Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Pigs Being Raised For Organ Transplants; Jennifer Crumbley Trial Continues; President Biden Decides on Response to Jordan Attack. Aired 1-1:30p ET

Aired January 30, 2024 - 13:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[13:01:00]

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: A decision has been made. President Biden says he's decided on how the United States will respond to a deadly attack on American troops in Jordan. But exactly what course of action he's planning to take is still unclear, and there's a major question at play. Will it further escalate tensions in the Middle East?

Plus, House Republicans pushing to impeach a Cabinet secretary for the first time in nearly 150 years, the homeland security secretary in the hot seat for his response to the border crisis. We're going to talk to lawmakers about their case.

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: And a CNN exclusive. As millions of Americans each year wait for a lifesaving transplant, researchers say they may have found a solution, pig organs. That's right, pig organs.

We get incredible rare access to a research facility that hopes to change the way we see medicine.

We are following these major developing stories and many more all coming in right here to CNN NEWS CENTRAL.

SANCHEZ: So, President Biden is facing potentially one of the most consequential decisions of his presidency, how to retaliate after a drone strike in Jordan killed three U.S. soldiers.

A short time ago, President Biden told CNN's Arlette Saenz that he's decided on a course of action. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

QUESTION: Have you made a decision how you'll respond to the attacks?

JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Yes.

I do hold them responsible in the sense that they're supplying the weapons to the people who did it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: Now, Biden there is tying the attack to Iran, but he has clearly stated he wants to avoid a direct conflict with Tehran. Administration officials indicate that this response, when it comes,

will be stronger than recent actions taken against these Iranian- backed militias in the region.

We want to start off with the White House with CNN's M.J. Lee.

So, M.J., the president says he's made a decision, but the details, he's keeping close to the vest.

M.J. LEE, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Boris, you heard President Biden there telling Arlette Saenz directly that, yes, he has made a decision how exactly to retaliate after the deaths of these three American soldiers.

But, as you can imagine, the White House has been very careful in recent days to not telegraph in any way what exactly that response would look like. But officials have said that the response that we are going to see in the coming days is likely to be more serious and more powerful than some of the retaliatory strikes that we have seen in Iraq and Syria.

Now, it's clear that the president is grappling also with the reality that some of those strikes in the past haven't successfully worked as a deterrence. It was interesting. When Arlette asked him what will actually be different this time with this response, he responded, "We will see."

So that wasn't exactly showing confidence about the fact that this future response is going to have a different effect. We do know that the administration is clearly considering a range of options as well. We heard Secretary of State Antony Blinken alluding to some of those options. He said that the attacks could be multilevel. They could come in stages. They could take place over the course of a while.

And so these are the decisions that the president has been grappling with. But, again, he says that he has made a decision. But it is an extremely complicated and difficult decision, because there are two things that he wants. He wants to show force and serious force that's different from before.

But, as the White House has made clear time and time again, the one thing they do not want is for this conflict to broaden out into a bigger regional war, Boris.

SANCHEZ: And, M.J., we learned that President Biden has had contact with the families of those service members that were killed in Jordan over the weekend.

LEE: That's right.

We just learned that the president made three separate phone calls to the families of the three American soldiers that were killed. We are told that the president expressed his gratitude to these families and expressed his sorrow as well, and made a promise to these families that their service will continue to be honored by the family.

[13:05:10]

We are also learning from the White House that, on Friday, the president will be there to attend the dignified transfer of their remains when they arrive at Dover Air Force Base. And this is something that the president actually raised with the families to make sure that this was something they were OK with.

We're told that all three families were OK with the president's presence there on Friday. So, all three of these U.S. service members will be returning home in the coming days. But, obviously, their deaths have really fundamentally changed and clarified the cost of the Israel war and the ongoing conflict in the region for the United States, Boris.

SANCHEZ: M.J. Lee from the White House, thank you so much for the update.

We want to take you now to the Pentagon with CNN's Oren Liebermann.

Oren, on the military angle here, is there a sense at the Pentagon of what the U.S. response might look like?

