Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Fourth Covid Vaccine Discussion; Russian Military Preparations; Judge Allows Lawsuit against Trump; Renato Mariotti is Interviewed about the Ruling for Cases Against Trump. Aired 9:30-10a ET

Aired February 21, 2022 - 09:30   ET

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

[09:30:00]

BIANNA GOLODRYGA, CNN ANCHOR: Will relax its mask rules. The company says face coverings will be recommended but not required.

Now, this comes after the CDC lowered its risk advisory for cruises from very high to high, but the agency still advises people to avoid cruise travel if they are not fully vaccinated or if they're vaccinated but still at an increased risk for severe illness from Covid-19.

The FDA is considering whether it will need to authorize a fourth dose of the Covid-19 vaccine. The agency says the best time for an additional shot may be in the fall when coronavirus spread is expected to pick up again.

But, in the meantime, health officials are urging vaccinated Americans to get their booster shots as the pace of those boosted doses has dropped dramatically.

CNN health reporter Jacqueline Howard has more on this.

So, Jacqueline, what more are we learning about the efficacy of the booster?

JACQUELINE HOWARD, CNN HEALTH REPORTER: Bianna, we are learning that, first, if you are eligible, get your booster. We do know that they are safe and effective. But there has been some research on waning immunity. And that's why the FDA says it is continually monitoring for if and when we might need an extra boost or we might need a fourth dose. The agency is looking at immunity and also looking at the possibility of emerging new variants. So those two factors are playing key roles here.

And the agency actually told me that Dr. Peter Marks, he's the head of the FDA's Center for Biological Evaluation and Research, he has spoken publicly about a possible fall timeline. The agency says this, quote, Dr. Marks has noted publicly that there is still much uncertainty as to how the pandemic may further evolve. He did note that it is possible that a fourth dose might be recommended as we move into fall.

So, Bianna, this fall possibly we could see the rollout of extra boosters, similar to how we saw the rollout of initial boosters this past fall. But health officials I've talked to say that while they are looking at the future, they are monitoring this. Right now it's important that if you're eligible for a third dose, for a booster, to get the booster. The pace of boosters being administered has slowed to the lowest pace yet, Bianna, in the pandemic. And right now, out of the U.S. population, only about 28 percent of people are boosted, 65 percent are fully vaccinated, but 28% percent have gotten their booster. So health officials say this is definitely of concern while they look toward the future.

Bianna.

GOLODRYGA: Yes, a stubbornly low level of Americans that have yet to receive that third shot.

HOWARD: Yes.

GOLODRYGA: Jacqueline Howard, thank you.

Well, President Biden agreeing in principle to a summit with Vladimir Putin, but only if Russia does not invade Ukraine. So, is Vladimir Putin on the same page? We'll discuss, up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:37:08]

GOLODRYGA: Well, right now the White House is again warning that a Russian attack on Ukraine could begin at any moment. The U.S. still remains committed to a diplomatic off-ramp in the face of that threat, announcing that President Biden has agreed in principle to meet with Vladimir Putin.

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN ANCHOR: Despite that talk of diplomacy, a senior government official tells me the U.S. see, quote, no slowdown in Russia's military preparations and readiness.

Joining us now to discuss, Lieutenant General Mark Hertling, a CNN military analyst, former Army commanding general for Europe and the Seventh Army, and Josh Rogin, a CNN political analyst, also a "Washington Post" columnist.

Good to have you both on.

General Hertling, if I can begin with you. Given what you've seen and read of the U.S. intelligence assessments of, for instance, commands going to tactical commanders to proceed with preparations for an invasion and all the forces arrayed along the borders of Ukraine, does a military, does Russia amass all those forces in your view just for show? LT. GEN. MARK HERTLING, CNN MILITARY ANALYST: It would seem strange,

Jim, that's for sure. But in these kind of situations, any kind of order from the top could stop the momentum. Certainly there seems to have been a drumbeat of war for multiple months and especially during the last few weeks. But, again, I'm hopeful that Mr. Putin will receive some information from his various advisers that requires him to turn around. That's my deepest hope right now.

GOLODRYGA: So, we don't know yet if Russian troops will, in fact, invade Ukraine. One thing we do know is that 30,000 Russian troops still remain in Belarus. And those joint exercises were said to have ended yesterday and that the Russian troops would be returning back to their bases in Russia. Now we know that they will be there for an extended period of time.

How big of a threat is that, not only to Ukraine, but also now to NATO, which borders Belarus, right? And you're talking about Poland and Lithuania with Russian soldiers at their border.

HERTLING: Well, you're talking to a guy who is an old Cold War era, Bianna, and I'm used to seeing Russian soldiers in other nation states. It's certainly unusual to have that many people from a military of one country posted in another for a long period of time without barracks, without chow halls, without all the things that go along with them. But we have seen this before with the old Soviet Union, and now Mr. Putin's ideal is to re-establish that in multiple states.

