Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Artificial Intelligence Models being Used for Weather Forecasting; President-Elect Trump's Pick to Head Health and Human Services, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., May Attempt to Revoke Approval of Polio Vaccine; Rep. Josh Gottheimer, (D-NJ) Interviewed on Federal Government's Lack of Communication about Numerous Drones Spotted over New Jersey; Lawmakers demand answers, action on unexplained Drones in NJ; Search Warrants Executed on New York Backpack, Burner Phone. Aired 8-8:30a ET.

Aired December 13, 2024 - 08:00   ET

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

[08:00:00]

CHAD MYERS, CNN METEOROLOGIST: Then super computers took over and everything changed. It wasn't just digits. It wasn't just numbers. Now we could make graphics. Now we could take all of this data and push it forward five, seven days, make it so much better.

But this was still human intelligence. Now we have artificial intelligence. This is what our model looks like right now. This is how good we've come from just numbers to this. But can artificial intelligence make this even better, make it more accurate? And the answer so far is yes. The Google GenCast looks like out to 15 days it will help our old models do even better, in fact, out forecast them in many locations.

Now, the problem here with this artificial intelligence model is that we're only looking back 40 years and saying, OK, if this happened today, what's going to happen tomorrow? But is the last 40 years really going to be indicative of what the next 40 years really is going to look like? Maybe not, but at least we have some hope, some at least increased accuracy hope that we could see things get better with artificial intelligence and the human element here, obviously, with the National Weather Service working in tandem, keeping everything together, making it better for us and keeping us even safer with the weather.

KATE BOLDUAN, CNN ANCHOR: Chad Myers, thank you so much for that.

A new hour of CNN NEWS CENTRAL starts now.

SARA SIDNER, CNN ANCHOR: The demand for answers at a fever pitch over mysterious drones flying over New Jersey, baffling lawmakers and sparking fear and frustration among residents. The White House is now weighing in.

The mounting evidence police now say they have discovered involving the suspect accused in the killing of the UnitedHealthcare CEO. The suspect facing second degree murder now, but could that change with all the new bits of evidence.

And a potential earth-shattering change for childhood vaccination programs. The president-elect saying he is in talks with his HHS pick, RFK Jr., to possibly end those. We're sitting down with a vaccination expert after hearing that news.

I'm Sara Sidner with Kate Bolduan and John Berman. This is CNN NEWS CENTRAL.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: All right, good morning, everyone. We are watching the Trump transition day by day as its now moved past the halfway point heading toward January 20th, inauguration day. In the last CNN poll, which was taken just a few days ago, a majority of Americans approve of the way that Donald Trump is handling the transition so far. We spoke to Democratic Senator Chris Coons just a few minutes ago, who said he would give the transition a grade of C or C-minus. Not a ringing endorsement, but I did note that is still a passing grade. Still, he did note there are a number of very controversial moves that are drawing a lot of heat and fire on Capitol Hill, and confirmation for all of Donald Trump's prospective nominees not a certainty just yet.

With us now, CNN political commentator and Republican strategist Shermichael Singleton and democratic strategist Matt Bennett, co- founder of Third Way, who is here in studio. Nice to see you in person.

Listen, Lisa Murkowski was talking about the pressure that she feels Republican senators are facing to get in, literally get in line, you'll hear her in a second, get in line over all the nomination. That includes RFK Jr., Tulsi Gabbard, Pete Hegseth. This is what she said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. LISA MURKOWSKI, (R-AK): The approach is going to be everybody toe the line. Everybody line up. We got you here, and if you want to survive, you better be good. Don't get on Santa's naughty list here because we will primary you.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: We will primary you. Matt, is that good politics, or does it cross some line?

MATT BENNETT, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS AND CO- FOUNDER, THIRD WAY: It is not how the system is supposed to work. I mean, if you look at the Federalist Papers, Alexander Hamilton wrote about this in Federalist 76. He said the Senate is supposed to be a check on the president because otherwise presidents are human. They're going to propose people for high office that are just favors to their friends and family. We're literally seeing that right now. As you just reported, there's family members all over the place in his nominations, not to mention a whole bunch of people that have no business running the agencies that they've been proposed to run. So senators are supposed to be independent checks on this. And the

amount of pressure coming from their own party for them to just snap to attention is really not how this system works.