OREN LIEBERMANN, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Well, just as the White House, the Defense Department is being very careful in terms of what it releases or says about what the U.S. response will look like.

Obviously, they're playing their cards very close to the vest here, because they don't want to give the groups there, the militant groups backed by Iran, essentially a heads-up on what's coming. But officials have made it clear this is expected to be wider, broader in scope and perhaps sustained over time, far -- much more so than we have seen in previous U.S. strikes in Iraq and Syria.

The question, of course, what does it look like? And that's where President Joe Biden has options. He could carry out strikes in Iraq or Syria or both. He could go after weapons and facilities, which has been sort of the M.O. of the past, or he could go after leadership, which the U.S. has done on occasion.

That would be a larger message. The strikes themselves could be sustained over time. They could have a cyber element to it as well, a cyberattack accompanying sort of a kinetic action. And then that doesn't even get into all the special operations forces options. So the president certainly has his options.

It is the Pentagon's job to come up with those options. And then Biden makes his choice on what he wants to do here. It is clear two things. First, it is expected that this will be bigger, and then, second, it is also expected that they will try to calibrate this to not spark a regional war here with Iran.

SANCHEZ: Oren Liebermann, an important update from the Pentagon.

Thank you so much -- Brianna.

KEILAR: Let's talk about this now with former NATO Supreme Allied Commander General Wesley Clark.

General, thanks for being with us.

You hear the administration indicating the response is going to be bigger than what we have seen previously. What could that look like?

WESLEY CLARK, CNN MILITARY ANALYST: Well, it could look like strikes in both Syria and Iraq and maybe even something on the literal coast of Iran.

It could go after headquarters and leaders, as well as the militia themselves. It could be repeated in a sort of action, evaluate, attack again, evaluate, attack again, cycle. It might go on for three to five days, maybe longer. They could be -- we could be listening to what's said after the first set of strikes, find out where they're being directed, the enemy's directed -- getting directions from, go after that site next.

There's a lot that could be done militarily here. The question always, as the president has said, is, he wants to do the best he can to deter. He doesn't want a regional war. And that's the art of this. We just have to see how it works.

KEILAR: When Blinken says it could be multilevel and sustained over time, explain what that means.

CLARK: So I'd be surprised if there's not an economic component to this, some tightening of sanctions, some seizure of assets somewhere. So that's one level.

I think a cyberattack is a second level. And then I think where you strike and how -- what you use is a set of third-level actions. So you can strike with Tomahawk-launched attack missiles, the TLAM, fired from Navy ships. You can strike airborne. You have got some attack helicopters that you could use.

So there's different ways of doing it. And then there's this special forces that can do actually insertions, raids on the ground, actually take out headquarters, capture people, grab documents and so forth. So there's a lot of different ways to go after this.

KEILAR: Some Republicans want these strikes inside of Iran, which, obviously, that's different than what you're talking about here. Is that a serious proposal, in your opinion?

CLARK: I hope it was one of the options that was being looked at. If I'd been in the chain of command, it's what I'd have recommended, because I think you have to cap this off. You have to put at risk assets that Iran really values.

And they're getting away for free with this proxy war on the United States. They don't care how many militiamen are killed out there. There's dozens of them and multiple headquarters and multiple young people standing up to be the next commander in line to get knocked off.

[13:10:15]

But what they do value is their own Revolutionary Guards' chain of command, their assets, and so forth. So, yes, that should have been a serious consideration. Now, when you weigh the pluses and minuses, you talk to the diplomats in the region, you talk to your allies in the region, you make sure you have got support and people understand what you may do. Maybe you come back with a different answer.

But I would certainly have been pushing for the top end of the strikes, because I think it's important to stop and get out of the action-reaction cycle and get control of the initiative of this, saying -- convince Iran to call it off. Enough's enough.

KEILAR: Yes, I mean, it is broadly understood that Iran stands to gain from a proxy war. And you also have Republicans calling for strikes against Iranian leaders.

Something like the Soleimani strike that Trump ordered, that does not seem on the table. That, according to the U.N., violated international law. It was controversial. But, to your point, how important is it that the administration do something that has some Iranian leaders looking over their shoulder? And how high up do those leaders need to be?

