Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Lauren Boebert Doubles Down on Incendiary Comments; Congress Files More Contempt Charges; World Waits For Answers on Omicron Variant. Aired 3-3:30p ET

Aired November 29, 2021 - 15:00   ET

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

[15:00:35]

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN HOST: It's the top of the hour. Hello, everyone. Welcome to NEWSROOM. I'm Alisyn Camerota.

VICTOR BLACKWELL, CNN HOST: And I'm Victor Blackwell.

President Biden is urging patience and cautioning against panic as the world waits for answers about the new coronavirus variant Omicron. Now, we have just learned from the World Health Organization that we could learn more about the transmissibility and the severity of the variant over the next few days, but whether Omicron can evade vaccines, that will take a bit longer.

Now, this highly mutated variant has now been found in more than a dozen countries.

CAMEROTA: More than 40 nations, including the U.S., are restricting travel from Southern Africa, South Africa announcing that Omicron is now its dominant variant less than two weeks after it was first detected there.

At the moment, there are no confirmed Omicron infections in the U.S., but President Biden says, sooner or later, Omicron will be here.

CNN international correspondent David McKenzie is in South Africa.

But we begin with CNN's Phil Mattingly. He is at the White House for us.

So, Phil, the president said shutdowns are off the table for now.

PHIL MATTINGLY, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: For now, shutdowns off the table.

Instead, the White House is focused on vaccinations and boosters. That will be the core, along with testing, of what the president is expected to lay out on Thursday, a plan about fighting the pandemic as the country moves into the winter months, and, obviously, that plan roiled by the discovery of this new variant.

Now, it is a variant that has caused serious concern inside the White House, with the president throughout the course of today, in both remarks earlier today and just a few moments ago in a meeting with executives on the supply chain, saying that this is about speed and science, not chaos and confusion.

And that is the core of how the White House is trying to fight and address this new variant. When it comes to boosters and vaccinations, that is the primary focus of what White House officials are pressing on at this moment. They believe, at this moment in time, that boosters will provide at least some protection to what they're seeing from this new variant.

But given the number of unanswered questions, they're also prepared, if changes to those vaccines are necessary. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Dr. Fauci believes the current vaccines provide at least some protection against the new variant and the boosters strengthen that protection significantly.

We do not yet believe that additional measures will be needed. But so that we are prepared, if needed, my team is already working with officials at Pfizer and Moderna and Johnson & Johnson to develop contingency plans for vaccines or boosters if needed.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MATTINGLY: Now, guys, you noted the travel restrictions put into place for South Africa and seven other Southern African nations. There's been some criticism with that, and the president acknowledging that the variant coming to the U.S. is an inevitability at this point in time.

But what those restrictions were put on for was for time, to give the U.S. time to prepare for that virus to come -- that variant to come to the United States. Now, when it comes to vaccines in South Africa, particularly the Southern African nations in particular, the U.S. has provided nearly eight million doses of the vaccine to South Africa.

And the White House press secretary when asked by our colleague Kaitlan Collins earlier today said that South Africa has turned down new vaccine, not a criticism, Psaki said, but just a reality, as countries try and get their own populations vaccinated amid the continuing evolution of this virus, guys.

BLACKWELL: Phil, thanks.

Let's go to David now in Pretoria.

And the criticism of the travel restriction starts at the top, with the president there in South Africa calling them unfair, unjustified. What more are you hearing?

DAVID MCKENZIE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Victor, Alisyn, there's been deep criticism of these moves by the U.S. and many other nations to lock out Southern African states and their travelers because of this troubling new variant.

Now, the president, President Biden, saying that this is to buy time, as Phil was saying. Well, scientists I have been speaking to here say time has already run out, that this variant is likely widespread outside of the Southern African region, and to really stop any evolution or distribution of this variant, you would have to ban all countries from traveling into the U.S. borders.

The scientists from the very top to the rank-and-file doctors are angry that they feel punished for their good science. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SALIM ABDOOL KARIM, SOUTH AFRICAN MINISTERIAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON COVID-19: It's outrageous that South Africa and Southern Africa is being punished for having good surveillance and ensuring that we wanted to be completely transparent and to share this data with the rest of the world as soon as we knew it and confirmed it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[15:05:04]

MCKENZIE: The big question now, how dangerous is this variant?

Where I'm sitting, there are rising cases, quite sharply, but, at this stage, not a big rush onto hospitalization. That's the good news. Also, some tentative news that vaccines appear to have some efficacy, say scientists .Those people who are unfortunately in hospital at the moment, most of them, the vast majority, are the unvaccinated, something we'd seen throughout this pandemic.

