Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Supreme Court Agrees to Decide If Trump May End Birthright Citizenship; Consumer Spending Stalls In September Amid Stubborn Inflation; Consumer Spending Stalls In September Amid Stubborn Inflation; Federal Judge In Florida Orders Unsealing of Grand Jury Records In Epstein Investigation; D.C. Pipe Bomb Suspect Did Not Enter A Plea At First Hearing; CDC Panel Votes To Drop Universal Hepatitis B Vaccination For Newborns; Army OB-GYN Accused Of Sexual Misconduct Now In Jail; U.S. Launches New Strike On Alleged Drug Boat Amid Growing Scrutiny; Admiral Bradley Told Lawmakers Survivors Didn't Radio For Help; Inflation Gauge Fed Uses For Its Target Rate Rose 0.3 Percent in September. Aired 2-2:30p ET

Aired December 05, 2025 - 14:00   ET

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

[14:00:00]

JOAN BISKUPIC, CNN CHIEF SUPREME COURT ANALYST: People who are here on temporary status and who have had children, immigrant advocacy groups. This could potentially affect hundreds of thousands of babies born in the U.S. every year, Brianna. So we'll hear those arguments. They'll both make their -- each side of the case. And then, as I said, likely by the end of June.

Now, I've really tried to convey what a major step this was of all the Trump executive orders that have taken place since January 20th, this one is probably the most audacious. And that is actually not a judgment that's too farfetched because even the Trump lawyers have talked about it as a novel and sensitive thing that he's doing here because no one has ever tried to roll back something that's been in place since 1868 in the 14th Amendment.

So I have to say just at this point, having not even heard the arguments that will be presented to the court, they have a very steep mountain to climb if they think they're going to get even this conservative court to rule for them, Brianna.

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN CO-ANCHOR OF "CNN NEWS CENTRAL": Yeah, so true. And very interesting that they've decided to hear the arguments because whatever they say is going to be very, very important. Joan, thank you so much.

BISKUPIC: Yes. And if I could just --

KEILAR: Yeah, go on.

BISKUPIC: I just want to mention one thing, Brianna. Every lower court judge who has heard an early version of this case has ruled against the Trump administration.

KEILAR: Yeah. And we'll see if the court goes along the same route. Joan Biskupic live on this very important news. Thank you. And a new hour of "CNN News Central" starts right now.

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN CO-ANCHOR OF "CNN NEWS CENTRAL": The man suspected of planning pipe bombs in Washington, D.C. almost five years ago, making his first court appearance as we're learning new details of his conversation with FBI investigators, what they could reveal about a possible motive. Plus, a move that some experts say is dangerous and will cause generational harm. Vaccine advisers to the CDC voting in favor of abandoning universal Hepatitis B vaccination for newborns. And later, newly released data showing inflation ticking up as consumer spending stalls. What this could do to the next Fed rate decision. We're following these major developing stories and many more, all coming away right here on "CNN News Central."

KEILAR: We have Breaking News. A federal judge in Florida just ordered the unsealing of the grand jury transcripts and records in the Jeffrey Epstein investigation. CNN's Kara Scannell is following this story. Kara, tell us what exactly we're talking about when we're talking about what's being unsealed.

KARA SCANNELL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Good to be with you, Brianna. So this is the first of three judges that the Justice Department has asked to unseal records since the passage of the Epstein Transparency Act last month. And this is the first judge to rule. It's a judge in Florida who oversaw a grand jury process involving the investigation into Jeffrey Epstein back in the early 2000s by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida.

Compared with the other two cases, the ones in New York, dealing with the 2019 investigation into Jeffrey Epstein and then the investigation into Ghislaine Maxwell, there has been a lot less discussion in the court documents about what these files do contain. In the New York cases, they've been explicit that it involves grand jury transcripts which were, just in one case, one federal agent, another case, two law enforcement agents who went to the grand jury summarizing testimony.

But across all three cases, they're also asking for the lifting of a protective order which would mean an order covering all these other documents, which could include financial records, travel records, civil lawsuits, civil transcripts. The details of what is encompassed in the Florida case is less clear than in the New York cases where they explicitly say it would involve these financial records, travel records, search warrant returns. The New York cases though also include the Florida case because all those materials went up to New York when they picked up the investigation into Epstein and Maxwell a few years ago.

So, it's possible we could see the early parts of this investigation, early parts of that record unsealed. A lot of that has come out through other lawsuits, civil litigation involving some of the survivors, and other -- and through the course of the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell. So it's still a little murky about the breadth of the material that we will see that will be released. DOJ is up against the 30-day deadline under the law to make these files public later this month. And also, there are two requests pending in New York for the later investigations and the judges could rule on those soon. Brianna? KEILAR: Kara Scannell, thank you for the very latest there. Boris?

