Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Trump Admin Directs Agencies to Prepare for Large-scale Firings; Trump Says U.S. To Sell $5 Million 'Gold Card' That Offers Path to Citizenship; Johnson, Trump Pull Off Last-minute Win as House Passes Budget Plan; Sexually Explicit Messages Found on NSA Chat Rooms; Pope Remains in Critical but Stable Condition; National Parks Litter Turned to Art; Zelenskyy Says Security Guarantees by U.S. Could Be a Step Toward Peace; U.S. Votes Against U.N. Resolution Condemning Russia's War on Ukraine. Aired 8:30-9a ET

Aired February 26, 2025 - 08:30   ET

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

[08:30:00]

REP. JAKE AUCHINCLOSS, (D-MA): Donald Trump is not on the ballot again, remember that. Congressional Republicans are on the ballot next November. And so, the feedback that is coming up to the White House from Congressional Republicans, and I'm hearing this from my colleagues on the House floor, is we are being fed to the wolves here. Every time Elon Musk goes out there and tweets and attacks, you know, EPA Regulators who are keeping PFAS out of our water supply, or attacks Air Traffic Controllers who are trying to keep planes from colliding in midair, we have to answer to our constituents.

And that's before they took the vote on taking $880 billion out of Primary and Preventative Care for Children. So Congressional Republicans are the ones who are going to bear the brunt of Elon Musk's unpopularity. Donald Trump is just simply going to kick him away when he's done being useful. We all know that Donald Trump is transactional. The problem is, is that Congressional Republicans are the ones going to be footing the bill.

SARA SIDNER, CNN CO-ANCHOR OF "CNN NEWS CENTRAL": Speaking of transactions, Donald Trump has floated this idea of this 'Gold Card' as he has put it. It's like a green card, but for the very wealthy, saying that he would charge $5 million in order for someone to get a 'gold Card' that includes, he said Russian oligarchs could be welcome to come to America if they paid the money. What do you make of this idea?

AUCHINCLOSS: It's typical Trump policy in that it takes a kernel of a legitimately good idea, which is that we do need immigration reform and we should be welcoming high-talent immigration, particularly through H-1B visa reform and adjustments to Schedule A, so that we can get people with advanced degrees to come here, create jobs, innovate.

And he takes it to a corrupt and counterproductive place where we were talking about having scientists come to America to cure disease, and now he takes it to, let's get Russian oligarchs here to come to America and, you know, play golf with him. So, it's just another disappointing example of Trump taking this kernel of bipartisan consensus and contorting it into his own chaos and corruption.

SIDNER: Let me ask you something. You know, no Democrat voted for either of these budget ideas from both the Senate and the House, the blueprints that went through because Trump helped push the House version through that he likes. Is there anything in any of those bills that you could get behind? Or how do you see it?

AUCHINCLOSS: Democrats voted against the budget resolution because Democrats defend healthcare. We defend healthcare for kids. We defend healthcare for new moms. We defend healthcare for seniors who need at- home care, and a third of Medicaid dollars go to seniors who need at- home care. The question is, why didn't Democrats vote for it? The question is, how are Republicans going to explain their vote for it to their constituents?

Let's take the Texas delegation, for example. I was recently speaking with a member of the Texas delegation who represents 100,000 constituents who use Medicaid, a majority of whom are children. They have no plan for how those kids are going to see doctors when they axe Medicaid. So, that's the explanation that is going to have to be put forward and it's going to be a series of rambunctious town halls.

SIDNER: Yeah. You're talking about the $800 billion, almost $1 trillion that they're trying to take out of Medicaid in one of these bills. I want to let get your reaction this morning to something that Republican Congressman Marjorie Taylor Greene said about the people who DOGE has been firing en mass. Here is what a Congress person said about federal workers.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. MARJORIE TAYLOR GREENE, (R-GA): Those are not real jobs producing federal revenue. By the way, they're consuming taxpayer dollars. Those jobs are paid for by the American tax people who work real jobs, earn real income, pay federal taxes, and then pay these federal employees. Federal employees do not deserve their jobs. Federal employees do not deserve their paychecks.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SIDNER: What's your reaction to her this morning?