BERMAN: Shermichael, Matt just dropped the Federalist Papers here. Thom Tillis, Republican from North Carolina, dropped just raw politics and said, you know what, I mean, Trump may get what he wants here now, but long term he may live to regret it. Listen to what Tillis said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

[08:05:08]

SEN. THOM TILLIS, (R-NC): I just think that, you know, it's a short- term win but a long-term loss if you're not careful with that. Once you've attacked somebody and they vote no, it's very easy for them to vote no for the remainder of a Congress. So that should be kept in mind.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: So look, at least for now or for the next year, three or four senators enough to sink anything that Donald Trump -- Republican senators -- wants to get through. So if you have the likes of Lisa Murkowski, Susan Collins, Thom Tillis, maybe Young from Alaska, those types of people against -- Joni Ernst, in some cases -- against you, or questioning you from the outset, does that put Trump in a possible bind, Shermichael?

SHERMICHAEL SINGLETON, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: I don't think so. You started off by asking Matt, is it good politics? And I would say that it is. A part of politics is having advocacy groups who may support a president, or president-elect in this case, who wants to see his agenda moving forward, which means the confirmation of his nominees.

Now, look, senators have the advise and consent, as Matt just articulated, referencing Federalist 76, to say, look, we want to take a look at each of these individuals, and then we'll ultimately decide if we believe they should at least make it through committee hearing to go before the full body of the Senate. But at least make it clear to the president-elect, sir, you just don't have the votes. I just don't understand, John, how many freaking conversations these guys need to have before they can make a determination if they want to support someone or not.

And the voters in their states have empowered these individuals by electing them to represent them. If the voters are saying, we don't like what you're doing, then the voters have the right to hold them accountable.

BERMAN: They do, although, as we all know Senate terms, they're not short things. Holding a senator accountable is one of the hardest things in in the game since the Senate terms are six years long.

There's politics, then there's policy, right. And RFK Jr. has been picked to, you know, to lead HHS, Health and Human Services, which has authority over the FDA, which approves or not drugs and vaccines here. And I want to read some reporting from "The New York Times" about a lawyer who was working with RFK Jr. right now and has worked with him in the past. This lawyer, according to "The Times," helped RFK Jr. Pick federal health officials for the incoming Trump administration has petitioned the government to revoke its approval of the polio vaccine, which for decades has protected millions of people from a virus that can cause paralysis or death.

Now, this lawyer, again, says -- Siri, I believe his name is, says the same thing that RFK Jr. likes to say, which is I'm not against all vaccines. I just have certain questions at certain times, and I'm just representing these interest groups here. But he's moved to revoke approval of the polio vaccine.

BENNETT: I mean, this is one of the most scary things. I wouldn't give him a C-minus. I'd give him an F at most because the people that he is appointing to high office are incredibly scary, and they could put us in physical danger, not just on the kind of national security side, which is bad enough, but on health care. Its RFK at the top, and then there's a whole bunch of other people that he's appointed to run the FDA, the National Institutes of Health, the CDC. These are people that were COVID truthers. They didn't believe that COVID was real. They said COVID would kill only 20,000 people and it ended up killing a million-and-a-half Americans. And they didn't -- they don't believe in vaccines. They are now proposing to do insane things like repeal the polio vaccine that could put our kids and our families at real risk. I think this is very scary.

BERMAN: Even Trump, Shermichael, has said, oh, when it comes to polio, I'm going to really have to be convinced here, although I guess they didn't rule it out completely. But we're talking about the polio vaccine. Polio used to kill a lot of people, Shermichael, and now it doesn't. And the vaccine is the reason.

SINGLETON: Yes. I mean, Mitch McConnell, right, it saved the minority leader's life. I mean, look, there's some things I just don't think we should really mess with, John, if I'm just being candid. It's one thing to say, look, let's look at why more younger people are being diagnosed with cancer, for example. And let's figure out a way to spearhead that research and provide more funding via HHS. Or maybe we're looking at other issues that the American people are struggling with. Let's put a spotlight there. I'm all for that. But stop messing with things where we have 100 years of research to showcase its efficacy and the effect.

