Return to Transcripts main page
Connect the World
Trump Tariffs Countries Trading with Iran; Iran State Media Announces Internet Blackout Will Remain until Security Restored; Iran Threatens to Retaliate against Any U.S. Attack; Clintons Say They Won't Testify in Congressional Epstein Probe; Trump Eyes Greenland for Its Minerals; U.S. Inflation Remained Higher than Expected in December; Trump Speaks to Reporters as He Leaves for Michigan; Russia Killed 2,500+ Ukrainians in 2025; SCOTUS Hears Cases on Trans Student Sports Bans; Paramount Files Lawsuit in Pursuit of Warner Bros. Discovery; AI Hailed as the Next Major Computing Platform. Aired 10-11a ET
Aired January 13, 2026 - 10:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[10:00:00]
(MUSIC PLAYING)
ERICA HILL, CNN ANCHOR AND U.S. CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Thanks for joining us for the second hour of CONNECT THE WORLD. I'm Erica Hill in New
York.
Protests roiling Iran as president Trump puts pressure on the country's leaders now using his go-to tactic as yet another threat, tariffs.
Former president Bill Clinton, meantime, called to testify before Congress over the Jeffrey Epstein scandal.
And U.S. bans on transgender athletes front and center. This hour, the U.S. Supreme Court set to hear arguments. The potential ripple effect of a
ruling.
(MUSIC PLAYING)
HILL: We do begin the second hour of CONNECT THE WORLD with the U.S. president's new tariff threat involving Iran. Donald Trump says he is
immediately imposing a 25 percent tariff on any countries doing business with Iran.
It's important to note there has been no clarification on how those tariffs would be implemented. The president is heading to Michigan this hour, where
he'll give a speech on the U.S. economy.
Later, his national security team is expected to brief Trump on military options against Iran. He, of course, has floated the idea of using the U.S.
military to help protesters, floating that idea just this past weekend. And moments ago on social media, he said he has canceled any meetings with
Iranian officials until the crackdown ends.
Meantime inside Iran, more demonstrations now in the face of this harsh government crackdown. A U.S.-based rights group now says security forces
have killed more than 1,800 people. That number, of course, significantly higher than before.
CNN cannot independently confirm casualty figures but we're closely monitoring what we can. Nada Bashir joining us now this hour from London.
This internet blackout of course continues several days in. At this point it is so tough to get information in and out.
What have we been able to learn though?
NADA BASHIR, CNN CORRESPONDENT: It is absolutely been very difficult to get any real-time updates on what is unfolding inside Iran. Some Iranians
have been able to use some landline phones, to make calls outside of the country to give updates on what is happening.
We've been hearing from some on the ground who have said that the protests have died down somewhat as of Monday, in comparison to previous nights.
I've been speaking to one contact who told me that one relative was able to make a call out to the U.K. to give an update, saying that they had heard
warnings from their students that security forces were shooting relentlessly at protesters during these nightly demonstrations taking place
in Tehran.
So a very troubling picture coming from just these snippets of information that we have been able to receive as a result of this total internet and
communications blackout that is still in place over Iran.
And, of course, we have seen some video emerging since that internet and communications blackout was in force. We have seen videos, distressing
videos, showing body bags lined outside a medical complex, giving an indication of the scale of the violence that we have seen at the hands of
Iranian security forces.
And as you mentioned, now a U.S.-based human rights organization, which is tracking that death toll, has given a staggering update in comparison to
that death toll, which was put at over 500 just yesterday.
Now this update saying some 1,800 are believed to have been killed since protests began. And this is a shocking jump in the figure. Of course, CNN
cannot independently verify this data but that gives you a sense of the scale and that certainly reflects what we have been hearing from what
little information is coming out of Iran.
We've been hearing that hospitals are overwhelmed, that protesters have been shot at. And, of course, these are large-scale protests that are not
only taking place in the capital, Tehran, but they have touched every province of Iran, multiple towns and cities.
And, of course, while there are reports that they have died down, there is still a concern that, during this internet and communications blackout, we
will continue to see that violence intensify and we will continue to see that death toll increasing.
We have heard from Iranian officials through state media suggesting that that internet blackout will continue to remain in place, in their words,
until security is restored in Iran. And, of course, fears again around the international reaction and the potential for the U.S. to take direct
military action, if indeed the violence continues.
HILL: And some of those concerns are that, Nada, that it could lead to, in many ways, a further crackdown, despite the threats from Donald Trump.
Just real quickly, too, in terms of these protests, is there a sense of how organized they are?
[10:05:02]
And by that I mean how much they are organized around a central rallying cry in terms of what the protesters want to see for change.
BASHIR: Well, look, this began very clearly as a protest over the economic crisis in Iran. We saw business owners from Tehran's bazaars carrying out
organized demonstrations alongside even university students over the soaring inflation rates, the plummeting currency.
And the fact that ordinary Iranians were simply unable to get by on a day- to-day basis, unable to pay their rent, unable to buy everyday goods such as food and essential medicine because things have become simply too
expensive.
But this has really grown and evolved into so much more. Of course, there are multiple wide-ranging grievances with the Iranian regime beyond the
economy, including political freedom, social freedoms.
