Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Time Magazine's New Exclusive Interview With President Trump; Sources: Trump Privately Concedes Ending War Harder Than He Thought; Jury Sees Text Messages Sent Between Read, O'Keefe Before His Death. Aired 7:30-8a ET

Aired April 25, 2025 - 07:30   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:30:50]

SARA SIDNER, CNN ANCHOR: New this morning more booing and more disruptions. Lawmakers from both parties continuing to face angry voters at town halls across the country.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

VOTERS: Chanting "Throw her out."

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SIDNER: That was the scene outside a town hall for Democratic Congresswoman Marie Gluesenkamp Perez of Washington. Inside, she faced tough questions about why she isn't fighting harder against President Trump's agenda.

Now, in Iowa, also frustration directed at Republican Congresswoman Ashley Hinson.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: When will you and your Republican colleagues take back your legislative power to rein in President Trump? When are you going to rein that power back in? You're not -- you're losing -- the executive branch is running the other two branches right now.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SIDNER: CNN's Arlette Saenz is joining us now. It's interesting to note that voters on both sides of the aisle are asking for the same thing -- to rein in some of President Trump's power and policies.

What are -- what are you, sort of, seeing at these -- at these events -- at these town halls?

ARLETTE SAENZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, you're right, Sara. Voters have made clear that there is frustration with lawmakers from both parties in how they are approaching the actions of the Trump administration. Now these town halls are really capping off the longest recess we've

seen from congressional lawmakers. They've been out there hearing from constituents for about two weeks, and these are themes that we continue to hear over and over again.

Now to start in Iowa with Republican Congresswoman Hinson, she really defended the Trump administration's policies saying that they are trying to rein in some of the damage that they believe was caused under President Biden. But as you heard there from that constituent there is a lot of frustration that Republicans aren't doing more to stand up to Trump.

And there was a veteran who specifically tried to argue that there is a double standard for Trump administration officials pointing to that incident involving the Signal chat that has included classified information. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If I had done what President Trump has done or what Mr. Hegseth has done, I would have been -- I would have lost my clearance and been court martialed. Yet these people seem to be going on and they're putting our military in harm's way by doing so. Congress needs to step up and do something.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SAENZ: Now over in Washington, Democratic Congresswoman Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, one of 13 Democrats to win a House district -- she also got an earful -- or in a Trump district. She also got an earful from constituents saying that they want to see more anger from the Democratic Party. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This administration is illegally deporting immigrants without due process. Why are we not hearing anger and fight from you?

REP. MARIE GLUESENKAMP PEREZ (D-WA): Being angry and being loud feels good, but it isn't a productive long term strategy.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SAENZ: And so you heard from people right there shouting that, yes, they do believe being angry and being loud is a productive strategy. That's a debate that's playing out right now within the Democratic Party as they are looking for various ways to counter Trump.

Lawmakers are set to return back to Washington next week and so we'll see whether they continue town halls down the road and hear from these constituents still frustrated about Trump's time in office so far.

SIDNER: It will be very interesting to see if they begin to listen to their constituents and how much power they actually have. We will see as 2026 comes rolling in. Arlette Saenz, thank you so much for your great reporting there -- John.

[07:35:00]

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: All right. Just moments ago Time Magazine released a rare longform interview with President Trump marking his first 100 days in office.

There is news on several fronts, including surrounding Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the man mistakenly deported to El Salvador. Remember, the Supreme Court ordered the administration to facilitate his return to the United States.

National political reporter for Time Magazine Eric Cortellessa writes, "Asked if he had requested Bukele..." -- that's the president of El Salvador -- "...to turn Abrego Garcia over, Trump said he hadn't. 'I haven't been asked to ask him by my attorneys,' he says. 'Nobody asked me to ask him that question, except you.'

As for the political outcry over this refusal to return a man mistakenly sent to a foreign prison without due process, Trump says he believes it will accrue to his advantage: 'I think this is another men in women's sports thing for the Democrats.'"

With me now is Time Magazine national political reporter Eric Cortellessa. I really enjoyed reading through the transcript of the entire interview this morning, Eric, so congratulations on that.

That little part that we just read right there, the president flat out admitting that he hasn't asked El Salvador for Abrego Garcia back, that's something.

