Return to Transcripts main page
CNN NewsNight with Abby Phillip
Trump Approval Rating Underwater on Key Issues With 97 Days to Midterms; Blanche Nomination Teeters as Senate GOP Postpones Key Vote. Republicans Grill Dr. Anthony Fauci over COVID Response and His Private Diary. Aired 10-11p ET
Aired July 29, 2026 - 22:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[22:00:00]
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ABBY PHILLIP, CNN ANCHOR (voice over): Tonight, a terrible report card for the president, the lowest approval rating since the insurrection, and an overwhelming 73 percent of Americans say he's paying attention to the wrong things.
Plus --
SEN. JOHN CORNYN (R-TX): They refuse to commit to writing what he testified to under oath. It's not a big ask.
PHILLIP: -- Todd Blanche's nomination hangs in the balance as two key Republicans hold out.
Also, heard on the Hill today more than 100 times --
DR. ANTHONY FAUCI, FORMER DIRECTOR, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ALLERGY AND INFECTIOUS DISEASES: I respectfully decline to answer based upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution.
PHILLIP: -- Senator Rand Paul promises a contempt vote next week after Fauci doesn't answer questions.
And Trump's retribution tour, new court filings show the DOJ pressuring the Secret Service to track James Comey, and Trump wanting details on the interview with the former FBI director.
Live at the table, Christine Quinn, Jason Rantz, Lydia Moynihan, Antjuan Seawright, and Dave Aronberg.
Americans with different perspectives aren't talking to each other, but here, they do.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
PHILLIP (on camera): Good evening, I'm Abby Phillip in New York.
Tonight, an extraordinary rebuke of President Trump's presidency, his failure to deliver on his promises, and an indictment of his priorities. A new CNN poll finds that just 34 percent of Americans approve of Trump's job as president, with nearly two-thirds of them disapproving. It's tied for the worst in Trump's career as president, matching his career low which followed the January 6th insurrection. Half of Americans now strongly disapprove of Trump, a high across his two terms, with a record low of 15 percent strongly approving.
Now, within his own party, Trump's approval rating has also hit a new low, and just 19 percent of Republicans say they're enthusiastic about the rest of his second term. A record high 73 percent of Americans say that Trump hasn't paid enough attention to the country's most important problems, with just 27 percent saying that he's had the right priorities so far.
Now, before we begin and open it up to the table here, I want to invite you at home to join our debate. Head to cnn.com/abby and weigh in. We'll get to some of your comments as we go through the show tonight.
But, Jason, this is a really terrible poll for the president, and it's not isolated. Quinnipiac poll had similar results. The president -- the American people are really trying to tell the president in overwhelming numbers that they think that he is focused on all the wrong things. When is he going to listen? Is he going to listen?
JASON RANTZ, SEATTL RED RADIO HOST: I mean, you mentioned the Quinnipiac poll. It's also not great for Democrats. I think the polling overall has been saying pretty much the same thing across the board, not just for the president, that people are generally unhappy. I mean, the Democratic Party is polling at 17 percent amongst independents with that Quinnipiac, and amongst men, it's at 20 percent. So, I do think that people are complaining --
PHILLIP: In that same Quinnipiac poll, Democrats have a 48 to 41 percent advantage on control over the House. That's --
RANTZ: Yes, but we're going into the House, where we expect that the Democrats are going to win.
PHILLIP: So, I'm just saying, I'm just saying, in that poll, even in spite of what you're saying, because I get it, right, like, actually Democrats are not happy with Democrats, which is probably driving this.
The generic ballot is, favors Democrats right now. But on the president the simple question, are you paying attention to the things we elected you to pay attention to? When do we get 75 percent of Americans practically saying anything in this country? They're saying he is not focused on the right things. How is that not a problem?
RANTZ: No, I don't think it's not a problem. It obviously is a problem politically. I think what the president would tell you is that he's focusing on what he believes is best for this country in the long-term, despite the fact that it's hurting him right now in the polls. Iran is a perfect example of that. I think everyone in this administration understands the importance of making sure that they don't have access to nuclear weapons and that we are able to completely eradicate the threat that they pose in that region.
At the same time, he understands that it's hurting him and the party in the polls. There's no doubt about that. The one bright side, if you want to think of it in that way, is that one that does get figured out, one of the leading reasons behind the polling is where it is, it's the economy and gas prices, and that will return back to normal within a reasonable amount of time.
[22:05:08]
So, it's not like something that's going to stay there forever because of a policy that he has gone down.
ANTJUAN SEAWRIGHT, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: The president, his party, and his policies on every single major issue they campaigned on are on political life support. Voters will have an opportunity to pull the plug in November. In that --
RANTZ: Well, Democrats are polling exactly the same way.
