Return to Transcripts main page
CNN's The Arena with Kasie Hunt
Now: Trump, Netanyahu Speak After Meeting at Mar-a-Lago; Trump Says "Very Good Talk With Putin" Following Meeting With Ukrainian President Zelenskyy At Mar-a-Lago; Pelosi Predicts Democrats Will Retake House In 2026; Trump: U.S. Struck "Big Facility" As Part of Venezuela Campaign. Aired 4-5p ET
Aired December 29, 2025 - 16:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: That was really where you mentioned that today, which started with Soleimani -- bad guy doing bad things, hurting a lot of people, killing American soldiers and other soldiers.
[16:00:11]
But it started right there, would probably be the starting point. And then from that point forward, but you would -- you have a wartime prime minister at the highest level. There could be other wartime prime ministers, but they'd lose. He won.
And I think the people of Israel appreciate it. I think a lot of the people in the world appreciate it, actually. And because of that victory, we were able to get peace in the Middle East.
If you had a different kind of a personality, if you had a weak person or a stupid person, and there are plenty of both of them, you would not have had success, and you might not have Israel.
And you report for Israel. I know you're very proud of it, and you do a great job. You might not have a job because there might not be an Israel right now if you had a different prime minister. That's a big statement. But to me, it's a very simple statement to make.
I'm looking at Pete Hegseth and he sort of nodding. If they don't have a strong prime minister, Pte, you might not have Israel today. I think he'll go down in the record books.
And, you know, I was a big help. I'll be honest with you. Big, big help. Somebody said in the room, if you don't have Trump, you needed a proper combination of everything. And if you didn't have that combination, which they had, you would not have an existing Israel right now. And the people of Israel know it.
That's why they like me, and it's why they really -- they actually like him. He's got a little bit of a love/hate more than I do over there. But you know what? Even the haters have a lot of respect for him.
There's a lot of jealousy about him, a lot of jealousy. Jealousy is a bad word. But I believe you would not have Israel right now, so it's a big deal.
Yeah. Please?
REPORTER: Mr. President, a recent poll showed that as many as half of Gazans would be willing to leave the Gaza strip if afforded the opportunity to do so. Back in February, you said that all Gazans should be --
TRUMP: I heard that number today. Half of Gaza would leave. I've always said it. I said, if you were given the opportunity to live in a better climate, they would move. They're there because they sort of have to be.
I think it would be -- I think it would be a great opportunity. But let's see if that opportunity presents itself. But we're helping the people of Gaza a lot. So is Israel, by the way. So we'll see what happens.
But I saw that it was a poll. It was actually more than half the people would leave if they were given the opportunity. And I've been saying that for a long time. To me, it was common sense. So it's interesting.
REPORTER: Why wouldn't countries accept them?
TRUMP: Look, let's not talk about it because we don't want the controversy right now. We're helping Gaza. But if they were given the opportunity, I think even higher than that, the person, the group that did the poll is usually, I call them negative pollsters. You have a lot of them.
And yet this poll was, I think, very accurate other than it would be more than half the people if given the opportunity, but they haven't been given that opportunity. So we'll see what happens.
REPORTER: Have you reached a point of understanding regarding Syria?
TRUMP: We do have an understanding regarding Syria now with Syria. You know, your new president. I respect him. He's a very strong guy. And that's what you need in Syria.
You can't put a choir boy. You can't put a, you know, somebody that's a perfect person. Everything's nice. No problems in life.
You have the opposite there. He's a strong guy. We get along with him. Great. I can't ask for anymore. He's been with us all the way. We had that mishap with ISIS, and he was with us all the way. He was fighting us -- you know, he was fighting them.
So, I hope Israel -- I'm sure that Israel and him will get along. I will try and make it so that they do get along. I think they will.
Bibi, do you have anything to say about that?
BENJAMIN NETANYAHU, ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER: Yeah. Well, our interest is to have, a peaceful border with Syria. Our interest is to have -- and we openly say it -- we want to make sure that the border area right next to our border is safe. We don't have terrorists. We don't have attacks.
And we also want to secure our Druze friends. And by the way, I think not only the Druze, but other minorities, especially the Christians, should be protected as well --
TRUMP: Right.
NETANYAHU: -- in Syria and throughout the Middle East and in Nigeria. In your efforts, we back completely because Christian communities are beleaguered around the world and especially in the Middle East, but in parts of Africa, too, and we stand for the same thing.
TRUMP: And don't forget, it was President Erdogan that helped very much get rid of a very bad ruler of Syria that was President Erdogan, and he never wanted the credit for it. But he really gets a lot of credit.
Bibi agrees with that. I agree with -- I mean, I know it and President Erdogan should get a lot of good credit for what he did. He got rid of some very bad people.
[16:05:01]
And, you know, they've been wanting to do that for a thousand years with different names. But for a thousand years in Syria, President Erdogan did it. And we give him a lot of credit. I give him a lot of credit. But I think it's going to work out well between Syria and Israel.
REPORTER: Mr. President, about Lebanon.
TRUMP: Yeah. Go ahead please.
REPORTER: The Lebanese government, so what we saw is not meeting the terms of the cease fire agreement has failed to disarm Hezbollah, actually. In your view, should Israel strike the terrorist organization again?