SANCHEZ: Breaking News from the first court appearance of the suspected D.C. pipe bomber. We are learning from her colleagues in court that 30-year-old Brian Cole Jr. did not enter a plea after the judge read him his rights. This first court appearance happening as the FBI says Cole has been speaking with them.

[14:05:00]

Sources tell CNN that he said he believed the 2020 election was rigged. CNN Senior Justice Correspondent Evan Perez is with us. And Evan, first, what more are we learning about what's transpired in federal court?

EVAN PEREZ, CNN SENIOR JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Well, what we know is this was his first appearance, and so he's going to have another one in a few weeks. He did not enter a plea. He has a new lawyer now representing him. And so this process will begin. But what we know is over the last 24 hours, since his arrest yesterday in Woodbridge at his parents' home, that he sat for hours of interviews with the FBI. He provided a number of statements during the course of those interviews. And one of them is this view that he had that in 2020, the 2020 election had been stolen.

Now, that's of course a claim that President Trump was making at that time. It was also a claim that brought all those thousands, tens of thousands of people to Washington for the 'Stop The Steal' rallies and of course led to the ransacking of the U.S. Capitol, the attack on the U.S. Capitol on January 6th, which was about -- just about the time that these two pipe bombs that Cole is alleged to have placed at the RNC building and the DNC building were discovered.

So, it provides perhaps for the first time an indication of a possible motive for this. There's still a lot of work for the investigators to do because one of the things we heard from the FBI and certainly from the prosecutors, is that they still have to go through a lot of the evidence, including stuff related to his cell phone, some of the purchases of the bomb components that he has alleged to have amassed over a period of months. All of that will go into perhaps additional charges that the attorney general says are incoming soon.

SANCHEZ: And you alluded to this, I wanted to ask if there was more regarding what he has told investigators, because you have the FBI Deputy Director, Dan Bongino saying that Cole had spoken with them at length.

PEREZ: Right. So he spent hours with the FBI. And one of the things that's very interesting about this is we were anticipating that he might show up in court yesterday. And we were told eventually, after waiting all day at the courthouse, that he was not appearing which was an indication that there was some movement behind the scenes. Dan Bongino, the Deputy FBI Director, who's been a big force to try to resolve this case, was the first one that actually broke with the protocol and said that he's actually been providing extensive interviews. Now the question is, what do those interviews say. The question is also, did he have a lawyer present? Did he waive his rights? All of those things are going to come into play when this case goes to trial, if it does ever get to trial, in the coming months.

SANCHEZ: We shall see. That hearing expected 10 days from now. Evan Perez, thank you so much. Brianna?

KEILAR: Major controversy at the CDC today, the agency's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices voting to drop recommendations for universal Hepatitis B vaccines for newborns. Those vaccines have been widely given since the early 1990s and now, there is growing concerns about how this vote could impact access to vaccines for families who want to immunize their children. CNN's Meg Tirrell is at the CDC headquarters in Atlanta for this very big story. Meg, what does it mean for the Hep B vaccine moving forward?

MEG TIRRELL, CNN MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, Brianna, so what happened today was a recommendation by these outside advisers to the CDC to remove this universal recommendation for a Hepatitis B birth dose. Now, that suggestion, that recommendation from this group goes to the CDC director. Currently, that's an Acting Director, it's Jim O'Neill, who also is the Deputy Director of the Department of Health and Human Services under Robert F. Kennedy Jr. He is expected to adopt the recommendation. He doesn't have to and there are calls for him not to adopt the recommendation from some outside folks. But if he does that over the next few days, then this becomes CDC policy.

Now, it's really important to note that this does not remove the availability of the Hepatitis B vaccine for anyone. And there are specific changes based on the mother's status for Hepatitis B. So, it basically splits into two different groups. For babies who are born to moms who are Hepatitis B positive or whose status for the virus is unknown, there's actually no change to the recommendation for them. They are still recommended to get that newborn dose while they're in the hospital of the Hepatitis B vaccine.

It's for moms who test negative for Hepatitis B, where the recommendations here are changing and it changes from a universal recommendation that those babies should still get this vaccine in the hospital, to saying the parents along with the healthcare providers can make that decision about whether to get the vaccine at birth. And if they don't get it, they suggest not getting this vaccine up until two months of age.

Now, outside folks are calling, and even some internal folks on this committee are saying that this could be very, very problematic.

[14:10:00]

And Senator Bill Cassidy, who is himself a doctor, posted on X some of the issues with this. He says, "As a liver doctor who has treated people with Hepatitis B for decades, this change to the vaccine schedule is a mistake. The Hepatitis B vaccine is safe and effective." He says the birth dose is a recommendation, not a mandate. So it wasn't required that people got this at birth already. And so, what's really introducing here is some confusion into the system that folks are worried will lead to babies being unprotected and exposed to a virus that can have real health consequences, without making them safer. Brianna?

