Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Interview with Rep. Seth Moulton (D-MA): Trump Says We're not Satisfied with Proposed Deal from Iran and Nobody Will Control the Strait of Hormuz; Judge Blocks West Point Restrictions on Civilian Faculty Speech. Aired 2:30-3p ET

Aired May 27, 2026 - 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: Today, President Trump making it clear he will not be pressured into striking a deal with Iran to end the war. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Iran is very much intent. They want very much to make a deal. So far, they haven't gotten there.

We're not satisfied with it. But we will be. We will be either that or we'll have to just finish the job.

But their Navy is gone, as I've said a thousand times. The Navy is gone. The Air Force is gone.

Everything's gone. And they're negotiating on fumes.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: Earlier today, Iran's state TV reported on a draft memo being circulated as part of the negotiations. In it, notably, Iran and Oman would share control over shipping in the Strait of Hormuz long term, something President Trump today effectively said was a nonstarter and will not happen.

We're joined now by Democratic Congressman Seth Moulton of Massachusetts. He's a member of the House Armed Services Committee. Congressman, thanks so much for sharing part of your afternoon with us. What do you think the United States will need to do at this point to ensure that this Persian Gulf Strait authority that Iran is trying to establish its control over the Strait of Hormuz, its charging of environmental fees and such for passing doesn't actually happen, doesn't go into effect?

REP. SETH MOULTON (D-MA): Well, they need to negotiate a much better deal than what the Trump administration appears to be proposing here. I mean, it's just amazing listening to that quote that you just played from Trump yesterday saying their military is gone, their Navy is gone, their air defenses are gone, their air force is gone. And yet just yesterday, our military claimed to be conducting defensive strikes against Iran, defensive strikes because they were attacking the U.S. forces.

So how can their military be gone when we're conducting strikes against them in self-defense? The Trump administration is clearly totally out of touch with reality here. And that starts with the president at the top of the heap here.

SANCHEZ: Do you think President Trump should listen to the Iran hawks that have called on him to exert more pressure via additional military strikes on Iran? Do you think that would elicit more concessions from Tehran?

MOULTON: No, I don't. And that hasn't worked at all here. I mean, remember, on February 23rd, the Strait was open.

[14:35:00]

Oil was at $66 a barrel. Inflation is up. And we have no way out of this. So this war has been a failure every step of the way.

And amazingly, the Trump administration seems to finally realize this, which is why they're backed off -- why they've backed off, why they are seeking a deal with Iran. Let's be clear. It's not Iran begging for a deal. It's the Trump administration.

But it's still the best course of action that they can take at this point, because escalating it only risks getting us more deeply involved, harder to pull out. And at this point, we're losing the war. We got to cut our losses and go home.

SANCHEZ: So if your argument is that the U.S. has to do a better job of negotiating to keep the Strait of Hormuz flowing with traffic unrestricted by Tehran, what leverage does the U.S. then have other than additional military action?

MOULTON: I mean, Boris, it's a good question. Candidly, we don't have a lot of leverage. But what we should do is, first of all, start by putting professional negotiators in charge, not Trump's real estate buddies, but people at the State Department who've negotiated with Iran for years, who understand how they work, who understand the levers that they can pull behind the scenes to get what they want.

You know, Iran is under some economic pressure right now. Let's get some professionals in there to conduct these negotiations, not this ridiculous back and forth where every few days Trump claims that they're begging to come to the negotiating table and they obviously are not. That's the first step, I think.

And then the second thing is he's got to show that the U.S. can actually be a reliable partner. One of the fundamental issues here is that no one wants to make a deal with Trump because he just tears up deals. I mean, remember, he had a nuclear deal.

He was handed it by the Obama administration. He could have chosen to strengthen that deal if he didn't like it. He could have built up on top of it. But instead, he just tore it up. So he's got to figure out some way to put some level of trust back

into the negotiations. Those are two basic steps, professionalism and trust, that could go a long way to making a deal. But those are steps that actually the Trump administration should take.

This ridiculous back and forth where he claims that Iran is begging for a deal and they're clearly not is not helping the situation.

SANCHEZ: We're learning that amid the war, the Pentagon has struggled in some cases to carry out routine training and maintenance. And alongside that, according to one source, the war has cost more than $40 billion so far. Would you support a supplemental funding bill? And if so, how much?

MOULTON: Absolutely not. Absolutely not. We are not going to reward Trump and Hegseth for this disaster of a war.

I guarantee you, I'll tell you right now, Boris, $40 billion is a major underestimate. I don't know exactly what the number is, but I would be shocked if it's not twice that at the end of the day. And not only is this a loss against Iran, I mean, the only thing that Operation Epic Fury seems to have accomplished is putting the IRGC in charge of Iran and the Strait of Hormuz.

I mean, we've literally empowered the hardliners in Iran, our worst enemies. That's the only thing this war has accomplished. But it's not just a loss against Iran.