TRUMP: Well, we're going to see about that. We'll see about it. The Lebanese government is a little bit of a disadvantage if you think of it, with Hezbollah. But Hezbollah has been behaving badly. So, we'll see what happens
(CROSSTALK)
REPORTER: Mr. President, how close are we to another operation of Israel in Iran? You said before the meeting with Netanyahu that you are in support of Israel if the ballistic missile project will take on and also the nuclear weapon. But after the meeting, after what, you know, from the intelligence, how close are we to another war with Iran?
TRUMP: Well, I don't want to say that, but Iran may be behaving badly. It hasn't been confirmed, but if it's confirmed, look, they know the consequences. No consequences will be very powerful. Maybe more powerful than the last time. Yeah.
And Iran should have made a deal the last time. I gave them the option. I said, you can make a deal. Do it. I told them, do it. And they didn't believe me. Now they believe me.
REPORTER: Do you have evidence that Iran is behaving badly? And what do you mean by that?
TRUMP: This is just what we hear. But usually where there's smoke, there's fire. Have you heard the expression?
REPORTER: What do you mean? Related to the nuclear capability?
TRUMP: No, I'm hearing that they're -- not nuclear yet, but maybe nuclear, too. The sites were obliterated, but they're looking at other sites. That's what I've heard. They're looking. So -- it will take a long time. They're not going to go back to where they were, but they have other places they can go. And if they're doing that, they're making a big mistake. Yeah, please. There's no reason for them to do it.
REPORTER: Mr. President -- Mr. President, is the United States currently, open to engaging in bilateral discussions with Tehran. We're hearing reports from numerous countries that there may be some discussions. Is that something you would support or something --
TRUMP: Yeah, I would.
REPORTER: You would support that?
TRUMP: I would, yes.
REPORTER: Right now. Thank you, sir.
TRUMP: I have been, by the way, before the war. I would support that. I said to him, maybe, I said, let's negotiate. And they didn't believe what was going to happen, would happen.
Yes, ma'am?
REPORTER: So, China has been doing naval exercises basically to test encircling Taiwan. Can you explain to us what your knowledge is of that? What do you think about that? Have you had any discussions with China about that?
TRUMP: Well, I have a great relationship with President Xi, and he hasn't told me anything about it. I certainly have seen it, but he hasn't told me anything about it. And I don't believe he's going to be doing it. No, nothing worries me. Nothing.
REPORTER: You said where there's smoke, there's fire, right?
TRUMP: Right.
REPORTER: So if you're encircling, if you're doing naval exercises and air exercises -- TRUMP: They've been doing naval exercises for 20 years in that area,
now people take it a little bit differently. But in fact, larger than they're doing right now. So we'll see. But they've been -- they've been doing that for 20, 25 years.
Yeah?
REPORTER: Mr. President, if you don't see Hamas disarm in that short amount of time you're giving them, can you tell us what the next steps would be?
TRUMP: It would be horrible for them. Horrible, going to be really, really bad for them. And I don't want that to happen. But they made an agreement that they were going to disarm. And you couldn't blame Israel.
By the way, we have other countries that will come in and do it. They said, let us do it for you if they don't. Countries that were with them wanted the deal to be made, agreed that they would disarm. And now if they say they're going to disarm, that's fine. If they say they're not going to disarm, those same countries will go and wipe them out. They don't even need Israel.
You know, we have many countries, 59 countries that are in agreement. This is a real peace in the Middle East. And Hamas is a small part of it, but it's still a part of it. But we have 59 countries that signed on big countries, countries that are outside of the Middle East, as you know the Middle East.
They want to go in and wipe out Hamas. They don't want Israel, they don't need Israel. They want to do it because it's the right thing to do, because they were for the deal based on the fact that Hamas pledged, they swore that they were going to disarm.
Now, if they're not going to disarm, those same countries will wipe out Hamas.
Yeah?
REPORTER: President Trump, do you think that the P.A. should be involved in the day after in Gaza Strip, even in the near future?
And the same question to Prime Minister Netanyahu, do you see a real opportunity that the P.A. will be in Gaza?
TRUMP: Go ahead, Bibi.
NETANYAHU: I think President Trump put clearly the conditions that of reform that he wants to see in the P.A. for them to be involved. And I think he put it very clearly what he wants to see, the kind of real reforms, not just perfunctory reforms, but real reforms, stop pay to slay, change the curriculum in your textbooks. Open up, you know, a different society and a different future.
If they do it -- well, you know, let them -- you know, I think it was clear. TRUMP: Pretty clear.
NETANYAHU: He put -- he put guidelines that, were, by the way, in the Trump plan of 2020. And they were put then in the 20 points. And it's up to them.
TRUMP: Remember this, if we didn't do what we did to Iran just to make the subject just slightly different, you wouldn't have peace in the Middle East. You wouldn't have a deal signed in the Middle East. You wouldn't have a deal because other Arab nations, which are great, great, great people, I know them very well. I know them, they're great people. They wouldn't be able to have agreed to peace in the Middle East, because you would have had a dark cloud hanging over everything. It wouldn't -- it wouldn't have been possible.
So, Iran has been greatly reduced in power prestige. I don't want to use the word humiliation because, you know, they're trying to build up again, but we can't let them build up because if they build up, there can't be peace in the Middle East. It was a mistake, you know, when they wiped out Iraq, Iraq and Iran were about the same power and they fought each other with different names for a thousand years.
