Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

January 6 Committee Subpoenas Four People From Trump's Inner Circle; Interview With Representative Pete Aguilar (D-CA); Search For Brian Laundrie In Florida Nature Reserve Enters Second Week; Latest Booster Shot Guidance Leads To Confusion; NYT: Security Team Hired By Britney Spears' Father Secretly Recorded Star In Her Home. Aired 3-4p ET

Aired September 25, 2021 - 15:00   ET

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

[15:00:00]

PHIL MATTINGLY, CNN HOST: The final report from a months' long partisan review of Arizona ballots confirms what we have known for 10 months, that Joe Biden won Maricopa County in Arizona. Even a conspiracy theory driven fake audit that checked ballots for bamboo fibers couldn't invent enough evidence to validate the Trump lie.

Now one would think this would be a nail in the big lies coffin. But that is a reality-based approach to things. And in this world, facts, they don't matter. So the former president now sets his sights on Texas, where everything is bigger, including his victory in the state, making it a bigger lie.

In a letter to Governor Greg Abbott he writes, quote, "Texans know voting fraud occurred in some of their counties. Let's get to the bottom of the 2020 presidential election scam." Now Trump, again, he won Texas, yet it appears the state will comply with his demand for an audit.

And in an attempt to keep the lie alive in Georgia, where are he is under criminal investigation for attempts to overturn the election, he'll hold a rally there tonight, throwing his support behind Herschel Walker, the former NFL star who's running for Senate. But the Trump rally track record tells us we're probably going to hear a whole lot less about Herschel Walker than we will hear about the election fraud nonsense.

Meanwhile, on Capitol Hill, key people who helped fuel the big lie, they're now under the microscope. The select committee investigating the January 6th Capitol riot has issued its firms round of subpoenas, targeting four close aides and allies of former president Donald Trump.

And that's where I want to start. I want to go right to CNN's Sunlen Serfaty. She's on Capitol Hill for us.

And, Sunlen, kind of lay out what's going on right now. Who is subpoenaed and what exactly is the select committee looking for with these subpoenas? SUNLEN SERFATY, CNN WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Phil, they're

really looking for people who were talking to the former president Trump before, during and after the January 6th attacks up here at Capitol Hill, specifically what information was known and being shared within the Trump orbit.

And that is why, as you said, these four first subpoenas from the committee are focused entirely on Trump aides and his closest allies. Mark Meadows, Steve Bannon, former deputy chief of staff Dan Scavino and Kash Patel, former chief of staff for the Defense secretary.

Now these subpoenas issued by the committee compel these people to turn over documents by October 7th. And then they asked them to sit for a deposition in private the following week on October 14th.

Phil, certainly all this indicating and signaling that this committee is now taking this investigation into a much more aggressive phase.

MATTINGLY: Yes, no question about it, Sunlen. Look, one of the big questions I think we've had, particularly those of us like you and myself who've lived through at least the first impeachment of former president Donald Trump, is the idea of invoking executive privilege particularly for a former president.

Do we have any sense right now on if President Biden is going to invoke executive privilege related to any of these documents or potential testimony to Congress?

SERFATY: It's certainly a hot topic and one that White House correspondents last week really peppered the White House press secretary about. Interesting answer in that the White House press secretary Jen Psaki, at first she said we take this matter seriously.

The president has concluded that it would not be appropriate to assert executive privilege. But then she walked that back a bit and clarified her remarks from the White House attempting to essentially clarify that position saying that they would take these requests and they would be handled on a case-by-case basis -- Phil.

MATTINGLY: A lot to play out on that front. A lot of precedent issues as well.

Sunlen Serfaty, great reporting as always. Thanks so much from Capitol Hill.

And also on Capitol Hill, or at least in Washington, I want to get to Congressman Pete Aguilar. He's a Democrat from California. He's a member of the House Select Committee investigating the January 6th insurrection.

Congressman, I want to start, you know, I mentioned the first impeachment and spent a lot of time in a basement in the Capitol complex outside of that process however many years ago it was now. All time has blended together. I think one of the big questions now that subpoenas have gone out is what's the strategy here from the committee perspective of what happens if and most likely when these four individuals rebuff those subpoenas entirely?

