Return to Transcripts main page

One World with Zain Asher

CNN International: Ukraine's Allies Meet For A "Coalition Of The Willing" Summit; European Leaders Vow Not To Lift Sanctions On Russia; Trump Defends Hegseth Amid Fallout From Intel Breach. Aired 11a-12p ET

Aired March 27, 2025 - 11:00   ET

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

[11:00:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BIANNA GOLODRYGA, HOST, "ONE WORLD": Europe holding talks on Ukraine's future with the U.S. noticeably absent. One World starts right now.

Leaders of the so-called "Coalition of the Willing" come together to support Ukraine. But, were any security guarantees provided? We'll have

details. Plus tens of thousands -- 10,000 government jobs being cut at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the man in charge calling it

a, quote, win-win for Americans. And new tariffs from the Trump administration could raise the price Americans pay for a new car by

thousands of dollars.

Hello, everyone. Live from New York, I'm Bianna Golodryga. Zain is off today. You are watching One World.

European leaders have wrapped up a summit in Paris meant to hammer out ways to help Ukraine defend itself against Russia. High on the agenda was the

Black Sea agreement, a U.S.-brokered deal intended to stop fighting in the Black Sea. Now, Russia has said it will only adhere to that agreement if

some sanctions against Moscow are lifted. Now, standing beside Ukrainian President Zelenskyy, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said, now is not

the time to lift sanctions on Russia, something echoed by other European leaders as well as President Zelenskyy.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY, UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT: No lifting any kind of sanctions until Russia will stop this war, and I think more pressure on it, more

packages of sanctions. This is --

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GOLODRYGA: Let's get to our Clare Sebastian, who is following the story from London. And Clare, a clear message of unanimity among European allies

in support of Ukraine, and awkwardly at times deviating from the current U.S. position in some statements.

CLARE SEBASTIAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yeah. I mean, I think that really sort of hung in the air today, Bianna. It's very clear, if you listen to these

European leaders, that they were talking in lockstep on sanctions. We heard it from Keir Starmer, the British Prime Minister, Emmanuel Macron, the

French President, the outgoing German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, President Zelenskyy, over and over again, there will be and there should be no

sanctions relief, and this carries some bite from Europe, because, of course, Europe was heavily involved coordinated with the U.S. in bringing

in the sanctions, or the multiple rounds of sanctions that we've seen throughout the war, and lifting them, in some cases, will require European

approval. SWIFT, for example, the international payment system, is based in Belgium. So, it falls under EU jurisdiction and EU sanctions.

So, I think the bottom line here is that Russia isn't going to get sanctions relief from Europe at this point, which very likely leaves the

Black Sea ceasefire deal still in limbo, and really sort of highlights where the U.S. approach of carrying out talks with Russia and Ukraine,

while sort of freezing out, Europe falls short here.

I think it was also really interesting to listen to the British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who came out of this meeting and said that, look,

while they are making progress, the EU and this "Coalition of the Willing", and making progress to be ready operationally to implement and to police a

ceasefire, should one happen. Equal amount of time was given at this meeting to figuring out how, as a group, they can put more pressure on

Russia to get them to the table, to get them to the point of a ceasefire. So, really, sort of reflecting on what we saw last week, the U.S. track

essentially stalling in the face of Russia -- Russian conditions, Russia essentially saying that they will not bring in a Black Sea ceasefire

without sanctions relief. So, again, that limbo here.

And I think the third point I would want to make is that what you really heard at this meeting is an extra level of urgency around this idea that

they will have to prepare for a future to go it alone, on their security, without the U.S. I think the backdrop to this meeting, the revelations and

the disdain that we saw from the Trump administration on that Signal chat calling Europeans "pathetic freeloaders", is potentially playing into this,

as is the escalation in the trade war that we saw coming in overnight. All of that playing into the calculus for European leaders looking at how they

not only step up support for Ukraine on their own, but also step up their own investment in their own security, and that is all part of the picture

here.

But, of course, hanging in the air is that they are still hoping to coordinate with the U.S. President Macron of France spoke to President

Trump ahead of this. He may well, he said, speak to him again after it. So, they are still trying to show that the transatlantic alliance remains

intact in the face of Russian aggression. Bianna.

