Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

FBI Makes Arrest in 2021 DC Pipe Bomb Case; Interview with Rep. Don Bacon (R-NE): Top Military Officials Briefing Lawmakers on Boat Strikes; Hegseth Under Pressure Over Boat Strike, Signal Chat Report; CDC Advisers Delay Vote on Changes to Childhood Vaccines. Aired 1- 1:30p ET

Aired December 04, 2025 - 13:00   ET

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

[13:00:00]

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: A break in the case, at any minute we're set to hear from FBI Director Kash Patel after the arrest of a man investigators believe planted pipe bombs in D.C. the night before the January 6th Capitol riot. We're going to bring you that press conference live.

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: Plus, under scrutiny, the commander who has been thrust into the spotlight over the alleged drug boat strikes in the Caribbean is on Capitol Hill. We have new details on what Admiral Mitch Bradley is telling lawmakers about why he ordered that follow-up strike that killed survivors.

Also, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr.'s handpicked vaccine advisers are gathering right now. The meeting could lead to major changes when it comes to your child's vaccine schedules.

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

SANCHEZ: Breaking news to CNN. We're standing by for FBI Director Kash Patel to give his first remarks on the suspect now in custody for allegedly planting pipe bombs outside the headquarters of the Republican and Democratic National Committee the night before the January 6th Capitol riot.

KEILAR: After nearly five years law enforcement reviewing tens of thousands of video clips and hundreds of tips, federal agents arrested a man identified by law enforcement sources as Brian Cole Jr. in a suburb of Washington, D.C. this morning. CNN's Josh Campbell is with us now. And Josh, a source tells CNN that Director Patel is expected to speak, or that he is going to be speaking, obviously, about this.

What are we expecting?

JOSH CAMPBELL, CNN SENIOR CORRESPONDENT: Well, we're expecting the details about what led them to this specific suspect and what actually justified the arrest. This is obviously a major break in the hunt for a suspect who had long eluded investigators, as you mentioned, for nearly five years. That led to a lot of frustration within the FBI, obviously among members of the public, and lawmakers on both sides of the aisle, because, as you said there, these pipe bombs were placed at the headquarters of both major political parties.

But behind the scenes, authorities had been working to try to gather evidence, to gather clues. They appealed to the public, releasing, you know, these video clips, trying to get people to provide any type of tips. At one point, the reward was raised to half-a-million dollars.

But it wasn't until recently, I'm told from a law enforcement source, that authorities began to zero in on this suspect here. They set up surveillance on him, which is all a typical part before the FBI would actually conduct some type of arrest. I'm told that, last night, the go-ahead was given by officials at the FBI to conduct that arrest this morning.

He was taken into custody by FBI agents early this morning in Woodbridge, Virginia, just outside of the nation's capital. Now, after the arrest went down, that obviously doesn't mean the investigation is over. I'm told that a search of that residence is also underway.

We saw some of the video with some of the agents in their Tyvek suits, you know, the moon suits, going through to try to gather evidence. And that is because they're not only looking for things like digital evidence, you know, his social media, any types of communications, but there's also a significant forensic component to this investigation as well. They still have these two devices that were placed.

Authorities have that in evidence. And so they're scouring that residence to try to determine if there's any type of residue, any type of components that may match what they found there that could further strengthen their case. But obviously, a very significant development.

As you mentioned, we'll wait to hear from the FBI director with more details on what actually led them to this man.

KEILAR: And, Josh, stand by for us on that as we are awaiting this press conference from the FBI director. Let's bring in former FBI deputy director and CNN senior law enforcement analyst Andrew McCabe. I mean, Andy, I think for all of us here in Washington, D.C., the idea that all of these years have passed and the suspect they have tracked down is just outside of Washington, D.C. It's pretty amazing.

[13:05:00]

ANDREW MCCABE, CNN SENIOR LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST: Yes, really incredible, Brianna. And you know, we have to remember the context in which this happened literally hours before thousands of people came in from all over the country for the purpose of essentially attacking the nation's capital.

So I think investigators probably had to approach this issue with the open mind that this person could have come from anywhere, could have easily kind of blended into that crowd of people coming to protest and do what they did on January 6th. But as you mentioned, it turns out he is from right here in our region. In fact, Woodbridge is still covered by the FBI's Washington field office, same office that led all the January 6th prosecutions.

