Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Pardoned January 6th Defendants Released; Americans Hawkish on Immigration; Aaron Ford is Interviewed about Birthright Citizenship Challenges; Dr. Jerome Adams is Interviewed about Vaccinations. Aired 8:30-9a ET

Aired January 22, 2025 - 08:30   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:31:33]

SARA SIDNER, CNN ANCHOR: New reporting from "Axios" about the internal debate amongst Trump's team over who and how many January 6th rioters should be pardoned. An adviser telling "Axios" it ended like this, quote, "Trump just said, f it, release them all."

The fallout catching Republican lawmakers off guard. Some angry and struggling to defend the president's decision.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. THOM TILLIS (R-NC): It was surprising to me that it was a blanket pardon.

What I'm trying to do is figure out, there are some commutations. To me, I - I just can't agree.

SEN. JAMES LANKFORD (R-OK): I think we need to continue to be able to say we are a party of law and order. And that is incredibly important to be able to protect those folks who are protecting us every single day.

SEN. SUSAN COLLINS (R-ME): I do not support the pardons, if they were given, if they were given to people who committed violent crimes, including assaulting police officers.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SIDNER: And that is what happened. They were pardoned, those who took part in violence.

CNN's Katelyn Polantz has more from us from Washington there.

Katelyn, you're - you're standing outside. I understand, one of the jails where the - where the rioters have been released. Can you describe what's been happening in the 36 some odd hours since the pardons happened?

KATELYN POLANTZ, CNN CRIME AND JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Sara, there had been a vigil here for many months. And then last night was the culmination of people standing outside of the D.C. jail welcoming rioters as they were released, or alleged rioters, because the people held at this facility here at the D.C. jail, they often didn't have their cases finished. So, some of them weren't eligible for the full pardon from Donald Trump. So, when Donald Trump pardoned more than a thousand of the rioters, people accused of misdemeanors, parading inside the Capitol, as well as people convicted of and sentenced to years in prison for things like assaulting police or even seditious conspiracy, those people were able to leave bureau of prisons facilities across the country very quickly.

But here at the jail, this is where people were still having cases ongoing in the court. And so judges needed to sign off. As that happened throughout the day yesterday, people were released gradually and there was a crowd here singing, praying, welcoming them with hugs, talking to them as those people came out.

One of the men, a man named Jake Lang, he had been held in this facility. He was waiting to go to trial. So, hadn't been convicted of January 6th crimes. What he was accused of was going into one of the most violent sections of the Capitol riot, on the lower west terrace, wearing a gas mask and then having a baseball bat and swinging it at police officers. He was released last night around 8:00 p.m. Just two hours before that was when a judge in the federal court in D.C. dismissed his case at the direction of Donald Trump's Justice Department. That was something that Trump wanted to be done.

Here's what Jake Lang had to say upon emerging from this detention center.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JACOB LANG, RELEASED JANUARY 6 DEFENDANT: This institutional nightmare, this weaponization, these institutions that have crumbled are now being restored. Faith and trust and hope are back in America. We are back, baby. We are back, baby.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

POLANTZ: Now, one of the people outside of the jail here last night when I was here was Stewart Rhodes, the leader of the Oath Keepers, who had been released from a federal prison well before his 18-year sentence was complete.

[08:35:11]

His sentence had been commuted by the president.

Here though, this morning, much less of a crowd. Not really a crowd much at all. Waiting to see if others who may still be held here will be released as well.

SIDNER: Katelyn Polantz, thank you so much for your reporting out there.

All right, ahead, another fire has erupted near Los Angeles this morning. The latest on the fire destruction there in L.A. and surrounding areas.

And President Trump has begun his aggressive campaign to slow immigration. But how do Americans feel about those who are in the country illegally? We will discuss. That's coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:40:24]

BOLDUAN: Breaking this hour, CNN has learned that refugees who were slated to travel to the United States after a year's long and tedious process, have now had their flights canceled. This is according to a State Department memo obtained by CNN. Another sign of President Trump's aggressive crackdown on immigration, an agenda that at least some parts appear to be in line with American's shifting attitudes on the issue.

CNN's Harry Enten has been looking at that for us. He's joining us now.