Lots of questions still unanswered. They're working in labs here across Southern Africa and across the world to try and figure out just how bad this variant could be -- Victor.

BLACKWELL: All right, David McKenzie for us in Pretoria, Phil Mattingly at the White House, thank you both.

CAMEROTA: OK, let's turn now to Michael Osterholm. He's the director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota. In his 2017 book, "Deadliest Enemy," he warned that time was running out to prepare for a pandemic.

And, sadly, that has become true, Michael, but always great to see you.

DR. MICHAEL OSTERHOLM, DIRECTOR, UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA CENTER FOR INFECTIOUS DISEASE RESEARCH: Thank you.

CAMEROTA: Look, we have been cautioned by all the experts it's too soon to know anything, we won't know real hard data in terms of whether or not this is a more dangerous variant for a couple of weeks.

One thing that I'm taking comfort in, but you can shoot that down in a second, if you want, is this South African doctor who we quoted. We played a comment from her earlier where she said -- she's the first person, as far as we know, who detected it in her practice. She started seeing case after case coming in on November 18. And she said that she was seeing mild symptoms. People -- her patients

were tired, they had a scratchy throat, but no loss of taste or smell. It was fairly mild. Should that comfort us?

OSTERHOLM: Well, first of all, let me just say that this is a rapidly evolving situation.

And we know even right here in the United States that oftentimes the first days of a COVID infection are actually relatively mild illness days. And it's only when you get to day seven or 10 that you see more severe illness, and often hospitalization is even after that.

So this is such a rapidly evolving situation in South Africa, I think we have to be very careful about assuming we're not going to see many more very ill people, including those requiring hospitalization and deaths.

The other factor about this is that many of the patients that were being discussed earlier on the show were actually younger, healthy adults, which, by their very nature, would be the people you would expect to see the least serious illness in.

So I think it's just far too early. The virus and everything we know about it so far in terms of how it's being transmitted, the fact that it has these mutations that very well could allow for immune escape, I think still are really of grave concern.

BLACKWELL: Where do you stand on the travel restrictions? We have heard from the leaders there in South Africa, who say they're unfair and they are unjustified.

There's now reports of community transmission in the U.K., but no travel restriction for the U.K.? Should these be in place? Are they effective?

OSTERHOLM: Well, as we know, this was all a rapidly evolving situation from a public policy standpoint also, and that, initially, when there were so many unknowns, these bans were put in place.

And once one government did them, they all kind of, I think, felt the need to follow suit. I predict that, within the next few days, a week or two at most, most of these bans will be changed, because we will be talking potentially 40 or 50 countries seeing transmission. How do you ban travel amongst all of them?

But, rather, what we need to do is have a way that we can make certain, when people get on a plane that crosses a border, they're not infected when they get on, meaning they should be vaccinated fully, should be tested. And then, when they arrive, there's a now a way to test them again and to follow up with them.

This is something we desperately need. And I think that will replace the travel ban in short order.

CAMEROTA: So what should Americans be doing over the next two to three weeks while they wait to see what this is all about? OSTERHOLM: Well, to take a famous line from the real estate business,

this is vaccinate, vaccinate and vaccinate.

As has been pointed out, even if you look at the Beta and Gamma variants that we saw earlier in South Africa and South America, these were the ones that actually could evade immune protection. We saw that, if you were vaccinated, you still had relatively good protection against serious illness, hospitalizations or deaths.

And so I can't emphasize enough. I don't think, Alisyn, most people realize, we're growing more vulnerable every day in this country, not less, because we have 120 million Americans who have now gone past their six months since they were originally vaccinated.

And each day, they become more and more susceptible to now getting infected. And we're only boosting about 35 million of those 120 million. So this is a real challenge. We have got to get people vaccinated, both first doses and boosters, as soon as possible.

[15:10:10]

BLACKWELL: And what do you make of what have -- I mean, former U.K. Prime Minister Gordon Brown wrote a piece in "The Guardian" saying that this is essentially chickens coming home to roost, that the wealthier nations did not do enough over the last year to make sure that the poor countries across the world got those shots, so that now, as it continues to spread, it mutates and this is coming.

He said it's coming back to haunt us. Is that oversimplified? Or is he right on point?

OSTERHOLM: Well, it is oversimplified.

There's some truth to all the angles you might say about this. Remember, you just reported on the fact that the South African government turned down a recent offer that we shared with them regarding more vaccine, and that is because they may have upwards of 20 million doses of vaccine that haven't been used yet.

