Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

U.S. Blockades Strait of Hormuz; Cuba Tensions; Trump Under Fire Over A.I. Photo. Aired 1-1:30p ET

Aired April 13, 2026 - 13:00   ET

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

[13:00:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:00:43]

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: A stress test on the strait. The U.S. military says it's blocking all traffic coming in and out of Iranian ports after peace talks collapse. Ahead, what this could mean for the global energy crisis.

Plus: Swalwell's swift exit, the Democratic congressman dropping his bid for governor of California over allegations of sexual misconduct. Could he soon be expelled from the House?

ERICA HILL, CNN HOST: And papal pushback. Pope Leo responding to the president calling the first American-born pontiff weak and terrible on crime and foreign policy.

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

SANCHEZ: Breaking news to CNN and some striking comments from President Trump right now referencing a post that he published on TRUTH Social appearing to show the president as Jesus, an image that he now says he thought showed him as a doctor.

CNN's Kevin Liptak is live for us at the White House.

Kevin, I'm not sure we're going to show that image, but I'm not sure how you would see that person wearing robes with light emitting from his palms as a doctor necessarily.

KEVIN LIPTAK, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: I'm not sure either Boris, but, nonetheless, that is the president's explanation.

He did confirm that he posted it, so we know that it wasn't some sort of errant mistake on the president's TRUTH Social page, but, clearly, the president wearing a long white robe and a red stole with an orb of light and rays emanating from his patient's head doesn't suggest any sort of physician that I have ever worked with before.

But that seems to be the president's explanation for what he thought that this image depicted. Listen to what he said. He was just out on the White House Colonnade. Listen to how he talked about it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: It wasn't depiction. It was me. I did post it. And I thought it was me as a doctor and had to do with Red Cross. There's a Red Cross worker there, which we support.

And only the fake news could come up with that one. So I -- I had -- I just heard about it. And I said, how did they come up with that? It's supposed to be me as a doctor making people better.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LIPTAK: It wasn't just the so-called fake news that had an issue with this post, Boris.

There were plenty of the president's own supporters who came out afterwards to suggest that this could even amount to blasphemy, that the president could be mocking God and Jesus Christ through this depiction. They called on him to take it down.

It has been taken down. It remained up overnight and into the morning, but we noticed about two hours ago that it no longer appeared on the president's TRUTH Social page.

SANCHEZ: Kevin, the president also discussed the war in Iran, repeating something that we have heard him say often regarding Tehran wanting a deal. He also mentioned obviously that the U.S. Navy blockade on Iranian ports is currently under way.

LIPTAK: Right.

He claimed that Iran had placed a phone call this morning saying that it wanted to make a deal, of course, after those weekend talks in Pakistan failed to yield the kind of agreement that the president was willing to sign off on. Now he is suggesting that Iran perhaps is more willing to negotiate and willing to submit to some of the red lines that he has laid out, in particular when it comes to Iran's nuclear program.

Now, who placed that call, who took the call on the U.S. side, the president doesn't specify, but suggesting that he remains open to these negotiations, which is something of a difference from what we heard from the president over the weekend. He said that he didn't care either way whether a deal could be struck, that Iran was defeated militarily.

The president today suggesting that these negotiations are actually ongoing and that there could be a potential agreement down the line. He also said, when it comes to the naval blockade of Iran, that other countries would be joining in the United States' effort to block access to the Iranian ports. He had said that over the weekend.

So far, no countries have come forward to say that they are planning to join in the U.S. effort. In fact, more countries have come out and said that they will not join it. We heard that from the British prime minister, Keir Starmer, earlier today. The president saying that there will be more details about these additional nations tomorrow.

[13:05:05]

SANCHEZ: We will look forward to that.

Kevin Liptak, live for us at the White House, thank you so much -- Erica.

HILL: Also joining us, retired Army Major General Randy Manner. He's a former deputy commanding general for the U.S. Third Army in Kuwait.

General, good to have you with us.

As we look at where things stand, given this blockade, I know you had said that it was ineffective before it went, before it started at 10:00 a.m. Eastern time. Do you see a clear military strategy from the administration at this point?

MAJ. GEN. RANDY MANNER (RET.), U.S. NATIONAL GUARD: No, I do not see it.

