Return to Transcripts main page

Erin Burnett Outfront

Biden Says Inflation Will "Taper Off" as it Hits 40-Year High; Report: Some Trump WH Records Sent to Mar-A-Lago Marked "Top Secret"; CNN: Hours-Long GAP in Trump Calls During Riot; Biden Tells Americans in Ukraine "Leave Now," Warn "Things Could Go Crazy Quickly" as Russia Scales Up Military Drills; Biden on Russia-Ukraine Crisis: "Things Could Go Crazy Quickly"; Cryptocurrencies Take Hollywood, Sports, Politics By Storm. Aired 7-8p ET

Aired February 10, 2022 - 19:00   ET


JIM ACOSTA, CNN CHIEF DOMESTIC CORRESPONDENT: Look for us on or wherever you get your podcasts.

And Erin Burnett OUTFRONT starts right now.

ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST: OUTFRONT next, inflation climbing at the fastest pace in 40 years. President Biden just responding to criticism that he said it would be temporary, when he says there will be relief for Americans tonight.

Plus, the Washington Post reporting that some of the White House records that Trump took to Mar-A-Lago were labeled top secret, classified, he took them anyway. Are there growing questions about Trump's call logs from January 6th?

And the autopsy for actor Bob Saget just released. The new details, we're learning tonight, about the actor's head injury at a Florida Hotel. Let's go OUTFRONT.

And good evening. I'm Erin Burnett.

OUTFRONT tonight, stocks dropped sharply and inflation surges. The Dow down more than 500 points today after a new report showed inflation spiked to a 40-year high. Price is up 7.5 percent over the past year. That is an incredible surge. And in fact, it is the fastest increase since 1982. And yes, it's worse than economists had predicted and it's getting to President Biden.


LESTER HOLT: Back in July, you said inflation was going to be temporary. I think a lot of Americans are wondering what your definition of temporary is.

JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Well, you're being a wise guy with me a little bit, I understand that's your job.


BURNETT: You could see he was testy there. Look, this is a tough moment for the president and he did acknowledge inflation is a very serious problem. But again, he made the case that it's going to get better.


HOLT: When can Americans expect some relief from this soaring inflation?

BIDEN: According to Nobel laureates, 14 that contacted me and a number of corporate leaders, it's ought to be able to start to taper off as we go through this year. In the meantime, I'm going to do everything in my power to do with the big points that are impacting most people in their homes.


BURNETT: Look, the reality of it is inflation is affecting most people, not most people, it is affecting all people. I mean, when you look at the prices in the United States, food prices up 7 percent from a year ago, 7 percent for basic food, used cars; 41 percent, gas; 40 percent and you've got now complicating matters on some of these fronts, those protests. The trucker inspired ones on the Canadian border crossings, that's threatening supply chains and further hurting America's auto industry. An industry that's already been crushed by inflation.

And rising consumer prices are taking a toll on everyone, including the President and not just in terms of his, obviously showing a little bit of testiness there with Lester Holt. But this, according to a new CNN poll, just 41 percent of Americans approve of President Biden's job as President, dig into those numbers and that's where you see a core part of the problem.

Only 37 percent of Americans now approve of Biden's handling of the economy. That's bad. But here's what's really bad, it's down eight percentage points from December. And December was when President Biden declared that the worst on inflation was behind us.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do you think this is the peak of the crisis? (Inaudible) ...

BIDEN: I think it's the peak of the crisis.


BURNETT: I think it's the peak of the crisis. He said two months ago. Inflation has gone up further since then. So now, President Biden's solution is to spend more money.


BIDEN: The fact is that if we were able to do the things I'm talking about here, it will bring down the cost for average families.


BURNETT: He's talking about some important aspects of the Build Back Better plan. His solution is to try to breathe new life into that spending bill, which would all in pump nearly $2 trillion into the economy. But what President Biden sees as an inflation antidote, others see as an inflation accelerant. Here's Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin.


SEN. JOE MANCHIN (D-WV): This is not a time to be throwing more fuel on the fire. We have inflation and we have basically an economy that's on fire. You don't throw more fuel on the fire that's already on fire causing the problems that we have.


BURNETT: Okay. Biden wants to spend more and Manchin required vote for any such spending. That's a hard no. Make no mistake, this is a four alarm inflation fire right now. The president of the St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank with a crucial vote in terms of raising interest rates, told Bloomberg today, "I was already more hawkish, but I've pulled up dramatically what I think the Committee should do."

