Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

Margaret Harris is Interviewed about Travel Bans; Brad Raffensperger is Interviewed about the Election; Scott Galloway is Interviewed about Social Media. Aired 8:30-9a ET

Aired December 02, 2021 - 08:30   ET

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


[08:30:00]

DR. MARGARET HARRIS, WHO SPOKESPERSON: That there is a risk of importation (ph), that's already happened. So the reason we're not keen on travel bans is it's not just because it harms the countries that you're shutting your borders to, but also it really limits the spread of critical things like the scientific materials you need, the humanitarian supplies you need to respond to something like this outbreak.

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN ANCHOR: So, using the time, you're talking about surveillance? What are you talking about?

HARRIS: Exactly. Up your surveillance, look at how you're going to test people, where you're going to test people, what you're going to do about it when you get positive cases, what's the situation in your hospitals, how can you accelerate your vaccination, and, lastly, but probably most importantly, what are you going to advise your people to do, how are you going to advise them and help them to protect themselves.

KEILAR: So, Doctor, as you're aware, we just learned about the first case in the U.S. We very -- you know, for sure do not have an accurate picture of what is going on right now. How much of a lag time is there on the countries that we think have omicron in it, and the countries that actually do?

HARRIS: Well, again, as I said, probably -- there are many more countries we expect that already do have cases of SARS-CoV-2, the omicron variant. It is simply a matter really of testing. In other words, if you don't take a temperature, you don't find a fever.

The critical thing is to be looking at what we all need to know. And the reason why we're all in this rather period of uncertainty is because the science has been so good and so transparent. We have learned right at the beginning. So now we're looking at what does it all really mean for us all and, of course, that's our job to find out and let you all know as soon as possible.

KEILAR: All right, well, we will be waiting to hear your assessments. Dr. Margaret Harris, thanks for being with us.

HARRIS: It's a pleasure. KEILAR: Our next guest sat down with the January 6th committee for

more than four hours. So what did he say? We'll ask him.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: And the conservative-leaning Supreme Court seeming poised to uphold Mississippi's controversial abortion law. What that means for the fate of Roe v. Wade.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:36:20]

BERMAN: Georgia's secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger, is one of the latest people to sit down with the January 6th committee for four hours yesterday. The committee is now focusing on the phone call between President Trump and Raffensperger.

Remember this?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT: So, look, all I want to do is this. I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have, because we won the state.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: Joining me now is Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger. He's also the author of the book "Integrity Counts."

Mr. Secretary, thank you so much for being with us.

I'm sure you love nothing more than to hear that phone call played for you again and again and again.

Listen, what did the select committee, four hours yesterday, what did they want to know?

BRAD RAFFENSPERGER: GEORGIA SECRETARY OF STATE: They wanted to ask me a lot of questions about the election of November 2020 and then every event that happened thereafter. And in my book I do document it. It's almost like a diary of every rumor that we were knocking down on a daily basis.

So, I explained to them exactly all the rumors, or allegations that were made, and that they were not supported by the facts. And -- so that's what we talked about, is a fact-based discussion I had with the panel.

BERMAN: And I've read your book and we've had a chance to talk about it before.

Was there any subject that they broached that didn't come up in your book or was there any area they were asking about that seemed new to you?

RAFFENSPERGER: They referred to a few letters that I received from the congressman and the state party. And I mentioned that when we did the 100 percent hand recount, what that proved is that the machines did not flip votes. It also verified the original count because it was so close to what we got on Election Day results.

BERMAN: So, had it seemed that they had turned up some new evidence, at least?

RAFFENSPERGER: I think, from my standpoint, everything that we've done has been an open and transparent process. In fact, my conversation with the president has been out there for nearly a year now. So everyone can listen to it and come to their own conclusions.

BERMAN: What conclusion did you come to?

RAFFENSPERGER: Well, I came to the conclusion that President Trump came up short in Georgia by about 12,000 votes. I have the data, and I wrote a letter to Congress on January 6th. They've had that letter since January 6th and no one has ever disputed any of those facts. I did let the committee know that a year ago we said that there's two dead people that voted. We found two more. So now we're up to four. Not 10,315. But that's the type of rumors and misinformation that we were continually knocking down after the election of November 2020.

BERMAN: Was there any discussion about former Chief of Staff Mark Meadows and what his role may have been in trying to instigate some of these conversations with you and other Georgia officials?

RAFFENSPERGER: No, they just referred to a couple of texts I received from him. And, obviously, I did have a call, and that was initiated by Mark Meadows calling my deputy secretary of state.

BERMAN: And just one more question on this broader subject. Have you been contacted at all by the Gorgia investigation into the president's actions -- the former president's actions?

RAFFENSPERGER: No.

BERMAN: No, you still haven't had any contact with them?

RAFFENSPERGER: No.

BERMAN: That's interesting.

RAFFENSPERGER: No.

BERMAN: Because that would be the potential criminal investigation, if there is one. And as of now, you haven't been contacted for any documents or anything?