SEAWRIGHT: In that polling, the best way you measure the economy is feelonomics, economics you can feel. Voters do not trust the president when it comes to feelonomics. That means MAGAnomics has been a failure. That also means the largest cut to Medicaid in American history, largest cut to SNAP, the 25 million Americans who've seen their premiums, co-pays, and deductibles skyrocket, including 18.2 million Americans in red states, they're showing their pissivity in this polling.
Donald Trump and Republicans have given the middle finger to middle- class Americans and Middle America, and they are going to respond, as they have been consistently in every single election.
RANTZ: But you're ignoring the polling that shows exactly the same thing when it comes to these issues with Democrats by and large across the board. That has been the case.
SEAWRIGHT: That may be true about our brand, but November is going to be a binary choice, us versus them. And remember, in elections, I learned this as a Democrat in the last election, it's easier to vote against something than it is to vote for something.
RANTZ: Well, historically, based on history, Democrats are going to win.
PHILLIP: I also want to point out that, Jason, you suggested that all the -- I don't want to say all. Most of the president's problems stem from his decision to go into the Iran war, which you support, and the subsequent high gas prices and inflation that followed. But let's look a little deeper at the poll because it goes even beyond that. On trade, he is underwater at 21 percent, immigration, underwater, 17 percent, foreign policy, generally underwater, 28 percent.
So, it's not just -- I mean, they are unhappy about the Iran war for sure, Lydia, but it's not just that. It's really literally every agenda item, including immigration, which is supposed to be a strong suit of his. 61 percent of Americans disapprove.
LYDIA MOYNIHAN, CORRESPONDENT, NEW YORK POST: Yes. Well, I mean, this is certainly a warning letter to Trump, and I think in the last few weeks we've seen he focused on election integrity, which is polling a little bit better for him. I think he's trying to sort of reposition himself on some of these issues, certainly pushing the Trump accounts, the messaging around that, that's been a huge focus for the White House.
But, look, I'm not going to be Pollyanna-ish here and say everything's fabulous. I think obviously the midterms is going to be a moment where people have to make a decision. I also am aligned with Jason that I don't think this is some sort of love letter to Democrats.
But it is striking to me that one criticism of President Trump has been that he's all about whatever is best for him politically. And I guess for better or for worse, Iran was something that he knew was not going to be popular. A lot of Republicans are sort of regretting that decision that he made, but he's obviously doing that because he sees it as the right thing for him to do.
CHRISTINE QUINN (D), FORMER SPEAKER, NEW YORK CITY COUNCIL: But he got into that war telling us it would be four or five weeks. We're now months into this war, with 18 dead American soldiers. He has no plan --
MOYNIHAN: The polling reflects that, yes.
QUINN: This isn't about polling. This is about what's really happening. He has no plan to get out. Obviously, no one wants Iran to have a nuclear weapon, but we were told as Americans twice that we had obliterated their arsenal for a nuclear weapon. Then we were told we obliterated their military to only a few weeks later have soldiers killed by missiles they fired.
Americans are -- it's not about a poll. It's about the fact that we're in a war led by a man who promised no forever wars, and he has no plan.
PHILLIP: So, Dave, to add to the many -- the mountain of problems, right, the president has also been very involved in a lot of personal vendettas, he's enriched himself greatly in the last 18 months, and 64 percent of Americans say that when it comes to pursuing his personal business interests while serving as president, Donald Trump has gone too far. There's kind of this sense, and when I talk to Republicans on this show and elsewhere, that, oh, it's just all baked in the cake. They know he's a rich guy. But I don't know. I mean, those numbers seem to suggest that Americans don't like it. It leaves a bad taste in their mouth.
DAVE ARONBERG, FORMER U.S. STATE ATTORNEY, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA: Yes, corruption's going to be a big issue in the midterms. And you can attach it to affordability, which he mocks. And then at the same time, he is putting his name on the Kennedy Center and the airport. I flew up today from DJT International Airport, formerly known as Palm Beach International Airport. And -- SEAWRIGHT: Don't make me sick to my stomach.
ARONBERG: So, it's a controversial thing amongst a lot of people.
And so while he's doing that and then making money through business ventures, like crypto, people are wondering how they can pay for their gas and their groceries, and so this is a problem.
[22:10:05]
Because you remember the issues he got elected on were affordability, it was inflation, and it was immigration. And I think of all the numbers you showed, that immigration number should really freak out Republicans. If they're losing on that, then there is no place to go.
RANTZ: Well, let's also get a better understanding of what it even means when we're talking about immigration in this context, because I think if you were to poll specifically about the fact that we actually have a closed border now and people aren't coming across illegally, across the board, Democrat or Republican would say that's a good thing.
SEAWRIGHT: But that's not what, that's not what Americans see. Americans see the $70 billion slush fund Republicans gave to ICE, and they see people being murdered.
RANTZ: There's not a single American who was polled there that was pointing directly to that. I guarantee you they're talking about --
(CROSSTALKS)
SEAWRIGHT: Think about the conversations we have when it comes to immigration right now, this moment. It's people, it's ICE killing people in cold blood in the streets on camera.