And this is a really important thing to keep in mind, if inflation tapers off this year. It is going to come along with an increase in interest rates and the cost of borrowing for all Americans.


Manu Raju is OUTFRONT live on Capitol Hill. And Manu, I know you have been talking to Democrats on Capitol Hill tonight. So do they think the President is doing enough, doing everything he can when it comes to inflation?

MANU RAJU, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, they simply do not, even though it's unclear exactly what else the administration could do to get a handle on this crisis. But these Democrats, the ones who are up for reelection, particularly in the Senate, in swing states, that could determine the next Senate Majority, they are feeling the pain, because voters are also feeling the pain.

They're hearing it when they go back home and they're making clear that the administration needs to do more and also they're taking steps themselves to try to push legislation that they believe can help stem the cost and everything ranging from gas prices to also do basic necessities such as groceries. And in talking to members such as Sen. Mark Kelly today, he said the administration is not doing enough.


RAJU: Are you satisfied with the administration's handling of inflation right now?

SEN. MARK KELLY (D-AZ): No, I mean, until it comes down to something that's more sustainable and that families across the country can actually deal with, no.

TED BARRETT: Are you comfortable that the administration is doing enough, in this way?

SEN. MAGGIE HASSAN (D-NH): I'm going to keep pushing them to do more.


RAJU: So that's one reason why there is a push back here is the poll numbers, showing that Joe Biden not just his overall approval number is something, but also voters disproving his handling of the economies and 62 percent disapproval of eight points from December, according to our new CNN poll and Republicans themselves believes this issue inflation will be the central issue that they hope to run on to take back both control of the House and the Senate. And as the number two Senate Republican told me earlier today, he said, this is one that everybody feels. Erin?

BURNETT: Yes. All right. Manu, thank you very much.

I want to go now to Van Jones, former Special Adviser to President Obama and John Avlon, of course, our Senior Political Analyst.

So Van, you hear President Biden today and in that interview with Lester Holt, obviously, a little bit testy on the question of temporary. He and others across this administration had been calling this inflation temporary, starting last winter and all the way through the summer and here we still are.

So he makes the case inflation will taper off, not mentioning that would come with interest rates going up, of course. But two months ago, he said it's the peak of the crisis, so is he making it hard for Americans to trust him on this, Van?

VAN JONES, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Look, I think he said the wrong thing for the right reason. In other words, when you're the President of the United States, especially when you're Joe Biden, you're optimistic about America. You don't want to come out there and say - something is going to talk to the economy down. He's trying to talk the economy up. It turns out, he was more optimistic than he should have been, but I don't think he's lost any credibility.

Don't forget the tools available to him to fight inflation are not in the White House. The Fed has the biggest inflation fighting tools and the Fed is going to do what it does. I don't think he's lost credibility, I just think that he was more optimistic than the facts warranted and that's not surprising with Joe Biden.

BURNETT: So here's the thing though, John, you've got employment numbers surging and they make a big deal of that in the White House, and they should. But if you have employment coming in with like double the job growth that even the most optimistic economists expected, you would think people would feel better about the economy than they do.

I mean, 18 percent of Americans say they have a lot of confidence in Biden's ability to handle the economy. That's terrible. It's down from 30 percent. I mean, there's just no way to look at those numbers and say that those are good things. Democratic senators, you just heard a couple speaking to Manu there. They want Him to do more. So what is Biden supposed to do right now?

JOHN AVLON, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, I think as Van pointed out, I mean, and we can learn from history when we've dealt with inflation, which hasn't been for almost 30 years. Presidents in the 1970s of both parties talked up the war on inflation, Gerald Ford wearing a whip inflation now - button. Those don't do anything.

The cheerleading doesn't help inflation. The Fed helps inflation. That's what Volcker proved that raising rates aggressively actually brought inflation under control for decades along with a sensible monetary policy. So this is not something that countries and presidents had to deal with in recent decades, but it is on the Fed. And the question is when are they going to raise rates and what are they waiting for.

But I will say that what's so surreal about the gap in Biden's numbers on the economy versus the record, I mean, 6.6 million new jobs record for the first term, manufacturing up, exports up, all that's being overwhelmed by the inflation narrative. And the inflation affects people where they live, I get it, but his administration deserves credit for what's gone extraordinarily right as well as this headwinds they're flying into but it's ultimately the Fed that's got to deal with this. They got to deal with it now.

