was successful. The British government has made clear, the breach is serious, it could even be criminal.

STEWART (voice-over): The U.K.'s data watchdog told CNN it's investigating.

And The London Clinic is taking disciplinary steps. The hospital's Chief Executive was ambiguous on the report, saying only that "in the case of any breach, all appropriate investigatory, regulatory and disciplinary steps will be taken."

At Christmas, Kate was the Belle of the Ball. But this was her last public appearance.

A statement came from Kensington Palace, in January. "Her Royal Highness The Princess of Wales was admitted to hospital yesterday for planned abdominal surgery," adding "she is unlikely to return to public duties until after Easter."

In the weeks that followed, speculation mounted. And it didn't dissipate, when the Prince and Princess of Wales posted this photo, on social media, which was found to be altered.

An apology from the Princess followed. But the speculation didn't end.

Now, the world has more information. And the message from the Princess of Wales is clear.

PRINCESS CATHERINE: We hope that you will understand that, as a family, we now need some time, space and privacy while I complete my treatment.

STEWART (voice-over): Anna Stewart, CNN, London.


COOPER: Well, Catherine talked about talking to her children, about her diagnosis. That's a difficult conversation to have, to say the least, with children.

Coming up next, we'll talk to a child psychiatrist, about parents and children having those kinds of difficult conversations, about cancer, and getting through it as a family.

Also, the latest from Russia, on the mass shooting, outside Moscow, that has now taken at least 60 lives.



COOPER: Prince Harry and Meghan, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, sent well wishes to their sister-in-law, saying simply, "We wish health and healing for Kate and the family, and hope they are able to do so privately and in peace."

They live at a distance, both physically and emotionally, from William and Catherine. But both Harry, his brother, and the entire royal family still share the same reticence when it comes to sharing their private lives, and showing emotion, which can only complicate what must be so difficult, if not terrifying, for any parent, telling your young children that mom or dad has a serious illness.

I spoke with Prince Harry for a piece I did for "60 Minutes," and he talked about the experience of his father, then-Prince Charles, delivering the worst news imaginable, to young Prince Harry, that his mom, Princess Diana, had died.



COOPER (on camera): In the book you write, "He says, 'They tried, darling boy. I'm afraid she didn't make it.' These phrases remain in my mind like darts on a board," you say.

Did-- did you cry?

PRINCE HARRY, DUKE OF SUSSEX, MEMBER OF THE BRITISH ROYAL FAMILY: No. No. Never shed a single tear at that point. I was in shock, you know? 12-years-old, sort of 7:00-- 7:30 in the morning, early. Your father comes in, sits on your bed, puts his hand on your knee and tells you, there's been an accident. I -- I couldn't believe.

COOPER (on camera): And you write in the book that, "Pa didn't hug me. He wasn't great at showing emotions under normal circumstances. But his hand did fall once more on my knee and he said, 'It's going to be OK.'"

But after that, nothing was OK for a long time.

PRINCE HARRY: No nothing -- nothing was OK.

COOPER (voice-over): Harry says his memories of the next few days are fragmented. But he does remember this: greeting mourners outside Kensington Palace in London the day before his mother's funeral.

COOPER (on camera): When you see those videos now, what do you think?

PRINCE HARRY: I think it's bizarre, because I see William and me smiling. I remember the guilt that I felt.

COOPER (on camera): Guilt about?

PRINCE HARRY: The fact that the people that we were meeting were showing more emotion than we were showing, maybe more emotion than we even felt.

COOPER (on camera): They were crying, but you weren't.

PRINCE HARRY: There was a lot of tears. I talk about how wet people's hands were. I couldn't understand it at first.

COOPER (on camera): Their hands were wet from crying? PRINCE HARRY: Their hands were wet from wiping their own tears away. I do remember one of the strangest parts to it was taking flowers from people and then placing those flowers with the rest of them. As if I was some sort of middle person for their grief. And that really stood out for me.

Once my mother's coffin actually went into the ground, that was the first time that I actually cried. Yes. There was never another time.


