Return to Transcripts main page
Erin Burnett Outfront
Pelosi Vows Vote Tonight On Infrastructure Bill; Sources Say About 20 Progressives Will Vote No; Jan 6 Chairman Responds After Trump DOJ Official Refused To Answer Questions: Cooperate Or Face "Strong Measures." Aired 7-8p ET
Aired November 05, 2021 - 19:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
WOLF BLITZER, CNN HOST: May he rest in peace and may his memory be a blessing.
ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST: OUTFRONT next the breaking news, Democrats in disarray tonight. The Chair of the Progressive Caucus dealing President Biden a blow, refusing to back his agenda as Pelosi is still pushing forward with a vote.
Plus, breaking news, the Albany District Attorney calling the criminal complaint filed against former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo potentially defective. So what does this say about Cuomo's fate?
And Green Bay Packers' quarterback Aaron Rodgers tonight admitting he wasn't vaccinated even though he said in August he was immunized. Hear his bizarre explanation. Let's go out front.
And good evening. I'm Erin Burnett.
OUTFRONT tonight, we do have breaking news this hour. President Biden taking a big blow from his own team. House Progressive Chair, Pramila Jayapal is the one dealing the blow telling Biden no, she will not support his bipartisan infrastructure bill without a vote on the progressive massive spending bill. This is a major hit this hour to the President and this is from his own party.
Biden canceled his trip to Delaware tonight, so we could call Jayapal to tell her to get her on board with her caucus, but as of this moment he has failed. And we are learning that as of this moment, 20 progressives will join Jayapal and go against Biden by syncing the bipartisan infrastructure bill tonight. Because as of now, there still is a vote Pelosi has not pulled it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA): Mr. Clyburn has the official whip count. I have the Speaker's secret whip count. I don't tell anything that he will tell me, not even you, my dear good friends. But I have a pretty good feel.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: Again, CNN learning as of this moment that 20 progressives have said they will not back the bipartisan bill. Now, Pelosi can only afford to lose three. So if they've got account where 17 of those are going to flip back, okay. But the truth is, if Jayapal scuttled the infrastructure bill, it may be deeply Pyrrhic victory. A victory that carries the consequence of holding up the one thing that has widespread bipartisan support, which is the infrastructure bill. It would be a Pyrrhic victory, one that makes Pelosi who is the Speaker for the entire Democratic Party look foolish if she's forced to pull yet another vote on the bipartisan bill.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PELOSI: Let me just say we're going to pass the bill this week.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do you think you're going to vote on the infrastructure bill today?
PELOSI: That is our plan. I've told you that again and again.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do you expect a vote today?
PELOSI: We're on that path.
This is professional. Let's do it in a timely fashion. Let's not just keep having postponements and leaving any doubt as to when this will happen. When we see that October 31st is the date of expiration of the Highway Trust Fund and we made this the target date for us to get this done, we need certainty.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: Day after day, week after week, it's also a Pyrrhic victory for this reason. It humiliates the President of the United States. The leader of Jayapal's party who today put his foot down, he explicitly told House Democrats that he wants a vote. He wants to vote not just when they get around to it, he wants the vote now.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I'm asking every House member, member of the House of Representatives to vote yes on both these bills right now. Send the infrastructure building to my desk, send the Build Back Better bill to the Senate.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: Jayapal tonight is not a yes, she's a no, doing a complete about-face actually when it comes to Biden and his agenda. Here she is earlier this week.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. PRAMILA JAYAPAL (D-WA): It's the President's agenda and his word is on the line and I got to trust him. I am going to trust the President. Our members are going to trust the President. I think he deserves our trust and I'm ready to give it to him.
(END VIDEO CLIP) BURNETT: She trusts him, she's ready to give it to him, you got to heed his call, but not right now. Not at this moment. At this moment, she is not ready to get Biden what he explicitly says he wants. Kaitlan Collins is OUTFRONT live at the White House tonight.
I want to start, though, with Manu Raju who's on Capitol Hill with all of these breaking developments. And Manu, this story literally is changing by the minute. There was going to be a vote, both bills were going to be voted on that. It was a framework for one, then all of a sudden Jayapal is a hard no. Where do things stand now?
MANU RAJU, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes. After a standoff earlier today with moderates who are holding up that larger $1.9 trillion bill, now there is a standoff with the progressives. We're holding up that separate $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill, but the pressure is on, the president and the speaker are trying to urge the progressives not to hold up that bipartisan infrastructure bill and vote yes and send it to his desk tonight.
Now, we are learning that Joe Biden has called into a meeting with the Progressive Caucus and he was on speakerphone, urging them to get behind this.
Now, I also was told that Biden spoke directly with Pramila Jayapal, the leader of the Congressional Progressive Caucus earlier today. But Jayapal told him directly she would vote no and she will continue to vote no. And at that same meeting, I'm told that there were 20 progressives who raised their hands and said that they were not willing to vote for this tonight.
