Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Do New Weight Loss Drugs Work?; Texas Supreme Court Clears Path For Execution; Interview With Sen. Alex Padilla (D-CA). Aired 11:30a- 12p ET

Aired November 15, 2024 - 11:30   ET

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

[11:34:28]

PAMELA BROWN, CNN HOST: Breaking news, the Texas Supreme Court has cleared a path to the execution for a man convicted of murdering his 2-year-old daughter.

The court has denied a state House committee attempt to delay Robert Roberson's execution. His conviction more than 20 years ago was based on allegations of shaken baby syndrome and has gotten a lot of attention. But his attorneys argue that diagnosis has been discredited.

I want to bring in CNN's Ed Lavandera.

What more can you tell us, Ed?

ED LAVANDERA, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, this is a development that has been several weeks in the making.

[11:35:02]

You will remember that, back in October, the day before Robert Roberson was scheduled to be executed. A state House committee issued a subpoena for him to testify in front of the legislature. And that subpoena date was set for after the execution date.

So that move there halted, in a very dramatic last-minute situation, the execution of Robert Roberson back in October. And that set off a legal fight between the legislative branch and the executive branch here in the state of Texas, which is was essentially what the Supreme Court here in the state was looking at.

The state Supreme Court essentially ruled that the state committee, the state House committee, couldn't block the execution that way and is now allowing it to go forward. So now we have to look at the local district attorney who will request, presumably, a new execution date. We have tried for weeks to get a hold of the district attorney. She hasn't spoken with us.

But that date has not been set. But what the state House committee officials are pointing to in the Supreme Court ruling, and which is what they have wanted all along, is the opportunity to get Robert Roberson's testimony, which would be an unprecedented scene, a death row inmate testifying before a House committee. This Supreme Court ruling today, Pamela, makes clear that that

testimony could happen. Now, the execution date can't be -- as soon as it happens, there's a 90-day window. So we are at least three months away from an execution date being scheduled. So that state House committee can in the interim here, in this period, gather the testimony of Robert Roberson before this House committee, which would be a monumental moment in terms of death penalty cases here in this state.

But that's where we're at now, so really all eyes now looking at the local district attorney to see if a new execution date will be set. And this House committee clearly, I get the impression, is going to move quickly to try to continue to gather the testimony and the appearance of Robert Roberson before the legislative committee to hear his testimony.

And what they want to do is to -- for the public to be able to see Robert Roberson testify, and they believe that will gather him goodwill, so that people can understand their case and why defense lawyers believe that he has been wrongfully accused and that the state, in their view, is set to execute an innocent man.

BROWN: All right,thanks so much, Ed Lavandera.

We will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:42:56]

BROWN: Well, this morning, Capitol Hill is looking like a very steep climb for Matt Gaetz. There was instant blowback when president-elect Trump announced the MAGA loyalist as his attorney general pick, and the criticism is growing two days later.

Lawmakers in both parties are demanding to see the findings of a House ethics investigation of Gaetz that focus on allegations of sexual misconduct and illegal drug use. But that probe ended when Gaetz abruptly resigned from Congress Wednesday.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. RICHARD DURBIN (D-IL): I want to know what's in this Ethics Committee report. It's a bipartisan investigation of some extremely serious charges. That has to be public. Let the American people then decide whether he's competent and qualified.

The timing of his resignation and flight with president-elect Donald Trump suggests he believes that this report is not friendly and favorable.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: Joining us now is a member of the Judiciary Committee, Democratic Senator Alex Padilla of California.

Thank you for coming on, Senator.

Do senators have a right to see the report on Gaetz before potentially voting on his confirmation and do you expect to see it?

SEN. ALEX PADILLA (D-CA): Look, I believe we do have a right to see not just the report, but all the supporting documentation and evidence that has led up to this near-final report.

If we are going to be true to our obligation as senators to conduct a thorough vetting and background before we can even consider this nomination, which we know is beyond troubled at the outset, just what's in the public domain is already disqualifying, I believe, for Matt Gaetz.