You sort of start losing a lot of credibility. Even the president- elect is saying, wait a minute here. Now, I'm skeptical on this because this appears to be a bridge too far. So if I'm RFK and you're going before some of these senators, you don't want to go before them saying, hey, I may remove polio, because there are a lot of Republicans who are going to say, OK, man, I'm willing to give you an opportunity here to articulate your case, to win over my support, right?

But when you start to remove things where we have decades and decades of data that shows that it works, it was a great thing. It saved millions of lives decades ago. You start to make people doubtful of your real ability to lead the agency well. And so if I'm RFK, I wouldn't move forward with this.

[08:10:00]

BERMAN: Shermichael Singleton, Matt Bennett, I give both of you an A- minus for this panel only because it wasn't longer, and I always want to leave some room for improvement. Thank you both very much for being here. Appreciate it.

Kate?

BOLDUAN: So they are not birds. They are not aliens. They are drones, or that is at least what people in New Jersey think, though that is now even in dispute after the Department of Homeland Security put out a statement that at least some of what's been seen are actually manned aircraft. But that's about all that is known.

Are you confused? Well, that is exactly how people in New Jersey say they feel right now after weeks of mysterious nighttime drone sightings and no word on what they really are or what they're really doing. Now, lawmakers have gone from asking questions to demanding answers.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, (D-CT): They should be shot down if necessary because they're flying over sensitive areas.

BRIAN BERGEN, (R) NEW JERSEY ASSEMBLYMAN: The whole government, state police, Department of Homeland Security, the governor, they need to take this way more seriously.

SEN. THOM TILLIS, (R-NC): It's a bit embarrassing that given the length of time and the number of sightings, that we don't have information.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BOLDUAN: The White House says there's no evidence the drones pose a national security or public safety threat, but that is not enough for people in New Jersey right now. And that includes Democratic Congressman from New Jersey, Josh Gottheimer, who is also running for governor right now. Thanks for joining me.

You think that that federal officials should offer a public briefing on the situation. The FBI and the DHS, they put out a statement. And I know you saw this, Congressman, but they put out a statement yesterday. I'm going to read what they said, in part, because I want your take. They put out "We have no evidence at this time the reported drone sightings pose a national security or public safety threat or have a foreign nexus. The FBI, DHS, or federal partners in close coordination with New Jersey state police continue to deploy personnel and technology to investigate the situation and confirm whether the reported drone flights are actually drones or are, instead, manned aircraft, or otherwise inaccurate sightings." Is that enough for you? REP. JOSH GOTTHEIMER, (D-NJ): Not at all. I mean, listen, I agree

with the assessment based on the briefings I've had from DHS and the FBI that there is no reason to believe these drones pose any immediate, credible threats to public safety, right? And so I agree with them that there.

However, they have a responsibility to the FBI, who's the lead agency here, and DHS, these are our federal partners who are responsible for this airspace with the FAA to brief the public more thoroughly. You know, these statements they're putting out bit by bit, when you have people so concerned about what's in the air, they have a responsibility to get out there and to fully brief people and to make sure that everyone knows what they know.

And frankly, I've written to them, we've got many demanding it. I have a classified briefing coming up this next week. But the bottom line is this -- they're not providing enough information to the public, and the public is concerned. And believe me, I'm hearing from my constituents about this all the time, and I think it's time for them to immediately get out there and brief.

BOLDUAN: So, Congressman, two things. One, you are confident that they know more than they are telling the public about what these are.

GOTTHEIMER: Well, what I'm confident in is, based on what I know, what they've briefed me on, and what I've seen, there's no immediate threats. That said --

BOLDUAN: Those are two different things, right? One, that's not enough --

GOTTHEIMER: That's not good enough to explain what's out -- right. It's not enough, because people still have a lot of questions to understand where they're from, right, and I think the -- and what these drones are. And I don't believe that all of these sightings, that none of them are drones. That doesn't make any sense to me.