And then our country came out and blew up one of those two countries, namely Iraq. And all of a sudden, Iran had the whole Middle East all to itself. But that's not true anymore. That's not true anymore.
REPORTER: Can you tell us something about it? Tell us something about your plan to expand the Abraham Accords. If you can tell us something about your plan to expand Abraham Accords.
TRUMP: Well, the Abraham Accords are a great a great achievement of Jared and everybody. I mean, it was one of the great achievements. They'll be expanded. Countries are already talking about expanding it, and they'll be expanded fairly quickly.
Yeah. Please.
REPORTER: If it's still on the table, the normalization?
TRUMP: Saudi Arabia is great. We have a great leader and friend of mine and a friend of a lot of people, also an enemy of some people, but those people aren't doing so well. Saudi Arabia has been very good as far as I'm concerned. They've done everything that we can ask for.
REPORTER: Normalization with Israel is on the table?
TRUMP: We're getting along great with Israel. They will. And at some point they'll sign the Abraham Accords.
REPORTER: Mr. President --
REPORTER: So one of the big domestic tasks ahead of you is to pick a new chairman for the Fed.
TRUMP: Yeah.
REPORTER: You're -- you've said that you have one favorite, but you're also doing interviews. So --
TRUMP: I do. I didn't change. Yeah, I'll announce them at the right time. There's plenty of time.
REPORTER: Are you -- is there any --
TRUMP: But in the meantime, we're doing numbers that nobody's ever seen. We have $18 trillion coming in. We had a 4.3 percent GDP. They thought it was going to be 2 percent. And that's despite the Democrat shutdown.
Had the shutdown not occurred, we would have had an extra point and a quarter. Think of that. We are doing and also despite the fact that we have a fool at the Federal Reserve, I mean, Biden reappointed him. It's too bad. You would have thought he wouldn't have done that.
But, he's an absolute fool who's building a new Federal Reserve, or he's doing a renovation of a building. Maybe he's up to $4.1 billion to do a renovation of a few very small buildings. It's the highest price in the history of construction. He's spending more money than any building has ever spent per square foot on the renovation of -- as an example, I'm doing a magnificent, big, beautiful ballroom that the country has wanted the White House has wanted for 150 years.
It's a massive job, and it's a tiny fraction of that number. And we're under budget and ahead of schedule. Now, it's bigger than I told you. It's, you know, after realizing we're going to do the inauguration in that building, it's got all bulletproof glass, it's got all drone -- they call it drone free roof. Drones won't touch it. It's a big -- it's a big, beautiful, safe building.
But it's, you know, it's a big project for a tiny fraction of that. We're under budget and ahead of schedule.
[16:15:01]
And they wanted it for 150 years.
Think of it. The Federal Reserve building, two buildings. They're -- they don't know what they're doing. They're -- they're way over budget. I mean, almost -- this was built during the Biden administration.
And I drove by it the other day, and its headed by the head of the Federal Reserve. Too late, you know, too late Powell. Too late because he's always too late with interest rates, except before the election. He was too early because that would have helped.
That was supposed to help get her elected. It had no impact. We won all seven swing states. But no, no, we're thinking about bringing a suit against Powell for incompetence because think of it, these are two -- these are an outstanding buildings. These are small buildings.
These add $4 billion more -- it's going to end up costing more than $4 billion, 4 billion. It's the highest price of construction -- again, Democrats highest price of construction per square foot in the history of the world has never been gorgeous. Monuments are built for a much smaller price.
So, we're thinking about bringing a gross incompetence, what's called gross incompetence lawsuit. It's gross incompetence against Powell. And it was his baby. And, the guy's just incompetent. I mean, there's nothing you can do about it.
He's just very incompetent, man. But we're going to probably bring a lawsuit against him.
Thank you all very much. I appreciate it. Bibi, congratulations.
REPORTER: Question to the prime minister --
REPORTER: When the announcement then on Powell's replacement?
TRUMP: January, sometime.
REPORTER: And will you ask Jay Powell to resign from the board entirely?
TRUMP: A favor to the nation, but he's come close. I mean, we're getting pretty close. I would fire him. I would love to fire him, but we're so close. You know, maybe. But maybe I still might.
REPORTER: Do you sell F-35 to Turkey?
TRUMP: Say it?
REPORTER: Are you going to approve a sale of F-35 to Turkey?
TRUMP: We're thinking about adversaries.
REPORTER: And what prevented --
(CROSSTAK)
TRUMP: They'll never use it --
(CROSSTALK)
TRUMP: I promise they'll never use --
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thank you, press.
TRUMP: Thank you, everybody.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thank you, press.
JIM SCIUTTO, CNN HOST: Hello, everyone, and welcome to THE ARENA. Kasie Hunt is off. I'm Jim Sciutto.
We've been watching there, President Donald Trump, alongside the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, speaking -- following their meeting at Mar-a-Lago. A fair amount of news there. You saw him at the end there criticizing the Fed chair, Jerome Powell, calling him a fool. We should note that President Trump himself appointed him during his first term.
There was other news in his comments. The Israeli prime minister announced that Israel has awarded President Trump the Israel Prize, Trump becoming the first American to be given that honor.
