Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Trump Heads To China As Iran War Looms Over Crucial Talks; Sen. Graham On Iran War Mediator: "I Don't Trust Pakistan"; Dir. Patel Defends Trump's $12.5B Budget Request For FBI; Nebraska Senate Candidate Says She'll Drop Out If She Wins. Aired 3-3:30p ET

Aired May 12, 2026 - 15:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:00:18]

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: Big business in Beijing. President Trump heading to the Chinese capital for a critical summit with Xi Jinping. He spoke last hour before leaving the White House and we'll tell you what he had to say.

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: Plus, inflation heating up to its highest level in three years, now outpacing wage growth. In a new poll, Americans tell CNN how they're dealing with a higher cost of living.

And an unusual campaign promise, Nebraska Democrats rallying around a Senate candidate vowing to drop out if she wins today's primary. We're following these major developing stories and many more all coming in right here to CNN NEWS CENTRAL.

KEILAR: We have breaking news. President Trump is now on his way to China. The President saying good things are about to happen as he left for a face-to-face meeting with Chinese leader Xi Jinping. It's still unclear though if what happens on this trip in the coming days will have major implications for the war with Iran. But we know that they'll be discussing, it appears, the future of Taiwan and global trade.

Keep in mind, President Trump delayed this trip in March because of the war. A war the Pentagon now says has cost nearly $29 billion but many experts expect has cost a whole lot more. CNN's Alayna Treene is live for us at the White House where the President was just taking questions about the war.

Alayna, what did he say?

ALAYNA TREENE, CNN WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Yes, look one of the key questions I had, Brianna, was about whether or not he plans to discuss this with Chinese President Xi Jinping, of course, given China's relationship with Iran. I -- you know, would remind you as well that we just saw Iran's foreign minister someone who has been crucial in the negotiations on this Abbas Araghchi. He was in China just last week meeting with his Chinese counterpart.

But essentially I asked the President, you know, what is your message to Xi Jinping about the Iran war and do you think that he could help in getting the Iranians back to the negotiating table in a more serious way. I want you to listen to that exchange.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TREENE: What is your message to President Xi as it relates to the Iran war?

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Well, I think number one we're going to have a long talk about it. I think he's been relatively good to be honest with you. You look at the blockade, no problem. They get a lot of their oil from that area. We've had no problem and he's been a friend of mine. He's been somebody that we get along with. I think you're going to see that good things are going to happen. This is going to be a very exciting trip. A lot of good things are going to happen.

(CROSSTALK)

TREENE: Do you think -- do you think he needs to intervene at all with the Iranians?

TRUMP: I don't think he's (INAUDIBLE) ...

TREENE: Do you think he can help in any way?

TRUMP: No, I don't think we need any help with Iran. We'll win it one way or the other. We'll win it -- we'll win it peacefully or otherwise.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TREENE: So, there you have it. The President saying that he's going to have a long talk with President Xi about all of this but then went on to say that he doesn't think that he needs their help.

Look, it's going to be very interesting and -- and you pointed out smartly, Brianna, that this trip -- the President's trip to Beijing was initially scheduled for earlier this year only to be delayed because of the complications around the ongoing war with Iran. The Trump administration, the White House and the conversations I was having did not want this meeting to be overshadowed by that. But. of course, we are now weeks into this war. It's gone on longer than the President had thought it would and so this is definitely going to be, I think, a key part of his time in China in addition of course the all the other key things they want to discuss including trade and the economy, Brianna.

KEILAR: All right. Alayna, thank you for the latest from the White House. Boris?

SANCHEZ: During a hearing on Capitol Hill today Republican Senator Lindsey Graham asked Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth about a CBS News report that Pakistan, the key mediator between the U.S. and Iran, had allowed Iranian military aircraft to park on its airfields. Here's that exchange. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): If the mediator is allowing reconnaissance aircraft Iran to be parked in Pakistani air bases, do you think that's consistent with being a fair mediator?

PETE HEGSETH, DEFENSE SECRETARY: I -- again, I wouldn't want to get in the middle of these negotiations.

GRAHAM: Yes. Well, I do.

HEGSETH: I want maximum efficacy for our people.

