Return to Transcripts main page
The Situation Room
President Trump Holds White House Press Briefing; Interview With National Institutes Of Health Director, Dr. Francis Collins; No Officers Charged Directly With Breonna Taylor's Death; Trump Says He May Overrule FDA On Vaccine Approval; Trump Says FDA Has Politicized Vaccine Approval; Trump Won't Commit To Peaceful Transfer Of Power; No Officers Charged Directly With Breonna Taylor's Death, One Indicted On Three Counts Of First-Degree Wanton Endangerment. Aired 6-7p ET
Aired September 23, 2020 - 18:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[18:00:14]
ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.
WOLF BLITZER, CNN HOST: We want to welcome our viewers here in the United States and around the world. I'm Wolf Blitzer in THE SITUATION ROOM.
We're following breaking news.
We are monitoring the protests in Louisville, Kentucky, right now, just ahead of a countywide curfew tonight. Earlier, police clashed with demonstrators shortly after a grand jury decision in the police shooting of Breonna Taylor.
None of the three police officers on the scene was directly charged in Taylor's death. The high-profile case is a fight for racial justice.
This hour, I will speak live with a lawyer for the Taylor family, as their team is slamming the decision as outrageous and offensive.
Also breaking right now, the U.S. coronavirus death toll now climbing above 201,000, this as the CDC director is warning that 90 percent of the people here in the United States remain susceptible to the virus.
We expect to hear directly from President Trump fairly soon. We are standing by to take his question-and-answer session during a White House briefing. That's coming up this hour.
But, first, let's go to our national correspondent, Jason Carroll. He's in Louisville for us.
Jason, so, what is the situation on the ground right now? What's it like?
JASON CARROLL, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Wolf, just a short while ago, we saw a number of protesters clashing with police just about a block from Jefferson Square.
You can see, there are a number of police officers who are still here. It all happened when one of the protesters started blocking police cars as they tried to move their way up the street here. They brought in some other vehicles. We saw the clash with police officers, police officers using pepper bullets and mace to disperse the crowd.
They were able to do that for now. As you have heard, we have heard a number of people responding and reacting to what happened with the attorney general's office with the grand jury.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It's not only Breonna Taylor. It can happen to anyone.
CARROLL (voice-over): After months of protests and anticipation, a Kentucky grand jury indicted one officer in the police operation resulting in Breonna Taylor's death.
Former Detective Brett Hankison faces three charges of wanton endangerment in the first degree. Two other officers who responded that night with gunfire, Jonathan Mattingly and Myles Cosgrove, were investigated, but do not face any criminal charges.
DANIEL CAMERON (R), KENTUCKY ATTORNEY GENERAL: According to Kentucky law, the use of force by Mattingly and Cosgrove was justified to protect themselves.
CARROLL: The charges against Hankison are in relation to shots he fired that ripped through a neighboring apartment.
CAMERON: Based on the evidence there is nothing conclusive to say that Detective Hankison, any of his bullets hit Ms. Taylor.
CARROLL: In the months following Taylor's death, there has been much speculation surrounding the details of what happened the night on March 13 when police showed up serving a no-knock warrant.
The attorney general says evidence shows Officers Mattingly and Cosgrove knocked and identified themselves before breaching Taylor's door, and he says there is an independent witness to corroborate their account.
But Taylor's boyfriend, Kenneth Walker, disputes the claim. Walker says he didn't hear police announce themselves and thought someone was trying to break in, so he fired a shot. Police have said that shot hit Mattingly in the leg.
KENNETH WALKER, BOYFRIEND OF BREONNA TAYLOR: All of a sudden, someone started beating on the door. They refused to answer when we yelled, who is it? Fifteen minutes later, Breonna was dead from a hail of police gunfire.
CARROLL: The attorney general says an FBI analysis determined the shot that killed Taylor came from Cosgrove.
CAMERON: The fatal shot was fired by Detective Cosgrove. CARROLL: Mattingly's attorney says: "The justice system worked. The
death of Breonna Taylor is a tragedy, but these officers did not act in a reckless or unprofessional manner. They did their duty, performed their roles as law enforcement officers, and, above all, did not break the law."
The long-awaited announcement sparking immediate anger in the streets of Louisville, the attorney general asking for understanding.
CAMERON: There will be celebrities, influencers, and activists who, having never lived in Kentucky, will try to tell us how to feel, suggesting they understand the facts of this case and that they know our community and the commonwealth better than we do. But they don't.
CARROLL: In the months since Taylor's death, her mother has wanted just one thing.
TAMIKA PALMER, MOTHER OF BREONNA TAYLOR: Criminal charges. They all four willingly committed a crime, so I don't think it is enough that one person should have to pay for it. It was a group effort, so...
(END VIDEOTAPE)
CARROLL: And, again, a lot of folks out here, protesters who support the Taylor family, demanding the same.
[18:05:03]
So, again, got cut off there, but what happened out here is, we saw a number of protesters clashing with police.
Police ended up using pepper bullets, mace to disperse the crowd. It makes you wonder, Wolf, what is going to happen at 9:00? Because that is when the curfew kicks in. You have got city officials asking for calm, asking for people to protest peacefully, but everyone out here awaiting that 9:00 curfew -- Wolf.
BLITZER: Very tense situation on the streets of Louisville.
Jason, thank you very much.
Joining us now, Lonita Baker, an attorney representing Breonna Taylor's family.
Lonita, thank you so much for joining us. I know this is a difficult, difficult day for you and the family.
What is your reaction to the decision by the grand jury to not bring any charges directly related to the death of Breonna Taylor?
LONITA BAKER, ATTORNEY FOR FAMILY OF BREONNA TAYLOR: My reaction is exactly what our statement said. This is offensive and it's egregious.
