Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Rory McIlroy Wins 2026 Masters Tournament; Man Arrested After Molotov Cocktail Thrown at OpenAI CEO's Home; Pope Leo Vows to Continue Speaking Out After Trump's Criticism; President at Odds With Pope Leo After He Speaks Against War and Nuclear Arms; Eric Swalwell Ends California Governor Campaign Amid Sexual Misconduct Claims; U.S. Military Blockade of Iranian Ports Take Effect. Aired 2-2:30p ET

Aired April 13, 2026 - 14:00   ET

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

[14:00:00]

DON RIDDELL, CNN SPORTS ANCHOR & CORRESPONDENT: Having entered the pantheon of greats by winning all four major titles for the career Grand Slam last year, now he joins only Jack Nicklaus, Nick Faldo and Tiger Woods as the only men to win twice in a row at Augusta. He's got six major titles to his name. He's tied for 12th on the all-time list, and he says he doesn't plan on stopping here. And he says a course that caused him so much anguish over the years now feels like home and next year, he will try to become the first player to win three in a row at Augusta. Wouldn't that be something? Back to you.

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN CO-ANCHOR OF "CNN NEWS CENTRAL": President Trump says a now-deleted post apparently depicting him as Jesus is not exactly what everyone thought it was, including some of his supporters. He says that he thought it shows him as a doctor. His explanation coming hours after he attacked Pope Leo as well, we'll discuss.

Plus, pressure at the ports. President Trump issuing a new threat to Tehran, saying the U.S. would sink any Iranian attack ships that come near the U.S. blockade on those Iranian ports. We're following the latest there.

And a CEO's plea, investigators searching for a motive after they say a man threw a Molotov cocktail at the home of Sam Altman. See what the CEO had to say about the attack as we follow these major developing stories and many more, all coming in right here to "CNN News Central."

Breaking News to CNN. President Donald Trump addressing his now- deleted Truth Social post which depicted the president as Jesus, saying he thought this portrayed him as a doctor.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Did you post that picture of yourself depicted as Jesus Christ?

DONALD TRUMP, (R) PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Well, it wasn't a picture. It was me. I did post it and I thought it was me as a doctor and had to do with Red Cross as a Red Cross worker there which we support, and only the fake news could come up with that one.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: Let's go live to the White House with CNN's Kristen Holmes. Kristen, the post was widely criticized, described as blasphemous even by some of the president's allies.

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: It certainly was. And I do want to go back quickly to what he just said. I mean, he acknowledges that he posted it. This is very different than what we've heard in the past when he posted that incredibly racist video of Barack and Michelle Obama. They said a staffer had posted that. He here is acknowledging this.

But what's really fascinating about it is how quickly he deleted it. He posted it overnight and within the last couple of hours, it was deleted That is actually a much shorter time frame than when he posted that Obama video. And that, of course, I'm referencing because that was the last time we saw him delete a controversial post.

Now, of course, there are a lot of questions as to why he would believe this was a doctor and not Jesus. If you look at the hands here, the healing hands, generally not done by doctors. But that is what President Trump is now saying. And I do want to post one or at least put up one of the responses here from Riley Gaines.

This is one of the people who condemned the president's post. And remember, she's a conservative activist. She has campaigned with him. She does a lot with the men and women's sports. She said, "Why seriously? I cannot understand why he posts this? Is he looking for a response? Does he actually think this? Either way, two things are true. A little humility would serve him well. And God shall not be mocked."

And that is just one of a number of posts that we saw from conservatives, from allies of Trump's, really raking the fact that he would do this across the coals. Now, of course, there was also the reasoning behind the part of why it was immediately connected to Jesus, not just the healing hands, not just the imagery and the demons in the background, but also because it came at a time where President Trump had spent an enormous amount of time posting about the Pope and posting critically about the Pope, saying that he shouldn't be getting involved in the war and that he shouldn't be criticizing the President of the United States.

At one point, he actually took credit for the fact that Pope Leo was selected to be Pope because he said that the Vatican or the powers that be wanted somebody who knew how to deal with Donald Trump. And then he praised the Pope's brother, who we, of course, have reported is a Trump supporter. But the combination of the two goes to show you why it was believed and many still believe, he was posting an image of him as Jesus Christ. However, of course, there was an enormous amount of pushback, probably more than he was expecting.

