Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Jan. 6 Select Cmte. Issues Subpoenas To Four Trump Loyalist; Bogus Audit Confirms Biden Defeated Trump In Maricopa County, A.Z.; CDC Breaks With Advisers, Backs Booster For Frontline Workers. Aired 9-9:30a ET

Aired September 24, 2021 - 09:00   ET

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

[09:00:00]

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: Sunday night at 8:00 Eastern Time. And CNN's coverage continues right now.

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN ANCHOR: Very good Friday morning to you. I'm Jim Sciutto.

ERICA HILL, CNN ANCHOR: And I'm Erica Hill.

In the battle against the big lie it is a victory for the truth. But let's be honest here, this fight is far from over. The results are in from that so called election audit in Arizona. And it shows once again what we all know --

SCIUTTO: Yes.

HILL: -- that Trump lost the state of Arizona.

That conspiracy, though, is moving forward in Texas. The governor in that state cave into President Trump's demands for more sham recounts. We'll have more on that in just a moment.

SCIUTTO: It's propaganda and it works. But first, the House Select Committee investigating the January 6 insurrection issued its first round of subpoenas for documents and testimony. They want to hear from four of Trump's closest advisors, Mark Meadows, Dan Scavino, Steve Bannon, and Kash Patel. All have been called to testify before lawmakers beginning next month.

Members of the Committee say they want to know what Trump's inner circle knew about the planning leading up to the Capitol attack and how they made decisions as the violence unfolded that day.

Let's begin on Capitol Hill with CNN Capitol Hill Reporter, Melanie Zanona.

So, Melanie, what more do we know about what the committee is hoping to learn from them? And I mean, are they going to challenge these subpoenas?

MELANIE ZANONA, CNN CAPITOL HILL REPORTER: Yes, well, the select committee is definitely kicking this investigation into high gear. These subpoenas are targeting some of the highest ranking staffers in the White House during Trump's time in office. You have Mark Meadows, Chief of Staff, Dan Scavino, Deputy Chief of Staff, Steve Bannon, an advisor who really had the former president's ear and Kash Patel, who was chief of staff to the acting defense secretary. So this offers a real window into the direction of the investigation.

They are not only looking at the planning surrounding the efforts to overturn the election on January 6, but they're also looking at the response efforts from the Pentagon as the riots unfolded.

Now, as far as the calendar and a timeline, the committee wants documents handed over by October 7. And they also want depositions with these people, so they want to hear from them directly. And they have asked that Bannon and Patel appear before the committee by October 14, and they want Meadows and Scavino to appear before the committee on October 15.

And, Jim, to your point, the big question now is whether these people actually comply. And if history is any indication, they are likely to fight these subpoenas and try to claim executive privilege.

Kash Patel did put out a statement yesterday saying he is disappointed but not surprised and suggested that the committee violated some long standing protocols. But look, the committee undeterred. Adam Schiff, one of the committee members, yesterday said that they could even hold people in criminal contempt if they don't comply. And take a listen to what else he had to say about the committee's efforts.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. ADAM SCHIFF (D-CA), CHAIRMAN, INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE: We're moving with great alacrity, and essentially, no one is off the table. We're going to determine what went wrong in the lead up to January 6. We're going to find out who was involved, who was knowledgeable, what roles they played in the planning.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ZANONA: So clearly, this investigation is heating up. These subpoenas are a big, big step. But there is still a very long road ahead. Jim. Erica.

HILL: Yes, that there is. Melanie Zanona, thank you.

Let's bring in now Elie Honig, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York.

So Elie, as we look at this, you know, as Melanie said, things are heating up, but, right? So as we get to this point, the two choices here are basically either they comply or they defy. Where do you think we see this going?

ELIE HONIG, FORMER FEDERAL AND STATE PROSECUTOR: All my money is on defy.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

HONIG: I think that's clear. And then the question is, what is the committee going to do? How is Congress going to respond to that?

They really have two options here. One, Congress can find, let's say Steve Bannon, for example, if he defies subpoena, they can find him in contempt, and then refer that over to the Justice Department, which has the option hasn't been done in the past --

SCIUTTO: Yes.

HONIG: -- that has the option of bringing a criminal prosecution for content. The second thing that the committee can do is go into the courts and say to a federal judge, we want an order instructing Steve Bannon to come in and testify under penalty of criminal prosecution. So those are the two options.

SCIUTTO: What's the timeline, though?

HONIG: Yes.