Now, the question will be whether or not any of them change their minds between now and to when Pelosi plans to put this on the floor, if she does move forward with the vote. Now this all comes amid just a change of strategy that Pelosi has employed from the beginning of today till the end, at the beginning of the day she wanted to get both bills done, they were expressing confidence that both bills would get approved.
But then the moderate said they will not agree to that larger bill, the $1.9 trillion bill until there was a full accounting by the Congressional Budget Office. But the problem for the leadership was that it would take weeks for that full accounting to happen, which is why the progressives said, well, if you're going to wait weeks to have a vote on that larger bill, we're going to wait weeks for the infrastructure bill.
So now Pelosi is trying to call their bluff, push them to break ranks and the President is trying to do the same. But I can tell you, Erin, in talking to the progressive members as they're leaving the meeting, they're showing no signs of breaking ranks. They are saying that they have said all along, both these bills need to go together and they're not changing.
So the question is, at the moment, who blink first and the progressives are saying it's not going to be them. Erin.
BURNETT: Yes. I mean, it is incredible to see what is happening. I think very few would have expected that at this moment that they would say no directly to the President and yet here we are, all right, moment by moment. Manu would stay with us, of course, as he continues to follow this minute by minute.
I want to go now to Kaitlan Collins at the White House, though. Kaitlan, this isn't what the President expected would happen, especially as things started out this morning and he came out with this plea. And Congresswoman Jayapal days ago had said his words on the line, we need to support him and yet now a complete change of tune. What is President Biden going to do now?
KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yes. Erin, what's striking about that is that, that plea that you're talking about that came from President Biden this morning saying you need to vote on this right now. That is what I'm asking of you. It's something that the President had waited to make.
I mean, these negotiations have been going on for weeks and four months now and the President has held off saying you need to vote now. He even did not do so last week before he left to go overseas on his foreign trip. When he went up to Capitol Hill, he met with progressives, he talked to them about these bills and they came out of there saying he did not ask us to vote on this today. He did not ask for a vote today.
Well, today, he certainly did saying you need to vote on these right now. And of course, what you're seeing and based on what Manu was hearing from these progressives leaving this meeting, they are set to do that. And to deliver the President a major setback on a day that he started on a pretty good foot with that robust jobs report that had exceeded economist expectations, something that he started this morning touting as he was also making the pitch for these bills saying he wanted to sign this infrastructure bill.
But the White House said he would sign without that other one also coming to his desk, that bigger package, of course, which is at the center of these negotiations and of this fighting that is happening within the Democratic Party and now the President was scheduled to go to Rehoboth Beach, Delaware tonight. The White House has just said he is no longer going to do so tonight.
So at least a postponement on the President's travel plans as they are watching what is happening on Capitol Hill, waiting to see what ultimately the progressives are going to do and if they're going to follow through on their word to not vote for this infrastructure bill tonight, like House Speaker Nancy Pelosi wants.
And it's been a bit of a scramble here at the White House, just as much as what you're seeing on Capitol Hill and what Manu are talking about, the President is calling several lawmakers as Manu and Phil have reported. He's also calling into the Congressional Progressive Caucus meeting, making all of these calls, trying to get his agenda over the finish line. But Erin, make no mistake. If these progressives do not vote on this, they are telling the President and delivering him a hard note when he has asked them to vote yes on this.
BURNETT: Yes. I mean, it's certainly so. All right. Kaitlan, thank you very much.
All right. I want to go now to Robert Reich, he was the Labor Secretary under former President Clinton and John Kasich, the former Republican Governor of Ohio, also former Chairman of the House Budget Committee.
Secretary Reich, let me start with you. Look, this is not the way anybody thought this day was going to go. It's not the way maybe even Congresswoman Jayapal thought a day like this would go. She's on the record days ago. "It's the President's agenda and his Word is on the line. I've got to trust him." She repeated it again and again, and yet tonight even with that direct plea, he called her, she's not willing to do it. Is that the right thing or is this going to be a Pyrrhic victory?
ROBERT REICH, FORMER U.S. LABOR SECRETARY UNDER CLINTON: Erin, look, this is a matter of timing. I mean, you know what they say about sausage and legislation. I mean, this is how things are done in Washington. There is going to be some friction over what comes exactly when and I think it's a gross exaggeration to think that this is somehow a humiliation for Joe Biden.
Obviously, the (inaudible) ...
BURNETT: Secretary Reich, so I have to say this is not how things are normally done. Normally, it does not get to this point.
REICH: I'm sorry, but I was watching them, Erin ...
BURNETT: Nancy Pelosi has never before said three times that ...
REICH: ... it was exactly the way ...
BURNETT: ... hold on, hold on, she's ...
REICH: ... it was exactly the way they do that.
BURNETT: ... no, but she has never said I'm going to bring a vote three times and been unable to bring.