His comments this morning about -- or yesterday about crushing and repressing Ukraine, that's what we're used to with the old Russian Soviet army. It could certainly happen again.

SCIUTTO: Josh Rogin, you've been in Munich at the security conference where there's been a flurry of diplomatic activity, visits from the U.S. vice president, the Ukrainian president and also talk of diplomacy.

[09:40:09]

I just wonder, if your conversations there, what evidence have those officials and diplomats seen that Russia is really willing to deal here? Because their public statements stick to lines, for instance, on forbiting NATO membership at any time for Ukraine, lines that the U.S. and NATO say are non-starters.

So where's the overlap?

JOSH ROGIN, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: To be clear, Jim, there is no evidence that the Russian government is negotiating in earnest, that they have any intention of finding a common ground with the European or U.S. officials who are putting forth various proposals.

Now, you know, if you talk to the Ukraine, what they'll say is that they want the U.S. and Europe to switch the strategy away from offering concessions and toward upping the pressure on Putin. And they say that this is not like all of the other amassing of troops that we've seen over history, that the invasion is coming and that, you know, the signaling that Putin receives when he receives these messages of diplomacy but not pressure is that he sees weakness. What Zelensky said is that what Putin sees appeasement.

So, you know, it makes sense for Harris and -- Vice President Harris and the European leaders to continue with the diplomacy. No one's saying that they shouldn't continue with the diplomacy. But what the Ukrainians said for three days, not just Zelensky, many Ukrainian officials, in Munich, at this conference was, how about some pressure, how about some sanctions now? How about more military support now? How about making an announcement that Ukraine is welcome in EU and NATO and advancing in that cause now. What use is it afterwards? Putin doesn't seem to be deterred and we can't take any of his claims without being interested in a diplomatic solution at face value.

GOLODRYGA: Josh, on that point, I mean the president of the United States and even what we saw out of Munich was a united front among NATO allies in the face of Russian aggression. But the longer that this standoff goes on, and I agree that diplomacy's better than a hot war, is there concern about fissures (ph) within NATO itself?

I mean you're seeing President Macron of France acting as sort of the third party here, on the phone with Vladimir Putin and then with President Biden. And just this morning, Vladimir Putin saying something pretty peculiar, saying that Macron had told him that the U.S. may have a change in its position. That is clearly not the language we have heard from the United States. I mean is he being more helpful here, or is he muddying the situation?

ROGIN: Yes, to be clear, there is unity amongst the allies and amongst the NATO allies and amongst the U.S. and European leaders. And there is room inside that unity for individual leaders to put forth creative solutions. So, the fact that Macron is coming up with some stuff that maybe Washington wasn't aware of is fine. That's not the problem. The problem, according to all the officials in Munich that I spoke to is that the unity of NATO and the unity of Europe and the United States is not lashed up with Ukrainian, OK? There is no unity with the actual people who have the guns pointed at their heads.

And that was pretty clear when Zelensky talked. But for those of us who have been talking to the Ukrainians for months, that's been pretty clear for a very long time. And I know both of you know that as well. It just spilled out into the open. So, you know, if Macron wants to come up with some creative ideas and they work, great. But, you know, what about listening to the Ukrainians? What about unity with them? What about their asks and their (INAUDIBLE)? And they feel they've been cut out of this unity, OK. And what's the good of unity if it doesn't help the people who are actually about to get attacked?

SCIUTTO: General Hertling, we reported over the weekend, it's the U.S. view that Russia now has 75 percent, three-quarters of its conventional forces postured against Ukraine. And that is their battalion tactical groups, basically their combat units, but it's also 35 or 40 air defense systems, it's hundreds of fighters and fighter bombers for a country that spans several time zones focused here.

How long can Russia maintain that pressure with -- if it chooses not to act immediately? Can it do so for the medium term?

HERTLING: It's a massive force, Jim. In terms of looking not only at the ground maneuver forces, you're talking about the artillery, their air force -- their supporting air forces deployed in different places. I don't think they can maintain that there for very long at that number. They could reduce it slightly. But that's the fear I have.

The second fear to war is that they will stay there for a very long time and try and outwait the west in terms of our unity. The potential for many European leaders going out on their own and getting off the one-page support for Ukraine.

So, as a military guy, I would tell you it's extremely difficult to keep that number of forces in the field, especially in the kinds of encampments.

[09:45:01]

We've seen the photographs. They are in mud pits right now. I mean that is not very beneficial for the morale of soldiers. And, truthfully, Russian soldiers' morale isn't high when they come into an operation. So, what we're going to see is continued passing of Covid, living in swamps, living in mud holes, not having very good food. Drinking radiator fluid as they've been known to do in the past. This will deteriorate the Russian forces if they're asked to stay there for a long time. So I think Mr. Putin's on the horns of a dilemma of, should I stay or should I go.

GOLODRYGA: Yes, it could also deteriorate as we're seeing Ukraine, right, not only its morale but its economy as well as long as Russia continues to remain encircled around that country.

Lieutenant General Mark Hertling and Josh Rogin, thank you, as always.