Also, news on Gaza peace deal. President Trump saying that he believes Israel has lived up to its side of the plan. There have been some reporting that Trump had expressed reservations about Israeli military action inside Gaza.
President Trump also vowed to eradicate Iran's nuclear infrastructure if it were to attempt to restart, and the president said multiple times he's hearing of some possible activity, some possible nuclear activity. Finally, he did say regarding Taiwan that he does not believe President Xi Jinping intends to invade. He says, I don't believe he, President Xi, is going to do it.
Our Alayna Treene has been covering, watching monitoring these comments here, covers the White House as well.
Alayna, do we know what the focus of President Trump's meeting with the Israeli prime minister was?
ALAYNA TREENE, CNN WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Well, from my conversations, Jim, and we're still, of course, learning more as its all unfolding in the president weaved a lot during those post bilateral meeting remarks, but the focus was supposed to be on trying to move to the next phase of the ceasefire proposal. I'd remind you that proposal initially began in October. That's when it was struck.
And at this point in time, you know, heading very close into the new year officials in the Trump administration had believed that phase two would already be underway. That is, of course, the disarmament of Hamas. The beginning of reconstruction in the enclave and postwar governance for Gaza.
Now, this is something I found very interesting, that the president talked a lot about heading into that meeting. The president said that he was hopeful that they could begin phase two very quickly, including the reconstruction of Gaza. And then after this meeting, he said essentially that he is going to give Hamas or that Hamas would have a very short amount of time to disarm. Again, that is a key part of phase two. And he said if they did not disarm within that short amount of time that he is stating on that stage that essentially things would be horrible for Hamas, he said that some of the other countries that went into this agreement and backed this agreement would go in and wipe them out.
So, very strong words for Hamas there. Another thing that was very noticeable to me, Jim, was how much praise, not only of course, Netanyahu was heaping on President Trump.
[16:20:00]
But the amount of praise that Trump was giving to Bibi -- at one point, he said that Israel has lived up to the plan, referring to the ceasefire plan, 100 percent. That is notable because and a lot of the conversations I've had with people in the administration, many of the advisors working on this deal, there's been some skepticism that perhaps Netanyahu has actually been slow walking phase two of this proposal, that essentially he wasn't entirely invested in the longer term peace plan. So that was very notable to me. He said that Israel essentially may not exist if they did not have such a strong prime minister like Netanyahu.
Part of the reason that's such music to his ears, to Netanyahu's ears, of course, is that he has elections coming up in 2026. And so, part of the goal for the Israelis and for Netanyahu specifically today was to really ensure that he has the full backing of Trump. And Trump got out there and did exactly what he wanted him to do, which was give him that type of support and praise.
SCIUTTO: Yeah, and one example of that is Trump's support for a pardon for Benjamin Netanyahu potentially being considered by the Israeli president.
Alayna Treene, thanks so much.
My panel is here with me, Evelyn Farkas, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for Russia, Ukraine and Eurasia, CNN political analyst. Jonah Goldberg, co-founder and editor in chief of "The Dispatch". Plus, Meghan Hays, former director of message planning for the Biden White House. And Bryan Lanza, former senior adviser to Donald Trump's 2024 campaign.
Good to have you all here.
And there's much to go through from -- from those few minutes that president was speaking alongside the Israeli leader, Evelyn, first to you, the president said multiple times, we have peace in the Middle East. He said that before. What we have, in fact, is a ceasefire.
Where does it stand in terms of moving to the next phase? Arguably the more difficult phase of the peace plan, including issues like disarming Hamas?
EVELYN FARKAS, FORMER DEPUTY ASSISTANT DEFENSE SECRETARY FOR RUSSIA, UKRAINE, EURASIA: Yeah. I mean, so first of all, Jim, they have to set up this peace council, which is kind of the political oversight, and we haven't really heard very much about that.
Remember, President Trump said, I'm going to be the head of it. And we know that his advisers -- so Witkoff and Kushner -- have been in the region, have been talking about it. Presumably, it includes all the actors in the region and the broader region, Turkey, obviously, Egypt and others.
But the big sticking point is that we still don't have an interim security force. Yes. You know, Ambassador Mike Waltz has been effective in the U.N. He got them to essentially authorize this security force. But we don't have countries and significant countries with real military experience coming forward to say we want to be part of this. They -- we've heard about Azerbaijan, Indonesia, Egypt, a couple of
other countries. But I think unless Israel and the United States are pushing, you know, the Arab community to say we need real security forces, that's not going to happen.
So, there is some kind of foot dragging on top of what Israel is doing on the ground.
SCIUTTO: It's an enormous risk to put your forces at on the ground there in the midst of fighting in Gaza, attempt to disarm Hamas and perhaps quite understandably, a lot of nations in the area. And by the way, the U.S. as well, but not willing to do so.
Bryan, on the on the Iran topic, if I can, because the president made quite clear that if -- what he's hearing is notable, perhaps it was an intelligence assessment about attempts at Iran resurrecting its nuclear program. The president said, if they are, we're going to have no choice but to eradicate. Can we take the president at his word there that he might order strikes again, if that's -- if it does turn out to be true?
