Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

A Look at the Middle East Conflict; Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-NY) is Interviewed about Israel; Vance and Waltz Spar at VP Debate. Aired 9-9:30a ET

Aired October 02, 2024 - 09:00   ET

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

[09:00:00]

DR. SANJAY GUPTA, CNN CHIEF MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Just referencing in the last question, those things start to change primarily at those ages. So, those are ages where you should really start to pay attention to aging more than you normally do.

You mentioned Jimmy Carter as well. You know, I have to say, 100- years-old. So, centenarian, right? It's an incredible feat. I had a chance to interview him a few years ago. And one of the things that you notice about him when you're interviewing him is the fact that he can just - his muscle mass was so good. He got out of that chair so easily at the end of that interview. He was in his mid-90s then, Sara.

SARA SIDNER, CNN ANCHOR: He's amazing because it takes me a lot longer to get out of a chair now. I have passed that 44-year mark.

Dr. Sanjay Gupta, thank you so much. Appreciate it.

And if you still have questions about aging, we all do, you can submit them using the QR code on screen, and Dr. Gupta will join me again tomorrow to answer your questions.

A new hour of CNN NEWS CENTRAL starts right now.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: All right, breaking this morning, we are standing by to see how and when Israel responds to the Iranian missile strike. What the troop movements this morning tell us about all of that, as Iran claims it does not want a wider war.

What the numbers tell us about what changed after the vice presidential debate as Donald Trump takes a new position on abortion.

And President Biden on his way to see the damage of Hurricane Helene, with new accounting of a staggering death toll.

I'm John Berman, with Kate Bolduan and Sara Sidner in New York. Erin Burnett is in Tel Aviv. This is CNN NEWS CENTRAL.

KATE BOLDUAN, CNN ANCHOR: The new clashes being described as at close range now happening today, this morning, between Israel and Hezbollah terrorists inside Lebanon. The IDF, moments ago, just reported an Israeli soldier was killed. This comes as the world is watching and waiting to see how Israel will respond to Iran's unprecedented missile attack. Iran's largest aerial attack ever on Israel.

And with that, U.S. officials say nearly 200 missiles were fired at Israel. Netanyahu says Iran will pay. A big question now is what role the United States could play in that retaliation.

CNN's Erin Burnett has been kind enough to join us all throughout the show today. She's in Tel Aviv once more for us.

What's the very latest that you're hearing, Erin?

ERIN BURNETT, CNN ANCHOR: You know, Kate, that is the crucial question is, what role could the U.S. play, what role will the United States be willing to play? And then perhaps the third and most important question is, what role does Israel want the U.S. to play? And, obviously, they want U.S. backing. They see this as a moment where they could seize on that.

I'm here with Jim Sciutto, our, of course, fellow anchor and chief national security analyst.

And, you know, Jim, this is - this is the wider war.

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Yes.

BURNETT: You know, protestations are protestations at this point. This is a wider war. That is what we're looking at. And the question is, where are you on an escalation scale?

SCIUTTO: Yes, it's a good point. I mean it's a multi-front war. That had been the concern since October 7th. You have war in Gaza. There were more strikes today. You now have Israeli boots on the ground inside Lebanon for the first time in 18 years. You had Israel take its longest aerial strike ever by aircraft on Yemen a couple of days ago, 1,500 miles away. And now, of course, you have the wait here, Israel getting struck by Iran and now the question about how Israel responds to that. So, we're in a wider war. The question is, how much wider and broader and how a far does Israel go now in terms of retaliating?

BURNETT: Right. So, OK, so on this now, you know, in prior months, you know, you had heard so much of the - the schism within the Israeli government, right?

SCIUTTO: Yes.

BURNETT: That there was Bibi Netanyahu and the hardliners and then there were people who were very pro-Israel and believe in the importance of this moment but could not stand Bibi Netanyahu.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

BURNETT: When Nasrallah was taken out, there was sort of a moment of coming together. This missile strike, from some quarters and some voices appears to have added to that moment.

