Return to Transcripts main page
CNN News Central
Jay Ashcroft, (R), Missouri Secretary Of State, Discusses His Threat To Take Biden Off The Primary Ballot; Mark Esper, Former Defense Secretary, Discusses Defense Secretary Lloyd Austins' Secret ICU Stay; Most Employer Insurance Plans Won't Cover Weight-Loss Drugs; U.S. Spacecraft Set For Moon Landing Suffers Major Setback. Aired 2:30-3p ET
Aired January 08, 2024 - 14:30 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[14:30:00]
JAY ASHCROFT, (R), MISSOURI SECRETARY OF STATE: If anyone can say so and so is not supposed to be on the ballot and it is wrong for you to put them on the ballot, then we are going to see secretaries of state, elections authorities, maybe even county clerks across this country removing people from the ballot.
I think that is a terrible thing.
BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: So --
ASHCROFT: I am against that.
What I said was, if the Supreme Court allows it, that slippery slope is going to happen to everybody. They need to stop it from happening to everybody.
SANCHEZ: I am sure the Supreme Court will settle whether you can remove someone from the ballot or not or potentially give guidance on that.
I am wondering, though, what would be your justification for removing Joe Biden from the ballot in Missouri? Has he engaged in your mind in some kind of insurrection?
ASHCROFT: There have been allegations that he has engaged in insurrection --
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: How so?
ASHCROFT: Please let me finish. There have been allegations --
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: You cannot say something and not back it up. What do you mean?
ASHCROFT: I am continuing but you interrupted me before I could back it up.
SANCHEZ: Go ahead.
ASHCROFT: Are you scared of the truth?
SANCHEZ: I am not terrified of the truth at all. It seems that --
(CROSSTALK)
ASHCROFT: -- allegations that --
SANCHEZ: What allegations?
ASHCROFT: President Trump has never been adjudicated --
(CROSSTALK)
ASHCROFT: -- in a court of law.
SANCHEZ: Sure. What did Joe Biden do in your mind that equates to insurrection? What allegations are you talking about?
ASHCROFT: I have seen allegations from the lieutenant governor of Texas that has said that Joe Biden has been part of an insurrection for rebellion. We've seen the president -- that's right. The governor of Florida said the same thing.
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: Insurrection over what? What does the governor of Texas say that Joe Biden was causing an insurrection over?
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: If you're going to make the claim, give me some specifics. Are you just going to cite --
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: -- the governor of Texas or Florida and not actually say what they are arguing? Do you know what they are arguing?
ASHCROFT: What I am telling you is this. They made allegations. And all it took for former President Trump to be taken off the ballot in Colorado and in Maine were allegations.
We should not be a country that removes people from the ballot based on allegations. I think you can agree with that.
SANCHEZ: I think it depends to a degree. Because --
(CROSSTALK)
ASHCROFT: So your guy --
SANCHEZ: My guy? Joe Biden is not my guy. You do not know who my guy is.
(CROSSTALK)
ASHCROFT: It does not matter.
SANCHEZ: The point is, sir --
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: -- the point is that it is not clear whether the 14th Amendment is self-executing or not.
In other words, it does not matter to a court at that point whether there was a conviction of Donald Trump on insurrection or not. That is a debate for the Supreme Court to have.
(CROSSTALK)
ASHCROFT: There's not an insurrection if there is not a conviction.
SANCHEZ: A judge decided so in Colorado.
ASHCROFT: But it was not a judge in Maine. It was just the secretary of state.
SANCHEZ: Because that is the way the constitution in Maine is laid out, sir.
ASHCROFT: The constitution in Maine gives the secretary of state the ability to decide whether or not someone is --
SANCHEZ: As part of the process, yes. Someone can make the claim that someone shouldn't be on a ballot, that somebody disqualifies them. The secretary of state is the first layer in a legal process of deciding whether that person belongs on the ballot or not.
It is in Maine's state constitution.
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: I think you should probably read it, sir, before you make claims about the Maine secretary of state and their process.
We've got to leave the conversation there but I very much appreciate your time. You are welcome back anytime, sir.
ASHCROFT: Thank you.
SANCHEZ: Of course. Have a good day. Happy New Year.
Stay with CNN NEWS CENTRAL. We will be back in a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[14:38:06]
BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: A new detail in the controversy surrounding the hospitalization of the nation's top defense official.
CNN has just learned the Pentagon did not tell the White House the Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin would be going to Walter Reed Medical Center for an elective procedure on December 22nd.
It was that undisclosed procedure that ended up leading to complications for Austin.
An official statement saying, "Austin suffered severe pain and then had to return to Walter Reed on January 1st and was admitted then to the ICU."
The next day, the Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman was told about Austin's hospitalization but he is not in the chain of command.