ERIC CORTELLESSA, NATIONAL POLITICAL REPORTER, TIME MAGAZINE: Yeah. I mean, I thought that was very noteworthy in the interview, you know. I started -- you know, we started that sequence basically asking him about his commitment to complying with court orders. And I interviewed President Trump a year ago in April of 2024 and he said he would always comply with Supreme Court orders.

And then I said, "Well look, the Supreme Court just ruled 9-0 that you have to bring this guy back. Why haven't you?" And his answer was that his lawyers read the ruling differently. That it did not order him to bring back Kilmar Abrego Garcia.

I then read from the ruling saying that the order required him to facilitate his release. And when I asked, "Have you -- have you asked President Bukele of El Salvador whether you would bring him back," he said that he hadn't. That his lawyers didn't tell him he had to and that nobody had even asked him that except for me.

I did get the sense that President Trump was following the advice --

BERMAN: Yeah.

CORTELLESSA: -- of lawyers on this -- on his answers to this question. BERMAN: Yeah. I have a hard time believing you're the first person to raise the possibility with him even though I do agree it's a great question on your part. But I have to believe other people have suggested it was at least a possibility.

Another part here that was fascinating has to do with the situation surrounding tariffs and the idea of the administration trying to work out deals within this 90-day framework with basically all the countries of the world. The president and his team have said they've had 100 offers to make deals. They say they have 18 proposals in front of them, roughly.

And then you have a great line of questioning here. Let me read this. "Not one has been announced yet. When are you going to announce them? The president says, "I've made 200 deals." Then you ask, "You've made 200 deals?" And then the president says, "100 percent." And then you ask, I think shrewdly, "Can you share with whom?" And then the president says, "Because the deal is a deal that I choose. View it differently: We are a department store, and we set the price."

Do you know what's going on here with his 200 deals that have been made?

CORTELLESSA: I can't say that I do. I think there are negotiations underway. President Trump told me in the conversation that he had spoken with Xi and that the Chinese were negotiating with the Trump administration. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and another senior administration official also confirmed that to me. The Chinese deny it.

But I think what I understood him to be saying was that he has deals worked out in his mind with all of these countries and that they -- he believes that they will ultimately -- you know, basically acquiesce to the terms that he's laying out because he believes the economic power of the United States and access to our markets is the leverage in order to get them to come to some sort of deal.

I don't -- I don't know if they're solidified yet. I don't know if they're already made. But he says that within the next three to four weeks he will be announcing everything.

BERMAN: "I have made 200 deals." And you say, "You've made 200 deals?" The president says, "100 percent." Again, zero have been announced up until this point. Perhaps that will change over the next few weeks. Two hundred seems like a high number there.

You asked the president on territory. Again, this is something that he dances around here and has talked about. "Asked if he'd like to be remembered for having expanded American territory as president himself, Trump says: 'I wouldn't mind.'"

Again, I think this might be obvious if you listened to his territorial aspirations with Greenland, the Panama Canal, and whatnot. But still, it's pretty remarkable to hear a president say he wants to expand territory. CORTELLESSA: Yeah. I mean, it's also noteworthy we were in the Oval Office, and he has installed many, many more paintings of former presidents in gold frames. And there's one of James Polk who expanded territory as well.

[07:40:07]

And I think President Trump has said he wants to acquire Greenland. He wants to annex Canada. He wants to seize control of the Panama Canal. And he basically sees himself as a president who can grow the American empire, who can expand territory, and he said he certainly wouldn't mind if that was part of his legacy.

BERMAN: Again, it is a fascinating read. I encourage everyone to read the entire transcript.

Eric Cortellessa from Time Magazine. Thanks so much for being with us this morning -- Kate.

CORTELLESSA: Thanks for having me.

KATE BOLDUAN, CNN ANCHOR: Let's continue from another major headline to come from that new interview with Time is Trump's current assessment of the future Ukrainian -- future of Ukrainian territory. Trump saying this in the Time Magazine in that interview -- this at one point. "Crimea will stay with Russia. And Zelensky understands that, and everybody understands that it's been with them for a long time."

These stark comments come as today, U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoff is meeting -- set to meet with Vladimir Putin rounding out a week where Russia ramped up its assault on Ukraine in ways that haven't been seen in over a year.

