Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Senate Confirmation Vote on Kash Patel's Nomination to Lead FBI; Walmart Warns of Disappointing 2025 Sales And Profits; USDA Trying to Rehire Staff Working on Bird Flu After Firing Them. Aired 2- 2:30p ET

Aired February 20, 2025 - 14:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:00:34]

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: We're tracking breaking news this afternoon on CNN. Right now, Senate lawmakers voting on whether to confirm President Trump's pick to lead the FBI, Kash Patel, even as some Democrats warn that Patel threatens to politicize the FBI and use it as a weapon for retribution.

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: Patel is one of the President's most controversial nominees with a history of making very inflammatory comments, referring to officials who investigated President Trump as criminal gangsters, accusing the FBI of using undercover agents to instigate the January six insurrection, creating what Democrats call an enemy's list of top political figures who oppose Trump and promising to, quote, come after anti-Trump conspirators.

Let's go straight to Capitol Hill. That's Manu Raju has been speaking with lawmakers. So Manu, Republicans are saying he's, quote, the right man at the right time, some of them anyways. How do we expect the vote to go down?

MANU RAJU, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, this is going to be a nail biter but we do expect Kash Patel to get the votes to be confirmed. Now, just moments ago, Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Republican swing vote, just voted against this nomination on the floor of the United States Senate. This after her support to advance this to a final vote. We have not seen a statement from her yet. I asked her about this today. She did not want to say how she would vote ultimately on this yet. We'll see what she has to say.

Now, we also expect another no vote on the Republican side that Susan Collins of Maine, she voted against proceeding to a final vote earlier today. And she put out a statement aligning with a lot of the Democratic concerns about Kash Patel to lead the FBI, she said in her statement. She said Mr. Patel's recent political profile undermines his ability to serve in the apolitical role of director of the FBI. Therefore, I will vote against his nomination. Now, if they're the only two no votes, that's still enough for Patel to be confirmed on 51-49 vote. The Republicans control the Senate. 53-47. And what does Mitch McConnell do? He is, of course, the former Republican leader today announcing that he would retire from his job, his current term at the end of next year. He's already voted against three other Donald Trump picks. What will he do on this vote? We have not seen McConnell yet on the floor. We'll be watching that very closely. If he does vote, that would require the Vice President to come in and break a tie. So we'll see if it ultimately leads to that.

But even if that happens, Boris and Brianna, we don't expect a fourth Republican to break ranks. That would be enough to scuttle this nomination altogether. But every other Republican has indicated that they are a yes, which means that we do expect Kash Patel to get this job. After weeks of battling, after Democratic efforts to try to delay and derail this nomination, they're expected ultimately to be unsuccessful as Kash Patel is expected by perhaps the narrowest of margins to get this very important post as Donald Trump expected to get his man into the FBI. Guys?

SANCHEZ: Manu Raju, live on Capitol Hill. We will be watching that vote closely. Let's discuss with the State Attorney for Palm Beach County, Florida, Dave Aronberg, and former FBI Senior Executive and Special Agent in charge Frank Montoya. Frank, I'd like to start with you. How significant of a change does Kash Patel represent for the FBI?

FRANK MONTOYA, FMR. FBI SENIOR EXECUTIVE: It's a radical change. It really is. I mean, I served under four directors in 27 years in the FBI and no one came in with these few qualifications with this guy's background, with the conspiracy theory angles, with just all of the things that he has said on podcast and written in his book, it makes you wonder where the bureau is going to be heading next. It's just, I don't know, befuddling to me.

KEILAR: And Dave, I mean, Patel worked actually as a public defender in Florida. In your view, how has he evolved since those days? What are you going to be watching for as he takes charge?

DAVE ARONBERG, STATE ATTORNEY, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA: Brianna, I knew Kash Patel when he lived in South Florida and he was Team Normal and now he's Team Ultra MAGA. And I think if you want to go to his villain origin story would be when in 2020 he was referred to the CIA for potentially leaking classified information. And that really transformed him as someone who turned against our federal agencies, law enforcement and intelligence agencies. He felt he was treated badly.