Let's start with how Americans feel now about people being in the country illegally. This is - this might be different from the headline we were just talking about, refugees who have applied and gotten - they've gone through this long process and gotten approved.

HARRY ENTEN, CNN SENIOR DATA REPORTER: Right.

BOLDUAN: But talking about undocumented immigrants.

ENTEN: Yes. Sometimes I like blunt questions because they sort of get at the underlying feelings that people have. So, this is about as blunt a question as you can get, deport all immigrants here illegally? I will note, the ABC News poll asked about undocumented immigrants. So, we have slightly different questions. But these were all taken within the last month. And there's real uniformity here. That's what I really think you see, you see real uniformity. Deporting all immigrants who are here illegally, 55 percent in "The New York Times," Marquette, 64 percent, CBS News, 57 percent. ABC News, with a slightly different question, 56 percent. So, what you're seeing essentially here is a very clear indication that a majority of Americans, in fact, when they're asked this blunt question, which I believe gets at the underlying feelings, do, in fact, want to deport all immigrants who are here illegally. There's no arguing with these different numbers because they're all essentially the same across four different pollsters.

BOLDUAN: So, if they say, yes, today, ish, how has that changed over time?

ENTEN: Yes, this is where I think you get very interesting. And so we'll take a look at that ABC News question in particular because you can really see that there's been a massive shift from when Trump was first getting into office eight years ago, right, deport all undocumented immigrants. You go back to 2015, I'm going to come to your side of the screen.

BOLDUAN: Hello.

ENTEN: It was 42 percent. Hello. Go to 2016. It was 36 percent. Look at where we are now. This was taken at the end of last year, 56 percent. This is 20 points higher than it was just before Trump got into office the first time.

So, feelings towards immigration in this country, feelings towards undocumented immigrants and deporting all of them have become considerably more hawkish. And I think that gives Donald Trump much more leverage to go with the American people and sort of have these hawkish, some might say, harsh, different rhetoric and also issue based sort of going after immigrants who are here illegally. And so, I think the American people are going to give Donald Trump the benefit of the doubt to do what he wants to do, at least if you believe these blunt questions, including this one.

BOLDUAN: How about immigration levels?

ENTEN: Yes. OK. So, this sort of goes in line with that, right, which is, again, trying to get at the underlying feelings.

Want immigration levels decreased. This includes legal and illegal immigration. Look at this. Last year, 55 percent. That is the highest level since the 9/11 aftermath. You go back just to 2023 -

BOLDUAN: This - and this again, legal and illegal.

ENTEN: Legal and -

BOLDUAN: So, they want - people want less people coming into the country.

ENTEN: Exactly. They want people - less people coming into the country. Look at that. That's a 14-point rise from 2023. You go back to 2016, when Donald Trump, again, was running for president the first time, it was 38 percent. That's a 17-point rise.

So, the bottom line is, more folks want people who are here illegally deported and their overall feelings towards immigration have become considerably more hawkish since Donald Trump was first getting into office, Kate.

BOLDUAN: Thank you, Harry.

ENTEN: Thank you.

BOLDUAN: John.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: All right, this morning, one of the pillars of the president's new immigration policy, his executive order ending birthright citizenship, is facing new legal challenges from two dozen Democratic-led states and cities.

With us now is one attorney general part of that lawsuit, Aaron Ford from Nevada.

Sir, always good to see you.

Talk to me about the basis of this lawsuit.

AARON FORD, NEVADA ATTORNEY GENERAL: Well, good morning, John. It's always great to see you. And thank you for having us on to talk - me on to talk about this important conversation.

The basis is simple. The Constitution prohibits what Mr. President is attempting to do here. I just heard your last segment, and I understand that this may be an unpopular topic relative to immigration being at the forefront of our conversations. But even an uncomfortable topics or unpopular topics, the rule of law prevails.

And what we are looking at here is a president who, within hours of being sworn in as our 47th president, violated the Constitution. And I said early on that, to the victor goes the spoils. He has every right to implement his own immigration policies, but he must do so lawfully. And when he does not, I will defeat him in court. And that's what we're doing.

[08:45:04]

BERMAN: So, let's read from the Constitution right now. The 14th Amendment, the beginning of it, "all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the states wherein they reside." That is the basis of birthright citizenship. If you're born here, you are a citizen has been the interpretation since the 14th Amendment.

