Return to Transcripts main page
Anderson Cooper 360 Degrees
New COVID Cases Top 400,000 Daily; Trump Moves To Quash Subpoenas For Testimony In Civil Investigation; Trump Supporters Embrace Conspiracy Theories, Deny He Had Anything To Do With The Capitol Riot; CNN: Jan.6 Cmte. Has "Firsthand" Knowledge Of Trump's Actions During U.S. Capitol Siege; Theranos Founder Elizabeth Holmes Found Guilty On Four Of 11 Federal Charges. Aired 8-9p ET
Aired January 03, 2022 - 20:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST: And thanks so much to all of you for being with me, this first show day of the New Year.
AC 360 starts now.
[20:00:07]
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST: And good evening.
The year begins with a flurry of new COVID developments as the omicron surge gathers force, the country's now averaging more than 400,000 new infections every single day.
Nationwide, they've risen 198 percent over the last two weeks. That's up to 222 percent in New York, and in Florida, where the State Surgeon General is now speaking out against so much testing, cases are up 947 percent again in just 14 days.
But it is not just cases that are rising, so is the number of people needing hospital care, even as more healthcare workers get sent home sick. Teachers as well with millions of kids going back to school today, mostly in person, but in several large School Districts, they've gone back to remote learning for the time being.
Against that backdrop, today, the F.D.A. signed off on booster doses of Pfizer's vaccine for 12 to 15-year-olds and shortened the waiting period between second and third doses to five months from six.
Meantime, testing remains hard to get, questions about how dangerous omicron is in general and specifically to kids remain unanswered, although there are late developments on that front as well.
Guidelines on isolation, the effectiveness of home testing kits, mask wearing remain confusing or controversial and sometimes even contradictory. It feels like a lot to process because it is a lot to process.
So tonight we want to devote plenty of time to answering the questions that most of us still have. Our Randi Kaye starts us off with a quick rundown.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
RANDI KAYE, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice over): What are we supposed to think about rapid tests? The F.D.A. has announced that rapid antigen tests may be less sensitive to picking up the omicron variant, meaning they'll spot an infection less often. PCR tests are considered the gold standard, but the F.D.A. still suggests people should continue to use rapid tests. So do they work?
DR. ANTHONY FAUCI, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ALLERGY AND INFECTIOUS DISEASES: The answer is they do. They're very good one they are given sequentially, but as a single test, they are not as not as sensitive.
KAYE (voice over): Adding to the confusion, a statement from Abbott, the company that makes one of the authorized at home tests BinaxNOW. Abbott told CNN BinaxNOW detected the virus in all tests at equivalent sensitivity as other variants and data from customers has not shown any change in test performance.
Still, the C.D.C. isn't recommending any rapid tests as proof someone is COVID free after isolation.
DR. ROCHELLE WALENSKY, DIRECTOR, CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION: We actually don't know how our rapid tests perform and how well they predict whether you're transmissible during the end of disease.
KAYE (voice over): On the issue of masks, when and where should they be worn? Paris, France is mandating all people 11 and older in that city wear masks outdoors as well as indoors. The decision was made after a record breaking number of cases reported in a single day, due in particular to the omicron variant, the City Police said.
That hasn't happened yet on a large scale here in the U.S., but should it, why is Paris masking outdoors and not New York or Miami?
This was Dr. Anthony Fauci in May.
FAUCI: If you're vaccinated in your outside, put aside your mask, you don't have to wear it.
KAYE (voice over): It isn't clear if that still holds true, and which masks really work. For some time now, people in the U.S. have been wearing cloth masks. But now experts say your best bet is a KN95 or N95 mask. That cloth masks are not as effective against the omicron variant.
DR. LEANA WEN, CNN MEDICAL ANALYST: Cloth masks are little more than facial decorations. There's no place for them in light of omicron.
KAYE (voice over): And if you tested positive after exposure, how long do you need to isolate? Those rules are changing.
Just last week, the C.D.C. issued new guidance lowering recommended isolation time from 10 days to five days for asymptomatic people. Critics worry that new guidance may allow infectious people to return to work.
WALENSKY: Our guidance was conservative before.
KAYE (voice over): And what about those soaring hospitalizations? If omicron is supposed to be milder than delta in most cases, then why are more than 100,000 people hospitalized with COVID-19 for the first time in nearly four months.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services also says about three-quarters of hospital beds across the country are full, and one in seven are for COVID patients.
FAUCI: And when you have so many, many cases, there is still the danger that you're going to have a surging of hospitalizations that might stress the healthcare system. So it's kind of like a very interesting, somewhat complicated issue.