One of the challenges that's happened in low- and middle-income countries is, yes, they need more vaccines, there's no question, but, just like us, they have had a problem turning vaccines into vaccinations. And when individuals don't want to get vaccinated, I don't care what country you are in, high-, middle-, or low-income countries, it's a real challenge.

We need to put much more into supporting low-and middle-income countries and helping them to get people vaccinated, not just the vaccines. So, yes, it's too simple just to say they didn't get vaccine. If we're going to solve this, we have got to get to the root cause of both vaccines and how to get needles in people's arms.

CAMEROTA: I mean, you and I were talking earlier, that it's too simple to say that it was just vaccine hesitancy on their part as well in terms of the vaccine, because there are also some reports that they weren't going to have enough vaccine for everyone. BLACKWELL: Yes, or a sustained campaign of mass vaccinations.

CAMEROTA: Yes. vs...

(CROSSTALK)

BLACKWELL: Yes.

CAMEROTA: So they were worried that that would cause and trigger some sort of problem or panic.

So we need to get to the bottom of how to help people. And then, I mean, look, Michael, as you have always pointed out, there's also -- it's also just very hard to force people to do something that they don't want to do, as we have seen in this country.

BLACKWELL: Right.

(CROSSTALK)

BLACKWELL: Go ahead. Finish your thought.

OSTERHOLM: Now, I was just going to say, absolutely.

This is not a simple issue of just vaccine. It's also about how to get people vaccinated. And as I have said over and over again, we have got to deal with the last mile, getting vaccine to people, and the last inch, getting it in their arm.

BLACKWELL: All right, Michael Osterholm, thank you.

OSTERHOLM: Thanks, Victor.

CAMEROTA: OK, just into CNN, the feud between Democratic Congresswoman Ilhan Omar and Republican Congressman Lauren Boebert is apparently even escalating today after a phone call.

Congresswoman Boebert was heard on video, you will remember, making Islamophobic comments, actually very anti-Muslim comments, about Omar, implying that the Muslim lawmaker was a suicide bomber.

BLACKWELL: And after Congresswoman Omar demanded some accountability, Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy encouraged them to work out their differences.

CNN's Manu Raju is here now with what happened next.

So, what -- tell us about the exchange between the two.

MANU RAJU, CNN SENIOR CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: It was contentious, according to an account from both sides.

According to what Congresswoman Boebert just released in a video, she said that she called Congresswoman Omar, talked to her about what happened, tried to explain what happened. She said that Omar said that she wanted a public apology for what happened. But then it turned very negative. Boebert said that she went back and demanded Omar herself apologize for some of her past rhetoric. And she also said that Omar later hung up on her in the aftermath of their back-and-forth.

And then in releasing this video statement, Boebert herself says some pretty incendiary things, even suggesting that Omar sympathizes with terrorists.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. LAUREN BOEBERT (R-CO): Make no mistake, I will continue to fearlessly put America first, never sympathizing with terrorists.

Unfortunately, Ilhan can't say the same thing. And our country is worse off for it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: So Omar released a statement about the phone call as well, saying in part: "Today, I graciously accepted a call from Congresswoman Lauren Boebert in the hope of receiving a direct apology for falsely claiming that she met me in an elevator, suggesting I was a terrorist and for her history of anti-Muslim hate. Instead of apologizing for her Islamic Islamophobic comments and fabricated lies, Congresswoman Boebert refused to publicly acknowledge her hurtful and dangerous comments. She instead doubled down on her rhetoric."

And she said: "I decided to end the unproductive call."

Now, Omar goes on to call on Kevin McCarthy, the Republican leader, to condemn these remarks. McCarthy himself has not done that. He did say he had a conversation with Boebert and suggested they try to resolve this on their own. Clearly, they have not been able to do it.

Omar also has called for some action taken for -- to be taken by Democrats. It doesn't appear at the moment that Democratic leaders are going to go down the route of possibly censuring Congresswoman Boebert for these comments.

[15:15:02]

But, as you can see here, it just -- the effort to try to find some sort of common ground going absolutely nowhere after this contentious phone call today that led to this back and forth that you just saw -- guys.

CAMEROTA: What an unfortunate development.

I mean, normally, when you talk to someone who you have vilified directly one-on-one, your heart does soften a bit or your mind expands somehow. And it's just unfortunate to hear that this call made it worse, actually.

BLACKWELL: Yes, she took this opportunity to ramp it up a bit.

CAMEROTA: Manu, thank you for your reporting.

RAJU: Thank you.

BLACKWELL: A former Department of Justice official could soon become the second person to face contempt charges as of late. This is after he defied the January 6 Select Committee.