This is something where the Iranians need to do nothing and just let the United States continue to block the strait, which we allegedly said we wanted to keep the strait open, and now we're blocking it. I don't follow the logic.

The harm to the United States, to its allies and to the world far, far outweighs that of the Iranians. Also remember that the Iranians have another seaport on the Caspian Sea. They also have rail and pipelines outside of their country.

While it, of course, will significantly reduce traffic from Iran, the reality is, this is actually harming the United States and our allies far more than it is Iran.

HILL: So, what I'm hearing from you is, is that Iran has the upper hand here. Is that correct?

MANNER: That's my opinion. The Iranians need to do nothing. They will obviously not attack our ships, because to do so would inflict the wrath of the president and, quite frankly, myself as well.

The Iranians only need to sit there and then just let the U.S. continue to keep the strait closed.

HILL: So, as this is all unfolding, how dangerous is this potential?

MANNER: It's very dangerous. It's putting pressure on the rest of the world, at the expense of the administration.

Every country has three forms to influence other -- three forms of power. We have diplomatic power through negotiations, we have economic power, and we also have military power. This president goes to military power immediately and frequently.

The problem is, many of the best leaders that we have had in the administrations over the years in our diplomatic -- the Department of State, as well as, of course, on our economic side, they're no longer there. And so we have a gap of competence, which, of course, then reflects the fact that we are not able to negotiate in a very meaningful way and only are using threats of military action, because that's the way this particular president works.

HILL: As we see all these threats of military action, there are also questions about what the ultimate goals are here, right?

So, coming out of what we -- of the talks over the weekend, what we have now heard from the president is that the main point now is to ensure that there is no possibility for nuclear weapons in Iran, no further nuclear enrichment.

And I was struck by a conversation that Dana Bash had over the weekend with former U.N. Ambassador under President Trump in his first term Nikki Haley, asking her if she believes, then, based on what we're hearing about, about the nuclear components here, whether this would mean Special Forces going into Iran, boots on the ground here to extract that enriched uranium.

Haley said she thinks that is actually what it's going to come down to. I want to play what she had to say.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NIKKI HALEY, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO THE UNITED NATIONS: This is a Special Force mission. It would take about a week to 10 days to get done.

They know how to do it. It's dangerous. It's not something that we can just sit and think it's casual. I think they have to do it. But once they do that, they're taking away literally one arm of the Iranian regime.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HILL: Certainly not a casual operation, certainly something for highly trained Special Forces. And yet, when she talks about seven to 10 days, the thought of U.S. forces going in, perhaps being there for seven to 10 days, what's your reaction to that possibility, sir?

MANNER: It is a possibility. I don't know that it would take seven or 10 days from now to be able to do it, or if she meant seven to 10 days on the ground. No matter what it would be, it would be a very high- risk operation.

That would also just grab the enriched uranium that is there. It does not prevent them from doing more. This needs to be a negotiated settlement that can obviously be verified by boots -- not boots, but by verifiable means on the ground. I don't think military on the ground.

And so it's something where it's far more complex, and yet it does need careful thought. The Iranians, if you look at it through their eyes, it's all about money and it's all about their position within the world.

So, right now, they have got the world exactly where they want it, which is by keeping -- by the U.S. keeping the strait closed, gas prices go up, oil prices go up, and the pressure is felt anywhere -- everywhere on the United States. Secondly, we need to be able to look at this as not only just money.

[13:10:02]

It's also about using the trade-off in terms of money for that capability to enrich the uranium that they have and to give up what they already have.

HILL: Retired Major General Randy Manner, appreciate so much your insight and your expertise. Thank you.

Still to come here: Congressman Eric Swalwell facing calls to resign or face expulsion from Congress amid serious allegations of sexual misconduct. We will bring you up to speed on the very latest there.

Plus, Pope Leo responding to President Trump, how he's pushing back against the president's criticism.

And, a bit later here, Rory McIlroy now a member of a very, very exclusive golf club -- that and much more ahead right here on CNN NEWS CENTRAL.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:15:05]

SANCHEZ: President Trump is now trying to explain what this now- deleted post apparently depicting him as Jesus is all about.

