Return to Transcripts main page
Anderson Cooper 360 Degrees
Judge Tosses Comey And James Cases, Says Prosecutor Unlawfully Appointed; DOJ To Appeal Dismissal Of James Comey And Letitia James Cases. Sen. Kelly On Pentagon Probe: Intimidation "Won't Work"; WH: Trump "Hopeful And Optimistic" For Ukraine Peace Deal; WH Postpones Expected Unveiling Of New Health Care Proposal; DOJ To Appeal Dismissal Of James Comey & Letitia James Cases; Rep. Greene's District In Disbelief At Resignation Announcement; New Location Feature On X Reveals Several MAGA Accounts Based Overseas. Aired 8-9p ET
Aired November 24, 2025 - 20:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
SUNLEN SERFATY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: They did not get back to CNN and RFK has not said anything yet publicly about his second cousin, about her diagnosis or her mention of him in this article but this family tension, Erin, RFK has addressed in the past, of course, without this new context. He has said that they have a large family and that they were raised to differ with each other on issues -- Erin.
ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST: Sunlen, thank you very much and thanks to all of you for being with us. AC360 begins now.
[20:00:31]
JOHN BERMAN, CNN HOST: Tonight on 360, tossing the cases against two Presidential enemies because the President's hand-picked prosecutor was put in the job unlawfully. What a federal judge ruled in what the President does next.
Speaking of next, the Pentagon goes next level on senator and retired Navy Captain Mark Kelly threatening to recall him for active duty and a possible court martial over the video he made, which made the commander-in-chief furious.
And then later, with millions of Americans about to see their health insurance premiums skyrocket, what's the administration's plan to stop it and when, if ever, will we see it?
Good evening, John Berman here in for Anderson. A legal tongue lashing, a political setback and an administrative embarrassment. A judge basically told the President that you can't do your retribution campaign at least not this way, you can't.
A judge ruled that the President's hand-picked federal prosecutor can't lawfully do the job she was told to do and can't bring two of the cases she was hand-picked to bring. She, of course, is Lindsey Halligan, who until recently had zero experience as a criminal prosecutor but plenty as the President's personal attorney and loyal defender.
The cases are the ones she brought in the Eastern District of Virginia against a former FBI Director James Comey, and New York Attorney General Letitia James. He on charges he lied to Congress. She on mortgage related fraud counts. In both cases Judge Cameron McGowan Currie ruled that Lindsey Halligan was installed as interim U.S. attorney unlawfully.
In the Comey case, she writes, in light of these principles, I conclude that all actions flowing from Miss Halligan's defective appointment, including securing and signing Mr. Comey's indictment, constitute unlawful exercise of his executive power and must be set aside. She dismissed both cases without prejudice, meaning they may be brought again, providing the legal errors can be fixed. The President did not weigh in directly today, but as if to underscore how unprecedented this is, it was not the Attorney General Pam Bondi, who holds the reins in this.
She did not go on camera until two hours after the White House press secretary did.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: We've seen partisan judges take unprecedented steps to try to intervene in an accountability before, but we're not going to give up and I know that the Department of Justice intends to appeal these rulings very soon, if they haven't already.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BERMAN: Now, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt followed a couple hours later and make of that what you will by the attorney general of the United States.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PAM BONDI, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL: I'm going to keep going on this. I'm not, you know, I'm not worried about someone who has been charged with a very serious crime. His alleged actions were a betrayal of public trust.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BERMAN: Now, New York Attorney General James put out a statement today saying she was heartened by the victory and promising to remain fearless, as she put it, in the face of these baseless charges. As for James Comey, he weighed in on camera.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JAMES COMEY, FORMER FBI DIRECTOR: This case mattered to me personally, obviously, but it matters most because a message has to be sent that the President of the United States cannot use the Department of Justice to target his political enemies. I don't care what your politics are. You have to see that as fundamentally un-American and a threat to the rule of law that keeps all of us free.
I know that Donald Trump will probably come after me again, and my attitude is going to be the same. I'm innocent, I am not afraid and I believe in an independent federal judiciary. The gift from our founders that protects us from a would-be tyrant.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BERMAN: Again, the President did not comment directly today, but his views by now are well known. he made them all but explicit a little more than two months ago in this posting online, which may have been intended as a direct message to the attorney general, quoting now, "What about Comey, Adam 'Shifty' Schiff, Letitia"? They're all guilty as hell, but nothing is going to be done".
The post ends with, "Justice must be served now". Now, five days later, Comey was indicted two weeks later, so was James. But it's not like it wasn't a long time coming if the President's words are any guide.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP (R) PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Comey and all those, you know, sleazebags.
Comey lied to everybody.
We fired Comey, that fraud.
That phony crooked Comey.
Comey should hang his head in disgrace.
Comey is a dirty cop.
Comey is a corrupt person.
One of the best things is firing James Comey's (bleep) out of there.
He's a leaker.
Comey who is the worst --
They lied to Congress many times, you know, Comey and all those guys.