KAYE (voice over): Complicated for sure. And with COVID confusion and the situation evolving at every turn. Calculating personal risk is harder than ever.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
COOPER: I mean, it is really hard to keep up. There's more changes in Israel as well. What's happening there?
KAYE: Yes, Anderson, a bit of news out of Israel today only adding to the confusion for folks here in the U.S. Israel now offering a fourth vaccine dose to those 60 and older so they've gone from the two doses of the mRNA to the third dose, which was the booster and now this fourth dose for that age group.
[220:05:10]
KAYE: So that is a lot of folks here wondering, well, where are we heading? Are we going to have to get a fourth dose as well here in the U.S.? Will people need that vaccine every three or four months? And nobody seems to be able to answer that question, at least not yet here in this country.
So still Anderson a lot of unknowns, a lot of questions and as you said, plenty of confusion.
COOPER: All right, Randi, appreciate it.
Joining us now, our CNN chief medical correspondent, Dr. Sanjay Gupta; also Dr. Leana, CNN medical analyst, former Baltimore Health Commissioner and author of "Lifelines: A Doctor's Journey in the Fight for Public Health."
So Sanjay, this is first that we've spoken since the omicron surge really took hold a little more than two weeks ago. First of all, what do you make of all that that's happened? And in particular confusion of the guidance from the Federal government?
DR. SANJAY GUPTA, CNN CHIEF MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, well, Happy New Year, right. Here we are back again.
I mean, I think there are a couple of things that have really struck me. One, as you just heard in Randi's report is that the number of cases is really -- it is pretty staggering, right?
If you compare this to last year's peak around this time, we are about you know, close -- approaching two times what we saw around this time last year.
Now at the same time, we have about 75 percent of the hospitalizations and this gets to that point that people have been making. Look, this may be less severe for various reasons because we have some existing immunity, because of the nature of this omicron variant itself. Who knows? We're not sure entirely. But there does need to be this decoupling of cases.
But what you've heard, again, from Randy's report, and many other people is that when we start talking about such a high absolute number of infections that is going to overwhelm hospitals and that is really, I think, that the biggest issue right now is that, you know, this gets back to the original dialogues we were having at the beginning of this about flattening the curve.
We realized it's a very infectious virus out there, more infectious and more contagious than ever, but the idea of having so many people becoming infected at the same time, no matter if it's less lethal, it's still going to be something that's going to overwhelm hospitals and that's the biggest concern.
COOPER: And Dr. Wen, a pediatrician Houston, the coleader of the COVID Command Center at Texas Children's Hospital told reporters late today they have, quote, "staggering numbers" of children hospitalized there. He said 80 percent of Houston area school kids are unvaccinated. How does that square with your argument the variant isn't so bad? I mean, staggering numbers obviously sounds very bad.
WEN: It is very bad, and it's for the reasons that Sanjay just laid out that we have omicron omnipresent at this point. That it is just really hard to avoid this virus because of how widespread it is. And so children, many of whom remain unvaccinated are just getting infected at much larger numbers.
And as a result, a substantial proportion of them are now getting hospitalized.
I will say this is a major problem, especially for our hospitals right now, not only because of COVID, but even before this wave, hospitals were being overrun. They were being overrun because of delta, but also they are facing substantial staffing shortages, and also many patients put off their medical care.
And so hospitals that were already at the brink, even a little bit additional from omicron is pushing them over the edge. And so when it comes to children, for parents of children, five and above who are eligible to get the vaccine, what are you waiting for? This is the time that's the most dangerous for our children in the
entire pandemic, because of how widespread COVID is. There is just virus everywhere. Please get your children vaccinated.
And that also, by the way, is key to protecting those kids under the age of five, if older siblings, for example, are vaccinated. That's the whole idea of herd immunity to protect those who need our help the most.
COOPER: So Sanjay, all of this confusion and frustration, a shortage of rapid at-home tests, week-long appointments for PCR tests, long lines when you show up and five days for the results. I mean, a lot of people are just fed up at their wit's end. What do you say to Americans?
GUPTA: I can understand that. And, you know, I think that the testing thing still sort of baffles me as to how -- I mean, I think this is the original sin. In medicine, you have to really diagnose a problem to best address it. And we still don't really have clear eyes on just how widespread.
COOPER: I mean, it is nuts that we are still talking about not enough testing. This has been from day one in the old administration. I mean, it's ridiculous.
GUPTA: It is and I -- and I'm, I'm not sure why it still continues to be this bigger problem. Yes, there are different tests out there, the antigen test versus the PCR test. And we spent a lot of time on your program talking about the differences and the utility of each of those tests.
But you know, we should be doing in the billions of tests probably in a month. And right now we're doing about a million, a million and a half tests a day, and we're nowhere close to where we projected we should be, you know, at this point in the pandemic.
