Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Trump Claims U.S. Authority To Take Gaza; Deadly Accident After Jet Crashes Into Parked Plane; Judges Repeatedly Block Trump's Plans To Upend Government. Aired 2-2:30p ET

Aired February 11, 2025 - 14:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:01:41]

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: President Trump's government overhaul running into some legal roadblocks. His aggressive efforts proving to be a major test for the rule of law. How judges are now standing up to the White House and his administration's response.

Plus, President Trump meeting with Jordan's King Abdullah and repeating his previous vows about Gaza, saying the U.S. has the authority to take the territory.

And a deadly accident in Scottsdale, Arizona, a small business jet hitting a parked plane. Questions now about the jet, which is owned by Motley Crue's frontman. We're following these major developing stories and many more all coming in right here to CNN News Central.

SANCHEZ: Right now, we're seeing a major test to the rule law as federal judges continue blocking President Trump's plans to overhaul the government. In a new social media post, Trump claims that DOGE, the Department of Government Efficiency, found billions in waste and fraud. He then calls out activists and highly political judges who he says are slowing the momentum of his administration. Over the past week, courts have moved to halt Trump's efforts to end birthright citizenship, freeze federal funding, cut government agencies, and forcibly shrink the federal workforce.

Meantime, there are new questions about potential conflicts of interest at the Justice Department, as a number of officials who previously worked on Trump related cases are now tasked with investigating those who tried to prosecute him. CNN's Katelyn Polantz and Evan Perez are here with their new reporting. Kaitlan, how is the Trump administration responding to these court orders?

KATELYN POLANTZ, CNN CRIME AND JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Well, they're fighting, and they're trying to appeal as fast as possible. But Trump is complaining about judges coming in and essentially putting on pause things that the Trump administration has done on many, many different fronts. Policy fronts, his reductions to the federal workforce, his efforts to curtail funding.

And the judges are saying, let's keep the status quo and just make sure that what the administration is doing here is legal. We don't know yet what the courts will ultimately decide. These are the things that could maybe even go to the Supreme Court.

But one area, Boris that is really a third rail that has evolved in the last two days is judges piping up around health care. There was a nationwide injunction last night, right before midnight, where a judge said, you can't cut federal funding to all of the research and academic groups and health care, health system administrations across the country. That was something the National Institutes of Health wanted to do. They wanted to reduce federal funding. That can't be done. And so that moved very quickly in court.

And then just today, we saw a judge say, hey, if the administration is taking down health care data from its websites, you can't do that. Put that back up. Because that's the sort of thing the judge says hurts everyday Americans and most acutely, underprivileged Americans seeking health care. So all of these cases are going to be moving forward in different ways, but the judges are stepping in quite quickly.

SANCHEZ: Yeah. To your point about health care, one of the doctors who provided testimony for one of these lawsuits argued that lives, American lives, would be lost as a result of these moves.

[14:05:08]

What's next up for Trump in court?

POLANTZ: Well, what Trump is going to want to do in court is argue with the Justice Department as the lawyers representing all the agencies in court, that the President should be able to do what he wants. He's the Head of the Executive Branch.

And they've even tried to say that a couple times in court so far that his actions shouldn't be reviewable by court. And also he should have this power. We're going to hear that over and over again as the separation of powers fights continue.

The other thing that's going to happen is Trump politically is going to be out there and saying its Democratic states that are suing to stop these things, and its Democratic appointed judges in the federal system who are stopping my policies. Although that's not true. There are just judges, even once appointed by Trump himself that had put a hold on things that he wanted to do.

SANCHEZ: And, Evan, turning to this battle brewing at the Department of Justice, it's really interesting because there's this review by the DOJ of the FBI and these folks that worked on January 6th related cases. But some of the folks that actually at least one person I'm thinking of who helped prosecute those cases is now reviewing the work of the agents that he directed to prosecute them.

