Return to Transcripts main page

CNN This Morning

Intel Officials Testify about Security Threats; Appeals Court Weighs Use of Alien Enemies Act; Rising Fear over Federal Communications; Fight over Trump's Agenda. Aired 6:30-7a ET

Aired March 25, 2025 - 06:30   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[06:33:04]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JIMMY KIMMEL, HOST, "JIMMY KIMMEL LIVE": No one on the chain thought to ask, who is J.G.? What are these initials? For all - they could have been leaking secrets to Jeff Goldblum for all they know.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AUDIE CORNISH, CNN ANCHOR: Classified military strike plans leaked. Members of the president's own cabinet. How did this happen? Well, because they added a journalist to a group chat.

Good morning, everybody. I'm Audie Cornish. Thank you for joining me on CNN THIS MORNING.

It is 32 minutes past the hour on the East Coast. Here's what's happening right now.

New questions over how that reporter was added to a highly sensitive group chat. That thread about airstrikes in Yemen was on an encrypted but publicly available messaging app. The defense secretary claims that no actual war plans were shared, but a National Security Council spokesman said the messages appear authentic.

Today, the Senate Finance Committee will consider the nomination of Frank Bisignano as the next Social Security Administration commissioner. This comes as the White House is pushing for changes at the agency.

And this morning, top U.S. intelligence officials were set to testify about worldwide security threats during a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing. CIA Director John Ratcliffe, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and FBI Director Kash Patel all expected to be there.

And with so many security threats in the world right now, the Israel- Hamas War, Russia's war on Ukraine, and, of course, as we mentioned earlier, the U.S. airstrikes on Yemen's Houthi rebels, the White House is still laser-focused on rounding up people they say are Venezuelan gang members and deporting them. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MIKE WALTZ, NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER: President Trump is taking decisive action to rid our communities of these gangs that are operating in a paramilitary fashion -

MARGARET BRENNAN, CBSN NEWS HOST, "FACE THE NATION": Yes.

WALTZ: And that we know Maduro is deliberately emptying his prisons -

BRENNAN: Right.

WALTZ: In a proxy manner to influence and attack the United States.

BRENNAN: That's different.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[06:35:01]

CORNISH: I want to discuss more with CNN senior national security analyst Juliette Kayyem.

Juliette, good morning. Thanks for being here.

We're going to talk about this threats hearing, but this is sort of a strange day because we have spent the last couple of days hearing about immigration and fentanyl and all of these things as the top priorities of this administration. What originally was this hearing kind of supposed to be about with all these security officials?

JULIETTE KAYYEM, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Yes, this is an annual hearing in which the senior leaders of any administration go forward and directly, and without a lot of drama, tell the Senate Intel Committee, in public, and tell the American public what are the real threats against the United States and what might be a threat to our - basically our safety and security. That has - and that goes to priorities. It's not a matter of, will we learn anything new? We know Russia's a threat. We know China's a threat. We know that there are dangers out there. It's a question of how the Trump administration officials will prioritize what they're telling the Senate Intel, because then that trickles down in terms of operational focus.

CORNISH: Right.

KAYYEM: And so, they seem to be focused on immigration right now. It's not that it's - it's not an issue. It's just it's not the issue that is - that threatens America's capabilities as a nation, like Russia and China would.

CORNISH: And then - Julie, in the meantime, we've got this news, right, about this breach in security in using this Signal app. What are foreign allies viewing this, right, in terms of security? I know that there have been cuts in cyber security on the U.S. side. Put this in context in terms of global threats. Is this a problem? KAYYEM: Yes. Look, I mean, the - the - we - our strength is in the

confidence other nations have in our capabilities and the personnel who run those capabilities, as much as it does with fear by our enemies that we might do something. Trump and his administration are good with fear. They - they - that is their sort of strategy. So, the - the - the biggest challenge, I think, coming out of the - the Signal hoopla in the last 24 hours is - is - relates to the Pentagon and Secretary Hegseth and his sort of disastrous sharing, negligent sharing of - of the war plans.

We - we base our safety and security on a belief that the secretary of defense is qualified and truthful. There are serious questions, and I - I would say I - I have tremendous doubts about both of those. He's - he lied aggressively yesterday about what happened in the Signal chat. And we already knew that he was not qualified for this position. Barely got through. Had professional limitations, personal baggage. And I think that will not only permeate with our allies, it permeates within the Pentagon.

We have reported that his focus on DEI - it's only - it's his only - that's been his only focus it seems to date and to purging DEI is getting - is - has a lot of senior Pentagon officials saying, this is just a waste of time. And so, I do think it damages the Pentagon and therefore damages our safety and security.