So, without the tests, everything else sort of falls apart. We don't know how widespread this is. There are a lot of people who are probably contagious walking around not knowing that they're even carrying the virus. Some of these therapeutics that we talked about like Paxlovid for example which could be very, very effective, we don't have enough of it, unfortunately.
[20:10:09]
GUPTA: But if people aren't getting tested enough, they don't know that they even have this virus when they're developing some symptoms. They have to take these medications within five days, people can't get their test results or get a test within that period of time. So it's really quite problematic.
And again, going back to the hospitals, this is part of the reason why hospitalizations are likely to keep going up. I can tell you today, Anderson, I operate on Mondays. Our hospital has been in and out of diversion over the last couple of weeks, primarily because they're just getting an influx of all these patients. COOPER: When you say diversion, what -- by asking people not to take
some surgeries or --
GUPTA: Yes, so diversion, basically, you have a triage center in the hospital. So, you know, people are calling in ambulances calling in saying, can we bring patients to your hospital with, you know, whatever problem may be, non-COVID related problems. And oftentimes, because there's not enough bed or theirs is an anticipated surge of patients, the hospital has to go on diversion. So you have a situation where that affects non-COVID patients as well. People who, you know, aren't sick from COVID.
Yes, they are vaccinated and boosted, not dealing with the problems of COVID, but this problem affects them as well.
COOPER: Yes. And Dr. Wen, in Randi's piece, you said that cloth masks essentially are just window dressing or facial dressing, is that really I mean -- people should not wear cloth masks?
WEN: My point in saying this is not to say that we shouldn't wear cloth masks, if that's the only thing that's available to us. But rather that at this point in the pandemic, where we are facing this contagious of a virus that is airborne, that a simple cloth mask just is not going to do.
I get so worried Anderson when I see my patients walking around going to train stations and busy in grocery stores, wearing just a facial -- a simple cloth mask, because I know that they think they're being protected when actually they're not.
At the very least, people should be wearing a three-ply surgical mask. They can put a cloth mask on top for better fit. Ideally, they should be wearing a KN95 or N95. There are really good recommendations online about where to find them, where to find ones that are not counterfeit.
And also these can be reused often for a week or so at a time. They cost about $1.00. So we really should be distributing them free. But also, people should be wearing these N95s at this point.
And I know that at this point of the pandemic, it's confusing. The risk to the individual person who is vaccinated and boosted is pretty low, but we're facing a potential collapse of our healthcare system.
There are simple things that we can do to prevent that from happening and one of them is wearing high quality masks in all indoor public spaces. We should be doing that while also trying to take away the stress from our healthcare system and just one last plea to everyone, if you are seeking a COVID test, please do not go to the ER, do not go to urgent care centers unless you know that's a service that they offer. Because our ERs are getting so inundated, so overwhelmed right now that care for patients even who don't have COVID is being compromised.
COOPER: Dr. Wen, thank you. Sanjay Gupta, as well. Thanks so much.
Next, we have breaking news, a big announcement by investigators running a separate civil investigation in New York State involving the former President and his children. Details on the pushback tonight from Ivanka and Don Trump, Jr.
Plus, our first look at many this week of the impact and the fallout of the capital insurrection, which occurred one year ago Thursday. Ahead, you'll hear about the followers the former President in a permanent state of denial about the facts and I'll talk to "New York times" columnist, Thomas Friedman.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:17:40]
COOPER: Lawyers for the former President Donald Trump, Jr. and Ivanka Trump tonight are making the kind of legal argument you can only make when you're facing more than one investigation of the same kind of potential wrongdoing. They are trying to squash subpoenas for their testimony, two of which went out today to the Trump children in a New York Civil investigation of this type of alleged financial misdeed.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MICHAEL COHEN, FORMER TRUMP ORGANIZATION ATTORNEY: It was my experience that Mr. Trump inflated his total assets when it served his purposes, such as trying to be listed amongst the wealthiest people in "Forbes" and deflated his assets to reduce his real estate taxes.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: That of course from former Trump Organization lawyer, Michael Cohen, testifying before Congress in 2019, accusing the former President doing what New York State and the Manhattan DA are both looking into, hence the subpoenas, now the attempt to squash them.
Joining us now with the latest CNN's Kara Scannell, so what's the reaction from the Attorney General in New York on the move by the Trump's to squash these subpoenas?
KARA SCANNELL, CNN REPORTER: Yes, almost immediately after the motions to squash the subpoenas hit the Court docket, the New York Attorney General Letitia James tweeted out that she is undeterred.
