Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

U.S. Intercepts and Seizes Iranian-Flagged Cargo Ship; U.S. Delegation Heads to Pakistan for Possible Iran Talks; Children Dead After a Mass Shooting in Louisiana; Pope Addresses Trump Spat, Reiterates Calls for Peace; Gunman Kills Six, Injures 15 in Kyiv. Aired 5-6p ET

Aired April 19, 2026 - 17:00   ET

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

[17:00:00]

EMILY SWEENEY, REPORTER, BOSTON GLOBE: Yeah. Well, you know, I got to say there have been offers that I need to talk about with my editors --

FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN ANCHOR: Yes.

SWEENEY: -- because I have never really been in this position before. So --

WHIFIELD: OK. The answer is yes. Go for it. Go for it. It looks good. Well, it has been really fun watching you --

SWEENEY: Oh, thank you.

WHITFIELD: -- and seeing your success and your rise, you know, to notoriety and, you know, and still, you know, keeping it real with the news. You're delivering, you know, the stuff. You know, facts first, but a nice flare. Emily Sweeney, thanks so much.

SWEENEY: Thank you.

WHITFIELD: Appreciate it. And thank you so much for being with me this whole weekend. I'm Fredricka Whitfield. The "CNN Newsroom" continues with Jessica Dean right now. And for our international viewers, "World Sport" is next.

JESSICA DEAN, CNN ANCHOR AND FIELD CORRESPONDENT: You're in the "CNN Newsroom." Hi, everyone. I'm Jessica Dean here in New York. We do have breaking news tonight. President Donald Trump says the U.S. Navy has fired on and taken custody of an Iranian-flagged cargo ship after it tried to get past the American naval blockade in the Gulf of Oman. Now, this comes just hours after the White House said the top U.S. officials are preparing to take part in another round of peace talks with Iran in the coming days.

It is the latest escalation amid an ongoing fragile ceasefire that is now set to expire in three days and an impasse over the control over the critical Strait of Hormuz has prompted renewed threats by Trump raising already heightened tensions in that region. Let's bring in CNN's Oren Liebermann, he's live in Jerusalem, as well as CNN correspondent Julia Benbrook who's at the White House. Oren, let's start first with you. Getting this news from President Trump not that long ago about the fact that this blockade, that American forces had stopped this Iranian vessel and had fired at it to disable it.

OREN LIEBERMANN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: And we've just gotten some more information about this incident from U.S. Central Command, which also put out this video of stopping the ship, an incident that lasted more than six hours, according to CENTCOM.

It was the USS Spruance, a guided missile destroyer, that warned the ship to stop. The ship, known as the Touska, was headed to the port of Bandar Abbas in Iran, meaning it was trying to run the U.S.-imposed blockade on Iranian ports. It is at that point that the Spruance issued warnings over a period of six hours, according to CENTCOM, to try to get the ship to stop. When that fails, CENTCOM says the ship gave a warning to the sailors on board the Touska to evacuate the engine room, and they used the destroyer's five-inch gun to disable the ship's engine. That's when marines from the 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit boarded the ship and took custody of the vessel itself before it was able to reach its destination of Bandar Abbas in Iran.

So, this is the U.S. imposing, according to CENTCOM and according to President Donald Trump, the blockade on Iranian ports.

Trump, a short time before the CENTCOM statement, had said this on his social media: The U.S. Navy guided-missile destroyer USS Spruance intercepted the Touska in the Gulf of Oman, and gave them fair warning to stop. The Iranian crew refused to listen, so our Navy ship stopped them right there in their tracks by blowing a hole in the engine room. Right now, U.S. Marines have custody of the vessel.

And remember here, as the U.S. imposed a blockade of Iranian ports, Iran imposed a blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. No tankers have gone through one of the world's most critical waterways on Sunday. And all of these happening as the U.S. and Iran are set to begin another round of diplomatic talks in Islamabad, Pakistan to try to get to a more permanent ceasefire agreement. That puts this in jeopardy and puts a tremendous amount of pressure based on what's happening in the waters around Iran.