REICH: Wait a minute, wait a minute, wait, it's a messy process. It's always a messy process and this is going to be - look at these negotiations that are going on all the time on the Hill, you know that.
REICH: I mean, I was there. I was in the middle of this. BURNETT: Gov. Kasich, what do you say, is this an overreaction? Is this how things are done?
JOHN KASICH, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: No, it's a total dysfunction. And I like Robert Reich, he's a smart guy. But this is ridiculous, what's happening now. If I were Joe Biden or his advisors, I'd tell them to start calling some Republicans. They shouldn't McCarthy. McCarthy is out the window on this.
But you got to find 20 votes among the Republicans? That would be really pretty earth-shaking, wouldn't it? Think about if they pass the infrastructure bill and the progressive sat out, and all of a sudden 20 Republicans showed up and said we will vote for this thing. They may get 20 Republicans if the President works this, it's possible.
BURNETT: Well, they had 19 in the Senate on the bipartisan bill.
BURNETT: So I want you to understand, this is the bipartisan bill you're talking about.
KASICH: Yes. It's possible and what it will do is, frankly, in some ways this could work the Joe Biden's benefit. He can say I've had enough of this, because right now he's being held hostage by the progressives and it's not his agenda, he didn't run this way. So, I mean, I'm just amazed. I mean, I've watched this. I've been in the Congress. I've seen all this. This is like nothing I've ever seen before.
Normally, it's a fight between two parties. So now it's a fight inside the Democratic Party and it looks like the Republicans win, which is ridiculous, because the country loses.
BURNETT: Secretary Reich, the Vice Chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, so Sheila Jackson Lee, obviously, right next to Congresswoman Jayapal. She tweeted earlier today. So President Biden came in front of the podium and said, "I'm asking every House member to vote yes on both of these bills right now."
Sheila Jackson Lee, the congresswoman responds on Twitter, "The answer is yes. Let's pass the President's agenda and invest in the American people." That was today. And now here we are and suddenly the answer is no. What do you think happened, Secretary Reich, when they changed their mind?
REICH: Wait a minute, but no what the progressives are saying is we want to do exactly what the President said, the President said I want votes on both of these today. I mean, look at the Senate, for example. I mean, the President has asked Joe Manchin over and over again and also Kyrsten Sinema over and over again to get on board with what the President wants and they are not doing it.
The Democrats are always a large kind of tumultuous group. I mean, to just simply assume that if the progressives say, well, we want to change the timing and Joe Biden says, well, I'd like both of these to be voted on today and the progressive said, yes, we want to vote on both of them today. But then they're not ready, the moderates were not ready to vote on them today, who's to blame? It seems to me it's not very clear.
BURNETT: Well, that's a fair point. But Governor, I put it to you, even if they passed this bill today, if they all just went ahead and did it, it kind of is like the sound and fury signifying nothing. Because the bill as it is structured now by all accounts is not the way it's going to pass the Senate. Now, that could change. But by all accounts, now it isn't.
KASICH: Well, it's definitely not going to pass the way it is.
BURNETT: So it is even the bill that's going to end up going to the President's desk if there actually even is one when we're talking about the - not the bipartisan bill - but the other bill, the Build Back Better bill.
KASICH: Look, it isn't going to pass the Senate as the way it is and Nancy, God bless her, she's sticking things in there that Manchin's already said he's not going to vote for.
KASICH: And Joe Manchin is not some not here. He's saying we got to worry about the debt. We've got to worry about growing the government. He's saying all those things and you know what, he's in tune, you look at Tuesday's election, he's pretty well in tune with the populace.
Now, look, right Republicans have had unbelievable dysfunction caused by the right wing inside of their party. They drove John Boehner out who was trying to get it right. But they were able to somehow muddle their way through this is unprecedented what's happening here and this is not good for the country. I don't celebrate this. I'm an American before I'm a Republican or a Democrat. This is just really hard to believe.
Robert Reich may be right, they may pass this thing tomorrow. But look, the steam is out of it. And what they hoped was going to be a great rebound, I don't think so. But get the infrastructure bill passed, it's good for everyone.
The country is probably for it 90-10, I don't know who's against it. That is the right way to proceed.
BURNETT: That bill is very popular.
KASICH: Yes. And look, there's nothing wrong with the President of the United States who was elected to bring both parties together to solve problems to start trying to recruit Republicans. That would be a great message to get out. And if he loses it, then he can say, I'm going to come back and I'm going to fight, fight, fight and have some passion, because I don't even hear passion tonight from him. BURNETT: Secretary Reich, let me ask you, do you have a deep concern, though, about the cost of this? Again, back to the point of a Pyrrhic victory, let's say you get one, the bipartisan when that's all you get or you get both, I don't know. The point is, it's been months, there's been this very ugly fight going. Sometimes, when you get to the end of that road, you get everything you want and nobody cares, because they're so poisoned by the whole process.
