Return to Transcripts main page

Inside Politics

Trump Says: "I Won't Use Force" To Acquire Greenland; Trump: Denmark Is "Ungrateful" For Not Turning Over Greenland; Justices Signal Deep Skepticism Of Trump Effort To Remove Fed Gov.; Trump Calls On Congress To Cap Credit Card Interest Rate At 10 Percent. Aired 12- 12:30p ET

Aired January 21, 2026 - 12:00   ET

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

[12:00:00]

DANA BASH, CNN HOST, INSIDE POLITICS: Backing down, but not backing off. President Trump says, he won't use force to take Greenland, but he is still demanding Denmark hands it over.

I'm Dana Bash. Let's go behind the headlines at Inside Politics.

We start in Davos, Switzerland, where global nerves are easing slightly after President Trump appeared to take military action to take over Greenland off the table.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: We probably won't get anything unless I decide to use excessive strength and force where we would be, frankly, unstoppable, but I won't do that. OK. Now everyone is saying, oh, good. That's probably the biggest statement I made, because people thought I would use force, but I don't have to use force. I don't want to use force. I won't use force.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BASH: But he made clear his ultimate goal has not changed.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: After the war, we gave Greenland back to Denmark. How stupid were we to do that, but we did it, but we gave it back. But how ungrateful are they now? And all we're asking for is to get Greenland, including right title and ownership, because you need the ownership to defend it. You can't defend it on a lease. Number one, legally, it's not defensible that way, totally. And number two, psychologically.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BASH: I'm joined now by a terrific group of reporters. Jeff Zeleny, you and I were sitting yesterday watching the president give a, what, almost two hour, whatever that was in the White House briefing room. And now here he is giving a speech that -- because it is in Davos, which is the World Economic Forum, was slated initially to be about that issue, the economy, which is what Americans care the most about, specifically their wallets. And he did talk about some economic issues, but of course, that was totally overshadowed by his insistence on the U.S. still wanting Greenland.

JEFF ZELENY, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: It was and not surprising to anyone, but frustrating to people at the White House and some Republicans who want him to talk about affordability, who want him to talk about the economy. And that's what White House advisers were saying he would do going into the speech, give much more of an economic speech. I don't think any of us actually believed it. I mean the people, all of us. We've watched Donald Trump for a long time, and we know that he doesn't often follow the script.

But I think what was so interesting about it was, it was different than any speech he's given it to Davos before. I recall being there with him early on, I think 2018, and people were just getting to know him. Now they know him very well.

What he didn't say, though, was anything negative about NATO. I mean, I remember in his first term, he was threatening to pull out every time he was in Europe. He was humiliating some of our allies and threatening to pull out. He did not threaten to pull out. He was clearly also looking for an off ramp for military engagement. He knows that that is not popular here at home. He reads the polls probably more than we do, and his advisers do, and that is something that there is no question. It is an 80-20 issue.

So, I thought that was interesting. But I think the bigger takeaway, when you watch that, I mean, it's just a remarkable moment that America can no longer be counted on by our Western allies. I mean, as Mark Carney, the prime minister of Canada, said yesterday, we were seeing a rupture here in the transatlantic alliance, and that was so striking to hear him say that, but to watch the president effectively do that.

BASH: He definitely was looking for an off ramp on everything that he has been saying about potential military action. He -- no question from my reporting. I'm sure you're hearing similar that he was told privately, find an off ramp, something else. There's no question was in his mind, or certainly something he was watching. And that's the markets.

[12:05:00]

Phil, yesterday, the markets closed down 870 points as the threats got bigger from the president as he has posted overnight the night before, some text messages from world leaders and he put up memes about Greenland. Now it is bouncing back a bit. Certainly, it has not recovered fully from what happened yesterday, but the markets like what the president said today. And again, this is something that he watches very closely.