So it's an enormous amount of work that that office has been dealing with in the aftermath of January 6th. There's a lot of reasons. I think many people thought, well, we have these videos.

What's taken them so long to identify this person? But first of all, very hard to do this, find one person out of 330 million or so. And also the video itself, even though it shows us these tantalizing scenes of the perpetrator walking through D.C., it lacks the sort of clarity and detail that we typically rely on these days to run biometric software against to come up with an absolute identification. He's wearing bulky clothing. He has his hood up on his sweatshirt. He's got a mask over his face.

So really, even though you can see him doing what we're what we're worried about, you can't really see the sort of details that typically help the FBI identify people from photographs or video.

SANCHEZ: What would you ask the suspect that's now in custody -- how would you handle that questioning and what details would you seek to get?

MCCABE: But that's a really broad scope of information to be looking for there. First, the way that it works is you bring this person back to the FBI offices for what we call processing. And that starts with a very innocuous conversation about what's your name, your date of birth, where do you live, just kind of what we refer to as biographic information.

Then the subject is given the opportunity to waive their right to an attorney and waive their their right to remain silent and to actually talk to the investigators about the substance of why they've been arrested. And if he's willing to do that, if he's willing to speak, you just want to start with the absolute beginning and have them lay down even inconsequential facts like how did you get there? Did you drive?

Did you take mass transit? Where did you go first? What brought -- you know, what was it that led you to decide that these were your targets?

And then you, of course, want the sort of information that Josh was alluding to. How did you construct these devices? Where did you buy the supplies?

Who -- where did you get the idea or the training to do this? Because all those statements hopefully can be backed up with the actual forensic evidence that you collect from the search of his residence, which we know is going on today.

KEILAR: Some allies of the president's have really fixated on this pipe bombers identity as potential proof that the January 6th riot at the Capitol was an inside job. That even includes Dan Bongino, who's now the FBI deputy director. Before he took that job, he said on a podcast, I believe the FBI knows the identity of this pipe bomber on January 6th, four years ago, and just doesn't want to tell us because it was an inside job. How do you see that kind of conspiratorial talk now in the context of this arrest?

MCCABE: Brianna, it's just a drop in the bucket of the many conspiratorial and false things that have been said about the FBI and the men and women that work there in the last, you know, however many years now. That sort of stuff is -- it's divisive. It's not based on any observable or verifiable fact.

So it's just nonsense from the beginning. But it's people jumping to conclusions. People, you know, people love a conspiracy theory.

And they particularly, you know, on social media and on the Internet, these sorts of conversations and bold statements garner a lot of viewers and interest. And that puts money in the pockets of the people who put that information out there. But it's not helpful to the to the organization.

It's not helpful to the investigation to be interested. I know that it seems that Deputy Director Bongino has been very interested in this case since he took the job. And that's great. And I'd be interested to see if he has ever apologized to the men and women of the FBI for insinuating that they were actually involved with or somehow contributed to this attempted act of violence.

[13:10:00]

But nevertheless, we're at a good point for the bureau on this case, making -- you know, we forget sometimes you think of someone like the Unabomber, who planted his first bomb in 1978, wasn't arrested by the FBI until 1996.

So these cases take a long time. And it's it is incredibly admirable. It's another example of what the FBI does very well.

They stay focused on a on an investigation until they bring it to a conclusion.

SANCHEZ: Andrew McCabe, please stand by. We're going to be back with you later when that news conference finally happens. Plenty of news to cover this afternoon.

Still to come, the Navy admiral with the White House says ordered a second strike on an alleged drug boat appears on Capitol Hill to brief senior lawmakers. One member who was given access to the full video of the incident says it's one of the most troubling things he's seen in Congress.

Plus, a city council meeting in New Orleans erupting in protest as federal agents fan out across the city.

KEILAR: And a panel of CDC advisers meeting right now. The stakes couldn't be higher. They're weighing whether to make changes to the way that children are vaccinated. And some of the presenters say they've heard from today -- some of the presenters they've heard from today include non-experts whose research has been discredited. We'll have that and much more coming up on CNN NEWS CENTRAL.

