Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

First U.S. Ebola Case Discovered; House Holds Hearing on Secret Service Failures; Interview with Newt Gingrich; Hong Kong Protesters Demand Chief Executive Step Down; Interview with Fmr. Ambassador to China Gary Locke

Aired October 01, 2014 - 07:00   ET

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

DR. EDWARD GOODMAN, TEXAS HEALTH PRESBYTERIAN HOSPITAL OF DALLAS: This is not transmitted by the air. There's no risk to a person in this hospital who is walking or is a patient. There's simply no reason to be fearful of that.

DR. SANJAY GUPTA, CNN CHIEF MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Paramedics who transported the patient now quarantined. The ambulance used, decontaminated. It's cordoned off. There's some concern because ambulance 37 was used for two days after transporting the patient, though health officials saying it's OK. The city spokeswoman telling CNN the Dallas County Health Department has confirmed that paramedics did follow proper guidelines to avoid contaminating additional patients. So far none of the crew members are exhibiting signs of the disease. This as the CDC says fellow passengers on the same flight from Liberia are likely not at risk. Still doctors warn to remain vigilant.

DR. THOMAS FRIEDEN, DIRECTOR OF THE CDC: I have no doubt that we'll stop this in its tracks in the U.S. But I also have no doubt that as long as the outbreak continues in Africa we need to be on our guard.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

GUPTA: So I'll tell you again, Chris, just that timeline, patient arrives on the 20th of September. We hear the patient had no symptoms at that time. The 24th of September, four days later, they first get sick. The 26th they go into the hospital, try to seek care, but they are not admitted to the hospital, not tested. And it wasn't until the 28th, four days after they got sick, before the person actually gets isolated and tested.

So again, it's those four days, really you talk about the investigation going on in Dallas, the CDC teams already arriving there, it's those four days, Chris, that they're going to need to target down.

CHRIS CUOMO, CNN ANCHOR: Sanjay, help me here, because I think it may be a little bit of a mixed message incoming, not from you, but from the CDC and those dealing with it four days, very scary, because you don't know who else could be infected. But it's hard to get infected because you have to be drenched in bodily fluids, which is just an unpleasant and, I apologize, un-morning-friendly phrase. So which is it, Sanjay? Is it hard to catch this, or can you get it by being coughed on so there's a reason for this concern?

GUPTA: Well, here's how I would say it. First of all, we say this is not particularly contagious, meaning it does not spread through the air. In part it's because when you cough or sneeze, you really don't have the viral particles in your coughing or sneezing. But you do have it in lots of other body fluids, including sweat, for example, obviously blood, those types of things are going to be much more likely to transmit the virus.

Now, it is though, infectious, highly infectious, and that's different than contagious. By highly infectious we mean it only takes a small amount of the virus, only a small amount of being exposed to bodily fluids to cause a potential infection. So you don't need to be bathed in it, as you say, even a small amount of fluid can cause it. But it does have to be body fluid that gets on your skin or gets into your body somehow. So that's the distinction they make.

But Chris, look, I share some of your concerns. This gentleman based on his history, his symptoms, the fact that he was in Liberia, the fact that there was some concern about Ebola, exposures to Ebola, probably should have been tested earlier. And that is a real cause for concern I think, Chris.

CUOMO: As you know, Sanjay, our greatest concern on the job is making sure that the urgency we translate is justified in not creating any false panic. And that's why you, my friend, are gold. Thank you very much for making it more understandable this morning, I appreciate it.

GUPTA: You got it, Chris, any time. Thank you.

CUOMO: Coming up, we're going to stay on this story. We have two men at the center of this situation, the CDC director himself, if anybody knows, he does, Dr. Thomas Friedan. And we also have Dr. Anthony Fauci, he's a top official at the National Institutes of Health. We will test both of them on how worried they are and why, and what the potential is, right here.

MICHAELA PEREIRA, CNN ANCHOR: From that, Chris, to this. Just when you thought it could not get any worse for the Secret Service, it does. Stunning new lapses, an armed contractor somehow was able to get on to an elevator at the Centers for Disease Control with President Obama just last month without proper clearance. Now news of this security violation, breaking just hours after Secret Service Director Julia Pierson testified before a house committee, House oversight committee. This he were quite furious, giving her really tough questioning. Yet she took full responsibility for the recent White House intruder. I want to turn to Michelle Kosinski live from the White House. So much attention on this agency right now.