EVAN PEREZ, CNN SENIOR JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Right. I think a lot of the attention is focused on Emil Bove, who is the acting deputy attorney general. And, you know, with good reason, he is now one of the powerful people in the government. But, you know, he's not alone. Pam Bondi is obviously someone who filed a brief in a pro Trump case. You have Todd Blanche, who's about to become the deputy attorney general, John Sauer, the also -- and then Ed Martin, who is the acting U.S. attorney in D.C. who represented defendants in January 6th.

In the case of Bove, though, there's a, you know, I talked to some of his former colleagues who are very surprised at his role here in part because, you know, after January 6th, he helped lead the effort in New York. He was a lawyer at the Southern District of New York. And he pushed for agents and prosecutors to be involved in these cases, helped approve some of the legal process. So for him to now be part of this weaponization group that is reviewing these cases seems like a bit of a conflict of interest.

SANCHEZ: I highly doubt --

PEREZ: (Inaudible) appearance.

SANCHEZ: Yeah, I highly doubt that his work on those January six cases is going to be reviewed as part of this. And Evan, we're learning that the new DOJ's leadership, their relationship with Trump has caused some tensions within the department. Tell us about that.

PEREZ: Well, yeah, I mean, obviously in some of the meetings behind the scenes, some of people like Bove, for instance, have raised that their orders are coming directly from people in the White House, people like Stephen Miller. And so you're now seeing congressional Democrats are raising this. They're getting complaints from inside the Justice Department, which are lawyers and agents who are complaining, saying, you know, this is causing problems for the work that we're trying to do.

SANCHEZ: Evan and Katelyn, thank you both. Appreciate the reporting.

We have a lot to talk about. Let's get right to it with CNN Senior Legal Analyst Elie Honig, he's a Former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, also a Former Federal Prosecutor. Elie, thanks so much for being with us this afternoon. Let's start with this weaponization working group. Do you think those who worked on January six related cases have an obligation to recuse themselves from this review effort?

ELIE HONIG, FORMER ASST. U.S. ATTORNEY, SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NY: Absolutely, yes. 100%, Boris. If the law schools were looking for a chance to update the textbooks on recusal, this is it. I mean, you cannot first serve as a criminal defense attorney on a case as Todd Blanche, Emil Bove, John Sauer, all of whom are now high ranking DOJ officials did for Donald Trump and then work on a group investigating the prosecution of that. The conflict of interest is so clear I hardly need to spell it out.

And by the way, if they do not recuse themselves, they're going to undermine whatever the ultimate findings are of this group. I mean, if this group comes back, as I suspect they will, and say there were all sorts of problems with the prosecution, well, you have the former defense lawyers who are running or overseeing that investigation. So the best thing for them to do in order to protect that investigation itself would be to recuse themselves.

And by the way, Evan had another piece of really interesting reporting right there that I want to comment on. I think it's a good sign that those same people I just mentioned, Emil Bove, are pushing back against the White House. They are correctly saying we should not be getting any orders, any instructions from Stephen Miller or anybody at the White House. So I think what you're seeing there is some of their SDNY credentials kicking in and they're rightly pushing back against having really any communication with the White House.

SANCHEZ: As we noted a moment ago with Katelyn, the courts are intervening to pause or block a number of the administration's efforts that would radically transform the federal government. And yesterday, Judge O'Toole, again, extended the deadline for federal workers to accept this deferred resignation offer. I wonder how you see this playing out.

HONIG: Well, I think that hold is likely to stay in place, potentially all the way up to the Supreme Court.

[14:10:04]

Whenever we're looking at these legal disputes over spending, can the President freeze or withhold spending? The first thing to start with is, that's generally speaking Congress is power. It's Article 1 of the Constitution. The very first enumerated power given to Congress is the power to tax and spend.

Now, that doesn't mean the President cannot do anything. There's times when Congress builds in some discretion, builds in some wiggle room. So there are places where the President can make spending decisions. But by and large, if we're talking about large scale spending decisions, are we going to pay 60,000 plus federal employees, seven months of benefits? Right now, you're going to run into a real separation of powers problem because that's fundamentally Congress's power.

