Return to Transcripts main page

The Situation Room

Race to Find Survivors After Devastating Colombia Earthquake; Trump Switched Planes in Elaborate Ruse Because of Iran Threat; Trump's Order Reshaping Child Vaccine Requirements Sparks Concern. Aired 10-10:30a ET

Aired August 11, 2026 - 10:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:00:00]

PAMELA BROWN, CNN ANCHOR: Happening now, secret flight, a catering container to a military jet and an Air Force One decoy. New details of an elaborate plan to transfer the president safely from the NATO summit, and a demand for answers as to why the president's location was concealed for several hours.

Scenes of devastation, 175 people are dead, and the death toll is climbing as rescuers dig through the rubble of that massive earthquake in Colombia. CNN teams are on the ground with the search for survivors.

And vaccine outrage, a warning from doctors after the president signs an executive order spacing out childhood vaccines and falsely linking them to autism.

And are you the firstborn or the baby of the family? What your birth order could reveal about your health.

Welcome to our viewers in the United States and around the world. I'm Pamela Brown. Wolf Blitzer is off, and you're in the Situation Room.

And we begin with that breaking news. CNN is on the ground in Colombia where crews are racing to find survivors a day after that devastating earthquake hit the western part of the country. Video is now emerging of all that chaos at the moment the earthquake hits the buildings and began to collapse.

At least 175 people have died and hundreds more have been injured.

CNN's David Culver is live in one of the hardest hit areas. What are you seeing there, David?

DAVID CULVER, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Pamela, I'm trying to listen in because it's gotten eerily quiet in the past few minutes or so, and what you're looking at is what was an apartment building on top about four storeys high, and then residents describe on the bottom was a bar and then a drug store.

And when we arrived about an hour ago, you had several dozen first responders mixed with locals trying to move as much as the rubble out as possible. They have a crane here that they've been bringing in, tanks of gas to try to keep fueled over the past 24 hours since the earthquake first struck. And then it went quiet, and they brought up another group of rescuers that then had a canine search and rescue dog that was up there. And now we're seeing that they're starting to bring some activity again and moving hand signals to try to relay more information.

Now, why are they so focused on this building in this moment? We know, according to neighbors, that seven people were pulled from there in the past 24 hours. Three of them were pulled lifeless. The other four seem to have survived and are okay, according to one local. They believe there's a little girl still in there, along with an older woman, as one local described it.

But I want to give you a sense of what the crowd is around here, too, because you have a lot of people who have certainly been displaced, also people whose lives have just been totally disrupted in seeing what has happened to their community.

And we're going to be mindful of the signal as well, Pamela, because signal has just come on here in the past few hours, and so people are rushing to their cell phones to let their loved ones know that they're okay. And so it can kind of go in and out, but I want to still give you a sense of what's happening. You have a lot of people who are standing around taking this in, clearly some still processing just the level of destruction.

You have one gentleman who told me, and he was recording video that was quite traumatic from yesterday, that he said in this place, you, you sit almost confused. You have conflicted emotions, and sometimes those emotions will rise with excitement and adrenaline and thinking that perhaps they've found somebody who's still alive and they can pull them out. And he goes, and then sometimes they are then subsiding quickly when they realize that person did not survive.

I want to show you over here because, yes, this is one town square, and that's incredibly destructive. But we've gone to several different locations, three or four in the past couple of hours that we've been here. And each location we've gone to, people have tried to redirect us to another one that they say is far worse.

I'm going to point out down here, you see at the end of the street almost this cattle-like truck, that's been retrofitted and carries a few dozen first responders and canines now. We've seen those on the roads here.

[10:05:01]

And then you can just look up across the street there. There's another building that is still standing, but the facade is starting to crumble. You can see some of the --

BROWN: All right. We just lost David there in Colombia. Hopefully, we can get that signal back. But we have a lot of other news to get to this morning. Cloak, dagger, and decoy, we are learning of an elaborate ruse to protect President Trump from an assassination threat by Iran. Here we see, right here, the president boarding the old Air Force One last month to leave the NATO Summit at Turkey, or so we were told.

Look closely at this catering truck that's highlighted under Air Force One. So, minutes after stepping aboard the plane, a U.S. official tells CNN the president was secretly moved into this truck in a clandestine move to protect him. As that was all unfolding, journalists filed up the rear steps onto Air Force One, thinking they would be accompanying the president on the scheduled flight to England.