DEAN: Certainly. Makes it even more tenuous. Oren Liebermann in Jerusalem with the very latest there from CENTCOM, thank you for that. Let's go to Julia now and focus on the White House piece of this and what the president has been saying leading up to this and the thinking around what happens next as they prepare for these talks. Julia?

JULIA BENBROOK, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Jessica. These next few hours, few days are really important as Trump is teasing the possibility of these upcoming talks. He in a post earlier today said, no more Mr. Nice Guy. That is how he was framing his approach to the Iranians. He also said that he believes the United States is offering a very fair and reasonable deal. At the same time, issuing a warning that if they choose to reject this deal, that he would do whatever he thinks needs to be done.

I want to pull up this post for you now. This was from this morning. And in it, he said in part, we're offering a very fair and reasonable deal, and I hope they take it because, if they don't, the United States is going to knock out every single power plant and every single bridge in Iran. That's where he added, no more Mr. Nice Guy.

[17:04:55]

Now, this comes a week after those negotiations took place in Pakistan led by Vice President J.D. Vance, special envoy Steve Witkoff, and Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner. Those talks ended without an agreement to end the conflict. Vance at the time said that this was the best and final offer from the United States. Trump even then was optimistic that the Iranians would want to come back to the table. He even said something along the lines of, I think we'll get everything that we want in these negotiations. But there are still sticking points, including, of course, the Strait of Hormuz and those recent developments there that Oren just detailed.

But as we look at these talks in the coming days, Trump did several brief phone interviews today. And in those, he said that Vance was not going to be attending because of security reasons. He said J.D. is great, but he would not be taking part in those. Since then, a White House official has confirmed to us that Vance, Witkoff, and Kushner will all be a part of these talks. When asked about the confusion about the U.S. delegation, they simply said that things had changed.

DEAN: All right. Julia and Oren, thank you both for your reporting. We really appreciate it. Joining us now, former U.S. ambassador to the U.N., John Bolton. He also served as Trump's former national security advisor during the first administration. Ambassador Bolton, thank you for being here with us. I just want to start by getting your reaction to this news we have now about the U.S. Navy firing on and seizing this Iranian-flagged cargo ship.

JOHN BOLTON, FORMER UNITED STATES NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR, FORMER UNITED STATES AMBASSADOR TO U.N.: Well, this is what blockades do. This ship, a very large tanker apparently, was trying to run the blockade. They were told not to do it. They kept going. So, apparently, we fired a missile into their engine room. That's usually a pretty good way to stop a ship. Marines boarded it and are presumably taking it into custody.

I might say, not only is the ship apparently in violation of the blockade, it is also a ship we've sanctioned. It may be part of what people call the ghost fleet. These are basically ships with shady ownership that change their flags or registration on an hourly basis. And that's a separate independent ground to board the ship. It's a stateless vessel, if that's true and, therefore, no state can complain when we board it. It ought to be a lesson to not just to Iran, but to any other ship owners or insurance companies that think they can run a U.S. Navy blockade.

DEAN: Yes. We're waiting for, obviously, confirmation of that. We don't know exactly the case on that just yet. Do you see this though as escalatory or is this expected?

BOLTON: Well, if anybody escalated here, it was the government of Iran to challenge the blockade. I believe this is the first Syria ship. Maybe some fishers down (ph) may have made it through the blockade. But if this is as large a tanker as it appears to be, I don't think they went out there by accident. So, Iran may have been -- the ayatollah, the regime, may have been trying to see whether we really did have resolve if somebody didn't turn around when they were ordered. Now, they know the answer to that.

DEAN: What do you think it means for the ceasefire?

BOLTON: Well, it's probably not good news, but it's exactly the right thing to do. I don't think Iran should make a nickel off of its oil as long as this conflict goes on. And frankly, I think the next step has to be the U.S. and Israel militarily opening the strait to ships from the Gulf Arab states to get their oil out onto the water.

