Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsroom
McConnell Disagrees With Trump On January 6 Pardons; Pfizer Asks FDA To Authorize Vaccine For Kids under 5; Tom Brady To Retire; Senators Moving "Aggressively" On Electoral Count Act Reform; Trump Advisers Drafted Two Orders To Seize Voting Machines; January 6 Committee Interviews Second Pence Aide. Aired 3-3:30p ET
Aired February 01, 2022 - 15:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[15:00:00]
(MUSIC PLAYING)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (voice-over): This is CNN breaking news.
VICTOR BLACKWELL, CNN ANCHOR: Top of the hour. Thanks for being with us. I'm Victor Blackwell.
ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: And I'm Alisyn Camerota.
BLACKWELL: Some breaking details about another conflict between Donald Trump and Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell.
CAMEROTA: The senator disagrees with the promise by Trump to pardon January 6th rioters, apparently. CNN's Manu Raju is breaking this story for us.
Manu, what do we know?
MANU RAJU, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, I just had an exchange with the Senate minority leader about what Donald Trump said in a Texas rally over the weekend.
Recall that in speaking to his supporters, he suggested that if he were elected president again, that he would give pardons to the people who came into this building, the U.S. Capitol, on January 6th, 2021, ransacked this building, attacked this building.
And McConnell made clear that he took exception to those remarks.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RAJU: How concerned are you about the former president offering pardons to people who attacked the Capitol on January 6th?
And because of those comments, that he has the moral authority to be president again?
SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL (R-KY), MINORITY LEADER: What we saw here on January the 6th was an effort to prevent the peaceful transfer of power from one administration to another, which had never happened before in our country.
My view is, I would not be in favor of shortening any of the sentences for any of the people who pleaded guilty to crimes.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
RAJU: The Senate Republican leader chooses his words very carefully when talking about the former president. Recall that McConnell did vote to acquit Trump for inciting the January 6th insurrection during the impeachment trial.
But he did say he was practically and morally responsible for the events of that day. That's caused Donald Trump for about more than a year now to attack Mitch McConnell repeatedly over and over again, trying to push him out of the Republican leadership position.
McConnell said he wanted nothing to do with Trump, says very little about him publicly. When asked about Trump, he often says this is about the future, not the past.
But what he made clear here is that he believes the election was decided when the states election, the electoral votes were certified on December 14th, 2020. And he made clear he disagrees with what the president said, the former president said, over the weekend.
And the one thing, too, he did not answer, I said, does he have the moral authority to be president again?
He did not answer that part of the question.
CAMEROTA: OK. Manu Raju, thank you for that breaking political news.
OK, now to this. COVID vaccines for children under 5 may finally be on the way. A source tells CNN that Pfizer is expected to seek emergency use authorization as soon as today for its vaccine for kids aged 6 months to 5 years old.
BLACKWELL: The company wants approval from the FDA for a two-dose regimen of the COVID-19 shot while continuing to test three doses in the same age group. Federal regulators hope it will be granted by the end of this month.
Joining us now Dr. William Schaffner. He's a professor of infectious diseases at Vanderbilt University Medical Center.
Doctor, welcome back. Let's start with this question. I wrote this down just to make sure I got it right here.
When Pfizer released their findings in December, they found that in children 6 months to 2 years, just a 10th of the adult dose created immune responses similar to those 16 to 25.
However, not as strong in kids 2 to 4. That's why they are testing a third dose. And they don't have the results from that. They will apply for this EUA anyway.
Should they wait for those or do you support that application coming in as soon as today?
DR. WILLIAM SCHAFFNER, DIVISION OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES, VANDERBILT MEDICAL UNIVERSITY CENTER: Well, Victor, that is a bit confusing, isn't it?
A lot of us are scratching our heads and are waiting to see the data, on what basis would Pfizer like to go ahead by a two-dose regimen with those youngsters.
We need to be sure about what it is that we're telling parents. We're going to bring those youngsters in.
What kind of protection will they get and will they, in the future, need a booster?
Let's look at the data. Let's not make policy here by press release. Let's look at the data very, very critically so that we can satisfy ourselves not only about the effectiveness but by the safety of these vaccines.
CAMEROTA: And will we have those answers by the end of this month?
Because we've heard that it could be approved by the end of this month.
SCHAFFNER: Yes, Alisyn, we'll need to see what the data are that are submitted to, first, the Food and Drug Administration and then to the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. Both of those committees will look at the data very, very carefully.
BLACKWELL: You talked about a booster, potentially, for that small age group under 5. We know that children 5 to 11 have been, they are covered by an EUA for two shots.
[15:05:00]
Will they need a booster at 5 months like older populations?