She said, "Donald Trump, Donald Trump, Jr., and Ivanka Trump are trying to stop my office from interviewing them under oath as part of our investigation into the Trump Organization of Mr. Trump. Over two years of delay tactics won't stop our investigation, because no one is above the law."
Now this comes as you mentioned, as Letitia James has subpoenaed not only Donald Trump Jr. and Ivanka Trump but also the former President for testimony in this investigation that she's looking into widespread allegations by Michael Cohen, and others that the Trump Organization and its executives have manipulated the finances.
Now, this subpoena is seeking not only their testimony, but also records, these statements of financial condition that were provided to insurers and lenders, as well as any of the supporting documents that went into how they came up with these evaluations.
Now, Trump's team is moving to quash the subpoena. They're saying James is trying to do an end run around state Grand Jury rules. In a criminal proceeding, if you testify before a grand jury, you get what's called transactional immunity, meaning, you can't be prosecuted unless you lie under oath.
But if you testify in a civil case, you don't get that same protection, and they are arguing that she is trying to leverage her position in one of the investigations to help the other one -- Anderson.
COOPER: Right. Because that's what's confusing. The subpoenas are part of a civil case, the Attorney General is also involved in a criminal investigation, which is being run by the Manhattan District Attorney's Office.
[20:20:10]
SCANNELL: That's right. I mean this -- she had launched this civil investigation in 2019. The Manhattan District Attorney's Office launched their investigation, initially looking into the payments that were made to Stormy Daniels to silence her allegations of an affair with Trump. But then they also began looking into the same conduct.
Michael Cohen has interviewed with the Manhattan DA's Office at least eight times. James then joined the DA's investigation earlier this year, and she participated in the indictment that was announced against the Trump organization and its CFO, Allen Weisselberg, relating to an alleged tax fraud scheme.
So now, they are working together, two attorneys from the A.G.'s office have joined the prosecutors and that investigation is still ongoing. It's been active in recent weeks.
There is a new Manhattan District Attorney, Alvin Bragg who was sworn into office on January 1st, and he is now getting briefed on that investigation, and it will continue on its own track separate from the civil investigation.
COOPER: All right, Kara Scannell, appreciate it.
Let's get some perspective from CNN legal analyst and former Federal prosecutor Jeffrey Toobin, and Preet Bharara who served as U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York.
Jeff, do you think the Trump's are going to succeed in quashing these subpoenas?
JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN CHIEF LEGAL ANALYST: No, I don't. And I think it's worth focusing on just sort of the big picture here, which is this isn't a prosecution, this is simply an attempt to take depositions, get information, and judges basically don't like it when witnesses try not to answer questions. There are certain well established privileges, you know, attorney-client privilege, spousal privilege, privilege against self-incrimination. There is no such thing as a father, son, or parent-child privilege.
So, you know, there is no basis that I can see that will allow Don Jr, and Ivanka to avoid testifying. And I think a Judge is going to say no, you have to answer the question.
COOPER: And Preet, I mean, other people in the former President's orbit have publicly defied congressional subpoenas if the Trump children and the former President fail to squash the subpoenas in Court. Can they just try to blow them off and not comply? Can people do that?
PREET BHARARA, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: You know, what gets complicated when we talk about the Trump's is that there are so many investigations by different bodies, Federal investigation, State investigations, Congressional investigations, they're all governed by different precedents, different standards, different courts.
It's a little bit easier, I hate to say to flout a congressional subpoena because some of those precedents are not clear. There are separation of powers issues.
This is a standard garden variety civil investigation by a particular Attorney General in this state, and all those other things we've been talking about for months and months executive privilege, deliberative process privilege, all of those things that are going on in Washington, they don't pertain here.
And so I agree with Jeffrey, I don't think there is a way to get out of it.
It is true, from time to time, litigants will say, look, the investigators have asked for a hundred things. It is onerous, it's overbroad, it doesn't relate to the basis of what they are looking at. And a Court will sometimes say, well, you know, you can't have the hundred things, you can have 89 of those things.
But barring that, I don't see what the argument is. We'll wait to see what the briefs say. I think they're supposed to be filed as early as today. I haven't seen it.
But they don't have much of a leg to stand on. And by the way, it's also my understanding that another sibling, Eric Trump did testify in this particular proceeding. So, I think it makes it even a more uphill battle for them.
COOPER: And Jeff -- how does that -- go ahead, Jeff.
JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN CHIEF LEGAL ANALYST: To add one point there is that, you know, one big issue with the January 6 investigation is that, you know, the Committee just doesn't have a lot of time. You know, they -- you know, you have the campaign coming up, you have the likely Republican takeover of the House. That doesn't apply.