And it is Cyber Monday. We have a look at how the supply chain issues could impact your holiday shopping.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:20:23]

CAMEROTA: OK, we have some news into the investigation into the January 6 insurrection.

The House Select Committee just announced they will vote on another referral for criminal contempt of Congress.

BLACKWELL: This one is for the former top Department of Justice official, Jeffrey Clark, who defied his subpoena.

Clark pushed to pursue unfounded claims of voter fraud in the weeks after the 2020 election.

Harry Litman is a former U.S. attorney, legal affairs columnist for "The L.A. Times."

Harry, welcome back.

HARRY LITMAN, FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY: Thanks, Victor.

BLACKWELL: And for people at home, this is the official who drafted that letter to be sent to Georgia officials to try to hold off the certification of the vote there.

We're seeing a pattern here. Should this be the pattern that goes for Jeffrey Clark, for the others who had been subpoenaed, including the former White House chief of staff?

LITMAN: So it's not clear, Victor, right?

We -- I think it's noteworthy that he's their second test case and not Mark Meadows. And the big difference, there's a couple, but the biggest difference between him and Mark Meadows, they already have the information that he would possess. They have it because his colleagues at the DOJ, Richard Donoghue and Jeffrey Rosen, have voluntarily provided it.

They don't have Meadows' information. And, remember, Meadows was sort of Trump's shadow and maybe partner in crime in the few days leading up to January 6. And if they do a criminal contempt, that puts Meadows, as it already has put Bannon, on a different track, in the federal courts. And that means his testimony and information is no longer available to them. Rather, they have to test his possible criminal contempt. I think it's

telling that they haven't yet done this with Schiff. So, Clark would be the second. And if they don't get it, they still have the information.

One other big point, it really is going to matter what happens in the D.C. Circuit tomorrow. Could I quickly mention that?

CAMEROTA: Yes.

BLACKWELL: Go ahead.

CAMEROTA: What is happening?

LITMAN: Oh, all right.

So, as you know, Trump lost in the district court in his attempt to keep the January 6 Committee from having his information. The court of appeals then made a lightning fast briefing schedule, and they are going to hear the case tomorrow. Let's say they hold, as I think it most likely they will, that there is no executive privilege claim for Trump, because Biden makes the call here and he has said no executive privilege.

Changes the landscape completely for Bannon, for Clark and for Meadows, because then, when they're saying we think we have executive privilege because of Trump, they can point to the definitive ruling from the Court of Appeals -- I don't think the Supreme Court will take the case -- and say, no, you don't. Are you sure you want to defy us?

Because now your intent would be very clear. You would have no leg to stand on. You're still saying you want to nevertheless invoke Trump's claim, but it doesn't exist. That makes a criminal referral much, much stronger.

CAMEROTA: OK. Really interesting. So, in that case, Harry, help us interpret what Congresswoman Kinzinger meant when he said this morning, basically, stay tuned. Something's about to happen with Mark Meadows. So listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. ADAM KINZINGER (R-IL): If people deny subpoenas, we will go after them. I expect that there is going to be movement, particularly on Mark Meadows, that we will know about shortly in the next day, next two days or so.

And I think the people will be very pleased with that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: That's very thinly veiled. I mean, are you saying he's waiting to hear about that appeals court decision?

LITMAN: I don't think so. I think there, because they need his testimony so much, and because he

very much doesn't want to have the criminal referral, my best guess, Alisyn, even though Schiff and Kinzinger and others have been talking tough about a criminal referral, is that they're trying to negotiate it out.

So I could be proven wrong in 24 hours, but I think the announcement is likely to be some half- or three-quarters measure to get Meadows' information without going to the step of referring it.

After all, it's a harder case to make for a criminal case for the DOJ to say he's actually guilty of a crime and refer it.

[15:25:02]

So, my best guess is, they're going to say, he's agreed to provide it in a certain way, maybe written answers subject to a penalty of perjury, something like that, that will give them the information. Obviously, we will find out soon.

But that's one where I think they can't play a tough, because they would lose his information. They don't have another route to that information. And they need it badly.

CAMEROTA: OK, Harry Litman, thank you.

BLACKWELL: Thank you, Harry.

LITMAN: Thank you, Alisyn. Thanks, Victor.

CAMEROTA: OK, former Trump official Mark Esper is suing the Pentagon over publication of his new book. Why Defense Department officials say several mentions of Donald Trump should be redacted.

BLACKWELL: Plus, more countries now confirming their first case of the Omicron variant. Other countries are taking new precautions.

CNN takes you around the world.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:30:00]