AUCHINCLOSS: Who does Marjorie Taylor Greene think pays her salary?

(LAUGH)

AUCHINCLOSS: It's the federal taxpayer. The federal taxpayer is putting the bill for her to spout this inanity and nonsense. When Elon Musk guts the career scientists at the Food and Drug Administration who ensures that medical devices are safe and effective before people put them inside their body, that does not make my constituents lives safer. It does not reduce the cost of healthcare, and it increases the cost of uncertainty for business and for investors.

The federal workforce is less than 5 percent of all federal budget. So Marjorie Taylor Greene and DOGE, they're claiming that they're saving money and wringing efficiencies out of the system. They're not. They're causing chaos. They're pursuing corruption. And it's all about misdirection because they don't want people to focus on the fact that Republicans are going to gut healthcare for children and for women in this country.

SIDNER: And Democrats are bringing that up over and over again. We will see how this all plays out as these budgets start going forward and they start being put out to all of you to vote on them. Congressman Jake Auchincloss, thank you so much for coming on this morning. Appreciate your time. Kate?

KATE BOLDUAN, CNN CO-ANCHOR OF "CNN NEWS CENTRAL": Coming up for us, we have new details about the decision to fire 100 people at the NSA over sexually explicit messages found on internal department chat rooms. And we have a new update from the Vatican on the Pope's health this morning.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:39:38]

BOLDUAN: This morning, more than 100 intelligence officers will reportedly be fired and stripped of their security clearances after allegedly turning work-related chat rooms into sexually explicit discussions. The new Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, called the chats an egregious violation of trust and says the NSA is now investigating. CNN's Natasha Bertrand is tracking this one for us.

[08:40:00]

She joins us now. Natasha, what are you learning about this?

NATASHA BERTRAND, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Well Kate, CNN has not confirmed the authenticity of these chats or obtained them independently, but they apparently show intelligence community employees sending sexually explicit messages in National Security Agency chat rooms, something that was first brought to light by a conservative activist on X.

So after this person posted them in recent days, they clearly caught the attention of the highest levels of the intelligence community. And one senior administration official told CNN that rank and file, Intel community employees actually began reaching out to Gabbard about it in the days after. Now, a spokesperson for the Director of National Intelligence said yesterday that these 100-plus employees would be identified and fired. And Gabbard herself spoke to this a bit in an interview last night, calling the messages, "an egregious violation of trust."

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TULSI GABBARD, UNITED STATES DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE: There are over a hundred people from across the intelligence community that contributed to and participated in this, what is really just an egregious violation of trust, what to speak of like basic rules and standards around professionalism. I put out a directive today, that they all will be terminated and their security clearances will be revoked. They were brazen in using an NSA platform intended for professional use to conduct this kind of really, really horrific behavior.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERTRAND: So Gabbard's comments came hours after the NSA said that it was aware of these posts that "Appear to show inappropriate discussions by intelligence personnel." And they announced that investigations were also underway. The agency said in a statement on X there that "Potential misuse of these platforms by a small group of individuals does not represent the community. Investigations to address this misuse of government systems are ongoing."

So, we will see how this plays out, but broadly, you know, I think it's more evidence of the role that activists on X have played in shaping policies across this administration. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, for example, he also routinely responds on X to post shared by the right-wing account libs of TikTok that purport to show violations inside the military of President Trump's anti-DEI policies. And of course, as we know, Elon Musk has also attempted to create policy for the entire federal government through his post on X. Kate?

BOLDUAN: Natasha, thank you so much for the reporting. John?