QUINN: It's covering their faces.
RANTZ: Yes, that's not happening.
SEAWRIGHT: It's little kids being arrested. It's people show --
QUINN: That did happen.
RANTZ: No, it didn't.
QUINN: It did happen.
RANTZ: You're talking -- no, you're interpreting certain instances in which people have been killed, there's no doubt, but this idea that they're being murdered in cold blood, that they're just --
QUINN: Renee Good and Alex Pretti.
RANTZ: -- who almost ran over an ICE agent, which we all saw on video.
SEAWRIGHT: What do you call the two Minnesota incidents?
(CROSSTALKS)
RANTZ: I'm not suffering from anything.
SEAWRIGHT: No, I think you might be suffering with a serious case of diabetes if you do not think that Americans do not see people being killed in cold blood by ICE. That's why American people --
RANTZ: Being killed in cold blood, I think, is rejected by the American people. I think when --
SEAWRIGHT: Well, that's not what the poll said. The poll said something different.
RANTZ: Is that what was questioned? Was that the question?
PHILLIP: Well, look, I don't --
(CROSSTALKS)
PHILLIP: But, Jason, are you suggesting that the American people were happy with how the president handled the Minnesota enforcement, which did lead to the deaths of two American citizens in the streets?
RANTZ: I'm suggesting that when we ask the question simply on immigration, people who are upset will look specifically at that. But when you point out very specific questions under immigration, you're going to have different responses.
PHILLIP: Okay. But either way, on the question of how is the president handling immigration, it seems like people are reacting negatively to that.
RANTZ: Yes.
PHILLIP: The border is closed. The president could have done that and left it at that. He'd probably have a sky-high approval rating on immigration. He chose not to do that. And so his choices around immigration are what is -- that's what's being told right now.
SEAWRIGHT: It's what people see.
RANTZ: Sure, but his choices were also based on campaign promises.
PHILLIP: That is exactly what people are responding to.
RANTZ: And, again, when you compare this also, this particular issue with where Democrats are polling, they're not doing better than the president, and I think that matters as well.
QUINN: But this is the president's signature -- one of his signature issues. Right or wrong, it's never been a great issue for Democrats, but this is the president's signature issue. And he didn't just do what was promised, to close the border. He never promised to, you know, arrest a whole people. RANTZ: Yes, he did. Yes, he did.
(CROSSTALKS)
PHILLIP: But here's the real question. Here's the real question for Lydia and Jason. You're looking at these numbers. You acknowledge that there's a problem. At what point do you change course, or do you just double down on the things that the American people are saying, We don't like? I mean, I get your rationalizations, but we're talking elections. There's an election in a few months. Are you just going to say, well, if you don't like it, I promised it, tough luck, guys.
MOYNIHAN: I mean, to my point earlier, I think he is trying in sort of marginal ways to re-message and highlight some of the things that he has accomplished. But I would also just say, I mean, this is Trump, who, as you noted, had a really bad approval rating about five years ago. He staged a comeback. So, one thing that we know about Donald Trump is he has come back from a lot worse, so I have no --
(CROSSTALKS)
SEAWRIGHT: Can I just remind you what my mother used to teach me when I was younger? A hard head will make a soft you know what. And the Republicans have been very hard-headed and bull-headed about what the American people are saying. You keep telling me or telling us at this table that, compared to the Democrats, voters are going to hold the people in charge accountable, not the people who are fighting to make policy better.
RANTZ: I agree with you.
SEAWRIGHT: The party in charge. So, that mean it's not about what people think about Democrats, it's about the people who are making the policies that are being impacted.
MOYNIHAN: Voters always want to see things happen more quickly than it can possibly happen.
RANTZ: I would argue your point -- yes, your point is correct. I don't dispute that. And history tells us, with the exception of two times, that the party in power is going to lose at least one branch of government. But the argument I'm pushing back against is that they don't like these policies, so they must like these policies. They don't like the Democratic policies. They simply are responding to the power -- the party in power.
ARONBERG: I agree with you. Elections are about choices. I agree with you. The Democratic brand is awful right now. But at the same time, it's about the candidates. As long as the Democrats can make sure that the DSA doesn't take over the party --
RANTZ: Which they are.
ARONBERG: Well, I can argue about that.
[22:15:00] I think the Democrats will be fine in November.
SEAWRIGHT: We'll press the ignore button on that note because it's not happening.
PHILLIP: We're going to leave it there.
Next for us, breaking news tonight, Todd Blanche's nomination vote is on hold to be attorney general. What two key Republican senators are demanding.
Plus, Anthony Fauci is under fire tonight. He pleads the Fifth more than 100 times on Capitol Hill, and now he's facing being held in contempt.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PHILLIP: Bad news for Todd Blanche. Tonight, the Senate Judiciary Committee has postponed a key vote to advance his nomination as the next attorney general.
