Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

U.S. To Send Cluster Munitions To Ukraine; Interview With Rep. Veronica Escobar (D-TX); Experts Pen Open Letter For Ukraine's NATO Membership; Former NYPD Officer Convicted Of Stalking NJ Family On Behalf Of Chinese Government; Mayor Sylvester Turner (D-Houston) Discusses Triple-Digit Temps Scorching Texas; FDA Fully Approves Alzheimer's Drug. Aired 4-5p ET

Aired July 08, 2023 - 16:00   ET

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

[16:00:34]

JIM ACOSTA, CNN HOST: You're live in the CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Jim Acosta in Washington.

We begin the hour with President Biden defending his decision to include cluster bombs in the administration's latest military aid package to Ukraine. Human rights groups oppose cluster bombs which can carry dozens or even hundreds of smaller explosives known as bomblets. Sometimes the bomblets don't explode on impact, as you'll see in this video of a Russian cluster bomb dropped on Ukraine last year.

The unexploded bomblets can kill and maim civilians. More than 100 countries have outlawed the use of cluster bombs but that group does not include the United States or Russia.

CNN's Priscilla Alvarez is Rehoboth Beach, Delaware, where the president is spending the weekend. She joins us now.

Priscilla, the president is facing some pushback from even some fellow Democrats on the inclusion of cluster bombs in this military aid package. Tell us more.

PRISCILLA ALVAREZ, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: That's right. This is a significant development, and one that is not sitting well with Democrats in Congress.

Now SeNATOr Merkley, along with former SeNATOr Leahy, wrote an op-ed in the "Washington Post" where they were quite blunt about this, saying that it was, quote, "a serious mistake" and it could have, quote, "devastating impact." The concern is what you outlined earlier that these munitions can scatter bomblets and they would have a long- term risk or there is a long-term risk because they may not explode right away.

Now Ukrainian officials have given the U.S. assurance that they would not use these in urban areas, but the concern is clearly still there among Democrats. Now of course, this is a decision that the administration did not take lightly. National Security adviser, Jake Sullivan, said that they came to a unanimous decision within the National Security team that it was time to provide these munitions, that President Biden himself grappled with it.

Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Two things for you, and it was a very difficult decision in my part. And by the way, I discussed this with our allies, discussed this with our friends up on the Hill, and we're in a situation where Ukraine continues to be brutally attacked across the board by munitions -- by these cluster munitions that are -- have dud rates that are very, very low -- I mean, very high that are a danger to civilians, number one.

Number two, the Ukrainians are running out of ammunition. The ammunition that they've been calling 155-millimeter weapons. This is a war relating to munitions, and they are running out of that ammunition and we're low on it. And so what I finally did, I took the recognition of the Defense Department to, not permanently, but to allow for this transition period where we have more 155 weapons, these shells for the Ukrainians, to provide them with something that has a very low dud rate. It's about -- I think it's 1.50, which is the least likely to be blown.

And it's not used in civilian areas. They're trying to get through those trenches and stop those tanks from rolling. And so it was not an easy decision, and we're not signatories to that agreement, but I -- it took me a while to be convinced to do it. But the main thing is, they either have the weapons to stop the Russians now -- keep them from stopping the Ukrainian offensive through these areas or they don't. And I think they needed them.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ALVAREZ: You heard there the president walked through his reasoning as to how he got to the point where they would provide these cluster munitions. But it is a critical time, it is one where Ukrainians have struggled to make major gains in their counteroffensive against Russia.

It also comes at a time where President Biden is set to go on a weeklong foreign trip tomorrow, where he's going to go to the U.K. where he'll meet with King Charles II and the British prime minister, then to Lithuania for that big NATO summit where the key topic of discussion with the war in Ukraine, and he'll conclude his trip in Finland.

But over the course of all of that imagine that he'll get questions about these munitions and the next steps in the war in Ukraine -- Jim.

ACOSTA: All right, Priscilla Alvarez. Thank you very much.

And you can see the entire interview with President Biden tomorrow at 10:00 a.m. Eastern on "FAREED ZAKARIA GPS." Stay tuned for that, and that will be right here of course on CNN.

Let's continue this discussion now with Texas Democratic Congresswoman Veronica Escobar.