GOLODRYGA: All right. Clare Sebastian for us in London. Thank you so much.

Well, faced with growing scandal regarding his top defense and intelligence officials, Donald Trump has fallen back on a tried and true way of brushing

it aside. He is calling it a witch hoax -- a witch hunt and a hoax. Trump defended his Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and other senior officials who

were part of that group chat where attack plans were leaked to a journalist.

[11:05:00]

The President even implied that the app Signal may have been to blame for the security breach.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: I don't know that Signal works. I think Signal could be defective, to be honest with you, and I

think that's what we have to, because you use Signal and we use Signal and everybody uses Signal, but it could be a defective platform, and we're

going to have to find that out.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GOLODRYGA: Our Alex Marquardt is tracking developments in this story. So, really two cases here of the administration trying to deflect and downplay

this, where we do know that the Senate Armed Services Committee co-chairs, Republican Roger Wicker and Democrat Jack Reed, have now officially sent a

letter to the Defense Department Inspector General for an investigation. So, given where the President is on this, will an investigation lead to

anything, Alex?

ALEX MARQUARDT, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Well, it could on Capitol Hill, and remember, Bianna, that the White House has said that

the NSC will undertake a review of what happened as well, but that's essentially the culprits investigating themselves. In terms of bearing

responsibility, the White House has made clear, President Trump has made clear that he believes that Mike Waltz, the National Security Advisor, was

the one who bears responsibility for this, because he was the one who set up the group chat. He was the one who put Jeffrey Goldberg, the reporter,

into the group chat.

But, when you look at the contents of what was written in Signal, it was really Pete Hegseth who put the information in there that is causing the

most trouble, and that is possibly the most disturbing from a national security breach perspective. The last few days, of course, Bianna, we've

had these two back-to-back, rather explosive hearings, first in the Senate Intelligence Committee, then in the House Intelligence Committee. So, to

some extent, the dust is settling around this story, but it is not ending anytime soon.

And in terms of the investigations, we have heard nothing from the FBI, from Kash Patel, in terms of investigating what happened here, but there is

this investigation that is being called for on Capitol Hill in a bipartisan sense. Roger Wicker, the top Republican on the House Armed Services

Committee, along with Jack Reed, the top Democrat, they have now sent this letter to the inspector general, the acting Inspector General at the

Pentagon, calling for him to look into this. I want to read part of this letter that just came out moments ago. They asked the IG for the facts and

circumstances surrounding the Signal chat incident. And then farther down, they asked for an assessment of whether any individuals transferred

classified information, including operational details from classified systems to unclassified systems.

Bianna, of course, Signal is very much an unclassified system. And the main argument that we have heard from the Trump administration, from all these

officials who are involved in this group chat, is that nothing in there was classified. But, when you look at the specifics there, that is very hard to

believe, because there are clearly operational details in there that are extremely sensitive.

Apart from this, but obviously very much a part of this story, there is also going to be hearing in a Washington court at 04:00 p.m. this

afternoon, an advocacy group taking a case against the Trump administration for flouting federal rules at preserving records, particularly when it

comes to this kind of national security conversation. We know that from the screen grabs in this chat that the messages were actually --

GOLODRYGA: Alex, I'm so sorry. I'm going to have to cut you off. President Zelenskyy is now speaking in Paris, and we're going to go to that live.

ZELENSKYY (Interpreted): I would like the whole world to get down to business, and I would like to thank France and President Macron for their

decisiveness since the start of this war in supporting Ukraine and Ukrainians supporting security in Ukraine in the face of challenges related

to Putin's aggression and Russia's aggression.

Yesterday, we had a good bilateral meeting. It was very important for us, for Ukrainians, for me personally. We were preparing for the summit today,

but there was also bilateral element in terms of supporting our armed forces and our civilian population, a new package, almost $2 billion, and

there is air defense artillery and some of the things I'm not going into detail in order not to waste your time, but it's very important.

We also discussed security guarantees. Today, this is one of the main topics of our summit. I would like to thank France and Britain for the

summit, because it is a forum where they are the main accelerators.