BRYAN LANZA, SENIOR ADVISER, TRUMP 2024 CAMPAIGN: I think it's pretty clear we have to take the president's word. He's not afraid to challenge Iran. He's confronted him in his first term. He's confronted him in his second term. He clearly sees them as an axis of destabilization in the region.
And he has to address it. And he, you know, he what makes him different, at least, you know, the interactions that I've had with other presidents, whether it's for good or bad, is the fact that he is this business guy and business guys and the business community. They always run towards problems, and they try to solve it. Whereas you got politicians always looking to kick cans down the road and not and push it onto somebody else.
He actually wants to solve this issue. You saw the investment in the first term. You're going to see it again. You're going to see more of it. And it's a risk. It's a huge risk. But he's clear that he is not going to allow a nuclear Iran.
SCIUTTO: Jonah, I mean, the circumstances of the strikes he ordered a number of months ago were quite particular in that Israel had already essentially eliminated all of Iran's air defenses. So, while that was a complicated and let's acknowledge the service of the American service members who were involved in that operation, it was not the same as going in there and being, in effect, the first to strike.
If the president were to order this again, would the circumstances be similar or would this be a higher risk operation?
JONAH GOLDBERG, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I can't imagine -- I would be hard pressed to imagine that it would just be like a light switch, and they would just turn, okay, tomorrow we're going to go attack Iran. It would probably be unfolded, you know, with cooperation with the Israelis and other people in the region. I -- I have a slightly different take on Trump, the problem solver who
runs towards fixing problems. I mean, it's been 11 years of two weeks for the Obamacare fix from Donald Trump. I think that the likelihood of him doing Iran strike, which I supported.
[16:25:02]
It was the right thing to do. I'm glad he did it -- is that it was also probably the high water mark of his presidency in a lot of people's eyes. And he likes to double down on previous wins if he thinks he can do it again. And I think that it's -- it's in his, in his, his own perceived political self-interest to make sure that that this was not for naught.
And so that's why I think he'd do it. But the actual circumstances, I think you probably have a lot of coordination. It's not like Bibi Netanyahu is going to say, no, no, no, don't go in again. Right? So, it would have to be developed.
SCIUTTO: But, Meghan Hays, there was some reporting prior to this meeting today that actually Trump was not that excited about meeting the Israeli prime minister. And there has, to Alayna's point, there's been CNN reporting and others that the Trump administration and Trump himself were frustrated by, foot dragging by Netanyahu on the next phases of the peace plan.
What is the actual state of the relationship between the two men, despite the goodwill? And by the way, the second, I think, non-Nobel Peace Prize Award president has now received after FIFA, he has the Israel Prize from the prime minister?
MEGHAN HAYS, FORMER DIRECTOR OF MESSAGE PLANNING, BIDEN WHITE HOUSE: Yeah, just based off some of the reporting, I think that Bibi had one mission here and that was to get Trump on his side and for him to say things about him publicly, as you mentioned, for his upcoming election. There was reporting that Netanyahu is not super happy with Jared Kushner and Witkoff and how the negotiations are going. So, he wanted to meet with Trump and he wanted to get his input, and he wanted to change his mind on how he is dragging his feet, or at least plead his case to him. So, we'll see if it works.
You know, what he says publicly is not always what he does in theory or in action reality. So, I think that we'll just have to wait and see how this all plays out.
SCIUTTO: All right, panel, stay with me.
Evelyn Farkas, thanks so much for joining us.
I'm going to ask the rest of the panel to stick around.
Coming up in THE ARENA, Congressman Don Bacon will join me. What does he make of President Trump's meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy over the weekend? And just the latest instance of Trump once again siding, it seems, with the Russian president, Vladimir Putin. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: And I learned about it from President Putin today. I was very angry about it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:31:26]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: Russia is going to be helping. Russia wants to see Ukraine succeed. Once it sounds a little strange, but I was explaining to the president, President Putin was very generous in his feeling toward Ukraine, succeeding, including supplying energy, electricity and other things at very low prices.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCIUTTO: President Trump there claiming this weekend that President Putin wants Ukraine to succeed. Of course, the same Russia that has invaded Ukraine twice. His meeting with Benjamin Netanyahu, not the only foreign policy meeting this weekend after hosting the Ukrainian President Zelenskyy at Mar-a-Lago yesterday, he held a phone call with the Russian president, Vladimir Putin this morning, one that he described as, quote, a very good talk. Is peace really any closer?
Here's President Trump today.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: We have a few very thorny issues. As you can imagine. He knows about thorny issues probably better than anybody in the world. But it's working out. We have a couple of issues that we're going to get resolved hopefully. And if we get them resolved, you're going to have peace.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCIUTTO: Joining me now, Republican Congressman Don Bacon, who sits on the House Armed Services Committee.
He joins me now.
Congressman, thanks so much for taking the time.
REP. DON BACON (R-NE): Thank you, Jim.
SCIUTTO: So, first to you, President Trump says Vladimir Putin wants Ukraine to succeed. What's your response?
BACON: Well, he says it's very strange. And it is because it's not true. It's clear that Russia wants to dominate Ukraine. They want a vassal state. And if you were Ukraine, would you want to rely on Russia for your energy and electricity? No way they would hold it. They would hold it over the Ukrainians the whole the whole time.
Now, there's no doubt that Putin wants to make Ukraine a vassal state. He wants to restore the old glory of Russia. He looks down upon the Ukrainians.