REP. PETE AGUILAR (D-CA): Well, we expect individuals to comply. That's what we're out to do is to seek to get the truth, and part of that is having these conversations. But ultimately, we feel that individuals who receive a subpoena should comply with the goals of what we want to accomplish here. But it's important to just step back and to show the American public that steps were taken to keep Donald Trump in power. And we know that those folks specifically around him and the --

MATTINGLY: I think we lost the congressman there. The joys of Zoom in this day and age. We'll see if we can get back to him in a little bit. But right now we're going to take a quick break.

Coming up, new details on the case of Gabby Petito and the reward money for info about her missing fiance's whereabouts is ramping up.

[15:05:06]

You're live in the CNN NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MATTINGLY: Welcome back to CNN NEWSROOM. Congressman Pete Aguilar is back with us now after some technical difficulties.

And Congressman, I want to make clear, you are not one of those who runs away from reporters so this was not an effort to dodge questions unlike some of your colleagues. But I do want to continue kind of where we dropped off. So I think this is an interesting moment right now. I understand what you're saying, there is an expectation that people should respond to subpoenas. That's totally fine and fair. That expectation was blown to heck back in the last impeachment.

So I guess how far are you willing to take this to try and ensure that the subpoenas actually have action tied to them?

AGUILAR: Well, the subpoenas should mean something, absolutely. And you mentioned the dates that were indicated to respond, for the individuals to respond to the subpoena.

[15:10:02]

We have options beyond that. Let's hope for compliance. But keep in mind that we do have those civil and criminal options beyond that. And so we hope it doesn't come to that. But at its core, these are individuals who played a very key role in what was going on at the White House, clearly January 4th, January 5th, new public reporting has indicated reports where they tried to pressure Mike Pence into reading a legal memo that he didn't believe in reportedly.

But then also, Steve Bannon, the night before the election, said he wanted to kill the Biden presidency and that he was talking to the president about it. That's what he said on his podcast. These are key, key points that we're going to need to flesh out and we're going to need to do everything we can to get that information. MATTINGLY: Yes, I want to -- you mentioned the memo. I want to get to

that in a second. But, you know, we've seen, the last two administration Justice Departments didn't actually pursue some of the tools you may have. And you mentioned them. Do you have a sense or have you gotten any type of nod from the Biden Justice Department that they will actually -- help is not the right word here, but actually use the tools that they can to try and press if it gets to that point?

AGUILAR: It's our hope that they will aid us in seeking the truth. We haven't received anything specific. They're aware of the work that we're doing and I believe that they're aware of the importance of the work of the committee. And so that is our backstop. And that's how we're proceeding. But we're hopeful that they will work with us to help seek the truth.

MATTINGLY: Now you mentioned a memo. I want to dig in a little bit on that. According to a new book by Bob Woodward and Robert Costa, some Trump allies were trying to engineer a way for then Vice President Mike Pence to overturn the election results and hand Trump back the presidency.

Let's be explicitly clear about that. That is a coup effort. Now we'd seen and saw the memo outlining the six-point plan by a lawyer working for Trump's legal team showing how Trump and others tried to get Pence to really subvert the Constitution.

I guess there's two parts to this. How close do you think the country came to an actual coup in part one? And in part two, are you guys considering legislative suggestions in terms of changing how the electoral count plays out in part of your recommendations here as a possible backstop to this?

AGUILAR: Well, I think that we can and should. And I know that Congressman Schiff is already -- Chairman Schiff is already working on legislative proposals that could make changes. Whether that's part of the committee's work is a topic for another day. But I think within the halls of Congress and the legislative side of what we do, it is something that is worth debate and a discussion.

I think that your first question is so impactful to the work that the committee wants to do. Ultimately when we produce a report, we hope that we can detail just exactly for the American public how clear we came to losing democracy on that day leading up to January 6th. But that remains a goal that we want to reach. And so getting information to make sure that we don't edge closer to the authoritarianism that clearly Donald Trump was trying to get to in subverting the will of the American public for an election that his own government said was safe and free and fair.

So that's something that we want to get to and hopefully the report will include a lot of information on that topic.

MATTINGLY: I want to shift gears a little bit because you've got a pretty wide portfolio. Not just you're on this committee but you're also the vice chair of the House Democratic Caucus. Look, nobody I've talked to at the White House or on the Hill right now seems to have a total sense of how the next 72 hours is going to play out. But if you do, by all means, please let us know.

But how worried are you right now when you look at just kind of this moment in time, this inflection point, if you will, for the president's domestic agenda that because of the infighting that's been going on, this might not actually get across the finish line?