KEILAR: Yeah, really interesting to see the Senator's reaction to this. Meg Tirrell live for us from CDC headquarters in Atlanta. Thank you.

Still to come, some new details on the second strike back in September that killed survivors from a suspected drug vote as the U.S. carries out a new attack on a suspected drug boat in the Eastern Pacific. Plus, some important economic data delayed by the government shutdown, it is now out. What it says about consumer spending and inflation. And then later, an update on that Army Gynecologist who has been accused of sexual misconduct, why he's now being held in a county jail in Texas. We'll have that and much more coming up on "CNN News Central."

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:15:50]

SANCHEZ: The U.S. military carrying out another deadly strike on a suspected drug boat in the Eastern Pacific. Here you can see the boat being hit in a video posted to social media by U.S. Central Command. That video will come up in a second. The Pentagon says that four people were killed. This comes as we get new details about that double-tap strike in the Caribbean back in September that some officials have called a potential war crime.

CNN has learned that Admiral Mitch Bradley, who oversaw that follow-up strike, told lawmakers during classified briefings that the survivors did not appear to have a radio or other communications devices that they could have used to call for help. Instead, after consulting with a military lawyer who said a follow-up strike would be legal, Bradley ordered the second strike because part of the boat was still afloat with cocaine and the survivors who bobbed in the water for some 41 minutes could have, in theory, made it to safety and continued their operation.

We're joined now by CNN's Zach Cohen. Zach, walk us through the new details that you're learning.

ZACHARY COHEN, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL SECURITY REPORTER: Yeah, Boris, we have the most fulsome picture that we've had to date of what happened on September 2nd during this strike. But really no -- we're no closer to a consensus as far as lawmakers on Capitol Hill go, as to was this strike legal or was it a potential war crime? Critically, we're learning from sources though that Admiral Bradley told lawmakers behind closed doors yesterday that this crew did not appear to have any sort of radio or communications device. Meaning that they could not have made a distress call and potentially get rescued.

Now, that's important because it undercuts what we've heard from defense officials privately, at least as far back as September. They essentially tried to push back on this idea that there was anything wrong with the strike because it was --they were legitimate targets as they could have radioed for help. We're now knowing that Bradley told lawmakers that was not the case. We're also learning new details about what actually happened and the decision making that went into launching a second follow-on strike, of course, which is the center of this entire controversy.

Admiral Bradley walking lawmakers through that process, saying the first strike appeared to cut the boat in half, at which point, military commanders including Bradley, watched for about an hour as these two survivors floated in the ocean, clinging to the wreckage. And ultimately, after consulting with his military lawyer in the room, Bradley ordered that second strike. But again, huge debates still from among lawmakers as to the legality of this. I want you to listen to what Tom Cotton though, said earlier today when he was pressed on this new revelation about the lack of a radio and what he still thinks now.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOHN BERMAN, CNN CO-ANCHOR OF "CNN NEWS CENTRAL": Did you see any evidence of them trying to use a radio?

SEN. TOM COTTON, (R-AR): No, John, but they were clearly not incapacitated. They were not distressed. One guy took his t-shirt off like he was sunbathing. They were trying to get the boat back up and to continue their mission of spreading these drugs all across America.

BERMAN: Did they get the boat back up?

COTTON: That's what they were doing and that's why Admiral Bradley ordered the second strike. No, they didn't because we killed them and we were right to kill them. And Admiral Bradley was totally justified in the decision he made.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COHEN: So one source familiar with the briefing had a very different opinion, said that rationale that they could have essentially floated to safety was (expletive) insane. So, Democrats really pushing back on that notion. There's a lot of debate still, but meantime, Hegseth and the White House and the administration still carrying out these strikes, announcing a new one yesterday.

SANCHEZ: Zach Cohen, thank you so much for that update. Brianna?

KEILAR: We have new developments in what is potentially one of the largest sexual misconduct scandals in U.S. military history. And the man at the center of it, Army Major and Gynecologist, Blaine McGraw, who's described in a civil lawsuit as a predator in uniform. He is now in jail in Texas. An army spokesperson says McGraw broke the terms set by his chain of command on where he can and cannot go. There is no evidence to suggest he violated a military protective order related to alleged victims, the Army says.

The spokesperson telling CNN in accordance with the Uniform Code of MILITARY JUSTICE, a neutral and detached military magistrate will conduct a pretrial confinement review within seven days and the magistrate will determine whether continued confinement is warranted. McGraw has been detained, though not arrested, but the timeline of that review means early next week, the military could face a decision to either release McGraw from jail or criminally charge him.