Comey lies and leaks. He's a liar and he's a leaker. Is this guy being looked at? But we're going to straighten it out.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[20:05:21]
BERMAN: The President on James Comey over the years. and here's some of his thoughts about Letitia James.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: By the racist attorney general of New York State, Letitia "Peekaboo" James. We have a racist attorney general who's a horror show.
She's got serious Trump derangement syndrome.
James ought to be looked at.
All they do is want to go after political opponents.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BERMAN: Interesting he put it that way.
And with us here, CNN chief White House correspondent and anchor of "The Source", Kaitlan Collins. You know, as we just heard there, the President hasn't been shy about expressing his feelings over James Comey and Letitia James and these cases over the years. So, is it clear how he's viewing this tonight?
KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: I mean, obviously, the White House saw this coming. The President himself, though, is unhappy with this. I mean, obviously, they're blaming judges here. That's what Karoline Leavitt was saying, you know, we're not that surprised by how this has played out. And it was clear that there were going to be huge challenges to Lindsey Halligan's appointment as the U.S. attorney.
This actually doesn't have anything to do with her qualifications. It's the fact that she's the second person put in this position on an interim basis. That is what the issue that the judge had here. But as for the White House and the DOJ and what they're going to do next here, I do think it was notable that the press secretary responded before the attorney general had, on this matter of what the next step was.
Pam Bondi did say they are going to appeal it. but the real question is, is whether or not they are going to re-file these charges against James Comey and Letitia James. And I've been talking to people about that this evening. It's not clear that they have a plan yet of what that's going to look like. But if you remember, John, when they first indicted Tish James here, in this case, it completely caught the Justice Department off guard. They did not know that was coming that day.
They knew it was in the works. but the day that Lindsey Halligan actually went to the grand jury to pursue that court, the White House and caught senior leadership at the Justice Department off guard by that.
And so, it kind of shows you how there's not really just a clear plan here of how to of how to proceed. There's a lot of factions inside the Justice Department right now that are competing for the White House's attention and so, it's not really clear what the next step here is going to look like.
BERMAN: You know, I too thought it was notable that Karoline Leavitt spoke before the attorney general of the United States. I was trying to say that before, I wasn't as eloquent as you. Any sense of a timeline here? Do they feel like they have to make a decision quickly?
COLLINS: I think the President will probably want to see action here, but I think, you know, there is a scenario here while I was talking to Trump sources about this a few weeks ago when this played out, that they did believe that a judge would intervene and either say Lindsey Halligan was put in that position and it wasn't legal. It wasn't fair, it wasn't justified. and that would actually be a way out for Lindsey Halligan to not actually have to prosecute these cases and go the full extent, because a lot of people at the DOJ don't actually think the case against at least Tish James has merit.
And so, they were saying, actually, it could be a way to still please the President, because you can still blame it on a judge and say the judge stood in the way, but it actually accomplished what he wanted, which was to target his foes.
So, we'll see how they decide to proceed here.
BERMAN: A lot of legal activity just to satisfy the President. Kaitlan Collins, thank you very much for that. We'll see you at the top of the hour for "The Source".
Attorney General Pam Bondi also weighed in on interim U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan's future after the judge said her appointment was unlawful, listen again.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BONDI: We have made Lindsey Halligan a special U.S. attorney. So she is in court. She can fight in court just like she was and we believe we will be successful on appeal. And I'll tell you, Lindsey Halligan, I talked to all of our U.S. attorneys, the majority of them around the country, and Lindsey Halligan is an excellent U.S. attorney, and shame on them for not wanting her in office.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BERMAN: All right with us now, former federal prosecutor and CNN senior legal analyst, Elie Honig and former chief judge for the U.S. Middle District Court of Pennsylvania, John Jones.
Elie, let me just start with you here. How embarrassing is this when a judge rules that the person who was appointed by the Justice Department isn't there legally?
ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Let's put it this way, DOJ has now lost both of its two highest profile cases with one fell swoop, and they lost it because of incompetence, because they didn't install Lindsey Halligan into office in the proper way.
And by the way, and this goes to the clip we just saw of the attorney general, they knew they screwed up. The Justice Department knew they screwed up. and here's how we know they know because after they installed Lindsey Halligan, they tried to issue a memo a couple of weeks later saying, well, actually, we call her this thing called a special attorney to the Justice Department. And the judge today said, yes, it doesn't work that way. You don't get to issue something two weeks later and say, this goes back to two weeks ago.
So it's a screw up at the most fundamental level and for now, these cases are dead.
BERMAN: What even is a special U.S. attorney in this case? That's what Pam Bondi was referring to.
HONIG: Yes, it's a way to really try to end run this ruling, to try to say, "Well, maybe this person isn't the temporary U.S. attorney, the top federal prosecutor in the district", but they're just generally exercising the attorney general's power. So, they're trying to fix it. but it's too late.
BERMAN: All right, Judge Jones, I want to bring you in here. The judge did toss out the case without prejudice, which leaves open the possibility that the cases against Comey and James can be brought again, alleging the same conduct. How hard would that be?