[13:15:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KEILAR: Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and the U.S. military strikes on alleged drug vessels in the Caribbean are under scrutiny today on Capitol Hill. The head of U.S. Special Operations Command, Admiral Mitch Bradley, and other military officials have been meeting with ranking members on the Senate and House Armed Services Intelligence and Appropriations Committees. They're being asked about the controversial follow-up strike on a suspected drug boat that happened on September 2nd. Democratic Congressman Jim Himes questioned Bradley earlier and also saw video of the attack. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. JIM HIMES (D-CT): But what I saw in that room was one of the most troubling things I've seen in my time in public service. You have two individuals in clear distress without any means of locomotion with a destroyed vessel who were killed by the United States. Any American who sees the video that I saw will see the United States military attacking shipwrecked sailors.

Bad guys, bad guys. But but attacking shipwrecked sailors. Now, there's a whole set of contextual items that the admiral explained.

Yes, they were carrying drugs. They were not in the position to continue their mission in any way.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: We're joined now by Republican Congressman Don Bacon of Nebraska. He's a member of the House Armed Services Committee. He's also served in the U.S. Air Force. He was -- he's a former brigadier general. So thanks for being with us. And I just wonder what you think about what Congressman Himes said there.

He also had said that Admiral Bradley said Hegseth did not give that kill them all order, that there was no order to grant no quarter. But I mean, him saying one of the most troubling things he's ever seen in public service. That is something to say.

What do you think?

REP. DON BACON (R-NE), ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE: Well, I was relieved to know that the secretary did not give those orders to say kill everybody, kill the survivors. That was the initial reporting in The Wall Street -- or The Washington Post. So I think that was positive for the secretary.

I think it's still debatable to me that you should target two people are trying to survive in the water. I know the military is saying that they were radioing in to be rescued by their drug colleagues. They were trying to save some of the drugs. But still, I am also troubled to -- you know, these two people were trying to survive. And our rules of law or rules of war would not allow us to kill survivors. And -- but I do think on the secretary's behalf that we had verification they did not give those orders.

I think that's a positive.

KEILAR: So you mentioned that radioing because people briefed on the strike say that the Defense Department, this case they're making here is that they were still in the fight. I think that's the question that these folks who were survivors were still in the fight because they appeared to be radioing for help. They could have theoretically continued trafficking the drugs.

Do you think that's the case? Were they still in the fight?

BACON: I think it's very questionable. I think we're definitely in a gray area here to be candid with you. The rules are they have to pose an imminent threat.

And I think we could say they did not pose an imminent threat to our country. But I get part of this argument that they were going to be rescued by the drug cartel and some of these drugs would be saved. So I think we're operating in a gray area here.

And it's I think it's worth having a hearing. I think it's worth reviewing this to see if we should make the rules more clear or not. But I don't think it's nearly as bad as it was initially reported.

And for me, that's a relief because I'm not I'm not here to -- you know, I have some criticisms of the secretary. I like calling balls and strikes and I want to make sure we're doing the right thing.

KEILAR: So these are leaders on these committees. When are you expecting to see the actual video? Because I'm sure that is certainly going to help you in your conclusions here.

BACON: Now, first of all, I'm very relieved that the chairman and the ranking member of Republican Democrat leadership are both there. I trust them on this. I don't think they want to make this partisan.

They want to just do the right thing. But I hope we hope the committee can get this soon. But I also would recommend bringing in the four star general in charge of Southern Command that resigned shortly after the strike.

It would be interesting to hear his perspective, because I sense that this was part of the whole reason why he resigned.

[13:20:00]

KEILAR: Yes, we've certainly reported the tension between him and Secretary Hegseth over strikes in the Caribbean. You want to hear from Admiral Halsey, who left one year into his tenure. Very strange to do that. Do you want to hear from lawyers? And was it your understanding that the administration during this

briefing of top members of these committees on the Hill did not bring lawyers to speak to the legality? Which is really in question.

BACON: Yes, we should. You know, the right way to do this is bringing people who defend the department and others who disagree and hear both sides. I think it's very important to hear Admiral Halsey, who resigned shortly after this operation.