COOPER: Joining us now is Dr. Judith Joseph. She's Clinical Assistant Professor of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry at NYU Langone Medical Center, here in New York.

Thank you so much for being with us.

First of all, to the way so many kids have grown up, and Prince Harry and Charles -- and William are examples of that, not crying, not being able to talk about stuff? That has ripple effects for their entire lives.

Having grown up with that, they -- Prince William and Catherine clearly seem very focused on trying to communicate this latest information, to their children, in the proper way. That's a really hard thing to do.


And you're absolutely right, Anderson. If you don't process that trauma and that grief, it shows up later in life.

And it's possible that Prince William doesn't want his children to go through the same type of trauma he did. Containing the information, making sure that they have a controlled way of delivering it to the children, very different than the way that he had his news delivered to him when he was younger.

COOPER: Catherine talked about wanting to basically not reveal this, until the kids were out of school. That seems to make a lot of sense, because not just that they'll be around them, so they can spend time, to concentrate their time together. But also said other kids aren't saying stuff to them.

JOSEPH: Children have the wildest imaginations. And if you don't anticipate that, you can't control the information. There are kids that could talk about their experiences with cancer. They can say dreadful things. So, I think it's appropriate.

Also, you have to remember, during breaks, you're with your parents, all the time. You're in a safe environment. You have access to them. So, if you act out, if you regress, you know that you have someone there to nurture you. Whereas when you're in school, anything could happen. You can act out. Then that's further shame, further trauma for the child. So, it's a safe environment, it's controlled when they have the news delivered during break.

COOPER: How honest should a parent be, with a child, about -- my dad died, when I was 10-years-old. I knew he was in the hospital, with heart disease, and died of heart attack. But I had no idea how serious it was, and kids weren't allowed to visit the hospitals back then.

JOSEPH: I'm sorry for your loss. And you know that grief is something that's very complicated.

And Kate, she's someone, who champions mental health in children.


JOSEPH: So, I'm sure she was very thoughtful in her process.

It's important to be very clear with children, use language that's plain, not complicated, because it's scary, if it's too complex. Be honest, when children know that you're lying, when you're holding things back.

COOPER: Kids know you're lying?

JOSEPH: They know. They imagine the worse.

COOPER: They just know what you're saying (ph).

JOSEPH: And you want to be honest with them. Because if they imagine that you're holding something back, they're going to think that it's dreadful news, that something is really bad, that's going to happen.

COOPER: You don't want -- I mean, there's honesty. And then, there's like brutal honesty. You don't want to be scary-honest.

JOSEPH: That's true. You want to make sure that you give the information, small amounts of content.

So imagine, this is a family that had a loss of a great grandfather, a loss of a great grandmother. Then you have the news of your grandpa having cancer, and now possibly your mother having a severe illness. That's a lot of information for these small children.

So, it's smart to spread out that bad news, and to use simple language. You don't want to sugarcoat it, because they can tell when you're not telling the truth.


COOPER: Also, delivering information to -- they have kids, who are 10, eight and five. Delivering information to a 10-year-old is obviously different to a 5-year-old.

JOSEPH: Very different. And Kate is someone, who champions mental health in children. So, she probably had some advisers around this.

But it's true. You can't give the same information to someone who's younger. You have to be very careful with the language that you use, depending on their developmental stage.

And also, when you deliver the news, you want to make sure that you're not panicked, you're not catastrophizing, because children mirror you. If you panic, they're going to panic.

COOPER: And is it one conversation? Or is it multiple conversations over time?

JOSEPH: That's a really good question. It's multiple conversations, over time. Give it to them, in small doses.

Make sure they're in a safe space. You don't want to be in a distracting environment, an environment where you don't have control. Have transitional objects, like a teddy bear, a blankie, things that they can hold on to.

Make sure that you can anticipate how they're going to react. Have your responses planned. Make sure that all caregivers have the same canned response.

They're going to ask hard things. They're going to ask things like, are you going to die, you know, are we going to be able to visit you? Have a canned response for parents.