SCIUTTO: Because the Trump playbook, of course, is go to court and drag it out. Right? You know, run out the clock. Can you do that here? I mean, by the way, the Republicans could control the House in a year and a half.

HONIG: It's a great question. And Trump has shown before he has won by losing, he has lost in court, but things have dragged out for so long that public attention has moved on, Congress has moved on.

So, if they go to a judge, given prior history that took -- look, Don McGahn that was in the courts for two years.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

HONIG: Now, part of the fault there is on Congress, it took them four months to go to court. This committee better be ready to go quickly.

But it's also on judges. I mean, judges have dockets, but judges can control their own dockets.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

HONIG: If you get -- if you're a federal judge, you get a case relating to battle of Congress versus the White House, put that up top of your docket, please.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

HILL: One would hope.

SCIUTTO: Yes. I mean, by the time. By the time Don McGahn testified, no one was paying attention anymore, right?

[09:05:02] HONIG: Exactly.

SCIUTTO: By the way Trump was out of office. I mean that's why this strategy works.

HILL: Right. And it absolutely works.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

HILL: You know, I do want to get your take, too, on this sort of reaction, I guess, that we heard from Steve Bannon, right, a reaction to some of what is in the new book "Peril." He appeared to confirm that he had said, quote, we're going to "kill the Biden presidency in the crib." Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ROBERT COSTA, CO-AUTHOR, "PERIL": "We need to kill the Biden presidency in the crib." That was the phrase based on our reporting in that conversation.

STEVE BANNON, FORMER ADVISER TO PRESIDENT TRUMP: Yes, because his legitimacy. Just let this go with this illegitimate regime is doing. It killed itself. OK? But we told you from the very beginning, just expose it, just expose it, never back down, never give up and this thing will implode.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HILL: So he said a quick yes there, right, after that bite that they played. Is that, you know, just political posturing? Is it's just rhetoric? Are there any legal ramifications?

HONIG: Well, so first of all, this is exactly why Steve Bannon got himself a subpoena, right? I mean, if you see this or you're aware of this.

I mean, if I'm an investigator with the January 6 committee, I want to bring him in right away. I want him to answer questions.

And by the way, one of the things I would put out there sort of atmospherically is you're willing to say things into a microphone, like we just saw Steve Bannon, why would you not be willing to come in and testify under oath? If all of you, Kash Patel, Bannon, Scavino have nothing to hide. Mark Meadows, come on in, right? Tell us what you know.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

HONIG: What's with all the hiding? So, I think that'll be a political dynamic that sort of overlays, all the legal battles we're about to see.

HILL: Yes.

SCIUTTO: Trouble is, a lot of people have already made up their mind, right? I mean, as to whether the election was -- I mean, huge majority Republicans believe what Bannon said, the elections are legitimate.

Elie Honig, always good to have you. Thanks very much.

Well, Joe Biden won Arizona in the 2020 presidential election. That's a fact, we already knew it. But many months, millions of dollars later, Arizona Republicans behind what they called an audit have to admit now to that fact as well, a draft report of their findings, even added votes to the final Biden tally in Maricopa County, that is won by even more than we thought.

HILL: CNN's Kyung Lah is in Phoenix.

So, Kyung, I'm going to go out on a limb here and say despite the fact, right, that bad draft report showed us once again that Joe Biden won, in fact, more votes. This is likely not settled for a lot of folks.

KYUNG LAH, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, it's definitely not settled for a lot of folks. And it's not even settled for today, really, because what you're talking about there, Jim and Erica, is a draft report. It's a report that we were able to get our hands on yesterday along with a lot of other media organizations.

And so, what is going to be happening later today is a final report will be presented to the Arizona Senate. It's going to look very much like what we know. And the big headline out of this, as you underscored, is the hand recount. The information from that hand recount shows that Joe Biden got 99 more votes, and Donald Trump actually got 261 fewer votes in 2020, that's compared to what Maricopa County did.

I need to warn you that having watched this hand recount up close, we should approach anything out of this draft report or final report with some healthy skepticism. And having read the draft report, there's a lot of errors in it. But it did not stop Maricopa County from issuing this tweet, this response, saying quote, "The hashtag AZaudit draft report from cyber ninjas confirms the county's canvass of the 2020 General Election was accurate and the candidates certified as the winners did, in fact win. Unfortunately, the report is also littered with errors and faulty conclusions about how Maricopa County conducted the 2020 general election. Board members and election officials will pay close attention to what said at Friday's scheduled Senate hearing and share facts as needed."

