Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Greenland's Prime Minister Slams U.S. Visit; Russia and U.S. Hold Talks on Ceasefire; Rep. Seth Moulton (D-MA) is Interviewed about the Russia and Ukraine Talks; Hearing on Trump's Use of Alien Enemies Act. Aired 9-9:30a ET

Aired March 24, 2025 - 09:00   ET

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

[09:00:00]

KATE BOLDUAN, CNN ANCHOR: My mother battled alcoholism for most of my life. Whenever I start talking about it, I get, like, really quiet all of a sudden. Like, I, like, start, like, stuttering and, like, it's - it's so hard to talk about addiction in a family. I'm not - I'm not even ready to talk about it fully.

There's so much conflict of, like, love and sadness and disappointment, like, all mashed up into one.

Were you nervous to tell me your story?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes, for sure.

BOLDUAN: Why?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Because what kind of piece of shit uses when they're pregnant? But it's reality. And it's not that simple.

BOLDUAN: Life isn't simple.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes, its not.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BOLDUAN: And there is a lot more to Marissa's story, that woman that you just watched, and a lot more to the complex reality of a life after fentanyl.

Please watch the culmination of this two-year investigation. It's called "Fentanyl in America: A Way Out," this Sunday, March 30th, on CNN's "THE WHOLE STORY" presented by Anderson Cooper.

A new hour of CNN NEWS CENTRAL starts now.

SARA SIDNER, CNN ANCHOR: President Trump is hell bent on taking Greenland. Now. Greenland says the administration is making a highly aggressive move against the Danish territory by sending the national security advisor and Second Lady Usha Vance for a visit. And today, another round of peace talks underway right now between the

U.S. envoy and Russian officials over Russia's war on Ukraine. Just 24 hours before the talks, Ukrainians in Europe shaken by comments made by Trump's U.S. envoy, Steve Witkoff, where he praised Putin and made comments that sounded a whole lot like Russian propaganda.

And starting today, workers at the Department of Education will begin packing up their cubicles after Trump takes the first steps to try to shut down the agency.

I'm Sara Sidner, with Kate Bolduan and John Berman. This is CNN NEWS CENTRAL.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: Highly aggressive. That is what the prime minister of Greenland is calling a planned U.S. visit this week to his island, as President Trump seems to juice his plans to annex the Danish territory.

Among the group of Americans headed there, Second Lady Usha Vance and Trump's national security adviser, Mike Waltz. The White House says Ms. Vance will take in Greenland's national dog sled race and celebrate Greenlandic culture and unity. It comes after President Trump said this earlier this month.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We need Greenland for national security and even international security. And we're working with everybody involved to try and get it. But we need it really for international world security. And I think we're going to get it. One way or the other we're going to get it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: One way or the other we're going to get it.

CNN's Alayna Treene is at the White House this morning.

And these trips this week seem to be part of that promise.

ALAYNA TREENE, CNN WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Yes, look, the White House, and from what we've heard from their statements announcing these visits, are trying to downplay them, argue, particularly in the case of Second Lady Usha Vance, that this is all about participating in Greenland's culture and their different practices.

But, of course, there are broader implications here. Just going back to the president's fixation on wanting to acquire Greenland. Now, this was also something, remember, that he talked about a lot during his first term, was unsuccessful, of course, but he is really ratcheted up that rhetoric, not only during his second administration, but also in the weeks leading up to him being sworn into office.

Now, this is something I've talked at length about with several top Trump administration officials, White House officials, again before and after he was sworn into office for his second term. And part of it is exactly what you heard the president say there during his joint address to Congress, which is, one, the territory itself, Greenland is a semi-autonomous territory, part of Denmark, but they have - its very rich in rare earth minerals. Something we know that the administration is very interested by. But it's also key to what they argue is curbing Russian and Chinese aggression in the arctic region.

