Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

IDF Ground Operation into Gaza City to Begin Soon; GOP Senators to Get Security Briefing at Conference Lunch Tomorrow; Interview with Rep. Suhas Subramanyam (D-VA): Lawmakers Seek Added Security in Wake of Kirk's Killing; Rare Tooth-in-Eye Surgery Stores Blind Man's Vision. Aired 2:30-3p ET

Aired September 15, 2025 - 14:30   ET

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

[14:30:00]

JEREMY DIAMOND, CNN JERUSALEM CORRESPONDENT: Benjamin Netanyahu was very much not apologizing and even doubling down on his decision to carry out this strike against Hamas leaders on Qatari soil. And so it remains to be seen what Rubio will be able to deliver to these Qatari officials tomorrow, but it comes as Arab and Islamic leaders met in Doha today to discuss some kind of a joint response to these Israeli strikes. We will see how this U.S. diplomacy factors into all of that. Boris.

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: Jeremy, all of this is happening, as sources say, that the Israeli military is soon going to carry out this ground operation to take control of Gaza City. IDF forces also conducting some major strikes today in Gaza.

DIAMOND: Yes, that's right. We are witnessing the enormous mass displacement of Palestinians from Gaza City right now. Over 100,000 people are estimated by the Israeli military itself to have fled Gaza City over the course of just this weekend.

That is one of the largest mass exoduses that we have seen in Gaza in many months now. Altogether, the Israeli military estimating that more than 320,000 people have left Gaza City in recent weeks. But there are still hundreds of thousands who are still remaining in Gaza City right now, where strikes are indeed intensifying.

More than 140 people were killed over this weekend in Gaza City alone, as the Israeli military has been carrying out airstrikes that they say are aimed at Hamas, but also at buildings, high-rise residential buildings in Gaza City that the Israeli military is also claiming are being used as Hamas infrastructure.

But we also know that many people are living inside of these buildings, and they have been left homeless and uncertain with where to go in the wake of those strikes. But the Israelis seem to have and will have going forward the support of the United States for this ground offensive that we're told could begin in the coming days.

The Secretary of State Marco Rubio, according to our Israeli sources, he conveyed that the U.S. is supportive of this Israeli offensive, but that the United States would like to see Israel expedite its plans for this. That's in line with comments that we've heard from President Trump in the past.

But all of this leaves us with questions about whether or not there is an exit ramp here for diplomacy, particularly as the Secretary of State today suggested that he's not sure that there is a diplomatic option to end this war in Gaza, talking instead about military operations both publicly and in his conversations privately with the Israeli Prime Minister -- Boris.

SANCHEZ: Jeremy Diamond, live for us in Jerusalem, thank you so much.

Still to come, details on the latest release of documents from convicted sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein. They include more pages from that infamous birthday book. Don't go anywhere.

[14:35:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: Charlie Kirk's assassination has led the nation's political leaders to question their sense of safety. We're learning that security officials will brief Republican senators on Capitol Hill tomorrow.

Plus, the Trump administration is requesting millions in additional security funding for the executive and judicial branches.

Let's go live to Capitol Hill with CNN's Arlette Saenz. Arlette, first, tell us what you know about this meeting involving senators and Capitol Police.

ARLETTE SAENZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, concerns over security are top of mind for so many lawmakers up here on Capitol Hill. And tomorrow, the Senate Sergeant at Arms and the chief of the Capitol Police will brief Republican senators at their weekly lunches about security measures. At the same time, there are active discussions underway about how to boost funding for security, not just for members of the executive and judicial branch, but also for legislators.

House Speaker Mike Johnson had noted that the White House has asked for about $58 million in security funding for the executive branch and for judges. But then he is also working behind the scenes trying to determine how much money is needed to protect lawmakers going forward. He told our colleague Manu Raju that he wants to tie any legislative security funding to an upcoming stopgap funding measure.

Take a listen to what the speaker had to say.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. MIKE JOHNSON (R-LA), HOUSE SPEAKER: We have to protect our judges and those who serve in those two branches, but also, of course, in Congress. And so we're looking at an amount that would be appropriate for a continued resolution in a short term to protect members in the leg branch as well. We don't have consensus around that yet because all of this is pretty rapidly developed over the last few days and everyone was home in their districts for the weekend. So I'm looking forward to having these conversations with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle over the next 24, 48 hours or so, and we'll determine what everyone believes is appropriate. It's costly to do this.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SAENZ: Now the speaker stressed that they are focused on trying to keep members safe but did acknowledge that there is more work that could be done on this front. We heard from so many lawmakers who are rethinking the way that they might do their own events.

Some lawmakers telling us that they've considered not holding outdoor rallies after the shooting of Charlie Kirk. There are others just assessing going forward how they will conduct these types of large scale events.

And already there had been concerns about security before Kirk's killing. You'll remember back in June, there was that Minnesota Democratic state lawmaker who had been assassinated that had really revived security talks up here on The Hill.