And, you know, it's interesting. I've met Zelensky, I've read his books, I've read stuff about him. He never thought Putin was dumb enough to invade Russia to begin with. He was a surprised as anybody.
So, this is -- this is not a Ukrainian fault at all. This is all on Russia and the and the only, the only way to really stop this war is to stop Russia's invasion. I hate to say it that way.
SCIUTTO: You heard the president there say there are thorny issues that remain. Perhaps an understatement, given that one of those thorny issues is the question of land concession. In effect, how much of its own sovereign territory is Ukraine pressured to give up in order to make peace? Do you believe that Ukraine should agree to give up any territory to achieve peace?
BACON: You know, I would have to leave that to the Ukrainians if they want to stop this war. I could see some willingness, maybe at some of the territory that was already taken, perhaps. But that's up to the Ukrainians.
I think it's very wrong for the United States, though, to be pressuring Zelenskyy that Ukraine to give up territory. What it does is it rewards the invader. And if you if you do this with Russia here, what will Russia do with Azerbaijan? What will they do with Georgia? What will they do with the Baltics?
And Russia -- and Russia is clearly a threat, and they're acting that way. I mean, let's, just take -- take Ukraine off the table right now. Putin and his army as military has shot down two different airliners. They're severing underground cables. They've assassinated people in Europe.
Theres a whole litany of things that is going on under Putin, and he is a threat. And I don't understand how this president is so blind to who Putin is. I watched this whole stuff with Netanyahu.
On one hand, President Trump has done a great job, I think, with Israel and Iran, but he's been absolutely bad on Ukraine. There's a moral blindness here. There's a moral ambiguity. I do not get it.
And that's why I'm very vocal, because this will go down in the history books. I want America to be on the right side of this, and I want to be on the right side of it. And I hope the president sees he's going down as a Chamberlain, not as a Churchill when it comes to this particular war.
SCIUTTO: And we should note that as the president was saying those words this weekend, Russia continued to bomb Ukrainian cities and many civilians paid with it with -- their paid for it with their lives.
I do want to go to another field of play, and that is Venezuela. Last week, Trump, somewhat cryptically announced a military strike on Venezuela, and today, he doubled down a bit and even provided a little more information, saying it was on an implementation area. Perhaps related to the drug, to the drug trade.
I mean, is it possible that U.S. military action against Venezuela on the ground has already begun, and that the president was revealing some sort of covert operation?
BACON: Jim, I guess it's possible. I'm surprised that Venezuela hasn't publicized any strikes. It -- try to read between the lines. It sounds like we may have targeted like a port facility or transshipment facility where the drugs would be -- you know, put on the boats. But I'm just reading into what is being said.
You know, I people ask me what's going on in Venezuela. I really don't know. The president and his team have said very little about Venezuela itself, though they've been very clear about targeting these drug boats. So, we have clear information there.
But threatening Venezuela itself is they've been very cryptic and very. I would say unclear with what they're trying to do there. And that's why I voted for the war powers resolution. I, I could support operations against boats, the drug boats, but I think the president has to make a case to the American people, to Congress on what were doing in Venezuela.
And I believe it should come with an authorization or if we vote against it, no authorization. I believe it's in our Constitution. And I believe that check and balance. And I believe it's what the founders wanted us to have.
SCIUTTO: Well, and as you know, a good quarter of the U.S. Navy is now positioned in the Caribbean. Question is, to what end?
Representative Don Bacon, we wish you and your family a very happy holidays.
BACON: Thank you. You, too.
SCIUTTO: Coming up next in THE ARENA, can the Democrats win big in 2026? Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, she's bullish ahead. More on why she believes Democrats will retake the House.
Plus, a major escalation in President Trump's campaign against the Venezuelan government. The U.S. now striking not just boats, but as we just mentioned, a target on land.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: There was a major explosion in the dock area where they load the boats up with drugs. They load the boats up with drugs. So, we hit all the boats and now we hit the area. It's a implementation area.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) [16:42:43]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JONATHAN KARL, ABC NEWS ANCHOR: So, if the Democrats win the House back --
REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA): Yeah. No, no. When -- when the Democrats win the house back, then they will.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCIUTTO: That was former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, of course, defiantly predicting that Democrats will retake the House in 2026 after their shellacking in last year's election.
Pelosi, who is retiring next year after nearly four decades in Congress, is also standing firmly behind her successor, Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, as the next speaker of the House should Democrats succeed.
But with a year marked by constant infighting, can Democrats unite their coalition? Can they convince voters they provide the best way forward?
My panel is back. We're joined as well by CNN legal analyst and former federal prosecutor Elliot Williams.
So, Meghan, Nancy Pelosi is confident. But she's not alone. A lot of folks see the trend lines in the special elections have trended towards Democrats. But of course, midterms different from a special election. Are you as confident as she is?
HAYS: Yes.
SCIUTTO: Tell me, why are.
HAYS: Well, I think that Democrats have I do think that they have gotten their coalition together. I think the affordability message has really worked for Democrats, and they all seem to be singing from the same songbook, whether they're progressive or whether they're moderate Democrats. So, I think that is one thing in their favor.
The polling is also suggesting that more people want Democrats in control of Congress than Republicans. And I think that has a lot to do with how they are. The congress right now is behaving towards Trump.