SANCHEZ: It's also problematic because that's money that Congress hasn't actually allocated yet. We're waiting for this showdown in March to figure out government spending. So it's unclear that these workers would actually wind up getting paid. Quickly, Elie, you have a piece out today on DOJ's push to drop the federal corruption case against the mayor of New York City, Eric Adams. What was your reaction?

HONIG: I want to make sure people understand just how unusual this is. I mean, this isn't unusual. This is something -- this isn't something that happens now and then. This is completely unprecedented to have a case where new management comes into DOJ orders the SDNY, my former office, to dismiss a case that's already been indicted by a grand jury and offers zero reason for it. The reason they say this has nothing to do with the quality of the proof or the actual case against Eric Adams.

The reasons that DOJ offers for this are preposterous. First they just say, well, the whole case was political. They offer zero support for that. And then they say, well, you can't charge Eric Adams because he's busy being the mayor of New York City. Take that logic. I mean, that would apply to ban any indictment of any public official from President to dog catcher, ever. So this is a major problem. I think it's an injustice, obviously, with respect to Eric Adams, but I also think it forebodes worse things to come.

SANCHEZ: Yeah, it was really surprising. Elie Honig, appreciate you joining us. Thanks.

HONIG: Thanks, Boris.

SANCHEZ: Republicans appear to be in lockstep with Donald Trump as he moves to overhaul the federal government. We had House Speaker Mike Johnson pointing to the Super Bowl as a measure of just how popular the President is. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. MIKE JOHNSON, (R) HOUSE SPEAKER: As you saw when they put his image up on the Jumbotron, the place went crazy. There was a lot of excitement, enthusiasm about President Trump and about, I would say, the House Republicans in Congress. We were cheered on Bourbon Street. You know, there's something happening out there.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: Behind the scenes, though, we're told that some Republican lawmakers are growing concerned about Trump's attempt to usurp Congress, and they're beginning to take action, testing waters for what a new era of pushback and a second Trump term might look like. We're joined now by CNN's Harry Enten. Harry, thanks so much for being with us.

Speaker Johnson sees enthusiasm based on folks cheering at the Super Bowl and on Bourbon Street. But some Republican lawmakers are fielding this deluge of calls from constituents who are worried. What have you seen in the numbers about how voters are really feeling about these executive orders and the idea that Trump might just ignore the courts?

HARRY ENTEN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL DATA REPORTER: Yeah, Boris, there's -- first off, let's just say there was a lot in that introduction, by goodness gracious, and a whole lot, and everything just feels very unusual these days. But, you know, you're talking about these executive orders, right? So I want to, you know, there are some that are popular, but I want to point out a few that the American people are against and also that the U.S. courts have said, hold on, wait a second, let's see exactly where we are right now.

So against some of Trump's executive orders. Look at this. Ending birthright citizenship, 59%, the overwhelming majority of Americans are against it. How about temporarily freezing federal funding on U.S. services? Again, the clear majority, 62%, more than 3/5 of the country is against it. And more than that, about a third of Republicans are against both of these. So even the Republican Party, while most Republicans are formed, there's a sizable minority who are against these different policies.

Now, of course, what about the idea that Trump might just say, you know what, screw the courts. I'm not sure that that would be the most shocking thing to the American public. Why don't I think it would be the most shocking thing to the American public? Because the Pew Research Center asked, okay, does Trump respect U.S. democratic values?

Get this, only 31%, less than a third of all Americans say, yes, they're quite confident. Compare that to, get this, the majority who say they're not confident. And this, 31%, Boris, this includes, get this, just 60% of Republicans. So there are a number of executive orders that the courts have stopped that Americans, simply put, don't want put into action. But I don't think it would be that shocking to Americans that Trump might be a little bit, eh, on listening to the courts.

[14:15:01]

SANCHEZ: Harry, how popular is Trump right now?

ENTEN: Yeah. Okay. So you see all this stuff and you might say to yourself, well, Trump can't be that popular. And then, of course, you listen to the speaker who apparently believes that Donald Trump is the most popular thing since Betty White. And then we might actually look at the polling data and say, okay, how popular is Donald Trump actually? All right, let's take a look at Trump's net approval rating on February 11th, which I believe is today.