[20:10:25]
JOHN E. JONES III, FORMER CHIEF JUDGE, US MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA: Well, I think, John, in the case of Letitia James, because there's a what's called a savings clause that gives a six- month window that the charges could be brought again. I'm not so sure, in the case of Mr. Comey. Even though it's without prejudice, I think there's a very creative and possibly strong argument that the statute of limitations has run in that case, the judge used the phrase "Void ab initio" as it related to Halligan's appointment. And that means, in layman's terms, basically dead on arrival.
So, I'm not sure the savings clause applies. and you can bet if these charges are brought again, that Comey's very excellent attorneys are going to argue that the statute has run and that the six-month extension doesn't apply. So, I think it's going to be very hard.
BERMAN: Plus, they have to find somebody who's willing to get in there and bring these charges, that's difficult in and of itself. And that was one of the problems the first time around.
Elie, talk to me about how justice would do this. How would they re- file? What would their argument be, and/or can they appeal this decision?
HONIG: So, there's two separate ideas. Yes, there's a bit of a dilemma here that DOJ is going to have to work out. They have two possible avenues available to fight this. One, they can appeal, they can go to -- this would be the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals say the judge got it wrong. Halligan was properly appointed. And/or they can try to go back and re-indict the case. The problem is they probably have to choose one or the other. Because if they go back and successfully re- indict, let's say next week, they find a prosecutor to sign it. A properly appointed prosecutor who goes back and gets new indictments of Jim Comey and Letitia James.
That would probably then moot their appeal. So, they would be stuck with this record that they screwed up on the appointment of Halligan. So, there's some delicate tactical discussions I would gather happening inside Justice Department and the White House right now.
BERMAN: And judge, what about the other side of this case that Comey's team was arguing that it was a selective and vindictive prosecution that was argued in front of a separate judge, Judge Nachmanoff, what happens to that case? Might Judge Nachmanoff rule there?
JONES: No, I don't think so, John, because the file is marked as closed and typically that would divest the district court of jurisdiction in this case. In other words, the case is over from the standpoint of the proceedings in that court and as Elie said, if they take an appeal to the to the Fourth Circuit, then it definitely divests and I think there's no question that the cup will pass from Judge Nachmanoff. Maybe he's happy about that under the circumstances, but that's the procedural posture, I believe that the case is in now.
It could come back if charges are re-filed and they could re-litigate if they choose selective prosecution, which I think is an excellent argument that they have and they're also improprieties, as we heard, that may have happened in the presentation to the grand jury that make this case very, very problematic if it gets to that point. But now they're going to apparently, if you take them at their word, go to the fourth circuit on the on the issue of the Halligan appointment.
BERMAN: All right, to be continued, Elie Honig, Judge John Jones, thank you both very much.
Next, new fallout from the video that irked the President now, one of the lawmakers in it is warned that he could be recalled to active military duty and perhaps even face court martial.
And later, what a new social network feature reveals about many of the seemingly all-American comments you see posted online, namely, their distinctly un-American origins. CNN investigates.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:18:37]
BERMAN: Tonight, Defense Secretary Hegseth is warning a sitting U.S. senator and retired naval aviator that he might be recalled to active duty and not to receive more of the many decorations he already has in combat and as a veteran of four spaceflights with NASA, know, Secretary Hegseth wants Arizona Democratic Senator Mark Kelly back to potentially court martial him for his part in this video.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. CHRIS DELUZIO (D-PA): The threats to our Constitution aren't just coming from abroad.
REP. JASON CROW (D-CO): But from right here at home.
SEN. MARK KELLY (D-AZ): Our laws are clear. You can refuse illegal orders.
SEN. ELISSA SLOTKIN (D-MI): You can refuse illegal orders. DELUZIO: You must refuse illegal orders.
SLOTKIN: No one has to carry out orders that violate the law --
REP. MAGGIE GOODLANDER (D-NH): Or our Constitution.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BERMAN: In a social media post today, Secretary Hegseth called Kelly and five other lawmakers who are service veterans in CIA veterans, the seditious six. He said he cannot recall the other five from retirement, but Kelly, he can, and it's not hard to see where his marching orders originate.
Here's the President on his social network last week, quoting. Now, "It's called seditious behavior at the highest level, each one of these traitors to our country should be arrested and put on trial, their words cannot be allowed to stand. We won't have a country anymore. An example must be set" and he signed it, President DJT. That was followed by this later that day, "Seditious behavior punishable by death." He also reposted other missives, including one that read "Hang them, George Washington would."
And though the President later said he was not threatening anyone with death, he also added, "But I think they're in serious trouble" and now he has seen to that prompting, Senator Kelly's Arizona colleague and fellow veteran Senator Gallego, to go all senatorial, online with this "... blank you and your investigation."
With us now, Paul Rieckhoff, founder and President of Independent Veterans of America. Paul, great to see you.
PAUL RIECKHOFF, FOUNDER AND PRESIDENT OF INDEPENDENT VETERANS OF AMERICA: Good to see you.