CORNISH: Can I just better understand this thing you're saying about DEI? Are you talking about what his sort of approach to the job has done within the Pentagon?

KAYYEM: Yes.

CORNISH: Meaning either trust or dismissal with other people? Like, there's something about the relationships there you're getting at?

KAYYEM: Yes. I mean you have a - I mean it's - it's - the part of it is just making people annoyed that you're, like, you know, taking down, you know, websites about Jackie Robinson. But the - the more important part is, this is a serious job, be a serious person. And I think the combination of Hegseth not taking his job very seriously in terms of what his focus is.

I looked back. I couldn't find almost anything that he has done or said that didn't relate to some - some perceived, you know, some purge of perceived DEI throughout the Pentagon up to this moment, up to the moment in which he shares operational capabilities to - in the signal chat room with Jeff Goldberg from "The Atlantic" on it. It is that lack of seriousness that - that came to him before - that came, you know, as he was entering the job. No one thought that he was sort of the best in terms of the Pentagon secretary. That permeates both within, in particular, the Joint Chiefs, the military and, of course, abroad.

The Joint Chiefs put up a plan to strike Yemen.

[06:40:01] They share it with the secretary of defense - defense because of civilian oversight and check. And he puts it out there for people that not only I mean this is what people are missing, not only, like, is it on a Signal - Signal text exchange, that information didn't really need to be shared with that group of people anyway. Even if they had been in The Situation Room, the Joint Chiefs rely on the capability and the stability of the secretary of defense. And I - and that hurts our - our safety and impacts the threat environment. You don't have competency and you don't have truthfulness in the secretary of defense. I think this is a bigger story than, was he on the Signal chat room.

CORNISH: That's CNN's senior national security analyst, Juliette Kayyem. Thank you.

Right now we are also waiting to see if a federal appeals court will uphold or lift a judge's temporary ban on President Trump's use of the Alien Enemies Act to deport alleged Venezuelan gang members, while a Justice Department lawyer argued in front of a three-judge panel.

Now, one of those judges said, quote, "Nazis got better treatment under the Alien Enemies Act."

My group chat is back.

I want to tackle some things Juliette said, but I also want to get to this Alien Enemies Act question because what this judge said is going to go far and wide. It gets to the point of due process. What are the circumstances under which you have due process, and can you show that you've been doing that?

MYCHAEL SCHNELL, CONGRESSIONAL REPORTER, "THE HILL": Right. And we've been seeing folks, the administration, the judge, go back and forth for a few days now debating whether or not this - this move by the Trump administration was valid, was reasonable under the - under the statute right there that you mentioned.

I think something that's important to note as we wait for this three panel - three judge panel to rule is that whatever happens is likely going to be appealed to the Supreme Court, and it's going to be fascinating to see how the Supreme Court handles this matter. We, of course, know it's very explosive. It's dealing with -

CORNISH: Yes.

SCHNELL: Yes.

CORNISH: And we're all kind of like skipping to the Supreme Court part. I feel like I've had some version of this conversation a couple times, which goes, they get it to court, then they get it to the Supreme Court. There's still a ways to go in between.

But, Chuck, it's abstract to talk about. Like, I feel like trying to talk about this with my relatives, they're like, great, that sounds good, but they don't know why they should care about this. CHUCK ROCHA, FORMER SENIOR ADVISER, BERNIE SANDERS' 2016 AND 2020

PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGNS: I think it's just one of the spokes in the wheel of frustration of people where you have to follow the rules. I think folks can agree, if there's somebody dangerous in this country, they'd like them not to be in this country. I'm not arguing. This is about following the rules.

CORNISH: But we're also a country that believes that, like, in a way, the rules don't apply to people who have done bad things.

ROCHA: That's a good point. But what I'm saying is that the point you're making about the rules and about bad things, all are relevant to each other. And we have a due process and we have rules you have to follow.

When Donald Trump doesn't follow the rules, or his administration doesn't follow the rules, folks see that. They're like, I have to play by the rules every single day.

Hell, my wife reminds me every day, I got to play by the rules because I'm the first one to want to break the rules. But we have to follow the rules, even if you're the president.

CORNISH: OK.

Jamil, I want to turn to you and a little back to what Juliette was saying because she brought up several points in which, fundamentally, this, as "The New York Post" calls it, "Operation Overshare," was just not following the rules, right, in so many ways. Using an open source app, not using the computers you're supposed to. Although, like basics, frankly. So, should someone be fired? Will someone be fired?