But, hey, this is Donald Trump's choice. And so let's go through the process. What are they afraid of by holding on to the report or even skirting a typical FBI investigation, background for members of the committee, both sides of the aisle, to consider?

BROWN: Gaetz, for his part, as you know, has denied any wrongdoing.

Last night, the majority leader-elect, John Thune, was asked on FOX News about using recess appointments to get Trump's Cabinet picks through as Trump himself has pushed for. Here's what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. JOHN THUNE (R-SD): All options are on the table, including recess appointments. Hopefully, it doesn't get to that, but we will find out fairly quickly whether the Democrats want to play ball or not.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: So he's putting the ball in Democrats' court. How do you respond?

PADILLA: Yes, what ball is he talking about? Is he talking about rubber-stamping anything that Trump is asking for? Or is he talking about playing ball in terms of living up to our obligations as a Senate to have genuine confirmation hearings and review of Trump nominees?

Look, as troubling as Matt Gaetz and all of Trump's nominees and announcements so far are, the bigger question here is also, this is a test of Senate Republicans, not just Republicans in Congress, but the Senate specifically.

Will they stand up and live up to their obligations that they accepted when they took the oath of office, or are they simply going to bend over and rubber-stamp anything that Trump wants? So, the question is on Republican leader-elect Thune and every single Republican in the Senate.

[11:45:13] BROWN: Do you agree with the next Senate majority leader, though, that Trump's overwhelming victory should factor into weighing qualifications in getting some of these picks through?

PADILLA: Look, I disagree. I absolutely disagree, I mean, for two things. Did he win an election? Yes. Did he win a mandate? I don't believe so.

It was a close election, as we have all covered for the last several months and for the last week-and-a-half. Second, if you want to look at numbers and mandates, when President Biden was elected, his national vote margin was more than seven million votes. Donald Trump's national vote margin is half that and shrinking.

So it's not a mandate, and it's certainly not moral high ground or moral authority here to just give the president what he wants.

BROWN: Right, but he still is ahead of Kamala Harris by millions of votes in the popular vote, and he won seven battleground states.

(CROSSTALK)

BROWN: And for a Republican, it's been a long time since he won a popular vote.

But that is the argument from his allies, that, look, he has this mandate, his pick should go through.

Do you think enough Republican senators will defect to imperil the confirmation of any Trump's -- any of Trump's picks? And who do you think would be most at risk right now of actually getting confirmed?

PADILLA: Look, well, I -- Matt Gaetz is obviously front and center, not just based on how troubling and problematic his nomination is, not that there's not others that are very problematic and troubling and concerning for the sake of the American people.

This isn't politics here. But I applaud a couple of my Republican colleagues who've already publicly expressed their concern and reservation with some of these selections and announcements. But the test will come when it comes time to a confirmation hearing how intensely we are asking questions and how people will vote again to either rubber-stamp a problematic Trump nominee or do what's right for the American people.

BROWN: Are there any of Trump's Cabinet announcement so far that you personally would vote for at this point?

PADILLA: I don't -- I don't want to speak in absolutes, because we haven't gone through the background and confirmation hearing process.

But if I had to pick one, one of my colleagues, Senator Rubio, we disagree on a lot, but I know that he's approaching this process, I think, as much more thoughtfully than Matt Gaetz, RFK Jr., Tulsi Gabbard, so many of the others that we have heard about. BROWN: Sources tell CNN that president-elect Trump's transition team

is bypassing the traditional FBI background checks for at least some of his Cabinet picks. They are relying more on private companies to do so. They think that it'll be faster, among other reasons.

Does that concern you?

PADILLA: It's a huge concern, not only because it's been standard practice in years past, right? Who better than the FBI to conduct a background investigation and provide to both the president to consider before he makes a nomination or to the Senate to consider before considering confirming?

We have got to ask, what are they worried about? What are they afraid of? What do they have to hide?