Of course, as we have seen in the past, women taking to the streets in protest against the regime's strict rules and regulations on the way women
dress, where they have access to in terms of whether they're able to be active openly.
And, of course, this has really garnered support from a wide range of the Iranian population and this is potentially what makes this protest movement
very different.
We are seeing Iranians from all ethnic backgrounds, religious sects, age groups, women and men, the young and the old taking part in these
demonstrations. And we are increasingly hearing calls for the regime to be toppled.
HILL: Yes, which is so important, Nada. Really appreciate it. Thank you.
Also joining us now, Sanam Vakil, who's director of the Middle East and North Africa Programme at Chatham House.
Sanam, it's good to have you. When we look at where things stand and even picking up on what, you know what Nada was just walking us through there,
the external pressure, the threats from Donald Trump.
You wrote about concerns that, rather than reshaping authoritarian regimes and toppling them, in many ways, this could actually embolden them.
How concerned are you about that happening in this moment in Iran?
SANAM VAKIL, DIRECTOR, MIDDLE EAST AND NORTH AFRICA PROGRAMME, CHATHAM HOUSE: This is -- first of all, thank you for having me.
But this is a real key, tense moment for the Islamic Republic. As we've heard, not only are they experiencing intense protests from across Iranian
society, having spread throughout the country and resisted a real violent, lethal government crackdown for two weeks.
But on top of that, now president Trump continues to increase the threat of a U.S. response. At first was limited last night to a 25 percent tariff on
those who engage in trade with Iran.
Today, he is intimating that he is coming to the help of the Iranian people. That would certainly keep momentum on the streets, perhaps. But the
Islamic Republic has long externalized threats and has consistently blamed the United States, Israel and all sorts of real and perceived enemies.
And this is certainly going to (INAUDIBLE). The regime itself will remain united. And it's not likely that we'll see immediate fractures. And that,
of course, is what the Trump administration and outsiders keep pointing to, that you need to see fractures in the regime.
HILL: And the fact that, as you point out, president Trump is saying he wants to help the Iranian people, wants to rescue them.
I mean, is there any evidence that you have seen that the U.S., that this administration, I should say, is actually invested in genuine democratic
transformation here?
VAKIL: Well, beyond Trump's rhetorical support for the Iranian people -- and here again, it's important to note that the death toll over these past
two weeks continues to mount. And I think it's certainly going to go higher than the current estimate of 2,000 people having been killed.
We don't really know if this administration has done further thinking. They certainly went for a change in the regime in Venezuela without, you know,
providing us with any plans on what comes next. And one could only assume that that same copy-paste could be implemented in Iran as well.
But the Iranian people are not necessarily happy with just removing the supreme leader or changing the pieces or leaders making decisions in Iran.
What they have been calling for, for two weeks now, is a real overturn of the Islamic Republic and a democratic transition.
HILL: Yes. And when we look at the region writ large, what is the impact of what we see in terms of the rhetoric right from the United States as the
region is also looking at what's happening in Iran and perhaps trying to figure out the best path forward there?
VAKIL: I think the region, countries around Iran, principally Arab states but also Turkiye and Pakistan, are really worried.
[10:10:00]
Iran is not a small country. It's 19 million people, almost. And people are worried about an American strike and what that would mean for regional
stability.
Iran has promised that it, too, would respond to any such attacks and that would perhaps bring in the region after what has been, of course, a really
troubling and difficult two years with war in Gaza and conflicts spreading in Lebanon and beyond.
Secondly, of course, regional states are worried about the effect of a longer-term conflict inside Iran for regional stability.
Whether, you know, we can imagine civil war-like scenarios or a gradual collapse of the Islamic Republic, these are all deeply destabilizing for
the region in terms of migration, in terms of trade, in terms of regional stability, more broadly.
HILL: Absolutely. There's so much been made about the fact that obviously Iran is not Venezuela, based on what we saw with the U.S. going in. But I
thought you made an interesting point in a piece that you wrote for "Time" just a few days ago, that Venezuela is a case study of endurance.
And there are actually lessons for Iran in terms of what is happening in Venezuela.
What are those lessons?
VAKIL: Yes, I think that it's a cautionary tale, both for the Islamic Republic and for the Iranian people. Iranians have been protesting for
decades for greater agency, for better governance.
And over the past two weeks, they're making it clear that they want to get rid of the Islamic Republic. And if they allow the U.S. or the West to
manage a transition, they might not see a democratic transition.
And so it's important that they're invested and involved and actually be able to name what they want and be part of a process of transition.
But for the Islamic Republic, the takeaway is that you could just imagine a change in the regime; not really regime change, a backroom deal with
president Trump or the emergence of new leadership from within that would be more amenable to work with the United States.
And, of course, that wouldn't be necessarily a good outcome for ordinary Iranians.
HILL: Yes, absolutely. I really appreciate the discussion. It's great to have you today, Sanam. Thank you.
VAKIL: Thank you for having me.
HILL: We are keeping a close watch on Capitol Hill to see whether former U.S. president Bill Clinton will show up today to answer questions in the
ongoing Jeffrey Epstein investigation.