MICHELLE KOSINSKI, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, and some of it is just the way these details keep coming out. Here you have the new director of the Secret Service, Julia Pierson, testifying before the House oversight committee, just being slammed by their questions for more than three hours.

But at the same time, she's there, outside of the hearing, new details keep coming out, again, from whistleblowers, and these are details that she never mentioned, some of them having to do with the new security incident. But this happened three days before the White House fence-jumper, just coming out now. It happened in Atlanta while the president was visiting the CDC. This contracted security guard was inappropriately taking pictures of the president while they were in an elevator, and it turned out he had a gun. That's in violation of Secret Service protocol because they're supposed to know everybody on location who has a weapon and then limit their access to the president.

Now Congress at the time didn't even know about this incident, but they let the director have it over the lack of transparency from the Secret Service.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. ELIJAH CUMMINGS, (D) RANKING MEMBER, OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE: It is very disturbing to know that Secret Service agents in the most elite protective agency in the world feel more comfortable, apparently from what I'm hearing, coming to members of this committee and telling things and coming to you and members in the agency. That I'm telling you, when I boil all of this down, that to me is dangerous.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KOSINSKI: The chairman of the House homeland committee is announcing this commission, an outside review now that's going to be done of the Secret Service. He called the lack of transparency deeply concerning and said that the White House fence jumper incident is just one in a long string of failures. Chris?

CUOMO: All right, Michelle, thank you very much, appreciate it.

Joining us now to discuss further CNN "CROSSFIRE" host and former House speaker, Mr. Newt Gingrich. I think you may have used the perfect word to sum up the situation with the Secret Service, this is weird.

NEWT GINGRICH: It is weird.

CUOMO: It doesn't make sense. And Pierson yesterday, supposed to be a change agent, comes out and says I take full responsibility. But it sounded like one of those typical, I take full responsibility as long as nothing happens to me because of the responsibility. Do you think she has to go?

GINGRICH: Yes.

CUOMO: Because?

GINGRICH: Because you can't run an agency -- somebody has to be held accountable. An agency which apparently for four days didn't notice that seven shots had actually hit, not been fired at, had hit the White House?

CUOMO: The housekeepers found it. GINGRICH: I mean, this is crazy. I understand that Mrs. Obama was

deeply upset. She should have been. You have a situation where somebody breaks in gets all the way inside the White House, far deeper than the Secret Service initially said they did.

CUOMO: Which may be a bigger problem than the break-in.

GINGRICH: Yes.

CUOMO: How they reported it may be a bigger problem.

GINGRICH: All of these bureaucracies, you saw this at the Veterans Administration, all of these bureaucracies start with, how do I protect myself rather than how do I serve the public?

CUOMO: And how about an armed guy at the CDC? We're worried about Ebola. You're at the CDC. You got a guy who is armed right next to the president in a metal box.

GINGRICH: The whole notion -- you're seeing a breakdown of the system. You see it across the whole government -- it's not an Obama problem. The whole underlying bureaucracy is decaying. Sooner or later somebody has to be held accountable and somebody has to say we're going to be serious about this. If you can't do your job, you're not going to be here. And I think it has to start at the top, not the bottom.

CUOMO: Two questions as a leader in your party, one, to be honest this is not about President Obama and his administration. And that's a cheap political shot that really just further toxifies the environment down there. Do you caution your fellow Republicans, don't make it about Obama and his ability to lead.

GINGRICH: My sense in the hearing there was a lot of Secret Service.

CUOMO: Yes, it was. But you know what's been going on.

GINGRICH: Sure. It's very hard five weeks before an election not to have everything degenerate into partisan politics. But this is one where we've all put the Secret Service on a pedestal for a long time. And I think that it's important to get it back up on the pedestal. And that was a totally nonpartisan pedestal. I worked with the Secret Service. When I was Speaker we hired the chief of staff of the Secret Service to professionalize the capital police. I have great respect for them. I think people should keep this at the level of this needs to be fixed for the nation.