There is sufficient evidence. If the grand jury felt it sufficient that Brett Hankison placed three neighbors in danger with his reckless behavior, then they had to have thought and found that he also placed Breonna Taylor at risk with his reckless behavior.
You can't separate the two. Breonna Taylor was unarmed. We know that, based on Sergeant Mattingly's own statement, in which he said the female that was in the apartment was unarmed. So, if he knew she was unarmed, the other officers knew she was unarmed, including Officer Cosgrove, who Daniel Cameron has said his actions were justified.
However, in Kentucky, it is clear that, when using self-defense, you cannot use -- it is not a justifiable defense when you put other people in harm of the person who you claim to be defending yourself against. Breonna...
(CROSSTALK)
BLITZER: Because the attorney general -- you heard the attorney general, Cameron, say, the officers were justified in firing their weapons because Breonna Taylor's boyfriend, Kenneth Walker, actually shot first, he fired the first shot and injured one of the police officers.
So, what is your response to that?
BAKER: My response to that is, he needs to continue to research the law on self-defense in Kentucky.
Self -- you cannot defend yourself such that you put other innocent persons at risk. And Breonna Taylor was unarmed. She was an innocent person that night. She should not have been fired upon and she should not have been fired upon after she was already down.
I know Daniel Cameron spoke of the fatal shot. Breonna Taylor was struck six times. It did not take six times to shoot an unarmed woman. So, they were not entitled to self-defense. They were not justified under self-defense in this case.
So, he needs to do a little bit more research on the full scope of self-defense in Kentucky.
BLITZER: The attorney general also says that the investigation revealed that the police officers did knock and did announce their presence before they decided to breach the door.
The attorney general says an independent witness, a witness actually can back that up. But that is not what we heard from Kenneth Walker, who told the 911 dispatcher: I don't know what happened. Someone kicked in the door and shot my girlfriend.
We also heard from Walker's attorney in the last hour here in THE SITUATION ROOM that other witnesses did not hear these police officers identified themselves.
Do you have any more information about why those accounts are so different?
BAKER: I take Attorney General Daniel Cameron's one independent witness and raise him 12 -- nearly a dozen neighbors who say that police officers did not announce themselves.
This is a situation where the prosecutor presented the case to the grand jury, took as fact the statement of the police officers, when that decision should have been made by a jury at trial, not in the grand jury process.
There is conflicting evidence, the conflicting evidence that nearly a dozen neighbors, dozen-plus neighbors, that said the officers did not announce themselves, alongside Kenneth Walker, who says the officers -- and he always maintained, like you said, since the 911 call, that they did not announce themselves.
I do also want to point out I find it ironic that they charged for three counts of wanton endangerment for the neighbors that live on the backside of Breonna, but they failed to indict for wanton endangerment for the neighbors who lived upstairs from Breonna, because officer gunfire also went into that apartment, nearly striking the members of that black family in the household above Breonna Taylor.
So, where is their justice and where is their indictments for wanton endangerment, just like we're missing Breonna's indictments?
BLITZER: The city of Louisville, Lonita, last week did award Breonna Taylor's $12 million. Isn't that an admission of wrongdoing on the part of the police in Louisville?
BAKER: I do want to distinguish the civil liability and the criminal liability.
I still think that these officers should have been indicted. But the civil litigation, the burdens of proof were different. The elements were different.
[18:10:01]
So, the $12 million was justified. But we were denied justice today. And my hope is that the FBI brings the justice that we were denied here today, when their investigation concludes.
BLITZER: Because we know the FBI is continuing their own investigation.
Lonita Baker, thank you so much for joining us. And please pass along our love to Breonna Taylor's family. Thanks so much for joining us.
BAKER: All right, thank you.
BLITZER: Let's bring in our senior legal analyst, Laura Coates, and our CNN political commentator Van Jones.
Laura, let me start with your reaction to what the Kentucky attorney general explained, why the two police officers were, in his view, in the view of the grand jury, actually justified in firing their weapons during this operation. Listen to this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) CAMERON: While there are six possible homicide charges under Kentucky law, these charges are not applicable to the facts before us, because our investigations showed, and the grand jury agreed, that Mattingly and Cosgrove were justified in the return of deadly fire after having been fired upon by Kenneth Walker.
Let me state that again. According to Kentucky law, the use of force by Mattingly and Cosgrove was justified to protect themselves.
This justification bars us from pursuing criminal charges in Ms. Breonna Taylor's death.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLITZER: Based on your analysis, Laura, of the evidence that we know right now, would it have been possible for the attorney general to actually bring homicide charges against these police officers?
LAURA COATES, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: It could have been possible, but for the benefit of the doubt that he is extending.
And, of course, what we have to see here is the full evaluation of what went into them assessing whether the officers used the requisite and reasonable amount of force. We don't have a full fleshing out of the details here as to whether there was a balanced response to what happened. We know that there was one shot fired toward the officers, and dozens returned, I believe, more than a dozen returned by the officers.
So, the question is going to be and could be for a grand jury who was listening to this case of, well, at what point did the officers exceed whatever use of force may have been justified when their lives were in danger?
Is it acceptable? Do we have just an unlimited use of force, or is it enough to just neutralize the threat? Did they act outside of the scope of that? Without a full fleshing out of the details, we're left with kind of a bald assertion here that somehow they were justified.
And that blanket assertion actually needs to be looked at more fully to understand fully whether officers in this case should have gotten the full benefit of the doubt under the law in Kentucky.
BLITZER: You know, Van, the attorney general, Daniel Cameron of Kentucky, acknowledged that this was a tragedy, but said the criminal justice system sometimes isn't, in his word, adequate to address situations like this.
What did you make of those remarks?
VAN JONES, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, what I say is that, when these young people are out here marching and protesting, and saying the system is completely broken, this is what they are talking about, bad policy, bad policing, and bad prosecution.