BURNETT: Right. And, of course, Van, the issue is you can have good news on jobs and you can have good news on wages. But if inflation exceeds those things, then that is bad news. And to this point - let me just play what the Minority Leader, Sen. Mitch McConnell, said today.



SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL (R-KY): If you haven't personally gotten a pay raise of 8 percent or more in the last year, then Democrats' policies have given you a pay cut.


BURNETT: So Van, I mean, the math is accurate, if you didn't get a raise of more than 8 percent, you're underwater. Take aside Democrats and the blame. You're underwater, because of that. That's what prices are going up. How effective is that messaging right now?

JONES: Well, look, I mean, that's an ouchy. That's a powerful message. It's just the problem is what policies is he talking about, is McConnell talking about the bipartisan infrastructure bill he voted for, because that's the only policy he could be talking about. The other stuff Biden is wanting to do, he has not been able to do.

So the he's been President for one year. He's got three more to go. The policies that he put forward on COVID relief, I think, were good ...

BURNETT: COVID relief last spring, yes.

JONES: ... and they're not causing what you're seeing right now. The only policy he's talking about is the bipartisan infrastructure bill that McConnell himself voted for, so I don't know which policies he's talking about.

BURNETT: So obviously - and look, regardless of who voted for what, there was a lot of money thrown into this economy, a lot, a lot, a lot, it was done under Trump and it was done under Biden. I mean, this fuel on the fire, if that's how you see it is indeed bipartisan nature.

But John, it's not just inflation that's worrying Democrats right now in terms of their election prospects and maybe that's part of the issue here is that this is actually, while very important, sort of the canary in the coal mine. I want to play with Sen. Jon Tester, a Democrat from a red state told David Axelrod on his podcast today, the question Axelrod asked was how Tester's Montana neighbors view the Democratic Party. Here's the answer.


SEN. JON TESTER (D-MT): It's toxic. The National Democratic brand in, I think in rural America generally, is toxic, and it's because quite frankly, we don't show up. I'm talking about national Democrats. We're not willing to go places we're not wanted and answer questions.


BURNETT: What do you say to that, John?

AVLON: Tester's is exactly right and the Democrats should listen to him. Democrats need to build out a branch of their party that connects with rural voters in red states. They need to be focusing their efforts in the middle of the country as well as the middle class. And too often their gravitational pulses in both the parties that pull them towards playing to the base that is not sufficient for building the kind of majorities the Democrats need. And so they need to be focusing like a laser.

Steve Bullock made this point a few months ago, but Jon Tester is by far the most credible emissary of this message. Democrats need to be building out red state Democrats and rural Democrats to get sustainable majorities. They can't simply play to the base.

BURNETT: Van, what do you make of that, Tester not mincing the word? I mean, toxic.

JONES: Look, I mean, he's not wrong. The reality is that we used to be a party that had a big beautiful tent and it included a bunch of working class white guys. Those working class white guys are not as present. I love people who are present, but we need to draw the circle bigger and Tester's right that we have room to regrow our coalition in that direction. BURNETT: Thank you both very much.

And next breaking news, The Washington Post reporting tonight that Trump left office with top secret documents marked such, marked classified and took them, pick them, cherry-pick them, took them Mar- A-Lago.

Also breaking tonight, President Biden with an urgent warning as Russia moves closer to war.


BIDEN: We're dealing with one of the largest armies in the world. This is a very different situation where things could go crazy quickly.


BURNETT: And an inside look at the investment that is turning so many people right now into millionaires and even billionaires.



BURNETT: Breaking news, some of the White House Records Donald Trump inappropriately took to Mar-A-Lago were clearly marked classified, including documents designated top secret. That's according to The Washington Post. And sources also telling the paper that Trump was very secretive about the boxes he took to Mar-A-Lago, not letting even his closest advisors look at them.

And as Trump's handling of his White House papers comes under greater scrutiny, CNN is reporting tonight that White House call logs obtained by the January 6 Committee contains significant gaps in Trump's calls during the riot. Ryan Nobles is OUTFRONT.

So Ryan, tell me about this. This obviously is very significant, Trump was a president who communicated on the phone. That's what he did. He was not emailing. What more are you learning about these colleagues?

RYAN NOBLES, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, the Committee was surprised to see such a lack of information regarding the president's communication from this information that they fought in court to obtain and ultimately won, despite the former president attempting to keep it secret. And what they discovered was serious gaps in the information about who the president was talking to and at what time.