JAMIL JAFFER, FORMER COUNSEL TO THE ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR NATIONAL SECURITY: Well, look, it certainly - it doesn't look like the president's aiming that way. All the conversations with him thus far in the last 24 hours have been, well, I don't really know what's going on. I didn't hear about it. Which is, of course, crazy. Of course the president heard that his senior national security leaders are talking on Signal and discussing war planning or strikes in Yemen, making decisions and the like. So -

CORNISH: Yes. It also means Goldberg exited the chat, and in Signal it says so on has left, and nobody said a word, right?

JAFFER: Well, so here's where it gets interesting, right? So this J.G. leaves the chat. Nobody knows who J.G. is. There's two theories about the case, right? It could have been Jamieson Greer, the U.S. trade representative, right? That may have been who they thought they were adding. It might have been somebody fat fingered it. You know, the "d" and the "j," you're adding J.D. Vance - the "d" and the "j" - the "g" are close to one another on your keyboards, as my son pointed out. So, you know, he's like, you old people, y'all might have just hit the wrong buttons, right? So, who knows.

CORNISH: I mean, fat fingers is not better than "Operation Overshare," to be honest. I want to ask a question also about this idea of potential threats going forward. If you're a foreign adversary, it seems like you're excited. You're taking notes. What are they learning from this experience?

JAFFER: Well, look, you've got the worldwide threats hearing today. We know the Biden administration made - said it was - it was China, Russia, Iran, North Korea. Transnational threats were like three quarters of the way into a 40-page document. Terrorism was at the end of that.

I think the Trump administration will switch that up. We'll see what Tulsi Gabbard says. It will be very interesting to see what she says, trying to coordinate with all the intelligence communities telling her -

CORNISH: But is there any way the Democrats don't ask about this today?

JAFFER: Oh, it's got to - it's 100 percent coming up. It's going to come up at every confirmation hearing going forward. It's going to come up in every security conversation. And they're going to make the point, you came after Hillary Clinton on the server. Now you guys were on Signal doing this. What's the difference? Why should we trust you?

[06:45:00]

CORNISH: All right, still ahead on CNN THIS MORNING, we're going to talk about the FBI launching a new task force. And this one is about Tesla.

Plus, why are some of the government's highest-ranking officials using that messaging app we've been talking about? Anybody can download it to talk about secret information. We're going to hear more from the group chat after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Because why would they do it on Signal? Why would they do this on a messaging app? And why would they invite the editor in chief of "The Atlantic" to watch?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CORNISH: All right, so with these new revelations surrounding the use of encrypted messaging app by top Trump officials to talk about military strike plans, we wanted to talk about how government workers decide to communicate.

[06:50:07]

How they are communicating seems to be under a microscope with this administration, and the ramifications of that. CNN has previously reported that many government workers have

abandoned using work computers for digital meetings. Now, this shift is driven by fear, fear of surveillance, fear of leaks, and fear of political retribution.

As Washington insiders increasingly turn to encrypted platforms, you've got concerns about division and mistrust within the government. One employee believes the new culture of fear is, frankly, by design.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PAUL OSADEBE, FEDERAL ATTORNEY: I believe people need to speak out right now. They're expecting the silence. They're hoping for it. And they are counting on it. And I believe the way out of this is for people to speak up about what is happening.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CORNISH: My group chat is back.

These things might seem unrelated, but one of the things I noticed with Trump two, this administration, the last couple of months, is the number of people talking about speaking on encrypted apps. What are you hearing as a reporter?

SCHNELL: Yes, I mean, you get a lot of Signal requests. People like to protect themselves and they want to use these encrypted platforms. Something that I think is interesting is, when you use Signal, you can set the messages to disappear after a certain amount of time. And this relates to "The Atlantic" story because in those screenshots that Jeffrey Goldberg had reported, you can see the timer, you know, emoji logo in the bottom right corner. That indicates that these messages were set to disappear after a certain amount of time, which is also another layer of the news that broke yesterday is the preservation of official documents and official communications.

CORNISH: So, we are supposed to have a record of these kinds of interactions.

SCHNELL: That's right. That's right.

CORNISH: And that ticking clock means we didn't.

SCHNELL: That's - well, that they deleted after a certain amount of time, that's right.

CORNISH: You know, one of the reasons why I thought about this is because when "The Atlantic" reported these messages, at one point Hegseth goes on to state, "waiting a few weeks or a month does not fundamentally change the calculus," right, referring to this, "immediate risks on waiting." "Number one, this leaks, and we look indecisive. Number two, Israel takes action or Gaza ceasefire falls apart." I feel like those would be number one, but it's not my group chat.

So, Jamil, help me understand this. Is this obsessive search for leaks and disloyalty starting to have an effect on operational security?