[09:05:02]

They think its location is key to those national security interests. And that's really where a lot of this comes down to. And because of that, there's been so much back and forth tension between the United States and Greenland and Denmark over this effort by the president.

Now, I want to read for you some of what Greenland's prime minister said regarding these two separate visits by Usha Vance and Mike Waltz. He said, quote, "the very aggressive American pressure against Greenlandic society is now so serious that the level cannot be raised any higher. Standing together in Greenland has not helped. Speaking out has not helped. And the diplomatic attempt at dialog is in vain. Now the international community must respond."

So, clearly they are arguing that they need the international community to weigh in here, to try and stop some of this rhetoric and efforts on behalf of the Trump administration regarding their desire to acquire Greenland.

And this is something we've heard from Greenland and Denmark repeatedly, that Greenland is not for sale. Of course, that has not stopped the president from saying that he still wants a way to acquire it, and he thinks that they'll be able to do it.

John.

BERMAN: Something about what the U.S. is doing this week has made the prime minister in Greenland say enough. It is interesting to watch this play out.

Alayna Treene, thank you very much.

Sara.

SIDNER: All right, happening now, a new round of talks over a potential ceasefire in Ukraine. U.S. and Russian negotiators meeting this morning. It comes as Ukraine says Russia launched another wave of deadly attacks on the country overnight. The U.S. is sitting down with Russian officials in Saudi Arabia a day after meeting there separately with Ukrainian negotiators.

The Ukrainian foreign ministry calling those talks, quote, "productive" and "focused." But there are big questions, what would Ukraine have to give up to end the war, and would Vladimir Putin set his sights on Europe next?

CNN's Alex Marquardt joining us now from Washington.

This meeting is coming at a crucial time. Trump's foreign envoy is being accused of parroting Kremlin talking points. Some of the things he's saying is exactly what the Kremlin has been saying about their takeover of territory in Ukraine. What are you hearing?

ALEX MARQUARDT, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Thats right, Sara, and that is certainly going to worry the Ukrainians as they get into this latest round of talks. This is day two, as you noted, of what are known as these indirect proximity talks. The U.S. is speaking to each side, but the sides are not together at the table. The U.S., of course, eventually hopes to get them together at the table. This is not at the highest level. These are what are called technical teams. So, what they're trying to do right now is to put the finer points on what both sides have agreed to, which right now is a narrow ceasefire on energy infrastructure. And then these negotiators are going to try to expand that ceasefire to include the fighting in the Black Sea and then all along the front before they finally try to hammer out a peace deal. And that's where things are going to get very complicated, Sara, particularly over the question of territory.

And there was this remarkable interview with top Trump envoy Steve Witkoff, who is a main mediator in these talks, who talked about the territorial concessions that Ukraine might have to make. And he said that the critical issue here is several territories in the eastern and southern part of Ukraine that Russia wants. And he says that this is all that Russia wants. But, of course, the general perception is that Russia would like to take over Ukraine completely.

Here's what Witkoff told Tucker Carlson.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

STEVE WITKOFF, U.S. SPECIAL ENVOY TO THE MIDDLE EAST: There's a view within - within the country of Russia that - that these are Russian territories, that there are referendums within these territories that - that justify these actions. I simply have said that I just don't see that he wants to take all of Europe. This is a much different situation than it was in World War II. In World War II there was no NATO. So, I just - you have countries that are armed there. I just - to me it just - it just - I take him at his word in this sense.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MARQUARDT: So, that was Witkoff speaking actually with Fox News.

And what is remarkable is, he was actually agreeing, Sara, with the Russian talking point, that these are Russian territories because they speak Russian, because there was this referendum that took place. Those referenda in these four areas were - was generally perceived to be a sham. It was done during an occupation. It was - you know, obviously there are going to be a lot of people who felt pressure to vote or didn't vote at all. And so here, essentially, you have the top Trump envoy agreeing with the position of the - of the Russians that they should take over, not just Crimea, but these four other territories as well.