And still ahead, former President Trump in more legal trouble. A federal judge is now allowing lawsuits seeking to hold him responsible for the January 6th insurrection to proceed.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:50:26]

GOLODRYGA: A federal judge says civil lawsuits aimed at holding former President Trump accountable for the January 6th insurrection can move forward. Judge Amit Mehta wrote in his opinion, to deny a president immunity from civil damages is no small step. The court well understands the gravity of its decision. But the alleged facts of this case are without precedent.

CNN crime and justice reporter Katelyn Polantz joins me now.

So, Katelyn, what does this mean legally for the former president now?

KATELYN POLANTZ, CNN CRIME AND JUSTICE REPORTER: Well, Bianna, this is an historic decision from a federal judge. And in this case, Judge Amit Mehta of the D.C. District Court, so that's a trial level court, he is saying that at this point in the case, he believes legally that the people who are suing Trump to hold him accountable for the insurrection. Democratic members of Congress, Capitol Police officers, that they can try and make a case against Trump for conspiracy. They can move forward, gather evidence, possibly deposing Donald Trump.

So, in this decision, there were a few key findings. One of them, Judge Mehta decides that Trump doesn't have immunity for what he said on January 6th just because he was president. So, no presidential immunity.

Second, Mehta decided that this call to action that Trump made on the 6th to his supporters saying, like, we're going to fight like hell and then asking them to walk to the Capitol, that isn't protected speech under the First Amendment. Those are key things that the judge is saying Trump isn't having the protections of.

He's also writing in his opinion about this possible conspiracy. He wrote, the president's January 6th rally speech can reasonably be viewed as a call for collective action. "We" used repeatedly in this context implies that the president and rally goers would be acting together towards a common goal. That is the essence of a civil conspiracy. That's the judge's ruling here.

But as these things go, they takes a long time in court, and so we have a lot of next steps to come and we do expect that there will be likely appeals long before this case could ever go to trial.

Back to you.

GOLODRYGA: Katelyn Polantz, thank you.

And for more on all of this, let's bring in former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti.

Renato, great to have you on.

So what do you make of the judge's decision here? Was it the right one?

RENATO MARIOTTI, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: Well, I have to say, it's a very -- it's -- it is a close call. There's a lot of difficult legal questions here. I do think there's a chance this may get overturned on appeal. But it is -- it is historic. And he's -- he -- I think had a very carefully reasoned opinion and I think there's a chance it will stand up.

GOLODRYGA: Yes, to -- right, as he did, to deny a president immunity from civil damages is no small step. Clearly the court is aware of that and how unusual and unprecedented really this is.

But what do you make of him still going on to say that the president, while he was in office at the time, cannot claim immunity over statements like "fight like hell"?

MARIOTTI: I have to say, it was -- I was a little bit surprised the First Amendment has such broad protections for speech. So it really takes a lot of effort to get outside of First Amendment protection. But Donald Trump's statements were so outside the box and so outrageous that he really put himself into this situation.

So, it will be interesting for me to see whether it holds up. I will say that it certainly -- it is certainly very close to the line to imminently inciting violence, which is what the Supreme Court said is not protected by the First Amendment.

GOLODRYGA: So, aside from appealing this decision, what other legal options does the president have for him? And we should just note, it seems as if every week we're covering yet another investigation, another case in another state. I mean these do appear to be piling up.

MARIOTTI: Well, that's right. And that's an issue for him right now. He is fighting on all fronts. He's got a very serious challenge in New York as well. Here, the biggest problem is if discovery starts, as Kate mentioned a moment ago, that's going to mean deposition, that's going to mean potential questioning under oath. He doesn't want to be opposite of Democratic members of Congress that have subpoena power. So, he really has to defeat this on appeal. If he doesn't, he's essentially already lost. Even if he defeats the case, he doesn't really want to sit for a deposition and undergo years of discovery in this case.

GOLODRYGA: Fine, so he is not expected to sit for a deposition in this case, but what role, if any, will the January 6th committee in their investigation play into this as this likely will go on to appeals now?

MARIOTTI: Well, I think it's going -- potentially the evidence uncovered there is going to color any appeal. Absolutely. One thing that is clear, the Judge Mehta understand here was the gravity and the historic nature of the opinion.

[09:55:03]

And I think the same is going to be true of the judges on appeal.

So, I think part of what happened here is that the judge understood that if the judges gave this case a pass and didn't allow it to go forward, that these facts would not be developed. And it is clear that there's a public interest in understanding and knowing what happens. So, I do think that that's going to weigh on the judge's minds on appeal and it's possible that it's going to work against Trump.

GOLODRYGA: Renato Mariotti, thanks, as always. We appreciate it.

MARIOTTI: Thank you.

GOLODRYGA: Well, new questions this morning about whether there is a real path to diplomacy to prevent a Russian invasion of Ukraine. President Biden is considering a summit if Vladimir Putin doesn't attack. Our live team coverage from the region with the latest details is up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)