COOPER: What does a 5-year-old know about death compared to a 8-year- old, or a 10-year-old?

JOSEPH: You'd be surprised. Children have access to information in this day and age. They watch cartoons. In Disney movies, people die. So, they have an understanding.

COOPER: Right.

JOSEPH: You want to use clear language. So, things like passed away? That's not very clear. That's abstract. You want to be concrete, you know, the person died. Or, things like sickness, instead of under the weather. Be very clear in your language with them. They know more than you think they do.

COOPER: That's really fascinating.

Dr. Judith Joseph, thank you so much.

JOSEPH: Thank you for having me.

COOPER: Appreciate it. And thanks for being here.

Coming up next, the latest on the terror attack that has left at least 60 people dead, a 100 wounded near Moscow, that, and the warning signs, raised weeks before the attack, by the United States and others.


(COMMERCIAL BREAK) COOPER: More breaking news. We're learning new details, about the attack, at a Moscow area concert venue complex that has now left at least 60 people dead, and wounded more than 100. The Russian Health Minister has called it the deadliest terror attack in Russia in decades.

We just want to take a moment to show you some of the horror that people faced during the attack. What you're about to see is disturbing.




COOPER: There're far more disturbing videos. We're not going to show those to you. That's just some of what unfolded inside the concert hall, as the assailants opened fire.

ISIS has claimed responsibility for the attack.

Joining us now with the latest is CNN's Fred Pleitgen.

So, walk us through what we now know, about what happened inside that concert hall, Fred.


We know that this happened around 6 PM Moscow time, that these assailants apparently already took out their guns, as they were in the parking lot, to the Crocus City Hall, which is in the town of Krasnogorsk, which is actually a suburb of Moscow. I've been there on many occasions in the past. It's a gigantic complex.

They then went in, and from what we hear from eyewitnesses, and from the authorities now, they immediately opened fire, on pretty much every one that they saw, at point-blank. And that's where a lot of those videos that we were just showing, obviously originated from.

And you can just see the panic there, among the people, who were inside that venue, some of them trying to get away, others trying to hide. There were some scenes of people breaking the glass of the windows, the window facade of that place, to try and get out.

At some point, apparently, the assailants also set fire to the building. We saw that large plume of smoke, and the flames coming out, the Russian authorities having to bring in choppers to try and get that blaze under control.

So, at this point, while we're speaking about it, at least 60 people, who have been killed and more than 140 have been wounded. The Russian authorities do believe that that number could rise, as they are still trying to get to terms with what happened there, Anderson.

COOPER: And are the suspects still at large?

PLEITGEN: Yes, that's one of the other big things out there, is that the Russians so far have not said that they were able to either apprehend or neutralize, as they usually say, these suspects. In fact, the Russians are saying they do believe that the suspects are still at large, and that they managed to get away, they believe, or tried to get away in a small white Renault car.

Now, of course, we know that ISIS has claimed responsibility for this attack. The Russians have actually not confirmed that they also believe that that is the case. We know that the U.S. says that they have -- that they believe that they have details that also seems to confirm that. But, at this point in time, the Russians are treating this as an ongoing situation, and with the suspects still at large, Anderson.

COOPER: And, I mean, it's remarkable that the U.S. Embassy put out a warning, to people about this.

Vladimir Putin, has he said anything yet about this, publicly?

PLEITGEN: Well, Vladimir Putin as far as the warning was concerned that the U.S. Embassy put out, on March 7th, he said that he believed that that was U.S. propaganda, U.S. scare-mongering, U.S. blackmail against the Russian Federation.

But it's interesting that tonight, we have not seen Vladimir Putin, publicly saying anything yet. Of course, Vladimir Putin is someone, who people are saying brought security, back to the Russian Federation, someone who stands for law and order, and has in the past. But so far, at least publicly, he's been silent.

The only things that we have heard, is from Vladimir Putin's spokesman, who came out and said that the President is being updated on everything that's going on. Allegedly, he also spoke to the Governor of the Moscow region, so the area outside of Moscow. And there's other Russian officials who say that he sent his well wishes or his best wishes to the people who have been wounded.