And then he found out not too long ago that the Department of Justice in 2017 had subpoenaed Google for his email.

[14:05:06]

And so he was appalled by that. That's what he's taking with him into this job. So I'm going to look to see if he continues those grievances or whether we see the Kash Patel we saw at the confirmation hearing someone who's more about conciliation than confrontation. I have a feeling there'll be more of the latter. SANCHEZ: I wonder, Frank, what you think this means for the rank and file at the FBI, the folks that stay away from the politics that are focused on investigations and helping people when they need it most and responding to things like the airline wreck over the Potomac a few weeks ago, because clearly the work of FBI agents, a lot of it has nothing to do with politics.

MONTOYA: Well, I mean, that's the big issue here, right? These guys have been, and gals, have been doing their work without any kind of controversy for years and years. They go out every day and they do this kind of stuff without concerning themselves with, you know, whose politics are going to drive today's investigation or the course of this investigation. It's just not something that they think about on a day to day basis.

But you know, the other part of this is they're not stupid. They have seen what has happened in the last month and how their friends and their colleagues have been targeted. Some have been fired, some have been demoted and reassigned, some have been forced into retirement. And I'm hearing the numbers are a lot larger than what are publicly being reported.

At the same time, you know, the acting director is doing his best to try to keep morale up, but everybody is worried because, you know, in addition to what has already happened, now there's this list out there with five to six thousand names on it. And then, and people are wondering, well, what's going to happen to me if I do one thing, if I step out of line one way or if I decide to try to do an investigation that they don't want me to do. So just a lot of concern about that.

Even when they're out there recovering evidence, let's say at that crash site, you know, in the Potomac, you know, are they -- in the back of their minds wondering are they going to even be able to come to work tomorrow or are they going to get that dreaded email? So yeah, it's just a lot of conflicting emotions right now, a lot of concerns. You know, I didn't even mention the probationary agents that are out there biting their nails every single day because they don't know if they're going to be able to come into work tomorrow.

So, yeah, it really is a great deal of emotional drain right now. And then there's this new guy coming in that everybody's looking at as, you know, more of the same, a hatchet man per se, who is coming in to finish the job that Emil Bove at DOJ has already started. So, yeah, a lot of concern about that.

KEILAR: Dave, what are or are there not guardrails at the FBI to prevent some of the dismantling, some of the potential retribution? And if not, what do you think it'll look like?

ARONBERG: You have the workers themselves, the FBI agents themselves, who have been there a long time, and they have a union. And so they do have some pushback. But ultimately this administration seems to get what they want, even though the courts have initially resisted some of their attempts.

If the courts keep pushing back the Trump administration and Kash Patel will just say, OK, you can stay on your job, you're just going to go to the basement and count paperclips for the next four years. So that's the problem. If the person in charge doesn't want you, you're not going to be used. You're not going to be happy there.

One guardrail would be at the Department of Justice, perhaps the Attorney General, Pam Bondi can serve as a guardrail because she said there will be no enemies list. Kash Patel had an enemies list, and she said there will be no political retribution. Ultimately, it's her decision whether someone gets indicted. But as they say in the world of law enforcement, you could beat the rap, but you cannot beat the ride. And it's Kash Patel who's in charge of that ride.

SANCHEZ: Dave Aronberg, Frank Montoya, appreciate the perspective. Thanks for joining us.

MONTOYA: Right.

ARONBERG: Thank you.

SANCHEZ: Let's discuss this upcoming vote and a few more items with Democratic Senator Peter Welch of Vermont. He is a member of the Judiciary Committee. Senator, thank you so much for sharing your afternoon with us. What is your reaction to the fact that Patel appears to be on track to squeak by and get this confirmation with possibly one to two votes?

SEN. PETER WELCH, (D) VERMONT: Well, it's the end of the FBI as we know it. Patel is an instrument of Donald Trump. Donald Trump's policy towards the Justice Department and the FBI is retribution. And Kash Patel has signed onto that full throat. When he was asked in the Judiciary Committee whether there would be retribution in the investigation, he said he didn't know anything about it. It turned out there's credible reports that he was running it even before he was fully nominated.