The policy of no-knock itself is completely insane policy that should be used almost never. It's been used 50,000 times a year. It is a complete contempt for life. And you know it is only going to be used against certain communities.
You don't wake up in the middle of the night, Wolf, thinking that maybe the police are going to kick in your door. You know for sure, if they had a problem with you, they'd call, they ring the door bell, they do whatever they could.
Many Americans don't have that assurance. And then bad policing. It is not just that they sprayed bullets everywhere. They didn't even give her medical assistance for 20 minutes. That is reckless. That's criminal.
And then bad prosecution. There is enough evidence that the police officers themselves were covering up stuff, committing crimes in the process, that they could have been charged for any number of things.
This is why you have a generation in the streets, and not just black, white and every other color. And so, when you have bad policy, bad policing, and now a bad prosecution, or no prosecution of a blatant murder of a black woman in her bed doing nothing, do not be surprised when you have a generation beginning to give up on our system.
BLITZER: How difficult, Laura, would it be, if they would have filed homicide charges against the police officers, to get a conviction, knowing what you know, how difficult it usually is to convict police officers, especially when Breonna Taylor's boyfriend fired the first shot and injured one of the police officers?
COATES: Well, first of all, every conviction is impossible if the prosecutors are not on board.
The prosecutors are the most fervent persuaders we have in this nation. So, if they wanted to try to pursue a prosecution, they could certainly do so.
Having said that, there is a lot of -- there are a lot of hurdles in place, namely, the benefit of the doubt that jurors give to police officers and that which is codified by the Supreme Court, which essentially says, we are going to view the reasonableness of an officer's use of force through the eyes of an officer, not what you and I would do, but an officer, which really invites that blue code of silence and also the support of saying, they have a script, they can do what they want.
[18:15:23]
But, remember, they also have a blueprint here. The chief of police, when he fired the Officer Hankison back in the summer, actually said, it was a wanton disregard for human life and indifference to human life.
Well, that actually tracks the language of the criminal code in Kentucky to demonstrate that, if you are engaged in behavior that is a wanton disregard and it results in the loss of life, there is prosecution that could be readily available to you, the other officers as well.
Remember, it wasn't -- any reasonableness force evaluation is more better in touch with the person who fired the bullet. And that would be Kenneth Walker. But Breonna Taylor is the one who died. And she did not hold the gun, did not shoot at the officers.
What they have really done is relegated her to some form of collateral damage. And we know in our society that there are ways to protect and prosecute those who are the victims of violence.
But if the prosecutors, which they were not, were not on board to do so, well, they would -- it would be impossible. But a prosecutor who was truly trying to understand the evidence and really wanted to have accountability for the life of somebody who is lost, they could have done more.
BLITZER: We will see what the FBI does. They're continuing their own investigation.
Laura Coates, Van Jones, guys, thank you very, very much.
Just ahead, a new warning that most Americans are still very much susceptible to the coronavirus right now, as we head into a rather risky period of the pandemic.
I will speak with the director of the National Institute for Health about a new move, several new moves, toward a vaccine, and new promises that it will be safe.
We will be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:21:15]
BLITZER: Tonight, stark new reminders of the urgent danger from the coronavirus.
As the U.S. death toll rises even higher, above the 200,000 mark, a top health official is now warning that 90 percent of the people here in the United States remain very much susceptible.
Joining us now, the director of the National Institutes of Health, Dr. Francis Collins.
Dr. Collins, thank you so much for joining us. Thanks to everything you guys are doing over there.
As you heard today in the testimony up on Capitol Hill, the head of the FDA testified that they won't authorize or approve any vaccine until they feel safe giving it to their own families.
Do you want to see the FDA enact tougher standards to build public trust, like requiring, for example, more -- more time to monitor people who have been vaccinated in these trials? What is your analysis? DR. FRANCIS COLLINS, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH: Well,
first of all, let me echo what you just started saying in terms of the terrible tragedy of the 200,000 people who have lost their lives, and how much we want to try to put that kind of terrible death and destruction behind us.
But we have got a ways to go. I totally am with the FDA. And they're putting forward the highest possible standards for safety and efficacy of the new vaccines that are being tested right now in phase three, including one that just started today, which we're pretty excited about.
We do not want the public to trust that these are something they'd want to endorse or roll up their sleeves for without having that data. And that is why these are some of the largest phase three trials ever run and why they also are looking very carefully to be sure that they're safe.
And I think FDA is on a very good path right now and they are determined to stick to that, as you heard in the hearing today from Dr. Hahn.
BLITZER: Yes, we want a -- all of us want a vaccine as quickly as possible. But we want to make sure it is safe and no very serious side effects, not just for adults, but for children, elderly people, and people who have underlying health conditions.
Everybody -- everybody has to trust this vaccine. As you know, the NIH announced the launch of another phase three trial of the -- what is called the Janssen coronavirus vaccine today. This is the fourth phase three trial, but the first of a vaccine that could be given in a single dose.
In other words, you get one shot, and that's it. The other ones, you got to get one shot. Then, a month later, you get a second shot. How significant potentially, Dr. Collins, is this?
COLLINS: Oh, quite significant.
First of all, this is a vector, an adenovirus vector, that has been successfully used for other infectious diseases, including Ebola. It is a company, Johnson & Johnson, that has decades of experience in this space. And it is a single dose, which all of the other phase three trials require two doses separated by three or four weeks.
So, obviously, for logistical reasons, it is a lot easier to give one dose.
The other thing about this particular vaccine, if it turns out to be safe and effective, is that it is fairly easy to transport. You don't have to have it at ridiculously low temperatures, like minus-70 degrees. This actually will manage pretty well as just a refrigerator kind of temperature.
And that can make a big difference in terms of distribution, if we get to that point. So, for many reasons, we are excited about this one, but we're excited about the others. This is the fourth one. And there are probably going to be two more phase three vaccines started in the next month or a month-and-a-half.