The way Iran has turned this control of the strait, blocking it on and off like a light switch, shows somebody needs to take the light switch away from them. They do not have the authority to do what they're doing. It's unacceptable to the Gulf Arab. And as a country whose foreign policy has rested on freedom of the seas since before the declaration of independence, we should open it up on that ground alone.

DEAN: And before this war started, Iran, to your point, to continue your analogy, didn't really seem to know that that light switch was so powerful, that they can really control so much and have so much leverage. Do you think that that has been one of the unintended outcomes of what's happening? And do you think -- you say that the U.S. and the Israeli military should take it back. What would that even look like?

BOLTON: Well, I think we've got plans for that. I think part of the operations are already underway or were before the ceasefire. Look, this notion that somehow, something new has happened, though, I don't think is correct. Any navy in the world knows a chokepoint like this when they see it.

And, in fact, the Iranians before, during the Reagan administration, were firing on tankers in the Persian Gulf, and the U.S. and Kuwait arranged for the tankers to be reflagged as American ships and were escorted by American naval vessels through the Gulf and out the strait.

[17:09:57]

What the Iranians did was take this potential leverage of closing the strait and make it a reality. And if there's any silver lining here, it's now everybody understands what's at stake. And there's no way that Iran should come away with the lesson that they can close the strait any time they want. They need to learn the exact opposite lesson, which is they better not try it again. That's how you restore deterrence. That's how you prevent whoever is ruling in Iran from thinking they can do it again. DEAN: Yes. That's what I was getting at, is just like if that's their takeaway, that that could be quite problematic. And so, what would you like to see happen then specifically?

BOLTON: Well, I guess we'll find out tomorrow whether there are talks in Pakistan or not. We're getting one signal from the White House, a different signal from Tehran. We'll find out tomorrow. But the notion that was being spread around at the end of last week and I think reflected in stock markets and oil prices, that this thing is almost over, that the differences are almost resolved is just flat out wrong.

You know, when people talk about sticking points like opening the strait, like possession of the Iranian nuclear weapons program, like their support for international terrorism, these aren't minor details, this isn't 80 percent of the deal done with just a few minor things to work out, these are the existential issues that in many senses caused the U.S.-Israeli attack to begin with.

DEAN: And we were hearing from Julia Benbrook there, the president saying in one of the telephone interviews that the vice president won't be going to do the security concerns. What does that tell you, if anything? And I know, I hear you, we have to see if these are actually even going to happen, but how are you thinking about these potential discussions?

BOLTON: Well, I think they're a waste of oxygen. In fact, I think it was a mistake to have the ceasefire. The overwhelming preponderance of weapons being delivered was by the U.S. and Israel on Iran, not by Iran on everybody else. They've got now a two-week breather where they're doing what they can to recover, regroup, get ready for the next phase of the war. We never should have let up on.

DEAN: Yes. Do you think J.D. Vance should be going? Obviously, the present is saying it's a security concern.

BOLTON: Yes. I don't -- I can't speak to the security concern. It wasn't such a concern the last time. But you shouldn't send the vice president. He's one level below the president. We don't know if the people the Iranians are sending have any authority to commit their government to begin with. If we were going to send a high-level official, it should have been the secretary of state, not the vice president and not civilian volunteers.

DEAN: Yes. And what message, do you think, that sent to the Iranian negotiators?

BOLTON: I think they smell panic in the White House. I think they can see Trump wants out of this. He's just -- he's broadcasting it almost every day. And it gives the Iranians enormous leverage they shouldn't have.

DEAN: Yes. And so, to that point, we have all the polling to back this up. This war has proven to be unpopular among the American people. Obviously, we're in a midterm election year that is several months away, but we're still getting ever closer. How much of that, do you think, is playing into the decisions that are being made now? BOLTON: Well, I think that's a big part of it. I don't think the president is making geostrategic decisions. I think he's making domestic political decisions. But a large part of this is his fault. He made no effort whatever in the weeks and months before the attack to build the case for whatever his objectives were. We still don't know what his objectives were. I think the proper objective is regime change.

