Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

CNN International: Kyiv Agrees On Minerals Deal; Zelenskyy Expected To Visit Washington On Friday; U.K. Announces Increase In Military Spending; Ukrainian Freedom Orchestra Performs In Warsaw; Trump Wants To Sell $5M "Gold Cards" To Foreigners; 21 Federal Workers Resign In Protest; U.S. Consumer Confidence Drops Sharply In February; Musk Gets FAA Contract; House Works Toward Key Budget Vote; Taiwan Detains Chinese-Crewed Ship; Shiffrin's 100th World Cup Win; Frenchman Offers to Split Lottery Prize with Thieves. Aired 6-7p ET

Aired February 25, 2025 - 18:00   ET

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

[18:00:00]

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN HOST: Hello and welcome to our viewers joining us from all over the world. I'm Jim Sciutto in Washington.

And just ahead this hour, a Ukrainian official says that Kyiv has now agreed to terms of a resources and reconstruction deal with the U.S. Donald Trump says he plans to sell so-called gold cards for $5 million to foreigners who want to move to the U.S. and eventually get citizenship. And Taiwan has detained a Chinese-crewed cargo ship suspected of cutting an undersea internet cable.

We do begin with negotiations between the U.S. and Ukraine over natural resources, including rare earths in Ukraine, as well as reconstruction. According to a Ukrainian official, both countries have now agreed to the terms of a deal.

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is now set to travel to Washington as early as Friday at a time of growing public tensions between Zelenskyy and Trump. President Trump called Mr. Zelenskyy a dictator last week. He is the elected president of Ukraine. He also had falsely accused Ukraine of starting the war with Russia. Of course, you'll remember three years ago, Russia invaded Ukraine. Trump somewhat backtracked on those comments. The U.S. president spoke about the deal from the Oval Office just a short time ago.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: I hear that he's coming on Friday. Certainly, it's OK with me if he'd like to. And he would like to sign it together with me. And I understand that's a big deal. Very big deal. And I think the American people, even if you look at polling, they're very happy because, you know, Biden was throwing money around like it is cotton candy. And it's a very big deal. It could be a trillion-dollar deal, it could be whatever, but it's rare earths and other things.

(END VIDEO CLIP) SCIUTTO: Nick Paton Walsh joins us now from Kyiv. And, Nick, the key question here is, did the U.S. president, did the U.S. include any security guarantees for Ukraine, or is this purely a one way street, in effect?

NICK PATON WALSH, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: At this point, we don't know the exact language, but we do know that a Ukrainian official says that some of the language appears to have spelt out more the security promises that Ukraine would like. Now, that's not to suggest a guarantee, and we did hear earlier from similar sources here in Kyiv that the Americans were very resistant to security guarantees.

So, no, I don't think that this document will indeed spell out a tough series of binding commitments from the United States. It might just contain languages that assuaged some of the Ukrainian concerns. Potentially, the largest really were to do with the extent of the resources and compensation in the terms from Washington that Ukraine would over a lengthy period of time be expected to pay.

[18:05:00]

There's a lot we still don't know about this. If you listen to President Trump there, he doesn't explicitly state that the deal is agreed by both sides. He says that the Zelenskyy would like to come and sign it with me. And so, you know, I think that holds out the possibility of maybe some last-minute changes in terms. Although, it's clear from the Ukrainian official that we've spoken to that they understand that the terms are now agreed between both particular sides.

They say the White House proposed a Friday meeting and we understand here that Zelenskyy plans to travel for that, and it does seem that Trump is open to that particular suggestion. And this is really is a key test of whether those two men can heal their relationship.

When I asked Zelenskyy about that on Sunday he said their relationship had never been, quote, "in the best way." It was sort of an awkward response trying to make light of, frankly, a horrific week between the two that you spelt out just earlier.

If these two men are able to potentially get along better, then it might cap some of the work being done by European leaders, principally French President Emmanuel Macron, who seems to have flown in Monday and really managed to drag Trump back towards European security orbit here as a guarantor.

You know, we were, really, over the past two weeks, wondering quite where Washington stood in terms of the NATO alliance. He does seem to have been encouraging and allowing Macron to talk about how the U.S. might be around in terms of solidarity or as a deterrent, if indeed the Europeans put a peacekeeping force on the ground here, if a peace deal is indeed agreed.

But a lot will rest on this meeting with Zelenskyy. The terms of this deal, as far as we understand from speaking to a source yesterday, when this finalized draft was put towards the Americans, that we seem to understand now they've agreed to, this put a lot of the difficult stuff for further talks, for further negotiations, the exact numbers. The Trump administration wanted half a trillion dollars. Zelenskyy objected to that, but doesn't seem to be in the final draft as it stands.