BERMAN: What message do you think this sends to threaten to recall Senator Kelly for a court martial?
20:20:38
RIECKHOFF: I think it's exactly what Trump said. He wants to set an example and Senator Kelly is a noted veteran. He's respected by people from all parties. He's an astronaut, he's a combat Navy aviator and I think what Trump wants to say is, if I can come after him, I can come after anyone.
He's made it pretty clear he wants to come after his political enemies. He wants to intimidate people. I think it's important to remember there are two million military retirees in America.
So, he can come after this guy for his political speech or for something he doesn't agree with. I think he's trying to send a very effective and chilling message not to senators, but to average people all across the country. And that's why this is so dangerous, so outrageous, so ridiculous, because it's about much more than just these six members. This is about free speech in America for two million military retirees.
BERMAN: Also, how does that sit with you then? How does it land with you?
RIECKHOFF: It's terrible, it's absolutely egregiously bad, dangerous, crazy, it would be an understatement because this is creeping across the line into authoritarianism. This is crossing the Rubicon. This is going into a space we've never gone before. The idea you can drag him back onto active duty and threaten court martial, which I don't think he has any grounds to do. But the fact that he's threatening to do it is breaking glass that's never been broken before in the modern military and it's very, very dangerous to all Americans, no matter what your political background is, should be outraged.
BERMAN: So, Secretary Hegseth wrote on social media, the video made by this Seditious Six and he called them the Seditious Six was despicable, reckless and false, encouraging our warriors to ignore the orders of their commanders undermines every aspect of good order and discipline, their foolish screed sows doubt and confusion, which only puts our warriors in danger.
It's the argument, the President and the White House have been making for days now. What's your response to that?
RIECKHOFF: It's a total misrepresentation of what everyone can see. You know, I don't think this video was necessary. I think most folks in the military know they have to refuse illegal orders, but it's not seditious. It's not traitorous, it's not something you drag somebody back into wherever for a UCMJ trial. It's weaponizing the Department of Defense. They've been moving the pieces in place to do this for a long time by purging senior leadership, by removing the chairman of the joint chiefs, by removing JAGs.
What he's done with the Justice Department? We saw how that landed today with Comey and Letitia James. He's now trying to do the same thing with the Defense Department and he's using Kelly as the first example.
BERMAN: How surprised are you, this sort of had this second act because the whole first round was the end of last week with the initial video, and then also the Presidents tweets and then threatening the execution and whatnot. but then to bring it up again on Monday, how surprised were you to see it resurface?
RIECKHOFF: I'm not, I mean, Trump doesn't let things go. He telegraphs his punches and they've had something -- they had a mark on Kelly for a long time. This is the same guy that Elon Musk called a traitor because of his position on Ukraine. Kelly is also uniquely effective. He's been a critic on Ukraine. He's been a critic on Venezuela, he's been a critic on domestic deployments of National Guard here at home.
And if you want to try to take down your political enemies, you start with folks who are the most formidable. and Senator Kelly is one of them. And I think that's why he's starting there, and he's not going to let it go.
But I think, Senator Kelly, I know him personally. I have great respect for him. He's not going to go down without a fight, and I think there will be an outcry from military retirees and legal experts across the military and veterans community.
BERMAN: And again, those six have been asked repeatedly now what they were specifically referring to, if they thought there were any illegal orders. Elissa Slotkin over the weekend said she'd heard from active duty troops who were concerned about the legality of strikes that have targeted people accused by the Trump administration of trafficking narcotics by sea.
Some wonder whether they could be held personally liable for the deaths, she said.
RIECKHOFF: Yes, I mean, I have a question for them. What do want to get out of this video? I think that's a reasonable request. I've been critical of the video, but it's not seditious. It's not treasonous, it might be politically sloppy. It's sloppy communication. And the question is, is someone going to come forward in the military and say, I think I received an illegal order?
So far, no one has. but if a Vindman type comes forward, then were going to force a very, very different conversation in this country and that may be what happens if Venezuela continues to unfold in the next couple of days.
BERMAN: Paul Rieckhoff, good to see you. Thanks so much for coming in.
Next with new Russian strikes tonight in Ukraine, the President saying something good may be happening in the peace process an update and perspective from veteran diplomat and Global Troubleshooter Brett McGurk.
And later, what Marjorie Taylor Greene's Georgia constituents make of sudden retirement of the sudden retirement announcement and virtual excommunication by the President CNN.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:29:25]
BERMAN: We have breaking news out of Ukraine. That country's Air Force says that Russia is launching a ballistic missile attack tonight on Kyiv. This follows a drone strike on Kharkiv yesterday. Even so, both the U.S. and Ukraine say progress is being made on a plan to end the war. President Trump says that something good maybe happening following intensive talks in Geneva over the weekend between U.S. and Ukrainian officials.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio called meetings productive and meaningful and Ukrainian President Zelenskyy is now striking a more optimistic tone.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY, UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT (through translator): Diplomacy has been activated which is good, very good. We expect that the result will be the right steps. The first priority is reliable peace, guaranteed security, respect for our people, respect for everyone who gave their lives defending Ukraine from Russian aggression.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[20:30:17]
BERMAN: Negotiators are working off the 28-point ceasefire plan that President Trump presented last week, which calls for Ukraine to give up territory, reduce the size of its military, and promise not to join NATO, demands that Russia has made all along. That plan is now being modified, but Vladimir Putin may nix any agreement. And President Trump's initial demand that Ukraine agree to a plan by this Thursday now appears flexible.