What they don't know, the catering truck had pulled away from Air Force One and was then whisking the president to a smaller nearby military plane that was standing by. And that undercover flight delivered him to England, where he arrived just before the Air Force One decoy.

So, let's go live to CNN's Kevin Liptak at the White House. Kevin, you've been covering the White House for so many years. This is quite extraordinary.

KEVIN LIPTAK, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Truly extraordinary, and it is, I think, reflective of what the administration believed were very real and credible threats from Iran on the president's life, but also concerns about what capabilities Iran might have to target the most secure airplane in the entire world. And so it is an extraordinary degree of subterfuge.

And, you know, looking back on it in retrospect, there were some details that perhaps we didn't notice at the time but do underscore what exactly was afoot. For example, when those reporters got aboard that legacy blue and white Air Force One, they were all asked to lower their window shades, which made it impossible for them to see the president in that catering vehicle moving over to the other smaller plane.

We also noticed, looking back, that once the legacy Air Force One landed in the United Kingdom, it took an unusual amount of time for the doors to open and for the reporters to come out, that time allowing the president to get back on board and then deplane again with the cameras rolling.

And so an extraordinary shell game that the White House orchestrated here. What the White House said, they didn't confirm it, they didn't deny it either. They said, quote, as the president has said recently, there are many enemies of America who have their sights on him, and we use every tool at our disposal to address those threats.

You know, it is rare, as you point out, for the president to use decoys when he's moving about in very sensitive situations, although it is not unprecedented. There was an instance back in 2000 when President Clinton was flying in Pakistan and he got on an unmarked plane, but the deception was revealed almost immediately. The cameras were rolling as he was stepping off of the plane.

That's a very different instance from what happened this time, and those members of the press and staff who were left on that old Air Force One essentially acting as unwitting decoys for Iran as the president was moving about in the other aircraft. Pamela?

BROWN: Wow. All right, Kevin Liptak, thank you so much.

And still ahead, does birth order determine health and disease risks? A new study looks at just that, and the findings are pretty fascinating.

Plus, we're fact-checking President Trump's vaccine claims as he issues new recommendations against the guidance of a number of major medical groups.

You're in The Situation Room, and we'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:10:00]

BROWN: So, there are growing questions, confusion, and concern this morning after President Trump and the Oval Office signed an executive order aimed at reshaping vaccine requirements for children. Now, this president's order proposes reducing the total number of shots recommended for kids, divides the nation's childhood vaccine schedule into three categories, and splits the mumps, measles, and rubella vaccines into three individual shots, which is a dramatic change that goes against broad scientific recommendations.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: For long, and far too long, a long period of time, America's recommended more childhood vaccines than any peer nation.

Effective immediately, my administration is recognizing gold standard childhood vaccine recommendations for only 11 core vaccinations.

You know, the expression is, we have really no choice, and nothing bad can happen from what we're doing. Nothing bad can happen.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: Now, Republican Senator Bill Cassidy, who cast the deciding vote to confirm Robert F. Kennedy as HHS secretary, had this to say, quote, I'm a doctor. This executive order is wrong. The president does not have the expertise to make these changes. Vaccines are overwhelmingly safe. Vaccines are effective. Vaccines do not cause autism. Breaking up vaccines will mean children have to get more shots to get the same protection, not fewer shots. It will increase hesitancy and make children less safe.

Parents should listen to their child's pediatrician about vaccines rather than listening to an inaccurate executive order. This is so wrong, end quote.

With us now is CNN Senior Reporter Daniel Dale and Dr. Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia.

[10:15:04]

I also want to note that Dr. Offit is the co-inventor of the rotavirus vaccine recommended for infants by the CDC, and he's also a former member of the FDA Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee.

So, before we begin, I want to note that these changes are not in effect and are likely to face challenges. This is an attempted workaround after previous attempts to alter the childhood vaccine schedule by this administration that has been held up in court. So, I'm going to play part of what the president said in the Oval Office yesterday, and Daniel, I'd like you to fact-check what he said for us, and, Dr. Offit, I'd like you to tell us what the science says. Here's what the president said about vaccines and autism.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: I came in and I said, I want to find what's going on with autism. It's many, many times what it used to be years ago, and it gets progressively worse, and we had progressively more and more vaccines. I think it's going to make a big difference. You know, there are some groups that have virtually no problem with autism, and they -- you know, I have to say this, they're groups that aren't big into the world of vaccines.