[16:05:04]

Congresswoman, thanks so much for joining us. We appreciate it. We know you sit on the Armed Services Committee in the House of Representatives. Let me just ask you flat out, do you agree with the White House decision, the president's decision to include cluster bombs in this aid package to Ukraine?

REP. VERONICA ESCOBAR (D-TX): Jim, I can absolutely understand why the president says this was a tough decision. This is a decision that I, for one, had hoped he would not have to make. But here's the reality. The reality is that for the most part, Congress -- I don't speak for all of my colleagues, but the majority of members of Congress want to make sure that we provide Ukraine everything it needs to win this war.

Russia has been engaging in the most brutal -- of this war, and we have been able to rally our allies and provide Ukraine with the support that they need. But the truth of the matter is right now we have a choice between a bad option and a worse option. The bad option is what the president faced with these -- you know, the cluster munitions versus the possibility that there could be a gap in the artillery that Ukraine needs.

And we want to make sure that Ukraine wins. I am grateful to the president for having spoken to our allies, for getting assurances from Ukraine. I think there are a lot more conversations we need to have as we return to Capitol Hill next week, especially those of us on the Armed Services Committee. But there are not a whole lot of great options for the president or for allies at this point.

ACOSTA: And what about this threat posed to civilians by these undetonated bomblets? I mean, it's been a concern when the Russians have used them.

ESCOBAR: It's absolutely a legitimate concern. And we have seen the impact on civilians in the past, which is why, from a humanitarian perspective, we all should be worried about this. But it's my understanding that Ukraine has made certain commitments to the White House and to the administration about the way that they will use this, and we can't forget that it is in Ukraine's best interest to protect their civilians and fellow Ukrainians.

And, you know, again, a really tough decision, you can understand why the president grappled with this. I am grateful that he's been transparent about it, that he and his administration have spoken to the American people through the media about this. But this is a tough war, Jim, as we all know.

ACOSTA: And you're in El Paso right now. Your congressional district includes El Paso. I want to ask you about a case that you know about all too well. Yesterday a federal judge sentenced the mass shooter who killed 23 people in a local Walmart almost four years ago. The killer was handed some 90 life sentences.

What's been the reaction among your constituents to that and I guess what's your reaction?

ESCOBAR: Jim, I've had the privilege of sitting with my constituents during some of the testimony that the survivors gave, their first-hand accounts during one of the days of the process this week, and to say it was gut-wrenching would be a massive understatement. There are innumerable El Pasoans victims, survivors, loved ones who still live with profound pain. Both emotional pain and literal physical pain.

There are still constituents of mine who have to undergo surgeries years later, constituents of mine who still live with significant PTSD. Young people who will never forget what they witnessed in front of them. And so this week has been tough. It's -- there were a lot of tears in that courtroom. A lot afterwards as folks exited.

And this is only one part of the process because we still have a state trial ahead. And many of these same survivors, victims, loved ones, will have to relive their trauma once again through the state trial process until they can finally try to achieve or begin to move towards some closure. But I think what's really important for me, Jim, is that the country recognize that mass shootings like the one that occurred in my community and all of the pain -- and my neighbors are living through, it is a policy choice by this country, by legislators who refuse to ban assault style weapons, and by legislators who continue to fuel hatred and xenophobia.

[18:10:06]

Both of those, the hatred, the white supremacy, and the easy access to assault style weapons, both of those things impacted the tragedy in my community and we have to do better as a country especially in Congress.

ACOSTA: And Congresswoman, sticking with the border issue that you just raised there, I want to ask you about this. The governor of Texas, Republican Greg Abbott posted this on social media. These are buoys that are apparently going to create a floating barrier in the Rio Grande, the river separating the U.S. from Mexico. The governor says the goal was to use these buoys to deter migrant crossings. What is your reaction to this method? What do you think of it?

ESCOBAR: I think it's really important for Americans to understand just how dangerous, reckless, and deadly the governor's decision is. When the Trump administration had to make the choice, their Department of Homeland Security had to make a choice about whether or not to use this same strategy, the Trump administration decided not to. The Trump administration lest me forget was an administration that had no problems separating families and engaging in other, very cruel anti- humanitarian tactics.

And so it was a policy decision that the Trump administration walked away from is one being used and embraced by Governor Greg Abbott. It is shameful. We are going to see more drownings. We know that deterrence and tactics like this don't stop desperate people who are running for their safety. It only causes more death.