GRAHAM: I want to get in the middle of these negotiations. I don't trust Pakistan as far as I can throw them. If they actually do have Iranian aircraft parked in Pakistan bases to protect Iranian military assets, that tells me we should be looking maybe for somebody else to mediate. No wonder this damn thing is going nowhere.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[15:05:00]

SANCHEZ: Let's bring in CNN Political and Global Affairs Analyst Barak Ravid.

Barak, thanks so much for being with us.

I do want to ask you about Pakistan and some of the reporting there, but first what are you hearing from the administration when it comes to expectations for this meeting between President Trump and Xi Jinping specifically when it comes to Iran?

BARAK RAVID, CNN POLITICAL AND GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: Well, I'm sure this is going to be a key issue. Several U.S. officials told me that Trump is going to raise it. You know, I'm pretty sure that President Xi is planning to raise it too because it's a key issue both for Trump, because this is a war he wants to end and it's a key issue for President Xi because the situation -- the instability in the Gulf creates great difficulties to China and the Chinese have been involved behind the scenes for several weeks now in trying to urge the Iranians to take a deal with Trump to reach some sort of an agreement.

Until now they haven't been very successful because at the end of the day the Iranians, on the one hand, didn't really care what the Chinese had to say and the Chinese didn't really use the leverage that they have on the Iranians, you know, in order to move them in the right direction. The question is if President Trump will be able to get president -- to convince President Xi to put some real pressure on the Iranian.

SANCHEZ: Yes, as we talk about the potential for China to be a mediator, there are a lot of questions about Pakistan and its role as mediator because even though we heard President Trump today before departing the White House saying that the Pakistanis have been amazing, we know that some in his orbit have questioned whether Pakistan is often sharing a more positive version of the Iranian position than what reflects reality. I wonder what your sense is in speaking to sources about how Pakistan is presenting the Iranian position to the administration.

RAVID: So, the Pakistanis are not the only channel, they're not the only mediators. There are the mediators that are, you know, the official formal ones, the ones that are in the front. But over the last week or two, I think, for example, the Qatari mediation the back- channel Qatar has with the IRGC in Iran and Qatar's very close relationship with the White House, I think that has become at least as a prominent mediation channel as the Pakistani one.

The Pakistanis, by the way, work very closely with the Chinese. The Pakistani foreign minister spoke to his Chinese counterpart before President Trump departed on his trip. The Chinese and the Pakistanis put out more than a month ago a sort of a joint statement laying out parameters for ending the war and for a ceasefire. Some of those parameters were used at the end in the announcement of the ceasefire.

So, again, I think the Pakistanis are still relevant but they're not the only mediators. The Chinese, the U.S. wants China to be more relevant than it is and there are several other mediators like Qatar like Turkey like Egypt, like -- by the way Saudi Arabia that are becoming more and more relevant over the last week or two.

SANCHEZ: Barak Ravid, thank you so much for sharing your reporting with us. Appreciate it.

RAVID: Thank you.

SANCHEZ: Still to come, FBI Director Kash Patel facing off with lawmakers right now on Capitol Hill as he makes a big budget request.

Plus, for the first time in three years, inflation is outpacing the growth of wages. What Americans are telling CNN about the high cost of living. That and much more coming your way in just moments.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:13:14]

KEILAR: We're following a contentious hearing on the Hill where FBI Director Kash Patel is appearing before the Senate Appropriations Committee, and just moments ago there was a shouting match that broke out when Democratic Senator Chris Van Hollen brought up recent allegations against Patel regarding excessive drinking.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KASH PATEL, FBI DIRECTOR: Unlike your baseless reports ...

SEN. CHRIS VAN HOLLEN (D-MD): I will say, Director ...

PATEL: ... the only person that was slinging margaritas in El Salvador on the taxpayer dollar with a convicted gang-banging rapist was you.

VAN HOLLEN: You know, the fact ...

PATEL: The only person that ran up a $7,000 ...

VAN HOLLEN: ... Director Patel ...

PATEL: ... bar tab in Washington, D.C. at the Lobby Bar was you.

VAN HOLLEN: ... this suggests to me -- this suggests to me that the allegations are true.

PATEL: So, the only individual in this room that have been drinking on taxpayer dime during the day is you.

VAN HOLLEN: Are you polygraphing -- Director Patel, come on. These are serious allegations that were made against you.

PATEL: The allegations are false.

VAN HOLLEN: They're in the lawsuit that you filed.

PATEL: You're drinking margaritas with a gang-banger is true and on video.