And this issue of security guarantees was left, as we understood yesterday, to the two presidents to discuss when they met. It's vital, but I think the notion of this initial document possibly a statement more of intent than the raw details, the ugly facts of the deal allows them to get over this hurdle and remove any immediate possibility that aid could be frozen by the Trump administration and get that relationship back on track and potentially draw some of the momentum away from the U.S.-Russia talks that are moving on quite fast. Jim.

SCIUTTO: If he does come to Washington, the Ukrainian president will have to stand next to a U.S. president who accused him, Zelenskyy, of being a dictator while refraining from describing Vladimir Putin that way. Nick Paton Walsh in Kyiv, thanks so much.

Alexander Rodnyasky is a former economic advisor to President Zelenskyy. He's also an assistant professor of economics at the University of Cambridge. Good to have you on here. And I wonder, Alexander, there's a lot we don't know about this deal, even whether it's actually binding. That said, based on what we know, what does Ukraine get from this, or is this purely something of a payoff, as it were, to the U.S. for the military support it's offered Ukraine these last three years?

ALEXANDER RODNYANSKY, FORMER ECONOMIC ADVISER TO PRESIDENT ZELENSKYY (2020-2024): Well, Ukraine is obviously getting U.S. investment, U.S. knowledge, spillover technologies, hopefully, in the best case. And that's good for the economy, that creates jobs, that creates economic growth and prosperity over time.

However, that's not enough in the present context. First and foremost, we need security guarantees, as everybody in Ukraine is saying, not just our political leadership. Hopefully, that will come along with the larger part of the deal. It's unclear yet how exactly that will look, but I think that's the first priority. And then, after we have that, we have the certainty and the economic environment to actually talk about development and economic growth.

SCIUTTO: Do you consider a security guarantee a credible one a real possibility given you have the U.S. president that will not even identify Russia as the aggressor following its full-scale invasion and publicly talking about, well, the Ukrainian president being a dictator? Do you see that as a credible expectation from this U.S. president?

RODNYANSKY: Well, yes. So, the rhetoric is definitely very different to -- compared to what we're used to. It's different from the previous administration. It's unconventional. It's provocative. There's no question about that. But maybe that's the approach that this current administration is taking in order to get everybody to sit in one table. So, I tried to, at this point, to be more prudent about this, to really look at what's going to happen in terms of the actions at the end of the day. And that remains to be seen. So, if we actually end up getting a deal, that's acceptable to Ukraine and everybody in the civilized world, then that's going to be a good outcome.

[18:10:00]

And that deal should include security guarantees, and it should include tangible security guarantees, that is so nothing like we ever had before. And then, hopefully, that should lay the foundation for future economic prosperity and development where we can talk also about investments into rare earth metals or other resources for that matter in Ukraine.

SCIUTTO: Given that this is an existential question for Ukraine, right? Without help, it faces the possibility of defeat by Russia and the loss of its sovereignty. Does Ukraine have a backup plan? I mean, we noted that the British prime minister announced today that the U.K. will increase its defense spending to 2.5 percent. You've heard both the British leader and the French leader say that they will continue to back Ukraine, but the U.S. would leave a big hole here. So, what is Ukraine's backup plan if the U.S. does not offer a credible guarantee of Ukraine's security?

RODNYANSKY: Yes. So, that is obviously a very concerning issue for us. If the U.S. were ready to pull out entirely, then it would be very hard for Europe to substitute all of what the U.S. has been providing over the years. Primarily military aid, but also financial aid, of course.

So, do I believe that Europe would be able to step up and fill this void? I don't think so. I have a lot of doubt that would be possible just because of the bureaucracy and the time it takes for Europe to make these decisions, unfortunately. But who knows.

If the crisis is actually large enough to, you know, cause these turbulences throughout the world and in Europe in particular, then maybe then push comes to shove that is and people would actually act differently. So, that remains to be seen.

But no questions asked, this would be a real crisis for us, and it will be crisis that the Russians would exploit. Even in terms of the morale, just having these discussions just from our soldiers seeing all these -- all this rhetoric, potentially, and also everything that's happening, that's already actually degrading some of the morale. So, that's not good for the dynamic at the frontline.

SCIUTTO: Yes, I had a U.S. lawmaker mention exactly that very point today, concerns about morale, because if the soldiers on the frontline feel they're being abandoned, do they stay on the frontline? I mean, these are concerning questions. Alexander Rodnyasky, we appreciate having you today.