On the official White House switchboard, there was a record of calls that he had made. One to Jim Jordan that we reported on last week that we could report was - that took 10 minutes long. But there was another entry where he attempted to call Vice President Mike Pence. Pence wasn't there and there's no record of a return call from Pence.

This despite the fact that we know from an interview that the Committee made with Keith Kellogg, Pence's national security adviser that Pence and Trump did talk because Kellogg was in the Oval Office as it took place. And then there's basically a black hole, Erin, from the time that Trump came back from the ellipse after delivering that speech at the rally outside the White House. And until he gave that speech in the Rose Garden around the time that the violence was raging here at the capitol where there's just no record of any calls that took place by the president that he either took or calls that he made himself.

And the question is we know that he did talk to people. Kevin McCarthy's talked about a phone call that he had with the president. There was that call that he made to Tommy Tuberville that was actually through Mike Lee and eventually got to Tuberville and there's no record of that.

So the Committee wants to know why that information isn't on there, and what other phone calls that may have taken place that are also not recorded in these official logs. And the Committee feels pretty confident they can still find that information out, either through depositions of the people that they've subpoenaed that call before the Committee.


And also they've, of course, sent out subpoenas and requested the information of the private cell phone logs and personal cell phone logs of a number of people who are in and around the White House at that time. Of course, Erin, the big question is, will they request the personal cell phone logs of Donald Trump himself. That's something that Bennie Thompson, the Chairman, has said they've not decided yet, but something that remains on the table. Erin?

BURNETT: Right. I mean, crucial, I mean, if there's one place they all are, obviously, that's it. Thank you.

And I want to bring in Elie Honig, former federal prosecutor and our Senior Legal Analyst. So, Elie, let's start with The Washington Post report on the documents in the boxes. They say a lot of these documents were in Mar-A-Lago were clearly marked classified, some of them labeled top secret. Could Trump face potential legal trouble for that?

ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Well, Erin, this detail is really important because under federal law, it is a crime to destroy or remove classified documents, so long as the person acts intentionally meaning on purpose. And knowingly, knowing that they are classified, well, if the documents have the words of classification stamped on them, kind of hard to argue that you didn't know.

And I should say, there are three levels of official classification in the U.S. government, the lowest is confidential, then in the middle is secret, at the top is top secret. And some of these documents reportedly are marked top secret. The official government definition of top secret is that if these documents were to come out, they would pose exceptionally grave danger, potentially, to the United States. So this is really serious stuff. BURNETT: It really is, okay. So there are top secret, plenty of them

in there. They're now sitting around Mar-A-Lago and I just want to now make sure anyone watching understands, they weren't just sort of willy-nilly put together by somebody and ended up there. No.

Post goes on to report, "Trump is very secretive about the packing of boxes that were retrieved from Mar-A-Lago and did not let other aides - including some of his most senior advisers - look at them, according to people close to him.

So he knew what was in there, he cared what was in there. This was not just a random thing that occurred.

HONIG: Right. So this goes to the intentionality part of it.


HONIG: There is a scenario where hypothetically, perhaps the movers packed it up or it was an accident or something like that. But this reporting suggests that Donald Trump did it himself, did it on purpose and did it in a way that he tried to hide from others.

BURNETT: And so now CNN is reporting about these - the call logs, I want to get to that, Ryan's reporting. So hours long gaps, now usually there's a call log of any official call that comes in or unofficial, but that comes into the switchboard. But then once this whole thing unfolds, the President comes back from the speech, from the ellipse, it goes silent. Okay. He wasn't silent. There were calls going on. They were on his cell phone. So is the Committee ever going to find out who he talked to?

HONIG: They can, Erin. It's going to take extra work and there's two things they can do. The first thing they can do, as Ryan mention is they can subpoena the cell phone providers, whether it's Donald Trump's own private cell phone or - there's been reporting that he used some of his aides' cell phones.

And by the way, this question of, should the Committee politically subpoena the president's cell phone, guess what, they're entitled to that information. It's supposed to be in the White House call log. So legally, there's no reason you can't do that. The other thing that committee can do to fill in those pieces, is to interview witnesses and if witnesses say I had a call with Donald Trump at, let's say, 2:30 pm and it's not on the call log, well, then you fill it in. It's like putting together a puzzle.

BURNETT: Yes, it is. I just want to emphasize something you just said, which is that if they want in court the right to have the call logs, that means they have the right to see who the President spoke to. So if it was on his cell phone, that would be consistent, from a legal person point of view.