But whatever he was after, he didn't bother to tell anybody until 2:30 in the morning on February the 28th after the attacks had begun. That's not how you do it. That's just politics 101 domestically. And for whatever reason, he didn't bother to do it. Now, he can see the consequences.

DEAN: All right. Ambassador John Bolton, thank you so much for being here. We appreciate it.

BOLTON: Thanks for having me.

DEAN: We have more on Iran straight ahead. The top Democrat in the Armed Services committee joining us next to talk more about all these developments. Plus, we are following breaking news out of Louisiana where officials are investigating what they describe as a domestic disturbance that led to the shooting deaths of multiple children. More on that. Stay with CNN.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:15:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DEAN: A potential escalation between the U.S. and Iran ahead of these critical peace talks. President Trump saying the Navy has seized an Iranian container ship in the Gulf of Oman, and the next round of peace talks in Islamabad, of course, just days away.

We are joined now by Congressman Adam Smith of Washington. He's the ranking Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee. Congressman, thanks for your time tonight. We appreciate you being here. I want to first get your reaction to what were this news that we're getting about what happened in the Gulf of Oman. What did you -- what did you think about it?

REP. ADAM SMITH (D-WA), RANKING MEMBER, ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE: What the most important thing to realize here is we are nowhere close to an agreement. President Trump seems to have been trying to wish that into existence, well, on and off, frankly, since this war began.

But I think Ambassador Bolton was quite correct. I mean, there's no -- nowhere close between where Iran is at and where we're at. I mean, we still have what we wanted out of this war, which was Iran's nuclear program gone, their ballistic missile program gone, their support for terrorism in the region gone.

[17:20:01] And then we also hope for a fundamental change in the regime. Iran has said no to all of that. They've put on the table the fact that they will now control the Strait of Hormuz in a way they never have before, and they're insisting upon us relieving all manner of different sanctions and basically paying to rebuild Iran. So, the biggest thing to realize this is despite what the president has said, we are miles away from an agreement, number one, and number two, how we get to an end to this war has never been less clear.

DEAN: Right. And that was going to be my follow-up question to you. Knowing that, as you lay out these objectives that the president and his administration have put out there as what they must be getting from Iran to get to a permanent deal, do seem pretty far apart at this moment in time despite what the president has said kind of off and on over the last several days, how concerned are you about how this end or if ends?

SMITH: Look, I'm very concerned. And this was all very, very predictable and was predicted by a lot of people. This is why previous presidents chose not to start this war. Iran is absolutely a problem. We have to stop them from getting a nuclear weapon.

They are also a maligned influence in the region. We have to figure out ways to deter and contain that maligned influence, always hoping that at some point they will change, but preparing for the fact that they won't.

We looked at military options for the last 15 years and concluded that it would play out kind of like it's playing out now, an enormously high cost for the region and the world without any clear evidence that we are closer to our two objectives. So, other options were chosen.

The president launched us into this war. And now, he really doesn't know how to get out of it. And you can see it in his style. His style is always basically to talk big and try to humiliate and belittle his opponents until they give in to him. But sometimes, that doesn't work. Sometimes, your opponent, Iran in this case, says, yeah, we're not going to do this. It's one of the oldest cliche in the military, the enemy gets a vote, and the president seems to have forgotten that fundamental reality when he started this war.

DEAN: I'm reminding people that you are the ranking member on the House Armed Services Committee. So, knowing that, U.S. Central Command chief, Admiral Brad Cooper, says the military is prepared to sustain this blockade and the Strait of Hormuz for as long as necessary. And obviously, this is all taking extreme resources from the military across all branches. How does this impact our readiness? How does this impact the U.S. Military?