Do you have concern that that could be the outcome? I mean, when you look at a 12-point swing in Virginia away from Biden towards the Republican, in New Jersey, the Democrat ekes it out. But it was a 13- point swing away from Democrats versus what Biden won by in the election. I mean, these are dramatic swings by voters.
REICH: Well, Erin, I'm not sure one follows another. I don't know whether the Virginia voters or New Jersey voters were really paying a huge amount of attention to the intricacies of congressional negotiations. But let's assume that there was some effect. I think the effect is and let's be fair about this, I think that the more the Democrats delay, the worse it is, I think.
I'm with Gov. Kasich, we ought to get this done as fast as we can. But what's this that we want to get done? I think that the public wants what is in the both of those bills, not just the infrastructure bill, but also the social and climate bill. And if you look at the polls, the public is overwhelmingly in favor of this. So let's get both of them done as soon as possible.
It's a shame that not a single Republican has signed on to either of these bills in the Senate or in the House. I think that's really the sad commentary about that.
BURNETT: Well, in the Senate, 19 Republicans did vote for the infrastructure bill, just to be clear.
REICH: Well, the infrastructure bill, but I'm talking about the package. The package is what everybody, I mean, look at those polls, Erin, in terms of what the public opinion, what the public wants in terms of child care (inaudible) ...
BURNETT: Well, the public is split, I mean, in general, they don't - yes, they want the childcare leave, but they don't think it's going to change their economic point of view when the polls on the second bill, the Build Back Better bill, as Democrats call it, but ...
KASICH: You know what, Erin, here's another point and I know that Bob Reich knows this. Again, he's a very smart guy. Look, they want this stuff but when you tell them they have to pay for it, they don't like it as much. Now, here's the thing I believe, I think if they broke this out, Erin and Bob, if they broke this thing out and did the child tax credit, I think they could pass it in a bipartisan way. If they did family leave, I think they could pass it.
But it's in one big package and we don't even know what it's going to cost. There's a thing that just came out today that said, it could cost three or four times what they're estimating and now the moderates in the House are saying, we need to know what it's going to cost, that's like a reasonable (inaudible) ...
BURNETT: Well, my biggest issue is these things that they're talking about are not things you do for a few years. But that's what they're doing, because that's what they can with the kind of way you do budgets. But that's not what these things are intended to be. You want family leave, you don't want it for four years and then it goes away, that's completely - it's just not the right way to do it. I understand there's budgetary process. There's other things, but we got to be honest. If you want it, you want it for the long-term. We got to pay for it.
Thank you both very much.
REICH: (Inaudible) ...
REICH: ... can we just - about paying for it. I mean, what we want is the richest people in America who have never as been as rich as they are now, most of the wealth of the country is now concentrated in the hands of a relatively few number of people. They should be paying their fair share. They ought to be paying for what the rest of the country needs. We're the only country in the world among the rich countries (inaudible) ...
BURNETT: But this came out time, Secretary, though, and you didn't answer my question which is they're already paying 78 percent of the taxes. How much more do you want them to pay? Are you saying they're not saying they're not paying their fair share ...
BURNETT: But you need to define that, Secretary.
REICH: (Inaudible) they just went two over the last 10 without paying a dime. You've got (inaudible) ...
BURNETT: I don't know who you're talking about. You're talking about a few billionaires, that's true, you could tax them at a hundred percent but that would not give you enough money to pay for this bill.
REICH: Are you kidding, (inaudible) ...
KASICH: Well, here's another thing though, we need to realize, Bob.
BURNETT: They would not.
REICH: Wait a minute, there was just a study ...
REICH: This is important, there was just a study done showing that during the course of the pandemic, can I just - this is important stuff.
BURNETT: Okay. REICH: During the course of the pandemic, the billionaires, 775 billionaires in America increased their wealth by $2.1 trillion, $2.1 trillion, what does that mean? They could pay a huge portion of what we're now talking about. Erin, don't say that they don't have the wealth, obviously, (inaudible) ...
BURNETT: Secretary, but, no, no, no, but I think this is important, but you're talking about increasing it and then what happens when the market goes down and all of a sudden their wealth is down by $3 trillion.
You're talking about unrealized gains and I understand this is an important issue but ...
KASICH: The other thing is - here's another point, though, Erin, I got to get this ...
BURNETT: ... hold on, let me just make the point, I think it's important for people understand that unrealized gain on your house if someone is going to take that away from you, but then you go to sell your house two years later and it's down, that's not real money. Secretary, you and I, we all know this.
REICH: But what the proposals that we're talking about incorporate exactly the condition that you're raising, that is if you lose money, you can take it away, you can deduct it and get a tax credit the next time around. This has been a demagogue in a way that is crazy. I mean, this country right now is in a position where we alone of rich countries, we don't have family leave, alone of rich countries, we don't have all sorts of benefits that people want and need and why not? Because the rich in this country, a handful of, comparatively handful have never been as rich as they are now and they're not paying anything. They're not paying their fair share. They're paying basically rounding errors. I mean, why don't we get (inaudible) here?