And in fact, not just the death of migrants, but I am very concerned also about the impact it will have on Border Patrol agents and other Department of Homeland Security personnel whose job it is to help provide rescue operations for migrants, and what this will do to their ability to do their job.

But we know that Governor Abbott doesn't care about federal personnel or the personnel on the border anyway because through his Operation Lone Star we've seen yet another death of a Texas National Guardsman along a long series of deaths -- by this governor. It really is shameful.

ACOSTA: All right. Congresswoman Veronica Escobar, thank you very much. Of course if the governor wants to come on and address what you just said there, we are happy to have him on. But, Congresswoman, in the meantime, thanks very much for your time. We appreciate it.

And more on the White House plan to send controversial cluster bombs to Ukraine, that's coming up in just a few moments. Next, what the White House said about them just one year ago that might surprise you. Plus a former New York City police officer convicted of acting as an illegal agent for China. He joins us live to explain how he got caught up in a U.S. crackdown.

And record-breaking temperatures are making it through -- making it tough, I should say, to beat the heat. The mayor of Houston, Texas, joins us live in just a little bit to explain what his city is doing to help people.

You're alive in the CNN NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:17:24]

ACOSTA: It's been 500 days since Russia invaded Ukraine in a war many thought would end in a matter of weeks. During that time, Ukrainian officials say at least 494 children have been killed and more than 1,000 others injured.

Earlier today, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy posted a video of himself visiting Snake Island, which became a symbol of Ukraine's resistance in the earliest days of the war. Ukrainian soldiers famously defied an order from a Russian warship to surrender that island. In the undated video, Zelenskyy voiced his gratitude for everyone who fought to protect it, calling it a place of victory that will never be conquered.

Meanwhile, Zelenskyy's government is thanking the U.S. for President Biden's decision to provide Ukraine with cluster bombs despite some international objections. Ukraine's Defense minister insists they'll only be used in nonurban areas and that careful records will be kept of where they are deployed for de-mining purposes later.

Biden's decision on cluster bombs comes just days before he meets with fellow NATO leaders in Lithuania. 46 foreign policy experts have come together to pen an open letter calling for a roadmap to NATO membership for Ukraine. They say any further delay in accepting Ukraine into the alliance will only cause more Russian aggression.

Among those signing the letter, retired Army Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman, former European Affairs director for the National Security Council, and Colonel Vindman joins me now.

Great to see you, sir. I guess we'll talk about the cluster munitions in a moment, but NATO membership for Ukraine, do you see that happening? You know, your open letter says they need a speedy path. Of course, there are going to be some rumblings inside NATO that that's going too fast. What's your sense of it?

LT. COL. ALEXANDER VINDMAN (RET.), U.S. ARMY: Unfortunately, I am -- I am going to be skeptical that we're going to make any bold moves at this Vilnius NATO Summit. I think we're missing a historic opportunity to invite Ukraine into NATO. It is one of the most powerful militaries in the world, and would be an enormous addition to NATO. But more importantly than its contribution to NATO long term and NATO security is the fact that this is a country that's at war with Russia and Russia believes that as long as this war is continuing on it maintains a veto over Ukraine's NATO membership.

So that means that we're setting up a recipe for Russia to continue to interfere, continue to wage war in Ukraine in an effort to block a session. If the U.S. were to deliver a roadmap, an aggressive roadmap, certainly if not immediately by the Washington summit next year, next NATO summit, then that would pretty much kill Putin's hopes of being able to wage war indefinitely and wait out the West.

[16:20:07]

So I think this would be a bold move with little risk, but I don't -- I fear that we're in an administration where the president is advised that the risks are too high without seeing all the opportunities that are commensurate with inviting Ukraine to NATO.

ACOSTA: All right. We'll watching that issue obviously next week. In the meantime, President Biden approved sending cluster munitions to Ukraine as part of a new military aid package. And as you know and the president acknowledged this, it's a controversial decision. As we mentioned earlier these weapons contain multiple explosives that are released over an area the size of several football fields. You can have unexploded bomblets in these munitions.

What is your sense of it, Colonel Vindman? Is this a good idea?

VINDMAN: I think the president is taking a little bit of heat from some corners. I think the progressive wings in particular are, you know, taking a very principled approach. He is likely to take a little bit of heat from elements of NATO also, that really -- that have the leisure to take these kinds of principled approaches. But from a practical standpoint, the president did the right thing and I support his decision.