[22:20:01]
Blanche could not afford to lose a single Republican vote, but two are now holding out after a weeks-long battle with the administration over President Trump's controversial $1.8 billion so-called anti- weaponization fund.
Now, today, Senator John Cornyn intensified his calls on the DOJ to meet his demands in exchange for his support. He's asking for a guarantee in writing that the fund is truly dead for good. He also wants changes to the deal that gave Trump and his family immunity from IRS audits. But Cornyn says he hasn't gotten the assurances that he wants.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MANU RAJU, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Have you heard from the DOJ at all? Have they responded to you after you sent that back to them?
SEN. JOHN CORNYN (R-TX): As I told you earlier, it was not responsive to my concerns. I mean, we've heard from them. It's just that they refuse to commit to writing what he testified to under oath, and it's not a big ask.
REPORTER: Why don't you think Todd Blanche has met your demands at around the 11th hour before this vote?
CORNYN: Well, I assume he's getting some pushback from the president's lawyers.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Cornyn's defiance comes weeks after he lost his primary race in Texas with Trump endorsing his opponent. Now, the president seems to think that Cornyn is holding a grudge.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: Well, all I can say is Ted Blanche is outstanding, and I thought he's -- I thought it was pretty routine because he's so good. We just wouldn't find a better person. So, I don't know. Maybe John Cornyn's upset with me because I didn't endorse him.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Maybe. I mean, that seems like a good theory.
ARONBERG: True.
PHILLIP: One of the reasons why you shouldn't go after people in your own party, incumbents, because they might pose a problem for you.
But, Dave, I mean, what does it mean that the White House is willing to put Todd Blanche's nomination in jeopardy so that they don't have to put in writing that this fund is not going to happen, and perhaps that there are going to be changes to this IRS audit assurance that, that was given to the Trump family?
ARONBERG: Because Trump wants these things. And in the past, Trump can get any nominee not named Matt Gaetz through the compliant Senate. But things have changed, and loyalty is a two-way street, so John Cornyn's going to hold out, and that's a good thing. But it also says something about Todd Blanche, that even though Todd Blanche has said verbally that, I promise the anti-weaponization/slush fund is dead, they're saying, trust but verify. They're treating him like Gorbachev. They're saying, put it in writing or else we don't believe you.
SEAWRIGHT: But who would trust the crooks who are in charge? No one. And that's why you see Cornyn and others taking this process as a marathon, not a sprint. It's easier to not do than it is to undo. It is very unlikely that you will be able to undo the confirmation of anyone at this point in the cabinet. So, I think they're taking their time and being methodical.
I also think they have witnessed what has happened with these other appointees who said one thing during the confirmation process, then in turn, when given the opportunity, they put their loyalty and their trust to whatever the president wants to do.
QUINN: And also the request to put it in writing, two very significant things, but really to put anything in writing when you're testifying before the Senate is not an outlandish request. It's very basic. And when someone or an administration can't meet something like that, it really makes you wonder why. And the answer is, as you said, because the president wants a weaponized fund. He wants all of the benefits he got in that IRS deal.
PHILLIP: So, let me play -- this is an exchange in June between Todd Blanche and Grace Meng, back and forth about, putting it in writing. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TODD BLANCHE, ATTORNEY GENERAL NOMINEE: We are not moving forward with the fund.
REP. GRACE MENG (D-NY): Not moving forward ever?
BLANCHE: Correct.
MENG: Would both of you now sign and release documents reversing the DOJ's position on the fund?
BLANCHE: I'm not -- we're not moving forward with the fund. I'm not committing to putting anything in writing. I must've said it over and over again.
MENG: Nothing in writing?
BLANCHE: I mean, I don't know what the purpose of putting something in writing. I'm telling you what we're doing. Meaning, like, what's the -- why do I need to put something in writing if I'm telling you what we're doing?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
QUINN: Just like RFK said he wasn't against vaccines.
PHILLIP: Why do we (INAUDIBLE) anything written on paper? I have no idea why paper is even a thing because you could just tell someone, and they would agree with you. He also, a month later, tells John Cornyn that, yes, Trump could bring a lawsuit to enforce the settlement. So, why won't they put it in writing if they're saying they're not doing it?
RANTZ: Well, my guess is because it is -- it came out of this IRS development, right, this IRS agreement, the settlement. So, I don't think it's probably as easy as just putting something in a sentence on a piece of paper without it having some complicating factors on the IRS agreement. That's my guess.
[22:25:00]
We'll see.
Again, the reporting is tonight --
PHILLIP: Just so I understand what you --
RANTZ: The weaponization fund came out of the idea of the settlement. I'm saying depending on what specifically Cornyn is asking for and the way that the agreement was written might be slightly more complicated. That's what I'm saying.