SCIUTTO: Yes. I think the combination of the success of the strikes against Hezbollah, taking apart the entire leadership, the entire communications network, really putting Hezbollah on its backfoot, plus the threat, the shared sense the threat from Iran when you have your country, and it's understandable, and you have a country fire 180 ballistic missiles at your, some of which struck. They struck. I mean they're -

BURNETT: Right. Yes, we can see the holes. We've seen them. I mean they're trying to fill them in fast, but we can see them.

SCIUTTO: We - when we were on the roof yesterday, I mean, I'm pointing over here half a kilometer away, one struck there.

BURNETT: Yes.

SCIUTTO: And then just a couple miles up around Mossad.

BURNETT: Yes.

SCIUTTO: And then on the two air bases as well. So, that's an understandable, but also a dangers combination of things, which could lead to - listen, at least a harder, more aggressive strike than U.S. officials would be comfortable with.

BURNETT: Right. And so that's the big question, right, then what does the U.S. do? You've had a huge increase in force posture.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

[09:05:01]

BURNETT: That's the reality. There could be efforts to downplay it by the Biden administration, but that - those are the hard numbers on the ground. That's the reality of it. And Israel wants - they want the U.S. in - with them on this all the way. But a lot of the things that they're talking about may be too far for what many in the U.S. administration would want, whether that's striking nuclear facilities or taking out senior members of the Iranian government.

SCIUTTO: Listen, the U.S. has shown that it will participate in some, but not all, of Israel's military operations. It absolutely took part last night in defending Israel.

BURNETT: Yes.

SCIUTTO: There were two U.S. destroyers that helped shoot down these missiles. They made it quite clear before, they would help defend, and that - that remains.

When Israel went into Lebanon on the ground, U.S. officials made quite clear to me and others, we are not participating in this. This - this - we are not supporting Israeli ground operations. They also said the same about the strike on Nasrallah. So, I would expect that in conversations between Tel Aviv and Washington right now, the U.S. is saying the things that it would not support Israel on.

BURNETT: Right. Right. And the question is whether the distinction the U.S. is making on that makes a difference when it comes to Iran, saying those things in private but in public perceived another way could put (INAUDIBLE) the direction of a war.

SCIUTTO: And there have been times when the U.S. has protested, and Israel has moved forward anyway.

BURNETT: Right.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

BURNETT: And we may be in one of those moments. A precarious moment in a wider war, Sara.

SIDNER: All right, thank you so much, Erin Burnett and Jim Sciutto there, live for us from Tel Aviv.

Joining me now, Democratic Congressman from New York Gregory Meeks. He is also the Ranking Member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

Thank you so much, sir, for being with us this morning. I do want to get your assessment, because you are on that committee, of what is happening in the Middle East. Do you think we have entered into a wider war now?

REP. GREGORY MEEKS, (D-NY) RANKING MEMBER, FOREIGN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE: I'm very concerned. This is what I've been concerned about all along, that we could be entering into a wider war. I think that Iran has made a mistake by shooting the ballistic missiles at Israel, unlike what took place before.

And I think that I know that the United States government is still monitoring the situation and collecting information. And, you know, we've got to continue and I hope that Israel and the United States, we've got to work together on this to protect the interests of Israel, to protect the interests of the United States of America. We've got to stand with Israel's right to exist.

You know, and for me, you know, it is important because I want to get, you know, 75 years of trying to destroy Israel. I want that to stop. It has to stop.

We were moving in the right direction, I thought, with reference to when I looked at Saudi Arabia talking and recognizing Israel's right to exist, and of course Egypt and Jordan and the UAE. That's what I think that people want, and ultimately, to have some kind of resolution that Israel can live side by side with its neighbors.

Clearly what Iran, its position has been, and what it did yesterday with shooting the missiles and them continuing to say Israel does not have the right to exist does not lead to that.