The Attorney General, Tish James, she is going to be there; the District Attorney, they're going to be there year after year. So, don't delay is certainly always something that the Trump's are going to try. But it's going to be a lot less effective when you're dealing with elected officials who have terms that go on for a period of years unlike Congress.
COOPER: And Preet, how does Letitia James joining the criminal investigation being run by the Manhattan District Attorney's Office change things? Has it somehow raised the stakes for their testimony?
BHARARA: I mean, so far, we understand the current dispute that we've been talking about to relate to the civil investigation. Now Kara Scannell brought up an interesting point, and I'll see how it is explained by the Trump folks in their papers. It is true as a general matter, there is a doctrine by which you need to be careful that if you have a parallel civil proceeding in a criminal proceeding, that you don't use the more generous and loose standards of the civil investigative proceeding to serve as a stalking horse to help buttress your criminal case.
That happens in ways that are familiar to a lot of people when the Securities and Exchange Commission investigates some conduct of insider trading or something else and you also have prosecutors investigating you criminally, those things have to be kept separate and parallel in particular ways or you'll get in trouble on the criminal side.
[20:25:10]
BHARARA: So that's all true as a general matter. I see no evidence here so far, that any kind of, you know, crossing over is happening in an inappropriate way. That would cause the subpoenas to be appropriately quashed, something that I think is just being thrown up against the wall. But there is that basic principle that people should be aware of.
COOPER: Guys, I appreciate it. Thank you.
Just ahead, the violence of the Capitol insurrection almost one year ago, and the followers of the former President who embraced conspiracies and their defense of him, the uncertain legacy that day when we continue.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COOPER: Thursday marks the one year anniversary of the Capitol insurrection. The facts of what happened that day are not in dispute.
Followers of the former President tried to overturn the election after a rally featuring him and allies who have spent months pushing a false story about a stolen election. The House Select Committee as you know is investigating.
A source tells CNN that the Committee now has firsthand knowledge from multiple sources about what the President was doing during the riot and two Committee members, Bennie Thompson and Liz Cheney say the information they have makes the case that he did nothing to stop the rioters who again were his followers. Despite all of this, there are supporters of the former President who
claim not to believe this accepted history They say a dark world of conspiracies were involved, those who pushed them, Donie O'Sullivan as more details about them.
[20:30:07]
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
LISA, TRUMP SUPPORTER: January 6 attack was not the Republicans nor Trump. It was the Democrats were behind it all. They're the ones that caused it all.
DONIE O'SULLIVAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (on-camera): You really believe that?
LISA: I know it. And there is no way that a Republican would act that way. And there is no way that Trump had anything to do with what happened on January 6.
O'SULLIVAN (on-camera): What about all the Trump supporters that have been charged and (INAUDIBLE)?
LISA: Because it's all Democratic judges and people that were on the take from the Democrats.
O'SULLIVAN (voice-over): It's been a year since the attack on the U.S. Capitol.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This is our (INAUDIBLE).
O'SULLIVAN (on-camera): And because of disinformation, denial and diversion, Americans don't have a shared history, a shared understanding of what happened here on that day.
ANITA GERMANO, TRUMP SUPPORTER: I think the whole reporting of it is a giant hoax.
MARGE MATHIEU, TRUMP SUPPORTER: We are very peaceful people. So it was a total setup to me. It was the FBI had set it up. I don't believe that they were Trump supporters that did that.
O'SULLIVAN (on-camera): You said the whole things are set up. You don't really believe that, do you?
JEANIE JOHNSON, TRUMP SUPPORTER: I do. I do. Because Trump won the election. They, they've proven it over and over again.
LARRY, TRUMP SUPPORTER: I really don't think Trump had much to do other people that were supporters for him, somewhere involved, but I think they were enticed by the FBI. And by, you know, undercover agents.
O'SULLIVAN (voice-over): When I spoke to Trump supporters here in Washington on January 6, most were in denial about the results of the 2020 election. (on-camera): Do you accept that Biden won the election?
LUCIA, TRUMP SUPPORTER: Absolutely not. Biden did not win this election.
O'SULLIVAN (on-camera): On January 6, we walked with Trump supporters who marched from the White House where Trump was doing the speech here to the U.S. Capitol. And as we arrived here, that is when the first security barrier was breached.
At the time, some Trump supporters told me they were happy with what happened here at the Capitol.
Are you proud of what happened here today?
PENNY ALLISON, TRUMP SUPPORTER: Absolutely. I think we should have gone on and yanks the -- our senators out by the hair and the head and throw them out and said, no more.
TODD POSSETT, TRUMP SUPPORTER: I'm absolutely stand behind 100% what happened here today, 1,000% is terrible how this election was stolen.