So there is a lot in flux and much to discuss with Brett McGurk, CNN Global Affairs Analyst, who has served in senior positions under the last four presidents, including President Trump. Brett, always great to see you. Look, you've been on the inside. Now, from the outside, can you tell where things are headed? Is this moving away from that very pro-Russia 28-point document?
BRETT MCGURK, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: Yes, John, I spent some time at that intercontinental hotel in Geneva, where a lot of deals, many times in secret, are done. I was struck by the room there. You had about 10 people on each side. It's kind of hard to get things done with that group.
But, look, it looks like there was some progress made. You know, over the weekend, John, this is what makes foreign policy both so interesting and so complicated. It's not just the President. He is primary authority in foreign affairs, but there are other actors, particularly here.
And if you even go through that 28-point plan that came out last week, there's a role, John, for Congress, because it calls for lifting sanctions on Russia. Those are congressionally mandated sanctions. You can't do that without Congress.
There's a role for Europe. It talks about using frozen funds that are in Europe. Europe has a say in that. There's a role for NATO. NATO has a say. And, of course, Ukraine has a say.
So what you saw over the weekend was all these other actors get involved and say, hey, wait a minute. We need some changes to this plan. And then you had the U.S. side meet with the Ukrainians. And from what we were hearing, the plan is now significantly revised.
Whether this can stop this horrific war that we all want stopped, that remains to be seen. And you can see again, John, Russia tonight launching another missile and drone attack all across Ukraine, which looks to be ongoing. BERMAN: You talk about people coming from different places in this not being a binary discussion. What about people coming from different places even within the U.S. administration? Does it feel to you --
MCGURK: Yes.
BERMAN: -- like many are writing, that Secretary of State Rubio may have been in a fundamentally different place than Steve Witkoff was, who was playing point on this 28-point plan?
MCGURK: You know, it seems like that, which is not totally abnormal when you have a complicated negotiation like this. But I was struck by one of the readouts from the U.S. side yesterday said the first part of the day was focused on coordination meetings, unilateral meetings. That's a fancy way of saying we are meeting with ourselves within the U.S. team to get on the same page.
That's never a great sign. You don't really want that out in the public, especially when you're negotiating with the Russians. I mean, the Russians will try to split any division in an administration. You want to be speaking from the same voice.
Look, I'm hopeful, John. We don't want this war to stop. I'm hopeful. What came out of the meetings yesterday, we just heard Zelenskyy there. You're starting to maybe get something that we can get behind and then present to the Russians.
And an important call today also, John, President Trump spoke with Xi Jinping. The readout of that call on both sides said they spoke about Ukraine. And look, China is supporting Russia in this war. Iran is supporting Russia in this war. That's one thing that makes us so important.
And I would hope the President with Xi Jinping says, hey, work with me here, help me out with some pressure on Putin to wind this war down. I doubt he said that, but that's what you should say in that call if you want to get this war wound down. You need more pressure on Moscow.
BERMAN: Some of the startling things in the 28-point plan included a significant cut to Ukraine's military, a handover of a significant amount of territory that Russia has not even conquered yet. And of course, never joining NATO, especially the first two there.
If Ukraine and the United States have backed off those now and those have been fundamental Russian demands, do you see this being something Russia could agree to?
MCGURK: Well, this is the crux of it. Look, this -- the crux of this agreement, there's really two pieces. There's the map in eastern Ukraine. You have to draw the line on the map and Ukraine will have to make some compromises there. And they can do so if the other part of the core crux of the agreement, the security guarantees, are robust enough that they have confidence that the war's not just going to start again in a few years.
Those are the two key elements. The problem with the plan that came out earlier this week in the 28 points, it was so lopsided on the territorial concessions to Russia, basically telling Ukraine to give up territory that Russia is going to have very hard time taking militarily.
And the security guarantees, while strong, the key element to a security guarantee, John, is not just what's on paper, but having allied forces in your country to train, to be present. And that was taken off the table in addition to the limitations on Ukraine's own military structure.
[20:35:10]
Those are the two key elements. But you nailed it. You can tilt now more in Ukraine's favor, and then the Russians are going to balk. That's what diplomacy is about.
You got to keep trying to get into that, I've said it on your show before, the zone of a possible agreement, the ZOPA. You got to keep working on it. You got to use pressure, all elements of power, to try to get into that ZOPA, into that zone, to stop the war and get into a ceasefire.
BERMAN: Brett McGurk, the next few days will be very telling. Thanks so much for being with us.