The former president subpoenaed to appear this hour to testify before the U.S. House Oversight Committee. Hillary Clinton -- of course, not just the
former first lady, the former secretary of state in the United States -- she's been called for depositions scheduled for Wednesday.
Neither confirming their appearance. The Republican-led panel is warning that a failure to show could lead to contempt of Congress. CNN senior
reporter Annie Grayer is joining us now from Capitol Hill.
The Clintons have been pushing back and also accusing the committee in some ways of a bit of a double standard, based on what has been afforded to some
others who they also wanted to depose.
Where do things stand at this hour?
ANNIE GRAYER, CNN CAPITOL HILL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Erica, I just was sent from a source, a letter that the Clintons gave to the House Oversight
Committee, outlining why they are not expected to appear for their depositions, Bill Clinton today and Hillary Clinton tomorrow.
And it's an eight-page letter from their attorneys outlining why they don't think they need to appear. They have offered to give written testimony to
the Oversight Committee, which the committee has granted to other witnesses as part of this investigation.
But House Oversight chair James Comer has maintained that that is not enough, that he wants Bill Clinton to sit for an in-person deposition.
And we're told that as soon as today, after some time elapses and Clinton does not, Bill Clinton does not appear for his 10 am scheduled deposition,
Comer is going to move forward with what's called contempt of Congress proceedings, which is essentially going to lead to a major legal battle
over the Clintons' testimony.
There's a process here. The committee has to vote for it. Then the House has to vote for it. Then it gets sent over to the Department of Justice.
And that's where the legal battle over the Clintons' testimony will unfold.
Now Republicans and specifically James Comer maintains that Bill Clinton has to sit for this deposition, that his face and name appear in the
Jeffrey Epstein files. And as we saw from the limited information that the Department of Justice has released so far that there are images of Bill
Clinton.
One, he is shirtless in a Jacuzzi with a person whose face is redacted. Another, he is photographed with Epstein and his coconspirator, Ghislaine
Maxwell.
Now there is no context around these images. Bill Clinton has never been accused of any wrongdoing and is said to have cut ties with Epstein before
he was arrested in 2019.
And Clinton's people have said that, you know, the Department of Justice put out these images specifically of Clinton when there were so many others
they could have put out because they're trying to detract attention away from president Trump, who has a lot tied up in all of this.
[10:15:02]
And they also said in the letter that I received today, the Clintons said that Comer is just trying to put on a show here, that there's really no
legislative purpose to them appearing.
But we are still waiting for the, you know, the Oversight Committee is going to give the Clintons a little more time if they make a last-minute
decision. But the expectation is they're not coming today. House Oversight Committee will start its contempt of Congress proceedings and major, major
legal battle ahead in this investigation.
HILL: Absolutely. Never a dull moment for you there on the Hill. Annie, appreciate it. Thank you.
Still ahead here on CONNECT THE WORLD, is the high cost of living getting any better?
We have the latest U.S. inflation report ahead for you.
Plus, as we watch for this high-level meeting in Washington on Wednesday, a closer look at why Greenland is really at the top of president Trump's wish
list.
(MUSIC PLAYING)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(MUSIC PLAYING)
HILL: The foreign ministers from Denmark and Greenland are planning to meet with the U.S. vice president and secretary of state at the White House
on Wednesday. The meeting comes as president Trump repeats his desire to acquire Denmark's self-governing territory.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: He wants to see the United States acquire Greenland, because he feels that, if we do not, then it will
eventually be acquired or even perhaps hostilely taken over by either China or Russia, which is not a good thing for the United States or for Europe or
for Greenland as well.
Let's not forget, it would not just be in the best interest of the United States but perhaps it would be in the best interest of Greenland as well.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HILL: Now the Trump administration's interest in Greenland, it's important to remember, is very closely tied to its untapped mineral wealth. Here's
CNN's Matt Egan with a closer look.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
MATT EGAN, CNN SR. BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT: No secret that Greenland is at the top of the president's wish list. And, yes, that is because of the
island's vast, untapped mineral wealth.
Officials in Greenland, they've identified more than 1,100 mineral sites there, everything from zinc and iron and uranium to those rare earths that
we hear so much about.
And yet there is no mining boom in Greenland. Look at this, just two active mines there right now. But researchers tell CNN that's not because
Greenland is owned by Denmark.
It's because of the harsh Arctic environment there, where a lot of these mines and these minerals are located in the Arctic, where there's mile
thick ice sheet and where it's dark most of the year.
And that's why the founder of the Arctic Institute, he told me the idea of turning Greenland into America's rare earth factory is science fiction. He
said it's just completely bonkers. And he went on to say you might as well mine on the moon because that might be easier than mining in Greenland.
Think about that for a moment. And yet some people do think the U.S. could make a strategic acquisition here. Because look at this over on the
prediction market, Kalshi, as recently as last summer, there's just about a 20 percent chance that the U.S. could take control of any part of
Greenland.
[10:20:03]
But that has surged to 45 percent now.