JOHN BERMAN, CNN CO-ANCHOR OF "CNN NEWS CENTRAL": All right. This morning, the Vatican is giving a new update on the health of Pope Francis. They're saying he had a "peaceful light," and he is now sitting in an armchair and continuing his treatment. So we asked all of you to submit questions about pneumonia. CNN Chief Medical Correspondent, Dr. Sanjay Gupta, is here to answer them.

And Sanjay, Jan from New Jersey wants to know, how much protection does the pneumococcal vaccine provide and does it ensure you will not get pneumonia? I practice saying pneumococcal, by the way.

DR. SANJAY GUPTA, CNN CHIEF MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Good job. Nice job. Yeah. So a couple things to sort of keep in mind. First of all, we've been using the term polymicrobial when describing the Pope's pneumonia, and that means different organisms -- bacteria, viruses, other things that can be causing pneumonia. The pneumococcal vaccine, which is the question Jan is asking about, that is specifically designed to target the most common form of pneumonia, which is a bacterial form of pneumonia known as streptococcus pneumoniae.

So, that is something that is typically given to children before the age of five, and then recommended for people over the age of 50 with a possible booster after the age of 65. That's because that's the populations -- those are the populations of people who are most likely to get very sick from pneumonia. Again, the most common form of pneumonia is actually a bacterial form of pneumonia. This does a good job protecting against that, could be up to 60 percent to 80 percent effective in terms of preventing the pneumonia.

But keep in mind as we talk about with vaccines, John, even if you do get pneumonia while on the vaccine, you're also likely to have a less severe illness as well. So that's where those recommendations come from. It's not ironclad, it's not foolproof, but it does a pretty good job.

BERMAN: That is interesting. I was asked just this last year, if I wanted the pneumonia vaccine. All right. Joyce for Mississippi asks, is pneumonia contagious? And if so, under what circumstances can it spread from person to person?

GUPTA: Yeah. So, this is a respiratory infection. It's not the pneumonia per se, but it is the pathogen, the bacteria typically, but virus as well that could be contagious. And you know, you spread it just like you'd spread anything else. Typically coughing, sneezing, you tend to be most contagious for a few days after you start developing symptoms. Once your fever goes away, once you're on antibiotics, if you get antibiotics, then you tend to become less contagious. But yeah, just like anything else, typically through the air, less common, but also possible, coughing. Pathogens hit the surfaces, people touch those surfaces, touch their eyes, nose or mouth, you can get it that way as well.

[08:45:00]

BERMAN: All right. And lastly, Jag from Canada wants to know, what's walking pneumonia and how can one detect it? And (ph) how can one treat it?

GUPTA: Yeah, so walking pneumonia as you might guess from the name, is going to be a less severe form of pneumonia. It's a kind of pneumonia where you could still be up walking around. You can still get pretty sick with this and sometimes it can be a little tough to distinguish walking pneumonia from the more standard pneumonia. But you can see these sort of symptoms that people have. You know, they're going to feel like they have a bad cold or flu even, but people are still generally able to be up walking around.

It is caused generally by a different bacteria. So streptococcus, that's the bacteria that causes the more common standard pneumonia. Mycoplasma is the bacteria that typically causes walking pneumonia. A lot of times the diagnosis is made just because you're really suspicious that's what's going on. But to really make sure you have the diagnosis, physical exam and a chest x-ray.

With standard pneumonia, the pneumonia tends to affect just one part of the lung. With walking pneumonia, it tends to affect more of the lung, but again, in a less severe way. Just one final thing, standard pneumonia, typically you'll get antibiotics. Walking pneumonia, you typically don't need antibiotics. It typically just sort of clears on its own.

BERMAN: Yeah, I got to say, it is interesting because it can mean so many different things, but I think the important thing is to take it very seriously. Sanjay, thank you very much for all that. Sara?