Moments ago, the president said he thought it was showing him as a doctor.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: It wasn't depiction. It was me. I did post it. And I thought it was me as a doctor and had to do with Red Cross. There's a Red Cross worker there, which we support.

And only the fake news could come up with that one. So I -- I had -- I just heard about it. And I said, how did they come up with that? It's supposed to be me as a doctor making people better.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: Important to point out some of the president's own supporters criticized him and interpreted it as him sort of depicting himself as Jesus.

Joining us now to discuss is Father Patrick Mary Briscoe, the co-host of the "Godsplaining" podcast.

Father, thank you so much for being with us.

First, I just want to get your reaction to this image the president posted and then his explanation.

REV. PATRICK MARY BRISCOE, CO-HOST, "GODSPLAINING": Well, thank you so much for having me on.

It's a very difficult situation here, because, of course, we don't want to see anyone in a dispute with the pope. The pope is certainly not out to make enemies. And I think that I can shed some perspective here. Certainly, when I looked at the image as a Catholic priest, it seemed to me that the president had depicted himself as Jesus.

And I and many others, not just Catholics, but Protestant Christians alike, denounced the image immediately as sacrilegious. It does appear the president has deleted the image, but I would say even more problematic now is the fact that the president has not offered an apology for the image or an apology for his other remarks concerning Pope Leo and the current war in Iran.

SANCHEZ: To sort of condense for our viewers what happened, the pope spoke out against armed conflict. The president attacked Pope Leo directly, and I'm paraphrasing, essentially saying that he was put in place by the Vatican as a response to his, Trump's, presidency.

How do you respond to that?

BRISCOE: Yes, that's exactly what I mean, about people having the framework wrong.

You see, the pope is not a political leader in that way. The pope is not running for office. He doesn't have to be reelected. The pope's role is not to craft or endorse specific foreign policy, but he is to advocate for the cause for peace, for human dignity, and especially for the vulnerable, for those who are going to be suffering most for the war.

So, Pope Leo on the plane today -- he's in the middle of an apostolic journey to Africa. Pope Leo on the plane today said that he is not a politician. And he focused his support, his message again on ending the war and on presenting himself most importantly as an advocate of the Gospel's message.

And I think that's the key, to see the pope and to understand that the pope is not simply a political rival of the American president. That's not now the case. It's never been the case, but to hear the pope as an advocate for human dignity throughout the world, as an advocate for peace, as someone that wants to present and further and advance diplomatic solutions to some very difficult problems.

So, certainly, the pope would condemn any -- any instances, violations of human dignity in regimes like the regime that had headed Iran, but the pope understands that a just solution has to be found, a solution that again furthers the cause for peace.

SANCHEZ: How do you see American Catholics reacting to the president speaking this way about the pope, given that there are certainly many Americans who may not necessarily like whether this pope or his predecessor, Pope Francis?

BRISCOE: The president of the U.S. Bishops Conference released a very powerful statement.

He said: "I'm disheartened that the president chose to write such disparaging words about the Holy Father. The Holy Father, the pope, Pope Leo, is the vicar of Christ, who speaks for the truth of the Gospel."

And I think most Americans, people of goodwill see the pope as that, understand that the pope is an important moral voice, again, that doesn't have a vested political interest. And I think what we're seeing now, what's different, what's changed now in this situation is, Pope Leo is, of course, an American.

Again, one thing that adds further context, we can remember the beginning of the Iraq War. And a lot of people were surprised to hear Pope St. John Paul II condemn that war. And what was different in that situation is that President Bush did not attack personally the papacy.

Diplomatic conversations continued to happen, and the Vatican continued to advocate for peace through the voice of Pope John Paul II and his successor, Pope Benedict.

[13:20:00]

And, again, I think what we're seeing now is the church's response to what is a breakdown of dignity. In the recent "60 Minutes" interview, three cardinals were interviewed. It's a very unprecedented thing.

And Cardinal Cupich from Chicago pointed out that one especially difficult thing is, we're seeing a gamification of war, he called it, a gamification of war, which makes death and violations of human dignity seem like casual and light things.

So it's really the tone and the tenor and the nature of discourse, because it belongs to the pope to correct all of us, to lead all of us, to help us aspire to greater things, to higher moral agency, right? And it's really the tone and tenor of that discourse now that's shifted.

