Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Columbia, Trump Administration Strike $220 Million Settlement Deal; Trump To Tour Federal Reserve As He Ramps Up Pressure On Powell; Families Of Slain Students Address Their Killer In Court. Aired 7:30- 8a ET

Aired July 24, 2025 - 07:30   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:30:58]

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: Breaking overnight Columbia University has agreed to pay more than $220 million to settle claims of antisemitism on campus in a deal with the Trump administration to get most of its federal funding restored.

Now, the school did not admit to any wrongdoing as part of the settlement, saying "...the institution's leaders have recognized, repeatedly, that Jewish students and faculty have experienced painful, unacceptable incidents and that reform was and is needed."

Let's get right to CNN's Betsy Klein for the latest on this agreement. Betsy, what are you learning?

BETSY KLEIN, CNN SENIOR REPORTER AND WRITER: Well, Education Secretary Linda McMahon has described this as a seismic shift and says it could serve as a roadmap for other schools. But after months of negotiation between a small group of officials from Columbia University as well as the White House, a deal to restore the school's funding has been reached.

Now, under this deal Columbia did not admit to wrongdoing but they agreed to pay the government a $200 million settlement over three years, plus $21 million to settle U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission investigations. Now, in return, the federal government will reinstate a vast majority of federal grants.

And the Trump administration had revoked about $400 million in federal funding from Columbia as it has taken aim at a number of elite universities, including Harvard, over their handling of antisemitism on campus.

But this really marked a broader push for policy changes on campus and all of this raising questions about academic freedom. The role of the federal government at colleges and universities. And it's really something that President Trump believes is a winning political issue.

But the school's acting president Claire Shipman saying in a statement, "The settlement was carefully crafted to protect the values that define us and allow our essential research partnership with the federal government to get back on track. Importantly, it safeguards our independence, a critical condition for academic excellence and scholarly exploration, work that is vital to the public interest."

Still, a senior White House official tells CNN that Columbia has agreed to provide the Trump administration with some data about compliance to their merit-based hiring and admissions processes. They are doing a comprehensive review of Columbia's regional program like Middle Eastern studies. And the school has also agreed to review its oversight of any admissions for international students. They say they're going to share relevant information with the Trump administration.

Now, this agreement came as Columbia and other schools have been under so much financial pressure. Really, no good resolution for anyone. And sources tell me that Columbia had really taken a less confrontational approach than Harvard during these negotiations -- all leading, John, to this outcome.

BERMAN: We'll see if this starts a trend.

Betsy Klein, thank you very much.

And I should note that very shortly the acting president of Columbia will be with us here -- Kate.

KATE BOLDUAN, CNN ANCHOR: And today President Trump is also escalating his pressure campaign against the Federal Reserve chairman Jerome Powell. The president has decided to take a tour of the Federal Reserve headquarters and the renovations that it's undergoing. No coincidence he has been attacking the chairman over the project's cost overruns pretty relentlessly leading many to speculate that the president, when it comes to this renovation, is looking for cause to fire the Fed chairman.

This is the first time in nearly two decades an American president will make an official trip to the central bank.

CNN's Kevin Liptak is at the White House for us and tracking this one. What is this going to look like today, Kevin?

KEVIN LIPTAK, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Yeah, and it really is dialing up that pressure campaign. You know, this tour was originally meant to just be among the president's staff members but obviously the president's decision to come and join them over at the Fed building really does ratchet up the significance as the president really tries to mount this pressure on Jay Powell over the $2.5 billion renovation but also on the matter of interest rates, which was really at the heart of it -- what the president is upset about here.

And as you mentioned, this is going to be the first time since 2006 that a president has gone over to the building where the Federal Reserve is headquartered. It's just over on Constitution Avenue only a couple of blocks from here at the White House. That was George W. Bush, who was attending Ben Bernanke's swearing-in.

