Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Soon: Hearing on Lawsuit Over Trump Admin's Use of Signal App; Judge in Deportation Case Also Given Lawsuit Over Use of Signal Chat; Pentagon Chief Under Pressure as Signal Chat Fallout Grows; Trump Vows 25 Percent Tariff on All Cars & Parts Imported into the U.S.; HHS to Slash 10,000 Full-Time Employees in Major Overhaul; Aviation Safety Officials Grilled Over D.C. Midair Collision; Victim's Brother Speaks After Senate Hearing on Deadly Midair Crash. Aired 3-3:30p ET

Aired March 27, 2025 - 15:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:00:34]

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: Joining the group chat, a judge. One hour from now, an emergency hearing will get underway. The administration hit with a lawsuit for using an app that can delete government information that is sensitive. We're following the latest here.

And the Trump tariff war taking a bite out of the big three automakers on Wall Street today. While Canada and Mexico weigh their options on how to respond to the President, American consumers could feel sticker shock at the dealer loss.

OMAR JIMENEZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Plus, the cuts keep coming. Thousands of federal employees at the Department of Health and Human Services are going to be laid off.

We're following these major developing stories and many more, all coming in right here to CNN NEWS CENTRAL.

KEILAR: Hello, I'm Brianna Keilar here with Omar Jimenez in Washington. And in less than an hour, a federal judge in Washington will be holding an emergency hearing. This is on a new lawsuit over the Trump administration's use of that Signal messaging app to discuss really sensitive attack plans in Yemen.

The administration is accused of violating the Federal Records Act by using this app that can automatically delete messages.

JIMENEZ: And we're still standing by for that hearing. But in the meantime, we are getting brand new CNN reporting on Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth facing growing doubts about his judgment and leadership within the National Security community. We're joined now by CNN Chief Legal Affairs Correspondent Paula Reid, CNN National Security Reporter Zachary Cohen, CNN Global Affairs Brett McGurk is here as well, and former U.S. Attorney Harry Litman as well.

Good to see all of you.

Paula, I want to start with you on this Signal hearing. I mean, what exactly does this lawsuit claim?

PAULA REID, CNN CHIEF LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: This is really significant because this is the first time that this controversial Signal chat will be the subject of a federal court hearing. And here, a nonpartisan nonprofit organization has sued, saying that the Trump administration is violating federal records law. Because under the federal law, they are required. Agencies are required. Each one is responsible for implementing its own system to preserve and protect records related to that agency's work.

And here, they're saying that they're violating this because, of course, Signal has an auto-delete feature, we know. And at least one individual in that Signal chat had that auto-delete set. And there's no indication that all of these were being preserved. Now, you can preserve a Signal chat, even if it's being deleted, if you take a screen grab.

Now, the Justice Department has responded to this lawsuit, saying that this request for a temporary restraining order should be rejected. They list out at least four reasons. They're saying, look, this group has not proven that, ultimately, they will be successful in this lawsuit. They're saying they haven't demonstrated any irreparable harm. The public interest weighs in favor of not granting a temporary restraining order. And they're saying, look, any release should be narrowly tailored. They also provided two sworn declarations that say the agencies are working to locate and preserve the contents of that Signal chat.

Now, one thing here that I think we need to all talk about here is who will be overseeing this hearing. This was assigned to Judge James Boasberg. He has been the subject of multiple attacks from President Trump because he oversaw, of course, the case related to the administration's efforts to deport people they say were affiliated with the Venezuelan gang.

Now, he was randomly assigned to this case, but he has extensive experience in National Security with these kinds of record requests. And because at this point, the Justice Department has given no indication that there will be a criminal investigation. Civil litigation may be the only recourse here.

KEILAR: Harry, talk a little bit about that, because in this filing where they're saying they're trying to preserve the chat, you have Paula talking a little bit about that there. But the Treasury Department says they have a partial version of the chat. And I do want to note that at least at one point, it was set to a one-week delete. And we have gone past that time period.

So there is at least a possibility that some of these have been deleted, although they are out there in the public. What kind of questions does this raise for you when it comes to actually preserving these as a public record and the legal liability?