This has never been done before. Let me just say, Operation Warp Speed, which has been supporting all of this with taxpayers' money, is responsible for the fact that this trial started today in phase three.
Initially, we were just going to be at phase one for Johnson & Johnson in September. And because of the support and all the logistics and, frankly, the financial support from Warp Speed, they were able to speed that up very substantially. And that is impressive work.
[18:25:01]
BLITZER: Dr. Anthony Fauci, who actually works for you over at NIH, testified that a large proportion of the country won't be vaccinated this year.
Actually, if you can hold on for a moment, Dr. Collins, the president is beginning to answer reporters' questions.
I want to listen in, and then we will continue our conversation.
Let's watch.
(JOINED IN PROGRESS)
QUESTION: There's been rioting in many cities across this country, red and -- your so-called red and blue states.
Will you commit to making sure that there is a peaceful transferal of power after the election?
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Well, we're going to have to see what happens. You know that.
I've been complaining very strongly about the ballots. And the ballots are a disaster. And...
QUESTION: I understand that, but people are rioting. Do you commit to making sure that there's a peaceful transferal of power?
TRUMP: We want to have -- we have to have -- get rid of the ballots, and you will very a very -- we'll have a very peaceful -- there won't be a transfer, frankly. There'll be a continuation.
The ballots are out of control. You know it, and you know who knows it better than anybody else? The Democrats know it better than anybody else.
Go ahead.
QUESTION: Mr. President, the second question is...
(CROSSTALK)
TRUMP: Please, go ahead. Go ahead.
QUESTION: Why won't you...
TRUMP: You asked a question.
Go ahead, please.
(CROSSTALK)
TRUMP: Say it?
QUESTION: Mr. President, do you plan to meet with Barbara Lagoa at the White House?
TRUMP: You -- I cannot hear you through your mask.
QUESTION: I'm sorry. Do you plan to meet with Barbara Lagoa in Washington? And is she still on your short list?
TRUMP: She is on my list. I don't have a meeting planned, but she is on my list.
(CROSSTALK)
TRUMP: But I don't really talk about the meetings planned. I speak to people. I talk to people. But I don't have a meeting planned, no.
QUESTION: Do you have a response to the governor of Missouri testing positive for coronavirus?
TRUMP: I didn't know that. No.
(CROSSTALK)
QUESTION: Mr. President, we asked you earlier today about the Breonna Taylor case.
TRUMP: Yes.
QUESTION: Could you comment now? I assume you've been briefed on the charges in the...
(CROSSTALK)
TRUMP: Well, I thought it was really brilliant.
Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron is doing a fantastic job. I think he's a star. And he made a statement that I will just read.
"Justice is not -- justice is often easy. It does not fit the mold of public opinion. And it does not conform to shifting standards. It answers only to the facts and to the law. If we simply act on emotion or outrage, there is no justice. Mob justice is not justice. Justice sought by violence is not justice. It just becomes revenge."
I mean, I heard that. I said, write that down for me, please, because I think it was a terrific statement.
He's handling it very well. You know who he is. I think you know. I think everyone now knows who he is.
I will be speaking to the governor. And we have a call scheduled to make very shortly with the governor. I understand he's called up the National Guard, which is a good thing. I think it's a very positive thing. And it'll all work out.
(CROSSTALK)
QUESTION: Can I just follow on your Supreme Court nominee?
It's highly unlikely that any Democrats will vote for your nominee if and when it comes to a vote in the Senate.
(CROSSTALK)
TRUMP: ... really good candidate.
QUESTION: Given the posture, I think that's a pretty safe assumption.
But, on that point, would you want to nominate someone who, in their confirmation to the appellate court, received broad bipartisan support? Or would you be more inclined to put forward somebody whose confirmation fell along party lines?
TRUMP: I can't tell you what's going to happen with the Democrats.
I can say this. The person that I will be putting up -- and I won't say that I've even chosen that person yet. I could say any one of the five. They're outstanding women. But the person I will be putting up is highly qualified, totally brilliant, top-of-the-line academic student, the highest credentials. All of them have that, but the highest credentials.
And you'll see on Saturday who that is. I can't imagine why a Democrat wouldn't vote for this person.
(CROSSTALK)
TRUMP: ... probably bet on you. Probably bet on you.
Yes, please go ahead.
QUESTION: Thank you very much.
TRUMP: No, not you. You right here.
QUESTION: Thank you, Mr. President.
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle chimed in on the U.S. election, and essentially encouraged people to vote for Joe Biden.
I wanted to get your reaction to that.
TRUMP: I'm not a fan of hers.
And I would say this. And she probably has heard that. But I wish a lot of luck to Harry, because he's going to need it.
(CROSSTALK)
QUESTION: Mr. President, the FDA is reportedly considering stricter guidelines for the emergency authorization of a COVID vaccine.
Are you OK with that?
TRUMP: Well, I tell you what. We're looking at that.
And that has to be approved by the White House. We may or may not approve it.
That sounds like a political move, because, when you have Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson, Moderna, these great companies coming up with the vaccine, and they have done testing and everything else, I'm saying why would they have to be adding great length to the process? We want to have people not get sick. The vaccine is very important. It is the final step. I believe it's going to be the final step. And, no, we're looking at that but I think that was a political move, more than anything else.
REPORTER: On that, sir, it's designed to improve trust in the vaccine. Do you think that's not needed?
TRUMP: Well, I have tremendous trust in these massive companies that are so brilliantly organized in terms of what they've been doing with the tests. I mean, I don't know that a government, as big as we are, could do tests like this. We've made it possible for them to do the tests in rapid fashion.