HONIG: Right.

BURNETT: It's just an important point I want to emphasize. Okay. One more thing. Maggie Haberman from The New York Times is writing a new book that officials thought Trump may have been flushing documents down a toilet. Here she is speaking with my colleagues, Brianna and John this morning.


MAGGIE HABERMAN: I learned that staff in the White House residents would periodically find the toilet clog. The engineer would have to come and fix it. And what the engineer would find would be wads of clumped up wet printed paper, meaning it was not toilet paper. This was either notes or some other piece of paper that they believe that he had thrown down the toilet.


BURNETT: Elie, what do you make of this? I mean, it seems like a pretty ridiculous thing to think that you could actually throw a wad of water paper down the toilet and it would actually go down through the pipes. But I mean, it appears this occurred.

HONIG: Well, Erin, if we look at the story from the other day about how the former president used to habitually rip up documents, tear him up, right?


HONIG: There's an explanation for that. Well, this is just a habit. It's something he did. It's careless, it's thoughtless, he would just rip things up and leave them about. It's a weird sentence to say, but the toilet is different. There's only one reason anyone puts something in the toilet and flushes it and that's intentionally to get get rid of it.


So yes, there's obviously - there's a ridiculousness to it, but when you're talking about intent, it doesn't get much clearer than that.

BURNETT: It's bizarre. All right. Thank you very much, Elie. I appreciate it.

HONIG: Thanks, Erin.

BURNETT: Next breaking news, President Biden urging Americans in Ukraine to get out now as the U.S. Navy is now beefing up its presence in Europe.

Plus, actor Bob Saget's full autopsy just released. What the medical examiner is revealing about the actor's sudden death.



BURNETT: Breaking news, get out. President Biden with a stark warning to Americans in Ukraine as fears grow about a Russian invasion that occur at any moment. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BIDEN: American citizens should leave, should leave now. We're dealing with one of the largest armies in the world. It's a very different situation and things could go crazy quickly.


BURNETT: Crazy quickly. These words from the President coming as a U.S. defense official tells CNN that the U.S. Navy is boosting its presence in Europe, sending for guided missile destroyers to the region. This new satellite images appear to show Russia continuing to build up its military on three sides of Ukraine.


More than 550 troop tents, hundreds of vehicles observed arriving at a former airfield near the capital of Crimea.

Fifteen miles from the Ukrainian border in Belarus, meantime, more deployments of troops, military vehicles and helicopters was detected. The first time helicopters have been seen in the area, as well as a possible new field hospital.

So another day, both sides ratchet up, up, up.

Senior national security correspondent Alex Marquardt is OUTFRONT in Ukraine tonight.

And, Alex, when we see all these, are there any signs that conflict can be avoided at this point?

ALEXANDER MARQUARDT, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Well, Erin, U.S. and European leaders certainly believe that there is a path to de-escalation through diplomacy. Those talks are continuing. They wouldn't continue if they didn't believe that. But, of course, they think that Russia is doing the exact opposite of what you should be doing if you want to ease tensions, if you believe that diplomacy will work.

So not only are we seeing Russian troops build up presence around Ukraine, they are getting closer. As you mentioned Russian -- Ukraine will be facing Russian military activity on three different fronts, to the north in Belarus, to the east in Russia and to the south in the Black Sea and in Crimea.

Those joint Belarusian Russian military exercises that just got underway today involve tens of thousands of Russian troops. This is the biggest deployment of Russian troops to Belarus since the Cold War. Now, Russia has announced this massive naval exercise, massive is their own word, that will start next week in the Black Sea involving, they say, some 140 warships and 10,000 troops.

We've been tracking six amphibious landing ships through the Mediterranean into the Black Sea. They have now arrived into Crimea. Ukraine accuses Russia of blocking off parts of the Black Sea in those naval exercises. The U.S. says the same thing, saying that commercial ships will not be allowed through. They won't be allowed to dock in Ukraine. Russia does deny that.

But, Erin, on top of what we're hearing from President Biden about the potential for things to get crazy quickly, we are hearing a lot of concern from top NATO leaders, including the British Prime Minister Boris Johnson who just today said this is the most dangerous moment in Europe's biggest security crisis in decades -- Erin.

BURNETT: Thank you very much, Alex.

OUTFRONT now, Republican Senator Mike Rounds of South Dakota. He sits on both the Senate Armed Services and Foreign Relations Committees and just received a classified briefing on Ukraine.