I also think, and I've called for this, Kate, for local and state law enforcement to have the tools themselves to be able to monitor these drones, and if necessary, if they're over threatening areas, right over bases, over our critical infrastructure like reservoirs or over police stations and other critical areas, that they should be able to take these drones down, right. And they should have the equipment. The equipment exists to be able to do that. They should be empowered to be able to do so. And you can't have the wild west of drones out there, right, with unlicensed and unregistered drones just flying around, threatening any kind of critical infrastructure or putting people at deep concern.

BOLDUAN: Have you been briefed if what has been seen and cited is approved activity?

GOTTHEIMER: Have I've been briefed that there's approved activity? What I've been briefed on is what they've monitored, which they have the equipment to monitor, what they've seen to date poses no urgent, critical threat. That said, long term, what I don't know, right, is -- and when I say critical threat, in other words that it's not over, they're confident it's not over areas that pose, like a base that poses an immediate threat to our national security.

BOLDUAN: Can I ask you one quick clarification just on that?

GOTTHEIMER: Yes, sure.

BOLDUAN: When they say, when they say it does not pose a national security or public safety threat, that suggests that in order to assess that, they know what these things are.

[08:15:00]

GOTTHEIMER: Kate, this is exactly why I would like them to brief publicly, because based on what they've told us in my briefings, not classified briefings based on the briefings that I've had with them that they have told us and shown and based on what they've assessed, because they can surveil that, there's not -- that they don't pose any immediate threats and there's no weapons cache or other threats to public that could cause threats to public safety.

What I'd like them to brief the public on is, where are these drones from? What are they? And to give that information and again, to make sure that our local partners have the equipment to be able to monitor going forward what these drones are and if necessary, to be able to take them out, and also to make sure that it is against the law.

Clearly, that if you're operating an unlicensed drone, right, and threaten any kind of public safety, whether that's critical infrastructure, an airport or a base, a reservoir that you will face, right, it's against the law -- you will face jail time if you do that. Because we can't have, again, as I said, you can't have the wild west of drones out here. And so, I think its critically important. That's why I'll do it again today, to get them out here and brief and tell the public what they know, everything they know.

BOLDUAN: And you're putting -- you've introduced legislation to give state and local more authority in being able to monitor and actually act. You said you want them to brief where these are coming from and what they are. Are you confident they have those answers?

GOTTHEIMER: Well, I think that's why we're going to ask them to brief. I'm confident -- here's what I know. They've been able to brief me, that they're confident of what they're not.

So now, I think it's really important that you tell the public what they are, right. And I think, listen, the public has a right to know because people are concerned, right? And when this is happening and they get no answers, no clear answers from the federal agencies responsible for monitoring, right? And then, of course, people are going to have questions. Of course people are going to be concerned.

They have a responsibility to allay people's concerns, to tell the public what they know and don't know, and to make sure that people are safe and protected, and that we're doing everything to protect our National Security and our public security and safety. BOLDUAN: That is for sure.

Congressman Josh Gottheimer, thank you so much for coming in. Let's see what happens today.

GOTTHEIMER: Thanks for having me, Kate.

BOLDUAN: Sara.

SARA SIDNER, CNN ANCHOR: Great conversation. Lots of people talking about that.

All right, ahead, President-elect Trump is making plans on how to deal with the media, which he's called the enemy of the people in the past. What he's saying now.

And new developments overnight in the investigation into the UnitedHealthcare CEO's murder. What could speed up the extradition of the suspected killer back to New York?

Also, a reality check for reality shows what happened after a complaint from the set of "Love is Blind" could spark a new era in that industry.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:22:32]

SIDNER: This morning, several new legal developments as UnitedHealthcare CEO, Brian Thompson's accused killer continues to fight extradition to New York.

Overnight a judge in Pennsylvania set two new court dates this month for December 23rd and the 30th. This, as ABC News is now reporting New York prosecutors have now started presenting evidence to a grand jury.

And overnight, we also learned that accused killer, Luigi Mangione was not insured by UnitedHealthcare. A spokesperson has confirmed neither he nor his mother were group members.

CNN legal analyst and criminal defense attorney, Joey Jackson is with us now. So you just heard that bit that our reporters got that he actually was not a member of UnitedHealthcare. Does that play any part in the legalities of this case?