But when they come back and they say that we have something that works and absolutely works and they're coming back with great numbers and statistics and tests and everything else that they have to come back with, I don't see any reason why it should be delayed further. Because if they delay it a week or two weeks or three weeks, that is a lot of lives you're talking about.
Scott, would you agree with that? Or how do you feel about that?
SCOTT ATLAS, WHITE HOUSE CORONAVIRUS ADVISER: Yes, thanks. Yes. I mean, there is no -- I think that people don't understand what is going on with Operation Warp Speed. It's unprecedented what's happened here. A typical vaccine takes roughly four years or so.
And now, we're going to have a vaccine highly likely in far less than one year but without cutting any safety corners, because the president has done things concomitant to the development of the vaccine. That is the manufacturing, logistics, everything that's being done at the same time, and that's never been done before. But there is zero cutting of safety concerns.
There should be no hesitation about the safety. You shouldn't be punished by doing something faster than other people could have done or thought. It's the opposite. We have a pandemic. The urgency is the pandemic, not politics.
REPORTER: Are you --
TRUMP: It sadder to me is that it's extremely political. Why would they do this when we come back with these great results? And I think you have those great results.
REPORTER: But when do you expected that --
TRUMP: Why would we be delaying it?
But we're going to look at it. We're going to take a look at it, and, ultimately, the White House has to approve it. And maybe we will and maybe we won't, but we'll be taking a look.
I have to leave for an emergency phone call. I'm going to let Scott and Larry finish. Larry will talk about --
REPORTER: Mr. President.
REPORTER: Mr. President.
TRUMP: So I'll be back. I will see you tomorrow, a big day.
REPORTER: One more question on Breonna Taylor. We are in a time right now where Americans feel like we are on this carousel.
REPORTER: Who's the caller? Who is the caller.
TRUMP: I have a big call that's really important. So --
REPORTER: Mr. President? Just one more question, if I can, on Breonna Taylor.
TRUMP: I have to go.
REPORTER: People are protesting in the streets. What is your message to them? People feel like we are on this carousel where another black life --
BLITZER: That was abrupt. The president says he has an emergency phone call he has to make, left it in the hands of Dr. Scott Atlas, who has been helping him on the Coronavirus Task Force.
But he made some significant news there. He said it is up to the White House to approve a vaccine. He said, I don't see any reason why the FDA, the Food and Drug Administration, should delay it any further. It sounds he says like some sort of political maneuver that they're taking.
Dr. Sanjay Gupta is with us. Sanjay, that was pretty surprising, or maybe not surprising necessarily coming from the president, that he is saying that it looks like the FDA is engaged in politics right now as opposed to finding a safe and effective vaccine that the American public can trust.
Sanjay, hold on a second. We got to get your audio --
DR. SANJAY GUPTA, CNN CHIEF MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Can you hear me Wolf?
BLITZER: Now I hear you, Sanjay.
GUPTA: Wolf, can you hear me?
BLITZER: Yes. Start again from the beginning. You heard my question.
GUPTA: And I was listening to the press conference as well, Wolf. Not quite sure what to make of that. I heard the president say that the White House may, I guess, overrule or whatever the decision by the FDA to approve this vaccine. They can't do that. I mean, you know, there is a whole process in place.
I shouldn't say they can't do that. I've never heard of such a thing. It sounds fairly preposterous. The White House, obviously, they're not the data scientists. They're not in the business of looking at this sort of data and making these decisions.
I think what this is stemming from, Wolf, as you know, is that the FDA signaled that they want to have a certain amount of time after the shots, the phase three shots, are all in to these volunteers. They want to wait around two months to basically determine that no side effects develop in the participants in this vaccine trial.
And I know that they got that sort of timeframe because that is typically from the FDA's own data base that is typically what most side effects occur.
[18:35:06]
So, you know, what we've heard from the FDA is that we want to wait at least that long. We'll continue to monitor these volunteers, these participants in the trial, but they want to wait at least two months, which would take it to late November, early December at the earliest, really, in terms of a possible authorization. And, again, this is an authorization, Wolf, not an approval, an emergency use authorization.
But I don't know if the president was just riffing there or if he was being serious that they would actually overrule the FDA in terms of making -- authorizing this vaccine. Again, I don't -- I won't say that they can't do that because I have never even heard of such a thing. This is squarely under the domain of the FDA. There is a data monitoring safety board that presents the data but then the FDA is responsible for the authorization or approval.
BLITZER: Stand by for a moment. I want to bring in Jim Acosta, our Chief White House Correspondent, into this.
I was pretty surprised to hear the president make the statement, I don't see any reason to delay it further. He has been saying now, for weeks and weeks, he would like to see a vaccine. He thinks there will be a vaccine by November 3rd, that's Election Day, here in the United States.
And just the other day the FDA said they're going through some extensive testing to make sure the American public is confident in this vaccine. It could delay it through November or December or even to early next year. The president clearly, Jim, is not very happy with that. And he says, there may be politics at play as far as the FDA is concerned. Have you heard the president say that before?
JIM ACOSTA, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: I haven't heard the president say that before, Wolf, but he is echoing what some of his Trump world advisers have said. He is echoing quite frankly what Michael Caputo said, the top spokesman at HHS, who recently took a leave of absence after accusing government scientists over the CDC of sedition.
He has made similar claims about FDA scientists, suggesting that perhaps they're working against the president. And so the president appears to be infected by some of these comments and some of these sentiments.
But I will say, Wolf, on the subject of a vaccine approval process, Dr. Anthony Fauci and many of the other top administration health experts have said that that process is going to be removed from politics. And the reason why it is removed from politics, as Sanjay Gupta has said so many times, is because you have to have national confidence in a coronavirus vaccine.
Otherwise, you won't have people lining up to get shots. And if you don't have people lining up to get shots, it's just like these Trump rallies where people don't want to wear masks. People are not going to be protected from the virus and the virus will continue to harm and kill people across this country.