[07:35:00]

The reason that presidents have typically stayed away is they try to maintain the independence of the Federal Reserve, particularly when it comes to that sensitive issue of interest rates. But obviously, President Trump has kind of blown past this. Almost on a daily basis he has called for Jay Powell to lower rates. He's assigned him the nickname "Too Late" suggesting that Powell is sort of behind the curve in trying to get the economy back to full throttle.

But he does seem to be using this issue of the Fed's renovations as sort of a pretext. He has identified it as an area where he can really go after Powell pretty heavily. You have seen the White House accuse the Federal Reserve of blowing past its budget. Of putting in sort of changes to its plans that didn't go past the local planning commission. What Powell has said is that it is not governed by that commission and that these changes are needed to do things like remove asbestos from the building.

The question, of course, is where this is all heading. You know, Trump has said potentially that this could be a fireable offense, although he did say this week -- he seemed to acknowledge that Jay Powell would stay in his job until his term is up in May. The strategy seems to be to just make his life so uncomfortable until that point that the president can eventually just name his own Federal Reserve chairman.

BOLDUAN: Yeah, that's what the president says today. It seems to -- you know, that seems to change week-to-week, for sure.

Great to see you, Kevin. Thank you so much for that reporting -- John.

BERMAN: Yeah. And on the subject of coincidences, or not, that is what the president is doing in the face of the morning headlines. From Punchbowl, "President Trump has lost control of the Jeffrey Epstein scandal." From Politico, "If it wasn't a crisis already, it is indisputably one now."

With us, CNN political commentator Karen Finney, and CNN senior political commentator Scott Jennings.

On that issue of control, Scott, you have this House subcommittee with Republican votes voting to subpoena the so-called Jeffrey Epstein file.

SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, FORMER SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: Um-hum.

BERMAN: Has the White House -- to what extent has the White House lost control of Congress?

JENNINGS: Well, I don't -- I mean, he's getting them to do, for the last six months, virtually everything he wants them to do from a policy perspective. I don't know how this is going to play out over the August recess.

The president has already told the Department of Justice if they have credible information, they can release it. His administration asked a court to unseal the grand jury information. So far, a judge has denied to do that.

I suspect over the next few weeks more developments will occur. The House doesn't come back until September 2.

And I think these headlines, to me, are a little inflated because there seems to always be this idea that Donald Trump is just on the cusp of losing Republicans. There is not a shred of polling evidence that a single Republican has broken with the president over this issue.

BERMAN: Well --

JENNINGS: So while he jousts with the Congress, the idea that his party or his base is leaving him is completely fabricated.

BERMAN: What does the base think about his handling of the Epstein case?

JENNINGS: It -- I've look at all the polling that has come out since this has started. If anything, he's gone up.

Look at the Fox News poll last night. Of the disapprovers in that poll only one percent of the people who said they disapproved of Trump mentioned Epstein, and they were all Democrats and Independents.

There's no evidence at all that Republicans are upset with him over this.

BERMAN: So again, upset may not be the right word, but interested and curious and want more may be a different way --

JENNINGS: Sure.

BERMAN: -- of looking at it.

Because I want you to listen to Eric Burlison, who is a Republican congressman from Missouri's seventh congressional district.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MANU RAJU, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: How much are your constituents clamoring for more information about Epstein right now?

REP. ERIC BURLISON (R-MO): It's the number one phone call that we get by far. It's probably 500 to one.

RAJU: Five hundred to one?

BURLISON: Yeah. It's the number one phone calls that we get.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: Just 500 to one.

And Scott, one last point on this. This district is, like, a 70 percent Trump district. JENNINGS: Yeah, that's fine. I think that two things can be true at the same time. People can want more information, but people don't necessarily think -- or Republicans don't necessarily think Donald Trump has done anything wrong here. And so -- but to be curious about an issue, yes, but that doesn't mean they're abandoning his presidency over it or that he's lost control of his party. I think that's a fabricated narrative.

BERMAN: Karen, what do you see here --

KAREN FINNEY, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, FORMER SENIOR ADVISER AND SPOKESPERSON, HILLARY CLINTON 2016 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN: Hmm.