SCHAFFNER: Well, If I had to guess, I would think probably. But once again, wait and see. That's why we do the trials, in order to get the data, evaluate them carefully so we can make very, very solid recommendations out there.
Certainly, children 5 and older are eligible for vaccine and, goodness, we haven't vaccinated nearly enough of them yet. We still have a large job to do there.
CAMEROTA: OK. Dr. William Schaffner, thank you for helping us understand what may be on the horizon. Great to talk to you.
BLACKWELL: Thank you, Doctor.
SCHAFFNER: Thank you.
BLACKWELL: All right, the NFL will be without one of its greatest players next year. Today, legendary NFL quarterback Tom Brady announced he's out, officially retired.
(WORLD SPORT)
[15:10:00]
CAMEROTA: OK, ahead, a CNN exclusive. We are learning Donald Trump's advisers drafted not one but two executive orders to seize voting machines in their attempt to overturn the 2020 election.
How will this impact the January 6th investigation?
Everything you need to know.
(MUSIC PLAYING)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[15:15:00]
(MUSIC PLAYING)
BLACKWELL: A bipartisan group of senators said the discussions on reworking the law about counting Electoral College votes is in the beginning stages. One Republican senator says former president Trump's comments on Mike Pence's handling of the certification underscore the need to clarify that issue.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. ROB PORTMAN (R-OH): We need to clarify how the electoral counting works. Part of the problem is there's so much ambiguity and confusion about it. If you looked at the statute, it's long and complicated. And there's a bipartisan interest in doing that, as there should be. So I think we will get something done.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CAMEROTA: OK, Chris Cillizza joins us now at the Magic Wall to explain.
Chris, what is the Electoral Count Act?
CHRIS CILLIZZA, CNN POLITICS EDITOR AT LARGE: Senator Portman is right, Alisyn. It is sort of complicated. So here is the situation. Let's start with how we got here.
In 1876, we had an election, Rutherford B Hayes, Samuel Tilden, very close election. And four states sent two sets of electorals, four states said different people won. They had to have a commission. It was eventually decided that Hayes had won very narrowly. Hayes is president.
But that's why we have it; 21 years later they passed this to try to codify and clarify what we're talking about. Now Donald Trump, who was never great at clarifying things, puts out this statement, talking about why -- this is your key -- why Mike Pence did not send back the votes for recertification. Investigation.
He wants Mike Pence investigated over the Electoral Count Act. It's not going to happen but it speaks to where Donald Trump's mind is.
Now let's talk about what the actual role for the vice president is and let's start with the Constitution. This is Article 2, Section 1. It's kind of vague.
"The president of the Senate" -- this is the V.P. -- "shall, in the presence of the Senate and the House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted."
Kind of seems pretty straightforward. But this is how they clarified it. This is the 1887 Electoral Count Act. This is the relevant part. But again, as Senator Portman said, a little confusing.
"If more than one return or paper purporting to be a return from a state shall have been received by the president of the Senate, those votes and those only shall be counted."
OK. What that means is if there are multiple slates of electors from states, the vice president makes the call on that. But there weren't that in this election. This is sort of the problem.
Donald Trump tried to force through changes, including up to the day before January 6th, meeting with Mike Pence, trying to pressure him. But the Electoral Count Act could do for some updating. It could do for some clarifying.
But nowhere in it, at least as I read it, in the Constitution that we just went through, does it suggest that the electors can be thrown out and then sent to the congressional delegations to vote, which is what Donald Trump wanted to have happen.
It's really like a quadruple bank shot and it's very unlikely to happen. I think it is smart, given what we know about Donald Trump and this election, in 2020 and maybe 2024, to make sure it's very, very clear so there are no potential loopholes in this language. And I think that's what you're seeing this bipartisan group do.
CAMEROTA: Sounds like it's overdue. Chris Cillizza, thank you very much for explaining all of that.
Now to new CNN reporting about Donald Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election results. CNN has learned that not one but two versions of an executive order were drafted by Trump aides to try to seize voting machines in states that Trump lost to Biden in the 2020 election.
The first one directed the Department of Defense to seize the machines. The second one directed the Department of Homeland Security to do so.
BLACKWELL: Let's discuss with CNN chief political analyst Gloria Borger, CNN legal analyst and former federal prosecutor Elliot Williams and CNN senior law enforcement analyst and former FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe.
Welcome to you all.
Gloria, let me start with you.
[15:20:00]
When we learned of the first draft executive order, we did not know the degree to which the former president was involved, if he knew about it. With this latest report, we know just how much he directed or pushed for those seizures, potentially through the DHS.
Just it could be easy for people because there's a constant flow of revelations to say this is more of the same. Just outline the gravity of what we've now learned in this new report.