MCGURK: Thanks, John.
Next, the President hits pause on unveiling his long-awaited proposal to lower health care costs. Now, with millions of Americans about to see premiums soar, the question is, when will we see the plan, if ever?
Plus, we take you to Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene's very red district in Georgia to see how her surprise resignation announcement is being received after her public falling out with the President.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, I think she represented the people, what they felt. Not everybody felt that way, obviously. I wouldn't have called her a traitor.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:40:46]
BERMAN: The White House postponed an expected announcement today of a new health care proposal from the President to address expiring Affordable Care Act subsidies. In just a matter of weeks, millions of Americans could see their health care premiums spike or more than double.
Officials did not give a reason for the delay, but sources tell CNN the plan is not final until the President makes the announcement himself, with the details, timing, and content still subject to change. The President has long derided the Affordable Care Act, dating back to his first administration, and has made big promises to replace it with something far better.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We're going to have a health care plan that's going to be second to none.
We have two plans coming out.
Coming out in a very short period of time.
The plan is coming out over the next four weeks.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Don't you have to tell people what the plan is?
TRUMP: Yes, we'll be announcing that in about two months, maybe less.
We're signing a health care plan within two weeks. A full and complete health care plan.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: So just a yes or no, you still do not have a plan.
TRUMP: I have concepts of a plan.
If we come up with something better, that'll be great. And everybody wants that because Obamacare sort of sucks.
Obamacare is a failure. Obamacare is not good.
We're really, I think, become the party of good health care.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BERMAN: All right. With us now, two CNN Political Commentators, David Urban and Bakari Sellers. And David, I want to start with you. I do a morning show from time to time. And we came in this morning and we were convinced that there was going to be a health care plan of some sort, a proposal announced today. Why? Because there was a serious float, because the White House floated that it was likely to come.
It was in Axios. It was in Politico. It was in Punchbowl. You know, we, of course, were told whispers of it. We were even given some of the details about it. But then, late today, nope, nothing. So what happened? The float didn't go so well?
DAVID URBAN, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: John, you've seen that -- I think it's about that time for that Charlie Brown Thanksgiving special to be replayed, perhaps, right, with a ball gets yanked away. Look, the health care is incredibly, incredibly complex. And there's, you know, this is a plan that is going to require buy-in from tons and tons of Republicans up and down the ticket in the House and in the Senate. Lots of folks are going to have to stand for reelection in the midterms. And what this plan looks like is going to be very consequential to them. And so I think that when, you know, whispers of the plan got out there, as you say, members of the House, members of the Senate said, hey, we want to hear some more details before this gets rolled out, because we're going to have to pass it, we're going to have to implement it, we're going to have to do a lot of these things.
I think most members of the House who are Republicans and Senate would like to see the cost curve get bent. Nobody -- I don't think anybody realistically thinks they can chuck Obamacare, but it sure needs to be fixed, because since it's been signed into law, health care has not gotten any cheaper. It's gotten more and more and more expensive, and costs have kept going up. So something has to be done. We just can't keep throwing money at it.
BERMAN: What made Republicans nervous, though, because it was a two- year extension of the Obamacare subsidies. It was an income cap, maybe at 700 percent of the poverty level for recipients and a requirement of some kind of premium payment. Someone balked on the Republican side, David?
URBAN: Yes. I mean, presumably, John, right? Presumably Republicans may say, look, we want deeper cuts. We want money to go certain places. There are, you know, I don't -- there are 435 members, right, each one of those. It's like counting, you know, hamsters in a cage.
You think everybody does have an opinion on this, John? There are a lot of tough phrases coming up. A lot of members are going to be on the bubble, especially on this issue, and I think that they want to have some buy-in, have some say before they have to walk a plank on something.
BERMAN: You know, Bakari, there were Democrats who were saying of this plan when the contours were being leaked this morning, maybe it doesn't sound so bad. I mean, what does it tell you that the White House was there maybe earlier and now not there later?
BAKARI SELLERS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: It tells me that those Democrats probably have an election and a tough seat. There's nobody who believes that Republicans know how to fix health care in this country. What Barack Obama did with the Affordable Care Act, we call it Obamacare affectionately, was make sure that he expanded health care coverage for millions of Americans.
Whether or not you were going up to 26 years old, whether or not we were expanding Medicaid in different states, whether or not we were eliminating the ability for insurance companies, and David probably remembers this.
[20:45:06]
But, you know, insurance companies could kick you off or not cover you because of pre-existing conditions. And Barack Obama eliminated all of that. Does it need tweaks? Does it need help? Does it need work? Yes, but we've realized a long time ago, ever since John McCain did the infamous thumbs down, that Republicans don't know how to fix health care.
That is a fact. They've been running on repeal and replace Obamacare for how long? I mean, my kids weren't born. My kids weren't born. Nobody's celebrating their seventh birthday in January. My kids weren't born when Republicans started talking about repeal and replace. I mean, that's how laughable it is.
Does Obamacare need to be fixed? Yes. Does it need to be updated? Yes. Does it need to grow with the times? Of course.