It's a geopolitical failure across the world because we're taking our eye off the ball in places like the Far East and in China, where China is looking for an opportunity to start a war over Taiwan that could literally result in World War III. We've significantly lost our edge in being able to deter that from happening. We're not doing anything to help Ukraine.

And even The Wall Street Journal just reported that Russia is looking at other places in Europe to attack. So this is a strategic failure across the globe, let alone a loss against Iran. We're not going to reward that behavior in Congress.

We should stop it right now before it gets even worse.

SANCHEZ: Before we let you go, Congressman, one of your Democratic colleagues from Massachusetts, Congressman Jake Auchincloss, pushed back on criticism this week after I had a conversation with him, and he argued that Graham Platner, the Senate candidate in Maine, is personally disqualified from running, given his controversial past statements, his Nazi tattoo, which he's since covered up. You have not endorsed Platner. Do you plan to?

What are your thoughts on the criticism that your colleague is facing?

MOULTON: I mean, look, my organization Serve America supports veterans, but we focus on the House of Representatives, not the Senate. Look, Graham clearly made a mistake. And I've been on CNN saying that what I appreciated about him is he owned that mistake.

He took responsibility for it. And I don't think that that's disqualifying. What is disqualifying is having a senator in Maine who just does Donald Trump's bidding.

That's not in the interest of the United States of America. That's not in the interest of Maine voters. Maine voters will have to make this decision, not politicians from Massachusetts.

[14:40:00]

But I think the single disqualifying person in this race is Susan Collins. And given the energy behind Platner's campaign, it sounds like a lot of Mainers agree with that assessment.

SANCHEZ: Congressman Seth Moulton will leave the conversation there. Thanks so much for the time.

MOULTON: Good to see you, Boris.

SANCHEZ: Of course. Coming up, the longest serving law professor in West Point history is celebrating a legal win after suing the Military Academy over freedom of speech. He will join us next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: A federal judge is blocking the U.S. Military Academy at West Point from enforcing speech restriction policies on its civilian faculty members, siding with the longtime professor who sued over the policy.

[14:45:00]

Tim Bakken sued over West Point blocking him from expressing personal opinions to his students. The judge also found West Point cannot bar civilian faculty members from speaking to outside groups on their areas of expertise, expressing personal opinions to his students.

The judge also found West Point cannot bar civilian faculty members from speaking to outside groups on their areas of expertise without permission. In her ruling, Judge Cathy Seibel says the requirements violate free speech rights.

She also writes, quote, "West Point cadets are already by definition smart, tough, and patriotic. They are not snowflakes who will somehow be harmed by learning about controversial issues or competing viewpoints."

When reached for comment on the decision, West Point said, quote, "In accordance with standing procedures, the Academy does not comment on current litigation. West Point will continue to work with Department of Justice attorneys from the Southern District of New York on next steps," end quote.

The judge cited President Trump's 2025 executive order known as Restoring America's Fighting Force. The policy targets DEI initiatives and prohibits the military from promoting, quote, "un-American, divisive, discriminatory, radical, extremist, and irrational theories." We're joined now by the professor behind that lawsuit, Tim Bakken.

He's also the author of the upcoming book, "Don't Say Sorry, Make Great Decisions Without Regrets." First off, just your reaction to the ruling.

TIM BAKKEN, LAW PROFESSOR, U.S. MILITARY ACADEMY AT WEST POINT: My view is that this is an opportunity for my colleagues and I on whose behalf I filed this action to get back to searching for truth. The West Point rule promulgated in February of 2025 said that civilian professors at West Point are not permitted to speak in their interdisciplinary expertise. That would be chemistry, philosophy, poetry. For me, it would be constitutional law and criminal law.

And it said we can't do that unless we submit our work prior to speaking or prior to writing, including publishing a book -- the one that you just indicated for me, for example -- unless we obtain permission from the military officers who created the rule and enforced the rule. I believe that was wrong.

A prior restraint, in my view, is the greatest threat to freedom of expression in this country. Moreover, with regard to college teachers, they're the people that we look to search for truth. That doesn't mean everybody agrees with everybody, but it certainly does mean that there is at least one place in society where we can look, where we believe that people will be searching for the truth.

We were unable to do that at West Point without the approval of the military officers who created and enforced this rule. And that's why I brought this action. And therefore, I'm very grateful that we have the opportunity to continue that search for truth.

Not that anybody will ever know what it is, but we all want to try to search for it.

KEILAR: So take us into the classroom a little bit, because we reported last year on how these directives from the president and from the defense secretary set off this sweeping effort at West Point to scour course offerings and syllabuses, canceling two classes at the time that we published a year ago, cutting some readings, canceling clubs for students of color and women. Similar things happened at other service academies. What was your experience in the classroom with teaching and sharing perspectives with students?

BAKKEN: The military officers who control West Point did all of that, even though there was no directive by the president or by the secretary of defense that required them to do that. Nonetheless, they did it, and they did it in three ways. The first way is that they prohibited professors from speaking as citizens.