HARRY LITMAN, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Okay. So, excuse me, in terms of the lawsuit, it raises the question of irreparable harm.

[15:05:05]

Judge Boasberg may say, we're really not sure you're being harmed at all. It's absolutely right. And lawsuits like this have succeeded in the past. If records are being destroyed, and it does seem that's the reason they were using Signal. But if they can really make a strong case that everything's being preserved, that would be a reason for Boasberg, who, by the way, has held plenty of times for Republicans and Democrats - the whole idea that he's partisan is just contrived - that would be a reason for him not to grant it.=

I just want to emphasize, though, this is an important aspect of the problem, preserving the records. But as Paula just said, no FBI investigation. That is mind-boggling for anybody who's ever been in the Department of Justice. Without a doubt, any other administration, Republican or Democrat, there'd be a piece of paper and an opening of a file that would say Espionage Act 793(f) would have the Secretary of Defense's name on it. And if they really intend to not do that or go forward, it's a very bad sign of the sort of political takeover of the DOJ.

JIMENEZ: And we haven't seen any announcement, at least of an investigation of - from the FBI, at least to this point.

Zach, you know, one of the concerns, lawsuit aside, is obviously the contents of these Signal messages. And in particular, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth sort of laying out a timeline of impending attacks by the United States. What are you learning about doubts over Hegseth's job performance to this point?

ZACHARY COHEN, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY REPORTER: Yes, guys, there was a lot of questions about Hegseth's experience and his background back when he was first nominated to be Trump's Secretary of Defense. But now what we're hearing from inside the Pentagon, from National Security officials across various agencies, is concern about his judgment and his leadership capabilities.

And they're pointing to this - his role in this Signal chat as a prime example of that. And that's because the messages that he sent to this chat really did contain operational details, not only about a pending military strike, but one that hadn't even started yet. And that's really what our sources describe as kind of the cardinal sin or cardinal rule of being a keeper of important sensitive information like this is you don't put troops' lives at risk. And by posting this in an unclassified channel, that's what they're saying that Pete Hegseth did.

And look, one source put it this way and put a finer point on it and said, quote, the egregious actor here is Hegseth. And this is a former senior intelligence official. He's in the bullseye now because he puts all this out on a Signal chat. And you may have noticed though, Hegseth's not really shying away from this controversy. He's been out there and really being defiant in defending his post and his messages and the existence of this group chat itself.

But sources say that also kind of underscores the broader problem here that Hegseth doesn't have the experience or the know-how to really understand why this was such an egregious breach in and of itself. One source put it this way, his quote, "a TV personality." So comparing him to his predecessors who were not TV personalities, but seasoned defense officials, I think that's sort of the juxtaposition officials are grappling with now.

KEILAR: You know who does have the expertise and the know-how is Brett McGurk, which is why it's really fascinating to have you here to talk a little bit about this, because you've been in a situation like this and it seems just wholly unnecessary some of what was discussed in this Signal chat. Can you just explain to us normally how it goes?

BRETT MCGURK, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: I'll be upfront where I come at this, I want these guys to succeed. I think this Houthi campaign is important. Actually, we developed this overall campaign. We handed it over to them in the transition.

I'll go back over a year ago, January 12th, 2024, a massive attack into Yemen. About 22 manned aircraft off the USS Eisenhower, aircraft carrier, about a hundred Tomahawk missiles from destroyers and from a nuclear-powered submarine attacked 60 targets all across Yemen. Very successful attack. I coordinated that attack from the White House Situation Room, in the White House, in a SCIF as things are done.

Frankly, I am shocked to even be talking about this because I know about how the targeting is developed. In December of last year, so only talking a few months ago, on December 30th, we did a strike against a command-and-control facility. We announced that publicly. I know a lot about that strike. We were targeting some Houthi leaders. They're targeting the leaders now.

The intelligence to get these targets is incredibly hard, dangerous work. And we're reading about some of the pattern of life against some of the leaders being targeted now. That's shocking. Look, I would recommend anyone involved in this just say, we messed up.

