Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Watchdog Finds Hegseth Risked Endangering Troops by Sharing Sensitive War Plans on Signal; GOP Wins Tennessee House Seat, But Democrats Encouraged by Close Margins; Interview with Rep. Maggie Goodlander, (D-NH): Trump, Hegseth Say They Didn't Know About Second Strike on Boat; Trump to Relax Fuel Economy Standards for New Cars. Aired 2:30-3p ET

Aired December 03, 2025 - 14:30   ET

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

[14:30:00]

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: Members of Congress are now calling on Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to testify after a new Pentagon watchdog report on his use of the Signal messaging app. Sources exclusively tell CNN the Inspector General's office says that Hegseth could have endangered American troops and mission objectives when he sent sensitive military information about planned military strikes to people in a group chat. The existence of that chat first revealed earlier this year when a reporter was accidentally added to the chain.

CNN's Manu Raju is live for us on Capitol Hill. Manu, what have you been hearing from lawmakers in response to the details of this reporting?

MANU RAJU, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, a lot of the members have not yet seen this report because it's only a couple of key committees have received it, the Senate Armed Services Committee and the House Armed Services Committee. And members have been going in behind closed doors to read the report, giving different reactions to it. I just talked to the Senate Armed Services Committee chairman Roger Wicker.

He declined to state his views. He said that he was going to put out a statement on this, and I'm waiting to see if a statement has been released at the moment. I don't have it.

But he said he didn't want to go beyond what his paper statement said. I said, well, what about this, you know, your view of the secretary's tenure, running the department, the controversy over the Caribbean boat strikes, his controversy of his comments over Ukraine from earlier this year, which Wicker criticized him over, over Signalgate and the like. And he said, well, we're continuing to get the facts.

But based on this particular allegation -- referring to Signalgate -- he said, which is now several months old, I think the secretary is in a, quote, pretty good position on that. But then I said, do you have confidence in Secretary Hegseth? He did not answer that question.

He walked away and he was asked later by our colleague Ted Barrett if he has confidence in Hegseth. Did not answer that question there as well. Now, the interpretations, though, coming out of the people who have reviewed this report are really coming down along party lines.

Senator Mark Kelly, who sits on the Senate Armed Services Committee, a Democrat from Arizona, said that he believes that it shows a clear violation of, contradicts what Hegseth said, was that he did not violate the law. That's what Kelly's interpretation was. While Eric Schmidt, a Missouri Republican, said this is a, quote, nothing burger.

So expect more of that, likely a lot of party line responses to this report when it is eventually released.

SANCHEZ: Manu, totally separate from this. There was a special election, Tennessee's 7th district elected Republican Matt Van Epps last night. Democrat Aftyn Behn made big gains, though, in something, in a district that reliably had been red.

There you see the difference being roughly eight points. This is a district Trump carried by something like 20 plus points. Are Republicans nervous about what this indicates heading into next year's midterms?

RAJU: Yes, some very much are. I mean, those, like the Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson, downplayed the narrowness of that margin, indicating that he believes Republicans are in a good position heading into the midterms. But others are fairly concerned because they see the party does not have the messaging appropriately situated for those who are feeling the pain back home, whether it's on health care or on grocery prices.

And one of them was Congressman Tim Burchett, also of Tennessee, who made clear that he believes that this should be a, quote, wake up call for the GOP.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

RAJU: Are you concerned at all that this was closer than it has been in the past?

REP. TIM BURCHETT (R-TN): I'm always concerned, to be honest with you. And yes, we got a real problem, and we better wake up.

RAJU: What about issues like affordability and the like? Do you guys need to do a better job on that, those issues?

BURCHETT: Of course we need to. The best friend the Democrats have right now is the Republicans' messaging, because we do a terrible job of messaging.

SEN. JOSH HAWLEY (R-MO): So we have got to help people be able to afford the necessities of life and just get by day to day. And there's no better place to start than health care.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

RAJU (on camera): And that last comment coming from Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri, referring to the debate that is ongoing among Republicans about how to move forward on health care, specifically with those subsidies under the Affordable Care Act set to expire at year's end. Republicans are still, as they have been for so many years, divided among themselves about how to move forward on this issue, particularly at a key moment.

[14:35:00]

Next week, the Senate is expected to vote on a plan on health care, because that was a commitment that the majority leader of the Senate, John Thune, gave to Democrats during the government shutdown fight, that there'll be a vote on health care. Democrats are expected to offer for an extension of those expiring subsidies under the Affordable Care Act. Most Republicans don't like that plan, plan to vote against it, but what is their plan?

That's something they're grappling with, particularly as affordability is becoming such a dominant issue on the campaign trail -- Boris.