VAN HOLLEN: Actually, it just goes to show ...

PATEL: You're running a $7,000 bar tab at the Lobby Bar ...

VAN HOLLEN: ... Director Patel ...

PATEL: ... has been filed by your own office.

VAN HOLLEN: ... this goes to show ...

PATEL: ... who drink during the day, that's you.

VAN HOLLEN: Okay. Mr. Chairman ...

PATEL: This is the ultimate example of hypocrisy.

VAN HOLLEN: Mr. Chairman ...

PATEL: I will not be tarnished by baseless allegations ...

VAN HOLLEN: Let me ask the question.

PATEL: ... and fraudulent statements from the media.

VAN HOLLEN: The fact that you mentioned that indicates you don't know what you are talking about.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: Senator Van Hollen went on to ask Patel whether he'd submit to an alcohol use disorder identification test.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) VAN HOLLEN: Are you willing to take the -- the -- the test, that --

it's -- it's called the audit test, that members of our active-duty military and others take to determine whether they have a drinking problem?

PATEL: I'll take any test you're willing to take.

VAN HOLLEN: I will take it, Director Patel. I'll take it. Ready to take it?

PATEL: Let's go.

VAN HOLLEN: Yes or no?

PATEL: Let's go.

VAN HOLLEN: I'll take it.

PATEL: Side by side.

VAN HOLLEN: I'll take it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[15:15:00]

KEILAR: Let's bring in former FBI Director Andy McCabe.

What did you think of that moment there, Andy?

ANDREW MCCABE, CNN SENIOR LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST: I mean, it's just incredibly dispiriting. You know, any time the director of the FBI is dueling in, you know, exchange -- in -- in the midst of a shouting match with, you know, members on the Hill defending himself against allegations of excessive alcoholism or excessive drinking, it's just the last thing that the FBI needs.

This is such a time -- you know, a horrible distraction from the great work of the men and women who protect this country every day. And, of course, I don't think it -- you know, what have we learned from this exchange so far? We uncovered some great nugget of truth in terms of the FBI's budget or the firing of -- of agents who worked cases that are now politically disfavored, the firing of the agents and analysts who are the Iran experts? No, I don't -- I don't think we've learned anything about that. We've just had to be spectators to this inane back and forth.

KEILAR: What are you watching for as this does continue? It -- it sounds like obviously it's a little unsatisfying because there are a lot of outstanding questions that you don't feel are adequately answered. But what are you watching for?

MCCABE: You know, this is the moment that the FBI Director gets to sit in front of the lawmakers and basically make the argument for the FBI's budget to come in and say, hey, we had this many personnel resources this year. Here's why we need additional resources to do X, Y and Z next year. Here are the new threats that we're facing. Here's where we're shifting people to address those threats. And here's what additional, you know, technology or -- or people or -- or physical plant resources we need to meet these threats.

But, yes, I haven't heard really any of that so far today. It's really all been about kind of the personal attacks on Kash Patel, which, quite frankly, he's provoked with his behavior in office so far. So, it's -- it's unfortunate that we're not hearing more about what the FBI is doing and more importantly, what they need from the lawmakers to be able to keep delivering a high level of expertise for the United States people.

KEILAR: I imagine that the FBI rank and file pay attention when their boss is there on the Hill testifying. You know, what are they looking for? What should be happening as they are trying to do their jobs?

MCCABE: It's a very strange time in the FBI right now. Morale is particularly low. Many people are, you know, agents in the field. Personnel in the field are generally kind of trying to keep their heads down and stay off the headquarters radar. Folks who are working at headquarters are concerned, quite frankly, about the rash of terminations, about people who are being squeezed out of the organization before they're ready to go, largely for political reasons. The use of polygraphs to find -- to test the loyalty of agents and personnel with regard to the director.

So, I'm sure they're listening quite closely, whether or not they're hearing anything that's going to resolve some of those fears and some of that anxiety, I -- I doubt. But no question. You're right, Brianna, they do -- they do listen to how their boss answers these questions. It's not typical to see an FBI director really engage in, like, essentially combat with the lawmakers and to provide attacking answers or highly defensive answers.

You know, we expect substance. And unfortunately, it doesn't seem like there's been a lot of that.