These jobs are hard. The amount of information coming at you at all times, 24/7, it's hard. We messed up, not going to happen again. On with the mission. All of this dissembling and finger-pointing, finger- pointing at the Biden administration and Jeffrey Goldberg, is a huge distraction from an ongoing military campaign that is ongoing tonight.

The Houthis had a statement today, totally defiant.

[15:10:01]

They launched missiles today at Israel. This is going to go on for months. I know about the campaign. It's not a one-night strike. So, you know, we got to get serious, focus on the mission and I'm really hoping the mission can succeed. I'm thinking about our guys out there in CENTCOM who are carrying this out.

JIMENEZ: And Brett, one follow-up there, because, you know, multiple officials now say Signal was pre-installed on their devices. Ratcliffe's saying that its use was a carry-over from the Biden administration. Did you ever see it pre-installed on government devices? Was it - was there a standard, I guess, channel that was used among high-ranking officials?

MCGURK: And it's - our government devices we could have Signal on our White House devices, at least in our administration.

KEILAR: And computers, because he says it was on his computer. Is that a different thing? Because, you know, one of the vulnerabilities here is your phone is not necessarily secure, right? Just walking around, convenient, but not the most secure thing.

Look, the way this type of information is communicated, what was - what Hegseth put into that chat is coming from CENTCOM, probably to the Joint Staff, directly to Secretary of Defense and it comes through secure communications. That is clearly classified information, and that's how that type of information is handled.

JIMENEZ: Harry, I want to bring you back in here, because, look, so much focus on the sensitive, classified nature of these messages, but this lawsuit focuses on records. Do you foresee any legal culpability around the actual content of the messages?

LITMAN: Well, that's what I was talking about, and normally there would be. Look, as Brett says, there's - another troubling aspect is there's a kind of squirreliness and evasion going on. Hegseth is saying nothing was classified. That's what Trump is saying. That's either not true or involves some kind of legalism.

There's no way, as Brett says, this is the crown jewel kind of stuff. Military operations that haven't yet happened couldn't be more serious. So, if it's not, quote-unquote, "classified now," it's because they've done some little maneuver.

In terms of possible culpability, as Brett says, big mistake, let's say, and just move on. But the law is so serious about this that big mistakes, even if you're reckless, are a criminal violation. The Espionage Act 793(f) says if you are really reckless and the information is published, that's a crime. The neighboring provision to the one Donald Trump was charged under in the Mar-a-Lago case.

So, I understand the impulse to say let's get it better from here, but this is such an enormous transgression that not getting to the bottom of it and not having accountability is just not the way we normally do things before the last two months.

JIMENEZ: Harry Litman, Zach Cohen, Paula Reid, Brett McGurk, I'm surprised I remembered all those so quickly. Thank you all for being here. Fascinating reporting insight, as always.

All right. A warning now, if you're looking to buy a new car, the price you pay could soon surge by thousands of dollars. What we mean by that is Trump is on the verge of slapping a 25 percent tariff on all imported cars and car parts.

KEILAR: CNN's Matt Egan is with us now live.

So Matt, how much are we talking about prices being expected to rise here? MATT EGAN, CNN REPORTER: Well, Brianna and Omar, this is just the latest front in the trade war and it is one that could cause significant sticker shock for car buyers and chaos for the auto industry. We're talking about import taxes on foreign cars. And remember, almost half of all cars sold in America are foreign, so now they face this 25 percent tariff.

And even the ones that are in America that are made in American factories, they have foreign parts that also face tariffs. And so that's why Wolfe Research estimates that the cost of a typical car could increase by $4,000. That's just the typical car. Goldman Sachs estimates that the cost of a imported car could go up by between $5,000 and $15,000.

And keep in mind, car prices are already near all-time highs. And it is not at all clear that consumers can stomach that kind of a price increase. So, what could happen is people could buy fewer new cars. Bank of America is estimating that these tariffs will hurt U.S. auto sales by between 2.5 million and 3 million vehicles a year. Wall Street is clearly worried about how these tariffs are going to impact the bottom lines of the automakers.

We're seeing auto stocks move significantly lower today on this news. Both the foreign automakers like Toyota and Honda, but the U.S. ones as well. Look at Ford, GM down almost 7 percent on the day.