But I think that working collectively together in the region, the region is different. It used to be where every, whether it was Saudi Arabia or Egypt or Jordan, all were saying that Israel did not have the right to exist. That has changed.

And so I don't want to lose sight of that, because ultimately, in the end, I think what we want is peace in the Middle East, peace for the people of Israel, peace for the people in the region. And I think that the region wants that, overwhelmingly with the exception of Iran, and that's why Iran has made a big mistake this time.

SIDNER: How far do you think the United States should go in supporting Israel when it comes to Iran? For example, you know, do you think the United States should start taking its own action militarily against Iran?

MEEKS: I think that there needs to be that kind of conversation between, again, with the United States and Israel. I think that, you know, we've got to do and look at what's in the best strategic interest and what will be impactful on Iran, to try to get them to move from saying Israel does no longer have the right to exist , and the Iranian people. So -- but I don't want to get dragged into it. I don't think that we don't want it. I don't think that the Israelis want an endless war.

You know, so at some point, we've still got to talk, and the administration is talking about how we can de-escalate tensions in the Middle East. I think that still has to be part of that dialogue and conversation, how we can make -- have a future where diplomacy takes center stage. I think that's still important. I think we've got to never lose sight of that, because ultimately what we want is peace in the region. I think that's what everyone wants. That's what Israel wants, and that's why they have fought against its aggressors who have clearly stated that Israel did not have the right to exist.

That's why it was a mistake by Hamas on October the 7th to attack Israel, because that said, and that's what they were telling the Israeli people, you did not have the right to exist, and Israel has the right to defend itself.

[09:10:04]

And I like the fact that others now, as we saw even with the previous attack, the April attack, we saw others that were in the region that stood side by side with Israel, and it was not Israel having to do it by itself, because people want peace in the Middle East, and that's what the ultimate goal is.

And so I would hope that Iran now, and will understand, based upon some of the responses that will have to take place here, that, you know, look at the region differently. Let's try to find a way to peace so that everyone can live side by side.

You have a free, independent state of Israel, a Jewish state in Israel, you have a two-state solution where you have a Palestinian state, you have other countries that are there, living and recognizing one another, and finally having a real peace in the region. I think that's the goal, and I don't want to lose sight of that.

SIDNER: It sounds good, but it is much harder to bring forth.

MEEKS: Oh, it is.

SIDNER: Congressman Gregory Meeks, thank you so much for coming on this morning. And please say hi to your lovely wife. Appreciate you.

John.

BERMAN: All right, President Biden heads to North Carolina as the search grows for a surprising number of people still unaccounted for. We've got new reporting this morning on whether there is a possibility, maybe, of another debate.

And New York City Mayor Eric Adams set to appear in federal court. He could be assigned a trial date as he faces charges of bribery, conspiracy, and wire fraud.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:16:08]

BOLDUAN: In the first and only vice presidential debate, the fact that civility is the headline says everything about the state of American politics today. And that is what you saw when J.D. Vance and Tim Walz took the stage for 90 minutes. Obviously, they disagreed, especially over the 2020 election.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GOV. TIM WALZ (D-MN), VICE PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE: He is still saying he didn't lose the election. I would just ask, J.D., did he lose the 2020 election?

SEN. J.D. VANCE (R-OH), VICE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Tim, I'm focused on the future. Did Kamala Harris censor Americans from speaking their mind in the wake of the 2020 Covid situation? Has she tried to -

WALZ: That is a damning - that is a damning non-answer.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BOLDUAN: Both running mates making clear efforts to target their attacks toward the top of the ticket rather than at the person standing feet away from them on the stage and a lot of Midwest nice on display.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GOV. TIM WALZ (D-MN), VICE PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE: I agree, it should not take seven years for an asylum claim to be done.

SEN. J.D. VANCE (R-OH), VICE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I agree with you. I think you want to solve this problem. But I don't think that Kamala Harris does.

WALZ: I agree with a lot of what Senator Vance said about what's happening. His running mate, though, does not. And that's the problem.