BLITZER: Yes. And let me get back to Sanjay for a moment. Sanjay, we also heard, one of the political appointees over at the Department of Health and Human Services suggest that there was a deep state working at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to block certain advances that were going forward to undermine the president's position.
And now, we're hearing the president suggest there's politics that play at the FDA. Let me just get your reaction to these developments that are so worrisome in the face of the enormous amount of deaths that have occurred here in the United States.
GUPTA: Yes. I mean, it is really worrisome. I mean, I have talked to several people at the CDC and the FDA over the past you know several months now reporting the story. I mean, I think there has been concern that there's political pressure at both to organizations, and some of it has been very obvious, you know, things being placed on the CDC's website without going through the scientific vetting process and then being retracted.
Similar sort of thing at the FDA sort of exaggerated data around convalescent plasma and the FDA commissioner coming back and apologizing and walking back some of that. So, if anything, it seems to sort of be this notion that there's a lot of pressure from the top coming down.
To speed things up is one thing. I think lot of people obviously want to move quickly. We're in the middle of a pandemic. But the idea of that information that is not scientifically-based suddenly shows up on one of the most prestigious scientific organization's websites in the world, the CDC's, was really worrisome to a lot of people who work there, and the same thing at the FDA.
I mean, you know, Wolf, these are institutions that have been around for a long time. They've gone through the processes of approving, lots of different therapeutics and vaccines in the past. And there is a process here. I think what this seems to be about specifically, this latest discussion, is that the FDA has come back and said, and this is after lots of questions about what is the protocol for this authorization if it occurs, what is it going to be.
And the thing they came back and said is, look. We have to have a certain amount of time where we can be confident that the people who are getting these shots aren't getting side effects.
[18:40:01]
We know what happened to this woman in the AstraZeneca trial, Wolf, you know, in her mid 30s, developed some weakness of her limbs for a period of time. That's concerning. And, obviously, it's rare. But if you're giving a vaccine to a hundred million people and something is a 0.1 percent side effect, that's 100,000 people. That's what the safety sort of protocols are all about.
BLITZER: Dr. Francis Collins, the Head of the NIH, National Institutes of Health, is still with us. Dr. Collins, you heard what the president said, and for those viewers who are just tuning in, he is suggesting that the FDA, there may be politics at play. They may try to a delay approval of a vaccine for the coronavirus. And then the president said, ultimately, it's the White House that has to make this decision, that the White House has to approve this.
Let me get your reaction to what we heard from the president, because I've known you for a long time. You've been intimately, deeply involved in all of this for years and years. Have you ever heard anything like this before from a president of the United States accusing the FDA of playing politics on a life-and-death issue of a safe and effective vaccine?
DR. FRANCIS COLLINS, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH: Well, let me say, I am disheartened that, once again, at a time of great national crisis and people dying from this disease that somehow we seem to be all focused on the divisions and the things where people can't seem to agree and everything becomes political. I'm a scientist. I'm a physician. I want to see something done that is going to save lives.
I think the FDA had signaled sometime ago, they were going to issue some additional guidance about what the safety guidance ought to be for these phase three trials. They previously said what the efficacy limit had to be. It had to be at least 50 percent effective but they hadn't laid out what the safety guidelines would be.
They have kind of gone with tradition here, this idea that you're going to ask for two months of data on at least half of the people in the trial before you decide that you've got a good bit of data about safety. That's not a new idea.
And so putting that forward at this point was not a big surprise, although they have not formally issued that. I guess it kind of came out into the open in the last 24 hours as something that they were drafting and considering.
My concern is that --
BLITZER: Let me interrupt for a moment, Dr. Collins. Does the White House, as supposed to the FDA, have final word on approval of a vaccine?
COLLINS: I am not a lawyer or a constitutional scholar. I actually don't know the answer to that. I guess Sanjay didn't either. But, certainly, the FDA, the agency that has the experience and the scientific expertise is in the best position to judge these issues about safety and efficacy. And, certainly, the public is looking at that.
And we already have a problem in this country where a lot of people are worried about whether this vaccine is going to be something they want to take. The last thing we need to do is to create another cloud of uncertainty about whether this is being done appropriately so that we can reassure people this is something they'd want to take advantage of.
BLITZER: Because we have to make sure, Dr. Collins. We have to make sure that this vaccine, and there are six potential vaccines that are being tested right now in various phases, we have to make sure it's safe for adults, for little kids, for children, safe for the elderly, safe for people with underlying conditions like diabetes, for example, or health or heart conditions. It has to be safe and there has to be confidence that it works. And the American public is going to be nervous if they see politics at play right now, right?
COLLINS: That has already caused, I think, some concern on the part of the public and we'd really like to get that settled by laying out very clear standards. By the way, it should be noticed that the CEOs of all the companies that are producing these vaccines have already come out themselves and said, they're not going to push something forward they don't think is safe and effective.
I noticed in the Johnson & Johnson vaccine that was announced today, that in their protocol, they include this idea they're not going to ask for approval until they have 60 days of follow-up of half the study. They've already incorporated that particular part of the safety standard into their protocol. They are already there.
BLITZER: Yes. And the president made it clear just now he is not very happy with that two-month review process. He wants it out there by November 3rd. He's made that clear many times. Dr. Collins, stand by. You know Gloria Borger is with us as well. Gloria, the other headline I heard from what the president said, the first questioned about a peaceful transfer of power after the November 3rd elections or whenever all the ballots are counted, it could take a few days, maybe even a few weeks after November 3rd. What the president said on this was pretty worrisome too, because I didn't hear him specifically state that he wants to see a, quote, peaceful transfer of power. What did you hear?
GLORIA BORGER, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, the same thing. I mean, he was asked twice about it, would he commit to a peaceful transfer of power. Obviously, transfer implies that Joe Biden would win. And his answer was, we're going to have to see what happens.
