Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Soon: Trump Speaks Amid Turmoil Over Trade, Ukraine Peace Talks; Trump Threatens to Reimpose Paused Tariffs Amid 90-Day Reprieve; One of Hegseth's Closest Military Aides Requested Exception to Use Signal, Raising Eyebrows Among Officials; FEMA to Lose About 20 Percent of Staff Ahead of Hurricane Season. Aired 1-1:30p ET

Aired April 24, 2025 - 13:00   ET

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

[13:00:00]

DANA BASH, CNN ANCHOR: Thank you so much for being here. Thank you for remembering. CNN NEWS CENTRAL starts after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: The art of no deal, at least not yet. We're standing by to hear from President Trump as White House negotiations on two fronts are in turmoil. Right now, President Trump is meeting with Norway's prime minister just hours after re-escalating his trade wars.

Trump had paused elevated so-called reciprocal tariffs on about 90 countries for 90 days, but now he's threatening to reimpose those tariffs much sooner, and so far he has made zero trade deals.

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: And in Ukraine, the deadliest day in the war in nearly a year since last summer. Russia striking Kyiv after Trump accused President Zelenskyy of hurting peace talks. Trump's social media post after those attacks, quote, Vladimir, stop.

He goes on to call this very bad timing. Let's get straight to the White House and CNN's Kevin Liptak. Kevin, you were just able to ask the president a question moments ago.

Walk us through that Q&A.

KEVIN LIPTAK, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Yes, and I think it's clear from the president's remarks and from that post that the president is frustrated that his attempts to broker a peace between Russia and Ukraine have so far fallen short. Remember, he promised he would end this war within 24 hours. Now we're approaching the 100-day mark of his presidency, and it doesn't appear as if a peace is anywhere nearer.

Now, I asked the president in the cabinet room, he's having lunch with the prime minister of Norway, whether he was considering sanctions on Russia if it doesn't stop this bombardment, and if he still believes that Vladimir Putin still actually wants a peace agreement. Listen to what the president said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LIPTAK: Do you still believe that Putin is serious about peace, given the events overnight in Ukraine? And if that bombing doesn't end, are you considering new sanctions on Russia?

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: So we are thinking that very strongly that they both want peace, but they have to get to the table. We're waiting a long time. There's a lot of hatred there. There's a lot of very bad blood, a lot of distrust, but I think we're going to -- I hope we're going to get there for the sake of a lot of young people that are dying.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Mr. President, do you have a deadline for when the diplomacy --?

TRUMP: I have my own deadline. I have my own deadline, and we want it to be fast.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LIPTAK: So the president not actually specifying there when exactly his sort of end point will be in trying to broker these negotiations, because you'll remember his secretary of state, his vice president, even the president himself have said that they are prepared to walk away from these peace talks if they don't see anything coming to fruition.

Now, we should note that tomorrow in Moscow, the president's special envoy, Steve Witkoff, will be meeting again with Vladimir Putin, trying essentially to ascertain how serious Russia is about coming to a peace deal with Ukraine. But certainly it's very clear from the president's remarks today and from his remarks over the last several weeks that his frustration is growing with both sides of this conflict, guys.

KEILAR: All right, Kevin Liptak, thank you for that.

And for the question, we have former CNN Moscow bureau chief Jill Daugherty with us now. She is now an adjunct professor at Georgetown University and the author of "My Russia, What I Saw Inside the Kremlin."

Jill, first off, did Putin take Trump's post criticizing Zelenskyy yesterday as an invite to attack Ukraine? Was it the talks in London yesterday that may have prompted Russia's aggression? How are you seeing this?

JILL DOUGHERTY, FORMER CNN MOSCOW BUREAU CHIEF: You know, I think it's actually hard to judge that, Brianna, because, you know, the Russians are now saying that those missiles and drones and everything that they fired at Ukraine were actually high precision weapons. So presumably they go where they send them.

Now, in the same breath, it would definitely say we never kill civilians. We never intended to. So you try to put that together. All we know is that it was a brutal, major attack on Ukraine. So maybe it's, you know, ultimately, obviously, trying to pressure the Ukrainians to come to the table. I'm not quite sure what kind of a message it sends to President Trump because it appears to have backfired. But I can tell you that I just checked the Russian media and a quick check.

I don't see a lot of references to what President Trump said.

[13:05:00]

You know, Vlad, Vladimir, stop. They're not quoting that.

And I think they might have a problem with that because, you know, Putin is supposed to be the person who decides things, who initiates things. And is that the person who is told what to do? So maybe that's why they're kind of ignoring it at this point.