And this surge occurred after the U.S. intervention in Venezuela. But there's key differences, of course, between Greenland and Venezuela,
including the fact that you have a situation in Greenland where they're very much open to foreign investment, including from the United States.
But the risk here is that all this talk of acquiring and taking over Greenland will end up damaging the U.S. relationship with the people of
Greenland and creating a whole new obstacle altogether. Back to you.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
HILL: All right, Matt, appreciate it.
Also want to take a look at U.S. inflation, which held steady in December. Consumer prices, though, actually rose 2.7 percent annually last month.
That closes out a year that saw slight progress on inflation.
Now it's important to note here there are continued affordability concerns for many Americans, especially when you talk about things like housing and
heating costs at the same time.
President Trump is feuding with the Fed over interest rate cuts. The U.S. central bank is expected to keep any rate changes on hold. The U.S.
president, posting to Truth Social that the Fed should, quote, "cut interest rates meaningfully," continuing to try to meddle there with the
Fed.
In just the past hour, I spoke with Joe Brusuelas. He's the chief economist at RSM and we talked about that inflation report amid the Trump
administration's criminal investigation of Fed chair Jerome Powell. We began by discussing why central bankers around the world are expressing
their support for Powell at this moment.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOE BRUSUELAS, CHIEF ECONOMIST, RSM: Central bankers perceive that they're being thought of as lackeys of the administration. You're likely to get a
backlash on the committee, right?
I mean, it's -- you -- they are human at one point, although it's really important to say these people are not political. They really want to act in
the best interest of the economy.
And in fact, they understand, if it's observed by markets that they're cutting interest rates in an excessive way, that will create a backlash.
And interest, long-term interest rates, will rise and the economy will slow.
HILL: Yes. And that's actually what we heard. Part of that is, of course, what we heard in the unprecedented, really, in the video statement that was
released by Jerome Powell, talking about decisions are made based on the data. Right. And based on what they see, not based on politics.
Globally, right, as you noted, the fact that this came out Sunday night, when we look at the markets, right, there was a dip earlier but then we saw
record closes for the Dow and the S&P on Monday. Markets just opening here in New York, of course. We heard the bell moments ago.
Globally, though, how does this move, just the probe itself, is it having an impact on the U.S.' standing?
BRUSUELAS: You know, I think that there's some risks there. When one thinks about political authorities moving against central bank or central
bankers, the pantheon of those countries are Russia, Argentina, Venezuela, Turkiye, Zimbabwe.
Not exactly the hall of fame when it comes to prices, price stability or maximum sustainable employment. And that's why you saw that unique and even
historic letter put out by global central banking community.
Because at the end of the day, they all matter. But the Fed matters just a little bit more.
HILL: Yes, it's also fascinating -- promise this is my last Powell Fed question for you before we move on to other things. But it's fascinating
too.
So, of course, Jerome Powell's role -- or pardon me -- his term as chair, he's up in May but his term on the board of governors actually extends into
2028. There was a lot of thinking that, once he's done in the current role, that he would likely step down.
Now it seems that the thinking has shifted and that he will stay on over concerns about the independence of the Federal Reserve.
Do you agree that this likely would push him to stay?
BRUSUELAS: Yes, I do actually. And I do think Jay is going to stay through 2028. And there's precedent for this.
In 1949, Marriner Eccles, the then chairman of the Federal Reserve, remained on the board after he exited the chair role because he was worried
about then U.S. president Harry Truman compromising the independence of the central bank.
HILL: All right. Well, as we watch all of that play out, I did want to get your take, too. So we got the latest consumer price numbers, of course,
just a short time, about an hour ago, they were released.
So rising 2.7 percent. That's slightly higher than what was anticipated in terms of inflation. And this really speaks to I think what we're seeing is
the main concern for most Americans, which is affordability and the cost of goods.
Is it your sense that this number will have an impact?
BRUSUELAS: Well, when you dig into the data, what you see is that the price of services, that's where Americans live, is up 0.3 percent on the
month and 3.3 percent for the year 2025.
You dig a little bit deeper, you can see where the pain point is -- fueling utilities advanced 0.8 percent on the month and is up 6.7 percent for the
year. When you talk to Americans, not policymakers.
[10:25:00]
When you talk about inflation to them, they talk about food, fuel, utilities, education and health care.
That's their market basket, right?
So there is a real sense that there's an affordability challenge here for most American households. And that was on display in the report.
Now I want to caution everybody, don't overreact to this particular report. We're still working through the distortions introduced by the government
shutdown and some methodological quirks of the Bureau of Labor Statistics in the way they're estimating the cost of housing.
We won't really get a clean report -- get this -- until April or May of this year.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(MUSIC PLAYING)
HILL (voice-over): Let's get you up to speed on some of the other stories on our radar right now.
A high-stakes trial is now underway to determine whether French far right leader Marine Le Pen can run for president in 2027. Le Pen is appealing a
ruling that barred her from holding elected office for five years following a conviction for misusing European Parliament funds.
In Ukraine, at least four people are dead, six are injured, after a postal service building in Kharkiv was struck overnight by Russian attacks.
Meantime, Kyiv is once again without power amidst below freezing temperatures following a Russian missile and drone assault.