AGUILAR: Yes. I don't want to undersell the important work that we have to do. Funding government, making sure government is open on October 1st. The Transportation Reauthorization needs to get done. The president's domestic agenda. The American Recovery Plan, making sure we hold true to that by building back better. All of those things do hang in the balance. And this is an important week.

Our caucus is broad and diverse and represents the American people. And so we're going to continue to have conversations within the family to try to make sure that we put forward legislation that can pass. But also helps the American public. We're talking reducing the cost of prescription drugs and making sure there are middle-class tax cuts, child care. Those are things that the American public wants to see.

And I understand the inside the beltway, you know, chatter about how we'd get there. Ultimately, we're more concerned about where we land.

MATTINGLY: Yes. To your point, this is going to be a very big week. Maybe not the end game here, but at least trying to map out a pathway forward.

[15:15:07]

Congressman Pete Aguilar, definitely rest up, drink water, carb load. You have a big couple of days ahead. Thanks so much for your time, sir.

AGUILAR: I won't run from you, Phil.

MATTINGLY: Never have. Thank you, sir. Appreciate it.

All right. Now onto the intense manhunt for Brian Laundrie that entered its second week as of today. And now rewards totaling $30,000 are being offered to anyone who provides authorities with his exact whereabouts.

Now we're learning new clues about some of Laundrie's last known movements. A woman in Wyoming says she gave Gabby Petito's fiance a ride on August 29th to the same area where Petito's body was later found. And Laundrie is now the subject of a federal arrest warrant for events following Petito's death including using a debit card that wasn't his.

Now CNN's Nadia Romero joins us from Venice, Florida, near where authorities are scouring a vast nature reserve for Laundrie .

And Nadia, I think everybody is wondering on a minute-by-minute basis at this point in time. What's the latest on the search that you're hearing? NADIA ROMERO, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Phil, the search is

ongoing, picking up again this weekend. But I want to note that it is not as robust as what we saw earlier in the week. But we were able to get a drone up to get an aerial view because, as you mentioned, this is a vast area. We're talking 25,000 acres that searchers are scouring right now. And it is hot, it is humid, it is swampy.

And there have been some flooding that's happened in this reserve. And so water is up to the waist of a lot of people there. And remember because we're in Florida, you're talking about gators and snakes. So this is a very dangerous area. Has a lot of people questioning if Brian Laundrie is there and how he was able to survive, if he's alive.

But there's also the question of whether or not he's there at all because this is all goes off of the word from his parents, who told investigators that he was coming here last week on Tuesday. That was the last they heard from him. They told investigators that they were worried that he may harm himself. There are other people who are speculating that he is not here at all and that this is just a way to get the attention away from where he may actually be or he's running, and not actually here.

There are so many unanswered questions. And this has been a very tricky case to follow. Because it really started out west in Wyoming and that's where we know that Gabby Petito's body was found. Then there was an altercation in Moab, Utah. But they are from this area. And that we know that Brian Laundrie came back here to -- Brian Laundrie, excuse me, came back here to Florida without Gabby.

And so that led investigators here as well. So we have three or four states that are all involved in figuring out what exactly happened -- Phil.

MATTINGLY: Yes. So many more unanswered questions right now than answers. But one of the new developments, can you tell us what more we know about the woman who says she picked up Laundrie, gave him a ride to the campground where Petito's remains were actually later found?

ROMERO: Yes. And that is all a part of this timeline that is so important because there have been so many twists and turns. So she's actually the second person. So we have two people now who say that they drove him to the area where her body was found. So that's another person who can corroborate that he was in the area where her body was found hitchhiking. And that will only help investigators as they try to figure out exactly what happened before and after Gabby's death -- Phil.

MATTINGLY: Nadia Romero in Venice Florida, great reporting as always. Thank you very much.

Joining us right now is CNN senior law enforcement analyst Charles Ramsey. He's also the former Philadelphia police commissioner.

Commissioner, thanks so much for your time. You know, the search for Brian Laundrie, it's now in its second week. You know, you've obviously been through many of these yourself. What does it signal? You know, we're this far into it. They have no sense of where he may be at this point in time. What are the chances in terms of finding her as you reach this 14-day mark, I guess?

CHARLES RAMSEY, CNN SENIOR LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST: Well, I mean, every day that goes by makes it a little more difficult. We don't know if he's dead or alive. It's hard to believe that he would be able to survive two weeks in that reserve where they're searching now based on the description of it, you know, with snakes, alligators and so forth. And he's not really the outdoorsman type person is my understanding.