[14:40:00]

And there were actually some pilot programs that were launched in both the House and the Senate to try to determine what it might look like to have extra security for these lawmakers. The concern is not just security up here on the Capitol, but especially when they go back home and they're traveling at home or around the country for events.

So these are all issues that these lawmakers are considering right now as there are major concerns about security after Kirk's killing out in Utah.

SANCHEZ: Arlette Saenz, live for us on The Hill, thank you so much, Arlette -- Brianna.

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: We're joined now by Democratic Congressman Suhas Subramanyam of Virginia. He's a member of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee. And you, Congressman, have talked about, you've said that you see a correlation between the rhetoric and the political violence.

What have you been reflecting on kind of in that vein since Charlie Kirk was killed?

REP. SUHAS SUBRAMANYAM (D-VA): You know, what happened to Charlie Kirk was awful, but it was not an isolated incident. You look at the president's assassination attempt last year, the attempt on the Democratic lawmakers in Minnesota, Nancy Pelosi's husband, Gabby Giffords, Steve Scalise, I mean, I can go on. Both sides of the aisle have seen this, and we were already talking about security in our caucus on the Democratic side.

We had concerns since that Minnesota shooting, and my office even got threats about a couple weeks ago. So we've been looking at security when this happened, and so we're definitely, the alarm bells are ringing for sure, and we just -- it's not just about our own security, it's about the security of anyone who attends our events. We know what we signed up for, but the constituents that come to our events didn't sign up for political violence at any rally that they attend.

So I'd like to see us do more when it comes to security.

KEILAR: OK, and to really tone down the violence, don't you need like a real conversion on getting everyone to agree? You don't divide people in a way that dehumanizes people, and where's the appetite for that? Because I mean, forgive me if I'm missing something, but I'm not really seeing that broadly from the majority of people.

SUBRAMANYAM: Yes, first, we have to lead by example in Congress. We have to make sure that, you know, when we have differences, that we don't use violent rhetoric or we don't make fun of violence or make light of violence.

Two, we have to root out and identify violent information online as well and see what we can do to address that and tone down the rhetoric there.

And then three, we have to keep our events safe and keep our constituents safe when they come to our rallies. And so we have to do all three things. It's not going to be easy.

It's really hard to address what's on the Internet right now. It's really hard to address extremism right now, but we have to do our best to make a concerted effort.

KEILAR: Utah's Governor Spencer Cox said that Robinson, the suspect, Tyler Robinson, had been indoctrinated with leftist ideology. He's not specified exactly what that means. My colleague Dana Bash actually pressed him on it this weekend for more details. He didn't really go there on that. What questions do you have about that?

SUBRAMANYAM: I mean, first of all, you know, I'd heard different things about his ideology. He wasn't a registered Democrat or Republican. He may have been a Groyper, which is a follower of Nick Fuentes, who's on the right.

But I'll say this. It shouldn't matter. This has happened to Democrats. This has happened to Republicans. The shooters were on both sides of the extreme. And so what should matter is that we should all come together to, one, tone down the rhetoric and to keep our events safe and three, make sure that this doesn't happen again.

And so playing the blame game is not toning down the rhetoric. Playing the blame game only makes the rhetoric and the problem worse.

KEILAR: Cox also said something about social media. And I think there are a lot of people reflecting on that because of the online presence of this individual.

He, Governor Cox, said that social media is a cancer. He told our Dana Bash that social media companies need to be held to account. They have largely evaded serious accountability by Congress. Is it time to finally change that?

SUBRAMANYAM: Yes, I mean, you know, I think we've been working on this for a while now. It's just whenever we try to make progress, they call it censorship and then the problem doesn't get fixed.

And so what we actually have to do is look at violent rhetoric on social media and look at what's going on on social media and figure out, you know, what's an actual threat and let's take threats seriously. When my office got a threat, we took it seriously. We don't pretend like it's not a problem. It is a problem. And so that's one of the first steps you have to take.

KEILAR: Are you talking to members of your party who represent California, who have a lot of tech donors? I mean, there are a lot of Democrats who know people in these fields, the owners of these companies. Are you looking within your own party at that?

SUBRAMANYAM: Yes, this shouldn't be about which party. Both parties should be coming together on this. This should be bipartisan.

And we should be looking at what we're going to do tangibly to address this issue, because that's what the American people want us to do. I want to call hearings on this. I want to call a hearing on political violence and an extremism on social media and see what we can do, what legislation we can push.

[14:45:00]

And I think the social media companies should be working with us. I don't think they want their tools used to commit crimes like this. And so we have to continue to be vigilant about it and take action.

KEILAR: I want to ask you about the Jeffrey Epstein files. You're on House Oversight and the Epstein estate turned over more documents to the committee on Friday. It includes two pages of that so-called birthday book that were redacted in the first production.

Who were those pages from? And do you know why they were originally redacted?

SUBRAMANYAM: You know, a lot of the stuff that we got on Friday and most recently, again, another dump of information. It's not necessarily new stuff. We're doing our best to try to find new things and trying to find more clues as to what this is.