JAFFER: Absolutely. Look, I have seen tons of people getting on Signal, tons of people changing their - their Signal messaging apps to, you know, delete messages earlier, changing their names to be just letters and initials, removing their phone number. So, you're seeing that happen with government officials, with people on the outside. Everyone's operating in a culture of fear. It's partly because, within the Trump administration, I mean they operate like "Hunger Games," you know, everyone's out for everybody. But on top of that, now you've got the president hunting down leakers, which he should do. That's the right thing to go after people who intentionally disclose classified information. Here you've got an inadvertent disclosure of classified information. And so, there are these challenges going on with the administration and they're out for people. They're out for their own people.

CORNISH: Yes.

JAFFER: The president is not loyal to his own people.

CORNISH: Chuck.

JAFFER: This is a problem.

CORNISH: Yes.

ROCHA: You know, I've run campaigns for a long time, and we were one of the first to use encrypted apps because we were passing information and we're on the road with the candidate, and we have to communicate back to the home base.

CORNISH: Right.

ROCHA: So, we were once - I don't even know what an encrypted app was until I started doing a campaign.

CORNISH: Yes. But also during the incidents with Russia and infiltrating -

ROCHA: Right.

CORNISH: Yes.

ROCHA: And remember when they hacked the DNC email?

CORNISH: Exactly.

ROCHA: That's when it all started, when they came into our computers and said, even if you've got a Gmail, now you have to have double authenticity and all the things that went around that. But to your point about what people are feeling in D.C., I now, to your point, have way more Signal chat asks other apps that I haven't even heard of, of folks being really, really cautious.

This week I was contacted by a whole group of USAID workers who have been fired, who now want to run for public office, and they said that's how they've all been talking to each other.

CORNISH: But the idea is you're afraid to talk.

ROCHA: Right.

CORNISH: I mean one of the things seeing in that chat, Hegseth saying, like this leaks, it's like, that means, in a way, you're having this chat because you somehow don't feel comfortable having it in DOD with the Defense Department.

JAFFER: Yes.

CORNISH: Is that how you read it?

JAFFER: Well, that's exactly right. And even more, you see the internal discussion, well, and the vice president disagreeing about some of the tactics being undertaken. But then you see other people chiming in, well, you know, we could go with you, JD. We might go with where the president is. And you see sort of people - you actually see them sort of Finlandizing inside the group chat to one another because they're afraid, if I go to, you know, much of here with where Waltz is, or I'm too in favor with where J.D. is, I might be viewed as disloyal. I might get fired right away. You can see it even happening in the conversation. They're revealing insight into what's going on inside the senior most levels of the Trump administration.

CORNISH: But basically we're lucky Goldberg didn't hold it two years for a book, right? I mean this dialog, as you're saying, is no longer - it's not on the record somewhere. There's not going to be a photo of them discussing, you know, what is going to happen.

SCHNELL: And it's always fascinating to see how elected officials, lawmakers are talking behind the scenes when they can speak candidly, freely, out of the public view. This is something that a lot of Republicans on Capitol Hill were saying. Speaker Johnson, for example, said this conversation shows that the process works, that people were having substantive conversations and came to a successful mission.

But again, it begs the question of, why are you having these conversations on an unsecure platform.

[06:55:01]

CORNISH: Yes, let me follow up on this. The process works?

ROCHA: I don't - I think there's a special room that they should all go into where nobody can hear it. I've seen movies. I know there's a room you can go into that can't be nobody hearing what you're saying.

CORNISH: OK.

ROCHA: They should all get together there.

CORNISH: You know, you're - you're relying on 90s depictions of high- level security operations.

ROCHA: That's what I'm saying. Open up the bookcase. We've all seen the movie. You go back there.

CORNISH: Yes. Jamil, is there a bookcase?

JAFFER: There is a - there are the rooms. Like, a secure -

CORNISH: There is an official room.

JAFFER: Secure Compartmented Information Facility.

ROCHA: I knew it.

JAFFER: The SCIF room. In fact, every senior government official has a SCIF, a Secure Compartment Information Facility, in their own home. Now, the reality is, when you're operating in a high-pressure environment, things are going on in a war situation, it's going to be hard to do that. Oftentimes you'll pick up the phone, you'll try to talk around the classified information. That's not legal, but that's how people do it. So, it's not surprising this is going on - frankly, this is probably going on for decades.

CORNISH: Yes, of course.

JAFFER: Humans are very creative. When you put in place really strict security restrictions or cybersecurity restrictions, people always get around them. This is the biggest challenge with - with cybersecurity and security rules. That doesn't mean it's right, but it happens all the time.