What Donald Trump and the current White House says is the words "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" creates a gray area for people, they say, who are here illegally because they are not subject to the jurisdiction, they say, of the United States since they're here illegally. What do you say to that?

FORD: Well, first off, let - let's back up and talk about the - the genesis of the conversation. The last time an American was denied birthright citizenship was the Dred Scott case. It was a dreadful decision wherein African descendants were told that whether they were free or whether they were enslaved, they could never be citizens of the United States, born here or otherwise. And that was what led to the - the overturning of that decision in the 14th Amendment. And subsequently thereafter we saw a case in the Wong Kim Ark case where the Supreme Court confirmed that children born to immigrant parents on our soil were also to be given Americanized - American status.

And so, what we're looking at here, again, is an effort to undo the constitutional edicts of - of that control our country by an executive order. He cannot do that.

And what I will say is this, the - and subject thereto, I find it ironic that he - he says that these children are - are not subject thereto when he certainly wants to subject them to the criminal processes of our country. It makes no sense. No logical sense whatsoever. And the last thing I'll say on this particular issue is, in fact, this

has been typically applied to the children of diplomats because they are indeed not subject to the laws here. They are subject to the laws of their - of their home - of their home countries, with their parents and/or their citizenship being directed toward where they're - where it is that they are representing.

BERMAN: I will say, the preponderance of scholarship over the last 100 plus years has been in line with what you're saying, that birthright citizenship is enshrined in the Constitution. But there have been some people who have tried to find some holes in the reasoning. You referenced the 1898 Supreme Court case, U.S. versus Wong Kim Ark. And there are those who suggest that the children of the Chinese immigrants, the parents themselves - and again, immigration was different in the 1890s, but had some kind of quasi legal status here so they weren't here technically illegally. So, that could be a way in.

I guess I'm asking, do you have any fears that as this moves up the court chain, that there could be a court, a federal court at some level, maybe the Supreme Court, sympathetic with this White House?

FORD: Well, look, let's be clear. You're right, that there were different immigration laws in the 1890s. These Chinese immigrants were law - were lawfully discriminated against in our naturalization process. And that's why there - these parents did not have lawful status.

Back to Dred Scott. Our country did have a different perception of what American meant. But enslaved were not to be considered Americans, and so their children were not Americans. So, there's no question that there's always been a discriminatory argument that can be made to deprive folks of birthright citizenship. And what we will not do is allow that or countenance that in our courts.

You are correct that there have been these arguments put out there, and there is indeed a concern that many would have that this Supreme Court would - would - would align itself with that more extreme view. But I remain confident in our judicial system. I remain confident in our courts. And I do believe that regardless of whether this lawsuit has brought, we're going to prevail because the Constitution and the rule of law still prevail, even in the face of an individual who is filing unlawful and unconstitutional executive orders.

BERMAN: A lot of legal ground to cover by February 19th, which is when this executive order is set to take effect. I am sure you will be busy.

Aaron Ford, great to see you. Thank you very much.

Sara.

SIDNER: All right, ahead, a warning from Trump's former surgeon general, vaccines must be part of Trump's pledge to make America healthy again. He joins us live on the hidden cost of anti-vaccine sentiment. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:53:48]

SIDNER: President Donald Trump's surgeon general, during his first term, has a stark warning for the country and the administration, don't ignore the alarming rise in vaccine hesitancy. In an op-ed this week with "Stat News," Doctor Jerome Adams says that while the president's emphasis on make America healthy again, which promotes nutrition and exercise should be celebrated, those priorities should be, quote, "in addition to addressing vaccine preventable diseases not in place of them."

Doctor Adams joins us now.

Thank you, sir, for joining us.

And reading through your op-ed, I want to ask you about this. Trump's nominee for Health and Human Services secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., has said there is no vaccine that is safe and effective. So, do you think that President Trump will actually heed your warning and listen to what you have said?

DR. JEROME ADAMS, FORMER U.S. SURGEON GENERAL: Well, let me be clear, countries that have higher vaccination rates have higher life expectancies, and vice versa. That's inarguable. When you look at Norway, when you look at Sweden, when you look at Singapore.

And if you don't believe me, you can go to Grok, which I did this morning. Grok is Elon Musk's designed and promoted search engine.