No one is checking him. And I think people want to see that check. And so that means that they need to switch power. And so Democrats will take over the House.
SCIUTTO: Bryan, I wonder -- I'm asking you the question somewhat differently. Do you agree? But an addendum to that question is this because Republicans are showing a willingness to challenge Trump more perhaps reading the same polls. But do you think Pelosi's confidence is misplaced? LANZA: No. Listen, I think we knew after the election in November that
that we were going to have a very hard time with respect to the House of Representatives. Historical trends are what they are. You know, it's not in the history of the party in power to hold on to the House during that moment. And that's just -- that's just where the reality is.
You know, we also knew that the economy is going to play a big role in any decision making process. We you know, the Republican Party has to -- probably July of this year to come up with a strong economic message that can help them through November, because that's when voters make the decision on the economy. And, you know, there are some components that are good about the economy, and there are some components that are very difficult.
I think what Trump needs to do to change the trends is to make sure that companies are hiring people that that economy is flowing in that direction. And you can have a strong case for the midterms.
But I think independent of a strong economy, it's just going to be a tough -- it was always going to be a tough haul.
ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: I think it's beyond tough. It's sort of if you look at the last like 20 midterm elections, you really have only 1998 and 2002. One of them the country being at war and one of them having followed the Bill Clinton's party in power, having lost like 60 seats in the election before that.
The headwinds are so great against Republicans. To Meghan's point, it doesn't' matter to some extent how great Democrats are if their message is winning. Just history is such a guide here, but --
SCIUTTO: Okay, but let me but let me throw some numbers.
LANZA: Let me add, it's not going to be the wave that we saw Pelosi took over in 2020.
WILLIAMS: No, I agree with you on that.
LANZA: You had redistricting that's going to sort of make that not be the big wave. So we'll see what it looks like.
WILLIAMS: Yeah. No, it's like we are not in an era where a party is going to pick up 50 or 60 seats like we've seen in the past.
SCIUTTO: Okay. So, let's look at some data, because a recent Quinnipiac University poll shows that only 18 percent of voters approve of the way Democrats in Congress are handling their job. That's low. And I should note, Jonah Goldberg, that 35 percent still not a great number, but 35 percent of voters say GOP members of Congress are doing a good job. And that should those numbers take away some of that Democratic confidence?
GOLDBERG: Look, I think the Democrats should run as if they're ten points behind, right? And so, the cockiness from Nancy Pelosi makes some people a little nervous. That said, the biggest source of discontent among Democrats about
Democrats is that they're not fighting Trump hard enough. So, like in an era of negative polarization, Democrats are going to crawl over broken glass to vote against Trump. The real issue is where the independents are.
And I think the administration misread their mandate, and the electorate, the all those Hispanics and young black and working class, non-college-educated people who voted out of nostalgia for the pre- COVID economy of the first Trump term, they didn't vote for the full MAGA agenda. They voted on this affordability and affordability adjacent stuff.
And, there's really solid evidence that those swing voters have swung back towards Democrats.
SCIUTTO: Yeah. You definitely saw that in the Virginia and New Jersey numbers.
And, listen, members of the Latino community, we've interviewed them on CNN have said they did not expect or vote for members of their community to be dragged off the street by masked officers.
Let me ask you this, Meghan Hayes, because to the -- to Jonah's point, Democratic voters want leadership and action. And perhaps hearing that message, we've seen several Democrats cast themselves as kind of the new disrupters of Washington.
Have a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. CHRIS MURPHY (D-CT): We have become the party of the status quo.
PETE BUTTIGIEG, FORMER TRANSPORTATION SECRETARY: We can't be wedded to the old ways or the status quo.
SEN. ELISSA SLOTKIN (D-MI): I think the Democratic Party should be leading instead of just saying no, no, no, status quo, status quo, don't change.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCIUTTO: So that they've identified the problem. Have they -- have they figured out a solution? And do you see folks that are -- that have figured out that message?
HAYS: I don't think that we figured out the solution 100 percent. I think that part of this is sort of to your point, no party is going to have a mandate, and we are going to have to work across lines to get some of these affordability issues accomplished in the next year just for the simple, greater good of for America. So, I do think that Democrats need to work towards that, and they are working towards that.
But I don't know that we have any leader that's rising up. That's going to be the magical person like an Obama was. But I do think that there's a lot of people that are making a lot of noise online, and then there are people who are doing things in Congress and getting things done and working across lines to raise some of these affordability issues.
SCIUTTO: Before we go, one name Democrat who you think is selling the right message right now, Bryan Lanza?
LANZA: If we're going fighting, probably Gavin Newsom from California.
SCIUTTO: Meghan?
HAYS: I agree with you or Shapiro.
SCIUTTO: Or Shapiro.
GOLDBERG: Yeah, I'm going to be the skunk at the garden party, Rahm Emanuel. Rahm Emanuel, the guy willing to pick fights with the base of his own party.
WILLIAMS: Elissa Slotkin, who you showed there, is also picking fights.
SCIUTTO: There's some -- there's some -- there's some ideas out there.
Thanks so much to the panel. Stay with us.