The BBC is seeking to have Donald Trump's $10 billion lawsuit dismissed. In a filing late Monday, the broadcaster argued the court in Florida actually
lacks jurisdiction in this case because the BBC didn't broadcast in Florida, also noting the U.S. president could not prove damages because he
was reelected after the segment aired.
Trump says the BBC defamed him by splicing together parts of a speech.
Still ahead this hour, a new report, shining light on the thousands of civilian deaths in Ukraine in what has become the deadliest year since the
first year of Russia's full-scale war. Those details ahead.
(MUSIC PLAYING)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(MUSIC PLAYING)
HILL: Thanks for staying with us here on CONNECT THE WORLD. I'm Erica Hill, joining you from New York. Here are your headlines.
(MUSIC PLAYING)
HILL (voice-over): A U.S.-based rights group now says security forces have killed more than 1,800 people in Iran. In now the third week of anti-
government protests. That number significantly higher than what had been previously repeated -- reported, rather. CNN cannot independently confirm
the casualty figures.
Residents in Tehran who spoke with CNN did report a quieter night on the streets of the capital.
In Washington, on Capitol Hill this hour, former U.S. president Bill Clinton says he will not testify before the House Oversight Committee in
the ongoing Jeffrey Epstein investigation.
Lawyers representing Mr. Clinton and former secretary of state Hillary Clinton sending a letter to the committee's chair today to say they will
not be appearing for the in-person deposition scheduled for this week.
They had asked to respond to questions in writing. The letter calls the subpoenas invalid and legally unenforceable. The committee has threatened
to hold the Clintons in contempt of Congress if they fail to show.
[10:30:00]
U.S. inflation holding steady. In December, consumer prices, though rising 2.7 percent annually last month and that closes out a year that saw slight
progress on inflation. Donald Trump, however, continuing his feud with the Fed over interest rate cuts.
Posting just a short time ago, the Fed should, quote, "cut interest rates meaningfully."
The U.S. president on Monday also said the United States is immediately imposing a new 25 percent tariff on any countries doing business with Iran.
It's important to note there has been little clarification on how these tariffs might be implemented or what exactly qualifies as doing business
with the country.
China, though, is a major trading partner of both Iran and the U.S. The measure threatens to reopen the trade rift between the world's largest
economies. U.S. allies India, the UAE and Turkiye have also, of course, have major trade relationships with Iran.
For a closer look at how NATO member Turkiye is viewing these events, which are unfolding in an at the moment, I want to bring in Mustafa Caner, who is
an assistant professor at the Middle East Institute of Sakarya University in Turkiye.
Mustafa, it's good to have you with us this hour. We showed the map. There are, of course, a little over 300 miles of border that is shared by the two
countries.
When we look at how Turkiye is responding, you have the foreign minister saying, you know, they don't expect the Iranian government to collapse,
going on to say, quote, "I'm sure the regime will get it in terms of the strong message that is being sent by protesters."
Is there really a sense that the regime is listening to protesters in this moment?
MUSTAFA CANER, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, MIDDLE EAST INSTITUTE OF SAKARYA UNIVERSITY: I think there is a, you know, really violent unfolding in Iran
right now. And we cannot have you know, an info coming from the ground due to internet disruptions. We don't have healthy info.
However, I think, foreign minister Hakan Fidan was saying, was referring to the security and administrative capacity of the Iranian regime.
And due to the fact that Iran is a very, you know, big country with 90 million people living in it and based on the progress -- sorry; the
developments on the ground, I think he is predicting that the regime will not be changed by these protests.
And also, he was referring to the, you know, a strong nature of relations between Turkiye and Iran and how important for Turkiye that Iran will be
one piece and, you know, not fragmented and not divided.
Because as you know, Turkiye and Iran are, you know, two states that have been neighbors for very long time. They share centuries-old relations. They
share a very, you know, long border. And, of course, they fought wars for hundreds of years but they also lived in peace for hundreds of years.
Their borders remained largely unchanged for about 400 years. So we know that these two powers are engaged in, you know, rivalry and competition in
many areas in Syria, in Iraq, partly in Lebanon and on other sides in the region.
However, they are also known for being able to work together at critical moments. And they also are in cooperation on the areas such as energy
trade, secure border security and other regional issues related to security of the region.
So they both respect their territorial integrity and national security. I think the foreign minister was referring to the possible negative outcomes
from that situation in Iran for Turkiye.
HILL: Right.
So to your point, it is it is understandable, right, why Turkiye would be so concerned about instability in Iran. Why there is also this concern
about taking up a position that Iran may interpret as being too aligned with Israel and/or the United States.
To that point, then, is -- I'm so sorry. I'm going to have to leave it there, Mustafa. I'm just being told that we need to go to the White House
for some comments from president Trump.
(JOINED IN PROGRESS)
TRUMP: -- the big speech. And I can only say that the country is doing well. You saw my statement on Iran. You saw my statement on Minnesota -- on
Minnesota. We have taken out killers, rapists, drug dealers, people from mental institutions that came in illegally. All of them, most of them came
in illegally.