So, what is going to be happening in just about six, seven hours is that you're going to see something that looks very much like a real Senate hearing. There's going to be testimony by the cyber ninjas, the contractor hired to do this independent, so called independent review, but it is going to be according to a number of election officials we've spoken to, Erica and Jim, a lot of misinformation and errors. So, approach this cautiously.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

HILL: Yes. Kyung, appreciate it. Thank you.

Well, even as former President Trump's election lies are exposed again. That playbook is still clearly in use.

The latest example Texas Governor Greg Abbott caving to Trump's demands announcing via the Secretary of State's Office a quote, "full and comprehensive audit." That review will target as you see on your screen there four Texas counties. Counties, which include major cities including Houston, Dallas, Fort Worth, and Plano. Texas, of course, is also important to note here. It's a state that Donald Trump won in 2020.

[09:10:05]

SCIUTTO: And in Colorado, the Secretary of State there is moving forward with a suit to remove a Republican clerk Mesa County and her deputy. Tina Peters is accused of facilitating a security breach that led to the leak of voting machine logins, that and other confidential information went on to appear in a QAnon video.

Joining us now, CNN's Senior Political Analyst, John Avlon, he's also the host of "Reality Check with John Avlon: Extremist Beat," a new weekly video series on CNN digital.

John, I mean, the thing about these audits, and by the way, notably, those targeted counties in Texas are blue dots in that state.

JOHN AVLON, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Yes.

SCIUTTO: I mean, they're zeroing in on, you know, regardless of the statewide election.

AVLON: Color me (ph) shocked, Jim.

SCIUTTO: The results don't matter here, though, do they not? I mean, this -- it's about propaganda. It's about perpetuating the lie and it almost doesn't matter what you find.

AVLON: Well, it does matter. But this is part of the disinformation reports.

SCIUTTO: Right.

AVLON: Right? I mean, this has always been about sowing the seeds of doubt and reducing confidence, not only in the 2020 election, but in our democracy.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

AVLON: That's why this matters so much. Now, the reason -- the fact that even this partisan sham fraud it by the cyber ninjas couldn't come up with a tally that fulfilled their wishes with regards to hand recount should matter to the extent that every single person, politician, fan boy, fan girl online who was burdened our hopes in this needs to recognize the fact that the results didn't bear out what they were told. They had been lied to from the beginning to the end. Full stop.

HILL: But the problem with that, right, is the people who don't believe this, believe that the lying is actually coming from the truth tellers. And that has been set up, right? And to your point --

AVLON: Yes.

HILL: -- it's not only questioning democracy, but it's also setting up this playbook for use in 2022.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

HILL: For use in 2024.

AVLON: Correct.

HILL: And that could have far more damaging --

AVLON: Right.

HILL: -- impact.

AVLON: And this is why the fact their hand, you know, hand recounts, to the extent they've been done, they don't need to be done everywhere, which should offer something called the truth, which is being called into question.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

AVLON: There is such a thing as facts. There is such a thing as truth. But it is an effort to decrease people's faith in democracy.

And what's being set up for '22 and '24 isn't just this cynicism about whether elections matter, but this election subversion --

SCIUTTO: Yes.

AVLON: -- that is being baked in the cake.

SCIUTTO: To empower the ability to overturn successfully.

AVLON: Corrects.

SCIUTTO: That's a thing. And changes -- substantive changes have been made in states that would allow partisan legislators --

AVLON: That's right.

SCIUTTO: -- for instance --

HILL: Texas.

SCIUTTO: -- to overturn nonpartisan, I mean, that's in the Arizona --

AVLON: Yes.

SCIUTTO: -- law, right? There's a nullification process.

AVLON: That's right. You want nonpartisan, people overseeing elections. Elections are being made more partisan. Now, I want to recommend an op-ed in the Wall Street -- in "The Washington Post" --

SCIUTTO: Yes.

AVLON: -- by Robert Kagan, which really says the crisis is here.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

AVLON: We are in a position right now where we need to defend our democracy against this information and structural attempts to subvert the outcome.

SCIUTTO: We're not, though. A party -- the party has succumbed to the big lie.

AVLON: One political party has. That political party is not the country.

Here's the important thing to remember, we're not actually a 50-50 Nation, as you know, right? You know, if 70 percent of Republicans believe the election was illegitimate, which is false, which is demonstrably false, that is still only around a quarter of Americans. That is far too many.

The Republican Party has succumbed to laws. They're culpable for that. But that does not mean that half of America believes this BS (ph).