SANCHEZ: I wonder what you think Putin reads when he hears that message from Trump. I mean, it is one of the few signs that we've seen from the administration, a direct call on Putin to halt attacks on Ukraine.

DOUGHERTY: Well, it is. But look at the way it's phrased. I mean, President Trump said, I'm not happy with this. And also, it was very bad timing.

I mean, that to me is a very, you know, careful kind of statement. He didn't say this was an attack that we cannot countenance.

And most importantly, he's not doing anything that we can see. It's words. And Putin, you know, words are nice. Putin might just pay a little bit of attention. But I don't think it's affecting Putin, especially a statement like this. Things that affect him are actions, you know, weapons, sanctions, et cetera.

But at this point, I think it's, you know, Putin will do what he wants to do. And he is dragging this out, in my opinion, in order to put pressure on Ukraine and influence the U.S. administration to give him the deal that he wants.

KEILAR: He is going to be meeting with the White House special envoy, Steve Witkoff, in Russia tomorrow. What are you looking for there? What message might Steve Witkoff be bringing with him?

DOUGHERTY: Well, I think it's interesting that Witkoff will probably continue. It appears that he will go to Moscow. That would be another thing you could do, just say, you know, we're not coming to Moscow. You straighten up and fly right or.

But that's not happening. So I presume the message will be, this is very detrimental, Mr. Putin. You shouldn't do this. You know, why did you do it? I'm presuming, but it really, truly is notable that Mr. Witkoff, when he comes back, tends to repeat many of the things and the opinions that the Kremlin has about this war. You know, who started it, who's at fault, who doesn't want an end to it, et cetera. So it will be very interesting to see what kind of an answer Vladimir

Putin will give tomorrow, if indeed that question is asked, why are you doing this?

SANCHEZ: The talks between the U.S. and Ukraine and the European allies seem to be hitting an impasse over one specific issue, and that is Russian control of Crimea. We saw President Zelenskyy come out and say that Ukraine is going to follow its constitution. He actually reposted this 2018 statement put out by former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo declaring that Russia does not control Crimea, that the U.S. wouldn't recognize that. Now it appears that the U.S. is, for the sake of peace apparently, willing to overlook Russia's invasion back in 2014. Is that an insurmountable peace?

DOUGHERTY: That is a -- let's say, well, it's a complicated thing because we don't know who the United States is talking about signing that or, you know, making that decision. So let's start. Recognizing Russian control, legally recognizing Moscow's control of Crimea is a very big deal.

The United States has never done it, and it sets a precedent of saying, essentially, you know, a country can take over land in another country. It's very important.

Now, the confusion is, is the United States saying Ukraine has to accept that or the United States would say, you know, we recognize?

Because Ukraine, according to its constitution, cannot do that. They would have to have an entire plebiscite of the entire country voting to accept that because it's a very serious issue. Crimea is really key in both countries.

So I think, you know, right now, we don't know exactly how would that work out. Would Zelenskyy say, I'm never going to sign, I will never accept, but you can or not? So you can see the confusion here.

And that, I should add, is often the problem, that the details are not worked out or at least not explained. So there's a lot of confusion and, you know, back and forth.

SANCHEZ: Yes, Jill Dougherty, always fascinating to get your perspective. Thanks so much for being with us.

[13:10:00]

So President Trump's trade war is taking yet another twist. He's now threatening to reimpose tariffs on some countries in as little as two weeks if they don't strike a deal.

Now, earlier this month, you might recall, the president announced the 90-day reprieve on those tariffs to allow some time to negotiate.

KEILAR: And then when it comes to China, the president insists trade talks are underway, despite denials of that from Beijing. One Chinese official calling that suggestion fake news.

Let's talk about this now with Damian Paletta, Washington bureau chief for "The Wall Street Journal."

I guess first off, Damian, is what's the effect of saying we're pausing tariffs for 90 days and then saying, oh, yes, actually, nah, not 90 days.

DAMIAN PALETTA, WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL: I mean, clearly, when he did the 90-day extension, it created no urgency for all these other countries to come to the table. So he realizes that everyone's backed away. He's trying to reimpose this, you know, two-week deadline that he's just made up. And it's this stop and start thing that's got everyone so confused.

The other day, he said at the White House that we're talking to China. At the same time, across town, the treasury secretary said we are not talking to China. China comes out, says we're not talking to China. The markets and investors are confused. I mean, what he really needs is a couple of deals to announce.