RAFFENSPERGER: Correct. I've not been contacted.

BERMAN: I want to ask you about one matter about current Georgia voting, which is, there were just elections in the fall there. And we learned that 52 percent of the ballots that were rejected were absentee ballots that were not requested before the new 11-day prior to the election cutoff date. Now, I want to stipulate, there are plenty of voting rights advocates

who thought the previous four days was too short.

[08:40:03]

But if 52 percent of the ones rejected are because it was 11 days, might there be some benefit in a middle ground there? Fifty-two percent is a lot.

RAFFENSPERGER: I think that really goes to voter education. And so we've been pushing that out. But this election came relatively quickly. The law was passed and signed into law this year. And so that's one of the things that our office will be making sure that we educate voters that there's now that 11-day timeframe so that they can make their requests, they can send it in, the country, they can process it, send them back their ballot and then the voter can send their ballot back in.

So it does require about 11 days. We want to make sure there's appropriate time. Many states have that. And so that will be really -- the county election director is working with their local communities and also our office, whatever we can do through our office to really make sure that voters are aware of that 11-day cutoff.

BERMAN: But you're not happy with that level of rejection, are you?

RAFFENSPERGER: No, I think that that's one of the things that voters were used to a certain way when the system changed. Sometimes we have to get -- make sure that we get that information out there. And so I think both political parties will be doing that. Obviously our office will be. And I believe that all of the 159 county election directors want to make sure that voters are aware that this is one of the changes.

Also, we've changed it. We've gone to a photo ID component for the absentee ballot, Similar to what they've been using in Minnesota for ten years.

BERMAN: Let me ask you. There is a new candidate for governor in Georgia. Stacey Abrams announced that she will be running in that race. What's your take?

RAFFENSPERGER: Well, after the 2018 race, she never conceded, and we ended up with at least nine lawsuits in my first day of office from her allied groups. I would hope this time, whatever the result is going to be, that she'll have the common grace to accept the results.

We have honest and fair elections in Georgia and I'll continue to make sure we have the appropriate guardrails of accessibility with security, that every vote will count and I expect a robust and very strong turnout for the 2022 cycle.

BERMAN: Want to make one thing clear. A lot of people like to equate Stacey Abrams with what the former president did after the election. Stacey Abrams never tried to overturn votes or find votes or call anyone to find 12,000 votes that didn't exist or try to convince people to use the Constitution to overthrow an election, but I do take your point on what you're saying there.

Just one last question. Former President Trump, last night, put out yet a new statement attacking the current Republican governor, Brian Kemp, who may very well be the opponent to Stacey Abrams. What do you think the impact of that will be?

RAFFENSPERGER: Abraham Lincoln said it best, a house divided among itself cannot stand. And so it's not good with those infighting. We need to unify and Republicans need to really look at issues, pocketbook issues. Gas is up $1.50 a gallon. We don't like what's happening in the border. I don't think any American liked what happened in Afghanistan. We have a lot of big policy issues. We need to get America working again. We need Americans working. And so those are really important issues and we focus in on that, creating jobs for Georgians. That's the candidate that's going to prevail in Georgia in 2022.

BERMAN: Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, I appreciate you being with us.

RAFFENSPERGER: Thank you.

BERMAN: A new warning about the impacts of Instagram on teenagers. Why Facebook's own research shows it could be dangerous, way more dangerous than TikTok.

KEILAR: Plus, Alec Baldwin says I did not pull the trigger. That claim already sparking major backlash from members of the film's crew.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:47:13]

KEILAR: Former Facebook data scientist turned whistleblower Frances Haugen returning to Capitol Hill and sounding the alarm on the dangers of the company's products, particularly Instagram pose to teenagers.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

FRANCES HAUGEN, FORMER FACEBOOK PROJECT MANAGER: Facebook's internal research states that not only is Instagram dangerous for teenagers, it's actually substantially more dangerous than other social media platforms because TikTok is about performance and doing things with your friends, Snapchat is largely about augmented reality and faces, but Instagram is about bodies and social comparison.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: Joining us now to discuss is Scott Galloway, CNN Plus host and professor of marketing at NYU Sterns School of Business.

Scott, it is so great to have you on this morning to talk about this.

You know, in your view, how harmful is Instagram to kids?

SCOTT GALLOWAY, HOST, CNN PLUS: Well, as a parent, you know, I don't think I'm being -- I think a lot of parents would agree with me on this, I would rather give my 14-year-old son a bottle of Jack Daniels and marijuana than an Instagram and a Snap account. I mean imagine, Brianna, you know, imagine at 15, and a lot of us making these decisions, don't have personal experience with this because these platforms weren't around as we were in our formative years. But imagine having a full self or being presented with your full self 24/7. And then imagine a platform that is very visual that is basically kind of dominated by young women or girls really who put up an image of themselves and then wait for comments from their peer group, or total strangers. I mean the basic premise is a little weird and uncomfortable.