[14:20:00]

An attorney from McGraw tells CNN his client did not violate orders, saying "He was authorized exceptions to the restriction, which incidentally was completely unnecessary. We've asserted our right to a speedy trial." He goes on to say the imposition of pretrial confinement is a complete abuse of discretion, but a lawyer for at least 70 McGraw accusers said his clients are relieved that McGraw is behind bars and insists McGraw did disobey orders.

Military officials at Fort Hood suspended McGraw last month. The civil suit against him accuses him of repeatedly groping a female patient and secretly recording intimate videos of her during a recent pelvic and breast exam. So far, more than 75 women claim they were victims of his sexual misconduct, according to two lawyers representing accusers. Fort Hood says the criminal investigation is ongoing.

My colleagues, Haley Britzky, Isabelle Khurshudyan and I have done exclusive reporting on another alleged recording incident that sources say prompted the most recent investigation into Major McGraw. We've learned that Army investigators have sent letters to more than 2,500 patients McGraw came into contact with at Fort Hood, but also at Tripler Army Medical Center in Hawaii where he was previously stationed.

Coming up, the Fed's favorite inflation gauge hitting its highest level since April 2024 and consumer spending cooled in September. We'll have a look at that latest economic data, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:26:10]

SANCHEZ: A highly anticipated inflation report delayed by the government shutdown has just been released by the Commerce Department. The inflation gauge used by Federal Reserve shows the annual rate rose from 2.7 to 2.8 in September. And while consumer sentiment improved, it remains at historic lows. The high cost of living inflation still weighing down American households.

KEILAR: The reports release coming ahead of the Fed's meeting to determine interest rates next week. So let's continue this conversation and dig into this with Scott Lincicome. He is Vice President of General Economics and Trade at the Cato Institute. Scott, thank you so much for being with us here. Talk to us about what is driving overall inflation here?

SCOTT LINCICOME, VICE PRESIDENT OF GENERAL ECONOMICS AND TRADE, CATO INSTITUTE: Well, we're still seeing inflation from tariffs, a lot of higher prices coming from durable goods, from clothing, and other goods items that Americans need. And so, that has an effect on consumer spending, especially lower-income consumers have to spend more of their budgets on the things they need and that's why consumers end up spending more money but not getting more stuff.

SANCHEZ: Just to that point, it is further evidence that the K-shaped economy is getting even more K-shaped.

LINCICOME: Yeah. And tariffs are a classic case of being what we call regressive, meaning they disproportionately harm consumers at the bottom end because wealthier consumers spend more on services, more on investments than other things that really don't get hit by taxes on imports, at least not directly. The lower-income consumers, they get hit more by that. So again, they end up spending more money for the same stuff, that means they have less discretionary income to spend on other things, and that means a lower standard of living.

KEILAR: And there's a separate report out today from the University of Michigan that shows consumer sentiment in December is up 2.3 points. How are Americans feeling about the economy right now? Why does that matter so much?

LINCICOME: Yeah, they're still not happy about it. A slight improvement lately maybe because of they are in the holiday spirit, but overall, you're still seeing pretty depressed numbers. And what's really interesting about the sentiment numbers is this is -- some of it is partisanship, right? When the different president in office, suddenly the sentiment numbers flip by the parties. But independents are also gloomy overall. And I think that's just kind of, it gives you an indication of what the economy is overall. It's not terrible, but it's not great.

SANCHEZ: So, how should the Fed read this data? Especially given that the last time they met, they were kind of playing with an arm behind their back from a data perspective. The government was shut down. They didn't have all the data they needed.

LINCICOME: Yeah. And they're still, unfortunately in that position because remember, these data are lagged. These are September data and we're in December. We don't get new jobs numbers until a week after the Fed meets. So, the Fed -- and tariffs are supposedly what we call transitory, meaning the Fed is supposed to look through those things. But with inflation still elevated above that 2 percent benchmark that the Fed wants and with jobs kind of weak, but they don't know exactly how, it's a really tough spot for the Fed. If they cut now, those cuts are prospective, but they're looking backward, way backward with that data. So, it's not a great place to be in.

KEILAR: So, how should the president be looking at this moment and how should Republicans, as they are having some, I guess, cautionary tales here of late electorally, right? And they're looking towards the midterm elections, the president is saying that this affordability crisis is fake. You are hearing different rhetoric even from the vice president. So, how should all of these folks be looking at this?

LINCICOME: Well, the president has started to, I think, at least behind closed doors, take the affordability issue more seriously. They cut some of those tariffs recently on food items. Ideally, I would love to see them cut a lot more of those tariffs, but I seriously doubt the president is going to do that.