[11:10:00]

And based on this platform and this coalition, if you like, we are building future security guarantees for Ukraine, for a peaceful Ukraine. We believe

and we want peace. And today, we discussed important issues. It is important for Ukraine to raise this issue, and all of 31 participants today

confirmed that lifting any sanctions on Russia before the war ends justly is not going to happen. It is an important signal, a united signal from the

countries of Europe, not only the countries of the European Union, but the countries of Europe. It is important.

And number two is new support packages. Again, I'm not going into detail, but they demonstrated and confirmed, some of the countries of Europe

confirmed their vision, and the whole vision in terms of increasing domestic manufacturing in Ukraine and investing into that manufacturing. I

think it is a very rightful step. We agreed that, in the near future, we'll work on the infrastructure behind security guarantees. We will expect some

of our partners -- we'll be waiting for some of our partners, because we need to work on the basis for this in Ukraine. Thank you.

And the Eiffel Tower yesterday showed the whole world what kind of support there is for Ukraine. I am very grateful for showing our national colors

there. Thank you. Thank you France television for your hospitality. You have the first question.

STEPHANIE PEREZ, SENIOR REPORTER, FRANCE TELEVISIONS (Interpreted): Stephanie Perez from France Televisions. Mr. President, Emmanuel Macron

said this morning that it was very unclear about the peace negotiations that are undertaken by the United States. He also thinks that the United

States a feeble ally. Do you share this opinion?

ZELENSKYY (Interpreted): Thank you for your question. I would like more accurate technical translation and louder please from French into

Ukrainian. Otherwise, I can only hear the words Emmanuel Macron, but I'd like to understand the question. Of course, America is important, very

important, and the decisions that America can show and can have influence, real influence over in an effort to end the war, and to influence Putin's

desire to end the war, because he doesn't want to, because he may divide Europe and America. Putin wants to divide them, and the whole Kremlin

machine is working on this and has been working on this for more than one year, to weaken Europe, weaken the European Union, to weaken the United

States, to divide the United States itself within in terms of supporting Ukraine or not supporting Ukraine. That is his desire.

We want America to be stronger. I agree with Emmanuel that we all need, and that's not even a question of wanting to, we all need America to be

stronger vis-a-vis Russia. We want the President of the United States to be stronger in his attitude to the Kremlin master, and it is important to us.

And for this, we need to work. We need to work at the level of the leaders, both diplomats in official and other diplomatic formats, to work with the

White House.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (Interpreted): Thank you. Suspilne TV from Ukraine.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE (Interpreted): Suspilne TV. Mr. President, we've been talking about America. We've heard that a new agreement on rare earths is

being prepared with the United States.

[11:15:00]

Can you reveal the details? Are we more satisfied with the draft, with the version, compared to the one before, and are you going to the States to

sign this agreement?

ZELENSKYY (Interpreted): I'm not going to Washington yet, not planning to travel there yet, because there is -- this issue is not on the agenda. And

we also have many agreements on minerals already. And so, I would like to take a practical attitude to it, not theoretical, when there is a final

version from the United States regarding a new agreement, because these terms keep changing, and I thought we already agreed on a framework

agreement and then a full agreement, but now, I understand the Ukrainian- American teams are working on this, and America is changing the rules and is proposing a full agreement, and a full agreement needs to be carefully

studied, because these are serious agreements that are to be ratified in Parliament.

And before all that, lawyers need to get to work. The lawyers were working on one version of the agreement, then another agreement, then we agreed on

a framework agreement, and now there are new rules. So, we need to be -- to act with moderation, as we always try, without emotion. The lawyers need to

study. If it's reasonable, we will support it, and issues and questions always find their answers. So, it is too early to talk about a version of

an agreement that keeps changing.

But, I don't want the United States to feel that Ukraine is opposed overall, and we've always shown, consistently, positive signals. We are in

favor of cooperation with the United States. We don't want to give any signals to push the United States towards ceasing support for Ukraine or

intelligence sharing. It is important for us to maintain that, and therefore, we are acting constructively every day.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (Interpreted): Thank you. Colleagues, please raise your hands so I can see who wants to ask a question. Inter TV, Ukraine.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE (Interpreted): Inter TV. President Macron said after today's summit that the French-British mission is traveling to Kyiv to

determine what can be done in support of the Ukrainian army. Could you tell us about the details? When is this happening? What are we talking about?