It was the righteous thing to do. The fact that these systems are essential to Ukraine in these battles for liberating territory and helping win the war quickly. I met with probably almost a dozen Ukrainian ministers on our trip there. I just got back yesterday. And de-mining these kinds of munitions are at the forefront of their minds. Russia has been using these weapons systems with impunity, with a huge amount of duds, meaning unexploded ordinands.

Ukraine is going to be very mindful. They're going to take responsibility for their territory. It's being employed on their territory. They are going to be careful with them, but they see it as essential to being able to liberate territory and destroy the Russian army. This is all about being able to attack the Russian army at its heart, break its ability to continue to wage war in Ukraine, and with that helped usher in the conclusion of the war.

In a lot of ways, it seems counterintuitive, but it's frankly one of the most humane things that they could do in order -- instead of having this war run indefinitely, have a sharp punctuated conclusion to this war. It's a pretty humane approach both for the population that's living under occupation, for the soldiers that are sacrificing their lives to liberate their country, and for all of us that are, you know, assuming enormous amounts of risk with Russia in engaging in a perpetual war in Ukraine.

ACOSTA: Yes. Colonel Vindman, let me ask you this, though, just to press you on that a little bit. Just last year, the then White House Press Secretary Jen Saki was asked about Russia's possible use of cluster bombs against Ukraine and here is what she had to say in response to that question.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: There are reports of illegal cluster bombs and vacuum bombs being used by the Russians. If that's true, what is the next step of this administration, and is there a red line for how much violence will be tolerated against civilians in this manner that's illegal and potentially a war crime?

JEN PSAKI, FORMER WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: It would be. I don't have any confirmation of that. We have seen the reports. If that were true it would potentially be a war crime.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ACOSTA: Yes, what do you think of that, Colonel Vindman? She seemed to say that if it could be confirmed that Russia's use of those kinds of munitions might constitute a war crime. And here the United States, the Biden administration is talking about using some of that -- or sending Ukraine these same kinds of weapons so they can be used by the Ukrainians. What is your sense of that?

VINDMAN: Sure.

ACOSTA: What's your response to that? Does it sound like perhaps the Biden administration is reversing itself on whether or not this constitutes a war crime?

VINDMAN: I don't think they are. I think the fact is the U.S. is not a signatory to the prohibitions on the use of cluster munitions. We did that intentionally because we forecast the need for the ability to use these kinds of weapons in a near peer fight for the United States. Ukraine is also not a signatory.

What Jen was referring to was the fact that Russia was using cluster missions against population centers and civilians. That in fact is, you know, in any kind of measure a war crime. This is going to be used against military targets.

Look, I would like to live in a world where we don't have to use cluster munitions. We have templated the fact that we want to dispense with nuclear weapons. Just recently within the past couple of days the U.S. announced that it eliminated its chemical weapons stockpile. Eventually, we will get there. It is the right thing to do to eliminate these systems that could impact civilians. This is not the case or this is not a kind of criteria that should limit the prohibition or limit the provision of these types of systems.

It is essential to Ukraine to liberate its territory. Ukraine is responsible, will use these things effectively and with good stewardship.

[16:25:04]

And I think that the best thing we could do is be a good ally and support Ukraine in its fight to liberate its territory. And then take this argument forward and see if we could address some of these issues and limit the use of cluster munitions especially because they affect civilian populations. But that's not something that we have the luxury to kind of debate from a kind of conceptual standpoint at the moment.

ACOSTA: Might it though incentivize the Russians to use those kinds of munitions even more? They're saying, well, the U.S. is giving the Ukrainians these types of munitions, why can't we use them? Might you get yourself under a situation like that?

VINDMAN: Sure. Yes. I think in this case Russia is not constrained by any norms whatsoever. They blew up a dam. There is evidence to suggest that they might try to blow up a nuclear power plant. They are not constrained in any way. If they have something in their arsenal, the only thing that they're not using right now is weapons of mass destruction because the U.S. has warned that this would be an enormous escalation and would warrant an unprecedented response.

Russia has received the same warnings from China recently that's been covered. So anything that they have in their arsenal that they think they can get away with, they'll employ. There's not going to be any change. What it will do is it will actually provide the Ukrainians with some critical weapons systems. These are going to be fired from a cannon, a 155-millimeter cannon, to relatively precise targets even though they could spread over a large area.