So the retribution is really chilling and terrible.

[14:10:02]

You've got these FBI agents who, by the way, had no decision making role in getting assigned to a January six case. They showed up for work, they were given a file by a superior, no involvement whatsoever. Yet what we're hearing is that everybody in justice and the FBI who had anything to do even remotely like an intern doing some photocopying, those names are being sought by the administration.

So how does somebody who's dedicated their life to the public service and law enforcement feel when they're on the block? Because they did their job and there is not a hint of any political action on the part of their decision to be involved. It's just that they showed up for work. So it's very, very alarming.

SANCHEZ: Sure. In that regard, Senator, if he is confirmed and he takes the steps that you are describing, what power do you and your colleagues have to hold him accountable? WELCH: Well, here's the reality. This is an overreach by the executive. I mean, my view, we're actually in a slow motion but accelerating constitutional crisis. The President has said it's, quote, my Justice Department. He's not kidding when he refers to himself as the king. So he is the one who has authority over the FBI and the Justice Department. Other presidents have acted with a lot of restraint, respecting its independence. Those days are over.

So what we're going to need, frankly, is some of our Republican colleagues who share the values but fear the retribution from the President if they, quote, get out of line. We've got to push back as the Article 1 branch, but the Democrats are in a position to do it. We're doing all we can, but we don't have the votes.

SANCHEZ: I just want to let our viewers and yourself know, Senator, that despite having voted against some of Trump's other nominees, retiring Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnell voted yes to confirm Kash Patel as FBI Director. This is literally happening on the floor of the Senate right now.

To your point about how the executive branch might be held in check, I've been speaking to lawmakers recently, and many of them have made similar appeals to their Republican colleagues. Some of them, though, have voiced concern about what might happen in the judicial branch. A lot of these cases about executive power seem destined for the Supreme Court, and we've talked about the recent history of this court. It leans conservative. They've also shown that they're willing to buck precedent.

When it comes to establishing the power of the executive with some of these questions about who he can fire and whether some of these agencies that Congress established that are supposed to be independent actually are independent. Do you see the Supreme Court siding with President Trump on these issues?

WELCH: Well, I certainly hope not, but I'm worried. I share that worry. Keep in mind, the Supreme Court did what can only be described as an astonishing decision where they said the President is, quote, above the law, gave him immunity even for illegal acts, if it's, quote, in the course of his duty. That's never been. Our country is premised on the opposite of that. No one, including the President, is above the law.

But the second element of this that I'm very concerned about is the remarks we heard from J.D. Vance, who basically blew off the court. If they rule against the President, let them enforce it. That's what he's signaling. That's where we'll have a real constitutional crisis. If you have the President getting an order from the Supreme Court and saying, drop dead, defy it. And those days, I'm fearful that we're going to face that.

SANCHEZ: So then what should be the response from lawmakers like yourself and others if the President and his administration decide that they would ignore the rule of law, ignore whatever the Supreme Court decides, if they rule against his reach as the executive? WELCH: Well, two things. One, it's going to take the American people to be objecting in showing their discontent with the failure of Congress to act, actually, the overreach by the President. The second thing is that we, each of us have an individual responsibility as U.S. senators to assert and accept the responsibility of the independence of the legislative branch. And our failure to do that is exceeding to the overreach by the President.

You know, the power of the purse is a major one. And we saw Speaker Johnson say, no big deal, that the President is literally interfering with that. So this is going to be played out over time. But beyond the Trump agenda, which many of my Republican colleagues support, and that's fair and square.

And it's fair and square for the President to use all his executive authority to pass his agenda. What he can't do is do things that are unconstitutional, like declare by executive order a constitutional provision is null and void.

[14:15:08]

He can't take away from Congress the power of the purse. So that's where we've got to set some collective limits.