And I think we should hear from Secretary Hegseth himself. He needs to be in front of the committee to take hard questions. That would be the proper way forward.

But, you know, I don't want to be the guy that's always critical or always positive. We have too much. If you're Republican, you've got to defend all the time.

If you're a Democrat, you've got to attack. I just want to do the right thing. Let's get the facts and go from there.

KEILAR: As I mentioned, you are a retired general officer. Where does the buck stop ultimately with this?

BACON: I think in this case, it would be the secretary. He's the secretary of defense. He gave out the orders.

Now, if somebody violated his orders, that's different. But I don't see that being the case. But ultimately, it stops with the secretary.

And you could say it ultimately stops with the president. But I think in this case, this operation was largely run out of the secretary of defense and the Special Operations Command and Southern Command. So those are your main participants.

KEILAR: Separately, I want to ask you about this report, the IG report on Secretary Hegseth's use of Signal on that strike on the Houthis. We now have this unclassified version of the report that was given to Congress earlier this week. And Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell says the report totally exonerates Hegseth.

Is that how you see it?

BACON: No, that is total baloney. I hate to -- I have better words for it, but you can't say it on TV. I read the report and what I saw, what had happened was wrong.

But the report makes clear that the secretary put sensitive information that would ordinarily be classified. Maybe he said he declassified it, but it was sensitive information about an upcoming attack on Yemen. The times of takeoffs for the aircraft, the F-18s, the time they were going to hit their targets.

And they put this out roughly two hours before the mission on an unclassified application that we know is being monitored by Russia and China. His unclassified phone is a top target. And that if this information would have got to Yemen, it would have compromised the mission and we could have put our pilots at risk.

And so the report was very clear on this. And what troubles me, instead of taking responsibility and say it was my fault, I learned from it. They use phrases like totally, you know, we're totally exonerated.

And they were blaming the reporter initially. That's not what a leader does. A leader stands up, says, I screwed up.

I take responsibility. I learned my lesson. I won't do it again.

This troubles me more, the response than the actual misdeed. Because it really undercuts his credibility as a leader.

KEILAR: Congressman Don Bacon, thank you so much for being with us. It's a very big day there on the Hill. We appreciate it.

BACON: Thank you.

KEILAR: And coming up, a panel of vaccine advisers handpicked by RFK Jr. have just delayed a vote on whether to change the childhood vaccine schedule after expressing confusion about what exactly they were voting on. We have a live report from the CDC next.

[13:25:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: Breaking news into CNN, vaccine advisers to the CDC are postponing a vote on changes to the way that children are vaccinated. They'll now vote tomorrow on whether to shift the timing of hepatitis vaccinations, a change that many public health officials fear may put kids' health and lives in jeopardy. CNN's Meg Tirrell joins us now.

Meg, what happened?

MEG TIRRELL, CNN MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Boris, there's just tremendous confusion among the advisers on this committee about what exactly they were voting on. One of the advisers noted that the voting language had changed maybe three times in the last 72 hours.

And they weren't even clear on what the language was in the most recent iteration that they were going to be asked to discuss and then cast this very influential vote on this afternoon. And so after a lot of back and forth and some frustration among the members that, you know, they hadn't worked out this language, they finally voted to table this until tomorrow morning. And we should note that this was already tabled from the September meeting when they couldn't agree on the language they were going to vote on then.

And so we are seeing some of the chaos and the confusion at these meetings that we'd seen in the previous two, because in part, this is an entirely new group of advisers that was put in place this year after Robert F. Kennedy Jr. fired the entire previous panel -- guys.

SANCHEZ: And Meg, the panel, again, a panel on vaccines, they heard from an atmospheric scientist today. Why?

TIRRELL: Yes, there's been a lot of criticism of some of the panelists who have been invited to present at this meeting. So there was one professor this morning who is an atmospheric scientist who gave a presentation about hepatitis B epidemiology, essentially. That was criticized as she is not a traditional expert in this subject matter.

There was another presentation from a recently hired CDC staffer who has written some controversial papers and called himself a CDC critic before coming to join the agency. He presented on vaccine safety for the hepatitis B vaccine. Traditionally, we hear these presentations from CDC staffers who, you know, make up the CDC Vaccine Safety Office, for example.