You go back to 2017, Donald Trump was underwater at minus five points on your approval, minus disapproval. He's considerably more popular now. He's actually on the positive side of the ledger. He's at plus four points, which might not necessarily be so hot for other presidents, but it's quite hot for Donald Trump because he has been on the positive side of the net approval ledger more days in his second term so far, which is just over three weeks, than the entire first term, Boris

SANCHEZ: Not quite, Betty White, who was universally beloved by both parties and everybody. Republicans, though, Harry, are arguing that Trump is following through on campaign promises. Would you say that is what he's doing?

ENTEN: Yes, I would say absolutely. That's at least what the American people believe. Trump's doing what he promised. Get this, 70% of Americans say, yes, he is. Compare that to April of 2017, his first term. It was just 46%. So I think that is a big reason why Trump is more popular now than he wanted in his first term, because a lot more Americans believe he's actually following through on what he promised, Mr. Sanchez.

SANCHEZ: Mr. Enten, always appreciate the time. Thanks for being with us.

ENTEN: Thank you.

SANCHEZ: Still to come. President Trump says the U.S. has the authority to take over Gaza, demanding that Hamas release Israeli hostages by noon on Saturday or else. We'll talk about what else came out of his meeting with Jordan's King Abdullah. Plus, Elon Musk rejected the reason the founder of ChatGPT says he will not accept a multibillion dollar offer from the world's richest man.

And yet another deadly air disaster. Some dramatic new video to share with you that shows the moment a private jet owned by the frontman of Motley Crue slams into a parked plane in Arizona. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:21:57]

SANCHEZ: President Trump today is doubling down on threats that Israel will unleash hell on Hamas if more hostages are not released on Saturday. Here's the President a short time ago during a meeting with Jordan's King Abdullah II at the White House. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, 45TH & 47TH U.S. PRESIDENT: You know I have a Saturday deadline and I don't think they're going to make the deadline. Personally, I think they want to play tough guy, but we'll see how tough they are. They either have out by Saturday at 12 o'clock or all bets are off.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: The President is also reiterating his redevelopment proposals for Gaza and relocation of the more than two million people who live there.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: We're not going to buy anything. We're going to have it and we're going to keep it. And we're going to make sure that there's going to be peace and there's not going to be any problem and nobody's going to question it. And we're going to run it very properly. And eventually we'll have economic development at a very large scale, maybe the largest scale on that site, and we'll have lots of good things built there, including hotels and office buildings and housing and other things, and we'll make that site into what it should be.

WOMAN #1: Mr. President, take it under what authority? It is sovereignty --

TRUMP: Under the U.S. authority.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: With us now to discuss, retired Army Major General James "Spider" Marks and Lead Global Security Analyst for the Washington Post Intelligence, Josh Rogin. Thank you both for being with us. Josh, I was struck not just by those comments from President Trump, but also King Abdullah seemingly being open to hearing what a deal involving Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and the U.S. might look like to effectively remove those two million people in Gaza. Do you think there's anything that Trump could actually offer in a deal that might persuade him?

JOSH ROGIN, LEAD ANALYST, WASHINGTON POST INTELLIGENCE: No. There's no prospect of two million Palestinians leaving Gaza because they won't go, because it's their land, because they live there and they've been there for generations. And short of forcing them out, that's the deal is dead as disco.

And if we were to try to force them out, that would be a war crime. That's ethnic cleansing. So that's not a good option either. And the idea that President Trump would sit there with the King of Jordan and sort of, you know, talk casually about how Palestinians don't want to live in Gaza is just bizarre because it's not true.

And King Abdullah has no choice, really, but to sit there and pretend as if it's not the craziest idea he's ever heard. Because what else is he going to do? What is he going to do? Tell President Trump to his face that he doesn't understand the region, he doesn't understand the context, he doesn't understand the history, he doesn't understand the people. And it's not going to happen. The Arab states, it won't take them. So he's got to play along and sort of go, ho, hum, ho, hum and get through the meeting.

But, no, this is a deeply flawed idea that's deeply damaging because it places America in the position of forcibly displacing 2 million people.