SANCHEZ: Yes, we were supposed to see a health care plan from the White House a few weeks ago. Then that got delayed, and now we're just waiting to see what the details are. Manu Raju, live for us on Capitol Hill. Thank you so much -- Brianna.

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: We're joined now by Democratic Congresswoman Maggie Goodlander of New Hampshire. She's a member of the House Armed Services Committee and a former intelligence officer in the U.S. Navy Reserve. Thank you so much for being with us here in the studio.

REP. MAGGIE GOODLANDER (D-NH), ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE: Thanks for having me.

KEILAR: I first want to ask you about this Pentagon watchdog report on the Secretary of Defense's use of Signal in this strike on Houthi rebels. You haven't yet seen the report, but you're going to, right?

GOODLANDER: I haven't yet, but I will as soon as it's available to me. You know, we've been anxiously waiting for this, and the Inspector General's office is incredibly important to our work on the Armed Services Committee.

KEILAR: And so, what questions do you want answered? What are you looking for?

GOODLANDER: Look, when the news broke about the Secretary of Defense using a group chat to conduct war planning and to direct military strikes, my first and most pressing concern was that this would put the lives of our service members at risk. It is absolutely baffling to me how a person in such an extraordinary position of public trust could be so reckless. And, you know, this is the core concern.

I think this is one example of, unfortunately, many that show that this is a person who is not fit to serve as our Secretary of Defense.

KEILAR: I want to ask you about this September 2nd follow-up strike, the two strikes on this alleged drug boat. You were a Navy intelligence officer for more than a decade. When you were hearing Secretary Hegseth say, as we heard him say yesterday, that they knew exactly who was in the boat, is that your expectation, knowing how intelligence works?

GOODLANDER: You know, we've seen from this administration a refusal to answer basic questions since September 2nd about what the mission that they're undertaking is here, what the objectives are, and what the legal basis for all of these strikes, and particularly the strike on September 2nd, really was. And this is another area of genuine bipartisan concern and commitment to get to the bottom of all the facts and make sure that we've got a full accounting for what went down on September 2nd.

KEILAR: There are a lot of Democrats, and even certainly privately some Republicans, who have questions about the Secretary's judgment. But we are now hearing from the White House, from the Secretary, that this was ultimately Admiral Bradley's call, right, that he was overseeing this second strike. Secretary Hegseth said he didn't see survivors, he wasn't there for this follow-up strike.

Bradley is someone who's pretty well-respected. Does that make you think differently about how this may have been conducted?

GOODLANDER: Look, we will be relentless in pursuing all of the facts in here. Facts are stubborn things, and we will get to the bottom of this. But look, this strike was first announced on Truth Social by the President. It was announced by the Secretary of Defense on his personal social media platforms.

This is the reversal and the instinct, and then the actual throwing under the bus of a military commander is not what we want to see in a Secretary of Defense.

KEILAR: So Bradley, who is currently the SOCOM commander, he was the commander of JSOC when he oversaw this strike, former head of SEAL Team 6, he is going to be up on the Hill tomorrow. He'll be meeting with leadership of the Senate Intel Committee. I'm sure you would love to question him, but what are you hoping that they are going to ask and what questions would you have for him?

GOODLANDER: Look, I think we need -- so there are two really important sets of questions here. One goes to the legal basis for all of these collective strikes, and, you know, there have been nearly two dozen of them. For this particular strike on September 2nd, we need a full accounting of the facts, who issued the orders, what did the orders say, what were the rules of engagement, what were the objectives here.

We need to know who was involved, and that's going to be a matter of documentary evidence, of footage and audio that will give us a sense of what really happened. And then I do think it's important for the American people to understand this and to hear directly, so that they can have faith that there has been a full accounting here.

[14:40:00]

And this is really where my fervent hope is that Congress is going to step up and actually perform its constitutional role, and we've seen throughout this year a complete attack on our most basic responsibilities under the Constitution. Oversight is one that I'm hopeful we will come together and really execute, because it's what I came to Congress to do.

KEILAR: You were part of that video with five of your Democratic veteran and former intel community colleagues who were urging troops to disobey illegal orders. The defense secretary has taken now the largely unprecedented step of ordering a Pentagon review of Senator Mark Kelly for his participation in the video, citing the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which allows certain retired officers to be recalled for disciplinary action. CNN's K-File actually found this video from 2016 of now-Secretary Hegseth.

Let's watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PETE HEGSETH, THEN CITIZEN: I do think there have to be consequences for abject war crimes. If you're doing something that is just completely unlawful and ruthless, then there is a consequence for that. That's why the military said it won't follow unlawful orders from their commander-in-chief.