So, there's something wrong when we see record numbers all the time, every year for years and years, every year gets higher, higher, higher, autism.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: So, Daniel, Trump once again hinting at the idea that vaccines might be linked to autism. What are the facts?

DANIEL DALE, CNN SENIOR REPORTER: There is no link between vaccines and autism. The idea that there was, was popularized by a fraudulent study, a retracted study in the 1990s. Subsequent real research in multiple countries involving millions of people has definitively shown there is simply no connection. The American Academy of Pediatrics emphasized yesterday there's no new science, there's no new data. This idea remains debunked even though the president is floating it again.

BROWN: Dr. Offit, what is the science behind autism and whether there are any links to vaccines? I know that there have been several studies done, and we have a full screen of one of the gold standard studies looking at siblings, one with autism, one without autism. Tell us about that.

DR. PAUL OFFIT, DIRECTOR, VACCINE EDUCATION CENTER, CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PHILADELPHIA: Right. So, there are many known causes of autism. So, it's at least genetic. I mean, there are 80 percent of autism is genetic based on sort of twin studies, fraternal or identical twins, and cousin studies.

You know that there are certain drugs that a mother can take during pregnancy that can increase the risk of autism. Tylenol is not one of them. You know that there are certain infections during pregnancy that increase the risk of autism. You know that the age of the parents at the time of conception increases the risk of autism, especially paternal age, the older the father, the more likely that the child would have autism.

And you know that there are the microbiome, which is sort of those intestinal bacteria that colonize the intestine when the child is born, also increases the risk of autism. So, there's a lot of interesting leads in autism. Vaccines isn't one of those leads. I mean, this is the best studied environmental factor, and it's not vaccines.

And what upsets me the most about this is that anti-vaccine activists like Robert F. Kennedy, or science denialists like, like, President Trump, basically have taken the autism story hostage, much to the detriment of children with autism, because there is much research that can be done that can educate us about this.

I just -- I think that were I, a parent of a child with autism, I would really be tired of talking about vaccines at this point, because we have so much data.

BROWN: Yes. And let's just drill down on that one study because I did some research before, and as I have been as a journalist, just wanting to look deeper into these studies and understand them and understand what the critics say and so forth.

And the one that really stands out is the sibling study, because critics said on these other studies, Well, you're looking at the general population. What about a subset of the population that could be more vulnerable to autism with these vaccines?

But the sibling study really seemed to debunk that narrative. Tell us more about that, Dr. Offit.

OFFIT: Right. So, if you are the product of you're a twin and then your other twin is identical, you have a much greater risk of having autism if you have an identical twin, whereas you have a lesser risk of autism if you have a fraternal twin, which tells you there's a genetic component to this.

I think what Robert F. Kennedy Jr. always says, he says, well, you can't have a genetic epidemic. But what he's forgetting is that there are -- we've broadened the definition of autism to include autism spectrum disorder. We have better diagnostic tools. We have more understanding of the fact that this is a disorder.

And I think that, you know, that's why there's an increase. It has nothing to do with the fact that children are getting more vaccines, and I think that it's groups like the Autism Science Foundation in New York are very good about getting information about that out there, what are the real cause or causes of autism. It's hard to watch Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and President Trump take this story hostage.

BROWN: All right. Here's what the president said about splitting the MMR vaccine.

[10:20:03]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: You have the MMR. We want it in three separate vaccinations given at separate times. Together, there could be a possibility they are quite lethal.

REPORTER: I think I heard you say that the MMR vaccine for measles, mumps, and rubella is quite lethal. Is there any evidence of that? Can anyone --

TRUMP: No. What I've heard is that there are some people that say it is that way, and I say, well, let's say there's a 5 percent chance of it. Let's split it up. Let's split it up.

I've heard when you put them together, they can be explosive.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: All right. Daniel, what are the facts behind the MMR vaccine and its alleged lethality as the president claims here from some people saying this?

DALE: I don't know who President Trump's some people are, but they're certainly not medical authorities because this vaccine, this combination vaccine, has been highly safe and highly effective and in use in the United States since the early 1970s. There are sometimes side effects. They are overwhelmingly mild, overwhelmingly temporary, and you don't have to take my word for it because as of this moment on the CDC website, it still says the MMR vaccine is very safe. That's a direct quote.