The Ukrainians could identify the areas that they're going to employed, the dud rates for U.S. munitions, the I for DPICMs stand for improved. The dud rates are somewhere around 2 percent or lower. That's a pretty reasonable number when you think about the Russians being able to use their cluster munitions with dud rates of 40 percent. So less Russian cluster munitions is probably a good thing, as Russia is pushed out further and further back and unable to continue to wage war.

ACOSTA: All right, Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman, I have a feeling we're going to continue this conversation, talk about this issue and other issues when it pertains to Ukraine in the days ahead. Thanks a lot. Really appreciate it. Good talking to you.

All right. In the meantime, police in New York are investigating a string of shootings within a two-mile radius. Three people were shot in Jamaica, Queens in the span of 20 minutes. Police tell CNN they plan to hold a news conference shortly. We'll have more on this developing story ahead in the CNN NEWSROOM. So stay with us for that.

And a former New York City police officer is convicted of acting as an illegal foreign agent for China but he says he's a scapegoat. He joins me live to explain next, why he is going to be appealing this case. That's just a few moments. Stay with us.

You're live in the CNN NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:31:57]

ACOSTA: The Justice Department says it is cracking down on China's so- called Operation Fox Hunt. The little-known operation is Beijing's self-described anti-corruption campaign targeting Chinese fugitives living in other countries, including the U.S.

Last month, a federal jury in New York convicted three men of stalking a New Jersey family on behalf of the Chinese government.

Among the defendants, Michael McMahon, a former New York City police officer-turned private investigator.

Prosecutors say the year's-long plot involved targeting a former Chinese official and his family living in the U.S. McMahon said he had no idea this job had any ties to the Chinese government and the DOJ, he says, used him as a scapegoat.

Joining us now is Michael McMahon.

Michael, thanks for joining us. Really appreciate it.

Anxious to get your side of this story here. What happened, Michael? Why do you believe you were wrongly convicted in this case?

MICHAEL MCMAHON, FORMER NYPD SERGEANT: So I conducted legal P.I. work, private investigation work in New Jersey in 2016. I was hired by a translation company.

They had a client out of China who had a family business, a construction business that an employee had stolen millions of dollars from them. Information that we received, he was located in New Jersey. So I hired

two retired NYPD detectives. We did background checks. We did surveillance for five days, one day in 2016 and four days in 2017. We notified the local police on each and every time we did surveillance.

We located the individual, sent the report to our client, and then, four years later, in 2020, the FBI came to my house, banged on my door with 12 agents, surrounded by house and they arrested me for working for the Chinese government.

I thought it was a joke. I'm like, there's no way, not me, I haven't done anything wrong in my life. I was real curious about, why me? And here I am today. I had a trial, I was convicted, and I'm shocked and completely upset over this whole thing.

ACOSTA: Let me ask you --

(CROSSTALK)

MCMAHON: There were two lanes to my --

ACOSTA: I was just going to say, prosecutors say they recorded --

(CROSSTALK)

ACOSTA: -- that included recording and harassing this individual's daughter. I guess this was the individual that was the focus of your investigative work. Apparently, this is what the prosecutors say, taping a threatening note to his front door.

(CROSSTALK)

MCMAHON: That had nothing to do with me. That happened in California.

ACOSTA: OK.

And apparently, there was an attempt to fly the elderly father to --

(CROSSTALK)

ACOSTA: Yes. What is going on with all of that? That sounds like some heavy- handed stuff. Maybe you can explain?

MCMAHON: Yes. I knew the father was coming here. I knew the father was coming here to New Jersey.

[16:34:59]

But my -- what they told me was that he was coming here to ask the son to return the millions of dollars that he stole from the construction company. So, that was my only involvement with the father.

I had nothing to do with the daughter out in California. I wasn't out in California. It had nothing to do with me at all.

There were two lanes to my case. There is a civil lane and a criminal lane. The Chinese were involved in the criminal lane. I had no idea what was going on in that lane.

My job was civil assets, location of assets, find LLCs, find homes that he owned, where he lived, and that was my involvement. My involvement was civil asset location only.

I had no idea what was going on with the criminal stuff. I found out about that after my arrest when they sent me discovery. And I couldn't believe what their goals were and their plans were.