And does this envisage military contingent to be sent? And what are the results of today's meeting? What countries are prepared to do this and to

what extent?

ZELENSKYY (Interpreted): Thank you for your question. President Macron, Prime Minister Starmer, and other leaders and I are now paying a lot of

attention to the infrastructure, as I said, the future infrastructure of security guarantees for Ukraine. An important component of this

infrastructure is our army, its funding, its reinforcement, the Armed Forces of Ukraine. We are working now, and today, this was a joint emphasis

from all countries that Russia cannot dictate the strength of our army, not now, not in the future. They may talk about something within their own

country, but they cannot dictate the rules of defending Ukraine, and it is important for them to have no support in this.

We can see there is no support that they have in Europe, among the majority of European countries. At least those here today, all support the fact that

Ukraine must maintain a strong army that is resisting the Russian invasion today, and it is important for this attitude to be there in the United

States as well. And therefore, the meeting today is giving the signal to the United States and to others.

[11:20:00]

As for the future security guarantees, in addition to our army, this is about a contingent. There are many proposals from the leaders, and there

are more now. There are more countries who are ready in whichever way, some in the air, some with air defense, some with boots on the ground, some at

sea. They are prepared to give security guarantees to Ukraine and not -- and send their contingent, and this is good news that there are more

countries like that.

As for action and the modalities of this contingent, what it is capable of, how to use it and who will lead this, there are many open questions and few

answers. There will be a meeting. As for the Franco-British contingent, well, there will be more joining in, and they will join in to see the

foundation that Ukraine has prepared, what we see this as, what is the numerical strength and the qualitative component of this contingent, and to

look at this more meaningfully.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (Interpreted): Are -- is other British media here?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: UK, from the UK. No?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: US.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: OK. It's even better.

CATHERINE PORTER, INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT, THE NEW YORK TIMES: Hi there. My name is Catherine Porter. I'm with The New York Times. I'm

wondering, you said yesterday in your televised interview with many different public television stations from around Europe that what you were

really hoping to get today was a firmer commitment from this "Coalition of the Willing" in terms of security guarantees. It seems you did not get that

today. Are you disappointed?

ZELENSKYY (Interpreted): I am not disappointed. I did receive things that are important to me. The amount and extent of support, this is high value.

This is our army. And the support today and after the war ends is important. I am very satisfied that today and in future, we and our

partners will invest in the Ukrainian drone manufacturing and electronic warfare manufacturing, manufacturing of air defense and other technological

issues such as missiles, drones and so on. I will go into detail. This is important to me that it happens not only now, but after the war.

Another important signal for me was that we will open platforms to manufacture drones, not only in Ukraine, after the war, and it is important

for us to guarantee the expansion of this technological process, and also important, our sanctions. After everything that has happened in the world

and all the signals we've heard in Saudi Arabia, and from that direction, about the sanctions and the possibility of their lifting very dangerous

signals, today, everybody confirmed that none of our partners present here, at least, is about to lift sanctions. On the contrary, they're talking

about their continuation and new sanctions packages.

As regards to the contingent, I think many leaders have their own vision. We're being honest. Some leaders say we can't forget NATO, and we agree,

because that is the simplest infrastructure, the most understandable, and I will repeat, the cheapest infrastructure. Instead of building a whole new

infrastructure in Ukraine, there is a very clear security infrastructure already built in NATO. But we have what we have, and at the moment, the

NATO issue is not active, but there are leaders that do support this direction. Some leaders say there may be security guarantees similar to

that in other countries, wherever there is, whenever there is an aggression, a number of countries get involved with all their strength, and

I don't want to go into details too early to do that.

But, there is a basis that is based on the core of the Ukrainian army and a contingent represented in Ukraine in the air, at sea, and on the road, on

the battlefield, as they say, and Ukraine, we believe, can propose an algorithm before a dialog, and I think that will happen in the next seven

to 10 days, with the meeting that President Macron has announced.