And that's what so many, I think, people are responding to vehemently, both in the image, which, again, has since been deleted, but the post, which has not.

SANCHEZ: Yes.

Father Patrick Mary Briscoe, thank you so much for sharing your perspective. We appreciate you being with us this afternoon.

BRISCOE: My joy.

SANCHEZ: Coming up: Cuba's president warning the United States that, if it invades the island, his people are prepared to die defending themselves.

We will take you live to Havana in just moments.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:25:51]

SANCHEZ: Cuba's president is warning the United States not to launch a military action, saying his people are prepared to die fighting back.

Miguel Diaz-Canel is speaking out amid high tensions with the United States. In recent weeks, President Trump has talked about taking Cuba and has worsened the country's fuel crisis by effectively shutting off the flow of oil.

Here is Diaz-Canel on "Meet the Press" this weekend.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MIGUEL DIAZ-CANEL, CUBAN PRESIDENT (through translator): Our responsibility entails the conviction and the commitment that we're willing to give our lives for the revolution and for the cause that we defend.

So, for me, that is not a matter of concern. If the time comes, I don't think there would be any justification for the United States to launch a military aggression against Cuba or for the U.S. to undertake a surgical operation or the kidnapping of a president.

If that happens, there will be fighting and there will be a struggle, and we will defend ourselves. And if we need to die, we will die, because, as our national anthem says, dying for the homeland is to live.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: Let's get more now from CNN Havana bureau chief Patrick Oppmann.

Patrick, what else did you take from this conversation between Diaz- Canel and NBC?

PATRICK OPPMANN, CNN HAVANA BUREAU CHIEF: Well, we continue to see a kind of a ramping up of rhetoric just minutes ago.

Donald Trump's talking about how U.S. forces may stop by Cuba on the way back from Iran after the war there is finished. So, day by day -- Diaz-Canel, you had him talking last week about how Cubans would fight to the death, there would be guerrilla warfare, and now Donald Trump essentially saying that he's prepared to send U.S. forces here.

So, neither side appears to be taking an off-ramp, but Diaz-Canel trying to show that he is in charge of this country, that he will not be stepping down, as the U.S. has demanded, but also not willing to apparently make any major economic concessions, open up the economy or given to any of the U.S. demands, while willing to negotiate, he says.

But it's not clear what there would be left to negotiate.

SANCHEZ: Patrick, he was also asked about releasing political prisoners on the island. That was one of several things that he was asked about, in which he ceded no ground.

OPPMANN: Absolutely not.

And we have seen some releases of prisoners take place over the last several weeks, but not many political prisoners, if any at all. The people considered by aid groups, by human rights groups to be political prisoners, they remain in jail, certainly some of the more famous cases.

And Diaz-Canel saying that, in his opinion, there are no political prisoners on the island. But, of course, once again, groups that follow this from outside of Cuba can point to numerous cases of people who are in jail for speaking out and criticizing the government here.

SANCHEZ: You also noted a moment ago, Patrick, that Diaz-Canel was trying to show that he's in power, in part because, for example, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, when asked about his message to Diaz- Canel, laughed and -- I'm paraphrasing -- and said, "I have no message for him," insinuating that he's not actually in charge.

And there has been reporting that teams with the State Department have been in communication with others in Cuba, most notably perhaps the grandson of Raul Castro. So, I guess the question is, what is Diaz- Canel's standing within Cuba as its leader?

OPPMANN: And in the interview with "Meet the Press," he says that he has never spoken to Marco Rubio, so he's not directly involved in these negotiations. Of course, he's the president of this country. He is very clear that the negotiations are something that he is ultimately overseeing.

But what we have witnessed over the last several weeks is, the State Department, Marco Rubio trying to make an end run around Diaz-Canel, who they view as something of an obstacle to any change here, and trying to essentially reach out to the Castro family, to people close to Raul Castro and say, you make a deal with us. Any of the officials that we see as just trying to hold on to the status quo, they need to leave.

That certainly would appear to include Miguel Diaz-Canel. And put someone in power who's more amenable to our demands. And that would be very beneficial in terms of U.S. sanctions being lifted and a path forward being reached.

We will see if that can be worked out, like -- looked -- like what took place in Venezuela.