Also, on January 2nd, deputy defense secretary, Kathleen Hicks, taking up some of Lloyd Austin's duties but it was not until January 4th, three days later, that she and President Biden learned of the details that Austin was actually in the ICU.
The Pentagon says one reason for the delay is that Austin's chief of staff was also sick.
Let's talk about this now with Mark Esper, who served as defense secretary, of course, in the Trump administration. He wrote the book "The Sacred Oath, Memoirs of a Secretary of Defense During Extraordinary Times."
Secretary Esper, you have said somebody dropped the ball here on Secretary Austin. Who is it up to besides him to alert the White House if his key aid is sick?
MARK ESPER, FORMER SECRETARY OF DEFENSE UNDER PRESIDENT TRUMP: I think, in ordinary circumstances, it would be his chief of staff who had the responsibility to convey the message to the White House. But also to others in the chain of command.
In this case, I guess she was not capable at all of doing so. The question is, who else within his inner sanctum was able to do that?
[14:40:00]
Now I do not think all the details have come out. Clearly, something that I look to when you lay out the timeline, Brianna, is somebody informed the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff on January 2nd.
The question is, why didn't that same person inform the deputy secretary of defense, who is the second in command, who should have known because you want to maintain that civilian chain of control.
It calls into some question about the civilian relationship and who did what, who was in power, not empowered to make notifications.
KEILAR: Is the protocol clear? Is it pretty clear here?
ESPER: It was during my tenure. My chief of staff handled those things. She was the interlocular between myself and the White House in most cases. Also between myself and the deputy secretary of defense.
That person is a key job, one of the most important jobs in the Pentagon. That person or their deputy has to be empowered and be able to make those notifications.
Especially to the president and especially when you are in the middle of a situation in the Middle East, you are conducting strikes in Baghdad.
That becomes a really tricky situation where you want to be able to, as the president, to pick up the phone and say, hey, what is going on, what do we need to do, what's the next course of action, other options, et cetera?
But for the president, the National Security Council and, of course, the deputy secretary of defense not to know, it is really troubling.
KEILAR: I want to ask you separately, today, we saw President Biden continuing to make his case that the 2024 election is about democracy.
You have said that former President Trump is a threat to democracy. You told my colleague, Jim Acosta, over the weekend that Trump will install royalists, including in the Pentagon.
Do you worry if Trump is re-elected that he will try to use the military unlawfully? What are your concerns?
ESPER: Yes. I am concerned about who he will install in various departments, not just DOD but DOJ as well. You could look at some other key positions, such as the director of the CIA.
The question, the way you asked it, I do not know what that means by unconstitutionally. I think military officers are bound to only follow orders that are legal, ethical and moral. So you will have some type of braking action there.
But at the end of the day, it is the civilian secretary, in which we were just discussing about Secretary Austin -- and by the way, I hope he is doing far better.
But it's the secretary of defense who is in the chain of command, running from the president to the secretary to the combat commanders. If it comes with regard to other parts of DOD, the same is true. So that is my concern there.
KEILAR: If he were to have a loyalist in there who just is a mouthpiece -- and it sounds like you really do have faith in the military. But how do you think the military would handle it if given unlawful orders by civilian leadership?
ESPER: I think, for the most part, I think most of them would refuse an unlawful orders and then they would be faced with resigning or being fired by the president.
My concern was always not as much as inappropriate orders. For example, the situation I faced was calling up the National Guard and for the Insurrection Act to be used against protesters.
For the most part, none of that is illegal. Certainly not unconstitutional. But it would be, in my view, a very, very inappropriate solution to an issue that the president may be trying to address.
To me, those are the trickier questions that are legal but inappropriate orders.
KEILAR: What happens then? If there is someone who will just pass that order on?
ESPER: Yes. That is the challenge. What the military is trained is to follow their orders. That is grounded in the beginning of your career.
I spent four years at West Point, 21 years in active and reserve duty. I know what the military ethic is, what the professional expectations are.
So they are bound to follow orders. We want our military to follow orders. That's why, when I was in office, I always thought it was important for the civilian leadership, myself, beginning with myself, were the ones that needed to kind of defend the uniformed military.
Against not just illegal and unlawful or immoral orders but inappropriate ones as well, to make that stand to the president and his staff, to say we are not doing this or we should not do this or this is a better way to do what you want to do because it does not cross any boundaries.
That is why the civilian positions are absolutely critical.
KEILAR: Yes, they certainly are.
Secretary Esper, it is great to have you. Thank you for being with us for this discussion.
ESPER: Thanks, Brianna.
KEILAR: And still ahead, new weight-loss drugs may be revolutionary for many people but not if they cannot afford them. Before you look at cheaper alternatives, let's talk about their safety.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[14:48:02]
SANCHEZ: It is the new year and a lot of folks are lining up their New Year's resolutions, including, for many Americans, they want to lose weight.