SANCHEZ: Kristen Holmes, live for us at the White House, thank you so much. Erica? ERICA HILL, CNN CO-ANCHOR OF "CNN NEWS CENTRAL": Also joining us now, Father James Martin, he's Editor-at-Large in America Media. He's written several books, including "The Jesuit Guide to (Almost) Everything." Father, it's good to have you with us this hour.

I'd just love to get your reaction to that image that the president posted and then deleted. He, of course, has said, as you just heard, he thought this was him being, you know, depicted as a doctor. Not everyone sees that as a doctor. What do you make of this, both this image and the backlash to it in this moment?

[14:05:00]

REV. JAMES MARTIN, JESUIT PRIEST & EDITOR-AT-LARGE, AMERICA MEDIA: Yeah, I don't know too many doctors that have glowing hands. So that's the most Jesus-looking picture I think I could imagine. And I think it was pretty shocking to me that someone would put themselves in the place of Jesus.

And as your reporter was just saying, it came after he had just been tweeting out a pretty hateful attack on Pope Leo. So obviously, religion was on his mind last night. And that probably came from watching the "60 Minute Special" with the three cardinals. So I guess he was thinking about religion, and that's what came out.

HILL: (Inaudible) you mentioned that "60 Minute Special" with the three cardinals. At the very end, one of them says that having worked with four different popes, he believes each one was there at that moment for a reason, that Pope Leo is in fact the right person to be pope in this moment. Do you agree?

MARTIN: Oh, sure. I think he's doing a great job. And it's not just having to do with political issues, but he's turning our attention to the poor and to the marginalized. He's asking the church to become more united. And as we speak, he's visiting Algeria, visiting a small group of Catholics in a largely poor country. So I think he's doing a wonderful job, and he is the right person for the time.

HILL: Part of what the president was criticizing him for is that, in the president's word, he's weak on crime, also on foreign affairs. This morning, the Pope responded saying, I have no fear of the Trump administration. Also saying, I do not look at my role as being political or politician. I don't want to get into a debate with him.

How do you think Pope Leo is changing the conversation in this moment? You noted we'll be seeing and hearing more of him over the course of the next few days with this trip to Africa. But even beyond that, he's certainly changed the conversation over this past year.

MARTIN: Well, I think he's focusing us on gospel values, real gospel values. And when it comes to, for example, migrants and refugees, he's reminding us that Jesus says we have to welcome the stranger. But more recently, he's reminding us that Jesus said, blessed are the peacemakers, right, not blessed are the warmongers. And after the resurrection, his message to the disciples is peace be with you. So you can't get away from the message of peace from Jesus, nor can you get away from the message of helping the poor. And these are gospel topics, they're not political topics.

HILL: Yeah, I'm sure, as you're well aware, religion has often been turned into politics. It's interesting too, in this moment, when you have the secretary of defense, who is a man of faith, who talks about his faith often, those comments from Pope Leo about war and about prayers for war seem to be directly in response to what we've heard from Secretary Hegseth over the last several weeks in terms of his justification for this war. How do you square those remarks?

MARTIN: Well, I think it's important to say that, you know, Leo is very careful about not mentioning people's names like Secretary Hegseth and President Trump, unless he's asked directly. You know, his remarks a couple days ago, you know, around Easter, were about peace in general and about war in general. So I think it's good.

This is, you know, he has to speak about peace. He's the Pope. And again, Jesus says, peace be with you. So if he didn't speak about peace during a time of war, I think he would be really negligent in his duties as Pope, but he's doing a great job.

HILL: It's certainly getting the conversation going. We know that. I'm curious though, what do you think the conversation is among American Catholics as they're watching all of this play out? What are you hearing from them?

MARTIN: Well, I would say that both, you know, Republicans and Democrats, are really shocked by President Trump's attack last night. I mean, that was really beyond the pale. And I heard from people from, you know, all sides of the political spectrum and theological spectrum as well. So, that was really beyond the pale and really kind of unique in history for such an uncharitable, unchristian and, you know, really unhinged attack on the Holy Father.

HILL: Father James Martin, really appreciate the time today. Thank you.

MARTIN: My pleasure.

HILL: Still to come here, step down or get thrown out. Democratic Congressman, Eric Swalwell facing threats of expulsion after four women accuse him of sexual misconduct.

Plus, Sam Altman's home targeted in a Molotov cocktail attack. What the head of OpenAI is saying about that. Plus, the Midwest could be hit with golf ball-sized hail, flooding, tornadoes. We are tracking this wide threat. That and much more coming up right here on "CNN News Central."