Senator Rounds, I know you are limited with what you can share from the briefing. But based on what you heard and the president telling Americans to leave Ukraine now, do you believe a Russian invasion is more likely than it was a day or two ago?

SEN. MIKE ROUNDS (R-SD): I would say that the possibility or the probability of a Russian invasion is -- is very accurate. They are on three sides of Ukraine. There is no indication that it is only a drill.

They have moved significant forces into the region, as large as we have ever seen. There is always a possibility that Mr. Putin may decide for some reason that he's not going to invade. But he's done everything to set up for an invasion, and there is nothing suggesting right now that he is looking at a diplomatic solution.

BURNETT: Well, when we spoke last, you told me that the United States saying that it would never engage, you know, in combat in any scenario, put the United States in a bad negotiating position. Even if it was true it was the saying of it that could be problematic.

Just given that context here I wanted to play something else for you. I don't know if you heard, senator but President Biden said a few minutes ago in the interview with Lester Holt.


LESTER HOLT, NBC NEWS ANCHOR: What scenarios would you put American troops to rescue and get Americans out.

JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: There is not. That's a world war. When Americans and Russia start shooting at one another, we're in a very different world that we've ever been.

HOLT: Not even on behalf of simply evacuating Americans.

BIDEN: No. How do you do that? How do you find them? This is not like I'm hoping that if, in fact, he is foolish enough to go in, he is smart enough not to, in fact, do anything that would negatively impact on American citizens.

HOLT: Have you told him that?



BURNETT: Senator, how do you view the exchange should the president have said there is no scenario involving U.S. troops even for evacuations?

ROUNDS: I think what the president maybe suggesting, and I don't mean to suggest that I know what the president necessarily meant. But my understanding is it would be seen as provocation if we were to enter Ukraine with our military at the time in which Mr. Putin is in an active military engagement.

I think the president gives good advice when he says to Americans that it's appropriate for you to leave now.


We don't have an exact timeline. But it would be imminent. Mr. Putin in this case can make up his own mind as to when he is going to invade. We know that he's done everything to set up for a major engagement. He has multiple options available to him in terms of what he is going to do. And the president is correct when he says if we were to step in, it would be seen as a provocation if he is actively engaged in a battle with -- with Ukrainian forces.

So at this point, look, we do not have any type of a treaty with Ukraine.


ROUNDS: Our armed forces are not set up to go into Ukraine. Our armed forces are working with other NATO members in Eastern Europe as our Article 5 guidelines permit. But this -- at this time, I am not aware of any plans in which the United States military would enter Ukraine.

BURNETT: So, you know, the one thing that's happened here is everyone said the diplomatic path involves, you know -- the one thing the United States can do since we said combat troops aren't on the table is sanctions, but no sanctions happened yet. The whole thing has been, well, Putin can put his entire military on the door step of Ukraine but until he steps over the line, we're not doing anything about it.

This has been a big debate in Congress, right? Do you do sanction attention ahead of it? Every time he puts troops in do you put in a sanction or wait until he walks over the line?

This divide has caused a problem. Today, the chairman and the ranking member of your Foreign Relations Committee Bob Menendez and Jim Risch said there's an impasse, not able to make a deal when it comes to sanctions bill. Are you worried about this? Do you still think you can get a deal done? Or is it dead in the water?

ROUNDS: Right now, I don't see a sanctioning deal being put together right now. I think the fact that we have waited this long to actually agree that sanctions beforehand, I think that that probably is gone now. I think we're too close to the point where Mr. Putin could make his actions known at any time.

But I do think there are some other things that we could be doing. Part of it is to clear delineate what the impact would be to Mr. Putin and to Russia. Not only in terms of our continued support for Ukrainians in their battle in terms of defensive weapons and so forth.

But one more thing as well. Today, Mr. Putin is using the wealth of petroleum products to literally fund his operations. Look, if we could open up our spigots again and if we could start to produce oil again here in the United States, bring the value, the price per barrel of oil and natural gas down, right now, that's going to impact Mr. Putin.

Not only that, but it would help domestically here in the United States. Bring the price of gas down, that's an inflationary issue on the supply side that would help our consumers. And at the same time, make life for Mr. Putin a lot more miserable.

BURNETT: Senator, thank you so much.

ROUNDS: Thank you.

BURNETT: And next, CNN just obtaining Bob Saget's autopsy report and there are details what the chief medical examiner is revealing about the actor's head injury tonight.