In response to a massive attack on the capital, Kyiv -- a massive missile strike on civilians -- Trump gave this tepid rebuke to Putin on social media saying "I am not happy. Vladimir, stop." Did that stop Putin? It did not. Since that comment from Trump, Russia launched more strikes killing at least eight people in Ukraine.

Joining me now is CNN global affairs analyst Kim Dozier, and CNN military analyst and retired Air Force colonel Cedric Leighton.

There's a lot that the president has said in the last 24 hours and there's a lot new we are hearing of President Trump's perspective on these negotiations from this new interview with Time. I actually have come across a few more quotes I wanted to read to both of you.

But Colonel, let me start with you on this. You hear that -- Trump saying that Crimea is going to stay with Russia. And you also have him saying this about NATO.

Should -- Time asks, "Should Ukraine give up any hope of ever joining NATO?" And Trump responds, "I don't think they'll ever be able to join NATO. I think that's been -- from day one, I think that's been -- that's I think what caused the war to start when they started talking about joining NATO. If they weren't brought -- if that wasn't -- weren't brought up, there would have been a much better chance that it wouldn't have started."

If that is President Trump's perspective what is your reaction to that?

COL. CEDRIC LEIGHTON, CNN MILITARY ANALYST, U.S. AIR FORCE (RET.) (via Webex by Cisco): Yeah, Kate, good morning.

I think that there are several things here.

First of all, with Crimea, there is certainly truth to the fact that it had been Russian territory before. But before that it had been the territory of the Cossacks, which are the direct ancestors of many of the Ukrainian people. So when you go back far enough it is Ukrainian territory. It is also considered, if you go back even further, Turkish territory in part. So there are a lot of things here, but internationally recognized boundaries are that Crimea is part of Ukraine.

And it -- there is a difference I think that the president doesn't make when it comes to de facto recognition and de jure or legal recognition, and that is a major issue in this particular case. So when it comes to the territory of Crimea the legal aspect of it should probably be handled more like OK, we recognize that Russian -- the Russian presence is going to be there in Crimea. But the fact of the matter is that legally we do not recognize it just like we did with the Baltic states in the -- in the 1940s -- from the 1940s on until they achieved their independence.

And then when it comes to the starting of the war with NATO being a precipitant cause -- NATO membership desired by Ukraine -- that is something that is really I think a critical aspect to not only the Ukrainian reason for being as a -- as a nation state but it is their choice as a nation state. The Russians, of course, don't see it.

There is some degree of truth in what Trump says. However, there are other causes. There are cultural causes that really make Ukraine a target of the Russians and there is more to it than just the NATO part when it comes to the Russians wanting to retake Ukraine in essence.

BOLDUAN: And Kim, you've got -- there's reporting behind the scenes that Trump is frustrated that his efforts to broker a deal here have fallen short, telling advisers that mediating a deal has been more difficult than anticipated. I mean, I think that might be stating just -- that might be surprising -- well, it isn't surprising if you set the standard as he was going to end the war in 24 hours -- in his first 24 hours.

[07:45:00]

And there's new information on that from this interview, Kim. I want to ask you. Trump has -- as we know, Trump has repeatedly said from the campaign trail that he would end the conflict on day one or in 24 hours. And now he tells Time Magazine that he said it in jest. "I said that

figuratively and I said that as an exaggeration because to make a point." And, you know -- and then he hits the news media. And then he says, "Obviously, people know that when I said that it was just in jest, but it was also said that it will be ended."

You've been talking to your sources about kind of where the negotiation is now. What are you hearing?

KIMBERLY DOZER, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: What I'm hearing is shock that no matter what Russia does, no matter how many times Russia strikes Ukraine despite Donald Trump telling them to stop, that the White House keeps rewarding Putin -- today with a visit by envoy Witkoff -- when normally if you had the kind of barrage over the past week in the face of the White House saying stop this violence, you would deny that kind of high-level visit.

But instead the Ukrainians I'm talking to and the Europeans I'm talking to are shocked that no matter what Kyiv does it seems like Donald Trump considers them the bad guy in this equation, and that all Russia has to do is just stop fighting, stay where it is, keep the territory it's already got. Concede nothing. Win legal recognition of the illegal annexation of Crimea.