And again, another thing that bothers me is this whole cell phone and wallet issue because, I mean, you can track a cell phone and you can really trace the movements of an individual through the use of a credit card. So by leaving them behind, that tells me he didn't want to be found. You know, and so he could very well be somewhere else. You know, a misdirection. Send you to the reserve while he goes in the opposite direction.

We just don't know. But the critical piece of evidence now, you've got two people that put him where the body was found. And that's important because they've got to put him at that scene. This is going to be a case based on circumstantial evidence once they're able to finally determine his whereabouts.

[15:20:02]

MATTINGLY: And so to be clear here, because I think this has been a kind of point of confusion here, Laundrie has not been named a suspect or specifically charged in Petito's death.

RAMSEY: Right.

MATTINGLY: But he might be the last person -- it seems to be the last person who may have seen Petito. How important is it that authorities find him. At this point is there any reason for them to start looking somewhere or anywhere else?

RAMSEY: Well, I'm sure they're already probably looking elsewhere but they don't know exactly where, but they've reached out to the public. They put that warrant out there that puts him in a national database. So if he is stopped, provided they can, you know, properly I.D. him, he'll pop with a warrant there. So that will be very, very helpful. But, you know, they just don't know right now. And so they're really hoping that they can catch a break.

Probably going to come from a member of the public that sees him or thinks they know where he might be and then pass that information along. But this is something that's going to be difficult to prove. That's why there is not a cause of death yet. They ruled it homicide, but the medical examiner could not yet determine cause of death. We don't know the condition of the remains that were found.

Probably heavily decomposed to a point where it makes it very difficult to determine a cause of death because it wasn't a gunshot, stab wound, something that would be fairly obvious if you were doing an autopsy. So they're going to have to really gather a lot of evidence. And that's why there is no warrant for murder. The warrant is for something else because they just don't have enough right now.

MATTINGLY: So can you take me -- you know, if you're inside the room, if you're in this situation and running this investigation or a key player in this investigation, you mentioned the difficulty that's presented by him leaving his cell phone, him leaving his wallet, that you'd would have to rely on the public. What is going on right now for investigators besides hoping that the public sees something and passes along tips?

RAMSEY: Well, you know, they've got a lot more information that is public. Believe me, I mean, I've been in investigations for a lot of years and used to do everything I could to keep information of an ongoing investigation away from the public unless we wanted some information to get out.

So they've got some stuff that we really don't know about. So maybe they've got some indication as to possibilities of where he might be, although you would think after two weeks if those led anywhere, they would probably have their hands on him.

So they're following a ton of leads right now. I mean, you have to be open. You can't just assume anything. And so, you know, you just have to have an open mind with these kinds of investigations. Otherwise, you lock yourself into a theory that may prove to be wrong and just take you further down a path that's just not accurate. So, you know, I don't know how much help his parents have been. I personally don't fully trust them.

I mean, it was four days before they reported him missing. That's a pretty significant head start. We don't know if they gave him cash if he's not using credit cards. And so, you know, there's a lot of possibilities. And I heard you say earlier, there's a lot of unanswered questions. And you're absolutely right. There are.

MATTINGLY: Yes. Which makes things even more complex for those investigating what's going on.

Charles Ramsey, really appreciate the insight, sir. Thanks, as always.

RAMSEY: Thank you.

MATTINGLY: All right. Coming up next, if you are still confused about whether you should get a COVID vaccine booster or not, you're probably not alone. A medical expert joins me next to tell you everything you need to know.

You're live in the CNN NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:27:58]

MATTINGLY: COVID booster shots. Who should get one and when? Over the past several days we've gotten one set of recommendations from the FDA and then the CDC Advisory Board made its recommendations, only to have the CDC director go in a different direction on one of its proposals. So maybe you're a little bit confused, and you're probably not alone, which is precisely why Dr. Peter Hotez is here.

Dr. Hotez is a professor and dean of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine. He joins us now to help figure all of this out.

And I guess, Dr. Hotez, look, I think the bottom line is boosters are available for a pretty significant segment of the vaccinated population. But for clarity purposes here, for anybody who is trying to follow advisory boards and so on and so forth, who right now is eligible to get a COVID booster and should they get them?