And with the rise of powerful weight-loss drugs like Wegovy and Ozempic, those resolutions could be more realistic and within reach than ever.
But with celebrities like Oprah Winfrey touting their benefits, supply is becoming a problem and so was the price.
KEILAR: You get Ozempic and you get --
(CROSSTALK)
KEILAR: -- and she's like, you can do that.
So most employer insurance plans do not cover these popular medications. That forces some people to make risky choices when they are looking for alternatives.
Let's talk about that. It is really a medical conundrum. We have CNN medical correspondent, Meg Tirrell, to take us through that.
What happens if patients don't have coverage for this? Where are they going?
MEG TIRRELL, CNN MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Brianna, it can be incredibly frustrating for patients if they lose coverage for these medications and sometimes, that means they lose access to the drugs.
We've seen from clinical trial results like one we can show you here that, on average, patients tend to gain weight back weekly if they stop taking these medications.
You can see this from this one clinical trial of Zepbound, the newest medication for weight loss out there.
Generally patients lose weight when they are on it but when they split, and half start taking a placebo and half stayed on the drug, those that got off the drug and went on placebo gained the weight back.
So we do hear from patients, sometimes they try to switch to a compounded version, for example. Those are versions of drugs that are allowed to be made by pharmacies when the drug is on the shortage of list, which these are.
But they are not as tightly regulated by the FDA. So there can be real safety concerns. And the FDA has warned about using those versions.
KEILAR: Why are employer insurance plans so reluctant to cover the drugs? You think that, ultimately, they have healthier people who weigh less, that they are going to, ultimately, be cheaper to cover for other things.
TIRRELL: These drugs can be incredibly expensive. They cost almost $1000 or more than $1000 each, before insurance and before any discounts.
[14:50:00]
So the conundrum with insurance sometimes is they want to be able to save money over the long term but it takes a long time to see those benefits get realized. So that cost equation can be difficult for them. KEILAR: A very good point.
Meg, thank you so much for that.
Houston, they have a problem. The company trying to put a lander on the moon says it's dealing with an anomaly. The historic mission now could be in jeopardy. We will have that ahead.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KEILAR: All right, we are getting new details about a major setback for the first U.S.-launched mission to the moon since the Apollo program.
SANCHEZ: CNN's Kristin Fisher is here with the details.
Kristin, what is going on? Is this mission done?
KRISTIN FISHER, CNN SPACE & DEFENSE CORRESPONDENT: It is not over yet but it's not looking good. It started off looking so good.
Early this morning, we got to see the first inaugural launch of the United Launch Alliances' brand- new Vulcan rocket. This rocket has been in development for quite some time.
It actually performed beautifully. This is a rocket that will be designed to send national security payloads into space. The Pentagon really watching this launch.
And that rocket did well. The problem is with the lunar lander that is on top of the rocket. It was built by a company called Astrobotic based in Pittsburgh. It's called the Peregrine Lunar Lander.
And a few hours after it separated from the Vulcan rocket, they ran into some issues. We now know it is one of the worst things that you can encounter in spacecrafts. That is a propellant problem.
Astrobotic put out a statement just about an hour and a half ago. I want to read it to you guys.
It says, "Unfortunately, it appears the failure within the propulsion system is causing a critical loss of propellant. The team is working to try and stabilize this loss.
[14:55:05]
"But given the situation, we have prioritized maximizing the science and data we can capture. We are currently assessing the alternative mission profiles that may be feasible at this time."
So, that is not good. A critical loss of propellent, a big problem. Now they are looking at alternative mission profiles.
The goal, to make this the first spacecraft to land on the moon since the Apollo program in 1972. The first private company to ever do this. This is not a U.S. government mission. Now, that very much in jeopardy.
KEILAR: So this thing is heading where then?
FISHER: That is what they are trying to figure out. We don't know how much propulsion is leaking, how much fuel is leaking. They don't even know how close to the moon it can get.
But I can tell you there is one group of people that will likely be very happy about this development and that is the Navajo Nation, the largest group of Native Americans in the United States.
Because they were very upset that one of the payloads on this lunar lander carried cremated human remains, which is something that these two companies do.
They were going to offer a first-of-its-kind lunar burial, but the Navajo Nation was very upset. They said that this desecrated a sacred space to their cosmology and culture.
So, they fought it. They said they were for and they supported advancements in spaceflight. But they did not these remains landing on the moon.
So while everybody else in the space industry is not liking these developments, I bet the Navajo Nation does.
SANCHEZ: Yes, this now ends the debate. We hope they make the best of that detour.
Kristin Fisher, thank you so much for your reporting.
So there's only one week to go, and every hour counts for Republican candidates courting voters in Iowa, especially for Donald Trump, the front runner, facing legal fights.
A new wrinkle in one case that we're going to break down when we come back on CNN NEWS CENTRAL.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