O'SULLIVAN (voice-over): Federal prosecutors have charged more than 700 people in connection with the Capitol rise and repeatedly documented the rioters support for President Trump. But some people in right wing media have pushed the dangerous idea that it was all an FBI plus.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: FBI operatives were organizing the attack on the Capitol.
O'SULLIVAN (voice-over): There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that this was some kind of false flag event staged by the Democrats or the FBI.
(on-camera): What would you say to people who say January 6 was the biggest attack on American democracy --
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Absolutely rubbish.
O'SULLIVAN (voice-over): Plus, amid all the denial and deflection, I met one Trump supporter who said it was important to be real about what happened on that day.
(on-camera): What do you think of the Trump supporters that stormed the Capitol?
ROZ LESSER, TRUMP SUPPORTER: Oh, you talk about misfound feelings. I'm seeing the folks from my side of the state that were there, and they're not the part of the campaign that we would like to have.
O'SULLIVAN (on-camera): Do you think some Trump supporters that say it's Antifa, it's Black Lives Matter, that they know that that's bullshit, but they just don't want to admit it's easier to blame someone else.
LESSER: Everyone is afraid to, you know, take the blame and that simple.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
COOPER: Donie O'Sullivan joins us now. That question you just asked the last question, it's the one I think about all the time. I mean, you know, the people you are talking to, do they really, really deeply believe in, a lot of them seem to really believe it when they say it to you? Or do they just know, you know, they don't want it to be true. And so they say it's not?
O'SULLIVAN: Yes, I mean, I think there are some folks there who just know this is the talking point. And that's what they should say. And they really do know what happened. But as you see in that piece, you know, there are people just like who genuinely believed the election was stolen and that American democracy is a joke. They really, really believe the lies about what happened here at the Capitol a year ago.
And, you know, that is stunning to hear it but it's not necessarily surprising when you think of there's a very sophisticated infrastructure of disinformation by design, whether it's right wing cable media or online on social media.
[20:35:03]
So if you want to live in this narrative and have plays into your biases you can really -- you could you can live happily in that world and not really have your viewpoint challenge at all.
COOPER: Donie O'Sullivan, I appreciate as always. Thanks.
Up next, a discuss report you just saw what it may say about the state of our country with New York Times columnist Tom Friedman.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COOPER: A lingering question about the January 6 attacks, one year later is how to deal with a large number of the Republican base who refused to believe basic facts about that day. Again this would some of them told our reporter Donie O'Sullivan.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LISA: January 6 attack was not the Republicans nor Trump, it was the Democrats were behind it all. They're the ones that caused it all.
O'SULLIVAN (on-camera): Do you really believe that.
LISA: I know it.
GERMANO: I think the whole reporting of it is a giant hoax.
MATHIEU: We are very peaceful people. So it was a total setup to me. It was the FBI had set it up. I don't believe that they were Trump supporters that did that.
(END VIDEO CLIP) COOPER: Joining out by a New York Times columnist Tom Friedman, who is also the author of a number of bestsellers including The World Is Flat.
Tom, I mean, those ladies seemed like lovely ladies who were probably great citizens in their communities and have great families and it's what do you think when you hear them say what seems so obviously not to be the truth?
[20:40:06]
THOMAS FRIEDMAN, COLUMNIST, NEW YORK TIMES: Well you know more and more It's becoming obvious Anderson that we're a lot of people in our country, whether it's on January 6, or on vaccines or any other things, they're marinated in social network sites, they're down rabbit holes. And we no longer share basic truths. And the country as a whole is kind of losing its cognitive immunity, its ability to really sort out fact from fiction.
COOPER: But, you know, I was thinking, I mean, I think about this a lot. I was thinking, you know, in, when there were demonstrations in the '60s, and the country seemed in turmoil, and there were fights with construction workers in the anti-war protesters. I mean, is it I guess it's worse now than it was then. I mean, I, as somebody who grew up just kind of seeing those images, and seeing it in documentaries and stuff that just seemed like real turmoil. Is it worse now?
FRIEDMAN: What was real turmoil, first of all, but it was filtered through basically a kind of edited news filter of ABC, NBC, CBS, New York Times, Washington Post, there were basic shared facts and truths that we trusted, all of us.
You know, I think what's happened since then I think of America today, understand is kind of a boiling pot, the pot would be boiling, no matter who was president. It's boiling, because we're going through huge social change, culturally inside the country, huge change in the demographics of the country due to technology changes. So that the pot would already be boiling. Then along comes Facebook, Twitter, the news media in general, Fox, and they turned the heat up on the pot, they're boiling the pot. And then along came Donald Trump. And he took the lid off the pot. He made it permissible to say things to and about each other that we never said before, that we never said before in public.