Second, they prohibited professors -- when they're at conferences, for example -- from speaking, again, without their approval. And third, because of a rule, an informal rule, that the dean of West Point, the chief academic officer, promulgated by virtue of telling all the faculty in a meeting what they could do, said that your opinion is no place for cadets in the classroom. My view of that is that our opinions on our disciplinary matters, our disciplinary expertise, I've been involved in constitutional law and criminal law for 43 years, are vital to helping the cadets understand.

For example, in my courses over the years, which have been constitutional and military law and criminal law, why they're fighting for the country, what they're fighting for, and what inside the Constitution, for example, is the reason that gives the president the authority to send them to war and convinces them that they should go to war in the first place.

Debating that in the classroom is vital. The example that I gave in the complaint, where because of what the dean said in prohibiting, in my view, at least, what can be said in the classroom is that I was asked once what my view of the effectiveness of the death penalty is.

[14:50:00]

And in the past, I would give my view of the effectiveness of the death penalty, but in this instance, which was last semester, the fall of 2025, I was not willing to give my view of the effectiveness of the death penalty because I was deferring to the directive of the Dean of West Point, the Chief of Academics.

KEILAR: So I wonder, when it comes to service academies like West Point, having military professors and civilian professors, and there are both at service academies, a different mix depending on the service academy, they're seen as very important, both of them, to the process. Civilian professors, obviously, generally, you're not in the military, right? And military professors do have, obviously, some constraints on them that civilians do not have because they are in the military.

I've spoken to former West Point professors, military and civilian, who worry that civilian professors at service academies are under fire. And when you look at this decision, do you worry that it could be followed by the paring down, sort of an end run around the rights here, the actual paring down of the number of civilian professors at service academies? And also, can you speak to what you think the effect that would have on cadets and the kind of topics they may or may not be subject to learning?

BAKKEN: I presume that the President and the Department of Defense, the Department of the Army, as well as the officers in the military want what's best for the country. And what's best for the country is for cadets, whether it's at the Air Force or Naval Academies or at West Point, is to receive the benefit of all the possible decisions that exist. In the case of civilian professors, they were prohibited by the Army from teaching at West Point until the mid-1990s.

And only then, for purposes of intellectual diversity, did Congress, a couple senators, push West Point to hire civilian professors. As a result of that, we number probably about 188 now out of perhaps 600 or more professors at West Point. And the irony of it is that those civilian professors who teach poetry, chemistry, English, philosophy, constitutional law, criminal law, and any number of courses are the people who are most qualified academically to do that.

That doesn't mean that the civilian professors are any better than anybody else. The military professors are also very good, but they have a focus on military affairs and matters. Civilians have a focus on creating intellectual engagement and creating critical thinking.

And as I tell the cadets in all my classes, our number one goal, aside from constitutional law or criminal law, is to develop good judgment to make decisions in emergencies. I know how to do that, I believe. I've written a book about how to do that, "Don't Say Sorry."

And my plea to the government, to the Department of Defense, to the Department of the Army, as well as to the military officers who control West Point is trust that we are able to do that. After all, I'm completing my 26th year at West Point and have great institution for the military, West Point, the cadets, and the officers. And I think I know what I'm doing and I should be given the opportunity to do that.

Unfortunately, I had to go to court to enable myself and my colleagues to do that once again.

KEILAR: Professor Tim Bakken, we thank you so much for being with us after what is a big win, certainly for you, in court. Thank you.

BAKKEN: You're welcome. Thank you.

KEILAR: Still ahead, five villagers trapped inside of a flooded cave in Laos found alive, but now rescuers have to get them out. We're going to talk to a cave diving and rescue expert ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: Now to some of the other headlines we're following this hour. The Trump administration is now proposing having all federal workers sign NDAs. It's part of an effort to stop employees from leaking government data to media organizations.

According to a draft memo, agencies would have the option of using the non-disclosure agreement. The proposal is expected to be published today, followed by a 30-day comment period.

Also, the Associated Press is reporting that Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O'Hara has resigned rather than face disciplinary action over a misconduct investigation. He was accused of interfering with a probe and allegations that he had intimate relationships with city employees. The city's mayor said that O'Hara would have been fired over the matter. He was hired to oversee reforms in the aftermath of George Floyd's killing and led police during the recent federal immigration crackdowns in Minneapolis.

And Chinese dissident Dong Guangping has made a daring 30-hour escape in an inflatable boat getting all the way to South Korea. He was spotted by South Korean fishermen and picked up by the Coast Guard on Monday. This was Dong's fourth attempt to flee Chinese authorities and reunite with his family, who have been granted asylum in Canada.

Dong was a former police officer who faced years of imprisonment and detention for his political activism. He has now also been granted asylum in Canada.

A new hour of CNN NEWS CENTRAL starts right now.

END