BERMAN: -- and what do you see particularly with the reporting that came out late yesterday, first in The Wall Street Journal and ultimately matched by the Times and us, that President Trump was told in May that his name is in the --

FINNEY: Yep.

BERMAN: -- Jeffrey Epstein files weeks before the Justice Department came out and said you know what, we're not releasing anything more.

FINNEY: Right.

BERMAN: We're done with this.

FINNEY: Yeah, nothing to see here.

Look, I will stipulate that it is not a surprise to know that Donald Trump's name is in that file -- those files. That does not mean he did anything wrong. And we -- because we knew that. I mean, anybody that lived in New York in the '90s knew that there was a relationship because they would pal around. They were -- like we're seeing right there. They were photographed together.

Now, the difference is now he's the president and the way that the White House has completely mishandled this situation and continues to mishandle it I think is very telling.

[07:40:00]

I mean, Scott's putting a brave face on it but let's be clear. His -- members of his own base -- and you have conservative media, influencers, and folks with their -- you know, actors who -- they're the ones who are unhappy.

And this is completely a crisis that Donald Trump created for himself because he trafficked in conspiracy theories and, you know, crazy, and made a promise. And the problem here is -- you know, I agree with Scott. I don't know that I would say he's lost his base, although I do think Republican members are going to go home and they're probably going to hear about this from people.

And I think there's a couple of pieces here, right? There's the one piece that is sincerely about getting to the truth,

which in this case is one in which I think people have been interested in that for a very long time and have a great deal of empathy for the young women who are now -- they were girls at the time who God bless them, they deserve justice. And they're terrified by all accounting from those who have been talking to them. And I think one thing we need to make sure of is let's make sure we're protecting them in this process. I think that's something we can all agree on.

But there's another piece to this which is it's not just about Trump breaking a promise. This is about -- and I say this as a Catholic, you know, who -- this is a lot like, to me, like the Catholic church scandal. Are you standing on the side of the powerful or are you protecting the vulnerable? Because Donald Trump has the power to make this happen today if he wanted to. And instead he's obfuscating with, like, oh -- well, let's get the grand jury testimony. Let's get -- let's go have Todd Blanche talk to Ghislaine Maxwell.

Well, that's not the same thing as saying you know what, we're going to redact the names of the women and protect the girls, and we're going to make the information available.

And the last thing I'll say, John, the reason it matters it's not just about whether or not Donald Trump is in there. It's about who else is in there who are likely very powerful people -- mutually assured destruction here with a lot to lose, and that Donald Trump is protecting them over these young women.

JENNINGS: Can I -- may I -- just for rebut. I actually agree with a lot of what Karen said about the need to protect victims and to keep them in mind here. But if it is a coverup or some scheme to protect Donald Trump today, what would you have called it, say, during the Biden administration when they had these exact same records for four years and not a shred of it was put out? Would you say they were covering up for the powerful too? Because if you're alleging it today --

FINNEY: Well --

JENNINGS: -- you must have been alleging it then.

FINNEY: Well, no -- actually, that's not what I'm saying, Scott, and you know it. So please don't be disingenuous.

JENNINGS: They had the records.

FINNEY: Donald Trump is the one -- hold on. Donald Trump is the one who made this an issue. The only reason this is an issue right now is because Donald Trump, for years, has been talking about releasing these records, releasing these records. It is his base that has been interested in OK, when you're going -- I mean, you have the whole show of the meeting at the White House with the binders.

Ghislaine Maxwell was sentenced in 2022. She was in prison. Her -- I mean, so there -- I mean, and you did have Debbie Wasserman Schultz has been trying to

pass legislation to protect victims from these types of secret sweetheart deals like we saw Epstein get.

But again, it is Donald Trump's base that has been clamoring. It is the Laura Loomers of the world who are attacking him about this -- that have kicked this up. And, I mean, there's -- the only reason is because Donald -- of Donald Trump's promise.

I'm not saying, you know, coverup or not. I'm saying who are you going to protect with your power? Are you going to protect wealthy men or are you going to protect the vulnerable?