But one of the things you can't do, John and David, is you can't pass the One Big Beautiful Bill and eliminate the subsidies and then say, oh my God, the health care costs are rising. This is why a lot of people had trouble with the government shutdown. This is why, when you look at this in -- with 50,000 foot lenses, you recognize that the Republicans now own this because they're the reason that the costs are actually spiking.
BERMAN: Well, no plan today. I mean, we know --
URBAN: Well --
BERMAN: Hang on, David. Hang on.
URBAN: Yes.
BERMAN: I just want to shift this a little bit because we didn't get the announcement of a plan today. Clearly, the White House thinks or thought that they needed to be in this space, although they backed off. Then late today, we have these Comey and Letitia James decisions, and now we're hearing a whole lot of noise there.
What do you think voters see, right? If they want people to address health care, if they want people to address affordability, but instead what they hear is Comey and Letitia James, is that where they want to focus?
URBAN: No, listen, I don't think that's where they want to focus at all. And just to correct the thing that Bakari said, Republicans didn't do anything in the One Big Beautiful Bill. The Obamacare subsidy sunset.
When -- during the pandemic, when Democrats passed this, they knew they were going to expire. They knew they were going to sunset. So Republicans didn't pull the plug on anything. They just didn't renew it.
Listen, John, clearly, the President got the affordability message. He had a very nice powwow with the mayor-elect of New York. I think many House members who are running in tough seats and many senators who are up, everybody in America, they're hearing it, right?
So the administration -- this current administration is doing a very good job. Inflation is getting under control. Real wages are catching up. But there was a big deficit for the past four years of the Biden administration they left us with, 10 months of the Trump administration, right?
Those number -- those lines are getting closer, right? Real wage increase and inflation are getting closer, but there's still a deficit. People still feel it in their pocketbooks. And that's the thing that the government, writ large, House, Senate, Democrats, Republicans, that's what they should be doing. That's what they're elected to do -- to make people's lives better.
BERMAN: David Urban, Bakari Sellers, happy Thanksgiving week to both of you, my friends.
URBAN: Happy Thanksgiving.
SELLERS: Same with you (ph).
BERMAN: In Washington and beyond the Beltway, there are still shockwaves over the upcoming resignation of Republican Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene. That happens in January. Greene made the surprise announcement online Friday night during this very show.
It's unclear what she'll do next after five years in office. She started as one of the President's staunchest supporters and will leave Congress branded as a traitor by him after the very public falling out.
Jeff Zeleny went to her district in Northwest Georgia to see how voters are reacting.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
DAVID GULDENSCHUH, VICE CHAIRMAN, FLOYD COUNTY REPUBLICAN PARTY: We wanted Marjorie to be Marjorie. We appreciate her. She doesn't blend into the curtains like other people do up in Washington.
JEFF ZELENY, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Like so many others here in Georgia, David Guldenschuh was talking about Marjorie Taylor Greene, and the bombshell announcement she will resign from Congress in January. But unlike most who only talk about her, he knows her well. And after finishing his weekly radio show today, he said three things, above all, explain why she's leaving.
GULDENSCHUH: She may be very, very, very conservative. At the same time, she wants to see things get done. The second factor, I think, was the Charlie Kirk assassination. That had a profound impact on her. And then the third thing, I think, was just the falling out with President Trump.
ZELENY (voice-over): Among friends and foes alike, and there are many of both in her hometown of Rome, Georgia, a sense of disbelief at her decision reverberated from one conversation to another.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: A big surprise.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: A big surprise. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We didn't expect that.
ZELENY (voice-over): Sunny Knauss runs the Sunflour Community Bakery, and had started to reconsider her view of Greene after she stood her ground against President Trump over the release of the Epstein files.
SUNNY KNAUSS, OWNER, SUNFLOUR COMMUNITY BAKERY: I disagreed with a lot of the stuff she did early on in Congress. I applaud her for breaking away from the pack, because that's a really hard thing to do in politics. There's just a handful of people that are brave enough to do that. So I got to hinder that.
ZELENY: Like breaking away from Trump, you mean?
KNAUSS: Right, right. Breaking away from Trump and just standing up.
ZELENY (voice-over): The 14th Congressional District, stretching from Atlanta's suburbs to the Appalachian foothills and Tennessee state line, has long been Trump country, and the congresswoman has long led the loyalty parade.
TRUMP: Come on up, Bunchy. Come on.
REP. MARJORIE TAYLOR GREENE (R), GEORGIA: Thank you, Mr. President.
[20:50:05]
ZELENY (voice-over): All that a distant memory after she criticized the President and he turned on her.
TRUMP: Marjorie Traitor Greene.
ZELENY (voice-over): The remarkable feud that ultimately led to a resignation video on Friday night.
GREENE: I refuse to be a battered wife, hoping it all goes away and gets better.
ZELENY (voice-over): Was still fresh on the minds of many people here today, including these two Greene supporters out for a morning walk.
ZELENY: How was she as a congresswoman from the district?