But so far publicly, we have not heard from Vladimir Putin, yet, Anderson.

COOPER: All right, Fred Pleitgen, thank you very much.

For more on that warning, the warning that we talked about is, here's CNN Pentagon Correspondent, Oren Liebermann.

So, ISIS claimed responsibility for the attack. Have U.S. intelligence officials responded to that claim?

OREN LIEBERMANN, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: They haven't, or at least we haven't heard a direct corroboration of that, meaning we have not heard U.S. officials tell us, yes, we have intelligence that absolutely says it was ISIS that was responsible for this attack. But crucially, U.S. officials say they have no reason to doubt the claim, from ISIS, that they were responsible for the attack. And that, in and of itself, is an important piece of information, as the U.S. tries to figure out what happened here, just as Russia tries to figure out what happened here, with their own criminal investigation.

The U.S., of course, watching this, from afar, and looking at the pieces of information, they do have. But at least, at this point, the U.S. has no reason to doubt the claim, from ISIS, that they indeed, did carry out this attack, Anderson.

COOPER: And CNN has learned that the U.S. intelligence community actually warned Russia, about a potential attack inside the country. That sounds extraordinary.

LIEBERMANN: It is, absolutely so. And it's also a clear indication that the U.S. has been watching this space.

According to two U.S. sources, familiar with the intelligence, the U.S. says they were picking up a pretty steady stream of information, since back in November, that ISIS, specifically ISIS-K, or ISIS- Khorasan, which is much more active in Afghanistan, was trying to carry out attacks in Russia, trying to create a mass casualty incident.

Some of that intelligence was fairly specific, according to one source, familiar with that intelligence, to the point where the U.S., under the duty to warn, in fact warned their Russian counterparts, or at least parts of the Russian government, that there was a potential for ISIS-K to try to carry out an attack.

Now, we haven't been able to connect those dots definitively, and to say it was in fact, that stream of intelligence that led to this attack. But it paints a picture of first, the U.S. watching this space, and sets up, at least a credible possibility of it -- of it was in fact ISIS behind this attack here, as we wait for more information, from the U.S. and, of course, from Russia itself, in regards to the latest information on this attack.

COOPER: And are Americans, inside Russia, hearing more from the State Department, tonight?

LIEBERMANN: So, first, there is of course, the general warning, from the U.S. Embassy in Moscow for American citizens to beware.

But we also know that earlier this month, about two weeks ago, on March 7th, the U.S. put out its own warning of the possibility of an attack, warning American citizens to stay away from large gatherings.

In fact, look at this statement, from that embassy outreach, in earlier March. "The Embassy is monitoring reports that extremists have imminent plans to target large gatherings in Moscow, to include concerts, and U.S. citizens should be advised to avoid large gatherings over the next 48 hours."

The caveat there, of course, is that we don't know for certain that this bit of intelligence is the attack that we're looking at now.

But you also can't ignore the similarities here. Large concerts, the U.S. Embassy warned about, and that's, of course, what was attacked, here. The difference is that was a 48-hour warning that expired, on March 9th. Here, this is two weeks later. But still, the similarities between the warning, and what we're seeing play out, they are certainly great indeed.

COOPER: Yes. Oren Liebermann, thank you.

I'm joined now by two CNN National Security Analysts, Steve Hall and Peter Bergen.

Steve's also former CIA Chief of Russia Operations.

So Steve, I mean, beyond U.S. intelligence private warnings, to Russian officials, the U.S. Embassy publicly warning Americans, a few weeks ago, that we just saw, as extremists have imminent plans, to target large gatherings, in Moscow, that Putin basically called provocative and outright blackmail.

It's pretty remarkable, is it not?

STEVE HALL, FORMER CIA CHIEF OF RUSSIA OPERATIONS, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Yes, he basically pooh-poohed it. That's one of the really remarkable things.

And I can tell you, one of the things that Vladimir Putin is most concerned with, tonight, doesn't have anything to do with the dead, doesn't have anything to do with Russian families grieving anything. It has to do with the following.