RODNYANSKY: Thank you. SCIUTTO: Well, the Ukrainian Freedom Orchestra, as it's known, has just wrapped up a performance in Warsaw, Poland, to mark the third anniversary of Russia's full-scale invasion.

(MUSIC PLAYING)

That, of course, is "Ode to Joy" from Beethoven's Sixth Symphony and the E.U.'s official anthem. One way or another, the end of the war could be in sight. Keri-Lynn Wilson, the conductor of the performance, spoke with CNN just minutes after stepping off that stage.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KERI-LYNN WILSON, FOUNDER AND MUSIC DIRECTOR, UKRANIAN FREEDOM ORCHESTRA: I have my baton, and that's why I founded this orchestra. I was inspired by my cousin who is still fighting on the battlefield in Bakhmut region. My baton is my weapon, and it's the one way I can contribute to fighting on behalf of Ukraine for a better world, for a free world, for them and for the future of a democratic world.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: Of course, that future hangs in the balance now. Well, back here in the U.S., President Trump says he now plans to sell what he called gold cards for $5 million to foreigners who want to move to the U.S. and he says, create jobs.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: You have a green card, this is a gold card. We're going to be putting a price on that card of about $5 million and that's going to give you green card privileges plus. It's going to be a route to citizenship. And wealthy people will be coming into our country by buying this card. They'll be wealthy. And they'll be successful and they'll be spending a lot of money and paying a lot of taxes and employing a lot of people. And we think it's going to be extremely successful.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: A path to citizenship for, as he says there, wealthy people. Meanwhile, the White House says a million federal workers have responded to Elon Musk's what did you do last week e-mail. Ahead of his original deadline of midnight Monday, Musk said they will be given another chance to reply. Listen to what President Trump had to say about that.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: No, we have to find out if people are getting paid and they're not working. And you know, they have a problem. Let's say they have another job. And then they write in false statements. It's a big problem if they write in false statements. They may be working for somebody else, but getting paid by the U.S. government. And that would mean that they're not allowed to be doing that. You know, they're not allowed to be working for us and be working for somebody else. We're paying them a lot of money. We're paying them. So, we'll see.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[18:15:00]

SCIUTTO: It's not clear what facts the president based that statement and allegation on. Today, more than 20 staffers of the agency that became DOGE quit, writing in a resignation letter, quote, "We will not lend our expertise to carry out or legitimize DOGE's actions."

The White House says that Musk, who is not a cabinet member, however, will attend the first cabinet meeting tomorrow, where, well, members of the cabinet meet, or at least they tend to. That's been the way.

Political White House reporter Sophia Cai joins me now. First, if I could ask you about selling gold cards here. We should note that this is a president who wants to end birthright citizenship, which has been the law of the land since just after the Civil War, granting citizenship to anybody born in this country. But now, he wants to sell a path to citizenship. Can he do that by executive order on his own?

SOPHIA CAI, WHITE HOUSE REPORTER, POLITICO: He can try. And that's what he's doing. This is someone who throughout the campaign, he sold a lot of things, right? He sold bibles.

SCIUTTO: Sneakers.

CAI: He sold sneakers. Now, he's trying to sell citizenship. I think we'll probably see a court challenge and, you know, he may be able to try to do that until the courts stop him.

SCIUTTO: And that's been the strategy, has it not, right, that we keep pushing ahead until a court forcefully gets in the way?

CAI: Yes.

SCIUTTO: OK. So, tell us about DOGE, because you had these federal staffers today resign. They, of course, were not brought in by Musk and Trump. They were there prior, but had been wrapped up in this effort to cut government spending. How significant a blow is this to that effort?

CAI: I think it's pretty significant because they account for a third to a fourth of all current DOGE staffers right now in that particular agency.

SCIUTTO: Just 20? Yes.

CAI: Yes. Because remember, Elon came in and he initially cut a bunch of them. And so, you know, these are a lot of people with the technical skills to carry out what Elon wants to be doing. And they're saying, look, we don't want to be using our expertise to help you cut vital government functions.

And it really begs the question of whether, you know, some of these tech sector approaches, you know, Elon has said, failure is an option, slash and burn. You know, in this approach, does it really translate well when we're talking about managing a federal government?

SCIUTTO: No question. And one -- listen, one question that come to mind has been, what are the effects of this? And there are folks asking questions about aviation safety here, given the cuts at the FAA. What has been the impact of that, perhaps it's too early to measure the impact, but what at least are the concerns about those kinds of cuts?

CAI: So, you know, inside the FAA, there's grave concern and, you know, the aviation safety inspectors together they're responsible for investigating 8,000 complaints from, you know, citizens like you and I and from manufacturers, and they're really concerned that the DOGE upheaval has been sending a lot of more senior aviation inspectors packing, managers with decades of experience. That'll have a tangible impact when it comes to aviation safety.