[10:35:00]
They are from other countries. They came in under the Biden ridiculous open border policy. And we've gotten a lot of them out. We just had numbers from
Chicago, where Chicago crime has gone down pretty good. It could go down 100 percent virtually but we're fighting with that governor who is so
incompetent.
But as you know, we took out a lot of killers, murderers, drug dealers, drug addicts, mental institution people and people from jails. We took them
out of Chicago. So Chicago has got much better numbers now than it had a few months ago. We will get no credit for it but these are minor details.
Crime in Washington, D.C., is almost nonexistent. It's a safe place so people can come bring their families. They can send their son and daughter
to look at Lincoln, Washington, Jefferson or whatever they want to look at. But it's almost nonexistent. We're very proud of that.
Memphis is making tremendous strides and so is New Orleans. We have a whole group of people. And crime in New Orleans is down about 65 percent. We've
only been there for three weeks. So it's really amazing what's happening throughout the country. The crime numbers are among the best numbers we've
ever had.
QUESTION: Are you calling an investigation to undermine confidence in the Fed?
TRUMP: Well, he's billions of dollars over budget. So he either is incompetent or he's crooked. I don't know what he is. But he does --
certainly he doesn't do a very good job.
QUESTION: Are you committed to -- are you committed to mass deportations among all this bad PR that we've seen and attacks that we've seen on ICE.
TRUMP: We're getting rid of a lot of people that are criminals that shouldn't be in our country. They came in through Biden's open borders and
we're getting them out of our country. That's why our crime numbers are so good. We have record low crime numbers.
Thank you.
HILL: So some comments there from president Trump. You see he's about to board Marine One. There he is on his way at this hour to Michigan where he
is set to make a speech on the economy. But making some comments to reporters just before boarding Marine One there before he makes his way.
We'll continue with more from those comments and much more ahead here on CONNECT THE WORLD. Stay with us to fit in a quick break.
(MUSIC PLAYING)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(MUSIC PLAYING)
HILL: A grim insight into the human cost of the war in Ukraine, one that stretches far beyond the front lines. A new U.N. report says more than
2,500 Ukrainian civilians were killed in 2025. That makes it the deadliest year in Russia's invasion and war since 2022.
More than a third of the civilians killed or injured were in areas far from the battlefield. Clare Sebastian has more on these chilling new numbers for
us.
[10:40:03]
So this increase in civilian casualties, is this part of a broader Russian strategy that we know of or, I mean, what does it tell us about the
situation?
CLARE SEBASTIAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, look, I think it's particularly bleak, Erica, that this comes in a year where the Trump administration had
promised that they would be able to end the war. And if anything, I think this data shows that it got worse.
We can show you a graphic showing the increase over the past few years. This is not the deadliest year -- or 2025 was not the deadliest year of the
war so far, the full-scale war, but it was the deadliest year since 2022, where, of course, the initial Russian advance caused very high civilian
casualties.
We saw last year 31 percent higher casualties than in 2024 and a full 70 percent higher than in 2023.
So why is this?
Well, I think you can split it into two categories. Most of the casualties did come in areas near the front line, about 63 percent of those.
Interestingly, within that 63 percent, about 45 percent of that or a little over 45 percent were those over 60.
So I think this reflects Russia's increasing push for territory last year and the fact that many people, in particular in that older category, had
not wanted to leave their homes; 26 percent of the casualties were from short-range drones. That's 120 percent more than we saw in 2024.
And I think that reflects the kind of weaponry being used in those areas near the front lines.
But it's not just near the front lines, of course, the rest of the casualties came in areas far beyond, many of them in urban centers, where
we saw stepped up aerial attacks, this attritional strategy from Russia trying to break the resolve of the Ukrainian people.
Really also stepping up last year, 35 percent of casualties came from long- range weapons, things like missiles and, of course, the attack drones that we see being used on a very regular basis. So that's breaking down the data
there.
But I think what's critical, I think, to try to understand from this is the context around the efforts by the Trump administration to end the war.
Because I think this does reveal some of the risks in the strategy of engaging with Moscow, of not trying to enforce a ceasefire, of not stepping
up in a sustained way, the pressure on the Russian economy, because it has, I think -- data like this does reveal reduced the incentive for Moscow to
compromise.
And I certainly think we are going to hear, as we see these aerial attacks and the pressure on the front lines increase going into this new year, we
are going to hear more calls both from Ukraine and in particular also from Europe, to step up the pressure on Moscow.
Really using evidence like this to show that engagement with Russia really hasn't worked in terms of bringing peace any closer. Erica.
HILL: No, it seems to have had the exact opposite effect, actually, Clare. And the way in the way that you -- that you lay it out.
Is there a sense, too, that this will have any impact on the way that perhaps the U.S. administration approaches these conversations moving
forward?
I would think a number of European leaders certainly taking this very seriously.
SEBASTIAN: Yes, I think on its own, this data in itself isn't necessarily expected to move the needle. But certainly we are seeing signs potentially
from the U.S. that they may be considering further pressure.
Senator Lindsey Graham saying that Trump has greenlit his sanctioning Russia act, which would give the president pretty broad powers to inflict
secondary tariffs, secondary sanctions on customers of Russian energy and other products.