There's a social contract between the Russian people and Putin. And it goes like this. Russians give up some freedoms, in order to get the stability and security of a police state.

Well, the Russians have been watching, as the Putin administration has been basically systematically getting rid of all political opposition. But hundreds of -- hundreds of forces, Russian forces, security forces doing that. And yet, they can't be kept safe, when they try to go to a concert in Moscow.

If I were a Russian, I think Putin is thinking this, I would be saying, what is the FSB, what are the security services doing? Why are they focusing on these people in prisons, and not keeping the general population safe? That's got to be a concern for Vladimir Putin, this evening.

COOPER: Peter, ISIS-K has claimed responsibility for this attack. I know, early on, you were skeptical, on whether they are the ones truly responsible. Do you still feel that way? And if it is, then what does that tell you, about their capabilities?



I mean, the reason I was a little skeptical, initially, of this claim, and we still don't have direct evidence that it's true, is ISIS has taken tremendous beating, as you know, Anderson, over the years.

I mean, they lost their geographical caliphate in Syria and Iraq. They used to be able to train people for attacks in Paris, in 2015, that killed 130 people, including Americans attending a concert. Once they lost their geographical caliphate, they lost their ability to train people. And it's sort of devolved into local affiliates, like ISIS-K, in Afghanistan and some in Africa. But they send it -- seems to have refocused on local concerns.

Now, where that changed was in January, where ISIS-K attacked a memorial service, for an Iranian general, Qasem Soleimani, killing almost 100 people. And that showed that their ability to kind of reach out, outside of Afghanistan.

Now, reaching out into Russia? That's close -- it's further away than Iran is from Afghanistan. So, it would show kind of a, unfortunately, a kind of resurgence of their -- of their abilities.

But I will say one other thing, Anderson. Very interesting. On March 7th, Russian state television reported that the Russian intelligence agency, FSB, foiled a plan to commit a terrorist act against a synagogue in Moscow. That's according to Russian state television.

So, the fact that the Russians are now sort of -- sort of backtracking and saying, well, you know, all the things they are saying, is sort of interesting. And that's exactly the same day that the U.S. Embassy warned about extremists having plans, to attack large gatherings, in Moscow. So, it's not just the Americans, who knew that something was going on, in Moscow. The Russians also did.

COOPER: Steve, what do you make of this ISIS claiming responsibility? And if it was them, what does it tell you not only about them, but about Russia's inability to prevent it?

HALL: Yes, that latter thing is a really serious issue. I mean, again, this is -- the amount of resources that Vladimir Putin, and the Kremlin, put into their security services, to do a number of different things, not only monitor dissidents, but also, hopefully, first and foremost, try to protect its own population against these types of attacks.

Now, this is not the first attack that's happened over the years. There have been lots of -- a number of different Islamic extremist groups that have tried to attack in Moscow, some with success and some with less success.

But one thing is -- one thing seems to me to be clear. Although we can't make a point-to-point connection between the 7th March embassy warning, and what happened today, it's clear that American intelligence had information that there was going to be an attack.

The March 7 thing that came out of the embassy was a public, it's anybody could access that, you, me, anybody inside of Russia, if they could have access on the internet.

Certainly, the terrorists could have had that. If they had planned an attack, in that 48-hour period, after 7th March, they could have seen the embassy report, and said, well, we need to regroup, because the FSB is going to be ready for us.

It's still early. We don't know all the details.

But what is clear is that the U.S. had good information on this and passed it to the Russian government. And Putin simply said, it's not that critical.

COOPER: Peter, when you look at that -- you look at this, these images now, all those blue flashing lights, it looks like an enormous police response.

If these perpetrators were able to get away? That's really stunning. I mean, the idea that you can attack, a huge concert venue, not be stopped?

I don't know -- we don't know if there was an exchange of gunfire with anybody. But we have no indication that there was police officers, on scene, who were rushing these people, as would likely happen in the United States. Unless, of course, you were a police officer, in Uvalde, Texas.