And it's volatile, risky, unregulated. And yet some of the biggest names in entertainment and technology are pouring massive money into it. Why?


SPIKE LEE, FILM DIRECTOR: The digital rebellion is here. Old money is out.




BURNETT: Tonight, more than 100 million people are expected to watch the Super Bowl. And for the first time ever, multiple cryptocurrency companies will be vying for eyeballs. And they're spending a lot of money on ads.

Celebrities like Matt Damon, Gwyneth Paltrow, Mike Tyson are now endorsing digital currency. And yet, to many, it is completely confusing.

Nick Watt is OUTFRONT with tonight's "Inside Look".


LEE: The digital rebellion is here. Old money is out.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Crypto is cool.

NICK WATT, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The entertainment world is embracing crypto, digital currency and collectibles more than any other.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What do you think are you?

TOM BRADY, FORMER NFL PLAYER: You know what -- I'm in.

DANIEL ROBERTS, EDITOR-IN-CHIEF, DECRYPT: It's an enormous fast growing new culture on the Internet and in tech that people in Hollywood realize they need to tap into.

WATT: AMC theaters now take bitcoin and others for tickets. Kobe Bryant's Lakers used to play at Staples Center. Now, it's the arena.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No, no, no, no, no, no.

WATT: Major League Baseball now has FTX all over the umps, another cryptocurrency exchange.

ROBERTS: They're trying to reach the crypto curious. And I think they targeted sports fans because they're young. Maybe they've done well during the last few years and they're starting to have some money to invest.

WATT: Daniel Craig on Bond's "No Time to Die" ushered in a new digital way for movies to make money.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The world has moved on Commander Bond.



WATT: They sold 007 NFTs, non-fungible tokens, basically collectible digital images.

ROBERTS: More and more film makers turning to NFTs to fund movies before they are made.


WATT: If you have questions, you are not alone.

With crypto, basically there is nothing to hold, no notes, no canvas. Cryptocurrencies exist only in the online ether. Transactions ownership information, stored in something called Blockchains. Secure, decentralized digital databases. No government monetary policy gets in the way.

And that worries some of the security-conscience crypto can be used to launder money, finance crime, and there are other cautionary tales. Melania Trump just auctioned this hat online, reserve, 1800 sol, a

cryptocurrency worth $250,000 when the auction opened.


By the time it closed, sol had crashed.

ROBERTS: We obviously think the technology is fascinating and here to stay.

WATT: So does the crypto evangelist mayor of Miami, and New York's new mayor taking his first paychecks in crypto.

MAYOR ERIC ADAMS (D), NEW YORK CITY: This is what the human spirit is about, not being afraid to look at every area of innovation.

WATT: Mayor Eric Adams and Matt Damon's much maligned commercial --

MATT DAMON, ACTOR: Then there are others.

WATT: -- actually captured the essence. This is a gamble on the volatile, untethered intangible. Yeah, that's a Wright brother.

DAMON: Fortune favors the brave.

WATT: Is this new world brave or stupid? No one actually knows for sure. Not yet.


WATT (on camera): And, Erin, as you said, come Sunday, 100 million people are going to watch the game and those cryptocurrency commercials. FTX,, they are in. They're going to be advertising.

Another exchange, Binance is not advertising. And the reason why it's interesting. It's because so many of us don't know what Crypto is. So one Binance exec told us, you know, you can't market crypto like you would a bag of chips or bottle of beer. You have to educate as well as advertise. And it's tough to do all of that in a 30-second Super Bowl spot -- Erin.

BURNETT: On this topic, it takes so much more if it does make sense.

All right. Thank you so much.

WATT: Oh, yes.

BURNETT: Nick, very much appreciated.

Next, the autopsy for the actor Bob Saget just released. And we are learning new things about the actor's head injury.

And President Biden tonight on whether it's time to end federal government mask mandates. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)


BURNETT: Breaking news, Bob Saget's full autopsy results released by a medical examiner in Orange County, Florida. The official cause of death, blunt head trauma. And the report goes further saying, quote, it is most probable the decedent suffered an unwitnessed fall backwards and struck the posterior aspect of his head. The manner of death is accident.

Saget was found dead in a hotel room in Orlando last month. He was 65.

And OUTFRONT now, Dr. Randi D'Amico, neurosurgeon in Lenox Hill Hospital in New York City.