Because I had no idea they had goals to repatriate this guy back to China. That was never told to me.

I saved all my text messages. I saved all my emails. The Chinese deleted all their stuff. They had encrypted apps all amongst themselves and they deleted everything.

(CROSSTALK)

MCMAHON: They never told me to delete anything. So I still have all my stuff.

ACOSTA: Apparently, this is such a concern for the Justice Department and the Biden administration.

Earlier this year, federal investigators sent out a notice warning U.S.-based private investigators and others to look out for oppressive foreign governments engaging in these types of harassment and intimidation campaigns.

We are showing a screenshot of it right now, which includes the steps to take to keep yourself from, quote, "being used as a pawn in a repressive foreign plot, including looking into the person or company hiring you and being mindful of members of the diaspora community being potential targets."

Does this warning suggest that some in your profession are unaware they may be used as pawns by the Chinese government?

MCMAHON: Absolutely, 100 percent correct. No P.I.s were ever made aware of these operations.

The government, the FBI knew about these operations in 2014 and 2015. I was hired in 2016. So they knew about these operations but they kept the information secret to themselves.

They should have warned P.I.s in '14, 2015, 2016, to let us know, hey, listen, this could happen. To any of the P.I.s out there, just be aware of these operations and if you hear or see anything suspicious, let us know.

When I was arrested in 2020, my first reaction was, oh, my god, the P.I. business is in peril. Something will happen to another P.I. We cannot let that happen.

So, my wife was the one who was contacting numerous P.I. associations across the country and letting them know about these Fox Hunt operations.

Why is my wife calling numerous P.I.'s and letting them know? That should have been the job of the FBI.

ACOSTA: And I guess --

(CROSSTALK)

MCMAHON: -- and warn people.

ACOSTA: And you spent so many years as a private investigator. One of the questions I have looking at this case is, why were you not able to sort out that perhaps you were being used by the Chinese government to harass, intimidate members of the Chinese diaspora?

Isn't that something that a private investigator like yourself should be able to figure out?

MCMAHON: We had no red flags. There was nothing out of the ordinary. I've done hundreds of cases, surveillance, background checks. This was typical of what I had done hundreds of times. Nothing stood out to me as wrong, unethical or criminal.

I was never asked to do anything criminal. If I did, I would have notified local police. I would have notified the FBI. You know, nothing stood out to me.

I hired two NYPD detectives. They were with me the whole time. They did background checks as well. They were with me on surveillance.

I spoke with two active federal agents during this time. Nothing stood out to them. No one heard of Fox Hunt. No one heard of these operations. So there were no red flags.

ACOSTA: Michael, I know that you will be appealing your case. Please keep us posted on how the case develops. And we would love to have you back on if there are big developments that come in the future.

Michael McMahon, thanks for your time. We appreciate it.

MCMAHON: Thank you.

ACOSTA: Thanks for sharing your side of the story.

[16:39:35]

We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ACOSTA: This past week was the hottest ever recorded here on earth, with record-breaking temperatures everywhere from China to Mexico.

Here at home, millions of Americans remain under potentially deadly heat advisories, including Texas, which is battling a week's-long extreme heatwave. It has already broken multiple high temperature records as residents break power-use records as well.

And joining me now to talk about this is the mayor of Houston, Mayor Sylvester Turner.

Mayor Turner, great to see you.

I understand your city finally got a little relief as some showers have been rolling through but, my goodness, it has been just brutally hot. What has it been like in Texas this past month?

MAYOR SYLVESTER TURNER (D-HOUSTON): Well, it has been brutal. To give you some sense, in June, the fire department received about 442 heat- related calls. That is more than usual in June. Usually, we expect it to be hot towards the latter part of July and August, but June was exceptionally hot.

We got a little bit of a reprieve this week. But next week, we are anticipating that it will be 100 degrees and more this coming week.

ACOSTA: When you hear headlines about the hottest weather ever on earth and that sort of thing. I guess, down in Houston, you could say, OK, amen to that.

[16:45:02]

TURNER: Well, you know, it is hot. Climate change is real.

When we prepared our climate action plan back in 2020, we predicted that, if we did not make changes as it relates to climate change, that Houston could expect some 30 days where the temperature would be more than 100 degrees but the average could be about 106. So, things are coming to reality.