Another direct quote on the CDC website, no published scientific evidence shows any benefit in separating the combination MMR vaccine into three individual shots. Dr. Offit can speak to this. My colleagues have spoken to him. I've spoken to a number of other doctors who deal with vaccines. They all say this is an extremely safe combination vaccine to take.

BROWN: I want to hear your thoughts on this, Dr. Offit, that the president wants to split the MMR vaccine, three separate vaccines at three different times. He says the one vaccine, as you heard there, can be explosive. I mean, is it even possible to split these up, and is this the best way to deliver this vaccine? I mean, is there a scenario where this might work?

OFFIT: Well, so measles vaccine, the first measles vaccine came into this country in 1963, the mumps in '67, the rubella vaccine in 1969. They were combined into a single shot to make it easier for parents, easier for doctors, easier for the child in 1971. The MMR vaccine came about in 1971. We had a single dose then. In 1989, we recommended a second dose, and so that meant the children got two doses to protect them against these three serious diseases.

What the President Trump is arguing for was let's go back in time, separate them into the three component parts, and have six shots instead of two for no reason. It doesn't enhance safety. It doesn't enhance efficacy. It's just spreading them out because President Trump believes that in some way they're dangerous when study after study after study has shown that it's not dangerous.

BROWN: Before I let you go, Dr. Offit, I wanted to address another story when it comes to vaccines. Yesterday, as you may know, two Republican senators released text messages from Dr. Fauci's former government phone while he was in communication with administration officials during the early days of COVID-19. And in those messages, Fauci discusses the possible risks and safety of receiving the vaccine while pregnant, particularly that second dose.

Now, we should note studies since the pandemic have shown the vaccines were safe for pregnant women, but it raises the question, should Dr. Fauci and those other health experts have been more transparent at the time about their concerns before they had all these studies and the science to really show the safety?

OFFIT: Right. So, in December of 2020, Pfizer submitted data to the FDA on their 40,000 person study, placebo controlled. 20,000 got the mRNA COVID vaccine, 20,000 got a placebo. And then a week later, Moderna submitted their data that were reviewed of a 30,000 person study. 15,000 got the vaccine, 15,000 didn't. What wasn't included in that were pregnant women. Pregnant women were not tested.

Now, you knew at the time that if you were pregnant and you got COVID, you had a one-and-a-half to two-fold greater chance of being hospitalized and going to the ICU and dying from that disease. So, now you had a vaccine that you think works based on, you know, studies of what ended up being about 35,000 adults.

And so what the CDC did is they said a pregnant woman could reasonably choose to get the vaccine. If she does make that choice, then what she should do is report through the V-safe system whether or not there'd been any complications, either complications with her pregnancy or complications in the child once the child was born. And very quickly, you had tens of thousands of women who were making that choice and who were reporting those data.

So, I think what Dr. Fauci was doing at the time, as we were all doing, was trying to understand in real time what was going on, because you learn as you go. And what we very quickly learned was that there were no problems with that vaccine in pregnancy. So, I think those are just sort of his musings early on and, you know, we learn as we go.

BROWN: Right. But just in terms of building public trust, and, again, I know that we're in this space right now in a country where people are trying to villainize him or make him a hero and that's not what this is about.

[10:25:05]

But at a time, you know, when you're trying to build public trust, should there have been more transparency of, hey, look, we're waiting for more data, these are potential concerns, but this is also what COVID can do to you if you're pregnant that we do know about, and just be more transparent because this will only fuel mistrust that people already have in the wake of the COVID pandemic.

OFFIT: No, I agree. I think looking back on the pandemic, there are a number of things which we could have done differently, and we could have communicated things better. Like, as you said, when that vaccine came out, we should have said, this hasn't been tested yet in pregnant women. We think it's safe, but we don't know that yet.

And so -- but we also know that, that the vaccine does appear to be highly effective in adults. We know that there's no reason it shouldn't be unsafe in pregnant women, but know that it hasn't been tested yet. So, we're going to be gathering data to make sure that it's not a problem for either the pregnancy or for the child after the child is born. And we are gathering those data, and we will continue to update you on what those data are.

I think you're right. I think that's right. There were -- I think there were a number of things in retrospect we could have done better and communicated better, but, again, it's always easy in retrospect.

BROWN: Yes, hindsight's 20/20.

Dr. Paul Offit, Daniel Dale, thank you both for that discussion and for bringing the facts to the table.

We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:30:00]