JOHN JACKSON, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Yes, Sara, good morning, it does not, right?

Certainly investigators wanted to piece together a motivation. Was it that he was insured? We heard issues with respect to his back problem. Could they have denied him insurance, et cetera?

But I think the overall message was to target an insurer, insuring one in seven people that would be known to all, and a message would be sent with respect to that. So whether he was insured or not is not outcome determinative at all. SIDNER: All right. We also talked about the search warrants that sources at CNN say police have found a backpack and a burner phone along the route where they believe Mangione took to try to escape. How significant are these pieces of evidence?

JACKSON: So damning and compelling, obviously, right. Because the more you bit together and put together which establishes his guilt, the better it is for a prosecutor. You put this next to the water bottle with his print, the cereal wrapper with his print. The manifesto, et cetera.

You know, Sara, very briefly, though, I wonder about what's called jury nullification. What does that mean? That means the jurors can excuse conduct in the event they think it's appropriate to do so. Now, others in my profession I've spoken to have said in this case, I'm insane to say that. But have you seen social media with respect to what they're saying? He is a hero.

They're selling things, he's -- they're Calling him Saint Luigi. And you just wonder if you impanel a jury who buys into that message. Do they excuse the conduct? It's insane to think about. But were in a world right now that distrusts government, government institutions.

And so I, wonder whether his attorneys pick up on that attack and do something about it. Because the evidence that you've asked me about, it's damning to him.

[08:25:04]

SIDNER: Yes, and we've also seen, you know, sort of the forensic with the gun that the police say they now have.

But his defense attorney has been very clear in saying, look, I haven't seen this evidence. He's putting questions out there as any good defense attorney would. When does he get discovery? When does he start getting this? Because of course as he said himself, he's going to try of course, to pull it apart.

JACKSON: Of course, so what happens is in New York, Sara, a few years ago, actually in 2000 starting then we have what's called open file discovery. What does that mean? It means were giving discovery. Prosecutors better get you that discovery immediately.

Usually 15 days after he's brought in front of the judge, right. it is called an arraignment, where you enter your plea, you get your discovery. Prosecutors can ask for additional 30 days if it is voluminous discovery, but we don't play hide the ball.

The legislature in this state have said give defense attorneys what they need to defend, to evaluate, to review, so that we can start the trial.

SIDNER: All right, I do want to ask you about one last thing. He is charged with second degree murder. And in a lot of places, when you consider sort of the details that prosecutors have put out there, that this man was unarmed, he was shot in the back. There seemed to clearly be a plan that was put in place beforehand, that's first degree murder. Why is it not in New York?

JACKSON: So, Sara, New York is a bit different in that regard. First degree murder is generally reserved for police officers, firefighters, judges, first responders, correction officers, et cetera. There's one wrinkle. If you could establish terrorism, now it gets you to first degree murder, right? Is he attempting to coerce or influence a civilian population? is he attempting to influence public policy? The issue for prosecutors is going to be, even If they can't establish that, do they want to?

Here's what I mean. prosecutors certainly have an obligation to prove and establish what you did, right. But generally, you don't have to show why you did it.

So with second degree murder, you establish intent. Someone's dead, guess what you get? Life in jail. So it's not much of a distinction between going between that and making things complicated if now you're showing terrorism, what's the benefit?

You still can get life for second degree murder but in showing terrorism now you have to introduce all kind of evidence to establish your mindset, why you did it, what message you were attempting to send, et cetera. We'll see what they do as they collect the evidence they're collecting.

SIDNER: Certainly they could try to use things like the manifesto, but again, they have to convince a jury and have enough proof. And so, I guess it makes sense. Second degree murder at this point. Joey Jackson, always a pleasure. Thank you so much for coming in. Appreciate it -- Kate.

BOLDUAN: Corporate America stepping up their protection. The new high level security measures that teams are putting in place to protect executives across the country now, in the wake of Brian Thompson's murder.

And before you pour your coffee this morning, there is a recall to tell you about, a popular travel mug. We'll tell you much more about it in a second.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:30:54]