HILL: It doesn't. But to your point in that piece, which Jim and I were talking about -- (INAUDIBLE) again?

SCIUTTO: That dude next to me. The dude next to me.

HILL: Which Jim and I were talking earlier this morning in the post, it really does set that up.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

HILL: But what it also does is make the case that it's time for people to step up. So if there is that larger majority, right, it doesn't have to be just lawmakers. But it has to be the average American citizen who says, this is not OK. I'm recognizing it's not OK. And I want to do something about it.

AVLON: Our democracy is on the line. If you are a flag waving patriotic American, you have an obligation to defend our democracy that extends well beyond party, let alone propaganda networks or partisans on T.V., trying to sell you their profit from their polarization. This is a full court press to defend our democracy and it's happening -- it needs to happen now in the face of these lies.

SCIUTTO: It could happen here. Right? I mean, look up that documentary, watch it, tells a story. It could happen here.

AVLON: Yes. It could.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

AVLON: Thanks. Yes.

HILL: My friend, thank you.

Just in to CNN, President Biden set to speak about the COVID-19 response this hour. This as we're hearing more mixed messages on booster shots. The CDC director overriding the CDC's Advisory Committee weighing in on who should get that third dose.

Plus, Brian Laundrie now a wanted man. Officially the FBI issuing an arrest warrant for him, but not in connection with Gabby Petito's death.

SCIUTTO: And overnight, we learned the name of the woman who was killed in a mass shooting at a Tennessee grocery store. Another 13 people shot there. Hear the harrowing details of how it all played out.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:19:19]

SCIUTTO: In just about 30 minutes, President Biden will speak about the pandemic response just as the CDC director gave the green light for a broader group of vaccinated Americans to get a booster shot.

HILL: Dr. Rochelle Walensky now recommending that third shot of Pfizer for adults who are 65 and older and immunocompromised as well as people who are at increased risk for catching the virus. For example, those who work on the frontlines in a hospital or those who work in schools.

And it's that last group that's in line with the FDA, but it's a step further than what the CDC's own advisors recommended this week. CNN's Kristen Holmes joining us now.

So, what more do we know about Dr. Walensky's thinking? What went into this decision here for her to go farther and sort of override her own advisory committee?

[09:20:05]

KRISTEN HOLMES. CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Good morning Erica and Jim.

Well, look, that is a big question here because as you said, this is an incredibly rare move. If you talk to health officials, the entire reason for the agency's independent vaccine board is to have an outside group looking at and assessing data to make the recommendation.

And almost always, the CDC follows the recommendations of this board. But as you said, in this case, Walensky went a step further.

So, let's take a look at what the CDC's full guidances here for boosters. They say that you should get the shot at least six months after the second shot. The people who should get it are people 65 and older, long term care residents, people 50 to 64 with underlying medical conditions. The people who may get it, people 18 to 49 with underlying medical conditions, as well as that group you just mentioned, 18 to 64 year olds at increased risk of exposure to COVID- 19.

Now that went further than what the board said. The board actually voted against that group.

Now here is how Walensky described her decision. In a statement she said, "As CDC Director, it is my job to recognize where our actions can have the greatest impact. At CDC, we are tasked with analyzing complex, often imperfect data to make concrete recommendations that optimize health. In a pandemic, even with uncertainty, we must take actions that we anticipate will do the greatest good."

Of course, this makes perfect sense. But the problem here is there was already a level of confusion. You had vaccine hesitancy, not just with people getting the first and second shot, but also around the booster. People saying, I already got vaccinated, does this mean it doesn't work? So there was explanations going out about that.

Then you had the issue with the rollout, the White House saying it would be done this week, then obviously the FDA not having approved it, the FDA approving it. And now this back and forth within the CDC.

So the big hope here is that there will be some sort of clarification, as you said, the President will be speaking about this shortly. But it couldn't come at a more critical time when the mission here is to get shots in arms. And everyone really would like to be on the same page, particularly these health officials I'm talking to.

HILL: Yes, I would imagine it would certainly make their jobs easier if everybody would be on the same page, right?

Kristen Holmes, appreciate it. Thank you.

Joining us now to help break it down, Dr. Carlos del Rio. He's Executive Associate Dean of the Emory University School of Medicine at Grady Health System.