So, I think this has been -- and there's been a lot of evidence now that shows that self-harm and teen suicide has exploded, especially among girls, since social hit mobile in around 2012 when Facebook acquired Instagram. I think this is a huge problem.

KEILAR: How do you worry that this changes the path of this generation, including girls?

GALLOWAY: Well, look, anyone with kids knows that you have your world of work, your have you world of fun and your have your world of kids. And if something comes off the tracks with one of your kids, your entire universe shrinks to that kid. So now we have -- I think looking back on how we have regulated or not regulated social media, we're going to regret the axis of misinformation that has decreased vaccination rates, that will lead to unnecessary death and disability. We are going to regret not breaking these companies up and we've stunted economic growth by letting them exert their monopoly power.

But the biggest regret we're going to have, Brianna, I think in ten years we're going to look back and think, how on earth did we let this happen to our children?

[08:50:02]

We age gate (ph) alcohol, the military, marijuana, pornography, but we decided not to age gate social media, which has demonstrated more harm to teens, especially young girls. Boys bully physically and verbally. Girls bully relationally. And we have put these nuclear weapons in their hands. I think it's -- I think we're going to look back on this and think, how on earth did we let this happen?

KEILAR: Yes, I have appreciated how much you speak online, just shouting from the rooftops to people that, look, if it comes down to our kids, that's really all that matters. But you see Congress, because of these platforms, involving speech. They seem unsure of how to effectively legislate this.

What actually would prompt Congress and big tech to address this?

GALLOWAY: In a word, mothers. In the '80s, the alcohol lobby was very powerful and resisted any attempt to raise the legal drinking age. And they put so much pressure on Congress because so many of their kids were dying in drunk driving accidents that the federal government found a creative way to inspire the alcohol lobby to check back, and that is they withheld federal funds for highways.

I'd like to seeing some the equivalence of MAMS, and that is Mothers Against Mark and Sheryl. But I think they have crossed the wrong cowboy here, specifically mothers. And if you've been in a household where a child is suffering from an eating disorder and you're finding that your 15-year-old, who is 5'10", 100 pounds is being suggested extreme dieting sites, that is the algorithms have decided to suggest these sites to your daughter, I think you've crossed the wrong person.

This takes it into an entirely different level. And I think parents, I'd like to think, are going to put pressure on our elected officials to figure this out, listen to Miss Haugen, who has put on a master class in how to be effective versus right.

I appreciate your words, your kind words about me, but a lot of me and my colleagues have, quite frankly, just not been that effective. We've had a ton of these hearings and nothing has happened. This should be the part of the program where we move to actual legislation and impact where we begin to protect our young girls and our young boys.

KEILAR: Yes, we can't just sit by. I mean we can't just sit and watch this -- it's a horror show really, I think, unraveling in real time before us. And Scott Galloway, I really appreciate you joining us to talk about it.

GALLOWAY: Thanks, Brianna.

KEILAR: And I will say, welcome to CNN. I have gotten stuck in an algorithm clearly of your videos online. It's one I didn't mind getting stuck on. I'm better for it. And so we are very happy to have you.

GALLOWAY: (INAUDIBLE). Thank you. Nice to be with you.

KEILAR: All right. Wonderful.

So, a woman in Reno, Nevada, who survived aggressive breast cancer found her confidence again after competing on stage in a fitness contest. And now she's helping other women in today's "The Human Factor."

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

HEATHER REIMER, BREAST CANCER 2 BIKINI: Push, push.

I was diagnosed with triple negative breast cancer. So treatment took me to my lowest place and I was in a deep, deep depression. And about six months later, I realized I needed to do something.

My goal was to do something really difficult, really challenging, to mentally and physically regain my life back. And it just came into my head that I was going to train for a fitness competition in the bikini division.

A 41-year-old woman who had had two children, has no breasts, had been through cancer, was bald, it seems like getting on stage in a bikini was going to be maybe the hardest thing I had ever done outside of cancer treatment.

Workouts were grueling, but it shifted something inside me. I started a non-profit organization. I created two separate things, but they come together really nicely. So, Each One Tell One provides awareness related to dense breast tissue and Breast Cancer 2 Bikini provides a healing place for women and survivorship. They mostly are doing weight lifting, but they'll also do cardio.

So we just completed year six. We have had almost 100 women cross the stage in a teeny, tiny bikini.

I've never had one woman gone through the program that hasn't said it's changed their life.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

KEILAR: I love that because, you know, so many times when I've spoken with friends who have gone through that surgery, they feel like they've lost themselves. You know, they lose part of their identity and there she is giving people the tools to reinvent themselves.

BERMAN: You can see with those women competing in their faces was a look of contentment, was a look in a way of arrival there. You can really see it.

KEILAR: Yes.

President Biden about to roll out some new testing protocols to combat Covid-19.

[08:54:47]

What you need to know before traveling.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:00:05]

BERMAN: An historic moment at the White House.