BURNETT: Governor, I'll give you the final word.
KASICH: Okay, first of all - well, look, the public doesn't want any taxes right now and they don't want giant government, they should have broken this up. But there's another interesting thing, Bob is saying that we don't want to let the rich off the hook. But included in this package now is to let rich off the hook when it comes to their proper state and local taxes. They're now raising the amount of money that people can be exempted from if they're so intent on punishing the rich, why are they doing that? And I'll tell you why. Politics.
But we'll get through it. We'll get through it and there was a day when Bob and I work together very closely and we're going to do it again. And Erin, I'm voting for Erin Burnett, whatever you're running for, Erin, I'm for you. I'm voting for you.
REICH: Wait a minute, John Kasich, can I just - this is ...
BURNETT: Okay, quickly.
REICH: You just said something that we really need to make note of and that is the rich and big corporations in this country have extraordinary political power. That's why the billionaire tax was taken off the table.
BURNETT: All right. (Inaudible) 775 people ...
KASICH: We have a problem with the wealth gap, we all agree.
BURNETT: All right.
KASICH: Thank you.
BURNETT: Thank you both very much.
KASICH: Thanks, Erin.
BURNETT: I really do appreciate having both of you on. I think it adds a lot of value.
KASICH: It was good.
BURNETT: I think it's important to have these conversations.
All right. Thank you both.
REICH: All right.
KASICH: Thank you.
BURNETT: And next, he's considered a key witness in the January 6th investigation, but why did he stonewall lawmakers today?
And Green Bay Packers' quarterback Aaron Rodgers playing the victim after claiming he was immunized even though he was never vaccinated.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
AARON RODGERS, GREEN BAY PACKERS QUARTERBACK: During that time, it was a very witch hunt that was going on across the league.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: New tonight, the chairman of the January 6th committee with a warning for witness Jeffrey Clark, after he refused to answer questions during his testimony today. Clark is the former Justice Department official who tried to help then-President Trump overturned the 2020 election and he spent about 90 minutes with the Committee.
Chairman Bennie Thompson saying tonight, "He has a very short time to reconsider and cooperate fully." Paula Reid is OUTFRONT.
And Paula, what more are we learning about Clark stonewalling tonight?
PAULA REID, CNN SENIOR LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Good evening, Erin. Well, this did not go according to plan. Now, sources familiar with his appearance say Clark presented lawmakers with a letter from his attorney saying he will not cooperate until a court declares that his interactions with Trump are not protected by attorney-client privilege or executive privilege.
Now, CNN has obtained that letter, which specifically cites ongoing litigation where Trump is asking a federal court to block lawmakers from accessing more than 700 pages of White House documents related to January 6th.
Now just yesterday, a federal judge heard arguments in that case and Erin she appeared deeply skeptical about Trump's claim that he should be able to block lawmakers from obtaining evidence that is relevant to their investigation. And the Chairman of the Committee, Rep. Bennie Thompson says he rejects Clark's claim of privilege and he suggested that contempt is an option on the table.
Now, of course, the committee recently referred longtime Trump aide Steve Bannon to the Justice Department for criminal contempt after he refused to cooperate. Now, Clark was supposed to appear last week, but that was delayed when he parted ways with his lawyer.
Today, he was joined by a new lawyer, Harry MacDougald, an Atlanta- based lawyer who actually worked with Trump ally Sidney Powell to challenge the results of the 2020 presidential election in Georgia.
Now, Erin, despite all the difficulty they appear to be having, getting some of these top Trump aides to cooperate we're told that the committee has prepared roughly 20 additional subpoenas that could go out as soon as next week.
BURNETT: All right. Paula, thank you very much. And as Paula's reporting here, we're awaiting a judge's decision over whether the Committee will get access to Trump's White House documents, that they've asked for thousands of pages. These include records of Trump's movements, notes from people who were with him that day and days prior and according to the National Archives, a 'draft proclamation honoring Capitol Police and deceased officers Brian Sicknick and Howard Liebengood.
Well, OUTFRONT now, Sandra Garza. She is the longtime partner of the fallen Capitol Police Officer Sicknick. And Sandra, I really appreciate your time. I know it's unbelievably frustrating for you when you hear someone like Jeffrey Clark refusing to answer questions.
SANDRA GARZA, LONGTIME PARTNER OF FALLEN CAPITOL POLICE OFFICER BRIAN SICKNICK: Yes, it is. BURNETT: But I wanted to ask you about this proclamation. I mean, Trump's White House ultimately did release a proclamation honoring your partner, Brian and fellow Capitol Police Officer Liebengood. But they're trying to keep any drafts of it, hundreds of pages of other documents hidden that the Select Committee cannot have them and specifically any drafts of that document. Why do you think that the former president wants to keep this secret?