DR. PETER HOTEZ, PROFESSOR AND DEAN, TROPICAL MEDICINE AT BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE: So thanks so much. You know, the final call is really the CDC director. And it's very similar to what the FDA recommended, which is those over the age of 65, those over the age of 18 that are in long-term care facilities, those who are 50 to 64 with underlying conditions.

But then there's a separate set of recommendations, who -- a little softer call of those who may require it, leaving it up to the individual of those 18 to 49 with underlying conditions or those who are in high-risk exposure settings such as through occupation. And there's a list on the CDC Web site. So the most straightforward thing to do is go to the CDC Web site on the booster recommendations, and you can see it for yourself.

And if it sounds a bit confusing, it's partly because there wasn't complete consensus within the scientific community. So there was some back and forth. And I think what we finally came up with looks like a pretty reasonable set of recommendations.

[15:30:00]

MATTINGLY: Sir, I want to get -- you know, you mentioned the CDC director, Rochelle Walensky. Let's be clear, she didn't overrule anything. She didn't undercut anybody. This is her authority.

But she did move in a different direction than what the CDC advisory board laid out.

This was kind of how she explained the decision.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DR. ROCHELLE WALENSKY, CDC DIRECTOR: I want to be very clear that I did not overrule an Advisory Committee.

This was -- I listened to all the proceedings of the FDA Advisory Committee and listened to this group of scientists that very transparently deliberated for hours over some of these difficult questions in where the science was.

This was a scientific close call. And I think you could tell by the duration of the meeting and the discussions that this was a scientific close call. In that situation, it was my call to make.

(END VIDEO CLIP) MATTINGLY: Scientific close call. And you could watch the FDA advisory meeting and take away the same thing. It was a close call when it came to authorizing vaccines for those in high-transmission environments.

Are you concerned, though, this creates confusion about the process and maybe sets back some of the booster effort in its kind of nascent stages here?

HOTEZ: That's always the risk of having transparency in the process. And unfortunately, it's all being piled on by the very aggressive anti-vaccine groups who do anything they can to foment discord and play this up.

But the truth is I think there was something close to consensus. I think part of it also, Phil, was the fact that there was a little disagreement in the scientific community about what the goals of vaccination are.

Is it only to stop serious infections, hospitalizations and deaths, as some feel or, individuals like myself, who feel it is also important to stop the actual infection and the consequences of long COVID, which we now are seeing causes brain degeneration and cognitive decline?

For me, that was very important to also think about that as a key indication. Even if you're not going to the hospital, we don't want to give a generation of Americans long COVID.

And my feeling also is if we can get enough Americans vaccinated, we can hold transmission.

There were some on both committees, FDA and CDC, that felt we could only do this with strong indication of breakthrough hospitalizations and deaths. But either of us had other considerations as well.

And that's how we do it. We're all very transparent in the scientific community. But there are some individuals out there who use this as a divisive issue.

MATTINGLY: Yes. Look, there are worse things than being able to see how this process plays out live in real time.

One thing they don't disagree on, getting the vaccine is the best way to protect yourself and put an end to this pandemic, as Dr. Peter Hotez has made very clear for months on end.

Dr. Peter Hotez, always appreciate your time, sir. Thanks so much.

HOTEZ: I appreciate it.

MATTINGLY: All right. Coming up, how far is the House Select Committee investigating the insurrection willing to go to get documents in testimony from four Trump loyalists? We'll discuss, coming up next.

You are live in the CNN NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) [15:37:57]

MATTINGLY: President Biden appears likely not to assert executive privilege generally to prevent Congress from accessing records into their investigation into the January 6th capitol riot.

Here's how White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki explained Biden's reasoning yesterday.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JEN PSAKI, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: We take this matter incredibly seriously.

And certainly we have been working closely with congressional committees and others as they work to get to the bottom of what happened on January 6th, an incredibly dark day in our democracy.

He's not asserting executive privilege. And obviously, some of this is predicting what we don't know yet, but that is certainly his overarching view.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Is there something you wouldn't turn over?

PSAKI: I don't think I'm going to get ahead of a hypothetical. But that is what is important to for people to know and understand. That is the principle with which we are approaching this.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MATTINGLY: White House official subsequently made clear this is on a case-by-case basis.

You get where the president stands on this. It comes just days after the January 6th House committee issued four subpoenas to Mark Meadows, Steve Bannon, Dan Scavino, and Kash Patel.

With me now, former Republican Congresswoman Barbara Comstock, and White House correspondent and Washington bureau chief for "The Grio," April Ryan.

Barbara, I want to start with you.