And I just want to pick up, Dr. del Rio, where Kristen just left off, right? She's talking about, you know, the official she's talking to would like to see a more unified, cohesive message. Are you concerned at all that with this move from Dr. Walensky, which, you know, a lot of people have said they agree with even if it is overriding her own advisors, but that this, you know, further undermines, in some ways, the credibility of the CDC because there is this consistent messaging confusion.

DR. CARLOS DEL RIO, EXECUTIVE ASSOC. DEAN EMORY UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AT GRADY: Good morning, Erica.

No, I don't think so. In fact, what Dr. Walensky has done is actually aligned her agency with what the FDA recommendations. Where the FDA recommendations were actually then taken up by the ACIP, and the ACIP rejected one of the FDA recommendations. So this actually aligns the CDC and the FDA.

I think what's very confusing for people is, you know, is -- the good news is transparency, you can watch this meetings, you can hear the discussions in social media. The bad news, it's really hard to see how the sausage is made, right? It's really confusing. And you think that people don't know what they're talking about when the reality is that there's a lot of uncertainty here. And I think the right decisions were made based on the data we currently have and based on where we are in this pandemic.

SCIUTTO: So, the focus now are on folks at increased risk, right? People immunocompromised, also people increased risk of getting infected, like folks who work in schools or healthcare workers, that kind of thing. Do you believe that after you serve that group with boosters, that eventually the recommendation will be for others because there is some data that shows waning efficacy of the vaccine after a number of months?

DEL RIO: Jim, I think you're right. I think one thing that we are slowly learning with this vaccines is that they're really probably not a two dose vaccine. They're more like a three dose vaccine.

There are other vaccines like that, the hepatitis vaccine, for example, is the vaccine that you give at zero, one and six months, it may be that this is the exact same thing with this vaccines. We still need to know that. And that may be what a full series will be required.

But the reality right now is I'm more concerned about two things. Number one is, you know, this only covers people that received a course of Pfizer. If you received Moderna or Johnson and Johnson, this recommendations do not apply to you, and there'll be other recommendations happening later. But right now the people that receive Moderna and Johnson and Johnson feel a little bit left out.

And then the second group that I really think we need to get vaccinated is, let's not forget that there are over 75 million Americans that are yet to be vaccinated.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

DEL RIO: And if we're to control this pandemic, we got to get them vaccinated.

HILL: In terms of, you know, picking up on both of those points, at this point what do you think is left? I mean, what other tools do we have in the toolbox? I know we ask this question a lot, but given where we are right now as a country to get some of those 10s of millions of Americans vaccinated who have not yet have the shot.

[09:25:02]

DEL RIO: Well, Erica, I think that, you know, the Biden plan to number one, you know mandate through OSHA vaccinations for employees working in certain jobs and businesses that have more than 100 employees, federal workers, people that work in health care, for example, you know, if you are -- if you receive money from -- in order to participate in Medicare and Medicare, your institution has to mandate vaccines.

I think vaccination mandates are going to make a difference. I think requiring vaccination for travel, for entry into certain events, I think is going to make a difference. At the end of the day, it's going to require that because the reality is there's going to be a group of individuals, that no matter what, are not going to want to get vaccinated.

SCIUTTO: So how much far, let me show you the figure on our screen, 55 percent of the country fully vaccinated. That's somewhat understates it because when you add folks who begun the vaccination process or have one shot it's higher getting to two thirds, children are probably going to get approval for this next month. How close are we to herd immunity?

DEL RIO: Well, it's hard to know, Jim, because you have to also add the people that already gotten infected --

SCIUTTO: Yes.

DEL RIO: -- right? There's certain protection from natural immunity. So you have to add those individuals.

There's some projections from several modeling groups suggesting that between the group that we have immunized and the people that got infected during this Delta wave that, you know, the bad news is that a lot of people got infected. The good news is that a lot of people got infected because now --

SCIUTTO: Yes.

DEL RIO: -- they have immunity. We may be reaching that level of herd immunity. And we need the data to prove that it because it may be according to the modeling we're seeing is that we're not going to have another huge wave like we had right now. So the winter is bad.

And maybe by March, we'll be back to, you know, under 10,000 cases a day and under 100 deaths a day and that would be a --

SCIUTTO: Yes.

DEL RIO: -- good point. Yes.

SCIUTTO: From your lips to God's ears, Dr. Carlos del Rio, we can hope. Thanks so much.

Well, the FBI is now stepping up their efforts to track down Brian Laundrie, the fiance of Gabby Petitto. They have issued a federal warrant for his arrest.

To be clear, though, it's not for her death. It's for other alleged crimes. We're going to have new details, next. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)