What he needs is some company to say we're bringing thousands of jobs back to the United States so that he gets some momentum. But right now, everyone's kind of calling his bluff and sitting pat, and that's making it really hard for him to act like this is working.

SANCHEZ: He just reiterated the claim during a press availability in the cabinet room that there is some conversation, some negotiation, perhaps, even going down with Beijing. I wonder what you make of the way that this conversation with China has been set up from the viewpoint of the United States, because you had members of the administration essentially telling Xi you should request a call with President Trump. We don't know if that call has even come yet.

PALETTA: Exactly. And having covered the U.S.-China trade deal in 2020, what happens is there's a call about a call, and then a call about whether to have another call. This process takes forever.

The Chinese do not rush into things. And they see, quite frankly, how the president's flopping and flailing and how he's flinching because of the market. And the Chinese are letting the market do some of the work for them.

So I think what they need is to get a table. The Chinese love these working groups, these groups where they all come and sit down together. And right now, Trump is trying to pressure them, and that's not working. So what he needs to do is create some kind of group.

Now, his issue also is he's got Peter Navarro at war with Howard Lutnick and Scott Bessent, his cabinet members, and they can't agree on exactly the strategy. The Chinese see all that as well.

So Trump needs to get his team on the same side, and then he can probably engage with the Chinese.

KEILAR: That's going to be tough. We know that. And so then after softening recently on China, rhetorically, here in the last couple of days, he goes on True Social today, and then he hits them for not accepting delivery of Boeing airplanes because of tariffs. They're much more expensive now.

He actually posted: Boeing should default China for not taking the beautifully finished planes that China committed to purchase. He says it's just a small example of what China has done to the U.S. for years.

One, does that just kind of reflect his frustration with China? And two, could Boeing really default China?

PALETTA: I think Boeing has too much to lose there with a client like China to default. But Boeing's in an awful spot now because President Trump is trying to bring them back a bit. You know, they've had a rough couple of years, but at the same time, they can't just be picking sides either. So they're in an awful position.

A lot of companies are in this position right now of not wanting to upset the president, but also they can't financially just do some of the things he's telling them to do because they have too much to lose as well.

SANCHEZ: Going back to your statement about the warring factions within the administration, it's so fascinating that you have Peter Navarro and Scott Bessent, Howard Lutnick, on opposing sides, even though I think fundamentally they agree that global trade is unbalanced and in their eyes rigged against the United States. How does that get settled?

PALETTA: I don't know how it gets settled. I mean, Peter Navarro is a fighter, and we saw this in the first term. He does not give up.

He went to jail for President Trump. He kind of clashed with Treasury Secretary Mnuchin in the first term and Gary Cohn, and he does not go away. And so what we saw, we had a story in the "Journal" on Friday about Navarro would not leave the outside of the Oval Office, and Bessent and Lutnick wanted to get in there to try to get him to pause the tariffs.

So there was a meeting across the White House. When Navarro went over, Bessent and Lutnick rushed into the Oval to get the president to pause and do the 90-day extension, and he did. That's the kind of stuff that's happening.

It's like cat and mouse game within the West Wing to try to get trade policy fixed.

SANCHEZ: It does not seem like the most efficient way to fight a trade war.

PALETTA: But it's the Trump way to fight a trade war.

SANCHEZ: Damian Paletta, very much appreciate you. Thanks.

PALETTA: My pleasure. Thank you.

SANCHEZ: Of course. Still to come this hour, sources tell CNN that an advisor for Defense

Secretary Pete Hegseth helped set up the Signal app on one of the Defense Secretary's computers at the Pentagon.

Plus, requests denied. As the Trump administration shifts the burden of disaster relief to the states, Arkansas's request for federal aid for tornado victims gets blocked. We have more details ahead.

[13:15:00]

KEILAR: And later, Harvard has a court date with the Trump administration now, as the president looks to target the college accreditation process.

You're watching CNN NEWS CENTRAL. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: We have some new details into CNN about Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and his use of the Signal app to share sensitive military information. Multiple sources say the defense chief was already using the app on a computer at the Pentagon weeks before that bombshell report from "The Atlantic." CNN's Natasha Bertrand helped break this story. She has the new details.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

[13:20:00]

NATASHA BERTRAND, CNN CORRESPONDENT: We're learning that Secretary of Defense Hegseth had Signal installed on a desktop computer in his Pentagon office weeks before it was revealed that he had used the app at least twice to text sensitive details about military operations. We're told that after the details about his use of Signal first broke last month, one of his military advisors actually requested that the Pentagon's chief information officer make an exception so that Hegseth could keep using Signal freely at work.