You obviously have done this works as a Hill staffer before you were in Congress. You worked at the Justice Department.

One of the questions right now is, the first impeachment kind of blew everybody's understanding of what a subpoena means out of the water.

And so I guess my biggest question is, you know, if these four individuals just choose not to comply, what are the actual grounds to fight them to compel testimony or documents or anything that the committee is seeking?

BARBARA COMSTOCK (R), FORMER U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FOR VIRGINIA: Well, I think these four individuals are going to be in a very different position than prior investigations of Trump officials.

Because, first of all, there will not be a basis for executive privilege because this was political activity, misuse of the office by Donald Trump, and all of their activities are involved in the political realm.

[15:40:08]

But more importantly, there's no -- the former president cannot claim executive privilege. So even though Donald Trump has said he's going to claim privileges, he doesn't have any to claim. So I think they can quickly move to hold them in contempt.

If they do not comply by October 7th, I would recommend they be writing the report already and make clear how quickly they are going to move to hold them in contempt.

We have a vote in the committee, then the floor. Then it goes over to the Justice Department, who would probably give it to the D.C. U.S. attorney to begin prompt prosecution.

And if you are found guilty of contempt, it is up to a $100,000 fine and up to one year in prison.

I think the committee should make clear they are prepared to go that route very quickly and make an example now of any of these individuals who are important individuals whose cooperation is needed if they decide to not cooperate.

MATTINGLY: Yes. That speed would be night and day compared to the first impeachment.

April, I was struck this week, the White House has been very careful on this issue really the last nine months, until this week, when they made clear this is a National Archives thing. This is not our issue. We'll see what happens. This week, they made clear.

The president seems very open, willing to exert executive privilege. Why do you think that is?

APRIL RYAN, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: The speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, made her case. She began this process. She made her case.

This is not just about politics. This is at the greatest levels. You had death. Democracy shaken. And you also -- what we saw was the executive branch waging war of the legislative branch. That is something we have not seen before.

And you still have the Trump loyalists out there who are waiting for the blood in the water to keep circling and then pounce.

And that's what this is about. To show there's punishment for this.

And it's true. The four that are targeted right now for depositions, they have not in the past wanted to give up information on Donald Trump or anything surrounding the efforts not to let Joe Biden come into office or anything else. So we should not expect that this time.

But what we should expect is the possibility of jail time to send a message. The question is, will they end up being martyrs for a cause?

MATTINGLY: That's a good point here, Barbara.

You have been waiting for repercussions for what happened January 6th. You have seen it for the 500-plus individuals who have been charged but not for those who initiated it.

I can only say that the sham review in Maricopa County, it showed what we already knew, actually, that Joe Biden won by more. Texas is doing a full forensic audit because the former president asked them to do so.

I guess my question right now is -- I get it. The president asked something. People feel they have to do it because that's what the constituents are asking for and that's what they believe.

How does this stop? How does this end? How do we move on from this point of absurdity? .

COMSTOCK: Well, I think there has to be serious consequences. And you can see some of the lawyers involved getting disbarred or getting threatened with disbarment. I think that is an important thing to happen.

It is important to note. even if they don't cooperate, there's a lot of ways to get the documents. Whether it's text, emails, phone records, the banking records of those who were involved and engaged in promoting this rally, there's a lot of records you can get.

And then you still can bring any of these witnesses in front of the committee, you know, with a subpoena. And even if they are going to take the Fifth or refuse to cooperate, you can read all of that information into the record.

And so these tough guys always out -- Bannon has a show that he does every week.

And if he's sitting there now mute and not responding, he's not going to look so well in terms of, you know, defending Donald Trump once he has a lawyer sitting next to him and say, no, you're going to take the Fifth Amendment.

I think there's going to be a lot of accountability in this process.

But I think the committee, at the outset, has to make very clear if there's not cooperation they are going to take swift action.

And for any of those people who are lower-level, middle-level witnesses, who have documents, who have information, they will see that, gee, I don't want to have to pay $100,000 fine or possibly go to jail or run up all kinds of legal bills. I'm going to get in there.

[15:45:09] And perhaps, maybe some of them will want immunity or they will get in there and just tell the story.

I think they need to be very, you know, serious about the consequences that they are going to impose on those who don't cooperate in this important congressional oversight.

MATTINGLY: Yes. It seems to be the way things are heading.

April, I want to close with you in the time we have left.