It's not exactly clear when or how that's going to go to a vote on Capitol Hill. And, of course, with everything else going on in the world, with
what's happening in Iran and Venezuela, the Russia-Ukraine topic has shifted slightly down the White House priority list.
But I certainly think this is going to be used by Ukraine, as I said, and by its European allies as further evidence that pressure on Russia should
be the main course of action going into this year.
HILL: All right, Clare, really appreciate it. Thank you.
Well, this hour, the U.S. Supreme Court is hearing the issue of transgender athletes when it comes to playing in girls and women's sports teams.
Justices are hearing challenges to laws in Idaho and West Virginia. Those laws ban transgender athletes from female competition. Now lower courts
have ruled separately that the bans violate the Constitution's equal protection clause and the amount to discrimination on the basis of sex.
Joining me now to discuss Corey Brettschneider. He's a professor of political science at Brown University.
Corey, there is so much attention on these cases. Let's just pull out, little 30,000-foot view, if we can, for a moment.
What are the legal questions here that the U.S. Supreme Court will have to decide?
PROF. COREY BRETTSCHNEIDER, POLITICAL SCIENCE, BROWN UNIVERSITY: Well, the question is whether or not, under the United States Constitution and, in
particular, one of its most important parts, the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment, as well as a law that's at issue here, too, passed by
Congress, Title IX.
Whether or not under those two sources of law there are protections of civil rights for transgender people. And the question in particular is
whether or not this transgender sports ban is a violation of the students' rights, the transgender students rights, who are -- who are affected by it.
And the court has had two ways of thinking about this.
[10:45:00]
One in its Bostock case, where it really talked about the idea that, when there's a ban on sex discrimination, it looks like that also bans
transgender discrimination, because, after all, what is transgender discrimination?
It's a discrimination based on sex. That's the argument of the court in the Bostock case.
And then more recently, the court had a case in which they considered bans on medical procedures for transgender children. And there the court said,
no, there are (INAUDIBLE) but seem to say that there's -- that we have to defer to states when it comes to their opinions about biological
difference.
So you have these two parts to the way that the courts thought about it. And right sandwiched between them is this issue here.
HILL: Yes. And that Bostock decision from 2020, a lot of backlash in the wake of that. Depending on what the court ultimately rules, this could have
a wide-ranging impact across the United States, especially on the -- on the state level.
BRETTSCHNEIDER: Yes. And one thing that's very interesting about that Bostock case and what makes it complicated for people to try to predict
what's going to happen here is you didn't get that usual liberal- conservative split that that we usually assume with the Supreme Court. And in fact, Justice Gorsuch wrote the opinion for the court outlining why sex
discrimination is gender-based discrimination.
That caused a lot of backlash from conservatives who thought, oh, I thought this was a conservative. What Justice Gorsuch is trying to do there and
what might be an issue here is show that he really cares about the text of the Constitution, rather than an ideology.
HILL: Is there a concern that you have seen about what or who else could be targeted, if in fact, the Supreme Court rules against these transgender
athletes?
BRETTSCHNEIDER: Well, I think when it comes to the question of civil rights, there's been just such pushback by this court. And for every step
forward, the worry is there have been two steps back.
So there's no question that when it comes to the question of civil rights, Bostock, that case that we mentioned, Gorsuch case, seemed to be a step
forward. But in this more recent case, the court seems to be abandoning that commitment to transgender civil rights in other areas.
You know, you heard president Trump outright endorse white supremacy in an interview with "The New York Times."
And is the court going to push back on any white supremacist policies by the United States?
I would hope so. But increasingly it seems to be abandoning a lot of those commitments that, even the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which Trump seemed to
disagree with.
HILL: Yes, certainly, based on that interview, as you point out, with "The New York Times," Corey, really appreciate it. Thank you
BRETTSCHNEIDER: My pleasure.
HILL: Still ahead here on CONNECT THE WORLD. Just what's next for AI generated voice assistant Alexa as Amazon battles to be number one in the
market. The AI wars really heating up. That's ahead
(MUSIC PLAYING)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(MUSIC PLAYING)
HILL: Paramount is once again ramping up its push to purchase CNN's parent company, Warner Bros. Discovery. Its latest move includes a lawsuit as
Paramount attempts a hostile takeover of the entertainment company. Here's more from CNN chief media analyst Brian Stelter.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BRIAN STELTER, CNN CHIEF MEDIA ANALYST: Hey, there. Yes, Paramount's checking all the boxes, taking the next steps in its months-long pursuit of
Warner Bros. Discovery, CNN's parent company.
On Monday, Paramount filed a lawsuit in Delaware, a frequent venue for corporate disputes and foreshadowed a proxy fight over control of the WBD
board.
[10:50:04]
Right now, Paramount's mounting a hostile takeover bid for all of WBD, including CNN and other channels.
Meantime, there's already a deal on the table between WBD and Netflix to take control of the HBO streaming library, the HBO Max streaming service
and the Warner Bros. movie studio. Netflix says that deal is moving forward, WBD says the same thing but Paramount is trying several different
ways to take control of WBD.