PHIL MATTINGLY, CNN ANCHOR & CHIEF DOMESTIC CORRESPONDENT: Yeah. I mean, look, no unprovoked, armed conflict, completely rupturing the core pillar of the Western alliance over the course of the last eight decades. It is something market participants probably don't frown on general. You know, was it my mistake yesterday? I have to be very candid, it was, when he -- when they announced, he was going to come out to talk in the press briefing room. I thought, well, he's looking at markets. Maybe he's going to try and talk markets back to reality. Maybe he wanted to do the opposite, right? And I think market went from like 820 to 870 down and had no intention of moving that the other way. Clearly, he did this time around.

And I think you could see, as he was saying, I'm not going to use force. He understood that everybody in the room wanted to hear that. That was a positive message. I think what's fascinating about it, though, is market reaction to a speech that still just absolutely leveled nothing but criticism toward Europe. Maybe didn't say, I want to pull out a NATO but just talked about how small he views every country that has been an ally of the United States over the past, again, eight decades.

And why I think it's important is because it's how he really feels. And I think we all know this from talking to people around him, from talking to a lot of his advisers. This is a long-held view. This is a long-standing view. This is a president who feels emboldened now more than ever and is just telling people what he actually thinks in a way that certainly disrupts the norms, but is a way that European leaders, I think, that I've talked to in Davos, at least, diplomats I've talked to in Davos have made clear, we get it. This is a different moment. This is a crisis meeting in Davos. This is not an economic forum.

JASMINE WRIGHT, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, NOTUS: Yeah. I think, one, we just have to note again that Trump is never the first one to try to take down the temperature, right? He's never the first one to try to de-escalate the moment. When we're talking about anything that's happened in the last 12 months, and yet, he is here particularly, I think, because of the markets.

But it was such a profound moment in looking into his psyche, in the way that he views foreign policy because it is just this transactional nature in which he is saying, America has done this for you. Now you need to do this for us. America has given this to you. Now you need to give this to us. America is essentially propping up your nations in a way that no other country can, and so you need to acquiesce to our demands.

And I think that you can take that through line through domestic policies that he's talked about here in the U.S., but fundamentally, he's laying it out in barra language about how he views the U.S.'s relationship to all of these other countries that, of course, have aided us in various different ways.

And so, I think that you're seeing the president really put down a marker here. And even though he's saying he will use force, he's saying, I am going to use these other leveraging and negotiating tactics in ways that other countries will not.

BASH: Yeah. And you're right that he didn't criticize NATO, as he has done in the past. But Lauren, he -- as he has said, I think, over the past two or three days, he is just flat wrong about what NATO has and hasn't done. Listen to what he said about NATO. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: I just say this NATO has treated the United States of America very unfairly. We never asked for anything. We never got anything.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BASH: After 9/11, it was the only time that the Article 5, part of NATO was invoked, and that is because the United States of America was attacked on 9/11. And as part of the NATO forces that went in to fight Afghanistan because the United States of America was attacked Danish service people. There were 9500 deployed after 9/11, 43 deaths. And because it's a very small country that's the highest per capita death rate of all of the NATO allies.

LAUREN FOX, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: I think one of the most fascinating things about Donald Trump is that he doesn't understand when to take the victory lap. I mean, when you think about NATO and what he has been able to do in order to get NATO countries to donate more to the conflict in Ukraine and what's happening there.

He could have used this opportunity to talk a lot more about that, and instead, what he does is continues to double down, criticize and alienate the United States from this alliance that has been really important to the country.

[12:10:00]

I will say this morning on Capitol Hill, it felt like a lot of Republicans we're breathing a little bit of a sigh of relief, given what he said on Greenland today, because that has obviously been a really difficult tap dance for so many members who on the one hand, are letting him, you know, have a lot more free reign when it comes to the world stage, but still have some red lines that they really don't want the president to cross.

BASH: There's just a couple of moments that I do want to make a point of showing. One is, we can play the -- imagine if Biden did this game on this one. The president referred to Greenland as Iceland multiple times. Let's watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: I'm helping Europe. I'm helping NATO. And until the last few days, when I told them about Iceland, they loved me. They called me daddy, right, last time. With all of the money we expend, with all of the blood, sweat and tears, I don't know that they'd be there for us. They're not there for us on Iceland, that I can tell you. I mean, our stock market took the first dip yesterday because of Iceland. So, Iceland's already cost us a lot of money.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BASH: Now, Greenland is icy and Iceland is green. And so, maybe that's part of why the president is confused and that was intentional.