And I noticed a number of very conservative Republicans who say I want the president protected. It wasn't President Obama or President Bush. It was the sense of the institution and the aura of the American president has to be safe and has to be protected.

CUOMO: Absolutely. And under the category of thinking outside the box, how do you fix it? There's a law that says the U.S. military can't be active domestically in this kind of capacity. It's a protection law, which is probably antiquated at this point. Do you think it's worth reconsidering who protects him?

GINGRICH: No. I mean, first of all, I think the military ought to do military things. And the military, as somebody once said, really specializes in breaking things. And they're very good at it. You want to keep them focused on war.

Second, the Secret Service has been an extraordinary institution since the Civil War. It's been around a long time. It has a lot of people in it who risk their lives every day and who are quite prepared. They know that's what they're signing up for. I think fixing the Secret Service is vastly more important than trying to find a substitute for it.

CUOMO: So do that, OK. So that's one scenario. Second scenario is what's going on with the war in ISIS. First, quick yes/no -- we are at war?

GINGRICH: Absolutely.

CUOMO: OK. And in this war, at this point, would you do anything differently than the president is doing right now in terms of how he's waging it?

GINGRICH: I would do a lot of things differently.

CUOMO: Not how we got here.

GINGRICH: No. But as of this morning, you need to recognize as the Belgians have, the Belgians are trying 45 people in a mass trial. You need to recognize that ISIS and radical Islamism is a virus. It's a lot like Ebola in a sense. The guy in Oklahoma City is the manifestation of it. He's not a card-carrying member. You go look at his website it's pretty clear he was deeply influenced by what he'd seen.

The fact that we have Americans, two Minnesotans killed in Iraq, or in Syria, this is not a geographic campaign. Libya is decaying, Somalia is decaying, Yemen is decaying, northern Nigeria is decaying. You have to think of a global campaign.

And the biggest mistake the president makes, and I understand where he's coming from and then the pressure from the left. But the biggest pressure is to say we're going to do this or we're going to do that. This is a real war and our goal should be to say how are we going to win it, and then let's figure out what that takes, or it's not a real war, in which what are doing, why are we there?

CUOMO: That's a very interesting question and something that I would think would be debated. If you were speaker of the House, wouldn't you call Congress back today and say this matters too much to just abdicate to the president, we have to figure out what the hell we're doing here, because this is not geographical, this is huge?

GINGRICH: I'm going to surprise you. No.

CUOMO: Come on, why not? Because of the midterms? GINGRICH: Because the fact is everything for the next five weeks is

going to be so politicized. And what you really need is you need the committees holding the hearings to set the stage. We're not even asking the right questions yet. And so we're in a situation where everybody is going to play gotcha and everybody is going to be involved and --

CUOMO: When does that change, after the election?

GINGRICH: I think after the election, both House and Senate have got to be hearings, and the hearings have to lead to a vote. But to have everybody run back here and vote yes based on whatever they heard last week.

CUOMO: Just start talking about it. Where is the leadership? This is supposedly an existential crisis.

GINGRICH: It's existential only in the sense that it's going to keep growing and it's eventually going to an enormous threat.

CUOMO: So you go to war without declaring war and ignoring the issue.

GINGRICH: I think the president -- I said at the time, he would have been far better off to have asked Congress to vote, because then it becomes the American people's campaign, not the Obama campaign. I said the same thing in 2001. I thought we would have been much better off to have had a declaration of war against Al Qaeda not just wandered off on some vague general assertion.

CUOMO: But given everything you say about the atmosphere down there and the politicizing of everything. If you were president, would you have asked --

GINGRICH: I think back when he made the first speech when the Congress is still in session, he could have said I really want you to vote whether you're with me or not. The Turks are doing this this week. My only point is a practical one. All these people are out there campaigning. All of them are narrowly focused on their own survival. It would be barring something on the scale of 9/11 or Pearl Harbor, it would be extraordinarily difficult to get them to refocus.

The country needs a real debate. The country is not going to get a debate in the next five weeks. But the country needs, much as the emergence of the cold war took a while and people had to talk about it and think it through, we're all going to have to confront how bad this is, how serious these guys are, and the fact that they're mobile. Trying to kill them with air power is nonsense.