ROCHA: (INAUDIBLE).

CORNISH: Is the military term for this snafu?

JAFFER: Yes, that's exactly it. That's exactly it.

CORNISH: Yes, Google it.

Jamil Jaffer, Chuck Rocha, thank you guys so much for joining us. Appreciate your insights.

It's now 55 minutes past the hour. I want to give you your morning roundup. More of the stories you need to get your day going.

The FBI launching a new task force to investigate all the recent acts of vandalism against Tesla. The FBI says Tesla cars, showrooms and charging stations have been vandalized, even firebombed in at least nine states.

An Oscar winning Palestinian director of the film "No Other Land" was assaulted in the West Bank, then taken away by Israeli soldiers. That's according to witnesses and a fellow director on the documentary. The Israeli military says they took four people in for questioning after what they called a violent confrontation.

And the U.S. receives a grade of c when it comes to the nation's infrastructure in a report released overnight. But it says overall things have improved over the past four years. It also warns that more money will be needed to make sure things are modernized or replaced so they can withstand extreme weather.

And a portrait of President Trump at the Colorado State Capitol will be taken down after the president complained it was distorted on purpose. The painting was unveiled in 2019. At the time, the artist, Sarah Boardman, described what she was trying to convey with the portrait.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SARAH BOARDMAN, ARTIST: I wanted him to look strong and thoughtful, but I didn't want him to look angry. He's not shakeable. At the door of my studio I try to leave any politics behind.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CORNISH: Colorado Republicans say the portrait will be replaced by a better one that depicts President Trump's contemporary likeness.

OK, we're going to talk now about things we're keeping an eye on.

Mychael, I wanted to take some extra time with you because obviously this is going to suck up all the oxygen, this conversation.

SCHNELL: Right.

CORNISH: People are going to hear about Signal apps all day. But there were actually a ton of really fascinating things coming up. What are you keeping your eye on?

SCHNELL: Yes, there are two things. One, we saw in recent days that push to impeach Judge Boasberg. We had discussed the - the case earlier. This -

CORNISH: So this is just lawmakers saying it's a leftist judge. We could get rid of them.

SCHNELL: Right.

CORNISH: And the Supreme Court chief justice, of course, said, stop talking like that.

SCHNELL: Not just lawmakers, but President Trump as well. We heard him call for that impeachment push. Now, it doesn't look like House Republicans are going to take that up because there's just not enough support. But the House, next week, is going to vote on a bill that would limit the injunctions that could be imposed by some of these district court judges. Republicans seeing it as a way to push back on some of these judges that -

CORNISH: To literally take the power of judges out of their hands?

SCHNELL: To - to - to limit, you know, to limit it.

CORNISH: Yes.

SCHNELL: To put - to place limits on it. So, that's one thing. And then the second thing a bit on the wonkier side of policy, a

policy issue. The Congressional Budget Office this week is expected to announce when the x date for the debt limit is, which is essentially, we hit the debt limit in January, Treasury Department put in extraordinary measures, and then there's a question of, when will those extraordinary measures run out and when does the debt limit need to be raised?

CORNISH: Yes.

SCHNELL: That - yes, that -

CORNISH: I want to ask about one more thing because we've got a minute left.

Social Security. There is a new Social Security sheriff who could be in town. What do you expect democrats to talk about today? Because he's got a background in business and in cutting.

SCHNELL: Yes, Democrats have, for a while, been warning that Republicans want to go after entitlements. It's been more about things like Medicaid because of that budget resolution that House Republicans have put forward that suggested that cuts to Medicaid would be necessary. But I suspect that they're going to bring in Social Security on this as well. And now, while Social Security cannot be touched during the budget reconciliation process, which is what Republicans are going to be using to move President Trump's agenda, there have been Republicans in the past who have suggested that there should be changes to Social Security and Medicare. Democrats have really latched on to that. It's something that they think is salient among American voters because everyone benefits from Social Security. It's like -

CORNISH: Yes, it's literally called the safety net.

SCHNELL: Right.

CORNISH: So - but this is such a long running discussion within the Republican Party as well. How you talk about this, do you talk about this, under what circumstances?

SCHNELL: Right.

CORNISH: It will be interesting to see what this conversation is like, whether it gets buried under all the security news today.

[07:00:01]

SCHNELL: Oh, drinking from a fire hose, as they say.

CORNISH: Yes.

OK, Mychael, so much - thank you so much for being with us. I appreciate it.

SCHNELL: Thanks. CORNISH: I also want to thank you for waking up with us. It's a busy day ahead. CNN NEWS CENTRAL is going to start right. I'm Audie Cornish.