GREG GARRETT, GEORGIA RESIDENT: Well, I think she represented the people, what they felt. Not everybody felt that way, obviously. I wouldn't have called her a traitor. That's Trump. You know, he -- but he hits back if you hit him.
ZELENY (voice-over): With 42 days now left in her abbreviated term, there was no shortage of opinions about Greene. Radford Bunker was among those expressing regret to be losing their firebrand in Congress.
RADFORD BUNKER, ATTORNEY: I'm sorry that she resigned. I think that she's a thoughtful person. Like I said, I'm just sorry that politics has come to the sort of tribalism where you have to agree with everything on everybody.
ZELENY (voice-over): Others like Virginia McChesney were far closer to saying good riddance.
VIRGINIA MCCHESNEY, RETIRED TEACHER: We, this district, really just want someone who represents us instead of thinks of themselves and tries to promote a political point of view.
ZELENY: Are you sorry to see her go?
MCCHESNEY: Not really. I think we've probably seen more of her as a real person in the past three days than we have ever.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BERMAN: And Jeff Zeleny is with us tonight. Jeff, has Greene said anything about what she'll be doing next after she resigns from Congress?
ZELENY (on-camera): John, she hasn't. She said what she will not be doing, and that is run for president. Why, you may ask? She would even be considering that? Well, there was a Time magazine report over the weekend that said she's considering it, according to friends of hers. She pushed back on that very strongly.
She said she is not considering running for president. She said she laughs at the idea if anyone brings it up. And the reality is that might be a bridge too far, obviously, going from the House to run for president. But the question is, what will she do? And even friends of hers that we talked to here are not sure what she will do.
Of course, there's a governor's race, a Senate race. But for now, at least, she plans to spend a little bit of time at home and go sort of under the radar after January 5th when she leaves Congress. John?
BERMAN: Under the radar and Marjorie Taylor Greene, not phrases that have gone hand in hand for a few years.
Jeff Zeleny, thank you very much.
Up next, what a new feature on X reveals about pro-MAGA accounts that look American but are not.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:57:14]
BERMAN: A big new feature is available on X. Users are now able to see the country of origin where an account is located. And it shows that a lot of accounts dealing with U.S. politics, especially pro-MAGA accounts, are actually posted from foreign countries.
Over the weekend, the head of product at X posted this note. "In a couple of hours, we'll be rolling out about this account globally, allowing you to see the country or region where an account is based. This will be accessible by tapping the sign-up date on profiles. This is an important first step to securing the integrity of the global town square. We plan to provide many more ways for users to verify the authenticity of the content they see on X."
More now from CNN Senior Correspondent Donie O'Sullivan. Great to see you, sir. So what are you learning about the origin of some of these accounts?
DONIE O'SULLIVAN, CNN SENIOR CORRESPONDENT: Yes. Well, all the John Berman fan accounts are based in the United States. You'll be happy to hear, John, they're all legit. But, you know, so often what we've seen, and look, it's been almost 10 years since the whole Russian trolls, 2016 --
BERMAN: Yes.
O'SULLIVAN: -- election, all that sort of stuff. So I think at this point, you know, most of us should at least know that anything on the internet can be fake, right? But oftentimes it is the accounts that purport to be most American that are often not.
I think we have screenshots here of some of those accounts. One called MAGA Nation, which has 400,000 followers. It says it's a proud patriot, actually based in Eastern Europe. The other, American Patriot, 140,000 followers, actually based in Chile.
And look, I mean, these are accounts that are very big. They have big reach. Where I guess this gets a bit problematic is like now on X under Elon Musk, anybody can sort of buy those -- the blue checkmarks. Before that used to mean, you know, the person who was running this account is who they say they are.
Now people, you see on both those accounts, they had those blue marks. So they have hundreds of thousands of followers. So, you know, it does sort of play into this whole thing of like, if you have that reach, you can push out a message. Of course, ultimately, they're still anonymous accounts.
And the reason I think -- we've seen the reporting today that obviously most of the accounts that have been caught up in sort of the virality of this news story are pro-MAGA accounts. I would say that that is probably because overall, more generally these days on X, it is a very much a pro-MAGA platform.
And that's another change that Elon Musk brought in is where accounts now are incentivized to make stuff, post stuff that go viral and get views because they actually make money. They get paid out through advertising dollars on X.
BERMAN: So, Donie, while I have you here, there was an issue with the Department of Homeland Security account?
O'SULLIVAN: Yes. Well, yes. So images started circulating last night over the weekend of the DHS account. People claiming that this new labeling showed that the DHS account was actually based in Israel. That got a lot of people online. There were, believe it or not, a lot of people on X who don't like Israel and don't like Jews. So they got very excited about that. It turned out that that was false. We think possibly a fake screenshot DHS came out today with a statement saying that is false.
Again, just don't trust what you see on the internet, John.
BERMAN: A collision of conspiracies.
Donie O'Sullivan, great to see you tonight. Thank you very much.
The news continues. The Source with Kaitlan Collins starts now.