SCIUTTO: You recently reported that the Trump administration is trying to shift from these rapid to a more careful evaluation of employees. Can you explain the method and is that actually happening now?

CAI: Yes. So, you know, the first two weeks we just saw slash and burn at the highest levels, meaning they would go and cut thousands of employees at once without knowing what specifically they did. And the mistakes, you know, they were real because -- you know, I mean, even now you have the CDC trying to hire back staffers who are in charge of monitoring and overseeing medical devices like pacemakers.

SCIUTTO: Or the -- Department of Energy who monitored the safety of nuclear weapons, you know, kind of an important job.

CAI: Yes. And they were brought back what I think at the end of last week. They realized and they heard from Republican lawmakers saying, you know, you can't just do this, and it's so blindsided. And so, they've decided -- I mean, look, this is what they're saying. They're saying that they're going to be more careful in terms of double checking, triple checking, quadruple checking to make sure that, you know, the workers who are fired or laid off are not essential.

SCIUTTO: We'll see.

CAI: Right, we'll see.

SCIUTTO: Yes, proof of the pudding. Sophia Cai, thanks so much, as always. White House reporter for Politico.

Still ahead, a sharp drop in U.S. consumer confidence is now putting pressure on Wall Street. Investors worry that a less confident consumer will lead to a weaker U.S. economy. What's behind that gloom exactly? We'll take a look next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:20:00]

SCIUTTO: Welcome back. It was a volatile day to say the least on Wall Street. The Dow was higher, but the S&P fell for a fourth straight session. You can see their tech stocks. Hardest hit with the NASDAQ falling more than one and a quarter percent. Many of the magnificent seven tech stocks, as they're known, that used to really be driving the market higher, continue to lose ground. Meta, Microsoft, Alphabet, NVIDIA, all falling 1 percent or more. A.I. chip giant NVIDIA lower as investors gear up for its earnings report on Wednesday.

A new survey from Charles Schwab shows that two out of three traders currently believe the market is overvalued. That would point to further losses. That nervousness reflected in CNN's Fear and Greed Index, which has now fallen into the extreme fear category, over there in the deep red zone.

The Fear and Greed Index reflects U.S. investor sentiment, and a new report out Tuesday suggests that U.S. consumer sentiment is weakening as well. The Conference Board's Consumer Confidence Index fell seven points in February for the third straight monthly drop. That, the sharpest monthly decline in the report in more than three years. That's a problem. Consumer spending makes up almost 70 percent of the U.S. economy. 7-0, more than two-thirds.

Those surveyed say they are increasingly worried about the Trump administration policies and the effects of those policies on the economy, their expectations for where inflation will be in a few years' time -- in a year's time rather, shooting higher as well.

Paul La Monica joins me now. He is a senior markets analyst analysis writer at Barron's. Listen, a big piece of this seems to be Trump administration policy, specifically tariffs. Is that really the driving force here?

PAUL R. LA MONICA, SENIOR MARKETS ANALYSIS WRITER, BARRON'S: I don't think it's the only factor, Jim, but it clearly is a big reason why we've had this precipitous drop in consumer confidence. And it's not just reflected in the numbers that we saw today. Another sentiment reading from the University of Michigan released recently also showed a pretty sharp drop and people were citing concerns about inflation.

Now, one thing that I, you know, like to talk about all the time is that sentiment readings are all well and good, but what matters more is what consumers are actually doing. And there have been times where consumers say they feel gloomy, but they keep shopping. Here's where it's getting a little concerning. That's not the case as much anymore. Walmart's outlook last week was disappointing, sending that stock and many other retail stocks lower recent retail sales figures for January also below expectations, again, in large part because of concerns about tariffs and inflation. So, it's one thing if it was just sentiment, we're seeing it in the actual action from consumers as well.

[18:25:00]

SCIUTTO: So, there are a lot of negative ingredients there, as it were, right? Because if sentiment is falling, that would mean, and you cite the Walmart report, which I saw as well as concerning people spending less, concerns about inflation, and that's not just from surveys, right, the Fed says that outright, and the Fed also saying, it's not going to be cutting interest rates anytime soon because of that. I mean, are there folks talking about recession already?

LA MONICA: Not as much as I think you would fear based on some of these numbers. A lot of economists are still expecting pretty steady growth because, again, one of the things that I think economists and investors are holding out hope for is that all of the economic headlines or many of them coming from the White House are the negative variety, it is the tariffs and potential immigration controls that could also, you know, hurt the labor force and raise wages across the board, which would fuel further inflation pressures.