ZELENY: I don't think so. I mean, the reality here is --

BASH: No, I don't, his intentional that he got screwed up.

ZELENY: Right.

BASH: But, I mean, initially when they were named.

ZELENY: For sure. I mean that is the naming of it, without a doubt. But President Trump benefits every day from following Joe Biden office. But we should point out many similarities in his speeches. And he did say he's the oldest -- one of the oldest people in the room now. He said, I used to be one of the youngest. He's obviously one of the oldest.

But the biggest takeaway, it was not, I mean, he can misspeak, that's fine. But what was very clearly understood in the room that the world does not rely on the U.S. anymore, and that is a very dangerous and different place to be.

MATTINGLY: You know, the solution to the Iceland, Greenland confusion, right, Mighty Ducks.

BASH: Mighty Ducks or Mighty Ducks 2?

MATTINGLY: The one where they play against the world.

BASH: OK.

MATTINGLY: It's a big thing.

BASH: OK. Emilio Estevez, if you're watching, get on that.

MATTINGLY: You'll never confuse it again.

BASH: The Supreme Court is signaling deep skepticism over President Trump's argument that he can fire Fed governors that he just doesn't like. Those arguments just wrapped up. And we're going to look at what's at stake when they finally decide. And it's never too early. We have exclusive new reporting on the 2028 presidential field and whether Senator Mark Kelly will join it.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:15:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BASH: The Trump administration is squaring off against Fed Governor Lisa Cook at the Supreme Court today over President Trump's effort to fire Cook. Former federal Fed governors rather of both parties say independence of American monetary policy itself is at stake. The conservatives on the court seemed skeptical about President Trump's argument that he's allowed to fire her for cause and that only he can decide what for cause means.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) BRETT KAVANAUGH, SUPREME COURT JUSTICE (voiceover): Your position that there's no judicial review, no process required, no remedy available, very low bar for cause that the president alone determines, and that would weaken if not shatter the independence of the Federal Reserve that we just discussed.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BASH: And my smart panel is back. Phil Mattingly, I know you listen to most, if not all, of the arguments. I feel like when you have lost Brett Kavanaugh as a Republican president, you've kind of lost likely.

MATTINGLY: Yeah. I'll one up you and say when you've lost Samuel Alito, Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett and Justice Gorsuch. All of whom have very skeptical questions of the Solicitor General John Sauer. Now, let's be very clear, that doesn't necessarily mean they're going to rule one way or another.

But having listened to a number of Supreme Court arguments this year, the Trump administration has kept a lot of us busy on that front. It was by far, I think, the most skeptical I've heard a large group of the conservative majority repeatedly over the course of the entire argument.

And look, let's be clear here. This is not just an argument about whether or not the president can remove somebody. This is an extraordinary court case with the highest stakes as the president continues his verbal and also legal assault on the Federal Reserve that we've seen over the course of pretty much the entirety of his first term.

I think the critical thing to keep in mind here, as we picked up the skepticism of the justices is at the heart of this is a an allegation of mortgage fraud. The justices themselves pointed out the actual documents that underpin that allegation are not even in the case file here. It's just tweets from Bill Pulte, that have screenshots of some of those.

And much of the discussion was not at all about the allegations or whether that hit the for cause threshold, but instead process, procedure, and why the administration wanted to move so quickly on this, none of which seemed to be good signs for the administration. And a lot of questions that I think are coming out of it, the administration will still have to answer.

BASH: And just on the underlying allegation by the administration, which is, I didn't actually realize that none of this is in this Supreme Court filing --

MATTINGLY: I mean, to be fair --

BASH: -- because it's understood.

MATTINGLY: No, no, I should be very sarcastic when I say screenshots of tweets are totally what should underpin a case in front of the Supreme Court. [12:20:00]

BASH: But let me just kind of catch people up in case they are not up to speed on Bill Pulte and who he is and how he's trying to find ways to take down the president's political enemies via mortgage fraud. He did so, at least he referred her for prosecution August 20. The president sent a letter five days later, saying that, he is going to fire Lisa Cook for cause.