GARZA: Well, Erin, first thank you for having me on your show, again. I think is going to expose Trump and the cockroach that he is and that's why he doesn't want those documents release. But in reference to the proclamation for Brian and Officer Liebengood, I don't know, maybe it's exposing that he had something to do with the riot, instigating it or it's a possibility that there was some empathy shown for some of the rioters who passed away that day.
Of course, this is just speculation. But if he didn't do anything wrong on January 6th and he had no role in instigating that riot, why wouldn't he want that paperwork released to the public? Innocent people don't have a problem releasing things. So, it's very, very upsetting.
ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST: Now, Sandra, we have obtained some internal documents showing frustration and confusion within the Capitol Police intelligence division. You know, specifically. And this came after an overhaul of their unit two months before the riot. So, there was an overhaul.
And then, there was a lot of confusion and frustration and happened rapidly. It came at the expense of training in these documents, possibly, could have led to intelligence breakdowns ahead of the riot, right? When they didn't -- they didn't have awareness of what was coming.
One source telling CNN the Capitol Police -- and I want to quote them to you, Sandra -- they were pulled in so many different directions, it would have been impossible to catch what they should have.
What goes through your mind as you are learning more about the missed warning signs, you know, that if caught, could have really changed what happened that day for the capitol police?
GARZA: Yeah. It's very disheartening to hear it, and to know that there was a lot of red flags there for them. But, you know, this is a hard topic for me to discuss because when it pertains to capitol police, I mean, you know, my -- my heart really is with capitol police. But I mean, I think like I had said earlier in some other interviews, I think any time you have something like this happen, it's an opportunity for learning, to make sure that these kinds of things don't happen again.
And, you know, it wasn't just capitol police that dropped the ball, right? I mean, now, we are hearing that the FBI knew a lot more and I read in "The Washington Post" article, which I was unaware of actually, about a pig's head being left at Nancy Pelosi's sidewalk outside her home and Mitch McConnell's house being vandalized. I mean, these are some serious, serious things.
So, I mean, I don't know what was going through their minds but hopefully this will never happen again because we can't have any more deaths or anything tragic like this happen. My other concern is the person who planted those pipe bombs is still not been found.
GARZA: That is scary to me. That's very scary.
BURNETT: It's important you bring that up. You know, tonight, we have a special report on CNN "Trumping Democracy" an American coup. It's at 9:00 tonight.
And Jake Tapper talks with key-Republican officials in this documentary. Some of them haven't spoken out. And one of them is Congressman Anthony Gonzalez, who was one of the ten house Republicans who voted for Trump's impeachment. Here is what he said in part.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. ANTHONY GONZALEZ (R-OH): This country's been through a lot. We fought through it and we've -- we've persevered. As much as I despise almost every policy of the Biden administration, the country can survive a round of bad policy. The country can't survive torching the Constitution. That's the one thing the country can't survive.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: You know, his decision, Congressman Gonzales's decision to vote to impeach Trump, incensed his constituents and now he is not going to seek re-election because he feels he can't win within his own party. Sandra, what does it say someone like him is now shunned for standing up for truth?
GARZA: I think it's -- it's -- you know, appalling. It -- you know, he sounds like he has America in his heart, just like Congressman Kinzinger. You know, and -- and people who really care about America, the safety of our country, keeping democracy intact, you know, are pushed out which I think is very scary.
You know, Trump is dangerous. I think -- I heard, also, that some members of Congress refer to him as the orange Jesus. I mean, what the heck have we gotten to, as a country, where you have people, members in congress, that are bowing down to a man who has done terrible things? Terrible things.
People have died. I mean, it took him actually days to lower the flag for Brian and Howard Liebengood. I mean, why do they want to follow this man? He's dangerous. He's sick.
I just don't understand it. I don't understand it.
BURNETT: Well, Sandra, I appreciate your -- your talking to me. Thank you so much for coming back and for sharing your thoughts.
GARZA: Thank you, Erin, for having me.
BURNETT: And next, we have breaking news on Andrew Cuomo. The Albany DA calling the criminal complaint filed against Cuomo, quote, potentially defective. So, what does it mean for the former-New York governor?
Plus, Green Bay Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers lashing out the against the NFL and the media after having to admit he wasn't actually vaccinated for COVID.
BURNETT: New tonight, potentially defective. That is what the Albany district attorney is calling the misdemeanor forcible touching case against the former Governor Andrew Cuomo. This is a case where the arraignment is now being postponed.
I want to go to Jason Carroll. So, why does the da now believe the case against Andrew Cuomo could be defective and what does it mean?
JASON CARROLL, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, good question. There are a couple reasons but first I have to tell you from a legal perspective, Erin, this is really an incredible development. Basically, the case against former-New York Governor Andrew Cuomo now is in doubt, because the criminal compliant against him might be, quote, potentially defective, namely, in part, because it did not include a sworn statement from the alleged victim.