But at the same time, the market is largely expecting, at some point, the Trump administration and Republican leaders in Congress to pivot to deregulation and the potential for more fiscal stimulus.

So, I talked to someone today who kind of joked that right now we're all getting fed the vegetables first that few people like, the dessert's going to be coming later, hopefully, but that's still a while away.

SCIUTTO: Yes, sugar high, right? Paul La Monica, thanks so much for breaking it down.

LA MONICA: Thank you.

SCIUTTO: Well, this next story really sparked concern today. A very close call at a Chicago airport. Federal aviation investigators say that a private jet entered the runway at Chicago's Midway Airport without authorization. The crew of a Southwest Airlines plane, which was landing, and just look at this moment here, had to then take off again. Wow. That's way too close for comfort.

A Southwest Airlines statement said their plane did eventually land safe -- safely without incident. This close call comes as the National Transportation Safety Board and the FAA are investigating a string of safety incidents in recent weeks.

The U.S. FAA is facing conflict of interest questions as well after awarding a new and quite significant contract, to whose company, Elon Musk's Starlink. Starlink operates under the SpaceX umbrella and the FAA says it will use the company to upgrade its networks, even though it already contracted with Verizon for similar work. Musk is bad mouthing Verizon on social media saying, quote, "The Verizon system is not working and so is putting air travelers at serious risk."

Bloomberg News reports the FAA will eventually install some 4,000 Starlink terminals. All this, of course, on top of the billions of dollars in federal government contracts already awarded to Musk's companies.

Richard Painter joins me now. He is a former White House ethics lawyer in the George W. Bush administration, currently a professor of corporate law at the University of Minnesota. Good to have you on, sir. Thanks so much for joining.

RICHARD PAINTER, FORMER WHITE HOUSE ETHICS LAWYER: Well, good to have me on the show. I'm here at the Washington National Airport and hoping that everything's OK in the control tower. And that the Federal Aviation Administration is hard at work and not worrying too much about Elon Musk's e-mails.

SCIUTTO: Yes. Well, we want you to be safe. I look at the conflict-of- interest statute, which you know far better than me, and I'm not a lawyer. But it seems to be quite clear that it imposes criminal penalties on any executive branch officer or employee who participates in the decisions, and I'm paraphrasing here, over picking federal contracts and then has a financial interest in those decisions.

So, why doesn't that statute apply to this FAA deal with Starlink, given how close Musk is to the ultimate decision maker, the president?

PAINTER: Well, it does apply. It would be a criminal offense for Elon Musk as a United States government employee, even a special government employee to participate in any government matter that has a direct and predictable effect on his government -- his financial interest. And that means that if he has matters before the Federal Aviation Administration, including contracts through Starlink, he has to stay away from the Federal Aviation Administration in his work for DOGE.

And that's critically important. And that's what I explained to a House subcommittee this morning in my testimony about Elon Musk. He absolutely must comply with the criminal conflict of interest statute and we also need to get a copy of his financial disclosure statement.

[18:30:00]

He is performing functions of a Senate confirmed principal officer in the executive branch, and he needs to release a financial statement to the public and to Congress.

SCIUTTO: The White House and Musk seem to be hiding behind downplaying his role, saying, well, he's not that senior, though he is going to a cabinet meeting tomorrow. Does that hold water in trying to get around what seems to be a fairly clearly written statute here?

PAINTER: This statute, the criminal conflict of interest statute, applies to every single executive branch employee, junior, senior, everybody, except for the president and the vice president. And it's a criminal offense to participate in a government matter that has a direct and predictable effect on your own financial interest.

The financial disclosure statute applies to the senior officials in the White House of which there are at least 100 commissioned officers who must disclose their finances and that included the White House ethics lawyer when I was in the White House and the idea that Elon Musk is not sufficiently senior, that we should have access to information about his finance is ludicrous. The financial disclosure form needs to be released to Congress and to the public.

SCIUTTO: When I was in government, I served for a short time. I remember the rules were so clear that you weren't even supposed to have individual stocks. You just had to have mutual funds so that, you know, one company's business couldn't come before you even at a junior level that might then create a conflict of interest here. Here, of course, this is different because we're talking about a multi, multi billionaire with massive federal contracts from companies that he controls. Have you ever seen anything like this in your time in the White House Ethics Office?

PAINTER: I've never saw anything like this in the Bush administration. We have a lot of very rich people come into the government, but they divested their financial interests before they came in. Hank Paulson, the CEO of Goldman Sachs sold about $500 or $600 billion worth of Goldman Sachs stock in order to be the treasury secretary. We never would have tolerated someone having this many conflicts of interest in such a powerful position in the government.