BERGEN: Yes. And, I mean, that's one of the reasons that I initially, when I saw this, I was a little skeptical, because typically, if you're an ISIS fighter, you don't care about getting killed, at the scene of the crime. You don't -- you're not looking for a getaway. You're looking to martyr yourself.

So, in this case, it looks like the people did get away, according to the Russians. And that isn't sort of typical for an ISIS type attack.

So however, I mean, the fact that all the, you know, there was -- it's not just the Americans, who had intelligence in the system, about ISIS presence in Moscow. It turns out that the Russians did too. Otherwise, why would Russian state television report on March 7th, about a plan, to attack a Moscow synagogue by ISIS?

So, I don't know. I mean, it isn't absolutely typical of their M.O. But certainly, ISIS has attacked concert venues in the past. In Paris, you recall, in 2015, they killed 130 people, most -- many of them were attending a concert. And obviously, this could well be, you know, it could be just what, as this group says.

I'm still looking for evidence. And hopefully, we'll identify that, you know, that who these people are, relatively quickly. Are they Tajiks, are they Chechens, if they're part of ISIS? Did they train in Afghanistan? I mean, that's one of the -- a very big question here.

Obviously, that would be very embarrassing, for the Biden administration, if it turned out that ISIS-K has sort of regrouped, to the extent, where they can reach out to other countries, carry out major attacks, at a time when they're responsible, for the withdrawal of U.S. troops, from Afghanistan.


COOPER: Yes. Peter Bergen, Steve Hall, thank you.

Next, breaking news, from Capitol Hill, on the growing likelihood of a government shutdown. In the middle of the funding fight, another Republican House Speaker's job possibly in jeopardy, as a member of his own divided party files a motion to oust him. Details on that ahead.


COOPER: Breaking news, tonight, from Capitol Hill. Just hours ahead of a shutdown deadline, the House has sent a funding package to the Senate. But they still don't have a vote scheduled, which means we could be headed for a government shutdown.

CNN Capitol Hill Reporter, Melanie Zanona, joins us now, with the latest.

So, what are you hearing on the Hill? And are we about to have a shutdown?


MELANIE ZANONA, CNN CAPITOL HILL REPORTER: Yes, Anderson, at this very moment, it does look like Congress is on track, to stumble into a government shutdown.

Now, it would be a partial government shutdown, because six government agencies have already be funded -- been funded. And it also would only be temporary, because if they can't come to an agreement, on voting tonight, on the package, they would just vote on Sunday. So, it would be a minimal impact of a shutdown.

But it is a shutdown, nonetheless. And that is because this has been such a tortured process to get here. Remember, they were supposed to have funded the government, back in October 1st of last year, this, for the fiscal year that they are currently in. And instead, they kicked the can down the road, past stopgap bill after stopgap bill, waited until the last minute, to pass this massive bill. And that's where we find ourselves, tonight.

At issue is some Republicans are seeking votes, on various amendments, some related to border and immigration. Some Democrats are pushing back on that. So, they're still scrambling to try to find an agreement, before that midnight deadline. But at this point, looking increasingly unlikely, like that is going to happen, Anderson

COOPER: And so, Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene filed a motion to vacate Speaker Johnson, over all of this. Is his job actually in jeopardy?

ZANONA: Well, it certainly is on thin ice. Anger had been brewing all week, over this bipartisan deal that Johnson cut, with Democrats and the White House.

Last night, Marjorie Taylor Greene said she was done with the Speaker. And this morning, she did file that motion to vacate the Speaker's chair. But she did not take a critical step, to force a floor vote, on that resolution. So, it's a slightly different scenario than when Matt Gaetz made his move, to oust former Speaker Kevin McCarthy.

But let's take a little bit of a listen to what Marjorie Taylor Greene had to say.


REP. MARJORIE TAYLOR GREENE (R-GA): I filed the motion to vacate, today. But it's more of a warning and a pink slip. I respect our Conference. I paid all my dues to my Conference. I'm a member in good standing. And I do not wish to inflict pain on our Conference, and to throw the -- throw the House in chaos.