Second, it's not shocking. I mean, Trump's selection for attorney general is Matt Gaetz, and he is already on record wanting to abolish the FBI. So, this is nothing other than Trump loyalty tests at every turn, both in who he selects, the processes he's trying to follow, that he just wants his people in place to do his bidding, regardless of the law, regardless of the Constitution, regardless of the safety of the public.

BROWN: All right, Senator Alex Padilla, thank you so much for your time.

PADILLA: Thank you, Pamela.

We will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:52:09]

BROWN: And turning out to dramatic new video just in to CNN from a passenger aboard a Scandinavian Airlines flight.

Watch the moment he captured extreme turbulence over Greenland.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

(SCREAMING)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: The plane was headed for Miami, but had to turn around and fly to Copenhagen after this. One person said he and his fellow passengers began praying. There were more than 250 people on board.

Scandinavian Airlines say -- they say that no one was severely injured.

According to a sweeping new study, nearly three-quarters of U.S. adults are overweight, nearly three-quarters. Wow, the study is published in "The Lancet," and it shows a steep rise in obesity rates since 1990. In 2024, many Americans are turning to some popular injectable drugs to lose weight. I bet you have heard of them or maybe you're taking them yourself.

Dr. Sanjay Gupta is back with us to answer some of your questions about these medications.

Hi, Sanjay.

So let's start with a question from Maria in Florida. She is asking: "Once you reach your weight goal, can you stay in a lower dose or space out injections for weight maintenance and to keep food noise away?"

DR. SANJAY GUPTA, CNN CHIEF MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, well, the short -- this is a great question. The short answer is yes. I mean, we're typically used to hearing about a medication being prescribed, taking it at a very specific dose and not adjusting it.

But I think people are tailoring these medications, such as Ozempic, Wegovy, Mounjaro, Zepbound, which might mean, as you point out, taking a maintenance dose, not increasing the dose, or lowering your dose, or spacing out your dose. That's something that's happening quite a bit.

And you should do this in conjunction with a doctor, so that you can just make sure you're doing this appropriately and checking important biomarkers and things like that along the way.

I will tell you something that's interesting, Pamela, is that if you look at the data, more than half the people who start these medications do stop taking them within 12 weeks, which I thought was really interesting, because I think the belief was that these were going to be lifelong medications for most people. Not the case.

We also find in a new study that about 80 percent of people who do stop the medications are able to keep a lot of that weight off. We're not entirely sure why, but it probably has a lot to do with adopting lifestyle modifications, in addition to the medicine.

So it's not just a medication for those folks, but a burst of motivation to sort of get their lifestyle in order as well.

BROWN: Yes, another positive outcome, right, from this.

GUPTA: Yes.

BROWN: So, Sam from Arizona writes that they are hopeful that these drugs can help with infertility, but says they are frustrated that insurance companies refuse to recognize this.

[11:55:08]

So, Sanjay, what can you tell us about the drugs' impact on fertility and -- quote -- "Do you see a world when they are eventually covered by most insurance plans?"

GUPTA: OK, well, the first part of the question, I think that there is a pretty clear link between the use of these medications and fertility.

It sort of started off by seeing these hashtags, Ozempic moms, people who are not able to get pregnant, went on the medications, and then were able to get pregnant. And then it was increasingly studied. And there -- found to be at this correlation between weight and most likely something known as PCOS, polycystic ovary syndrome, which can be associated with infertility.

Lower the weight, lower the PCOS, and that's why they're probably more likely to get pregnant. It's not yet an indication for these medications. So that's the insurance part of this. It'll be harder to get insurance to cover it. But if it's associated with obesity, it'll be a BMI of 30 or higher, then it should be associated -- then it should be covered, Pamela.

BROWN: All right, Dr. Sanjay Gupta, thank you so much.

And thank you for joining us. I'm Pamela Brown. You can follow me on Instagram, TikTok, and X @PamelaBrownCNN. I want to hear from you.

And stay with us. "INSIDE POLITICS" with Manu Raju starts after a short break.