SIDNER: Thank you, John. Things could get real awkward. Elon Musk, not a cabinet member, joining President Trump as he holds his first official cabinet meeting this year as some of the cabinet pick's patience wearing thin with Mr. DOGE. And what Monica Lewinski now says Bill Clinton should have done after his affair with her. Those stories ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:51:45]

BERMAN: So this morning Maine artist, Mariah Reading is taking trash out of national parks and using it to showcase the beauty of the parks and the need to preserve them.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MARIAH READING, ARTIST TRANSFORMING TRASH TO HONOR NATIONAL PARKS: So the trash itself is a portrait of the landscape. I decided to just pick up as much trash at each national park that I could, and then use that trash in order to create art specifically about that park. If you are doing something from the bottom of your heart and like, it's clearly made from passion, others will be attracted to that passion.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: Reading says she hopes her project inspires others to look at trash differently. Although, I hope it inspires people not to leave it around the national parks. Sara?

SIDNER: Always with the good point, but it's really cool.

BERMAN: Wickedly (ph).

SIDNER: What a great idea?

BERMAN: Very cool.

SIDNER: Just shows you humans aren't so bad after all, are they? Don't answer that, John. (LAUGH)

SIDNER: Don't answer that. Nevermind, go about your day. All right. Breaking news, just moments ago, Ukrainian President Zelenskyy says, security guarantees from the U.S. as a result of a new mineral deal could be the first step towards peace.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY, UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT (through translator): If we understand that the U.S. will be one of the countries or one of the leading countries who gives security guarantees, then this could be a success or the first step towards a sustainable fair peace growth of the Ukrainian economy. Or if it is just some sort of beginning without a vision for the end, we will make conclusions after my conversation with President Trump.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SIDNER: All right. CNN's Nick Paton Walsh is joining us now live from Kyiv. What else are you hearing from Zelenskyy? This sounds very transactional, but he sounds also hopeful.

NICK PATON WALSH, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, I think, look, it's clear that this is moving forwards. What we did not hear though is perhaps also important, we did not hear Zelenskyy say that final terms have been agreed with the United States. Indeed, he said he was going to have to read the document at some point and he did not specifically say, I know the date and time of my meeting with President Donald Trump, but he certainly wants one, and he even talked about going to London after having one.

So, nothing to suggest that it is being derailed, just not finalized. Interesting about how he talked about the document itself. Now he talked about, you know, how he was grateful there were lawyers out there to deal with all the complex technical elements here, but there are some very clear things he had in his mind that the figure of $0.5 trillion initially floated by the Trump Administration that Ukraine would have to repay the United States, that wasn't in there. He said $100 billion wasn't in there either.

And he also said there was a key point of principle for him that the document could not suggest that even $0.10 of the money already given by the United States to Ukraine as grants, not loans, would be repaid. He also talked about the need for security guarantees. Now, where are we with that in the document? He suggested there was a Point 10, which made reference to security guarantees for Ukraine. Now, I should point out that it's not the same as giving security guarantees to Ukraine and he didn't even suggest that there were necessarily security guarantees within this document.

[08:55:00]

This has been something we understand from Ukrainian officials, has been a point of resistance from the American side for some time. And so there may be, as we suggested yesterday in our reporting, that this final draft contains references that spell out more clearly security guarantees for Ukraine, but don't actually give them. They're clearly still negotiating parts of this text. It is clear he wants that meeting. Whether those two men get along well and have something meaningful to sign, probable. At this point, not guaranteed, nothing has been for the last week. Sara?

SIDNER: Well, yeah, it has been very contentious with some of the things that Donald Trump has said about Zelenskyy. We will see what happens and if a deal indeed is made. Thank you so much. Nick Paton Walsh there live for us. Thank you to your crew as well in Kyiv. Kate?