SMITH: Yeah, the costs of this conflict are enormous. You focus on one piece of it, and that is the tens of billions heading towards hundreds of billions of dollars that we'll be spending on this conflict. And then also the Navy ships in particular that have been at sea much longer than normal. They will take time to repair. The service members' readiness will be harmed by this. And I think the clearest evidence of this is the president is now asking for roughly $1.6 trillion for defense budget between the defense asks, the supplemental, and -- sorry, excuse me, and the reconciliation package. That's a 60 percent increase in our defense budget at a time when we're pushing $40 trillion in debt and the president still insists upon cutting taxes.

Yeah, it undermines not just our military readiness, it understands our fiscal readiness. It is enormously costly. And that's to say nothing of the impact it's having on the economy, the dollar plus increase in gas, the surge we've seen in inflation and the global economy, the impact this is having on others. Yeah, the costs are very high. The benefits are still not there and increasingly difficult to see a path towards achieving them.

DEAN: And where are you on the president's request on that increase in budget? Do you think that's necessary?

SMITH: No, I do not. I am a hell no on it for a variety of different reasons. One, because I do not support this war. I do not think we should be funding it, number one. And number two, we need a national security strategy that's realistic. And it's not realistic to imagine that we can have a $1.6 trillion defense budget and that we can somehow dominate the world.

And that's really the strategy here, is that we are going to bend the entire world to our will, we're going to dominate the entire Western Hemisphere, apparently, we're going to run Venezuela, we're going to run Cuba, we're going to threaten Greenland, we're going to threaten Canada, we're going to threaten Panama. And now, we're going to reshape the Middle East with our military, all the while pushing away all of our partners and allies who could conceivably help us achieve that.

That's ridiculous. It's incredibly dangerous and something we cannot achieve. So, no, I don't support this. And I'll just close with a quote from former secretary, Gates, and I think Secretary Mattis said this as well. Look, if you're going to push away all of our allies and cut the State Department, then you better give me more ammunition because we're going to have to fight everywhere. And that is the world that Trump has now brought us into.

[17:25:01]

DEAN: And so, what would you say to the proponents of adding to the military's budget who say, listen, we need to support our troops, they need to have what they need to do that, this is how much money we need? Do you -- you don't agree with that?

SMITH: No, I don't agree. It's not $1.6 trillion. And I'm not going to -- I'm not going to say I support the mission. I don't support the mission. The president asked him to do that. He can get the votes for that money if he thinks it's a good idea.

I don't think we should support it because if you don't fund it, then that forces them to make different choices. They're not going to send the troops out ill-equipped. They're going to have to make different choices. Ultimately, this is how Vietnam ended. You know, the Congress refused to fund it. They refused to provide the appropriations.

So, no, I don't think that the president is so in charge of our defense policy that every single member of Congress just has to follow whatever harebrained idea he comes up with because we don't want to look like we're not supporting the troops. This war was a bad idea. It's bad for the troops. Don't forget, we've also lost 13 service members lives in this conflict, hundreds more wounded.

So, no, I don't agree that somehow, that once the president sends us into a war, we're obligated to fund it on behalf of the troops. We are obligated to advocate for the right policy of this country for our troops and for the taxpayers.

DEAN: All right. Congressman Adam Smith, thanks for your time. We do appreciate it.

SMITH: Thank you.

DEAN: We are also following this breaking news out of Louisiana where there was a deadly mass shooting. We're going to have more on that when we come back. You're in the "CNN Newsroom."

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:30:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DEAN: We are following what is horrific breaking news out of Louisiana where police have confirmed eight children were killed, two women wounded in a mass shooting in South Shreveport. Those children, all eight of them, younger than 14 years old. According to police, this started as a domestic disturbance. It then spread across at least three homes.

We'll bring in Rafael Romo now with more details on this. Just an awful headline, Rafael. What happened?

RAFAEL ROMO, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, you said it right, Jessica. Just a horrific, a horrific shooting there. Shreveport police officers responded to reports of shots fired just after six this morning and found victims in two homes in the Cedar Grove neighborhood along West 79th Street and a third home on nearby Harrison Street.