This came to light after the Albany district attorney wrote a letter to the court detailing the problems he saw with the complaint. Now, just to give you some perspective, one would normally expect the district attorney to be working in tandem, hand in hand, with the sheriff, but not in this case. You may remember, it was Sheriff Greg Apple who surprised the DA and Cuomo last week when he charged Cuomo with misdemeanor forcible touching, alleging that Cuomo had groped Brittany Commisso, a former staffer in the executive mansion.
Well, the DA was unaware that the sheriff was going to charge Cuomo. Cuomo, who has repeatedly denied the allegations of sexual misconduct against him -- he was also unaware. And an attorney for the alleged victim said he was also surprised, but says that he has confidence in the DA's investigation into the matter.
And so, so now, according to the da, the complaint filed by the sheriff's office is potentially defective not only because it does not contain that statement from the victim but also because the DA and, again, he is the one who would ultimately decide whether to proceed with criminal charges here, says the complaint misstates the relevant law. So the sheriff, for his part, says he has a solid case. And so, that
leaves us all wondering, Erin, what does all of this mean? The DA has now asked a judge to delay Cuomo's arraignment for 60 days to, quote, reduce the risk of a procedural dismissal of this case and to give him time to continue with our independent and unbiased review of the facts in this case.
Now, Cuomo's arraignment was, initially, scheduled for November 17th. Now, it's scheduled for January 7th. But an incredible legal development here, a lot of this very much up in the air, Erin.
BURNETT: I mean, it is, you know, we live in unprecedented times in so many ways.
Jason Carroll, thank you very much.
CARROLL: You bet.
BURNETT: Next, Green Bay Packers' quarterback, Aaron Rodgers, laying out a long list of reasons why he is not vaccinated. But his arguments do not add up.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
AARON RODGERS, GREEN BAY PACKERS: There's been zero long-term studies around sterility or fertility issues around the vaccines.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: Plus, potentially damning testimony from a witness who detailed a crucial interaction with one of the men who was shot and killed by Kyle Rittenhouse.
BURNETT: Tonight, Green Bay Packers' quarterback Aaron Rodgers claiming that he didn't lie about his vaccine status after he tested positive for COVID. And, of course, had previously said he was immunized.
Rogers, instead, says that the media is to blame.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RODGERS: I didn't lie in the initial press conference. During that time, it was a very, you know, witch hunt that was going on across the league where everybody in the media was so concerned about who was vaccinated and who was not.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: Okay. So, what is he calling a witch hunt as opposed to a lie that he, himself, put out there? Well, let's just play for you what Rodgers said, himself. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REPORTER: Are you vaccinated? And what's your stance on vaccinations?
RODGERS: Yeah, I'm immunized.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: Yeah, I've been immunized.
But it was a witch hunt. CNN medical analyst Dr. Leana Wen joins me now.
I mean, Dr. Wen, Rogers today insisted he wasn't lying but look, an influential figure in the sports world. It's clear from -- from what he said that he wanted everyone to go away. Yeah, I have been immunized.
That -- that he put out there something that it, at best, was incredibly misleading.
DR. LEANA WEN, CNN MEDICAL ANALYST: Right. I mean, he was lying when he said that he was immunized when, actually, he was not. And I think it's really important for us to clarify that vaccination is not just an individual choice. It's not like saying that you have decided that you are going to eat unhealthy food and so it only affects you and your body. We are talking, in this case, about a very contagious disease that's potentially deadly and I fact has killed more than 750,000 Americans.
And so, that lie or misleading individuals, it makes other people around you think that you're vaccinated and protected when, actually, you're not. And we know that if you are unvaccinated, you are six- times more likely to have COVID-19, compared to somebody who is vaccinated.
BURNETT: And what's amazing is that -- that Rogers, who has access, Dr. Wen, like all Americans, but a lot of access given, you know, being in the NFL and the doctors he had and all of the medical support to all the facts, still, laid out a whole host of conspiracy theories as to, you know, the reasons for why he hadn't been vaccinated. Here they are.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RODGERS: There's been zero long-term studies around sterility or fertility issues around the vaccines. The people who get COVID and recover have the most robust immunity. I have been taking monoclonal antibodies, ivermectin, zinc, vitamin C and D, and HCQ, and I feel pretty incredible.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: Of course, Dr. Wen, everything he mentions -- it's been, you know, disproved or debunked. The CDC has made clear there is absolutely no link to infertility of any kind. CDC study last week found that vaccination protects people against coronavirus infection, much better than prior infection. Ivermectin hasn't been effectively proven to treat COVID-19. Neither has zinc, vitamin C, D, HCQ.
Why are people still clinking to debunked theories which have been so clearly debunked? I mean, I hear fertility and I think how can this still be?
WEN: I think there is a lot of fear around COVID, which is understandable. But the problem is that the people who remain unvaccinated -- they fear the vaccine more than they actually fear the disease. Of course, that should be the other way around.