[11:25:00]

So, we will be discussing, debating very -- in a very friendly way on a platform that will be already prepared. So, we will propose this base

strategy.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (Interpreted): Next question.

GOLODRYGA: All right. We've been listening to a press conference with President Zelenskyy speaking there in Paris at a summit of the "Coalition

of the Willing", some 30 countries gathering. There leaders from 30 countries in Europe, showing their support for Ukraine and its ongoing,

now, a three-year war against Russia.

And I want to bring Clare Sebastian back in. It is interesting what he said here, Clare, saying that he is satisfied with the support from European

allies thus far. This in a question as to whether he was disappointed that he didn't get more specific security guarantees from the Europeans. But, he

was also very blunt in what he is not getting from the Americans, and that is more influence against Russia, specifically the President of the United

States, he said, needs to be stronger when it comes to negotiations and conversations with Vladimir Putin, and also a bit critical of where the

rare earth mineral deal stands at this point, saying there is no trip planned in the foreseeable future to Washington, D.C. What else stood out

to you?

SEBASTIAN: Yeah. That was exactly what stood out to me, Bianna. He was very direct when it comes to talking about the U.S., and frankly, he had been

going into this meeting as well. He talked at an interview on Wednesday night with international media, saying that it's very important that

America does not help Putin to get out of this global isolation. We've got a continuation, I think, of that line of commentary in this speech today.

He said, we want the U.S. President, as you noted, to be stronger in its attitude to the Kremlin master, talking, of course, about Vladimir Putin.

Again, on the mineral deal, he said, the U.S. is changing the rules. We had a framework, he said. Then they wanted a full deal. And at the moment, he

said, there is no trip planned to Washington. There won't be until there is a full agreement, which he said would take a lot of work and the scrutiny

of lawyers and teams on each side. But, he did, then, interestingly, qualify this. He said, look, we've always shown positive signals. I think

perhaps this a holdover of the fallout of that Oval Office meeting some month or so ago. He said, we've always shown positive signals. We want to

work with the U.S. We don't want to give, he said, any signals to push the U.S. to stop supporting us or intelligence sharing. So, I think a very sort

of blunt nod to the fact that he understands what can happen if he falls out, again, with President Trump. So, I thought that was interesting.

In terms of the disappointment that he was asked about, he said, look, I was very satisfied today. The allies agreed to invest in Ukraine's drone

production, in electronic warfare, and he noted the fulsome support that he got from pretty much everyone, he said, there at this meeting. This is some

31 delegations, including 27 heads of state that they will not be lifting sanctions on Russia.

So, this, as you and I noted earlier this hour, does not dive with what we're hearing from the U.S., who said they're looking at the conditions

that Russia has placed on the idea of they want sanctions relief if they're going to implement this Black Sea ceasefire. Europe clearly not on board

with that. And President Zelenskyy is, I think, relieved to hear it. He does not want any sanctions lifted, especially while the Russian aggression

on the frontlines and in terms of aerial attacks on Ukraine cities continues unabated. Bianna.

GOLODRYGA: Yeah, part of the most sharp, diverging views there in terms of what we're hearing from the White House, a bit more muted as to the idea of

possibly lifting sanctions in exchange for a temporary ceasefire in the Black Sea, which is what Russia is demanding. Ukraine and all of its

European allies uniformly saying now is not the time to lift sanctions.

Clare Sebastian, thank you so much.

And we'll be right back with more news.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:30:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

GOLODRYGA: Welcome back to One World. I'm Bianna Golodryga in New York. Here are some of the international headlines we are watching today.

At least six people are dead and nine injured after a tourist submarine sank off the Egyptian coast in the Red Sea. That is according to Egyptian

state media. The Russian embassy says that the vessel was carrying 45 Russian tourists, including miners, and that the submarine was on a routine

underwater excursion to inspect the coral reef.

Sudan's army chief is back in the nation's capital, proclaiming the Khartoum is now free. This as his forces say they have wrested back control

of the city. It marks a major turning point in the two-year civil war between the army and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces.

A search is underway for four U.S. soldiers who went missing during a training mission in Lithuania. The soldiers were reported missing Tuesday.

Their vehicle has been found submerged in a body of water in a training area close to Lithuania's border with Belarus.