CLARK: Well, I would think it's important. And I think the leaders need to be the Revolutionary Guard command level.

I don't think you're going after the ayatollahs, obviously. It's not against civilian targets. But it is against this revolutionary group. When the Iranian foreign minister says, we didn't do it, maybe he sincerely believes that. But we know what the intelligence says. And we know that these attacks are not only supported, but organized and equipped.

And in many of these militias, they actually have Revolutionary Guard technicians there to make sure the equipment works properly, the drones are launched on time and on schedule and armed properly, et cetera.

So we know that there's a big Iranian hand behind this. And the question is, what's it take to get Iran to decide that this campaign is not in their interest? Because, right now, they're getting away for free. And the president's got to convince them it's got to stop.

KEILAR: And we're going to see what that is that he tries to convince them with.

General Clark, great to have you. Thank you so much.

CLARK: Thank you.

KEILAR: So, right now, Homeland Security Chief Alejandro Mayorkas is in the crosshairs of the House Homeland Security Committee as it readies to take up articles of impeachment against him. What Mayorkas is saying about the hearing. Plus, new video revealed in court of the interaction between the Oxford High School shooter and his parents when they first saw him after the shooting. What it could mean for the case to hold him -- pardon me -- to hold them, his parents, criminally responsible.

And after 87 years, has Amelia Earhart's plane finally been found? We're going to speak to the CEO of a company who believes that they have discovered it.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:17:25]

KEILAR: Some new testimony in the historic trial of Jennifer Crumbley.

Today, jurors heard from Oxford County High School's former dean of students. He testified that he had no reason to discipline Crumbley's son before the teen killed four of his classmates in 2021. Crumbley is facing four counts of involuntary manslaughter.

We have CNN's Jean Casarez, who has been watching today's testimony.

So, Jean, we also heard from Crumbley's former boss. What did he have to say?

JEAN CASAREZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Jennifer Crumbley's former boss, yes.

And it all started that morning, the morning of the mass shooting. Jennifer went to work as a normal day, and then she gets a phone call that she returned about 9:30. And she gets this text of this picture that her son is drawing in school of a figure and guns and bullets, and my life is worthless, the world is dead.

And so she's summoned to school. And she went there very hurriedly. And then she came back after that meeting and she spoke with Andrew Smith, her boss. She was a marketing director of a property management firm. She spoke to him after that meeting. He testified to what she told him at that point.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANDREW SMITH, FORMER BOSS OF JENNIFER CRUMBLEY: I recall walking up to her asking, how was she doing, how -- was she doing OK?

And I recall her mentioning that she had to get her child counseling. She seemed down. I think she had mentioned a few things. I recall her mentioning that his dog had passed away and a grandparent -- or grandparents had passed away.

She may have said more. I remember she seemed down. I think she said she felt like she was a failure or failing him and she had to get him help.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: When you said -- when she said, "I feel like I'm failing him," who did -- who was she talking about?

SMITH: I believe her son.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CASAREZ: So that focus at that meeting at school that she had with the dean and the counselor, her husband was there, Ethan was in the room also, was suicidal ideation.

They were concerned that he was going to take his life because he was depressed, because there were mental issues. Well, so she's back at work. The day is going on. At 1:09, she gets an emergency text from Oxford High School, big words, "Active shooter."

And she immediately panics, and she ran out the door wanting to go to that school. She contacted her husband. Her husband had already called police and turned in Ethan. He believed he was possibly the shooter. And then it all culminated that day, where they went to the sheriff's department. They were in that room with Ethan for just a split second.

[13:20:04]

She was angry. He -- James was sobbing. And it was a few days later that they were both arrested for involuntary manslaughter themselves, homicide.

KEILAR: And we're seeing the moment here in the wall, this moment where they saw their son briefly. What did we hear from the school's former dean of students, Jean?

CASAREZ: Well, this was -- reasonable suspicion is the test as to whether they could have looked in that backpack.