There's a standard. There's an ethos. There's a belief that we are above what so many things that our enemies or others would do.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: What is your reaction now hearing Hegseth talking and saying essentially the very same thing himself?

GOODLANDER: Look, you know, what we said was what the law is. We all swore an oath to the Constitution, and in doing so, my colleagues who came together to say something very simple, which is what the law says, that our service members are obligated to uphold their oath by obeying lawful orders and lawful orders only. It's nice to know that at one point in time, the Secretary of Defense did know that this is the basic rule of law.

But I think, look, the bottom line is in any other administration in American history, a clear and simple restatement of what the rule of law is, what the law says, should never be a threat. And the response to this, which was immediate and swift and so extreme from this president to call for and to really what it appears to be weaponize law enforcement and the Department of Defense against members of Congress, it's just -- it's not what we need right now in this country. I would love for the president to be focused on the actual problems that we need to be solving.

KEILAR: Were you aware of this specific September 2nd follow-up strike incident when you were deciding with your other colleagues to issue this very serious message in this video?

GOODLANDER: You know, we as the rest of the American public has been trying to get to the bottom of what's happening with these strikes. I saw the public reporting. And as a member of the House Armed Services Committee, we've been trying to get information about what's happening.

KEILAR: You did not know about it before putting that video out?

GOODLANDER: You know, we're still getting to the bottom of the facts of what happened on.

KEILAR: But that's not what I'm asking. I'm asking if when you guys were deciding to do that video if you knew about that follow-up strike.

GOODLANDER: No, I learned about this in the press at the same time everyone else did.

KEILAR: OK, very interesting to know that.

GOODLANDER: And just to be clear, I mean, we really are still trying to get to the bottom of what actually happened on September 2nd.

KEILAR: Yes, a lot of questions, certainly, and we're hearing that from Democrats and Republicans as well. Congresswoman Maggie Goodlander, thank you so much for being with us. We really appreciate it.

GOODLANDER: Thanks for having me.

KEILAR: And President Trump is set to unveil a plan to make new cars more affordable by lowering fuel efficiency standards. But will it work? We'll discuss next.

[14:45:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: President Trump this afternoon is expected to announce that he's going to relax fuel economy standards for new cars in the United States, rolling back Biden administration standards put in place to fight pollution and climate change and to promote electric vehicles. Executives from Ford, Stellantis, and General Motors are being invited to this event, which we are anticipating is set to start shortly. Ford CEO Jim Farley calls this a win for customers.

Let's get some perspective from Patrick De Haan. He's joining us now live. He's the head of petroleum analysis at GasBuddy.

Patrick, thank you so much for being with us. Just wondering from a pragmatic, practical standpoint, what it means for consumers that these standards are changing.

PATRICK DE HAAN, PETROLEUM ANALYST, GASBUDDY: Yes, Boris, you know, we go back to 2012. That's when Obama implemented this big improvement in CAFE standards. Now, keep in mind, these CAFE standards took effect back in 2017 in Trump's first term.

Now, CAFE standard, they definitely influenced vehicle design and the costs back when they were implemented over a decade ago. But today they have almost no incremental impact on prices overall. If you really want to know why cars cost a lot -- SANCHEZ: Oh, looks like we're having some technical issues there with Patrick's signal. We're trying to work on getting him back up. Hey, Patrick, can you hear me?

Oh, he's gone again. Patrick, can you hear me?

DE HAAN: Yes, sorry. I'm here.

SANCHEZ: Sorry. You go, sir --

DE HAAN: Yes, I can.

SANCHEZ: Could you just take us back to what you were saying that in 2017, these took effect, but these changes. Goodness, you know what? We're going to take a quick break.

We're going to try to get that fixed. Or maybe not. I think we got to take a quick break.

We'll get that fixed. We'll be right back. Don't go anywhere.

CNN NEWS CENTRAL is back in just moments.

[14:50:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: All right. Let's see if this works.

Patrick De Haan joins us again. He's the head of petroleum analysis at GasBuddy. Patrick, when we were last able to hear you, you were explaining that you don't think that this change in fuel economy standards is going to represent a huge shift in gas prices.

DE HAAN: Yes, Boris, exactly. You know, these CAFE standards were implemented back in 2012 for effect back in 2017 during Trump's first term. But you look at it now and it's kind of like unscrambling the egg.

The egg's already broken. The cost has been passed along to consumers. All of these standards, all of these improvements in fuel efficiency are now standard technology.

So, you know, you talk about an incremental increase. I mean, CAFE standards are such a small part of today's modern vehicle.

[14:55:00]

If you really want to know why cars cost a lot more nowadays, you'd have to look at things like the tariffs on car parts, on steel and aluminum, the spikes in commodity prices, electronics and all the supply chain changes that we've seen since COVID.