Doctor, I really appreciate your time. I mean, look, this story is obviously very sad. It also, of course, other people are afraid when they hear this. My goodness, you get a knock to the head and you go to bed and this could happen.

The report does detail multiple fractures now, though, to Saget's head, along with heavy bleeding, all right? So, these are new and significant pieces of information. How significant of a blow would it have to be to cause the trauma in this autopsy report.


You know, I think it's very important to understand we don't know a lot about this situation, right? The brain is housed in the skull. The skull is meant to protect you from blunt force injury and impacts like this. It would take a significant impact to actually crack the skull which we see here.

And what it is, it's here in the occipital bone in the back of your head and it extends to the right temporal bone as well with the fracture. What's interesting and why I say we don't know a lot here is he also has fractured on the front of his face as well. And so, you know, trying to predict how he fell or what he hit becomes a little bit difficult and a little bit confusing.

BURNETT: But it sounds like from what you're saying, you're talking about the back of the head, the side, and also to the front of the head, multiple trauma, breaks the skull, bleeding. I mean, this wasn't just kind of like stumbling and hitting your head on the back of the headboard. I mean, something very significant, it seems like, occurred in that room, right?

D'AMICO: Yeah. If you were to see a subdural hematoma or blood in the brain like they talk about in the report, you -- it might have been smaller injury. But to have multiple fractures, this really requires a significant blow to the back of the head which you can sometimes if someone would have passed out and fall from standing, you know, with just basically their body weight to either a hard surface to the floor. BURNETT: OK. So -- and obviously, he was -- he was found in his bed.

So he was somehow able to get to his bed. I mean, the autopsy says that Saget had two drugs in his system, Klonopin, which is taken for seizures, or panic disorders and anti-depresssant Trazodone.

When you hear those drugs, does that stand out to you in any way in this context?

D'AMICO: You know, Klonopin is an angiolytic. It helps you sleep. Some people use it for anxiety or depression or certain things. And, you know, we when used in combination with Trazodone, it can cause drowsiness. But these are presumably medications he was subscribe and used to taking. And so, it's hard to predict whether these would play a role in his fall or whether or not they would play a role in his going to sleep.

We know that the blood in his head or the injury itself could kind of promote an injury where he would have difficulty arising out of consciousness over time.

BURNETT: And so, you know, so -- and just one final question to you. You know, when you saw this, is there anything that still stands out to you -- I know you said there's still so little we know so you would have many questions. But what are some of the big questions you would still have that this could happen, so many fractures in a skull in a situation where somebody is found in their bed?

D'AMICO: Yeah, I mean, it's tough to say, and there are some things that are purely speculative. But based on the kind of mechanism of injury or what we presume happened just in a hotel room, to create a fracture on the back of the head and the side of the bed as well as the front of the head suggests that maybe a ricochet type of event happened where he fell back and hit his head on something and then fell forward afterwards.

We also see in the brain itself that there are bruises in the brain, and they're called contra co-injuries. And when you hit yourself on the back of the head, your brain actually moves around in the skull and you bruise the front of it as well.


And so, really the inciting event here is probably in the back of the head and whether he stumbles to the floor or hear something else on the way down, you know, is really unclear.

We know that the primary injury is more to the right side than the left side. And it's not uncommon to be able to get up from something like this, you know? It would hurt without a doubt, and a skull fracture caused paint. But the bleeding itself doesn't happen immediately, it takes time to accumulate and caused pressure on our brain. So, someone might be able to wake up and, you know, shake it off a little bit or tried to, and go lay down, and, you know, and then catastrophe happens.

BURNETT: All right. Dr. D'Amico, thank you very much. D'AMICO: Thank you.

BURNETT: And next, more and more blue states are rolling back their mask mandates, but not the federal government. So what does Biden say? Is it time for the government to end federal mandates or not?


BURNETT: President Biden saying tonight it's too soon to end federal government mask mandates, but he admits in an interview with NBC that changing mask mandates is a tough call.


BIDEN: It is confusing. It's worrisome to people, for trying to figure out. But what I've tried to do, I've tried to make sure we have all the vaccines needed, all the boosters needed, all the masks needed, all the protection that's needed.


BURNETT: This as statewide mask mandates are disappearing in states run by Democrats. As for schools, the president still supports masks. He suggests there will be fewer mask requirements as the COVID-19 vaccine is approved for more age groups. It is, of course, already approved for all children in kindergarten and older.

Thanks for joining us.

Anderson starts now.