Now, that question about an exception, it raised eyebrows among other senior Pentagon officials who wondered whether it was appropriate, especially from a uniformed officer rather than Hegseth's chief of staff. But that officer, Ricky Buria, who also served under former Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, has now retired in order to become a top civilian advisor to Hegseth. And he is one of about three people who Hegseth truly trusts in his inner circle following weeks of turmoil inside Hegseth's office.

Now, Buria's transition from military assistant to senior advisor was extremely unusual, we're told, particularly because he worked so closely with former Secretary Austin. And it also contrasts with how Hegseth treated other so-called holdover military officials. Early on in his tenure as Secretary of Defense, he fired former Joint Chiefs Chairman C.Q. Brown and the chief of naval operations. And last week, of course, he fired two of his closest longtime advisors after accusing them of leaking. But we're told that Hegseth really likes Buria's yes-sir attitude,

according to one official, which was also reflected in how Buria worked to help Hegseth set up and use Signal while at the Pentagon.

Now, when we asked for comment about Hegseth's use of Signal at work, Hegseth's spokesperson, Sean Parnell, said that the secretary did not use it on his government computer, but he did not address why Hegseth had it set up on a second desktop in his office.

And we should also note, of course, that Hegseth's use of Signal to share very sensitive military details is now being reviewed by the Department of Defense's Office of the Inspector General.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

KEILAR: Natasha Bertrand, thank you for that.

Paging FEMA, we are five weeks to hurricane season, but the agency is about to lose a large number of workers and also some of its most senior staffers in that group. One source is calling it a, quote, brain drain.

We're told that about 20 percent of FEMA's permanent full-time staff, that's roughly 1,000 workers, are expected to take a voluntary buyout as part of the DOGE cuts. And what will states do when the federal government isn't there to help out during disasters like it usually does?

Well, one state is already finding out. Disaster-hit state Arkansas has been denied FEMA aid. Governor Sara Huckabee Sanders, who served as President Trump's press secretary, of course, during his first term, is now appealing the denial.

CNN's Gabe Cohen is with us with the details on this. Tell us, I mean, this is really interesting, right? This is someone who is allied with President Trump, her state being denied these funds. Why?

GABE COHEN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, so just to give you some context, Arkansas had requested that assistance after these severe storms and tornadoes that hit last month killed more than 40 people across the region, did millions of dollars in damage. The Trump administration this week rejected that request. And you ask why they would do that?

Well, the Trump administration said in its letter: It has been determined that the damage from this event was not of such severity and magnitude as to be beyond the capabilities of the state -- Arkansas -- affected local governments and voluntary agencies.

Obviously, Governor Sanders disagrees. She's already appealed the decision to the White House, saying, quote, The state and its citizens are in dire need of assistance to recover, rebuild, and mitigate further loss.

As you mentioned, the politics here, very interesting. The first time we have seen a prominent governor and Trump ally really pushing back on FEMA and the Trump administration rejecting federal assistance for natural disasters.

But to be clear, we have seen a couple of other recent rejections. North Carolina had asked for more assistance for Hurricane Helene recovery. We also saw Washington state ask for money because of a bomb cyclone that hit last year. Both of those were recently ejected by the Trump administration.

So what this appears to be is the president really making good on promises and an executive order that he issued earlier this year to start transitioning and moving the responsibility for disaster recovery and response away from the federal government and on to states. It is no secret they have talked extensively about FEMA being bloated, as they put it, inefficient, and that it should be dismantled altogether.

And so what we may be seeing here is the president really raising the threshold of how much damage a community is going to have to experience before the federal government steps in. In other words, if you have a Katrina-level storm, maybe the federal government pays a lot of money to help you recover. If it's a tropical storm, the states might be left to foot the bill.

[13:25:00]

But that could be a real problem because in recent years, states have not been budgeting for a federal government and a FEMA that is not going to be there when storms like this hit. And some of the communities, based on the sources I'm talking to, who could suffer the most are rural communities, especially in bigger states, who may have concentrated damage, a lot for them to deal with.

But it may not meet that equation, that threshold for the federal government to step in and help. The question is, who's going to pay for it at that point? Are states going to be able to handle it?

KEILAR: Yes, will they? It's a very big question. Gabe, excellent reporting. Thank you so much for that.

Still to come, why the judge handling the case of the man mistakenly deported to El Salvador put a sudden pause on the expedited fact- finding process.

Also ahead, mourners at the Vatican lining up to pay their respects to the late Pope Francis as we learn more about his final hours.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:30:00]