PHILLIP: But I think that's really -- that is actually the exact reason why Cornyn wants it in writing, because for two reasons. One, Trump has basically -- they've dropped this case, right? But there's a settlement that is still in force. The DOJ is saying part of it they're just going to pretend that it doesn't exist. The other part of it he won't address. Cornyn is saying, if you are going to testify under oath that this is not going to happen, you need to put it in writing. You need to get the other side to sit down and say, we both agree that neither of these things are moving forward. That can be done.
RANTZ: That is currently being done. They're having the conversations. The reporting is later to --
QUINN: But they're not writing it down.
RANTZ: Well, I'm sorry, but the reporting as of just a couple hours ago was that they had submitted something to Cornyn's office. We don't know what was submitted exactly. We don't know where they are, how close they are to coming forward with the deal.
We also don't know what Cornyn is specifically asking for beyond the sort of one-liner bumper sticker response. We don't know specifically any of that. He hasn't released that kind of detail. If he was more specific in the language that he's looking for and telling us this is why the White House --
PHILLIP: I'm sure he's been specific to the White House. You know --
RANTZ: I'm sure he has been.
PHILLIP: I'm sure he's told them exactly what he would need.
RANTZ: But I'm saying we don't have those details, but we are now pretending to do.
PHILLIP: He's said as much. Well, I'm telling you, Cornyn has told them exactly what he needs in order to move forward. They have not given it to him.
RANTZ: What is it though that he's asking for?
PHILLIP: So, we know that those are the two things that we know.
RANTZ: Yes, we know that John Cornyn is asking for that, but he's not telling us specifically what he's telling the White House. And if he did, I'm simply suggesting that maybe there'd be a little bit more clarity for us to be able to explain why it is that it's --
QUINN: But the clarity needs to be with the White House.
PHILLIP: No, I don't -- no. I think this is a red herring. We don't need to know. It's not about what I don't need to know. The White House knows.
RANTZ: We all should know. This is a guy who's taking control of this. Well, if he is a toddler who is holding this guy hostage.
PHILLIP: Oh, a toddler, okay, toddler.
RANTZ: Yes, he's holding this guy hostage.
PHILLIP: Yes, I agree, Jason.
RANTZ: I've had the same position of Republicans and Democrats where they all --
PHILLIP: We all want to know all the intimate details. But I'm just saying the reason we are sitting here talking about this is because whatever Cornyn has asked them for, they have not provided, period, that we know that that's the case. So, I don't understand.
(CROSSTALKS)
SEAWRIGHT: I think you may be forgetting, cabinet secretary after cabinet secretary, they have lied under oath about a number of things. You can't trust them, one. Number two, I think that what the American people expect and what the legislative branch should expect is a sense of independence from the next director.
RANTZ: Yes, he shouldn't be a wing man to the president, correct?
SEAWRIGHT: We know that Donald Trump is a control freak. We also know the first pledge any nominee takes is pledge to Donald Trump and Trumpism. So, I think people want a sense of comfortableness.
RANTZ: They serve at the behest of the president.
MOYNIHAN: This just strikes me as a lot of political, petty theatrics. I mean, John Cornyn voted for Merrick Garland. And now he has a few months left in the Senate. He's sort of feeling his oats, embracing being relevant, getting lots of attention. And I think it's petty, and he's done this now as well with a couple of ambassadors that Trump's tried to get through. He wants certain things agreed to, certain USAID reinstated. And it --
PHILLIP: How is that --
RANTZ: That was AIDS funding.
PHILLIP: But hold on. How is that being petty?
SEAWRIGHT: He's doing his job.
PHILLIP: Is that not called legislative? Like he's the -- it's advice and consent. Like his job --
MOYNIHAN: He's happy to go along with all of Biden's nominees, that he's not --
PHILLIP: But that's not -- But, Lydia, you know that that's not the case. He did not go along with all of Biden's nominees. He's actually gone along with all of Trump's nominees, not Biden's, Trump's.
So, in this moment, he's asking for something in writing that the DOJ has already agreed to under oath. It should be a simple, yes, sir, and a piece of paper to answer that request. You still haven't answered to me why this is so hard for the DOJ to do it.
MOYNIHAN: I think they should absolutely do it. But I also don't think that the stakes of this are even that -- I mean, what we're talking about is whether or not Todd Blanche is acting in front of the Senate. Yes, I know it bestows credibility, but for John Cornyn to really be making this into such a big deal, to me, signals somebody who's a bit bitter about not getting the president's endorsement.
PHILLIP: They had to say that this weaponization fund was not going to go forward in order for Todd Blanche to even get a hearing in front of the Senate, and that's not only because of John Cornyn. It's because of a lot of other Republican senators who thought that this was a bridge too far. So, he is not alone. He's might be the only one in a political position to say something about it, but he's not alone.
QUINN: And who cares what his motives are. He's right.
MOYNIHAN: But regardless, Todd Blanche has been running the DOJ. He will continue to run the DOJ.