CUOMO: And that's absolutely true. And that's why when you have the speaker of the House saying we're definitely going to need U.S. boots when everybody else around him is saying we're not putting U.S. boots there, that's a disconnect that needs conversation.

I actually question you answer about what you would have done if you were speaker. I can't believe knowing you the way I do and following you when you were speaker that you would have let yourself be absented from something that matters as much as what's going on right now.

GINGRICH: I wouldn't have been absented, but I wouldn't call the House back.

CUOMO: Newt, thank you very much.

GINGRICH: Good to see you. Thank you.

CUOMO: I appreciate having you here, always.

A lot of stories this morning you need to know about as you start your NEW DAY. Let's get you right to John for those.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: Thanks so much, Chris. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu meets with President Obama at the White House today. The two leaders plan to discuss the ISIS issues, the crisis in Gaza, and nuclear talks with Iran. A spokesman for the president said that the prime minister's visit is a demonstration of the enduring bonds between the two countries. It should be noted though at times that relationship between the president and prime minister has been complicated, to say the least.

Congressional leaders are holding a hearing later this morning on the U.S. marine jailed in Mexico. Lawmakers are calling for the release of Sergeant Andrew Tahmooressi so he can receive treatment for PTS. The hearing was called by an Arizona lawmaker who visited Tahmooressi in his prison cell. Tahmooressi was arrest in March after crossing in Mexico with three firearms in his truck.

Oh my goodness, what a game this was. Nearly 30 years of waiting paid off big-time for the Kansas City Royals. The never say die Royals mounted like three comebacks in this game to beat the Oakland A's 9-8 in 12 innings. What they get for this is a big heaping serving of Mike Trout. They will face the Angels in the American League Division series. This game last night was an instant classic for fans of George Brett, Bret Saberhagen, Amos Otis, Willie Wilson, Willie Aikens. Royals fans around the world, a long time coming. The Pirates and Giants I should say battle for a spot in the National League Division Series tonight.

Michaela?

PEREIRA: Imagine a Kershaw/Trout face-off. That would be awesome.

BERMAN: Those are some very good baseball players.

PEREIRA: The Dodgers. Just saying, just saying. All right. John, thank you.

Nobody seems to be backing down in Hong Kong. Protests there intensifying. Deadlines being threatened. The big question -- is China going to resort to violence to end the protest? We're going to speak with a former U.S. ambassador to China about his fears, coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) CUOMO: Breaking news out of Hong Kong -- protesters there say the chief executive needs to step down by tomorrow or they will, quote, "escalate the situation." What could that mean? Especially with thousands of protesters, as you're seeing now, live picture, packing the streets. And they're not the only ones threatening to escalate matters. There are fears the government will use force if they do not disperse.

Andrew Stevens live in Hong Kong with the latest. Andrew, anything changing there right now? And where is the mood in terms of what happens next?

ANDREW STEVENS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, the mood here, Chris, is still one of camaraderie and common purpose. Let me get out of the way just so you can see the scene down there.

I would estimate this is well in the tens of thousands, if not the hundreds of thousands of people. That crowd goes way beyond eyesight as well. And they're all chanting, they're all singing, they all have the common purpose that they want to see democracy moves here in Hong Kong. It is a very, very well-mannered crowd. There's no police, no perceptible police presence.

But we have, as you say, just in the past 30 minutes or so, heard this new deadline being announced by the leaders of the students union, they want the resignation of CY Leung, the head of the Hong Kong administration, within the next 24 hours or they will escalate.

We understand escalation could mean occupying government buildings in Hong Kong. And that would take this protest to a new and potentially very dangerous level. We did have those tear gas and pepper spray effects two days ago -- on Sunday, actually, three days ago -- because the police said some protesters had tried to get into government buildings. So if they are going to now do a policy of trying to occupy government buildings, it could mean a forceful police reaction.

At the moment, as I say, no police here, or no police presence you can see -- very, very peaceful. But we now take it to a new level by the looks of it. Chris?

CUOMO: Andrew Stevens, thank you for the reporting. Hopefully those in power are talking so it does not come out to dealing with the people on the streets. Thank you this morning.

Mick?