VANCE: Governor, I agree with you, Amber Thurman should still be alive. And there are a lot of people who should still be alive. And I certainly wish that she was. WALZ: I'm in agreement with him on this.

VANCE: And first of all, I didn't know that you 17-year-old witnessed a shooting. And I'm sorry about that.

WALZ: No, I appreciate you saying so.

VANCE: And I just want to say, Christ, have mercy.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BOLDUAN: Joining us right now is former White House director of message planning for President Biden, Meghan Hays, and strategic communications expert, former Republican strategist and pollster, Lee Carter.

Guys, thanks for coming in.

Meghan, you called this a pre-Trump era debate. Walz looked nervous, especially off the top. Everyone saw that. The way Jen Psaki described it, her take was, she - the way she put it is, missing the magic and the organic spontaneity of Tim Walz. What did you see last night?

MEGHAN HAYS, FORMER WHITE HOUSE DIRECTOR OF MESSAGE PLANNING FOR PRESIDENT BIDEN: Yes, I think he was absolutely nervous. I mean, I would also be very nervous on that stage as well. And then he got into his groove, and I think he did very well. I think the highlights for him are obviously the issues on reproductive rights. I think he was very strong there. I think he pushed back really appropriately on immigration and some other top areas.

I do think that his shining moment where the dials were really high, according to a lot of the polls, were the last question about, if he can, you know, stay that Donald Trump lost the election. And I think that the independent voters in these swing states, that's what people are noticing. Do they really want someone who can't say that their boss lost the election as the last person in the room when they're making these crucial decisions, you know, during a war time and during some of these other crises that you face as the president and the vice president. So, I think that that was a really telling moment for Walz. And I think, you know, that both of them did no harm. And I think that, you know, we will all move on to the next major news event in the cycle.

BOLDUAN: We have all survived and we will all move on together.

And to your point that that was a high - a high point, the campaign - the Harris campaign seems to think so. We have new reporting that they're cutting an ad with that moment about the 2020 election question. An ad for that.

Lee, some people saw J.D. Vance last night as kind of working to soften some of the sharp edges that are Donald Trump and Trump's message to voters. The Democratic governor of Colorado, who's a surrogate for the Harris campaign, was on with John this morning and I want to play for you what he said to that idea. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GOV. JARED POLIS (D-CO): If you're - if you're looking for a car salesman, he's your guy. I mean I think he looked shifty, he looked slick. Of course, he's good at what he does. He talks to the different groups in different ways. No question about it. But at the end of the day, he failed to say he would side with the American people over Donald Trump.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BOLDUAN: Lee, you held a focus group last night. What did you see last night?

LEE CARTER, STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS EXPERT: So, I saw that Democrats really didn't believe J.D. Vance. They said he seemed nice. Very, very much in line with what we just heard from the governor here. But I think that independent voters and Republicans feel (ph) refreshed to see a softer side of J.D. Vance. They - actually many people said they think - really didn't know what to expect. They listened to him and they said, I appreciate that they can just agree without demonizing.

[09:20:04]

He talked about a lot of issues some ways (ph) that resonated. He got away from the abortion debate unscathed, which I think is a big deal because this is the biggest weak spot for Republicans.

And so I think overall J.D. Vance came away with more fans than he went in with. Is it going to change votes? Absolutely not. There was not one voter that I talked to last night that end up changing their mind. But people had a more favorable impression of J.D. Vance than they expected to.

BOLDUAN: Favorability. He did go in with historically low favorability. I remember Harry Enten has done an analysis of that. So, any improvement to be made there, I'm sure - I'm sure he and the campaign will be happy about.

Meghan, do you think last night did anything to make a second debate between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump more likely?