JENNINGS: Hey --

FINNEY: That's the question right now.

JENNINGS: It's a good question. But I would just ask who was Biden protecting --

BERMAN: I will --

JENNINGS: -- with his power?

BERMAN: We're going to leave it there with that question. But also with the question of if he was told in May that his name is in the files --

FINNEY: Um-hum.

BERMAN: -- why then say no, no -- he wasn't told last week? It does -- it does beg more questions --

FINNEY: Yeah.

JENNINGS: Well --

BERMAN: -- and we will keep on asking this.

JENNINGS: They did use the phrase in The Wall Street Journal --

FINNEY: I mean --

JENNINGS: -- "unverified hearsay." I mean, if it --

BERMAN: I'm --

JENNINGS: You know.

FINNEY: Well, but he was so --

(CROSSTALK)

BERMAN: The New York Times and CNN have both reported by multiple sources --

FINNEY: Right.

BERMAN: -- that the president was briefed by Bondi. And the White House hasn't really denied it.

JENNINGS: But what he said is that the file contains references that are unverified hearsay.

FINNEY: And was he -- but Scott, are you saying he's so senile he couldn't remember, or he was lying?

JENNINGS: That's what the Journal says.

FINNEY: Is he lying or was he -- is he senile? Which is it?

BERMAN: We will -- we will see if he faces more questions on this and what he says this time.

FINNEY: We probably will.

BERMAN: Scott Jennings, Karen Finney, thank you very much -- Kate.

BOLDUAN: So there are new details this morning about the Pentagon's internal investigation into the Signal scandal involving the defense secretary and other top Trump administration officials. Sources now tell CNN the Pentagon watchdog has evidence that classified information was shared by the Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on the Signal chat back in March.

CNN's Zach Cohen has this new reporting and he's joining us now. Tell us more, Zach, about what you are learning and what the Pentagon is saying.

[07:45:00]

ZACHARY COHEN, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL SECURITY REPORTER: Yeah, Kate. Those details about U.S. military operations in Yemen that Hegseth shared with the Signal group chat came from a document that was produced by U.S. Central Command. And we're told that document was marked classified at the time that Hegseth shared it. And we're also told now that document with its original classification markings is in the possession of the Pentagon's inspector general, which has been investigating Hegseth's use of Signal since April

Now look, we reported back in March that the details in this Signal chat when it came to light were classified, but now this does raise fresh questions about the ongoing investigation by the Pentagon's independent watchdog, and especially because we've heard from the White House, Hegseth, and other individuals in the Trump administration in the months since those revelations that no classified information was shared via Signal.

Take a listen to some of the -- what we've heard from some of those officials in the months since the revelations came to light.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, (R) PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: There was no classified information, as I understand it.

TULSI GABBARD, DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE: There was no classified material that was shared.

KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: No classified material was sent on this messaging thread.

PETE HEGSETH, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: There's no units, no locations, no routes, no flight paths, no sources, no methods, no classified information.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COHEN: So obviously a document in the possession of the Pentagon's inspector general marked classified would undercut that defense we heard from even the President of the United States just then.

But the Department of Defense, in a statement to us, is still standing by those previous comments that no classified information was shared.

A Pentagon spokesperson told us, "The department stands behind its previous statements: no classified information was shared via Signal. As we've said repeatedly, nobody was texting war plans, and the success of the department's recent operations are proof that our operational security and discipline are top notch."

Now it ultimately remains to be seen what the conclusion of the Pentagon inspector general is when it finishes its investigation. Obviously, Hegseth and the White House still standing by its previous claims. But ultimately, Hegseth going to have to face more questions about an issue that he and the White House had hoped had subsided by now.

BOLDUAN: Yeah, it sure sounds like that. That's for sure.

Zach, it's great to see you. Thank you so much for your reporting.

Let's also turn to this. Now there are new details that were revealed overnight with the release of more police documents after the final sentencing of the man who murdered the four Idaho college students.