ZANONA: So, Greene is essentially preserving this as a threat, and keeping it in her back pocket, at least for now.

For Johnson's part, he says he's not worried about losing his job. But this is something he is going to have to contend with. He can't just ignore this, as a threat, especially given the razor-thin margin in the House, and especially given what happened to his predecessor, Kevin McCarthy.

COOPER: And how'd this land with the rest of the Republican caucus?

ZANONA: Well, it looks like there's not a very big parade or any parade following behind Marjorie Taylor Greene, at least at this moment, even though she does insist that she has some colleagues, who are behind her.

But many Republicans that I talked to said, this is crazy. This is stupid. They are still reeling from that chaotic Speaker drama, back in October.

And meanwhile, some Democrats are signaling that they'd be willing to step in, and save Mike Johnson, if he puts a Ukraine funding package on the floor.

So, it does not appear like there's an appetite, in either party, to plunge the House into chaos, once again. But it is an issue that everyone is going to have to keep an eye on, especially Mike Johnson, as he deals with potentially divisive issue of Ukraine funding, in the coming weeks.


COOPER: Melanie Zanona, thanks very much.

Coming up next, we return to the surprise announcement today, from the Princess of Wales, on her cancer diagnosis, and look at the long history of health battles, for the British Royal Family, and the secrecy that has often surrounded them.



COOPER: More now, on the Princess of Wales, who revealed her cancer diagnosis, today, after more than two months of seclusion. There's a lot still the public doesn't know, which is not unusual.

CNN's Tom Foreman looks at the history of medical secrecy, in the British Royal Family.


TOM FOREMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Even when Queen Elizabeth the Second was in the final year of her life, slowing down, using a cane, canceling engagements, the Palace said she was fine. And the story of solid health held on, even after a tabloid revealed she had been in the hospital.

KATE WILLIAMS, CNN HISTORIAN & ROYAL EXPERT: But I think that as soon as the winter is over, she will be keen, to get back on her feet, back out there, meeting people. It's just whether or not the doctors are going to agree with it.

FOREMAN (voice-over): Like so much around the Royals, secrecy about health is a deep-seated tradition.

The Castle was cagey about Prince Philip's condition, the year he died.

Rumors of eating disorders swirled around Princess Diana long before she confirmed them.

DIANA, PRINCESS OF WALES: I have it, on very good authority, that the quest for perfection our society demands can leave the individual gasping for breath.

FOREMAN (voice-over): Meghan Markle says her mental health was so taxed, by life in the Palace, she considered suicide. But she talked to Oprah about it only on her way out.

MEGHAN, DUCHESS OF SUSSEX, MEMBER OF THE BRITISH ROYAL FAMILY: I went to the institution, and I said that I needed to go somewhere to get help. And I was told that I couldn't, that it wouldn't be good for the institution.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I wish you the best of health, father.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Wish me. Wish me.

FOREMAN (voice-over): Secrecy around much older cases, such as the growing madness of King George in the 1700s was so strict, medical experts and movie-makers still speculate about the cause.

But even when the Royals had lost almost all their practical power, maladies of the monarchs remained largely private, such as King George the Sixth, battled with stuttering and lung cancer.

QUEEN CONSORT ELIZABETH, FICTIONAL CHARACTER PLAYED BY HELENA BONHAM CARTER, "THE KING'S SPEECH": I don't have a hubby. We don't pop. And nor do we ever talk about our private lives.

You'll appreciate the need for absolute discretion.

FOREMAN (voice-over): So, the revelations that King Charles, Princess Kate and Sarah Ferguson are all dealing with cancer are unusual, even if the details remain scarce.



FOREMAN: The sense of secrecy can endure, even after the subject is gone. When Queen Elizabeth passed away, a year and a half ago, at the age of 96, the death certificate listed the cause as merely old age.


COOPER: Tom Foreman, thanks very much.

The news continues. "NEWSNIGHT WITH ABBY PHILLIP" starts now.