ARONBERG: Three months ago, John Cornyn tried to name a highway in Texas after President Trump. So, yes, Trump is right that there are things went sideways after Trump endorsed his opponent.
[22:30:01]
At the same time, Cornyn's still right that we do need more assurances on this slush fund.
SEAWRIGHT: And it's not clear --
QUINN: And you know what? You reap what you sow.
PHILLIP: We have to leave it there.
QUINN: You reap what you sow if you're Donald Trump and everybody else.
PHILLIP: Next for us, Dr. Anthony Fauci grilled on Capitol Hill in a hearing that was more spectacle than substance as he pleads the fifth more than a hundred times, and Senator Rand Paul is now threatening him with contempt.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:35:05]
PHILLIP: He spent decades becoming the government's most recognizable public health authority. And just a few short years ago, he was the face of the nation's COVID response. But today, Dr. Anthony Fauci faced the very real threat of criminal prosecution.
In a contentious hearing on Capitol Hill, Dr. Fauci was relentlessly grilled by Republican senators as part of a years-long investigation into the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic, its handling under the Trump and Biden administrations, and what Republicans allege is a cover-up. Dr. Fauci offered a brief opening statement, arguing that Republicans' repeated calls for his prosecution justified his refusal to answer questions.
Then, over the course of more than two hours, both on the substance and in moments that were clearly manufactured for spectacle, Fauci invoked his Fifth Amendment rights more than a hundred times. Now, despite Fauci's refusal to speak, Republican senators continued to pepper him with questions, accusations, and insults.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. RAND PAUL (R-KY): The American people deserve an apology.
SEN. JOSH HAWLEY (R-MO): Somewhere along the way, you lost your way. You may have been a good public servant at one time, I don't know. You became a narcissist and a megalomaniac and a liar, and you've lied to the American people and you lied to this body. You've got rich while people were dying. Hundreds of thousands of Americans, over a million in the end, and you were getting rich.
SEN. BERNIE MORENO (R-OH): Who the (expletive) do you think you were for doing that? It is a total disgrace what you did to this country.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Near the end of the hearing, Senator Rand Paul said he would hold a committee vote on contempt of Congress next week.
Joining us now is Dr. Scott Ratzan, editor-in-chief of the Journal of Health Communication, and he joins us in our fifth seat. So, Dr. Ratzan, obviously there are a lot of questions about COVID-19. Did you find any of this enlightening questions or lack of answers?
DR. SCOTT RATZAN, EDITOR-IN-CHIEF, JOURNAL OF HEALTH COMMUNICATION: Well, look, in reality, right, public service and public servants should be respected. Everyone who was in that hearing and meeting room.
But what's happened is this is an assault on science and scientists. And unfortunately, Dr. Fauci is in that seat, 38 years of service to the country, one of the best known scientists for infectious disease, unfortunately, has taken a lot of heat for probably a lot of, shall we say, issues that were not fully his.
He didn't make all the decisions that drove the COVID pandemic, but you are right that he is one of the most respected scientists and should be respected in that same sort of way. Today, we certainly didn't learn anything from the way the hearing was held.
PHILLIP: So let Lydia respond, and then I want to --
LYDIA MOYNIHAN, CORRESPONDENT, "NEW YORK POST": Let's be super clear, though. Based on his policy recommendations, there were people removed from beaches at gunpoint. There were people who were trying to open a gym so people could work out outside, they were arrested. Children who weren't able to go to school. People who committed
suicide because of the social isolation and anytime that anybody dared to ask a question about herd immunity, COVID origins, the vaccine, are there other treatments, they were systematically silenced, they were de-platformed. In some cases, they were fired, their lives were ruined.
And at the same time, now these diaries have revealed Dr. Fauci was more concerned about being on Zooms with celebrities. He was more concerned about his style than any other --
PHILLIP: Let me ask you a question. Can you be a little bit more specific about what you think Fauci did and said that was so wrong that, based on what we knew at the time, that you should hold him accountable for every bad thing that happened during COVID as a result of the virus and lockdown?
MOYNIHAN: So the diaries are quite illuminating because he was writing one thing at the same time that he was saying something very different publicly. He was extremely dismissive, for instance, of the origins of COVID at the same time that he was saying, I don't think this is from the wet market. That's just one example.
JASON RANTZ, SEATTLE RED RADIO HOST AND AUTHOR, "WHAT'S KILLING AMERICA?": He adamantly said that this whole idea that we would even talk about a lab leak theory is wrong and suppressing those opinions.
PHILLIP: So hold on a second. July 20th, 2021, he's testifying in a Senate hearing. He says, "my own view based on the studies I've reviewed is that most likely COVID infections were a result from zoonotic transmission. However, as I have publicly stated, the possibility of a laboratory accident exists.
A laboratory accident could include scenarios where a naturally occurring virus was unintentionally released during research activities, such as the collection of animal samples or examination of virus in a laboratory. I am in full favor of investigation into the origins of COVID-19."