The number one plan right now is what's known as a tender offer, where Paramount's trying to buy up shareholders' shares of WBD for $30 per share.
In this lawsuit filed on Monday, Paramount is seeking more information about how WBD valued the assets, including CNN and other channels, before
going ahead and agreeing to the deal with Netflix and rebuffing Paramount's competing offer.
Here's part of what Ellison wrote in his letter to shareholders. "We are surprised by the lack of transparency on WBD's part regarding basic
financial matters." It just doesn't add up, Ellison said, much like the math on how WBD continues to favor taking less than our $30 per share all-
cash offer for its shareholders.
Indeed, Netflix's offer for HBO and Warner Bros., it's closer to $28 a share, a little bit less. However, the idea from WBD's board is that CNN
and other cable channels are going to be a part of a new publicly traded company called Discovery Global that has considerable value. And if you add
it all up together, then that makes the Netflix deal superior.
That's what we've been hearing from the WBD board, again, in a statement on Monday.
Here's what the company said on Monday afternoon. "Despite six weeks and just as many press releases from Paramount Skydance, it is yet to raise the
price or address the numerous and obvious deficiencies of its offer.
"Instead, Paramount is seeking to distract with a meritless lawsuit and a tax on a board that has delivered an unprecedented amount of shareholder
value."
Major WBD shareholders have been split over Paramount with some siding with the Netflix deal that's already on the table and signed and with others
suggesting the Paramount bid is superior. So this corporate tug-of-war is going to continue probably for months to come -- Brian Stelter, CNN.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
HILL: Let's take a closer look now at the battle for AI dominance and how it just may reshape your online experience in the near future.
Amazon now upping its game against rival ChatGPT. It doesn't want voice assistant Alexa to just remember your preferences; it wants Alexa to really
know you. That is apparently the driving philosophy behind the plan for Alexa Plus.
The new website launched last week. It echoes web browsers that OpenAI and the AI startup Perplexity created to make their chatbots integral in the
way the web is used. Joining us now CNN business tech editor Lisa Eadicicco.
Lisa, it's good to have you this morning. So how exactly is Amazon upping its game with Alexa or how is this going to work?
LISA EADICICCO, CNN BUSINESS TECH EDITOR: So I spoke with a couple of Amazon executives last week at the CES tech conference in Las Vegas, who
kind of laid this out. And really, what it boils down to is, like you mentioned, this idea of Alexa getting to know you better and then
incorporating that context into its answers.
And that's really how Amazon wants to make Alexa stand out, kind of building on the vision of Alexa Plus, the new version of Alexa that it
announced last year, that it now just launched a web version of last week.
And that's part of this strategy, is putting Alexa in more places, like on the web, for example, which could be really important for kind of boosting
the way people use Alexa outside of the traditional ways.
The Alexa that we've known for maybe the last 10 years, that people use to set alarms, set timers, listen to music. I think part of this that's going
to be crucial to Amazon is getting people to think about the way that they use Alexa in a different manner.
And I think bringing her onto the web and letting users interact with her online and then have that context carry over to other devices is going to
be a big part of that. Another part of that is also just kind of the new ways Alexa might show up in the future.
And Amazon executives did tell me that a company that they acquired called B last year, which is a wristband, that, when you press a button, can
record your conversations and what's happening around you. That device might also play a role in where Alexa goes in the future as well.
HILL: So that would be choosing for Alexa to listen to me rather than just feeling like Alexa is always listening, if I were to push that button on
the B?
EADICICCO: Yes, exactly.
HILL: Real quickly, I know you're just back from CES. There are a lot of concerns and questions about the impact on the labor market and jobs with
this rise in AI and AI doing all these jobs.
How much of that was a concern?
EADICICCO: So I think that is a looming concern that we've seen throughout the past year. There wasn't as much chatter about that at CES, because that
does tend to be a little bit more focused on consumer products specifically and some bigger topics like sustainability and things like that.
But based on experts that we've spoken to in the past, it does kind of seem like this year we're going to get a bigger window into how AI is impacting
work, whether that's through new features like Anthropic, for example, just yesterday announced a new agent meant for general purpose productivity, not
just coding.
[10:55:03]
So that's a big deal.
Experts we've spoken to expect skills that are required in jobs to change and that we might also get more data on how AI is impacting jobs. So I do
think this is going to be a slow transition.
And it's something that we're not going to get an answer to right away but that will gradually change over time. And that's what we're going to be
looking to this year.
HILL: Yes, absolutely. Lisa, appreciate it. Thank you.
EADICICCO: Thank you.
(MUSIC PLAYING)
HILL: And before we let you go this hour, I just want to update you on the breaking news that we've been following. President Trump ruling out
diplomacy with Iran for now.
Posting on social media a short time ago, quote, "Iranian patriots, keep protesting. Help is on the way."
He also said that he had canceled all meetings with Iranian officials until the crackdown ends. All of this as a U.S.-based human rights group, says
now more than 1,800 people they believe have been killed in these anti- government protests.
We'll continue to follow those developments and many more right here. Stay with us on CNN. "ONE WORLD" is up next.
END