Shreveport Police Corporal Chris Bordelon described a very large scene with eight children shot dead. He called it the result of -- quote -- "a domestic disturbance." He said the dead victims' range in age from 1 to 14 years old and were all apparently shot by the same individual who is related to some of the victims.

Bordelon also said the suspect carjacked a vehicle after the shootings and a chase ensued with Shreveport police officers right behind the suspect. The corporal said the chase ended in neighboring Bossier Parish when officers fired at the suspect. The man is now dead and is believed to have been the only shooter.

This is what Shreveport Mayor Tom Arceneaux told CNN about a possible motive.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MAYOR TOM ARCENEAUX, SHREVEPORT, LOUISIANA: My understanding is that he had some kind of relationship with the woman who lived at the home where the children were and with the woman that he had gone to first. But we're not entirely sure. Obviously, the two women are in very, very critical condition, so we're not able to get information from them. And, of course, he is no longer with us either.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ROMO: Jessica, the mayor also told us that there is an additional teenage child who survived the shooting and is in the hospital doing well. The shooting happened in House Speaker Mike Johnson's district. In a statement, Johnson said, we're holding the victims, their families, and loved ones, and our Shreveport community close in our thoughts and prayers during this incredibly difficult time.

Police have not released the names of the victims or the suspected shooter.

Jessica, back to you.

DEAN: All right. Rafael Romo, thank you so much for that update. We appreciate it. As Pope Leo pushes for a peaceful end to the war in the Middle East, he's now directly addressing another issue, that public spat with President Trump. You're in the "CNN Newsroom."

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:35:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DEAN: Pope Leo is reiterating his calls for peace in the Middle East while commending the ceasefire announced earlier this week in Lebanon.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

POPE LEO XIV, HEAD OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH, BISHOP OF ROME, SOVEREIGN OF THE VATICAN CITY STATE (through translator): The ceasefire announced in Lebanon offers cause for hope. It is a sign of relief for the Lebanese people and for the Levant. I encourage those working towards a diplomatic solution to continue the peace negotiations so that the cessation of hostilities throughout the Middle East may become permanent.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DEAN: The pope's comments coming at a mass earlier in Angola are part of his 11-day trip to Africa. This visit has at times, though, been overshadowed by this back and forth with President Trump. A week ago, the president attacking the pope on social media, calling Pope Leo weak on crime and terrible for foreign policy. The president also posted this now deleted AI-generated image depicting him as Jesus, though he says he thought it was showing him as a doctor.

During a prayer meeting in Cameroon Thursday, the pope spoke about a world being ravaged by a -- quote -- "handful of tyrants." He later told reporters those comments were written weeks ago before the president's social media attacks.

Let's bring in CNN's Gloria Pazmino. She is here in New York. She has been talking with Catholics about this back and forth, about this conflict. What are they telling you, Gloria?

GLORIA PAZMINO, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Jessica. You know, it's interesting. Even as Pope Leo tries to sort of pivot back from the debate that we saw unfold last week between his comments, the analysis of his comments and that which was being said by President Trump and Vice President Vance, we are seeing that here at home, the back and forth is still very much resonating with people, especially Catholics, who showed up to Sunday mass this morning.

[17:39:56]

And I spoke to several of them here today, including some supporters of President Trump who, I would say, were disappointed and even frustrated that President Trump had decided to pick this fight with Pope Leo. They said that they thought it was a bad idea. And I spoke to a woman who told me that she just wished he would back away from picking fights with someone like the pope.

I also spoke with Archbishop Hicks here in New York. He is the leader of about two and a half million Catholics spread out across New York City. He talked about the pope's message of peace. He said that he supports what the pope has said. And he also said he believes that message is part of what's driving the increase in church attendance that we have been seeing in the past few months. He also talked about the importance of having an American pope in this moment and the pope's message. Take a listen to what some of the parishioners told us earlier today.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DAVE MEICHSMER, PARISHIONER: It is hard to defend what he's doing in Iran right now. And the pope is -- he's the first American pope. He's trying to come out for peace, which is what the pope does.