So here are the facts. On Monday, he was researching bullets. He was then watching -- between Monday and Tuesday at school, he was watching a movie, they said, where someone was shooting and killing someone, murdering someone. And then there is the math drawing where he has the stick figure and bullets and blood everywhere along with "My life is worthless."

But the dean said that there was no discipline involved necessary for any of that and there was no reasonable suspicion to ever look in the backpack. And he was the one that went and got the backpack out of the math class to then give it back to Ethan, which was shortly before that mass shooting happened.

Now, in his defense, he said there are state laws, rules we have to follow, and I was just following what the state mandates.

KEILAR: Really interesting.

Jean Casarez, thank you for following this for us. We appreciate it.

It's a rare moment on Capitol Hill, as Republican lawmakers pushed to impeach Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. And we are live on the Hill following the very least. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:26:19]

SANCHEZ: Some incredible new medical technology using animal parts could potentially be the future of organ donations. Currently, 17 people in the United States die every day waiting for a new organ.

And CNN can now show you some exclusive and rare glimpses into how those patients on the brink may one day be saved by pigs. But these aren't just any ordinary pigs. They're some of the cleanest and most genetically modified creatures on Earth.

CNN chief medical correspondent Dr. Sanjay Gupta has this exclusive.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

DR. SANJAY GUPTA, CNN CHIEF MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): These pigs could one day provide a nearly endless supply of organs to

save humans, kidneys, hearts, livers.

It's called xenotransplantation. And what you are watching at this research facility has never been seen by the public before.

MICHAEL CURTIS, CEO, EGENESIS, INC.: We usually try to limit this to the only staff that takes care of the animals. We very rarely let other folks come in.

GUPTA: Mike Curtis is my guide today. He is CEO of eGenesis. That's a company devoted to raising pigs to try and solve the organ shortage crisis.

CURTIS: Everything is controlled. Like, all the feed is clean, water is clean. As you can see, the staff is clean. We try to maintain a very clean environment here.

GUPTA (on camera): And I should just point out that I walked into a room, turned on a filter, essentially cleaned the air for five minutes before I could then go shower. That's why my hair is wet.

I have washed myself. I have put on everything new here, including underwear, socks, shoes. Everything is different just to be in this room. It gives you an idea of just how clean it is in here and how important that is.

(voice-over): It's more than I typically do to prep for the operating room, all of it to protect the pigs from us.

(on camera): I got to tell you I did not know what to expect. It's powerful just to be here with these pigs.

CURTIS: These two and those three and the little guy here, they're fully edited. All these piglets can carry a total of 69 edits to the genome.

GUPTA (voice-over): That makes them among the most genetically modified mammals on the planet.

(on camera): How much change has to happen to that pig genome in order for it to actually become more compatible with the human?

CURTIS: Our approach is really three-pronged, where we're trying to reduce the risk of disease transmission from the porcine donor to human. We're editing in a way that reduces or eliminates rejection and then we add genes to control rejection.

GUPTA (voice-over): They do all of this with the help of CRISPR, the gene editing tool that allows scientists to manipulate the cell's DNA, knocking out or adding in genes, in this case, to make a pig's organs more compatible with the human recipient.

CURTIS: To keep the consistency of the genetics, we establish a cell line and use cloning to produce consistent donors. It's akin to what was done with Dolly back in the '90s, cloning.

GUPTA: It is essentially a modern-day assembly line of standardized, genetically modified pigs.

CURTIS: We have selected the Yucatan mini-pig because, fully grown, they're about 70 kilos, 150 pounds. So, the organs are correctly sized for a human recipient.

GUPTA (on camera): It's kind of amazing. As much as we talk about the really intricate science of gene editing, ultimately, you have got to get the size right.

CURTIS: That's right.

DR. ROBERT MONTGOMERY, TRANSPLANT SURGEON, NYU: Less than 1 percent of the people who die every year die in a way that they could ever even be considered as organ donors.

And so, even if you optimize everything, there still wouldn't be enough organs.

GUPTA (voice-over): Dr. Robert Montgomery is the director of the Transplant Institute at NYU Langone Health. He's also the recipient of a heart transplant.

MONTGOMERY: I had a heart transplant five years ago. I had seven cardiac arrests.