We now know investigators -- well, many things. They never found the murder weapon. They never found a connection between Bryan Kohberger and the students that he killed. And that Kohberger, amongst many things and strange behaviors leading up to his arrest and in the weeks -- in the weeks leading up to what happened -- Kohberger wiped his devices before investigators were able to get ahold of them.

And some gruesome details have been revealed from the scene of the murders. One of the victims suffered more than 50 stab wounds. The wounds indicating an intense struggle. And one officer said in one of these documents that Kaylee Goncalves was unrecognizable as her facial structure was extremely damaged is how it was written in these documents.

But even with so many unanswered questions -- even with all of that, there are so many unanswered questions that remain as this never went to trial. So they may never find out why did Bryan Kohberger choose these four friends to attack in the middle of the night in 2022. Why did he leave two other roommates to survive?

Now, during sentencing Kohberger declined to speak publicly. The families and friends of his victims -- they did have their say, finally able to address him face-to-face. A warning: what we're going to play here, some of this language is graphic.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ALIVEA GONCALVES, KAYLEE GONCALVES' SISTER: You act like no one could ever understand your mind, but the truth is you're basic. You're a textbook case of insecurity disguised as control. Your patterns are predictable. Your motives are shallow. You are not profound; you're pathetic.

Let me be very clear. Don't ever try to convince yourself you matter just because someone finally said your name out loud. I see through you.

You want the truth? Here's the one you'll hate the most. If you hadn't attacked them in their sleep in the middle of the night like a pedophile, Kaylee would have kicked your fucking ass.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BOLDUAN: That from the sister of Kaylee Goncalves.

Now, today, Bryan Kohberger begins the first day of his life sentence without the possibility of parole.

And let's talk about this. Joining me right here is CNN legal analyst Joey Jackson for more on this.

I mean, these victim impact statements -- and I watched a lot of them yesterday -- wow. You expect them always, Joey, to be very painful and emotional, but they took a turn at one point when they turned that lectern and the podium, hearing from Kaylee's sister from tears to just rage.

[07:50:00]

JOEY JACKSON, CNN LEGAL ANALYST, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY, FORMER PROSECUTOR: Yeah, they did, Kate. Good morning to you.

And that's certainly anticipated. You have a number of families -- certainly families having different views, different emotions. Some believing the matter should have gone forward and the death penalty should have been sought. Others perhaps buying into this. Some families expressing the notion that this D.A. should not have entered the deal and, in fact, you should have included us more.

But, you know, it puts a face on the system. We talk about different deaths. We talk about different issues, but there's a face and there's a life story, and there's meaning. And we heard it there. You know, one of the victim impact statements -- something that really struck me was Ben Mogen, Madison Mogen's dad, who was talking about the last Father's Day card. Talking about she was the most important accomplishment of his life -- the pride and joy. They're meaningful. It's impactful. And so how the system deals with it is very important.

And yesterday, of course, Kate, was the day for the families to talk about who the victims were, what they meant to their friends, family, the world, and how they were just ripped apart from their life. And so just emotional, compelling, and just gut-wrenching moments.

BOLDUAN: And important for them to be able to have their say --

JACKSON: Yeah.

BOLDUAN: -- though they will never find the closure that they deserve.

What do you make of these new details -- and there is a lot of it coming out in these police documents that were released. But clearly, it's unsatisfying to the families because it leaves -- because there was no trial, because he did not ever speak, there is so many unanswered questions that in a lot of those victim impact statements they asked the questions that they would like him to answer.

JACKSON: Yeah.

BOLDUAN: Does what came out from these police documents -- do you -- does it reveal anything of the case that was there to -- that was building against this man?

JACKSON: So I think so, Kate, and there's a couple of things, right, to take from this.

The first thing is that certainly, it gives credit to the notion of perhaps if there was a trial, right, on the one hand you would learn a lot more --

BOLDUAN: Um-hum.

JACKSON: -- about the trial. Certainly it would put the families through a lot with respect to the graphic nature and detail, right? Pink blankets and how they're covered in blood, all right? One of the victims being unrecognizable. You spoke about the 50 stab wounds -- wow -- many of them defensive.