But climate change is real. Just in Houston alone, for example, since I have been mayor, and I've been there going on eight years now, we have faced seven federally declared disasters in those eight years. And now we are experiencing extreme heat conditions.

In fact, the U.S. Conference of Mayors is asking FEMA to designate heat, extreme heat as an element for FEMA to consider. I am hopeful that they will because the heat is serious.

And we are identifying various heat islands within the city. We are planting trees to go over the city of Houston, for example. Our goal is to plant 4.6 million trees in 2030 alone.

And since 2019, we have planted right about 1.4 million trees in the city of Houston to try to break up these heat islands.

ACOSTA: I've got to ask you, Mayor, because, if we are seeing records getting broken in recent days, it only logically follows that we could see even hotter temperatures in the years ahead.

What does that mean for cities like Houston? Can you keep up if it keeps getting -- if the weather just keeps getting hotter and hotter and hotter? TURNER: Well, what it means is that cities like the city of Houston

and others, we have to build in resilience. We have to take into account the impact on vulnerable, marginal communities.

We have to really be very data-driven and evidence-based, and that is why we are doing a lot of heat mapping in the city to determine and designate where those heat islands are.

We are certainly partnering with -- in our case, we have this Beat the Heat every June where we are partnering with, for example, reliant utilities and others, providing air conditioners especially to seniors that do not have them.

We opened up, for example, well over 20 cooling centers all throughout the city of Houston, and trying to create these lily pads throughout the city.

But what it means, as we move forward, now instead of focusing on, let's say the end of July, August in terms of stream heat, now we have to look into June. And if the pattern continues, we'll have to look at May, as well.

But it does not bode well. The planet is getting warmer. For any who have been questioning climate change, Mother Nature is reminding us each and every day that climate change is real.

ACOSTA: All right. Mayor Sylvester Turner, great to talk to you again as always. Thanks so much. Thanks for that warning as well. I hope people heed it. Thanks a lot.

We will be right back.

TURNER: Thanks.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:52:40]

ACOSTA: This week, the Food and Drug Administration fully approved the first treatment proven to slow the progression of Alzheimer's. Now an estimated one million patients suffering from early forms of the disease have access to the drug.

And Dr. Joanne Pike, president and CEO of the Alzheimer's Association, joins me now.

Dr. Pike, thanks so much for joining us on such an important topic.

How significant is this for patients? There are so many families who have been waiting for this news for years.

DR. JOANNE PIKE, PRESIDENT & CEO, ALZHEIMER'S ASSOCIATION: Yes. First off, thank you for having me to talk about this pivotal moment in the history of progress against Alzheimer's disease.

This is truly a moment that we should all be celebrating. It has taken us decades to get to a point where we have a traditional approval from the FDA for a drug that treats the underlying biology of the disease.

This means for those in the earliest stages of Alzheimer's or those with mild cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer's disease, they have a treatment option available to them that they can discuss with their physicians and certainly make informed choices with their family and their doctor.

ACOSTA: And I mean, as with many medical treatments, not everybody is going to be eligible for this drug, Leqembi. Is there any hope for those with more advanced forms of Alzheimer's?

PIKE: This is certainly -- as you mentioned, this is for the earliest stages of the disease. And as we look to the future of more research, we know that the mid to later stages of the disease are those areas that we need to expand on our research portfolio.

Certainly, in the coming weeks, at our own local conference, the Alzheimer's Association International Conference, we're going to hear about more advances in the fight against Alzheimer's.

ACOSTA: And I mean, how promising is this for folks who have been just waiting for this to happen, for folks with early signs of Alzheimer's? What kind of life-changing news is this, would you say?

PIKE: This is an opportunity for individuals who could potentially benefit from this to have an opportunity for a treatment that extends their time within the disease at the earliest stages when you are hoping to pause that progression over time.

[16:55:09]

What we saw in the clinical trials is that treatment with Leqembi can be averaged about six months of extended time before the disease progressed.

And six months is incredibly meaningful in the fight against a fatal disease where individuals are looking to extend that time with loved ones, make more memories, be able to think about and participate in the decisions about their own health care into the future.

ACOSTA: All right, well, Dr. Joanne Pike, it is a very big moment for families dealing with this disease.

We really appreciate your time. Thank you so much.

PIKE: Thank you.

ACOSTA: We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)