But this is what's happening when we listen to Aaron Rodgers, essentially we are hearing a synthesis of the major anti-vaccine conspiracy theories that are out there. So, there is absolutely no medical or scientific evidence that in some way the vaccines will cause infertility. And in fact, there aren't long-term side effects. That's not how vaccines work.
We have experience over dozens and dozens of years with many other vaccines, they don't have long-term side effects.
And then when it comes to this whole idea of, quote, natural immunity, recovery from COVID-19 we know give us some level of immunity. But we also know that getting vaccinated gives you additional protection.
And so, everybody really needs to be vaccinated at this point.
BURNETT: Yeah. Dr. Wen, thank you very much. I appreciate it. Love having you on.
Next, emotional testimony tonight from the fiance of one of the men killed by Kyle Rittenhouse.
And election officials say the underage son of Virginia Governor-elect Glenn Youngkin tried to vote in Tuesday's election, twice. We'll tell you why.
BURNETT: Tonight, a witness testifying that the first person shoot by Kyle Rittenhouse during unrest in Wisconsin last summer was acting quote, very belligerently.
Shimon Prokupecz who was in the courtroom today is OUTFRONT.
SHIMON PROKUPECZ, CNN CRIME & JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Lawyers for Kyle Rittenhouse adamant their client was forced to fire his weapon after threats and a foot chase. But prosecutors countered with a former marine, Jason Lackowski, who was also there.
JASON LACKOWSKI, WITNESS: I wanted to come help any way I could. PROKUPECZ: His movements that night, similar too the defendants. Both
had medical equipment. Both were armed with an AR-15-style rifle.
LACKOWSKI: I was trained shout, shove, show, shoot.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What does that mean?
LACKOWSKI: You shout. You shove. You show your firearm. And you shoot.
PROKUPECZ: But prosecutors claim Lackowski had a much different reaction than Rittenhouse to the apparent aggression of Joseph Rosenbaum, the first man Rittenhouse shot and killed.
LACKOWSKI: He had been acting very belligerently. He had asked, very bluntly, to shoot him.
PROKUPECZ: At one point, Lackowski demonstrated the way Rosenbaum was lunging at him.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Whether a did you what did you think of him?
LACKOWSKI: A babbling idiot.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did you consider him a threat?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did you feel that he posed any danger to you or anyone else?
PROKUPECZ: A much different encounter than Rittenhouse would have just minutes later. But the defense claimed that Rittenhouse was much more of a target than Lackowski.
COREY CHIRAFISI, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Fair to say, no one verbally threatened to kill you, did they?
LACKOWSKI: Not that I recall, no.
CHIRAFISI: No one actually chased you, did they?
LACKOWSKI: Not that I recall, no.
CHIRAFISI: Is it fair to say the reason that you didn't use your firearm that night is nobody had attacked you that night, right?
LACKOWSKI: No need for it.
PROKUPECZ: The defense also showing this photo of Gaige Grosskreutz holding a gun. He is the man Rittenhouse would later shoot and injure. Lackowski says he removed bullets from a pistol he saw on the ground shortly after Grosskreutz was taken away for treatment.
CHIRAFISI: Does there have to be a bullet in the chamber to fire the gun?
CHIRAFISI: Was there a bullet in that chamber?
CHIRAFISI: So in your training and experience with firearms, was that gun ready to be fired?
KARIANN SWART, ROSENBAUM'S FIANCE: I fell to my knees and cried.
PROKUPECZ: The prosecution relied Kariann Swart to bring emotion into the courtroom. The fiancee of Joseph Rosenbaum portrayed as an agitator for much of the trial, instead humanized him. Speaking of her visit to the location where Rosenblum was shot.
SWART: There was the mark where Joe had been laying and I put my hand in it. And my hand was wet with his blood. And that's, again, when I collapsed on the ground.
PROKUPECZ (on camera): And, Erin, the prosecution is expected to wrap up their case early-next week. Then, the big question is going to be does Kyle Rittenhouse testify? Obviously, that will be a big moment in this trial -- Erin.
BURNETT: Very big.
All right. Thank you very much, Shimon.
And next, election officials say Virginia Governor-elect Glenn Youngkin's son tried to vote on Election Day twice despite being too young to do so.
BURNETT: Virginia Governor-elect Glenn Youngkin's son tried to vote in Tuesday's election. Of course, the problem is that he is only 17, so not legally allowed to vote. I'm sorry. He tried to do so twice, according to Fairfax County officials.
Now, a spokesman for Youngkin describes the teen's attempts as an honest misunderstanding. According to "The Washington Post," the precinct said Youngkin's son thought he could vote because he had a friend who was also 17 who had been allowed to cast a ballot.
Now, it's unclear exactly what happened. Obviously, you can't be 17 in a gubernatorial election casting a vote but you can in special elections. If you are turning 18. At any rate, the top election official in the county says there was not an apparent criminal offense.
Thanks for joining us.
Anderson starts now.