And what happens to the war crimes it has committed? What happens to the frozen assets that Europe has held onto to pay for the reconstruction of Ukraine? And Ukraine's future security. The reason Ukraine wanted to join NATO was, especially after the seizure of Crimea, to keep Russia from seizing any more of it.

So it really feels like it's through the looking glass for Ukrainian officials and European officials even as they try to stay, like, practically focused and talking behind the scenes to U.S. officials at lower levels in hopes of salvaging something out of all of this.

BOLDUAN: Yeah, especially on the heels of a week like what we've just seen with the attacks ramping up on Ukraine and now having Steve Witkoff going there to meet with Putin. But, you know, that also raises questions of what kind of pressure are you really applying behind the scenes if -- since that what Donald Trump is now saying.

Thank you, guys, both very much for -- we'll be following what the special U.S. envoy is doing over there, and if we hear from him, we will bring it to everyone. Thank you -- Sara.

SIDNER: All right. Ahead, the jury in the Karen Read murder retrial will visit the site where the body of her police officer boyfriend was found as testimony and texts detail the cracks in their relationship. That story and much more ahead.

(COMMERCIAL)

[07:52:20]

SIDNER: Today the jury in Karen Read's murder retrial will see for themselves the site where her boyfriend's body was eventually found, and they will visit the area where police officer John O'Keefe was found dead in the snow in January 2022.

In court yesterday the jury was shown a string of text messages that Read and O'Keefe exchanged in the hours before O'Keefe died. Texts that seem to show the couple frustrated with one another.

Let's discuss now with CNN correspondent Jean Casarez and criminal defense attorney and CNN legal analyst Joey Jackson.

We are going to start with you. You are steeped in this. Tell us what you saw happen in court yesterday.

JEAN CASAREZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: OK. In court yesterday a lot.

First of all, the prosecution is building their case and they had -- they had, like, so many text messages the afternoon -- hours before John O'Keefe's body was in that snow -- and the couple is arguing.

So let's look at that right now.

First of all, Karen says to him, "Last night you're basically like yeah, what about when we talk about the future. So why don't you just admit you're not into so much anymore? Can you please admit your head is out of the game with us?"

John, "Sick of always arguing and fighting. It's been weekly for several months now. So yeah, I'm not as quick to jump back into being lovie dovie as you apparently."

They go back and forth for hours on this. He doesn't pick up her calls. But here's the worst thing. He says there is going to be a blizzard tonight. We need to stay inside.

SIDNER: OK, Joey, when you look at these --

JOEY JACKSON, CNN LEGAL ANALYST, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY, FORMER PROSECUTOR: Um-hum.

SIDNER: -- how damaging are these for the defense?

JACKSON: From a defense perspective I'll argue not at all. Why do I say that? First of all, people -- news flash --

SIDNER: Have arguments.

JACKSON: -- have arguments, right?

SIDNER: That's true.

JACKSON: It's very consistent with respect to couples. It doesn't make anybody a murderer. So that's number one.

Now, prosecutors -- I see why they're doing it. You want to establish a motive, right? You don't have to prove motive in court, but inquiring minds always want to know. A jury wants to conclude why this happened. But people fight. It doesn't mean he killed her. Now, it also contradicts other evidence -- like what? Like an individual who knew Mr. O'Keefe, the decedent -- the person who died -- and said that the time in that night they were very affectionate towards each other. So you can, on the one hand, have an argument and on the other be happy.

And so it's disconnected from the actual specific incident and to that extent that's what the defense will argue. Nothing to see here will be what they say.

SIDNER: They're always looking for a motive. Juries like to know why, and they are always trying to -- the prosecution always try to give them that answer. But it may not be the answer in this case. The defense obviously is trying to blow that up.

[07:55:05]

What are we expecting in court today?

CASAREZ: Well, a jury view, first of all. They're going to go out to the scene, and I think that'll be in the afternoon. But jurors will be able to, in silence -- with the attorneys, the judge, and Karen Read is going to be there -- assess the scene. So they see exactly what they're hearing about in court.

But a blood expert is going to take the stand today because Karen Read was drinking heavily. And that blood expert, I believe, is going to look at the extrapolation that was done with her alcohol level that next morning, and it was high.