And to me, the big question I have on my mind is, what is the Republican Party after Donald Trump? I don't know when that will be. And I'm not talking about his life or death, but ft would hopefully leave politics. OK. What would it be, because there's only one good thing about Donald Trump, God only made one of him. God only made one of him. And there is no one you know in your life or have ever experienced that is as shameful as he is. And will shameless excuse me and willing to shameful and shameless, to literally lie about the most obvious things.
So what is the Republican Party after that? Well people follow Ted Cruz? I don't think so. I wouldn't follow Ted Cruz into an elevator. So I really asked him the Republican Party will come back to some senses after this.
COOPER: To that point, you know, column you wrote following the January 6 attack. I remember you when you wrote this, and I think you're on to talk about it. You said, my number one wish for America today is for this Republican Party to fracture splitting off the principal Republicans from the unprincipled Republicans and Trump cultists. That was I mean, that was basically a year ago. Why do you think that big split didn't happen?
FRIEDMAN: Well, partly, I think we all want it to persuade COVID, we were absorbed by the pandemic. And I think we've all been generally Americans, this one is to go away. And just to go away. OK. I think 2022 is going to be crunch time. You know, Larry Hogan, my governor in Maryland, he's been going around the country raising money for Republicans who are on Trump's enemies list. And that's a very interesting experiment going on. And let's see what energy he galvanizes.
At the same time the American business community, the big business community of America, many of them announced after January 6. Anderson that they would not donate to anyone who voted to decertify the election. Are they going to hold to that promise going forward? Will their shareholders hold them to that promise? Will their employees hold them to that promise?
So I think 2022 is going to be a real year of decision in the way 2021 was not. You know, Liz Cheney, Anderson, she said it so beautifully. You know, we can be either loyal to Donald Trump or we can be loyal to the Constitution, but we can't be loyal to both.
COOPER: Cheney said over the weekend that the committee had first hand testimony about what the President, then President was doing on January 6, that Ivanka Trump had asked her father at least twice to intervene to stop the attacks. I mean, is there anything you think any information that could come to light that would change the minds of some of the people we just heard from tonight in the very strong Trump days?
FRIEDMAN: I don't believe there's any information that will change anyone's minds. What I do believe is that there are principled Republicans out there who do not want Donald Trump to be their party's candidate. I don't think it's good for the party or the country. And I think if enough of them get together, whether it's behind Larry Hogan, or someone else and run a principal Republican candidate, so Trump cannot win one more round and return to the White House that would be doing the Lord's work.
[20:45:00]
At the same time, Democrats have to hew to the center too. I really believe Anderson the country America today sit somewhere between don't dismantle the police and don't dismantle the Constitution. No one is better than the other. No question is not false equivalency, one is much bigger than the other. But emotionally, there's a big part of America that really sits between those two, and they don't like what progressives tell them not to worry about the first and they don't like it when Republicans tell not to worry about the second.
COOPER: You write about reporting about Russia a lot. I want to ask you about what the ongoing tensions right now between the U.S. and Russia over Ukraine. President Biden spoke again with Ukrainian president on Sunday saying that the U.S. and its allies will, quote, respond decisively, end quote if Russia invades Ukraine. What actions are -- I mean, what's in the quiver?
FRIEDMAN: Yes, what's in the quiver is, you know, taking Russia off the SWIFT system that will really you know, inhibit its ability to transfer capital through your global banking system, (INAUDIBLE) a lot more sanctions I'm sure. One thing we're not going to do is go to war, we could also arm the Ukrainians. This is madness when you think about it, Anderson. I mean, this is from a standing start, Vladimir Putin. But if you follow him to Putin woke up in about 2012 and said, you know what, I'm actually not going to run on trying to build a Silicon Valley and in Russia and try to focus on economic growth. I'm actually going to run on the sort of cultural religious symbols of restoring the great glory of the Soviet Union, Russia, and the Motherland, he's been doing that ever since.
But to now put himself up a tree to say to us, look, you basically -- you the West, you America, you NATO, you have to recognize Russia's authority and it's your sphere of influence over both the former Soviet, you know, satellites and Eastern Europe, the Warsaw Pact, that's not going to happen. So I don't know how this is going to end. I'm worried Anderson, Vladimir Putin is up a tree.
COOPER: Tom Friedman, I appreciate it. Thank you, Tom.
FRIEDMAN: Thank you.
COOPER: Reminder this Thursday, CNN is going to mark the one year anniversary with the attack with a live two hour broadcast from the Capitol to honor those heroes who protect our democracy that day. Police, lawmakers, the leaders who remembered that day will join Jake Tapper and myself live from the Capitol, "JANUARY 6; ONE YEAR LATER," begins Thursday at 8:00 p.m.