So the idea that he completely dismissed the lab leak theory, which he did not, seems to be disproven by testimony that he made within a year of the pandemic. Secondly, you're talking about the lab leak theory as if that is proven, which it is not.
[22:40:10]
RANTZ: It is widely believed that that is what happened.
PHILLIP: Dr. Ratzan, tell us what is widely believed.
RATZAN: I think the reality is we shouldn't be worrying about the lab leak theory today. What we should be thinking about is how we build a healthier America. That's what this homeland security group is about. How do we prepare? How do we have a proactive plan and be able to
avoid some of the problems that happened in the past? RANTZ: You're now saying that we shouldn't talk about where COVID came
from, at least looking forward to see how we can prevent something like this from happening again.
QUINN: I also think your assertion that the lab leak is widely believed, and I take from that widely believed by scientists and doctors, is not true.
ANTJUAN SEAWRIGHT, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST AND FOUNDER AND CEO, BLUEPRINT STRATEGY, LLC.: This was intentional today to be about political theater. Let's just put that on the table, number one.
Number two, I think people forget, one, Donald Trump was the President. And while Fauci was trying to save us, Trump was trying to grave us, telling people to drink bleach.
RANTZ: That didn't happen. I'm telling you with a matter of fact, and everyone knows that the President told you to drink bleach.
SEAWRIGHT: I'm telling you otherwise. As an African-American sitting at this table, when America had a cough during that COVID-19 pandemic, black America had the flu. We were dying at clips that no other constituency, no other race were dying. So, we took this pandemic very serious.
RANTZ: Everyone took it serious.
SEAWRIGHT: We need to be in a position to where when things like this happen, that we don't press the ignore button and act as if it's a big deal. In other words, we need to believe science when it comes to having a vaccine.
MOYNIHHAN: Science does not need to plead the fifth 111 times. It does not need --
QUINN: You know what, when the chair of the hearing, the senator, has said repeatedly that he wants to put you behind bars, it is a prudent thing to do.
MOYNIHAN: Is that out of nowhere?
RANTZ: You can choose not to commit a violence.
PHILLIP: Hold on one second.
MOYNIHNA: I don't know about -- The man had an agenda.
PHILLIP: Lydia, just a second. I just want to make it clear. Let's not pretend that Anthony Fauci has not testified before Congress on these issues before. He has testified to gain-of-function research, he has testified to all of the issues that we're talking about here today, he has testified under oath repeatedly over the last six years to a lot of those issues.
RANTZ: You've got to pardon me.
PHILLIP: But I want to -- But hold on. Okay.
RANTZ: He was preemptively pardoned, and I think that the pardon wouldn't have extended to that.
PHILLIP: Jason, what does a pardon have to do with the fact that he testified under oath to all of these issues? So the idea that he has not answered questions is not true.
Just a second, Jason. I want to get to a really important thing. Because the American people are grappling with to what degree science can be trusted, right?
And I think this is a difficult topic, because there were things that were said early in the pandemic, which, by the way, I guess I may need to remind some people, when Donald Trump was President and shut the country down, there were decisions that were made based on what they thought they knew at the time, right?
Some of those things actually did turn out to be wrong. Schools were closed for too long. There were a lot of things, perhaps, that went on for too long. What is the responsibility of the scientific community in a circumstance like that?
RATZAN: Well, that's a really important question, Abby. Science is incremental, and scientists are not always the best scientific communicators. So really what we need to do, what we had in the past, was strong institutions that were able to communicate, whether it be the CDC, Health and Human Services, others that were leaders.
We once had a Surgeon General that actually was followed, C. Everett Koop, during the AIDS pandemic, while Anthony Fauci was head of NIAID. There have been times when we have had a very significant response.
The America Response to AIDS campaign did very well, both with Dr. Fauci and Dr. Koop at the time. We don't have that today. We need a trusted, coordinated source somewhere, whether it's in Washington, whether it's here in New York, whether it's some group that's together, to give us the information to make appropriate decisions.
PHILLIP: All right, hold that thought. We're going to pick this up after a quick break. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:45:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP. PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: I inherited Fauci. He was here from the 1980s, so I had him for a period of time. And I disagreed with him on a lot.
I would have had to close down the whole country if I listened to him. I went the Federalist way, which is basically let the governors decide. And generally speaking, the Republican governors did very well, the Democrat governors did not very well.
But Fauci wanted to have nobody wearing masks, if you remember. And then everybody had to wear five masks, as many masks as you could get. I mean, he made a lot of mistakes. And he wasn't a big factor for me, he was a very big factor for Biden.
[22:50:00]
And if you remember, even though we were sort of prime time, in terms of that whole disaster of COVID, four people died fewer in the Trump administration than in the Biden administration. We ran it well.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Now, memories may be short of the COVID pandemic. But I'm here to remind you that Donald Trump was President when the country shut down.