Yesterday -- there are so many interview clips that the prosecution is putting into evidence. This is from "INVESTIGATION DISCOVERY," a part of Warner Media. She did a docudrama, and she talks at length about drinking that night -- listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KAREN READ, And it was a round of shots that Chris Howard -- that I did take. So that would then -- that would have been the night. But I did not consume nine vodka martinis or take nine shots, depending on how you count it. And the last two drinks I didn't touch.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CASAREZ: So she is downplaying the alcohol level in her. And so this will be the fact -- the fact that the blood was very high.

SIDNER: When you look at this, she did a whole lot of interviews.

JACKSON: Yeah.

SIDNER: There is a lot there. Bad idea?

JACKSON: So I'm troubled by that and I'm troubled because attorneys don't like clients talking before trials --

SIDNER: Yeah.

JACKSON: -- during trials, and certainly after trial knowing there's going to be a retrial.

Now, this will play in two ways. From the prosecutors' perspective, right, she was not lucid, she was not clear. She was drunk prosecutors will say. That impaired her judgment and could have led to what occurred.

From the defense perspective this is not a drinking and driving case --

SIDNER: Right.

JACKSON: -- this is a did he -- did she kill him case. And they will argue that again, there are witnesses who indicate that at time they were very affectionate, number one.

Number two, his injuries were inconsistent from any collision with respect to him hitting her.

Number three, there was not that body there, right, all night as the prosecution will argue because people were leaving the party and not seeing it. A plow was gone by and didn't see it. There was a Jeep there at some separate time.

And more importantly, the ultimate injuries and cause of death is inconsistent from someone who would have been laying there.

So it plays both ways and this is why Sara, judges always say to jurors as they leave don't discuss the case. Keep an open mind because there's lot of evidence, lots of dots to connect. They're not yet connected.

SIDNER: Same thing to the reporters. And I know, Jean, you have talked about -- you know, you see these things and you're like oh, this definitely happened. And then you go oh, there is an alternative possibility.

CASAREZ: Yeah.

SIDNER: So that's what the jury is supposed to do.

By the way, you're hired. You know this case as well as her own attorneys. You go.

Jean Casarez, Joey Jackson, always a pleasure. Thank you.

JACKSON: Thank you.

SIDNER: Kate.

BOLDUAN: Both of them -- always, you're hired -- always.

Let's turn to this. In the new CNN original series "MY HAPPY PLACE" which, of course, is at CNN -- on CNN NEWS CENTRAL -- "MY HAPPY PLACE." Six celebrities take you along as they travel to the places and explore the places that have become their own personal sanctuaries.

This morning our colleague, CNN anchor Boris Sanchez, is showing you his happy place, Key Largo, Florida.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN ANCHOR: Florida oozes from my pores. It is home and I feel special when I'm here. I feel right when I'm here.

I grew up in South Florida not very far from the water. I got started with snorkeling and free diving and one thing led to another. I started scuba diving, and I've never looked back.

You've got Fabio Jr., John. These are my childhood friends. I've known them for many years. We've done dive trips down here now for seven- eight years.

The ocean itself is like a mystery. You sort of see what's happening above the water. And while that is captivating, what's happening underneath is unbelievable.

Key Largo is a place unlike any other in the United States. You have these massive shipwrecks just off shore. These wrecks are not only historic, they're teeming with life.

We're right above the Spiegel Grove. It's an enormous wreck. It's about two football fields long and it's like a haunted mansion underwater.

It's been underwater for about two decades. Famously, the folks who sank it messed up and it sank on its side. Then a hurricane came in about 2005. It fixed the boat. It lifted it upright.

On the second dive we moved about six miles. We went to the Duane. This is a Coast Guard cutter. One of the cool things about the Duane, it's sort of a thin vessel and on the sides of it you almost get this waterfall of fish. Hundreds and hundreds of fish all moving up and down the side of this wreck.

We saw this really big hawksbill turtle. They're gorgeous and hilarious and also not shy around people. So we got to swim with it for a while and check out what it was doing.

I spend so much of my days talking to people. One of my favorite things about diving is that nobody can talk to you. You can't hear anybody.