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:14:29]

SANCHEZ: We're following Breaking News on Congressman Eric Swalwell. The House Ethics Committee has now opened an investigation into the embattled Democrat, who on Sunday dropped his bid for governor of California after four women accused him of sexual misconduct. One of the allegations is from a former staffer who says that Swalwell sexually assaulted her after a night of heavy drinking in New York. The Manhattan District Attorney's Office is now investigating those claims.

HILL: In a video message, the Congressman acknowledged "mistakes in judgment," but denied the allegations against him.

[14:15:00]

Members of Congress, however, including some from his own party, are calling for his expulsion from the House. Joining us now is CNN Senior Legal Analyst, Elie Honig. He's a former assistant U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York.

Elie, when we look at the fact that the Manhattan D.A. did open this investigation over the weekend, what specifically will they be looking at?

ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Well, Erika, there's two relevant questions here. First of all, was there sexual contact? And second of all, was it consensual or non-consensual? And the latter is going to be much more tricky to prove. So first of all, the Manhattan D.A.'s office is certainly going to interview the complainant, the person we just saw Pam Brown interview in the prior hour, and get her story, get all the details.

Typically, the prosecution would also reach out to the accused, Eric Swalwell. You would have to go through his defense lawyer and ask whether he wants to make a statement. From that point, it really becomes all about corroboration. What do the other details suggest? So, for example, did the complainant make statements that were consistent or inconsistent to others at the time of the event back in 2024?

The reporting is that the complainant did send various texts to friends and relatives alluding to this event. You want to look at any medical evidence. This complainant apparently got treatment for or tested for STDs or pregnancy. So there's some medical evidence, but not the full workup that you would get in certain cases.

So in the end, it really comes down to a credibility issue, and prosecutors have to look at the two people, and also what the external evidence tells us.

SANCHEZ: How could what's been reported publicly now in CNN's reporting and other outlets as well potentially be used? That other material, in terms of CNN's reporting, it's three other women who are also alleging sexual misconduct.

HONIG: So first of all, prosecutors can and often do use media reports as leads for investigations. I've done it. Nothing wrong with it at all. It could be a great source of information. Regarding these three other women who allege sexual misconduct by Eric Swalwell, prosecutors should absolutely speak with them. But I think prosecutors need to be careful here because the other three women's stories are distinct and separate in some respects from what we're hearing from the primary accuser.

Things like sending unwanted texts or images are bad, but they are not the same thing as a sexual assault. So prosecutors want to hear those stories. They're going to have to make a calculation. Do we try to use these women as part of our overall prosecution? Are we going to argue that there's some sort of pattern here, or are they going to determine that these witnesses, even if their stories are true and problematic, don't necessarily go to the issue of sexual assault?

HILL: So, as we've been noting just in the last hour or so, the House Ethics Committee has opened an investigation into Swalwell. There are multiple calls for him to resign from Congress, possibly face expulsion. Anything that's happening on the Hill, to Boris's point, there's (ph) what happens in terms of the reporting.

In terms of what's happening on the Hill, could that in any way be used in this investigation? Is there any intersection?

HONIG: Sure. So technically, these are separate investigations, whatever prosecutors are doing in New York, whatever may be happening on Capitol Hill. But whatever evidence is given in either of those probes can theoretically be used by the other.

But I will say this, Erica, prosecutors do not like it as a rule whenever anybody else is investigating. That can mean other prosecutors, that can mean civil authorities, and that certainly means Congress. And it's not unheard of for prosecutors to say to Congress, just hold off for a minute because we're going to do our investigation first. And Congress sometimes honors that.

And the reason is because if you have the same witness being interviewed by different sources, especially in Congress, which isn't always great at conducting investigations, you could create contradictions. You could subject witnesses to more lines of cross- examination.

So there could be some interaction here, some coordination between the D.A.'s office and Congress. At times, the D.A.'s office just decides, let's just let Congress do what it has to do and we'll use what they have. But it's not unheard of for prosecutors to ask Congress to hold off a minute.

SANCHEZ: Elie Honig, thanks so much for sharing your expertise.

HONIG: Thanks, guys.

SANCHEZ: Still to come, after peace talks break down, President Trump issuing new threats to Iran, saying that if any boats try to break the new blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, they will be immediately eliminated. That and much more, coming your way next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:24:00]

HILL: Breaking News on the war with Iran. President Trump a short time ago saying Iran wants to make a deal, in his words, very badly. This coming, just a short time after the U.S. military began its blockade of Iranian ports in the Gulf and beyond, including in and around the Strait of Hormuz, which of course is a crucial lifeline for Iran's economy.