These fuel economy rules are really at the lowest level, meaning smallest of these impacts.

SANCHEZ: And does this potentially represent a change for electric vehicles and the market for them?

DE HAAN: Probably not a whole lot. I mean, some Americans still like the allure of not have to -- not having to rely on a gas pump, though we expect gas prices to be more affordable. We already saw a bit of a slowdown in EVs even as Biden was closing out his term.

So I wouldn't necessarily look for a huge slowdown in the shift to EVs, although if automakers start presenting vehicles with lower fuel efficiency, that actually could bolster the reason that some Americans could buy EVs.

SANCHEZ: That's a good point. And just generally, we're seeing gas prices dip below three dollars a gallon in a lot of places. What is driving that?

DE HAAN: Yes, a lot of it is simply a shift in OPEC policy that is back in March of this year. After about two years of cutting oil production, OPEC decided to give in and start increasing market share. And so back in March of this year, OPEC raised oil production, something they've done on a monthly basis since then.

And that has lowered the price of oil by putting more oil on the market. And that is something that they're going to pause for the first quarter of 2026. But all in all, a lot of this is simply because of OPEC increasing production.

And compared to, say, 2022, a lot of the shockwaves brought on by the economy reopening and Russia's war in Ukraine have finally rebalanced.

SANCHEZ: Patrick De Haan, thanks so much for joining us. Appreciate your time.

DE HAAN: Thanks, Boris.

SANCHEZ: Brianna, it looks really cold on that side of the studio over there.

KEILAR: Yes, it sure is, Boris. This is my PSA and I am taking my own advice. Bundle up and brace for cold because a powerful Arctic blast is expected to bring record low temperatures to much of the country.

And it's going to stick around for a while, unfortunately. So let's go to CNN's Derek Van Dam. I'm ready, Derek, but you're going to need some more layers.

DEREK VAN DAM, CNN METEOROLOGIST: Brianna, I'm looking at that coat. You need one of those hoods with the feathers and the, you know, the nice fur on the top, right? Like, you're missing something there because it's about to get drastically colder where you are.

So you're kind of, I'll call you 50 percent prepared, OK? I need to up my game, too. I don't have my long trench coat here with me, but I'll try my best, right?

This is what we're facing, Brianna. And for everybody who's watching, you think it's cold now. The bottom is about to drop out of our temperatures here going forward.

Get this. Roughly two-thirds of the lower 48 are going to experience below freezing temperatures over the next week. That's really saying something.

So, yes, records will fall across the Central Plains into the Midwest, the Great Lakes, and then eventually into the East Coast as well. So not only do we have these Arctic blasts of air coming in from the north, but we've got this fresh layer of snow. Remember about this time yesterday, we were talking about the snowstorm that brought over a foot of snow across northern New England.

So this fresh snowpack means that we've got what's called a high albedo effect. So the sun radiates its energy down towards Earth, but with snow on the ground, it bounces it right back up, kind of a reflective-type property. So it doesn't get that opportunity to heat the ground.

And so with the 40 percent of the northern parts of the country covered in snow, that heat is just going to radiate back into the atmosphere, and our temperatures will take a nosedive. So check this out. This is what it'll feel like on Thursday morning.

Negative 21 in Duluth, negative 17 in Minneapolis, below zero for Chicago. Then the cold air moves eastward, and it's headed towards, Brianna, along the East Coast. It is this cold front that's going to be responsible for that.

So, again, the winter coat, you're halfway there, but you need the hood as well, because you'll definitely need it.

KEILAR: I'm no way there now because the coat is gone, but I'll tell you, the bomb cyclone hit our studio years ago. I wear that coat during the commercial breaks, Derek, because it gets so darn cold in here. But I'm ready, and I can't mess up the hair during the show.

VAN DAM: The ears perk up when you're body's back home.

KEILAR: But I will, yes, I'm going to get that hood. You told me to. Derek Van Dam, thank you so much.

So now to some other headlines that we are following. In a first-of- its-kind lawsuit, the city of San Francisco is suing 10 of the nation's biggest food manufacturers, alleging that the ultra-processed foods they make are responsible for a public health crisis. Some of these companies named include Coca-Cola, Nestle, Kraft, Heinz.

The lawsuit argues that ultra-processed foods cause diseases that have saddled local governments with public health care costs. It accuses the companies of using unnaturally high doses of reinforcing ingredients to keep people wanting more.

Also police in New Zealand charging a man with theft after he allegedly stole a jewel-encrusted gold Faberge egg locket from a store by picking it up and swallowing it. The 32-year-old man is scheduled to have his first court appearance next week. Investigators revealed that he has since undergone a medical assessment and is being constantly monitored by an officer.

[15:00:00]