I've never seen anything like this before in any administration before this one, and that includes the first Trump administration. We have nothing like this.

SCIUTTO: Yes, it seems like divestiture is a thing of the past. Richard Painter, former White House ethics lawyer, professor at the University of Minnesota, thanks so much for joining.

PAINTER: Thank you for having me.

SCIUTTO: And coming up right after the break, high stakes here in Washington, D.C. as House Speaker Mike Johnson tries to find enough Republican votes to advance President Trump's economic agenda. It's not clear he has those votes yet. The latest on the budget battle, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:35:00]

SCIUTTO: Right now, in Washington, we are waiting on a crucial vote in the House to advance President Trump's agenda. The budget blueprint lays out some $300 billion for defense and border security, also aims to cut $2 trillion in spending overall over a number of years. Some moderate Republicans worry those cuts could hurt their constituents.

Today, Speaker Mike Johnson has been working to flip the remaining no Republican votes. Senate Republicans have already passed their own scaled back budget measure. House Democrat Ami Bera from California joins me now. He sits on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Congressman, thanks so much for joining. We appreciate it.

REP. AMI BERA (D-CA): Jim, thanks for having me on.

SCIUTTO: I'm curious what the Democratic approach is to these budget votes here. The House Democratic leader, Jeffries, he's vowing that Democrats will not provide a single vote to get the Republican budget passed. Is that the right strategy in your view?

BERA: You know, I think for this particular vote, which is a reconciliation bill, they haven't negotiated with us. So, it is likely going to be a straight party line vote. I don't know if -- they can only lose three votes. So, will they have enough Republican votes to get this bill passed? I'm not sure about that.

SCIUTTO: If the choice becomes -- if Republicans can't get those remaining votes across the finish line in the end, and the prospect of a shutdown comes to the fore, is that something Democrats would let happen, or at that point, would the strategy be, we're the adults in the room, we're going to save the process?

BERA: Well, I don't think any of us wants to see a shutdown, and that comes up March 14th. So, that's the budget vote, and this is a little bit different from what we're voting on today. On that budget vote, we should negotiate it. We should take it through the regular order, the appropriations process. Get those bills on the floor and vote on a budget to move forward.

SCIUTTO: I want to ask a bigger picture question because I'm sure you're aware that James Carville, longtime Democratic strategist, he wrote a piece in The New York Times today saying that the Democrats' smartest strategy would be to, in his words, roll over and play dead and let the GOP fail, saying, again his words, the Republican Party flat out sucks at governing. Do you view that as a smart strategy?

BERA: No, we're all elected to govern. But on this bill that we're about to vote on, you know, in a few minutes, this is a Republican only bill. It cuts potentially 25 percent out of $800 billion out of Medicaid. That's going to hurt every American rural states, more than, you know, my home state in California.

So, that's when it becomes real to Joe the Plumber, when they take away his health care, when he can't, you know, go to his rural hospital because it's closed. It's going to become very real fast if they pass this budget.

On the other hand, I hope they come negotiate with us. They haven't thus far. And if they did, we ought to negotiate in good faith.

SCIUTTO: Well, we'll see if that happens. It hasn't always been the friendliest of negotiations, as I know you're well aware of.

BERA: Yes.

SCIUTTO: I want to, while I have you, turn for a moment to Ukraine, given your position on the Foreign Affairs Committee. What was your reaction to seeing the U.S. vote this week with Russia to reject a U.N. resolution stating, quite simply, what is a fact, that Russia invaded Ukraine and is the aggressor in this war? What's your reaction to seeing the U.S. take that position?

BERA: I think it's a bit shameful. Vladimir Putin was the aggressor. Russia was the aggressor. Ukraine was the victim here. This was an unprovoked, unnecessary war. So, we should have supported that resolution.

[18:40:00]

SCIUTTO: Where does that leave the U.S. today? Because if you look at the collection of Trump decisions and statements, not being willing to identify Russia as the aggressor, talking about some big trade or business deals with Russia, communicating to Europe, at least this is the way they're taking it, that they're on their own, that the U.S. will no longer defend Europe. Where does that leave America's role in the world, in your view?

BERA: I think it diminishes our role in the world. Now, I'm not against negotiating a ceasefire and getting to a peace in the Ukraine conflict. We're now at year three and, you know, the Ukrainians are tired, you know, there is a stalemate, perhaps Russia's on the move a little bit. So, what does that look like? How do we guarantee Ukrainian security? That might not be NATO, but, you know, you heard President Macron talk about European troops within Ukraine. That might work. They may cede some territory, and then what does a rebuilding process look like?