KEILAR: Yes. I mean, especially right now, there -- there are a lot of substantive things. You highlighted some of them. But also, what would you want to learn from Patel about how the bureau is operating right now during this ongoing war with Iran, especially since we know that Iran has escalated cyber-attacks. In April, Iran-linked hackers successfully targeted and caused disruptions at multiple U.S. oil and gas and water sites. What do you want to know about how the FBI is responding kind of broadly to all these things?

MCCABE: The elevated threat picture from Iran is not a surprise. This is something that we had been planning for in the FBI literally for decades. We had a classified program that we had developed over the course of many years on how exactly to respond, to assess and mitigate threats to the homeland as a result of U.S. open war hostilities with Iran. So, how are we doing? What is the director's current assessment of the current -- of the state of this threat? What sort of actions have they been able to take? What sort of disruptions have they -- have they been able to engage in? Where do they think the next wave of threats or activity is going to come from? [15:20:02]

Is it -- should we be looking for more action on the cyber side? Do we actually think that there are Iranian operatives here in the United States?

Are we expecting some sort of kinetic action here in the homeland? So, like, these are all very important questions. They are logically derived from the current state of war that we are in with Iran. But again, you know, it's -- it's -- we've heard a lot more about accusations of drinking.

KEILAR: Yes. Andrew McCabe, great to have you on. Thank you so much.

And coming up, voting is underway in key primaries in Nebraska, why a leading Democratic candidate for Senate has a unique campaign promise to drop out if she wins.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:25:23]

SANCHEZ: It's a bit of an unusual pitch from a candidate. If you vote for me and I win, I will drop out. That's what's happening in Nebraska's Democratic primary for Senate, and the reason for the unusual campaign is an effort to defeat another candidate on the ballot, William Forbes.

KEILAR: He's a President Trump-supporting, abortion-opposing pastor who Democrats say is only running to take votes away from an independent candidate. Are you confused? Well, so are some of the voters. CNN's Jeff Zeleny is here to explain, though, to un-confuse us.

Jeff, what's going on here?

JEFF ZELENY, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Well, look, the bottom line here is the Democratic brand is not all that strong in a place like Nebraska. So, there's an independent candidate who's running for Senate, Dan Osborn.

For him to have a chance, Democrats are hoping to not field any candidates at all. So, there are some Democratic leaders who believe that a GOP spoiler, you can see right there, William Forbes, they say, was decided to run even though, as a Democrat -- even though he's voted for President Trump three times. Well, Cindy Burbank, the person on the left of your screen there, she's a retired pharmacy, a technician from Omaha, a staunch Democratic activist. She's running as well. If she wins the primary today, she's going to say, look, I do not want to accept this, and that means there will not be anyone under the Democratic line, which gives Dan Osborne, the independent, an open race with Pete Ricketts in the fall.

A bit confusing here, but clearly both sides are trying to game this a little bit. But the bottom line is, what we're seeing in Nebraska and other states, independents are trying to run in place of Democrats because their brand is somewhat stronger or more neutral. But Dan Osborn came fairly close a couple years ago in the race with Senator Deb Fischer. So, Pete Ricketts, the Republican senator, former governor, was a little concerned. Some people believe that he had a hand in getting William Forbes on the ballot. He says he did not. In any case, a lot of candidates, but there could be fewer if Cindy Burbank wins, she will drop out.

SANCHEZ: Democrats are also optimistic about their chances in the House race for Omaha, the district that Omaha is in, to replace Don Bacon, right? What -- what are the odds there?

ZELENY: Don Bacon is one of three Republicans who won in 2024 in Kamala Harris-won districts. So, that would give Democrats a pickup opportunity. He's retiring like so many other House Republicans, I think 37 or so. So, in this race here, there's a very crowded Democratic primary to choose the Democratic nominee to run against the Republican in this seat. It's Democratic-leading, but a lot of intrigue in this one as well.

But Don Bacon, of course, who's very familiar to many of our viewers, an outspoken Republican, he is retiring. So that creates a potential pickup opportunity for Democrats.

KEILAR: Retiring but independent-minded ...

SANCHEZ: Yes.

ZELENY: For sure.

KEILAR: ... certainly, very interesting. Jeff, thank you.

ZELENY: Certainly, in this day and age.

KEILAR: Yes, certainly. Thank you so much.

Up next, another state is now monitoring multiple people for possible exposure to the hantavirus, but health officials are still stressing there's no sign of a larger outbreak. We'll have the latest.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)