PEREIRA: Well, let's continue the conversation now though, Chris, with former United States ambassador to China, Mr. Gary Locke.

Ambassador Locke, what a pleasure to have you here today. I'm sure you've been watching the news and hearing the developments out of China. We're hearing that Hong Kong students union demanding the chief executive step down by Thursday or they're threatening to escalate the operation. How concerning is this to you, sir?

GARY LOCKE, FMR. UNITED STATES AMBASSADOR TO CHINA: Well, I think we all have to be worried about any further escalation, which then drives the different parties into -- into corners that they can't retreat from. And the last thing we need is violence; the last thing you need are images of another Tiananmen Square. And you know that the Beijing authorities want to stay out of it. They don't want to get involved, and yet much of this protest initially was focused on the new policies by Beijing, which said that the chief executive in 2017 would be chosen only from a slate approved by Beijing, contrary to the expectations of full democracy in Hong Kong.

PEREIRA: We know that the students have said, look, we'll negotiate with Hong Kong, we'll negotiate with the Chinese government, we do not want to negotiate with the chief executive, who they are calling for him to step down. How likely is it, in your estimation, knowing some of the players in this situation, that the chief executive is going to give into this demand?

LOCKE: Well, a lot of it is going to be decided by Beijing. And perhaps this is a face-saving way in which the tensions by the protesters and the frustrations of the protesters and the pro- democracy movement protesters can be satisfied without having to change Beijing's position of not allowing full democracy in terms of how the next chief executive is elected and chosen.

PEREIRA: For the most part, we've noticed that it was, save for the tear gas a couple of days ago, things have been fairly orderly. It's amazing to see the sheer number of people that have come out. But they talk about this escalation and occupying potentially key and important government buildings. I want to you go back to what you're saying about the danger. Are you fearing that this has the potential of being a powder keg?

LOCKE: Well, it's very much a powder keg because, first of all, many of the pro-democracy leaders do not want to resort to violence, they're very concerned about confrontation, because that's the last thing that Hong Kong needs. And it could really set back their efforts at full democracy down the road.

And, of course, this is being watched on the mainland of China; the Chinese leaders don't want this to get out of hand because they do not want to encourage protest on the mainland. And it's even being watched in places like Taiwan, many of whom on the island want a reunification with China but they want to have democracy, too. And so if this thing isn't resolved peacefully, if Beijing insists on controlling the election process, this could sour the potential reunification between Taiwan and the mainland.

We always hear of "one government, two systems" between Hong Kong and the mainland. A lot of people are talking about "one country, three systems". Mainland Chinese political system, Hong Kong freedom autonomy, and perhaps Taiwan autonomy. If there's a Tiananmen Square, if there's a massive crackdown with violence by the authorities, this could really set the democracy movement and reunification and independence back very, very far.

PEREIRA: You speak about more eyes watching this, the government, the Chinese government watching. I want to read you a quote from a Shanghai columnist who spoke to the Associated Press.

He says, quote, "The authorities see this as a matter of life and death. They don't see it as a local affair, but a fuse that can take down their world."

Do you think the Chinese government is going to have to step in? Do you think the Chinese president is going to have to step in to prevent further escalation, to demand a change here?

LOCKE: Well, first of all, the original intent of the protesters was to force Beijing to change its policy on how the next chief executive would be chosen. And Beijing has refused to do that. So Beijing cannot agree for fear of looking weak and almost basically encouraging other protests on the mainland to achieve other political objectives or economic objectives.

And so they've got to make sure that this thing is resolved peacefully without caving in or making concessions to the protesters. At the same time, the protesters aren't going to be satisfied with just some soft or small step. So both sides are actually dug in and how it's going to be resolved is -- is fraught with danger.

PEREIRA: It is fraught with concern for us, for sure, as we watch the situation. It does appear that both sides have their heels firmly dug in.

Ambassador Locke, really a delight to have you here to share your insight with us on this situation that continues to change by the moment. We'll watch it together. Thank you.

LOCKE: Thank you.

PEREIRA: As a congressional committee grilled the head of the Secret Service over security lapses, Republicans showed concern over the safety of the president. But were politics involved as well? John King is going to examine that INSIDE POLITICS.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)