So, those are all legitimate conversations, but to side with Vladimir Putin and say, you know, he gets whatever he wants, that's just not who we are as Americans.

SCIUTTO: As I've been covering this war, and I spend a lot of time in Asia as well, so often officials, commentators, analysts will make a direct connection between Ukraine and Taiwan and say that China is watching America's support or lack of support for Ukraine as it makes its own decisions about the possibility of military action against Taiwan.

In this Trump administration, do you think Taiwan should be concerned for its safety from a Chinese invasion? And do you think Taiwan can rely or count on the U.S. to support it and help defend it?

BERA: Certainly, China is watching how this all unfolds. Yes, I would hope if we are winding the Ukraine war down that we're moving assets to the Indo-Pacific theater, because that really is where the greatest potential conflict is.

You know, our goal of a one China policy strategic deterrence, making sure China doesn't take the unnecessary provocation of an invasion of Taiwan. You know, I think, I can only speak for Congress, there's strong bipartisan support, as one of the Taiwan caucus co-chairs. It's up to the people of Taiwan to determine their own future. So, you know, I don't speak for the president, but I do think there's broad bipartisan support in Congress.

SCIUTTO: We'll see if that holds up. House Democrat Ami Bera, thanks so much for joining, especially given you got votes to make tonight.

BERA: Thanks, Jim. Be well.

SCIUTTO: Coming up, to that point, tension near Taiwan as authorities detain a Chinese-crewed cargo ship. We're going to tell you why in just a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:45:00] SCIUTTO: An investigation is now underway after Taiwan's Coast Guard detained a Chinese-crewed cargo ship. Authorities believe that ship may have deliberately cut an undersea internet cable. This, the latest possible attack on the island's telecommunications. Taiwan has faced growing intimidation from Beijing, which claims Taiwan as part of China.

Will Ripley joins us now from Taipei. And, Will, as you know, this is not the first time something like this has happened. Have they conclusively determined that's what this ship was up to, or they're still investigating?

WILL RIPLEY, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, they're still investigating, Jim. And this incident could have been a lot worse. You mentioned those other incidents. The worst one was back in 2023. Taiwan's outlying Matsu Island had its undersea cable cut, and they were in a total internet and cellular blackout, essentially, aside from, you know, a microwave antenna that people had to gather around and took like five hours to send a text message. That was that was a bad situation and it lasted for weeks back in 2023.

This time around, the cable for the island of Penghu was cut, but Chunghwa Telecom, the communications provider, was able to reroute to other cables and also back up microwave transmitters. And so, there was not a significant service disruption in this case.

But nonetheless, you now have the crew of this ship, the Hong Tai, being detained in the Southern Taiwanese port of Tainan as prosecutors investigate whether this was a gray zone operation. Taiwan has long suspected, but has never actually proven that China has been behind these undersea cable incidents. There have been several of them in recent years.

What we know about this ship, the Hong Tai, it's actually registered in Togo, which is a small West African nation, often known as a flag of convenience, because when you fly that flag, you can bypass a lot of international regulations. It's also a nation that happens to receive a lot of Chinese funding. So, perhaps unsurprisingly, there were eight Chinese crew members on board.

As I mentioned, prosecutors are now questioning them because they say that this ship was lingering near the cable for days. It was ignoring Coast Guard warnings. And then after they dropped anchor, the cable connecting the Penghu Islands was cut. And so, they believe this could be a gray zone operation. They certainly suspected. But, Jim, no conclusive evidence as of now.

SCIUTTO: And, of course, the Penghus, they have key military bases there, air bases for the Taiwanese military, naval bases, et cetera. Visited them myself. I think it's important to mention the context, which you know well, is that there have also been a series of Chinese military exercises around Taiwan and the read from your region and the Pentagon here is that is practice perhaps for some sort of encircling operation.

Is the concern among Taiwanese officials you speak to that those are connected, those military operations and these activities around undersea cables?

RIPLEY: It seems from the Taiwanese perspective to be an attempt to test the island's response, to test the island's backup systems. Taiwan doesn't use Elon Musk's Starlink, largely because they know that Elon Musk has such a close relationship with Beijing. So, it's incredibly vulnerable when these undersea cables are cut, because they don't, at this moment, have a backup satellite communication system.

They're trying to develop their own, but they're -- basically, they've been starting from scratch. They've been making progress. They're trying to do something that can keep Taiwan online in the event of a conflict. But these cables are crucial. So, that's why you have Taiwan's Coast Guard out there patrolling the areas where these cables are.