GLORIA BORGER, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL ANALYST: It's stunning and it's serious. And it's unprecedented. You have a President of the United States, trying to figure out a way to overturn a free and fair election, using every lever of power he thinks that he has.
He thinks or thought -- now we know that he was more directly involved than we ever thought -- that he could go to the Department of Homeland Security and say, seize voting machines, have the Department of Defense do the same thing.
Whoever thought Rudy Giuliani would be the voice of reason in all of this, saying to him, you can't go to the Pentagon and have them do that. Although according to "The New York Times," Rudy Giuliani did call the Department of Homeland Security.
It is shocking and when we think about the events of January 6th -- and this is the story I believe that the committee will tell -- you have to go all the way back to the election and see the different ways in which this former president was trying to undo the results.
CAMEROTA: Yes, Elliot, I think it's chilling. I think it's chilling to hear the plan to involve the military. We had General Mark Hertling on last hour. He talked me off the ledge in terms of thinking that it was as bad as it sounds.
He said there are guardrails in place in the military and explained how commanders won't take an illegal order. But I don't know. Just get a rogue somebody, as we saw with all of these efforts.
Do you think there are enough legal guardrails in place, now that we have learned that this was the effort for next time?
ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Look, even if there weren't legal guardrails in place, even if legal guardrails were in place, they would have been clearly violated here, based on the nature of the conduct.
The biggest and most troubling thing about this is it's using law enforcement, the machinery of law enforcement to carry out a political goal. Forget the military. The Department of Homeland Security, which is a major law enforcement force, the president attempted to deputize it for this election purpose.
And it was so egregious that Ken Cuccinelli, the deputy secretary for the Department of Homeland Security at the time, a huge ally of president Trump, pushed back on it and said he could not do it.
It's the use of law enforcement that, yet again, the former president attempted to do. So yes, it is egregious, both the use of the military and immigration and law enforcement authorities.
So yes, we could always tighten our laws. Chris was reporting before this what was dead on. Of course, you could fix the Electoral Count Act. But something just transcends fixing errors in laws.
BLACKWELL: Andy, the former president, with this reporting added to it, has tried to pressure the Department of Defense, the Department of Justice, his vice president, state legislators, secretary of state in at least Georgia and then sent his supporters directly to the Capitol.
When you look at this collective and you're trying to determine if a crime has been committed, intent, how much of the collective get you to answering that question?
ANDREW MCCABE, CNN SENIOR LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST: Well, there's definitely an element of the sum of all evidence going on here. It's not, as Elliot and Gloria laid out, it's not just one thing. It's this collection of efforts that started immediately after the election and continued at least until January 6th.
The thing that sealed Nixon's fate was the discovery that he had tried to get the CIA to stop the FBI investigation of Watergate on some fraudulent national security grounds. When that was discovered by his own colleagues in the Republican Party, they came to him and said, you're done. You're going to get impeached and removed if you don't resign.
Where is the outrage among former president Trump's fellow Republicans, having now tried every one of those efforts that you just detailed?
Fake electors, using the Department of Justice, using the Department of Defense, using the Department of Homeland Security, all to secure his own power, it's just -- of the s an extraordinary silence that we hear from that side of the Hill right now, I think.
CAMEROTA: Gloria, that leads us to the January 6 House committee investigating all of this. And your reporting is that Marc Short, the former vice president's chief of staff, has, under subpoena testified to the committee.
[15:25:00]
Does that mean that Mike Pence is next?
(LAUGHTER) BORGER: We don't know. Mike Pence's attorney has been also in there, his former counsel was in there today. We don't know the answer to that.
I think the wish, on the part of the vice president, if I were to glean that from people familiar with his thinking, would be that the people who worked for him would tell the story for him. And therefore he would not have to go in before the committee.
Obviously he doesn't want to do it. There are political problems with that. He probably wants to run for president. He would alienate the base. I don't think the committee will say sure, OK.
There may be ways to get around that. You could always have written questions -- remember that with the former president and Team Mueller when they were investigating Russia.
So they could maybe do it that way, who knows. People are scratching their heads, trying to figure it out. But I do believe that, under subpoena, these people on the vice president's staff are going in and giving them very important information.
They were with the vice president on January 6th, in important meetings, where the president tried to convince the vice president that he really ought to do the right thing and decertify the election. So they have a lot to say.
BLACKWELL: Greg Jacobs with the committee today.
Gloria Borger, Elliot Williams, Andy McCabe, thank you.
A federal judge has rejected a plea deal for Travis McMichael, one of the men convicted of killing Ahmaud Arbery. An attorney of the Arbery family will tell us why they pushed for the judge to block that deal.
CAMEROTA: And at least 13 historically Black universities are targeted with bomb threats today, many of them forced to cancel or postpone classes.
Who is behind these threats?
That's next.