BOLDUAN: So with President Zelenskyy headed to Washington and to the White House, I want to play for you what President -- play for you President Trump's take on it all yesterday.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, (R) PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: I hear that he is coming on Friday. Certainly, it's OK with me if he'd like to, and he would like to sign it together with me. And I understand that's a big deal, very big deal. And I think the American people, even if you look at polling, they're very happy because, you know, Biden was throwing money around like it's cotton candy and it's a very big deal. Look, it could be $1 trillion deal. It could be whatever.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BOLDUAN: Joining us right now is Retired Army Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman, a Former Director of European Affairs on the National Security Council, also the author of a new book out now that could not be more relevant, " The Folly of Realism: How the West Deceived Itself About Russia and Betrayed Ukraine." It's really good to see you. Thank you so much. Congrats on the book.

(CROSSTALK)

LT. COL. ALEXANDER VINDMAN (RET.), FORMER DIRECTOR FOR EUROPEAN AFFAIRS, NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL: Thank you.

BOLDUAN: Let's jump off what we heard from President Zelenskyy there, what we know and really what we don't know, which is all of the important detail of what this rare mineral -- rare earth minerals deal could mean. Zelenskyy seems hopeful or just unclear. You talk about realism --

VINDMAN: Yeah.

BOLDUAN: -- in your book so much, why are security guarantees so important? Why has the Trump Administration, do you think, been resistant to put that out there to this point? What do you think comes of this very important aspect of getting any negotiation done?

VINDMAN: Sure. So first of all, it's interesting that these are two media figures. You know, one of them is a career actor. The other one is a, you know, hosted on "The Apprentice," TV personality, and how much of this is playing out in the public eye. Usually, these negotiations take place behind closed doors. The nuts and bolts are worked out, not kind of the smoke and mirrors that we see right now.

BOLDUAN: Right.

VINDMAN: How much is real, how much of is substance? What historically the U.S. has been resistant to is it doesn't want to be on the hook to secure Ukraine against Russian attack. Why? Because that puts the U.S. in a position where U.S. troops are on the ground. There's a chance for an escalation of war. Now, the theory is that this is the way that war starts, that U.S. provides security guarantees.

The counterfactual, the more relevant data point that my research tells me in the book is that this is the one thing that forestalls Russian attack. Why? Because the Russians are not the least bit interested in a confrontation with the U.S. or with NATO. The U.S. is a much, much more powerful military, a much, much more powerful alliance. Nukes are irrelevant. Trump and Putin, neither of them are suicidal. Neither of them want to get to this point.

So, providing Ukraine security guarantees is a way to forestall or end this war, and prevent future wars. But, we've not gone there in the past 30-plus years. I find it hard to believe that the U.S. is going to offer anything substantive yet under the Trump Administration. Eventually, we need to get there. Eventually, we need to realize this promise of Ukraine in NATO --

BOLDUAN: Yeah.

VINDMAN: -- as we declared back in 2008, just so much has to happen before we get there. The folly is that we haven't learned the lessons of the past. We keep repeating them.

BOLDUAN: That's what it is. And again, this is extremely relevant because you talk in the book about how the United States has made mistakes in its approach, and you're talking the last six administrations, but maybe you make the case, maybe no one making worse mistakes than Donald Trump right now.

The United States has just sided with Russia by voting against the U.N. resolution condemning Russian aggression in Ukraine. There is a range of opinions how relevant the United Nation is on any given day.

VINDMAN: Sure.

BOLDUAN: But how big of a turn or reversal do you think that move is?

VINDMAN: In terms of the U.S. moral leadership in the world, it's disastrous. It's frankly one of the most public facing changes in U.S. course that we've seen. You have a continuity in foreign policy across administrations. You might have some adjustments, but there's generally continuity. We haven't had a reverse course where we went from declaring somebody an enemy, an adversary, a dictatorship, to now embracing them.

BOLDUAN: Yeah. Like sky is blue, sky is green.

VINDMAN: Yes.

BOLDUAN: -- is essentially what it kind of feels like.

VINDMAN: It is a disastrous about-face from that standpoint.

[09:00:00]