But it's hard to keep tabs when you're talking about not necessarily Chinese military vessels, of which there are many, China has the world's largest navy, but you also have potentially civilian vessels that are working in these gray zone operations.

So, it's China's -- not just China's military -- not just China's Coast Guard, but potentially also Chinese fishing boats involved, and it's just an overwhelming number of vessels, and there's just not enough manpower to monitor all of it and to keep the cables safe.

SCIUTTO: Yes, and they used that sort of unofficial Navy. We've seen it. The South China Sea is kind of a force multiplier. Will Ripley in Taipei. Thanks so much for joining.

Well, from just a terrifying crash to an historic triumph. How Mikaela Shiffrin has set a new milestone. That's coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:50:00]

SCIUTTO: Here's a happy story. Mikaela Shiffrin making history, becoming the first athlete in downhill skiing to win 100. That's right, 100 World Cup races. The 29-year-old American skier has now extended her victory only three months, and this is key, after she suffered just a major injury and quite a scary crash on the course. My colleague, Coy Wire, got the chance to speak with her.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

COY WIRE, CNN SPORTS ANCHOR: Mikaela, the first downhill skier to reach 100 wins. The tears were flowing. What sort of things were racing through your mind after you raced into the history books?

MIKAELA SHIFFRIN, CLAIMED RECORD-EXTENDING 100TH WORLD CUP WIN ON SUNDAY: Oh, man. Well, immediately, and this is me being just a little too literal, but I was immediately just trying to find where my time was, and I couldn't actually see the scoreboard, which is you would think after, yes, a hundred times doing it, I would think to know where the scoreboard is. But anyway, I thought I was in fourth for a second. I was like, is that first or fourth? And that is green or red? Didn't really want to celebrate. If it wasn't, that would be really insensitive. Anyway, that's me being literal.

But yes, overall, it's been quite a journey this season after the crash in Killington and the injury and working back to getting my oblique to be functioning and work through the wound care and the whole puncture situation was -- that's been wild over the last few months. And then, just to work to get back into the start gate and back on skis. So, it all kind of came bubbling to the surface and I was -- yes, no shortage of tears on Sunday. That's for sure.

WIRE: Now, some of the greatest athletes ever, Novak Djokovic, Simone Biles, Katie Ledecky, LeBron, and Mikaela Shiffrin. That is you. You are in that company. Is that something you envisioned and manifested? And I know you're one of the most humble superstars I've ever met, but what's it like knowing that you're one of the greatest of all time?

SHIFFRIN: I think it's a little bit too overwhelming to process, you know, even a hundred victories. It's been hard enough to process just, you know, skiing these last few weeks. The overall number is a symbol of just a lot of work and a lot of teamwork and a lot of effort from my coaches and, you know, my ski technicians and physical therapists and medical staff and the whole U.S. ski team. It's kind of a symbol of a bigger picture. That's like, take care of the details and stay true to how you feel. You need to do things in order to be the best you can be.

WIRE: What else is next? Are there just a few seasons left? Is there another ultimate goal you have in mind before all is said and done?

SHIFFRIN: It feels like I have more in me. But with this latest injury, there's also a part of me that wonders if I'm going to be able to get back to that level. So, right now, probably my biggest goal has nothing to do with results and not about milestones. It's really just about kind of diving within myself to see what's now possible after everything else that's happened.

[18:55:00]

There's this feeling of 100, almost being like resetting to zero. And yes, this idea of resetting the sport. I feel like I'm resetting myself a little bit. And I'm hoping to, I guess, ride that wave and see where it goes.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SCIUTTO: Well, that's quite a comeback. We're happy for her. Finally, a man in France is looking for the thieves who stole his credit card, not to punish them, though. world to reward them. Earlier this month, two thieves bought a winning lottery ticket. Worth more than $500,000 with a stolen credit card. The card's owner says he's willing to split the winnings 50-50 with the thieves. His lawyer tells my colleague Jake Tapper he's hoping the robbers come forward soon.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PIERRE DEBUISSON, ATTORNEY REPRESENTING JEAN-DAVIDE ESTELE: It's a good deal for them because at the beginning my clients went to the police and filed a complaint. Now, of course these two guys, the thieves, would be the best friends of my clients if they accept the deal. And splitting the money 50 percent each would be a good thing for them, a miracle, because they seem to have financial problems. And for my client, it would be a wonderful gift, too. So, I think it's -- from a legal and a moral point of view, splitting equally would be a good thing.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: Sounds like a win-win. The lawyer says it might not be the craziest case he's ever handled, but certainly the funniest. Let's hope they come together.

Thanks so much for your company today. I'm Jim Sciutto in Washington. Please do stay with CNN.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:00:00]