Now, at this point, the auto industry is scrambling to try to figure out how to respond. I just talked to an auto executive who isn't authorized to speak publicly. But he said, look, there are active discussions going on right now across the industry about either cutting production or cutting incentives.

[15:15:08]

And he noted that either way, it's going to increase prices for consumers.

JIMENEZ: Now, look, the President has said he wants auto manufacturing to return to America as part of his reasoning for implementing these tariffs. Is there a roadmap to that based on if these tariffs are implemented, especially in the long-term?

EGAN: Yes, you know, it's too early to say at this point. I mean, the tariffs have not even kicked in yet. But remember, this is all about a supply chain that has been built up over years or decades. And it is an intricate, delicate supply chain.

So, undoing all of those interconnected links will not be easy. It can happen overnight. And it won't be cheap, right? We're talking about something that would cost hundreds of millions or billions of dollars per factory. And CEOs are not going to make that kind of commitment unless they have clarity on where tariffs are going to be.

I talked to an editor from Kelley Blue Book, Sean Tucker, and he said, these auto executives, they have to calculate the cost and return over decades. But it's hard for them to predict the next 10 minutes right now.

KEILAR: Wow, that puts it into perspective. Matt Egan, thank you very much.

EGAN: Thanks, guys.

KEILAR: Still to come this hour, the Department of Health and Human Services is about to get a big overhaul, thousands of jobs on the chopping block. We'll tell you how these latest cuts could impact Americans.

JIMENEZ: And on Capitol Hill, senators question why the Army is still flying helicopter training missions near Reagan Washington National Airport without the surveillance tool that maybe could have prevented the January midair collision. We're going to speak to the brother of a passenger on board that tragic day.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:21:09]

KEILAR: Health and Human Services Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr. announcing that the department is cutting 10,000 full-time jobs from federal health agencies. These are layoffs that are in addition to the roughly 10,000 employees who have left voluntarily.

JIMENEZ: I want to bring in CNN medical correspondent Meg Tirrell, who's here with more.

So, Meg, can you just map out what these changes would actually look like?

MEG TIRRELL, CNN MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Omar, I mean, they're massive. We're talking about an agency that had 82,000 employees at the beginning of all of this. And at the end, we'll have 62,000. That's almost a 25 percent reduction in headcount at HHS.

They say this is going to save $1.8 billion a year for taxpayers and they're consolidating divisions down from 28 into 15. And so, all of the agencies we think of when we think of Health and Human Services, like FDA, they will have 3,500 jobs cut: CDC, 2,400 employees; NIH, 1,200; the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, 300 employees.

Now, they're trying to emphasize that certain things, including Medicare & Medicaid Services, should not be affected, as well as at FDA, reviewers of food, medical devices and drugs, as well as inspectors. But folks in the public health community are very concerned about the scope of these cuts and the depth of these cuts.

And we're starting to hear responses from folks like Xavier Becerra, the former HHS secretary, who just put out on X earlier, quote, "this has the makings of a man-made disaster. Downgrading services for our elderly and our disabled, downgrading services for mental health, downgrading our strategic preparedness and response capabilities - how can that be good for the health of any American?" And guys, really what I'm hearing from folks who've worked in government before is that the concerns here, there could be folks who have really specific abilities and knowledge and they could be swept up in this and they're hard to replace. Guys?

KEILAR: Yes, they really are. Meg Tirrell, thank you for that report.

Today, the director of Army Aviation, who in this picture or in these pictures are seen on the right, got a stern warning during a Senate hearing on the January midair collision between an American Airlines passenger jet and an Army helicopter. Sixty-seven people died in that crash near Reagan National Airport. Senator Ted Cruz questioning why the Army is still flying some helicopter training missions near the airport without key surveillance technology to prevent the collision. It's called ADS-B Out and it broadcasts latitude, longitude, altitude and velocity every second.

JIMENEZ: And it wasn't transmitting on the Army helicopter the night of the crash.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. TED CRUZ (R-TX): I have to say, I find that shocking and deeply unacceptable. If today, another accident occurs over DCA with another helicopter that had ADS-B Out turned off, the Army will have very direct responsibility for that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

JIMENEZ: Now, today, the acting head of the FAA announced at the hearing that said it would require nearly all aircraft operating by Reagan to use the technology.