SANCHEZ: Senator, while we have you, I do want to get quickly your thoughts on Ukraine and some of these comments from President Trump being so closely aligned with the view of the Kremlin and Vladimir Putin specifically on Ukraine having started the war in his mind and on Zelenskyy, President Zelenskyy being a dictator. Do you believe that that is simply bluster to try to bring Zelenskyy to the table and to try to extract more from European allies, or do you think that Trump is simply cozy with Vladimir Putin?

WELCH: He's flipped sides. We used to be for Ukraine and now apparently we're for Putin. I mean, that's real. The President doesn't kid around. He's got that offhanded way, you know, you could interpret it as a joke or being provocative. But if we look at what Trump has done, that's the beginning, opening statement of where he's going.

He's definitely cozy with Putin. He definitely prefers Putin. He's showing massive disregard for the commitment our country has had and my Republican colleagues have had, by the way, leaders like Roger Wicker who've done so much for us to stand by Ukraine. But the President has made it clear he's flipping sides.

SANCHEZ: Senator Peter Welch, we have to leave the conversation there. Appreciate you sharing your point of view.

WELCH: Thank you.

SANCHEZ: Thanks.

Still to come. A red flag from Walmart when it comes to the economy. What the store just signaled.

Plus, the Trump administration now scrambling to rehire employees it just fired from the USDA after realizing they were part of the ongoing response to bird flu. We have a firsthand account of that chaos next.

And later this hour, new details about what was happening inside a Texas school in the weeks leading up to an 11-year-old's suicide. Other parents are now speaking out. That and much more coming up on CNN News Central.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:21:48]

SANCHEZ: We're following a developing story on the economy. Walmart is warning of disappointing sales growth this year with its shoppers showing signs they are dealing with inflation by being choosier about spending their money. And since it's America's largest chain store, that's a red flag for the economy and the stock market. The Dow is trading down about 560 points. CNN Business reporter Nathaniel Meyersohn joins us now with more. Nathaniel, walk us through this report from Walmart.

NATHANIEL MEYERSOHN, BUSINESS REPORTER: So Boris, it's actually pretty interesting. Walmart's business is doing very well right now. It's become kind of a real rival to Amazon. Walmart's particularly getting more growth from higher income shoppers. You think about in the past, Walmart traditionally been kind of middle income, lower income.

So last year, sales were up 5% at Walmart. The big problem though, Boris, is that they're supposed to slow down in 2025, up only 3 or 4%. Now that may not seem like much, but that has investors really freaked out right now. Walmart stock is down about 6%. And Walmart, of course, is a bellwether for the retail industry and for the economy as the largest retailer in the country. So what happens at Walmart, Boris, is going to have an impact across the industry and across the economy.

SANCHEZ: So what does this tell us about the broader economy?

MEYERSOHN: Boris, it tells us it's going to be a rockier 2025. You know, Walmart's talking about tariffs. Tariffs certainly are on top of everybody's mind right now. Even a company like Walmart says it's not immune from the pressure from tariffs and that it may have to raise prices on customers.

And that of course, would come as inflation starts to pick back up. We don't have to talk about kind of what we're seeing right now at the grocery store with eggs, but that's a big concern for customers. So the big question, Boris, is how is this all going to impact consumer confidence and consumer spending? And consumer spending is the backbone of the economy. If it starts to weaken, which Walmart is signaling that it may, we could be in some real trouble here.

SANCHEZ: Nathaniel Meyersohn, thanks so much for the update. Brianna?

KEILAR: Happening now. The Trump administration is rushing to rehire workers in multiple departments in the federal government and that includes the Department of Agriculture. These are people who were working on the government's response to bird flu as the outbreak worsens. The USDA is now realizing they need those officials back. An agency spokesperson saying, quote, USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service frontline positions are considered public safety positions. And we are continuing to hire the workforce necessary to ensure the safety and adequate supply of food to fulfill our statutory mission. The firings were part of President Trump's cost cutting mission being spearheaded by Elon Musk's so called Department of Government Efficiency.