Protesters in northern Gaza were back out in force for the second day in a row on Wednesday, demanding Israel end the war and saying that Hamas does

not represent them. The protests appear to be the largest demonstrations against the militant group since the October 7th attacks and the subsequent

war.

Well, 10,000 full-time employees at U.S. health agencies will soon be out of a job. That is thanks to a major overhaul the Department of Health and

Human Services announced today. In addition to slashing jobs, the government will consolidate divisions and close some regional offices. The

dramatic overhaul will include creating a new division called the Administration for a Healthy America. New Health Secretary Robert F.

Kennedy Jr. says the department will do a lot more at a lower cost.

So, let's get all the details now from CNN Medical Correspondent Meg Tirrell. And Meg, these cuts, as I take it, are in addition to the roughly

10,000 HHS employees who opted to leave since Trump took office. What impact will all of these cuts ultimately have?

MEG TIRRELL, CNN MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Yeah. I mean, so, we're getting from an agency that was 82,000 employees, down to an agency with 62,000

employees. And while Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is saying they're going to do a lot more with a lot less, public health experts are telling us they are

concerned that this will lead to government health services being affected for people. And exactly what that looks like, we are trying to find out now

in terms of what these cuts are really going to affect.

The government says this will save $1.8 billion per year through this reduction of 10,000 new jobs on top of the 10,000 you just mentioned. They

are consolidation agencies, as you said.

[11:35:00]

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., saying, quote, "We're not just reducing bureaucratic sprawl. We're realigning the organization with its core mission and our new

priorities in reversing the chronic disease epidemic." He says, "This department will do more, a lot more, at a lower cost to the taxpayer."

As you mentioned, they're also creating this new agency called the Administration for a Healthy America, which he pronounces, AHA, which

sounds similar to MAHA, the Make America Healthy Again movement that he became known for during his joining forces with President Trump on the

campaign trail. That's going to combine five different agencies from across the HHS into that one umbrella, unified entity, they say.

Now, as part of this, also, Bianna, they are outlining the cuts that we're going to see to FDA, CDC, NIH, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid

Services. They'll be largest at FDA, 3,500 people, 2.400 at CDC, 1,200 at NIH, and 300 at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, where they

emphasize, they say, the reorganization will not impact Medicare and Medicaid.

At FDA, they say this won't affect drug, medical device or food reviewers or inspectors at CDC. Even though these cuts are quite large, they say they

are doubling down on the core mission of preparing for and responding to epidemics and outbreaks. This, of course, as we've got a measles outbreak

that's growing in Texas, now potentially reaching a fourth state. We are also dealing with bird flu, a number of other things. So, this makes people

very nervous that we're cutting health workers amid all of this, Bianna.

GOLODRYGA: And cutting rather quickly as well.

Meg Tirrell, thank you so much.

We're turning now to one of our top stories, a continued fallout from U.S. military secrets being leaked over group text. Donald Trump has called the

whole thing a "witch hunt", and we have seen members of his administration blame both the journalist who was on the group text and the texting app

itself, Signal, for all of this.

But, some Republicans on Capitol Hill are admitting this data leak is serious. Roger Wicker, the Chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee,

has asked the administration to have an inspector general look into the leak, and other Republican senators say the answers they've heard so far

are not enough.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. LISA MURKOWSKI (R-AK): I'm worried about everybody in how they have handled this Signal controversy. Does it concern me? Hell, yes.

SEN. JERRY MORAN (R-KS): We rarely hear anything as secret as the stuff that these guys were talking about. And I know every single one of them

understands that about this too, which is what makes it so agonizing.

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN HOST: So, you believe they lied?

MORAN: I think they're just lying.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GOLODRYGA: I want to bring in Democratic Congressman Sean Casten, who has been very vocal about what is now being dubbed Signal gate. Congressman,

thank you so much for taking the time. You've been extremely vocal, even putting out a statement, calling for all of the principals involved in this

text to resign. The odds of that happening, as I'm sure you are aware, are slim to none. But, who do you lay the most blame with at this point? There

has been a lot of pressure on the Defense Secretary himself to resign. He has doubled down, and you hear the President's take, calling this a witch

hunt, blaming Signal, perhaps, and suggesting that this is more of the journalists to blame than his own administration.