[18:45:04]
And then after that, he said, if you get rid of the ballots, there won't need to be a transfer. In other words if you get rid of the ballots that he doesn't like, the mail-in ballots, the millions of ballots that he seems to be saying are going to be illegal, if you get rid of them, then he would win.
But it's kind of stunning that a president of the United States from the podium at the White House is unwilling to commit to a peaceful transfer of power should he lose the election. That's kind of quite remarkable to me, Wolf.
BLITZER: Yeah. And, you know, Gloria, this is -- this is all so worrisome because, because of the coronavirus a lot of Americans will not want to actually show up at the polling places on November 3rd with a lot of people there, people waiting in line, especially the elderly, especially people, and there's a lot of them with underlying health conditions, they want to vote by mail, they want to perhaps drop off their ballots in some containers where it will go to the polling places. They are very nervous about this right now but the president is not very happy that millions and millions of Americans want to vote by mail.
BORGER: Right. And he's -- so he is effectively saying the election is illegitimate unless he wins. And what he said yesterday along the same lines was also quite stunning, Wolf, because he effectively admitted that one of the reasons he wants the Supreme Court nominee confirmed very quickly is that it might have to go to the court, some of these -- some of these state ballots and he implied then that he assumes that because he would get a nominee, that that nominee would vote in the way that he wanted.
Therefore, he would want to stack the Supreme Court so if this goes to the court that he could win through the courts. So, you know, he wouldn't talk about a peaceful transfer of power. Yesterday, he talked about having an extra seat on the court, having a seat on the court so if he went there he could win. I mean, this is somebody who is plotting every potential way to win and none of it sounds very presidential, Wolf.
BLITZER: Yeah, and he is going to announce his Supreme Court nominee Saturday at 5:00 p.m. He says he has five candidates but looks like he has narrowed it down to one maybe two right now. We'll see what happens.
BORGER: Right.
BLITZER: Dr. Collins of NIH, before I let you go and I know you got to run, you've been very patient with your time, if the president, this is a hypothetical. It's a -- it is a worrisome question, if the president were to override the FDA when it comes to approving some sort of coronavirus vaccine, what if anything could be done about that?
I know you're not a lawyer, you're not a politician. If it happens, that would be so, so worrisome.
COLLINS: Well, the person at the FDA who oversees this decision who is the career person who already said he would resign if something like that happened, it would certainly lead to an enormous response.
And again, I'm an optimist. I figure this will somehow sort itself out. The goal is to try to be sure the public has confidence in this vaccine or these vaccines. Meanwhile, there's a lot of storm going on right now because we're in the silly season right before an election and tonight is a good example of that.
BLITZER: Yeah. As usual, Dr. Collins, we're grateful to you for everything you do and grateful for everything NIH does. You guys have done a really life saving work for so many years. Thanks so much for joining us.
COLLINS: Sure. Wear your mask and get your flu shot.
BLITZER: Wear your mask. So critical. And I'll get ready to get a flu shot. You are absolutely right.
Thank you, as Dr. Fauci said, getting a regular flu shot this year may be more important than ever because of the coronavirus.
Daniel Dale, our CNN reporter and fact checker, was listening as closely as anyone to what we heard from the president.
Always anxious, Daniel, to get your analysis of what we heard.
DANIEL DALE, CNN REPORTER: Just a few items today, Wolf, because it was short.
As Gloria said, Trump's insinuation about mail ballots is just baseless. It's just nonsense. Mail voting has proven to be safe, reliable, not rife with fraud whether talking about so-called absentee ballots or what Trump calls unsolicited ballots sent to all registered voters in certain states. It's all safe, it's not rife with fraud.
Number two he keeps accusing Biden of having anti-science approach to the pandemic and never explains what he means possibly because he cannot. Biden has repeatedly emphasized what he thinks is the importance of listening to scientists in responding to the pandemic. Number three, Wolf, the president keeps boasting about increases in
economic numbers over the past four months without acknowledging the hole we're in from the previous two months. One number he cited repeatedly over the past couple weeks is 10.6 million job gain over the last four months. He says that is a record and that is true.
But before that, in March and April, we had a larger record of 22 million, 0.2 -- 22.2 million jobs lost.
[18:50:05]
So, we're still down more than 11.5 million jobs since March even with this 10.6 million increase.
BLITZER: Yeah, more than 900 Americans by the way died just yesterday from coronavirus here in the United States.
Daniel Dale, as usual, thank you very much.
Much more on the coronavirus pandemic coming up.
But right now, I want to go back to the breaking news out of Louisville, Kentucky, protesters on the streets and outraged after a grand jury failed to directly charged any police officers with the death of Breonna Taylor.
Joining us now, the global human rights leader, Martin Luther King III.
Martin, thank you so much for joining us.
I'm anxious to get your thoughts. What does it say to you that the only charges brought by this grand jury and the attorney general in Kentucky weren't even directly related to the deaths of Breonna Taylor but rather bullets that were fired into adjacent apartments without harming anyone. What do you think about all this?
MARTIN LUTHER KING III, GLOBAL HUMAN RIGHTS LEADER: I think it continues to reinforce and many in the African-American community that the system that we call the system of justice does not work for African-Americans, and in this context specifically, an African- American woman. It almost -- it's beyond unconscionable. It is -- it is a very, very sad day when you cannot find some level of justice.
And I think that the nation must continue to come together. Almost the system itself has got to be reformed. The system may be worked for the system, but it is not working for black people and black women specifically at this particular moment.
BLITZER: Twenty-six-year-old EMT who was shot and killed.
What's your message, Martin, to all the people who are in the streets of -- on the streets right now who are so heart broken and are so angry over what happened today? We're looking at live pictures coming in. KING: You know, my message is, we can never give up, never give out,
or never give in. Part of that is John Lewis. Part of that is my father. We have to always stay vigilant.