With us now is Keith Poulsen, who's the Director of the Wisconsin Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory. Keith, thank you for being with us. I do wonder, just first off here, since we've been talking about some of these firings. Have you felt any direct consequences or disruption in bird flu response as a result of these USDA or CDC firings and then rehirings?

[14:25:06]

KEITH POULSEN, DIRECTOR, WISCONSIN VETERINARY DIAGNOSTIC LABORATORY: Absolutely. And thanks again for the opportunity to speak today, specifically as part of the National Animal Health Laboratory Network, or the NAHLN, which is really the glue that keeps together our national testing capacity for animal health. And not just testing and surveillance, but maintaining continuity of business.

The NAHLN was affected the same as any other federal agency, whether that's FSIS, the NBAF facility, NBSL, CDC and FDA. And realistically, when you look at the H5N1 outbreak, be it in poultry, dairy cows, or being spilling over into other species like people and cats, it's not just a single agency issue. Not being able to have the resources at CDC, the FDA and USDA and all of the different counterparts is certainly making it more challenging to respond to the epidemic.

KEILAR: OK. And I will tell you, and I'm pretty good at acronyms, but that was a lot, those were a lot of acronyms there. And I'm wondering, so if you're like a layperson and you're thinking about this because a lot of people are concerned about the bird flu and they're thinking about these firings, I mean, what are the things that ultimately might trickle down to them as some of the disruption in government?

POULSEN: Sure. It's kind of an Alphabet soup, right?

KEILAR: Yeah.

POULSEN: And they kind of roll off the tongue after a few years of experience.

But realistically, when you lose capacity and let's just take the National Animal Health Laboratory Network. So there's 64 labs across the country, 58 of us have been activated essentially since 2022. And when a group like that, which is only 14 people, seven of which are spread across the country from Hawaii to Virginia, is that when you lose 25% because there's 25% new people to help us deal with things like antimicrobial resistance, H5N1, amongst all of the other foreign animal diseases that we watch, like foot and mouth disease and African Swine Fever, 25% of 14 people, that's a big deal. And when that causes is instead of data or testing results or coordinating and troubleshooting those 64 different labs across the country and different states or universities, it makes it slow. So farmers, it's slower to get their test result back. For state animal health officials, state veterinarians, it takes them longer to get that data and those testing results to actually make an evidence based and informed decision. So it slows the process down significantly. And that has a real negative impact on human and animal health.

KEILAR: Yeah, certainly. OK, that is very clear on how that's impacting people very negatively. You told Reuters about the bird flu response, the confusion over messaging and who can say what or anything is complicating matters at a bad time. Can you talk a little bit more about that? Are you saying that people are restricted from sharing necessary information or are they just kind of afraid of doing it? What's happening?

POULSEN: You know, it's a pretty tricky situation all around and it didn't start just on January 22nd with an administration change. We since the beginning of 2024 when we started dealing with the problem in dairy cows as an undiagnosed morbidity event and now into H5N1 influenza A, it's been quite challenging because we haven't been able to have full access and unfettered access.

And by we, I mean industry, whether that's dairy, poultry, pork, our state animal health officials, our laboratory diagnosticians. It's been pretty challenging. Just, I don't, you know, there's a lot of different complicating factors being in an election year having a pretty unknown impact and this is a new disease in dairy cows and now with an administration changeover, and this happens for every administration.

But even now I think it's quite a bit more public. And like even at our multidisciplinary meeting this morning, CDC and FDA still aren't at that table. But we can talk to USDA, but it's still pretty challenging because we don't really know what decisions are happening or if the industry folks and the people that are on the front lines, are they there to help guide and tell and provide feedback of, well, here's what happens if we decide to do this.

And I think that was really kind of highlighted and we're hoping for more information after this weekend where we came out with the administration said, hey, we're really going to double down and we're going to make H5N1 a priority, which is great. We're all very anticipating that because we know it's a big problem, we have to do something about it. But then there were three kind of 10,000 foot (ph) view signs of we're going to use vaccines.