SABINA HITCHEN, PARISHIONER: I think he should stay in his own lane, meaning the president, not the pope. The pope's lane is leading us, right? As Christians. And the pope, we would hope -- sorry, the president, we would hope he could focus his goals on leading the country, though I would say he could take some notes from the pope on kindness, taking care of our neighbors and things like that.

VALERIE FODSER, PARISHIONER: I think Trump has his own ideas about what he can say and what he cannot say. And I think that he has proven that he can say whatever he wants to say about anyone and about anybody. And he knows that people will push back against it, but he likes that push back. He loves that pushback.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PAZMINO: I thought that last part was interesting. You know, Valerie's analysis was just basically, you know, this is who Trump has been over and over. He tends to sort of speak off the cuff and create these distractions and these debates. But I think for Catholics specifically, I heard from one woman who told me that she believed it was deeply offensive and that she hoped that the president would issue an apology. Jessica?

DEAN: All right. Gloria Pazmino, thank you so much for that. And joining us now, David Axelrod, CNN chief political analyst, former senior adviser to President Obama, also met with Pope Leo recently. David, it's good to see you. Thank you so much. Our colleague --

DAVID AXELROD, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL ANALYST, FORMER OBAMA SENIOR ADVISER: Good to see you. Thank you.

DEAN: I want to ask you about something that's a little just more broad about this. Our colleague, John Blake, writes today that in his view, this is about more than just this one incident, this one back and forth, that it's a larger battle that has been brewing for years, which in his mind is historical Jesus and MAGA Jesus, and that the pope is critiquing this idea of MAGA Jesus, this idea of a warrior Christ who supports war in Iran, who's combative and fighting, and that that's what so many MAGA supporters have kind of taken on, and that now there's pushback against this. What do you think about kind of that way of thinking about it?

AXELROD: Well, there's no doubt that -- I mean, listen to the words of the secretary of defense who closed this war in Iran in very much theological terms and sort of holy war terms and suggested that God was on the side of the war. And this is what, of course, the pope reacted to.

I remember, and I don't want to mess it up, but Lincoln's old -- Lincoln's phrase about how we should not hope that we are -- that God is on our side, we should hope that we're on God's side.

And the pope spoke as the vicar of Christ. I mean, I'm not Catholic, but he was articulating views that have been central to the Catholic Church from the very beginning, blessed are the peacemakers. Christians generally know that.

I think it was a terrible mistake for the president to engage him in that way and to treat him as if he were just another public figure. He's not into -- certainly, to the 73 million Catholics in this country, that is not the case. So, you notice now, the pope clarified his comments were not personal.

But I saw that Vice President Vance, who said the pope ought to be careful when he's talking about theology, grabbed onto the pope's words and sort of slid down that pole because he got way out over his skis in ways that I think were deeply offensive to Catholics and non- Catholics alike. DEAN: Yes. And I wanted to ask you about that because, to your point, we have Vice President J.D. Vance. He's the highest ranking Catholic in the administration.

[17:45:00]

And he has been involved in this, notably, as you said, saying earlier this week that, in his words, the pope should be careful when talking about theology, but then essentially maybe appearing to try to de- escalate a little bit last night after the pope said that, you know, he was not trying to talk about President Trump in those remarks. What do you think about Vice President Vance in all of these?

AXELROD: Well, I really appreciated the comments of John Thune, the majority leader, when he was asked about this and when he was confronted with Vance's comment that the pope should be careful about talking in the way he was talking about theology. And Senator Thune said, isn't that his job? I mean, that's what popes do. And so, I really didn't understand Vance's comments in the first instance. I think he was smart to walk away from them in his more recent comments.

DEAN: And then just the political, the sheer political piece of this, what it means for Trump and the evangelicals and the Catholics that make up, you know, so much -- you know, a very key part of his MAGA base. Obviously, he is not on the ballot in a few months. But what kind of political effect, do you think, this has?