[14:25:03]

And that radicalizes the region and harms our security and has shattered the ceasefire, and, you know, already had a destabilizing effect on the region.

SANCHEZ: Spider, I'm curious to get your thoughts on Josh's argument and specifically the part about removing these two million people without needing U.S. troops to be involved or without, in his words, buying the territory. Trump has argued that these folks would leave voluntarily if they were persuaded by better housing, essentially. Is that at all a realistic scenario?

MAJ. GEN. JAMES "SPIDER" MARKS (RET), CNN MILITARY ANALYST: Well, you know, I think the way to look at this is you either take this President seriously or you take him literally. I can't imagine emplacing U.S. soldiers in Gaza, Marine soldiers, air support, et cetera, naval forces coming ashore, facilitating the logistics that are necessary. The removal of two million folks or whatever remains forcibly either into Egypt, you know, the south end of Gaza or across the border and getting them into Jordan is not a likely scenario.

And again, I can't get into the President's head, but if there is some type of a temporary solution and displacement, then a return at some point that could possibly take place. But the interregnum between departure and return would be quite considerable, I think. So I don't see that there would be -- there's a legitimate reason based again, on what you've heard the President say and then what you think he really means is putting a bunch of U.S. service members on the ground in Gaza to create this end state. SANCHEZ: I should point out Trump was asked whether he believes that if Palestinians were to leave and Gaza were to be rebuilt, whether they had a right to go back. And he actually said that he did not believe that they would have that right. Josh, I want to pick at something you said when you described King Abdullah as essentially sitting there and being ho hum throughout the meeting, because he has to.

Trump today said that he does not believe that he has to threaten to withhold aid to get Jordan and Egypt to accept some sort of deal, even though he has done that in the past. That's essentially why Abdullah is ho hum about this, right? Because what would happen to the Middle East if the U.S. were to stop giving aid to Jordan and Egypt?

ROGIN: Right. So Trump is threatening to further destabilize the region unless the Arab states agree to destabilize the region further, right? That's the deal. Or he might not destabilize their countries as long as they agree to destabilize their countries by taking millions of refugees against their will.

You know, it's so crazy and it's so, you know, ignorant and really cruel when you think about it, because you know what, he's humiliating our allies, what the King of Jordan is supposed to do. He can't say what he's thinking. You know what he's thinking? He's thinking, that's crazy, that's not going to happen. How do I get out of this?

And so what he said was, okay, well, the Egyptians are going to come up with a plan, so they'll come up with some sort of, you know, face saving measure that they hope Trump will swallow in order to just make the whole thing go away. And maybe they'll do that, you know, like the Canadians and the Mexicans will come up with some stuff he can put out.

But the damage is already done. Even if they come up with something to make Trump happy enough that he agrees not to threaten them to destabilize their country and perform an ethnic cleansing, there's already a lot of damage done by this. Not to mention that the ceasefire Trump says he wants peace is now going to be shattered, and Trump seems to be totally fine with that.

And what happens to the hostages, including six Americans, now that there'll be no ceasefire and more war? So it's just a disaster. It's kind of an -- it's a disgrace, Boris, is what it is. And you know, the King of Jordan, yeah, he's stuck, you know, what's he supposed to say? But we can say the truth, which is that this is a crazy and horrible idea that won't happen. It is really counterproductive and cruel.

SANCHEZ: General, I wonder when Trump says that all bets are off if Hamas doesn't hand over hostages on Saturday, and you hear Netanyahu sort of echo those comments, what is a cessation of the ceasefire mean if they're going to resume hostilities? How do you see that playing out?

MARKS: Well, there are several things that have to be understood. Number one is legitimately when the President says all hell will break loose. As a military planner, you have to go back without being flippant. You go, Mr. President, you got to define hell for me. You know, what is the objective? What does this look like? And if you don't give me options, then I'll bring those options to you in order to accomplish that task.

So it requires that level of definition and that level of clarity, so you can do a troop to task kind of an analysis to figure out what needs to be applied to a achieve that desired end state.