Joining me now is Dailey Crafton, the brother of Casey Crafton, an American Airlines passenger killed in the crash. That's him there.

Dailey, thanks for being here.

I knew you were at this hearing today, which I can't imagine was easy. What was going through your mind when you were sitting there listening?

DAILEY CRAFTON, BROTHER KILLED IN MIDAIR COLLISION OVER POTOMAC: I was just, you know, we'd heard - we'd had the preliminary report already, but I wanted to see what the responses were and it kind of was all over the place. The thing - one of the things that stood out to me the most was the lack of interagency communication. Like these people had these data, but they didn't share with, it wasn't shared with these folks, you know, over here and these other ones and just a lot of kind of like siloing, yes.

sa15:25:00]

KEILAR: But they weren't talking to each other about close calls. I mean, some of the --

CRAFTON: The 15,000 between October, 2021 and December 2024, yes ...

KEILAR: Yes.

CRAFTON: ... that was no information.

JIMENEZ: Getting within 400 feet.

CRAFTON: Yes.

JIMENEZ: Yes.

KEILAR: Yes, getting very close. And so, when you hear that and obviously you want more coordination, what kind of changes are you looking for that they seem some of them pretty obvious?

CRAFTON: Yes, it seems like transparency would be one big one just with, you know, sharing information and that was discussed. I mean, like too little, too late, right? Oh, yes, we're going to share our information now. And, you know, some things have been implemented already. And, again, this is the preliminary report, so there's going to be more to come, but I think that starting with that and some of the things you've mentioned about the safety systems that were maybe not on or maybe not functioning, we don't know yet. Those being corrected, you know, as a starting point.

JIMENEZ: Yes. I know you said you want more transparency. Is there anything you're looking for in terms of accountability here?

CRAFTON: Yes, we didn't hear a lot of accountability today. We heard a little passing the buck and, you know, this, that and the other, but this - in terms of like, yes, we take responsibility for that. It didn't seem super apparent in today's hearing, yes.

KEILAR: These lawmakers and these officials, the lawmakers doing the questions and the officials who are answering them, you know, what did you want to say to them?

CRAFTON: I don't know. I was just - I kind of wanted just to be there for the conversation and see what transpired. And I mean, one thing I just kind of want to say in general, I guess to them is that - and this was touched upon by some of the senators, is these are people's lives. This is my brother and my parents' son, and my sister-in-law's husband and my nephew's dad. And that applies, you know, exponentially to the 67 lives that were lost. It's not a number on a sheet. It's somebody's somebody that's lost and is - and we don't get back.

JIMENEZ: And, you know, we're showing you and your brother there, I believe, I don't want to misquote, you called him Bro-ham earlier.

CRAFTON: I called him Bro-ham.

JIMENEZ: Yes.

CRAFTON: But we would call each other, bubs (ph). That was our nickname for each other. And we all - ended up calling each other uncle bubs. And our nieces and nephews would call the respective one uncle bubs and that was - kind of like defined our relationship was just, we had like a lot of fun and a lot of camaraderie and just kind of like being silly and, you know.

JIMENEZ: And, you know, you were talking about him, husband, father of three, your brother. I mean, you know, we didn't have the pleasure, unfortunately, to know him, but can you just tell us a little bit about him?

CRAFTON: Just deeply invested in his family, and his wife, and his three boys and my parents, our parents, making sure they're okay. They just moved up to Connecticut from Memphis to be near us. He lives in Connecticut, I live in New York, so we were geographically, you know, close. And then, the story I keep telling is this about - he borrowed an RV for - from my father-in-law for a charity event he was doing for his co-worker's son, like just like very selfless. And he brought the RV back with some repairs done on it that it needed, like, so he left it better than he found it. And that's just kind of defined Casey and who he was and how he led his life.

JIMENEZ: Dailey, I really appreciate you being here.

CRAFTON: Yes. Thanks for having me and letting me tell my brother's story.

JIMENEZ: Of course, thanks for being here.

CRAFTON: Thank you.

JIMENEZ: Everyone else, we'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)