And ultimately, there is a time where we will prevail. We did not prevail today.
Tragically, this has happened over and over again. But we can never ever give up. I think about the millions of black families that are sitting down with their children today, particularly girls, having to say, you do matter, even though it feels in this context that you don't. You do matter.
Dad used to say we have to have a tough but tender mind. So, you know, we have to be tough, which means we have to keep working. Obviously, voting is part of the answer, but maybe there's more that has to happen.
In fact, you know, I think, finally, there may be a scenario where some economic withdrawal might need to take place on a national level.
BLITZER: Well, you know, I want to get your thoughts, Martin, on something the Kentucky attorney general, Daniel Cameron, said at today's announcement. Listen to this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DANIEL CAMERON, KENTUCKY ATTORNEY GENERAL: We must also remember the facts and the collection of evidence in this case are different than cases elsewhere in the country. Each is unique and cannot be compared.
There will be celebrities, influencers and activists who have never lived in Kentucky will try to tell us how to feel, suggesting they understand the facts of this case and that they know our community and the commonwealth better than we do. But they don't.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLITZER: At the news conference, you just heard, Martin, the president strongly praised the Kentucky attorney general who spoke at the Republican National Convention here in Washington, by saying he's doing exactly the right thing. I think he's doing a great job. He's a superstar. I'm paraphrasing what the president had to say. And he says he's going to be speaking to the Kentucky governor soon.
So, what's your reaction to what we heard from the attorney general and what we heard from the president?
KING: Well, I certainly believe that because he did speak at the convention -- and I'm not saying that anyone does not have that right, but it certainly took him out of being objective to obviously supporting the nominee of his party.
And so, I think that this says -- and yes, I heard the statement about people may not understand Kentucky. But people do understand the loss of a human life, a female in this context, when justice has not been served.
There is no justice in this -- there is not justice yet, I should say, because we don't know. The FBI is still doing an investigation. But thus far, there's been no justice.
[18:55:00]
It's just very sad that in 2020, we're still going through some of the same things that happened years ago. The fact that you can just knock down a door and go in and shoot someone is unconscionable. And we -- again, I think the system has to be addressed, meaning the system must be broken down. And that means creating a new and better system that works for all people.
BLITZER: What would your father, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Martin, say if he were with us today -- and we're sad he's not with us today. If he were with us today, what would be his message to those angry folks on the street of Louisville right now who are so upset over this decision by the grand jury and the Kentucky attorney general?
KING: I -- I don't know that any of us can say what he would say, but I know that he would think and understand the anger because we -- many of us are angry and frustrated. But we have to find ways to transform that anger into something transformational that brings about change.
That's why, you know, in 1955, there was a boycott for 381 days where people didn't ride buses. This is different because it's about a human life that cannot be replaced. But justice can occur. And so, you know, when you think about the fact that black people spend a trillion dollars in this economy, over a trillion last year, and if black people decided that maybe we need to stop spending our money in this economy, then maybe the system can be restructured appropriately and justice can be served for all people.
BLITZER: Is that someone, Mart -- is that something, Martin, you're proposing, that you support, some sort of huge economic boycott, if you will?
KING: I have certainly heard discussions about it. I think that that is a very real and viable option that could happen. I am not saying I'm calling for that. I am saying that I'm hearing all of these discussions today. And there may be an effort of a number of people coming together and say, you know, look, this is something we must do, because that is one of the non-violent actions that probably will create changes in this nation.
BLITZER: So, what do you think -- what else do you think potentially could come next for the Black Lives Matter movement here in the United States in the wake of this decision in Kentucky with so many folks, and you can see them on the streets of Louisville right now, find so deeply disappointed?
KING: Well, the biggest thing is, you know, you've got the George Floyd Policing Act that's sitting at the desk of Mitch McConnell, and he refuses to hear that. And the John Lewis Voter Restoration Act that's sitting there as well that the Senate refuses to pass. The House passed, but Mitch McConnell won't allow it.
Therefore, the people in Kentucky must mobilize and decide to vote for others. But that also means all the way through the ballot. I mean, there are some who are saying that the attorney general, when he's up for election, may not need to be reinstated or re-elected. And I think that those are some of the things that have to happen.
But it's not just a political solution. Again, I said this is a structural -- this is around the policies, even the policy around law and law enforcement because everyone wants law enforcement that works, and law enforcement is not working in communities of color. And in this context, as it relates to black women.
BLITZER: Martin Luther King III, Martin, as usual, thanks so much for joining us on this very important day. Appreciate it very much.
KING: Thank you.
BLITZER: Tonight, we also remember Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, as she returns to the U.S. Supreme Court, this time for the final time. More than 100 of her former law clerks gathered to honor the late justice as her casket arrived at the high court this morning.
Also paying their respects, former President Bill Clinton who nominated Justice Ginsburg to the Supreme Court, and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
At the ceremony earlier today, the Chief Justice John Roberts celebrated the life and legacy of his late colleague.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHIEF JUSTICE JOHN ROBERTS, U.S. SUPREME COURT: The voice in court and in our conference room was soft, but when she spoke, people listened. Tough, brave, a fighter, a winner, but also thoughtful, careful, compassionate, honest. She will live on in what she did to improve the law and the lives of all of us. And yet, still, Ruth is gone, and we grieve.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLITZER: We certainly do. We all grieve. These are live pictures as members of the public gather to say good-bye to Justice Ginsburg. Our deepest, deepest condolences to her family. May she rest in peace and may her memory be a blessing.
Thanks very much for watching.
I'm Wolf Blitzer in THE SITUATION ROOM.
"ERIN BURNETT OUTFRONT" starts right now.
[19:00:00]