AXELROD: Look, I don't think there is any one thing that is determinative in a presidency, especially a presidency that has so many moments as this one. But, you know, when he posted that picture depicting himself -- very clearly depicting himself as Christ, I think that crossed the line for a lot of people, both evangelicals and Catholics, but also people generally. It was blasphemous, obviously so. And he tacitly acknowledged it by removing the photo and then saying he was -- he was -- though he was dressed as Christ, he was actually posing as a doctor.

I would say, you know, the old phrase, doctor heal thyself. I think he's trying to do that. This was -- this was a mistake. And I think it was costly. But do I think it's determinative? No. I think these things are cumulative and they go to fundamental decency. You know, the president has some vulnerabilities on that -- on that score.

DEAN: Does the pope being American play any role in this at all, do you think?

AXELROD: Well, I think his words have special meaning to Americans because he speaks in their idiom. He's a recognizable figure. I went to see the pope, Jessica, because he's from Chicago. And I was so intrigued --

DEAN: Right.

AXELROD: -- that, you know, he came -- we were about the same age, we came up in the city at the same time, we attended the same baseball games. And I've also been very impressed with what he's had to say about what I think is one of the most significant threats that we face, which is the power of social media to divide us. That's really their business model. Divide us, shove us into silos. Everyone outside the silo is not just someone with a different background or view, but an enemy. It's antithetical to all faiths and our basic common humanity.

I wanted to talk to him about all of that. So, I was really pleased to go and see him. It was depicted after as, you know, some sort of political errand, and that couldn't have been farther from the truth. And it was just an incredible honor to meet him.

DEAN: All right. David Axelrod, thanks for your insight. We appreciate that.

AXELROD: Nice to see you.

DEAN: Good to see you as always. Thanks so much. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:50:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DEAN: Ukraine today launching a terror investigation after at least six people were killed and 15 others injured after a gunman opened fire on the streets of Kyiv. And we do want to warn you, what you're about to see is graphic.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DEAN: You can see a man with a gun roaming the streets, and then this happens.

(SHOOTINGS)

He passes one person before approaching someone else and appears to shoot them at point-blank range. CNN's Sebastian Shukla has more on this now.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

SEBASTIAN SHUKLA, CNN FIELD PRODUCER: A truly shocking incident took place on Ukraine's capital on Saturday, one that has left several dead and a dozen or so people injured, including a child. Harrowing video circulating online of the attacker shows him walking down a street wielding a weapon and then, apparently, shooting somebody at point- blank range. Authorities say that he killed four people on those streets.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNKNOWN (through translator): The shooter, who was born in 1968, was most likely a pensioner. He lives nearby. He walked down the street, starting from (INAUDIBLE) Street. On his way, he shot four of our citizens. And he also shot a fifth person who was being held hostage in that shop.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[17:55:01]

SHUKLA: The shooter, not named by authorities but confirmed as a 58- year-old male born in Moscow, then entered a supermarket where he took hostages. Authorities swooped on the supermarket and began negotiating with him to free those hostages for around 40 minutes, which he did eventually do, but not before he killed another person. The incident took place in the Holosiivskyi district of Kyiv, a largely residential suburb at southern part of the city where you would find the usual shops, restaurants, and grocery stores.

Very little detail, though, has been released about the motive behind this attack, but officials are calling it a terrorist act and that the shooter had spent a lot of time in the Donetsk region of Ukraine's eastern region. President Zelenskyy, though, has said that every detail must be examined.

The whole affair, though, has really shaken the city of Kyiv, which does say something for a city and a nation that has been under near constant attack for over four years now following Russia's invasion. But incidents, particularly ones like this, have been so rare.

Sebastian Shukla, CNN, Berlin.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

DEAN: All right. Sebastian, thank you for that. Still ahead here, escalating tensions in the Strait of Hormuz as President Trump says the U.S. Navy has fired upon and seized an Iranian-plagued cargo ship. We are going to have the latest when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:00:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)