And so I think the course of the trial, on the one hand, would have put families through so much but perhaps they would have learned more about motivations, about details, about other things.

But at the end of the day the case is wrapped up --

BOLDUAN: Yeah.

JACKSON: -- and as the judge noted, unspeakable active evil. His 15 minutes of fame are done, and he gets four consecutive life sentences without the possibility of parole for what's done. And what was -- what was really interesting to me, Kate, also was

there being no connection to the victims at all, right?

BOLDUAN: I know.

JACKSON: Sometimes you have a situation where a person has an axe to grind. There's a prior history. Maybe envy, jealousy, something else. Here, just where is the connection?

And then you learned so much about who he was in jail --

BOLDUAN: Yeah.

JACKSON: -- and washing his hands all day dozens of times.

BOLDUAN: And spending hours in the shower.

JACKSON: Yeah. Just -- some things are just unexplainable.

BOLDUAN: Yeah.

Thank you, Joey.

JACKSON: Absolutely.

BOLDUAN: I really appreciate it -- John.

BERMAN: All right. Start working now and maybe in 250 years or so you have about as much as a single CEO paycheck. The stunning, maybe depressing new report.

(COMMERCIAL)

[07:56:54]

BERMAN: All right. New this morning a new report shows the pay gap between America's corporate leaders and their workers grew even larger last year. In order to catch up, the average American would kind of need a time machine.

CNN's Matt Egan is here to explain. Good morning.

MATT EGAN, CNN SENIOR REPORTER: Good morning, John.

Look, it's no secret that America has an inequality problem, but these findings are really staggering. So this is coming from the AFL-CIO.

And they found that last year the average CEO in the United States made almost $19 million in salary, bonuses and stock awards. And that is light years away from the typical worker pay of almost $50,000. That means that the gap between CEO pay and worker pay got worse with the typical CEO making 285 times more than workers.

Now here is the craziest stat in this report. Let's say you're a worker and you're making that typical $50,000. It would take you -- to try to catch up to what a CEO made just last year alone, you would have had to have started working back in 1740 --

BERMAN: Oh!

EGAN: -- AKA before the Revolutionary War, hence the need for that time machine. Just a stunning finding here.

Now this report found that the pay gap was particularly glaring at one company, Starbucks. Their CEO Brian Niccol made, last year, $98 million. That is well ahead of the median Starbucks employee take-home pay of about $15,000. That means their CEO made more than 6,666 times than the typical employee.

Now, Starbucks noted in its filings that they looked at all of their employees, so that does include many part-time employees, including baristas. And they also looked at their global workforce where overseas the pay tends to be a little bit lower. But still just a really stunning figure there.

Now as far was what's going to happen next, I think the good news for workers is their pay is going up. It sent up last year. It continues to go up now. CEO pay, though, it's going up much faster.

And that tax law that the president just signed into law -- that offers even bigger tax breaks for CEOs than workers. This report finds that the typical CEO -- their tax break is going to average almost $500,000 a year due to that tax law. And that is, of course, miles ahead of the $765 typical worker tax break from this law.

So John, it's quite possible that you could see the pay gap get even worse in the future.

BERMAN: I mean, yeah, you have to go back to, like -- I don't know -- like the Norman Conquest.

EGAN: There you go.

BERMAN: You need to start working from before the Norman Conquest to reach that.

All right, Matt Egan. Thank you --

EGAN: Thanks, John.

BERMAN: -- very much -- Kate.

BOLDUAN: The Oakland County Sheriff's Department is asking for the public's help right now in finding a group of smash-and-grab robbers. Police say it was July 6 they're talking about. At least eight suspects stormed into a Sacramento store and stole $1 million worth of jewelry. And they did this in less than two minutes.

And some of the new video that's been released shows two of the robbers wielding what appears to be hammers that they used to smash the glass displays. A security guard was pepper-sprayed but nobody was seriously injured.

Police say they identified and arrested the primary suspect but they're still looking for the others.