And he was President when the mask mandates went into place, he was President when social distancing went into place, he was President when schools shut down. So he was President when he developed the vaccine, which he should get an enormous amount of credit for, he took the vaccine when he contracted COVID. So the idea that Trump bears no responsibility if the conclusion is that it all went so wrong, that doesn't line up with the facts.
QUINN: Not at all. I mean, look, I want to say the President for Operation Warp Speed deserves a lot of credit. Getting that vaccine out there undoubtedly saved countless lives and prevented a lot of people from getting very sick.
But he was the President. He was the President when we first thought you didn't need a mask and then science and medicine evolved. As we learned more, we knew you did need a mask.
As you said, he was the President when schools got shut down, when businesses got shut down. He can't now pivot and kind of blame it on Anthony Fauci because he thinks Fauci is unpopular at the moment.
I don't understand why if you were President during COVID, you wouldn't stand up and say, we did the best we could with the info we had. And the second we had more info, we changed. As opposed to sloughing it off on someone who worked for you. You are the President of the United States.
PHILLIP: I would even argue that you, I think you could certainly argue that maybe they didn't move fast enough to adjust when the info changed. I totally would put that on the table as a very legitimate critique.
RANTZ: That's the argument.
PHILLIP: But I think that the question for me is, what makes that a criminal mistake and not just a mistake that any person facing these incredible unprecedented circumstances could potentially make not knowing what the right choice is? RANTZ: Yes, I think the American people, conservatives and liberals
give a lot of deference to public health officials in cases where we don't have information. But to your point, we started to get information.
It became pretty obvious pretty quickly that people who were children, people who were young and healthy were not being impacted by COVID the same way that someone who's elderly. People who contracted the COVID virus and then being told immediately, initially, that you had to get a vaccine, being told that the vaccine was going to stop the spread of COVID. And people asking really honest and good faith questions about whether or not it was as efficacious as we were being told were being shut down, I don't think that that's the criminal part.
What I do think could potentially be a criminal issue for Dr. Fauci was precisely why he pled the fifth today is because he was potentially lying, giving certain answers while under oath to the Senate, which would have been covered, was covered, is covered by the pardons, but would not have been covered today had he decided to commit COVID.
QUINN: There is no evidence in Fauci's career that he is a liar or has ever lied.
RANTZ: Well, so that's not true. According to the diary, that is not true.
QUINN: That is an evolution of thinking.
PHILLIP: Just to respond to this idea of, was it too late how quickly Fauci responded to changing information?
RANTZ: Well, I think we could have done better for sure, but we can't put it all on Dr. Fauci. We had Governor Cuomo every day. We had all sorts of, we were right in the middle of it.
We had the incremental evidence to make decisions. Unfortunately, the mask was very confusing. And even the CDC, one day the mask was on, one day the mask was off. Do you do a double mask? What kind of mask? All of these added confusion.
So we could have done better and we could have done this with a trusted source. Now, I can't say that Dr. Fauci was the right one. We had Ambassador Bricks later. We had, we did have the issue of bleach. We can't, I saw that.
RANTZ: You didn't say drink bleach.
RATZAN: I saw that press conference. So we did have conflicting messages. We had ivermectin, we had all of this other stuff that was out there that did not need to be.
PHILLIP: All right, we got to leave it there.
Next for us, our panelists are going to react to your feedback from cnn.com/abby. We'll be right back. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:55:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PHILLIP: We've got some viewer feedback from cnn.com/abby. The first one says, why are we using the statement, quote, "a reasonable amount of time" for the economy to get better as if it isn't just important at this very moment? I guess you might've been the person.
RANTZ: Yes, because I think people assume that you can just flip a switch on anything when it's within your control, that the economy takes a dive or not within your control. That's just not a reasonable position to hold. It's of course urgent. And if you are feeling it, it's even more urgent. It doesn't dismiss that. I'm just being honest about how long things take.
[23:00:01]
QUINN: Wasn't the tariff on-off kind of something that raised costs and food. So, and the President flipped that on.
PHILLIP: Yes, all right.
RANTZ: But I'm saying the recovery.
PHILLIP: Let me get to the second question.
QUINN: He could flip it off. It happened quickly.
PHILLIP: Or the second comment, quote, "why do I need to put anything in writing if I'm telling you?" As a lawyer, I'm guessing Todd Blanche already knows the answer to that question.
I don't know if there are any lawyers left on the table, but --
SEAWRIGHT: I'm going to stop.
MOYNIHAN: I'm looking at you.
SEAWRIGHT: I'm going to ask you, lawyer.
PHILLIP: I think that's all.
SEAWRIGHT: We owe everything to you on T.V.
MOYNIHAN: You weigh a lawyer on T.V.
PHILLIP: Thank you for watching "NewsNight." "Laura Coates Live" starts right now.