Now, in - in the other interview that he gave with Tucker Carlson, Witkoff spoke quite glowingly about Putin, saying that he did trust him, that he believes that he does want to work towards peace. He said that he was graciously welcomed by the Russian president, and he actually told a story about how Putin had commissioned a painting by a top Russian artist of Trump that was then given as a gift to the American president.

Sara.

[09:10:10]

SIDNER: Yes, Putin, former KGB, tends to play the field pretty darn well.

Alex Marquardt, thank you so much.

Kate.

BOLDUAN: Joining us right now is the Democratic congressman from Massachusetts, Seth Moulton, who sits on the Armed Services Committee.

Congressman, thanks for coming in.

Let's continue with what Alex Marquardt was just talking about and how Trump's top envoy, kind of envoy to Vladimir Putin personally, and what he has just been saying in these new interviews, more with Tucker Carlson and Fox News. Witkoff echoing Kremlin talking points around these referendum votes held by Russian forces occupying parts of Ukraine taken by military force.

Let me play this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

STEVE WITKOFF, U.S. SPECIAL ENVOY TO THE MIDDLE EAST: There have been referendums where the overwhelming majority of the people have indicated that they want to be under Russian rule.

The Russians are de facto in control of these territories.

TUCKER CARLSON, HOST, "THE TUCKER CARLSON SHOW": Yes.

WITKOFF: The question is, will they be - will the world acknowledge that those are Russian territories? Will it end up - can Zelenskyy survive politically if he acknowledges this? There's - there's - this is - this is the central issue in the conflict.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BOLDUAN: What's your reaction to that? If this is the - now the stated U.S. position of these talks?

REP. SETH MOULTON (D-MA): I mean, it's just insane. I mean I think we've known for a while that Tucker Carlson is on the Kremlin's side and has been for some time. But now the lead negotiator for the United States is taking the Tucker Carlson/Putin position on these negotiations. He's literally negotiating for the other side. Negotiating for the aggressor. Negotiating for the violator of international law.

And what does he say? He says, oh, I take Putin at his word. Is this guy a total idiot? Is he just completely naive? I mean, I can't figure out where he's coming from. Maybe he's paid off by Russia. I mean, it's just insane that you have a U.S. negotiator taking the side of our enemy.

BOLDUAN: Yes. No evidence has been presented that he - there's any - I get your point, but there's no evidence this - that has been presented that there's any payoff that has actually been happening to Steve Witkoff.

But in terms of -

MOULTON: No, I'm not - I'm not saying there's any evidence. I'm just trying to understand why on earth would a U.S. negotiator take our adversaries side? I mean, Reagan must be rolling over in his grave here. The Republican Party has become subservient to Russia. The Republican Party has become completely weak on national security. I mean, this is like a repeat of Chamberlain going to Munich and appeasing, trying to get peace through appeasement. That's the opposite of peace through strength. And it doesn't work, Kate. It doesn't work. We're just giving in to our enemy.

BOLDUAN: Let me add into this. "Time" magazine actually just posted an exclusive interview with Ukraine's president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy. I want to read a portion that seems significant to this exact point. He says he sees the White House beginning to take Putin at his word. The way it's written in "Time," even when their own intelligence contradicted him. The quote from Zelenskyy, "I believe Russia has managed to influence some people on the White House team through information," Zelenskyy told "Times" Simon Schuster. "Their signal to the Americans was that the Ukrainians do not want to end the war, and something should be done to force them."

I saw that in terms of Zelenskyy speaking out and saying that. And I'm wondering, given the troubled, traumatic and fraught relationship that has become the relationship between Zelenskyy and - and Donald Trump, having Zelenskyy say that in the middle of this is going to add what to these talks to try to reach a ceasefire, an end to this war?