Up next tonight, more breaking news the jury reaching a partial verdict in the trial of Elizabeth Holmes, the former CEO and founder of failed blood testing startup Theranos.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:51:34]
COOPER: There's breaking news tonight a jury has found Elizabeth Holmes the former CEO and founder of failed blood testing startup Theranos guilty on four out of 11 federal charges. She was convicted on four charges of fraud and acquitted on four other charges including those related to patient fraud. Now, the jury remained deadlocked on three other charges. She faces up to 20 years in prison. The verdict comes after the jury deliberated for seven days in more than 50 hours.
Want to talk right now to legal reporter for The Wall Street Journal, Sara Randazzo. Sara, you've been following this trial closely. I'm wondering what your reaction is right now to the verdict.
SARA RANDAZZO, LEGAL REPORTER, WALL STREET JOURNAL: Yes, it was truly a mixed verdict. We knew earlier today, it was likely to come back like this, the jury that said, hey, we can't reach a unanimous verdict on three of the charges. So we knew something like this was coming. But it was even more mixed than I thought they -- you know, were had a miss trial on the patient (INAUDIBLE) you said and they also are sorry that a mistrial on some of the investor counts, and then they voted not guilty on the patient counts.
So, it really seems like the jury went very carefully look at all the evidence very specifically and said, hey, yes, they prove this count. No, they didn't prove this count, and really split the difference here.
COOPER: I also want to bring in Sara, jury consultant, Alan Tuerk -- Tuerkheimer. Alan, what do you make of the verdict? And how common is it failure to reach a verdict on several counts, especially in a very major confusing case like this one.
ALAN TUERKHEIMER, JURY CONSULTANT: A lot of times juries come into it with a predetermined verdict in mind, and then they work backwards and then use the law to fit within how they want the case to turn out. This jury didn't do that this was a legalistic jury, I would call it, because they really focused on the law. And the fact that they asked for the last several weeks ago to bring home with them is very telling. They treated each of these counts very distinctly. I'm sure in the deliberation, they read carefully and repeatedly, key words from key passages, and ultimately decided that she was guilty on for the count and not guilty on for the other counts.
And then for the remaining three, at some point in the deliberation, jurors on both sides and not guilty and guilty camps, said something to the effect of look, this is how I feel and you guys are going to convince me otherwise. And they decided to tell the judge that they were deadlocked,
COOPER: Sara, I mean, this the this whole story of Theranos is fascinating. I read the book Bad Blood, anybody who has not read it, they should. There's an amazing documentary, as well called The Innovator I think it is. What -- can you just explain, sort of for those who haven't been following this? Can you try to explain what happened here with Theranos?
RANDAZZO: Yes, so Theranos was the Silicon Valley darling that arose at this point, I think it started around 2003. And it's been more than a decade. And it was really captured the imagination, because Elizabeth Holmes himself -- herself was very compelling. She had this look where she emulated Steve Jobs, she wore the black turtleneck. She had the blond hair and the deep voice. And it was an image that really captivated people. And what she said was also really captivating. She said, hey, I can eliminate all these large vials of blood, I can take a fingerprint of blood and test for a couple 100 health conditions with this. And people really wanted this technology to work.
And so, you know, it was a startup that had a lot of hype that got hundreds of millions of dollars. But then ultimately what came out in the trial and in the Wall Street Journal's reporting is that the technology really never worked like she said it did. It was very limited in what it could do. And instead, Theranos really just use conventional blood testing machines that any other lab testing company could use, but wasn't being transparent about that.
And so, it all began to unravel once the Wall Street Journal started reporting on this and then criminal charges and other legal repercussions followed.
[20:55:06]
COOPER: Yes, I mean the Wall Street Journal's reporting on this has been unbelievable. What is next for her, for Holmes in terms of sentencing?
RANDAZZO: And yes, so sentencing will follow at first we have these three counts that the judge, the jury didn't reach consensus on and in the coming weeks, they'll have some hearings about that the government could retry them. It seems like that could be unlikely given that they did have some guilty verdicts, but we'll find out. And then sentencing will likely be months from now. She faces a maximum of 20 years for each of the counts she was convicted on. You know, stalking is sometimes not common in wire fraud cases. So, you have the chances of the government going for 80 years is probably unlikely, but we'll see what kind of sentencing they suggest and it could still be months away though.
COOPER: Yes. Sara Randazzo, Alan Tuerkheimer, really appreciate it. Thank you so much.
COVID hospitalizations for children reaching their highest numbers ever if Omicron has a milder strain according to most experts. Why are we seeing such a spike in paediatric cases? We'll take a look at that. We'll go inside the country's largest children's hospital. Next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