Coming up on THE ARENA, a major escalation in President Trump's campaign against Venezuela. The U.S. has now conducted a strike on what President Trump calls a big facility related to drugs. What exactly that could mean and what it means might come next, coming up.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REPORTER: The facility taken out by the U.S. military, or was it another entity like the CIA?
TRUMP: Well, I don't want to say that. I know exactly who it was, but I don't want to say who it was. But, you know, it was along the shore.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:53:53]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: There was a major explosion in the dock area, where they load the boats up with drugs. They load the boats up with drugs. So, we hit all the boats and now we hit the area at sea implementation area. That's where they implement. And that is no longer around.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCIUTTO: President Trump offering the first details on what appears to be a major escalation in his ongoing pressure campaign against the Venezuelan government. After teasing the news on Friday that the U.S. had launched a strike on land.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: And we just knocked out. I don't know if you read or you saw they have a big plant or a big facility where they send, you know, where the ships come from. Two nights ago, we knocked that out. So, we hit them very hard
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCIUTTO: CNN senior military analyst and former NATO supreme allied commander, retired Admiral James Stavridis, joins us now in the in THE ARENA.
Thanks so much for joining.
JAMES STAVRIDIS, CNN SENIOR MILITARY ANALYST: My pleasure, Jim.
SCIUTTO: So, is it your read that the president revealed a covert operation?
STAVRIDIS: Kind of looks that way when you don't hear anything from the Department of Defense and something blows up to the advantage of the United States, you tend to think, covert, CIA.
[16:55:08]
But look, I don't know. You don't know. There are eight people who I really hope know, and those would be the heads of the big defense and intelligence committees in Congress, the so-called Gang of Eight. You know them well. Hopefully, they were briefed. They know what's going on.
But the fact that it was not sort of led out of the Pentagon tells me probably CIA what's called Title 50 operations as opposed to Title 10 Department of Defense combat operations.
SCIUTTO: Would that have likely included boots on the ground to carry out such an operation? Because that would be -- there had been a fair amount of talk of airstrikes and in terms of danger to U.S. forces involved, obviously, that personnel on the ground would be a significant step.
STAVRIDIS: It sounds to me like it could have been one of two things. One is it could have been a drone operation. We certainly have that capability in the region. That's kind of in between. The manned strike coming off USS Ford or boots on the ground.
I don't think it came off the carrier. Just a gut feeling. Given the pinpoint accuracy, the lack of any announcement from the Pentagon. So that leaves you, generally speaking, with a drone, potentially it could be a tomahawk, but boy, those are hard to kind of hide.
So, I'm thinking a drone. Could it have been boots on the ground? It's possible. That's what CIA does. They do it quite effectively.
But we don't know. Again, not a problem that you and I don't know, as long as the Congress is aware of what's going on.
SCIUTTO: And we've certainly seen in Ukraine a lot of quite successful. Stand back drone operations against Russian positions. If so, let's say a strike has taken place. The president has said as much. Is this the beginning, in your view? Your best read of a major military operation? Or should we more likely consider this in the category of the president ratcheting up the pressure and just hoping Maduro leaves of his own accord?
STAVRIDIS: Jim, it's the latter. And I think that almost without doubt, you've seen this kind of very consistent raising of the vertical ladder of escalation, starting with small boat attacks, then escalating to the tanker seizures. Now escalating to a series of I think it'll end up being a series of strikes ashore. And I think they'll be exactly, as the president said, directed against, narcotics targets.
He mentioned implementation facility. Kind of unclear exactly. I would guess it's a transshipment point, a place where trucks come in. The drugs are broken down into, if you will, bite size, or in this case, boat sized portions loaded onto small boats and then launched out to sea, a pure guess on my part.
But if you're sitting in the White House now, you're thinking, okay, I'm doing these pinpoint strikes, either by drone, maybe I have some boots on the ground. CIA, who knows? The next step, Jim, would be as we as we say in the navy, kind of launch them and you send something big coming off the deck of the aircraft carrier.
Now you've got real capacity to go after major installations, the military of Venezuela. And then the highest point in that letter of escalation, Jim, would be to go after the leadership targets themselves, to go after Maduro and his inner circle. We've still got a ways to go until we get there.
SCIUTTO: I don't have to tell you that the U.S. track record for forcing bad leaders out of power is not great, and Trump is not the first president to want to see someone go. We saw the Iraq war, but there are a whole host of other attempts that didn't work out as planned.
Based on your strategic analysis, is this an achievable goal?
STAVRIDIS: I think it is. I think you're right to categorize it as doesn't always work out. I can equally and you remember well point to the Balkans, where we took out Milosevic, the gang leader, if you will, of Serbia. He's -- he went ended up going to the International Criminal Court. We certainly got rid of Manuel Noriega.
So, there are counter-examples to that, "Hey, we always fail at this rubric," which I don't agree with.
In this particular case, I think there is a reasonable chance of success, particularly less about maduro deciding to go and more about his inner circle, saying, why are we carrying this guy along? And I think if, if, if that keeps up, it'll be those senior military around him who force him to take a deal and get out of the country.
SCIUTTO: I suppose you could add to the list, Bashar al-Assad, not from U.S. pressure, but from pressure inside his own country.
Admiral James Stavridis, thanks so much for joining us.
And thanks as well to my panel for sticking around.
Phil Mattingly is standing by for "THE LEAD".
Phil, look forward to the show.