You mentioned polls inside the White House. Officials aren't always talking about them but they are keenly aware of them right now.

Given what the president is facing in terms of his agenda this week, he is 45 percent approve, 51 percent disapprove. What is your poll on the read of the Biden presidency?

RYAN: Let me say this. From the highest levels, he is keenly aware. And I wrote about it this week, "Inside His Jacket Pocket." And we have all seen that card that he keeps with him.

He is keenly aware of the issues that are on the table that are causing him problems at the polls, that are causing him problems with people's thoughts about how he's handling his job.

I mean, just on the black numbers, overall, his numbers have taken a hit because of Afghanistan. But that's one of the reasons.

But for the black numbers, they have taken a hit from his mandate for federal workers to be vaccinated.

But there's also a hit, too, when it comes to the black agenda, policing, voting rights, and Haiti.

He is fully aware of this. The question is, how will he react? How will he create a win to come out of the doldrums in poll numbers?

MATTINGLY: I think there's an opportunity there. Clearly, they have taken a hit.

Read April's piece in "The Grio."

Barbara Comstock, appreciate your perspective and insight. Invaluable.

Thanks, guys, so much.

COMSTOCK: Thank you.

RYAN: Thank you.

MATTINGLY: Coming up next, bombshell allegations in "The New York Times" that the security company hired by Britney Spears' father to protect her secretly captured audio recordings from her bedroom. Details next.

You're live in the CNN NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:51:59]

MATTINGLY: We are learning shocking new details about Britney Spears life under a court-ordered conservatorship.

A former employee of the security firm hired by Spears' father has told "The New York Times" the pop star was watched and recorded incessantly.

He alleged the intense monitoring included access to her phone and even a secret recording device inside Britney's bedroom.

This comes as CNN is exploring her battle for freedom in a new documentary called "TOXIC, BRITNEY SPEARS' BATTLE FOR FREEDOM." It airs tomorrow night at 8:00 Eastern.

And CNN's Chloe Melas joins me now.

Chloe, you've reported so well on this. What are we going to learn in this special report tomorrow on Britney Spears?

CHLOE MELAS, CNN ENTERTAINMENT REPORTER: Yes, well, thank you for having me.

I'm so excited for people to see what we have worked so hard on for many months. We got people to sit down and speak for the very first time.

You're going to hear from people who worked with Britney on her circus tour right after she was put under that now infamous 13-year conservatorship.

You'll hear from people who worked with Britany very early on in her career, friends of hers, some celebrities that have gone to great lengths to reach her over the years but couldn't get to her.

We're also going to take you inside that 911 phone call, two of them, actually, that took place earlier this summer the day before her first emotional testimony on June 23rd.

So you know, there's going to be kind of a revisiting of her early career to, you know, jog many of your memories, but also a lot of new information.

And, you know, like "The New York Times," we're going to also talk about how Britney was closely monitored during this conservatorship.

But Black Box Entertainment did not respond to CNN's request for comment.

And neither did Jamie Spears' legal team when we reached out regarding the security devices allegedly in her room and the alleged surveillance of her cell phone. MATTINGLY: I'm really interested to see this. The whole world has been

focused on this for a long time and also just the sheer amount of reporting you guys are going to have in there.

Chloe Melas, you've been stellar on the story. Thanks so much.

MELAS: Thank you.

MATTINGLY: Make sure to tune in to that CNN special report, "TOXIC, BRITNEY SPEARS' BATTLE FOR FREEDOM." It airs tomorrow night at 8:00.

Now to this week's "CNN Hero." So many communities are living without access to electricity, clean water, sanitation services.

That's why our next hero started an organization that goes to the most isolated regions of the country, where no one else travels, to fill those gaps.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JENIFER COLPAS, CNN HERO: The families that we are working with are living in extreme poverty. These areas are so remote that there's not even roads to get there.

(CROSSTALK)

COLPAS: The communities use candles, gasoline lamps. They don't have a lot of money. And the smoke of the lamps were negatively affecting their health.

[15:55:02]

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: (SPEAKING FOREIGN LANGUAGE)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (SPEAKING FOREIGN LANGUAGE)

COLPAS: Our mission is to provide access to basic services.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: (SPEAKING FOREIGN LANGUAGE)

COLPAS: My biggest dream for the people that I'm working with, that they wake up not just to survive, but they can take small steps to fulfill their dreams.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MATTINGLY: Go to CNNheroes.com right now to hear Jenifer's full story.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)