MOULTON: Well, Zelenskyy is just trying to introduce some reality here that the Trump team apparently can't figure out, because Vladimir Putin is a KGB agent who is playing Trump like a violin. Playing him like a violin. And now, apparently, he and the Kremlin are doing the same to Witkoff, who I thought was a smart negotiator, but apparently is following the Trump playbook of giving all your concessions away up front. I mean, this is - this is how not to win a negotiation unless you're trying to win for the other side, which increasingly seems to be what Trump is trying to do. The Trump administration is taking the side of Russia and Vladimir Putin in this conflict, and they're so naive, they're so idiotic to actually believe Putin when he says, oh, yes, no, don't worry, everything's just going to be fine. Just trust me. I mean, just - how dumb do you have to be, Kate? I just don't figure it out. BOLDUAN: I want to also turn our focus, because you have also been

outspoken in telling the Democratic Party that they need to get their act together. And that seems to be coming to a head right now as well.

[09:15:08]

Big questions around Democratic leadership right now. "Axios," this morning, the way they put it is, top Democrats say their party is in its deepest hole in nearly 50 years, and they fear that could actually get worse.

And then there was this from fellow Democrat Ro Khanna speaking to Dana Bash this weekend.

Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. RO KHANNA (D-CA): The American people are fed up with the old guard. There needs to be a renewal. You know, in Silicon Valley, when a company isn't doing well, you don't keep the same team. And I think there's going to be a new generation in this country. They want to see a more compelling economic message.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BOLDUAN: He was criticizing Chuck Schumer and his moves in the - on the GOP spending bill there.

Do you think the Democratic Party is in such disarray? How do you describe it?

MOULTON: Yes, I mean, it's - I - look, it's pretty clear that people are upset. Of course everyone on the right doesn't like Democrats. That's - they voted against us in the last election. A majority of Americans chose a party led by an indicted criminal. A convicted criminal, sorry. A convicted felon.

But, on the other hand, Democrats, the base, are really fed up with the fact that we're not being very effective at standing up to Trump. And a lot of Democrats are not speaking out. They're not just telling it how it is. I mean they're not using such strong language to condemn the Trump team and all the things that they're doing. So, on both sides, people are upset with Democrats.

But, Kate, you're also right, this is a tremendous opportunity for the Democratic Party. We do need a new generation of leadership. I've been calling for that since I was first elected in 2014. And, you know, sometimes it's gotten me into some hot water. But over time I think people have said, yes, that's right, we do need some new leaders. And new leaders can reassert our position on national security because Democrats are proving that we are the party of a strong country, of a strong national security, because we're not appeasing Russia.

We're also the party of a strong economy. Trump is wrecking our economy. You know, China's stock is up, Russia's stock is up, but American stocks are cratering because of Trump's tariffs, his complete, you know, all over the place economic policy where people can't even know what he's going to do in the next 24 hours. It's wrecking the economy. And Democrats are trying to hold the line.

So, forget Republicans being strong on the economy. Democrats are strong on the economy. But it's obvious that we need new leaders to come out and make this point because the old, tired leaders of the Democratic Party just can't prove to America that we're going to change. And we need to change. If we want to be a majority party, if we want to win, we've got to listen to the voters who told us in the last election that we're out of touch and start winning again, show that we can change, show that we can embrace these new issues and there's a bright future for the Democratic Party.

BOLDUAN: Well, and what that new leadership looks like, I think, is where the big questions remain right now.

Congressman, thank you so much for coming in. Appreciate your time.

Sara.

SIDNER: All right.

The White House Easter Egg Roll, brought to you by the highest bidder. President Trump wants to open the White House tradition to corporate sponsorship. This, of course, brings up an ethical issue, especially after he used the White House as a lot to show off Teslas this year.

Plus, Tesla sales are tanking as quickly as its stock price, but does Elon Musk's work with DOGE pose a long-term threat to that company?