KEILAR: But this appears to be new. These are two pages that were previously redacted. Do you have a sense at this point who they're who they're from?

SUBRAMANYAM: I don't have a sense. I'll just say, though, the best way to get all the information is if the president and this administration releases all the files to us unredacted. And if we want to actually get some answers, which is what the victims want as well, we'll get those files released immediately.

KEILAR: The Treasury Department will turn over certain bank activity reports that relate to the Epstein investigation. Have you seen any of these suspicious activity reports from Treasury yet? Have they turned over anything here? And what are you looking for in these?

SUBRAMANYAM: I haven't seen anything yet, but I'll say that many of the victims told us to follow the money because a lot of the banks knew about what was going on. And the -- and Epstein himself, you know, his bank records will tell a story about what he did and what happened. And so we think that we can find a lot of information in these bank records. That's why we want them.

KEILAR: What is that story? Is it -- I mean, just explain to us where following the money to to even just a category of person or alleged co-conspirator. Tell us what that story is.

SUBRAMANYAM: Epstein commingled his social life with his business and with his crimes. And so the story he tells is basically in his accounts, the people he paid, the money that came in and out of those accounts tells a story about who was involved in these crimes as well. And so we want to follow the money and see where it leads us.

KEILAR: All right. Congressman Suhas Subramanyam, thank you so much for being with us. Really appreciate it.

SUBRAMANYAM: Thank you.

KEILAR: And still to come, a last resort effort to save a man's vision using, get this, one of his teeth. How they did that next.

[14:50:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: We've all heard about an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. How about a tooth for an eye? Doctors have restored a blind man's vision using one of his teeth.

CNN's Meg Tirrell explains how they did it.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

MEG TIRRELL, CNN MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Brent Chapman is able to see clearly for the first time in 20 years with the help of his tooth.

BRENT CHAPMAN, PATIENT WHO REGAINED SIGHT: Seeing the skyline, differentiating the buildings.

TIRRELL (voice-over): He's one of just a few patients in the world to undergo a procedure known as tooth-in-eye surgery.

DR. GREG MOLONEY, CLINICAL ASSOCIATION PROFESSOR OF CORNEAL SURGERY, UBC: Tooth-in-eye is probably the simplest way to describe it, but the full name is Osteo-odonto-keratoprosthesis or OOKP.

TIRRELL (voice-over): It's a procedure for when people have damage to the front of their eye or the cornea. And you may never have heard of it because it's only used in very rare circumstances when other options have failed.

MOLONEY: Much like replacing a broken windscreen on a car. That's just to restore a clear view into the back of the eye.

TIRRELL (voice-over): Here's how it works. The patient's own tooth, the canine or eye tooth, coincidentally, is extracted. It's then formed into a rectangular shape and a plastic lens is fitted into it.

The tooth is then sewn into the patient's cheek for long enough that connective tissue grows around it, which is then used to help fix the tooth over the eye, holding the new lens in place. The result is this pink-looking eye with a small black circle in the middle. So, why a tooth?

MOLONEY: As it turns out, the tooth is a really ideal structure for holding, you know, focusing element in place. It's hard, it's rigid, it survives in poor environments, and the body accepts it because it's part of its own, because it's part of you.

CHAPMAN: I think at first, I'm like -- like most people, it seems kind of science fiction-y and out there.

TIRRELL (voice-over): It may have sounded out there, but after losing most of his sight when he was 13 years old and going through almost 50 surgeries trying to regain it, Chapman was willing to give it a try.

CHAPMAN: This sort of opened a new door for me and a new chapter in my life.

TIRRELL (voice-over): And the results? Well, seeing it is believing it for Chapman.

CHAPMAN: Little things like eye contact are just, I think, things that people take for granted. It's very, very powerful. And you have that human connection again visually. And you're like, wow, we actually pulled this off.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SANCHEZ: An incredible story. And Meg Tirrell is here to tell us more. Meg, where did the idea of using a tooth for an eye surgery come about?

TIRRELL (on camera): Yes, Boris, I mean, this is admittedly wacky. Even the doctor who performed this said it sort of has been that way and thought of that way. This was actually come up with by an Italian surgeon in the 1960s.

So this idea and this surgery has been around for some time and it has stood the test of time because it works in these situations where patients have run out of other options. Other options have failed them. And it's only really rare patients who have a circumstance like Brent's who can benefit from this kind of surgery.

[14:55:00] There are very few surgeons around the world who are trained in how to do this. Dr. Moloney, of course, is one of them. He said it takes two very lengthy six hour procedures typically to get this done.

And he told us that with glasses now Brent's vision with the help of his tooth is 20-30 -- Boris.

SANCHEZ: That is incredible. Meg Tirrell, thanks so much for bringing us that story.

Still to come, some folks are losing their jobs for voicing their opinions on the death of Charlie Kirk. We'll discuss next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

END