[08:55:01]

And if you ask Grok, are vaccines safe and effective, it literally says, quote, "childhood vaccines have been overwhelmingly shown to be highly safe and effective."

But you mentioned my op-ed. I just want to highlight, we're seeing an alarming decline in childhood vaccination rates. In my home state of Indiana, 42 percent of three year olds are not up to date on recommended vaccines. In Idaho, we see MMR vaccinations when people are entering kindergarten down to 80 percent. That is dangerously low levels of vaccination.

And what our leaders say and do matter. If they preach hesitancy and advance policies that have been shown to decrease vaccination rates, like increasing personal exemptions, which is what they did in Idaho, then we reap what we sow. And this has a personal cost, but it also has a societal one. Increased health care and public health expenditures, increased national security concerns, as I laid out in my op-ed.

SIDNER: Can you give me sort of an example of what those security concerns would be and the hidden cost to families if they have a child who isn't vaccinated and ends up contracting something like the measles? ADAMS: Well, that's a great question. And one of the things I

highlight in my op-ed is, during the pandemic I was at an Indo-Pacific defense chief's conference where our allies were literally saying, we are not going to let American soldiers into our - into our nations because of fear of them transmitting Covid. It was at the time when we had incredibly high Covid transmission rates. We run the risk of them saying, we're not going to let a submarine or an aircraft carrier land here because of - because of your risk of transmitting measles to our country.

And we also know historically, there have been multiple times in history when infectious diseases, when vaccine preventable diseases have been the difference between winning and losing battles and wars. George Washington, for goodness sake, actually was one of the first people to promote the smallpox vaccine.

So, I want people to think about the fact that, yes, we need to respect personal autonomy, but whether it's seat belts or whether we're talking about washing your hands in restaurants or whether we're talking about vaccines, there's always going to be trade-offs, and we have to understand the broader societal implications.

And you said national security, but a toll on hospitals of chasing down vaccine preventable diseases and outbreaks, a single measles case can cost tens of thousands of dollars in terms of outbreak investigation, in terms of time of public health officials. And for the individual, it can cause weeks of missed school. People are rightly upset about missed school during the pandemic because of Covid precautions, but we don't seem to care as much about people missing school for measles or mumps or pertussis.

SIDNER: I do want to just insert here that Trump has vowed to reinstate troops. You talk about the potential security risks, but he's vowed to reinstate troops who refused to get the Covid vaccine back when Covid was - was rampant and give them back pay.

I do want to ask you lastly this. Trump has said in an executive order that he is getting out and taking America out of the World Health Organization. A public health law professor at Georgetown University said this about the withdrawal, saying, this is the most momentous of all of the executive orders, and it could be sowing the seeds for the next pandemic. Do you agree?

ADAMS: Well, one thing I - I absolutely think that we need to remember is that infectious diseases do not respect borders. So, we need to have some sort of cooperation set up.

I understand the frustration of the president and many others going back to the pandemic based on the lack of information sharing from China. This is what this - this relates back to. I also understand the president saying, we want other countries to share more of the financial burden of supporting organizations like NATO, like WHO.

That said, we can't be a safe United States if diseases are spreading in the rest of the world and we don't know about it. We can't be a safe United States if we aren't actively involved in keeping Ebola outbreaks contained in Africa and not letting them come to the United States. So, if we're going to pull out of WHO, the question I have for the administration is, what comes next and how are we going to keep our country safe and maintain our national security without that - that - that international cooperation that WHO facilitates?

SIDNER: Doctor Jerome Adams, I appreciate your time and thank you for talking me through what is a real concern for - for a lot of parents in this country as well. Appreciate it.

John.

BERMAN: All right, new this morning. President Trump has pardoned the founder of the Silk Road dark web e-commerce site. Ross Ulbricht had been serving a life sentence. He was found guilty almost ten years ago of money laundering and drug trafficking. Serious charges. Ulbricht was an early enthusiast of bitcoin, and some activists in that community did push for his release.

Happening now, a new blaze is spreading across southern California. It erupted east of Los Angeles County overnight, fueled by resurgent Santa Ana winds.

[09:00:02]

Officials say the fire is not threatening structures at this time, and it is spreading fairly slowly. No mandatory evacuation orders are in effect.