And employees with the Department of Education begin clearing out their desks this morning? Caught up in the breakup of the agency.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:22:31]

BERMAN: All right, in just a few hours, the Trump administration will try to get an appeals court to overturn a federal judge's ruling temporarily blocking them from deporting planeloads of migrants using the 1798 Alien Enemies Act. Justice Department lawyers will also ask for that judge, the lower court judge, to be thrown off the case. This after he's been attacked multiple times by President Trump.

With us now is the former assistant U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, CNN's senior legal analyst, Elie Honig.

Counselor, as always, great to see you.

Explain to me, because this case has now become pretty complicated at several different levels, what exactly the appeals court is considering today?

ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: So, John, the main issue in front of the appeals court today is whether the administration correctly and constitutionally applied the Alien Enemies Act to this deportation of Venezuelan gang members that happened about ten days ago.

Now, the challengers here are going to argue that the administration incorrectly said this is an incursion or an alien invasion perpetrated by a foreign government, which is what the law requires. But the administration is going to argue, first of all, that it's up to them to make that decision, whether this is an invasion or an incursion. And, second of all, that they're correct in making that decision.

So really, today's argument gets back to the heart of the issue here, the constitutionality of the use of this law from 1798 as applied to this specific situation.

BERMAN: And the judges hearing the case today, who are they and what impact could that have?

HONIG: Well, this ended up being about as good a draw as the administration, as the DOJ, could have hoped for. So, this is the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. There are 11 active judges on that circuit. And what happens in any given case is three of them are randomly assigned.

Now, if you look at the 11 active judges, seven of them are Democratic appointees, four of them are Republican appointees. This court, as a whole, tends to lean left, although they're not particularly ideological. But if you look at what came out of that random assignment, two of the three judges who will actually be hearing this case are Republican nominees. One was appointed by George H.W. Bush. The other was appointed by Donald Trump. And the third was appointed by Obama. But that judge, Judge Millett, is known to be fairly non- partizan, non-ideological.

So, it's a left-leaning court, but it's a right-leaning panel of three who's going to actually hear this case. It does not guarantee any result. This court is primarily about the law above politics, but a good draw.

[09:25:00]

BERMAN: Yes, it's hard to know because part of this ruling will be about what role the courts play in interpreting law. And courts occasionally have some wonky opinions about that. And this gets back to some. Judge Luttig wrote in "The New York Times" this morning, this gets back to Marbury versus Madison, the famed Supreme Court case of 1803, where Chief Justice John Marshall wrote, "it's the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is."

How much does Marbury versus Madison matter here, and how are each sides trying to apply it, Elie?

HONIG: Well, Marbury versus Madison applies here. It applies to every case. But it doesn't necessarily dictate the outcome. So, watch for the challengers here to cite Marbury versus Madison. They're going to say, you're court. It's your job to decide these matters. But the DOJ is going to argue, and they have argued already, no,

judiciary, no, judges, this is an area, when it comes to foreign policy and immigration, that is strictly for the president, strictly for the executive branch. And it's actually beyond your role, judges, to get involved here.

Now, I want to be clear about this. Marbury versus Madison says the courts do have the power, if they choose to exercise it, to say what the law is, to hear any given case. It does not say the courts have to rule on every case. In fact, there's a whole bunch of different doctrines where courts say, no, we choose not to get involved in this case. For example, a court might say we don't have jurisdiction. A court - a federal court might say that's a state level case. A court might say that's a political question. That's something that we are not going to get involved in.

So, Marbury versus Madison, if I have to boil it down to a sentence or two basically says, the courts do have the power to decide whatever they want to, but they don't have to exercise that power in every single case.

BERMAN: We will see what this three judge panel thinks about all this.

Elie Honig, thanks for explaining it so well. Appreciate it.

Sara.

SIDNER: And we should just keep Elie around for this next one. The NAACP has joined groups suing the Trump administration over its dismantling of the Department of Education. Ahead, what's at stake? We will talk to one of the stakeholders.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)