Hours ago, the president began that blockade with a new threat. Posting on social media, "if any Iranian attack ships come anywhere close to our BLOCKADE, they will be immediately ELIMINATED," in all caps, as you see there. And he then said this about Iran after peace talks over the weekend failed.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, (R) PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: They will never have a nuclear weapon. Iran, you marking it down? Iran will not have a nuclear weapon. And we agreed to a lot of things, but they didn't agree to that. And I think they will agree to it. I'm almost sure of it. In fact, I am sure of it. If they don't agree, there's no deal. There'll never be a deal.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HILL: Joining us now, CNN Political and Global Affairs Analyst, Barak Ravid. So Barak, the president there saying that, you know, he had just gotten a call from the other side. They very badly want to make a deal.

[14:25:00]

Do you have any additional reporting on that? What are you hearing about just how much is behind that and what that actually means?

BARAK RAVID, CNN POLITICAL & GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: Well, during the talks in Pakistan over the weekend, the nuclear issue was the main sticking point. And I would even say, according to sources I talked to, if the U.S. and Iran got to a deal or close to a deal on the nuclear issue, I think all the other loose ends would have been solved.

Two main critical things were part of this disagreement over the nuclear issue in Pakistan. First, the U.S. asked Iran to freeze its uranium enrichment completely for a period of 20 years. The Iranians agreed to the principle of freezing uranium enrichment, but they only agreed to a single-digit period. That's number one.

Number two, the U.S. wanted Iran to agree to remove all the highly enriched uranium that it has in its stockpiles, to remove it out of the country in order for it to be diluted. The Iranians agreed to dilute the material, but only agreed to do it in a monitored process inside the country. I think those are the two main disagreements. On the one hand, you know, it's quite substantive disagreement. On the other hand, U.S. officials I talked to and the mediators that I talked to don't think that this is a gap that cannot be bridged in negotiations.

And I think that this is where the focus is now, to find the solution to those two points. And if those two points will be solved, I'm pretty sure that all the other points will not be deal breakers.

HILL: So that offers some optimism, right? That that gap can be bridged, as you point out. But then it also begs the question of how long could that take? The reality is, these are very difficult negotiations, especially when we're talking about those points.

RAVID: No doubt. And the previous nuclear deal took a year and a half to negotiate. Here, we're talking about negotiations that, you know, there were negotiations last April and May. There were negotiations now before the war in February. But now, we only had 21 hours of negotiations.

But I think what they're trying to reach is, first, a one-pager that gives very, very general -- in very general terms, what both sides agree on. And if on the nuclear issue, there will be a general agreement, I think everything else will -- there's a good chance it will fall into place. And I think that's the effort right now.

We have until April 21, when the ceasefire expires. One of the things that the mediators are trying to do is to get the U.S. and Iran to hold another round of negotiations with the hope that there'll be enough progress for President Trump to agree for another extension of the ceasefire. One of the mediators, the foreign minister of Turkey, said today that 45 to 60 days will be needed to get a deal.

Other mediators, you know, have different number of days. But I think that's the effort right now, to have another round of negotiations and to have an extension of the ceasefire.

HILL: Iran was very clear not long ago, they didn't want to deal with Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner anymore, why they were frustrated about that. How much do you think it did change having Vice President Vance involved in these discussions?

RAVID: I think it changed. But I think the main change is the fact that the U.S. and Iran sat directly in the same room. On the one hand, Vice President Vance, on the other hand, Speaker of Iranian Parliament, Mohammad-Bagher Ghalibaf, the guy who is actually one level down from the supreme leader. So he's the most senior civilian official other than supreme leader. Both of them sitting together in the same room.

This is something that has never happened since the Islamic Revolution in 1979. This is the most senior level, most high-level meeting between Iran and the U.S. And this is what President Trump and Vice President Vance wanted to do for a year, to sit together on a high level, people that can make decisions and, you know, try to negotiate this deal. It happened now. I think we need to see if there will be a follow-up and another meeting on such a level.

HILL: Yeah, absolutely. Barak, appreciate it, as always. Thank you.

RAVID: Thank you.

HILL: Still ahead here, could Democratic lawmakers force out one of their own as four women accused Congressman Eric Swalwell of sexual misconduct? We'll discuss with one House lawmaker. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)