HAYS: No, I don't think last night is going to change that dynamic. I think that Trump is going to see how things are going in the next couple of weeks before the debate and see if he feels that he needs to go back out there and take another swing at it and to see what he can do. I - I don't think he will show up for another debate. I don't see why he would do that. I mean it was - I don't - he does not like to lose, and he clearly lost the last one. So, I just don't see him putting himself in that situation again. But I don't think last night would change his mind on that.

BOLDUAN: Lee, I want to ask you, especially because you have the - you have this insight of the focus group. One statement from J.D. Vance that stuck out had something to do with abortion, reproductive rights, what he said. He was asked about the campaign's stance on abortion rights. And Vance said this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. J.D. VANCE (R-OH), VICE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: As a Republican who proudly wants to protect innocent life in this country, who proudly wants to protect the vulnerable, is that my party, we've got to do so much better of a job at earning the American people's trust back on this issue where they, frankly, just don't trust us.

BOLDUAN: Earning the American people's trust back on this issue. But Trump's take on abortion rights and reproductive rights include statements like, he's proudly the person responsible for killing Roe versus Wade. Trump says he's done exactly what he intended to do. Why then is J.D. Vance saying he needs to earn back the people's trust?

CARTER: Well, I think that - that Republicans have done a very, very bad job talking about their position here. Their position on abortion is actually not the popular position among Americans, and so they're really fighting upstream. So, the way that they've dealt with this has made women feel like they're completely left behind, that they have no rights if - if - if the Republicans take office. And so I think J.D. Vance was trying to say here that we need to do better. And if we are going to take this position, we recognize that we need to support women in other ways so that it's best choice.

And, frankly, it was a refreshing answer to folks that said - that many people said, this didn't seem as scary as other answers I've heard before. They want to hear that there's more support to women. Does it answer people whose primary, you know, concern is women's rights and abortion? Absolutely not. But again, I think this showed a different side of J.D. Vance and the Republicans that we've seen until now. And for many people that was somewhat refreshing and made them feel less scary. Scary was a word I heard a lot before the groups - I'm very scared of what's going to happen if this person gets in office. I'm very afraid of this situation that we're in, in the Middle East or all of these other things.

At the end of the night, I heard a lot of people say they felt refreshed, reassured. And so that was really positive.

BOLDUAN: Don't worry, we'll scare them all over again once, you know, they wake up - they wake up this morning and they read the headlines.

CARTER: Exactly.

BOLDUAN: Guys, it's great to see you both. Thank you very much.

John.

BERMAN: All right, breaking this morning, Israel's foreign minister appears to announce a ban on the U.N. Secretary General from during the country, saying he, quote, "does not deserve to set foot on Israeli soil."

And the death toll from Hurricane Helene, it rise - is rising, President Biden heading to the Carolinas to assess the damage. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:28:30]

SIDNER: This morning, President Biden is traveling to North Carolina and South Carolina to see the extent of the damage from Hurricane Helene. Days after the storm hit, the death toll continues to rise, now at 166 people across six states. Thousands across North Carolina are still without power, and hundreds of roads are still closed. Some of them damaged beyond repair, making access to necessary supplies, like food and water, extremely difficult.

CNN's Isabel Rosales is in Asheville, North Carolina.

What is happening where you are this morning? Obviously, this is just such a dire situation for so many people still days after this storm hit.

ISABEL ROSALES, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Hey, good morning to you, Sara.

Yes, so many people here in Asheville, they're trying to turn the page on this. They're trying to dig out and clean up. And the conditions are certainly treacherous. You can see so much debris, so much mud, so much destruction that they need to go through. This is going to take weeks to months, if not years to recover from this.

But then, Sara, I also want to make it clear that right now there are still active search and rescue operations. So there are people trapped, cut off in the most - more mountainous areas with limited resources that are waiting for rescue crews to get to them because the road conditions, bridges have collapsed. There's trees in their way. So, they're dealing with an emergency situations still.

Now, Biden has called Helene a history making storm. He vowed that the federal government would be there for survivors as long as they need, that they would provide resources.

[09:30: 05]

And he's urging Congress to approve even more funding to recover from