Based on that, she sued to keep her job three days later. Then a federal district court granted an injunct -- an injunction preventing her from being fired. Then there was a report from Reuters that cast doubt on Pulte's fraud claims to begin with. And then October 1, is when the Supreme Court decided to take up the case, which they heard today.

FOX: Yeah. And the process piece of this was something that the justices really dug into, including the fact that was she given appropriate notice, given the fact that Donald Trump just tweeted about the fact he intended to fire her. Was that really substantial enough in order to move forward with this process?

And again, like you noted, they were not really getting into the underlying issues of the mortgage spot are questioning the cause piece of this. This was really a process piece. And if you have watched Supreme Court fights in the past, you have to really cross your t's and dot your i's in the process here before you even get to the underlying issues of this case.

BASH: And just a bit of analysis from our colleague Bryan Mena today, and he wrote. If the court green-lights Cook's ouster, it would set a pre -- excuse me, a precedent that Trump and any future president could take advantage of in order to reshape the board and force lower interest rates, even when they are not warranted by economic reality.

ZELENY: And I think three of the most important words and there are any future president. And that clearly is on the minds of the conservative justices that Phil was talking about here. The Donald Trump era will end at some point, but this will go on, and this is a decision that will last beyond that, and it is so important to the independence of the Federal Reserve.

And I think that this is something that a fight the president picked early on that he may live to regret overall in the Federal Reserve because it has absolutely, sort of changed his ability to shape it. His fight with Jerome Powell over and over again, you know, in the criminal charges or the investigation, it probably has hampered his ability to change the Federal Reserve like he otherwise would have been able to, had he just left the process alone.

WRIGHT: And I think Bill Pulte's role in this can't kind of be under talked about, because obviously he is the person who looks over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. But he -- sources tell me, is at the White House all of the time, kind of going in and talking to the president about various different matters. We know that he's not just behind this Lisa Cook, you know, sort of indictment on her, or at least the beginning parts of that, but he's done it to other officials that he believes that should be Fani Willis, that should be kind of under investigation, and the president has vocalized that he wants to see under investigation.

And it's, you know, kind of to the annoyance of some White House officials. Some White House officials like the idea that they're being more aggressive and that he is kind of behind this, but he's fundamentally a part of all of these efforts to bring folks up on these mortgages' charges. Not only that, he's a member of Mar-a-Lago, so he can go, talk to the president in Florida.

And so, I think that you see him kind of move in these shadow ways. And a lot of times we see somebody come under indictment or investigation, and then we learn just a few weeks later that it was Bill Pulte. They're putting their name (inaudible)

BASH: Yeah. Bill Pulte, who, as you said, is the FIFA FHFA chair, and so his job is to be in charge of Fannie and Freddie. He is very well aware of who the president wants to either send a message to or maybe even just full on prosecute. And so, he's finding ways to do so in his narrow domain.

WRIGHT: In a way that other people in the administration just aren't yet.

BASH: All right. President Trump wants to cap credit cards -- excuse me, cap credit card rates. Wall Street's biggest banker says that would be an economic disaster. What would it mean for consumers? That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:25:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BASH: Among President Trump's targets at Davos' credit card companies. The president's original deadline for companies to cap interest rates to 10 percent came and went. No action yet, but as the president chases the affordability conundrum, Congress now has a task.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: I'm asking Congress to cap credit card interest rates at 10 percent for one year. And this will help millions of Americans save for a home. They have no idea they're paying 28 percent. They go out there a little late in their payment, and they end up losing their house.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BASH: American households are holding record levels of credit card debt. The latest data show $1.23 trillion in outstanding balances. CNN's Vanessa Yurkevich joins us live. So, Vanessa, we're going to obviously have to see if Congress votes. In the meantime, the banks have a lot to say about this.

VANESSA YURKEVICH, CNN BUSINESS AND POLITICS CORRESPONDENT: They certainly do. Listen, a one-year cap on credit card interest rates at 10 percent, sounds great, especially when you compare it to the average interest rate for credit cards, which is 19.62 percent according to bank rate.