REP. SEAN CASTEN (D-IL): Well, thanks for having me. And I first just want to talk about, it's not lost on me how that it's politically unlikely that

all of these people, including the Vice President, are going to resign over this. But, we cannot lose sight of the fact that what they did is either in

gross incompetence or gross treason. There is no other option. Every single one of those people knows how to manage secure data. They've all been

trained in it, some of them because they have their service in Congress. Some of them because, one presumes, if you're the director of the CIA, you

know this.

The fact that they all sat on that chat and said nothing. They never chirped up to say, Hey, guys, this is not a secure network. These are not

secure devices. We do not have this conversation here, means that they are completely unfit for leadership positions. And what that then means is that

everybody in those organizations is now going to say, if this is how our leaders behave, why should I behave differently? The figuring out who

should be most responsible for this, I think it's a little bit into a game of like, which head can the Republicans politically afford to lop off to

make this go away? But, you do not end the problem as long as you have people in senior leadership positions who are not much more focused on

making sure that our enemies do not get information on war plans in real time.

GOLODRYGA: So, you do see the Senate Armed Service Committee co-chairs, a Republican and a Democrat, calling for Inspector General at the Department

of Defense to investigate this. But, at the same time, first of all, we know that many of these inspector generals had been fired shortly into this

administration. Also, I'd like to play sound for you from the FBI Director this week when he was asked numerous times whether he would launch an

investigation into what happened here.

[11:40:00]

Here is what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. CHRISSY HOULAHAN (D-PA): Now that another day has passed, you believe that it's now time, potentially, for the FBI to open an investigation into

this?

KASH PATEL, FBI DIRECTOR: I'm not going to comment on that.

HOULAHAN: Because you're the director of the FBI, you don't believe it's appropriate to comment on that?

PATEL: Because there is a process in place. There is an ongoing litigation, and the National Security Council is reviewing this matter, and I'm not

going to discuss any open or close investigation.

HOULAHAN: That ongoing --

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GOLODRYGA: I mean, in any other administration, Republican or Democrat, I'm sure we would have seen the FBI director at least say we are going to

launch in an independent investigation looking into exactly what went wrong here. Given that we have not seen that, given how loyal, especially all of

these officials are to the President, and we hear from the President where his stance is on this issue, the likelihood of an investigation and really

finding out how this happened is what to you.

CASTEN: We are so deep in a constitutional crisis right now that we have to back up a little bit. The Congress has an advice and consent. Well, the

Senate has an advice and consent. The Senate decided these senators, who are acting very tough right now, they confirmed Tulsi Gabbard, despite her

known links to Syria and to Russia. They confirmed Kash Patel, who is insane. He is not a voice for the rule of law. They confirmed Pam Bondi,

who is essentially a yes woman for Trump. I would like to see them now say, OK, we messed up. We confirmed people who are not fit to serve. I mean,

Pete Hegseth, the guy has got an alcohol problem, legitimate allegations of spousal abuse, no real history relevant to the job other than that.

GOLODRYGA: But, they're already in office, congressman. I mean, they've been confirmed. So, they're already in office, and that's the defense

you're hearing from the White House itself yesterday, from the Press Secretary saying, who are we going to believe? A partisan journalist, as

she described, Jeffrey Goldberg, or the Director of the Defense Department here, given that he has already been confirmed. So, you have -- you're

making a point that perhaps we could have having this conversation during the confirmation hearing, but they're already in place. I'm just wondering

how you explain this to your constituents when they ask you, why is this such a big deal, and what are you specifically doing to rectify it?

CASTEN: Well, so, the point I'm making is that having confirmed them, yes, I made mistake the first time. Congress still has oversight

responsibilities that we can fulfill, and Congress can fulfill those oversight responsibilities so long as the majority, who controls what

happens on the floor, calls for those hearings. It's one thing to say we would like the White House to solve this with inspectors general, but

Congress has more power than that. We could have oversight hearings tomorrow. We could issue subpoenas. That is what we should be doing, and

that's what our office and others on the Democratic side are calling for.

But, we are not getting support from the Republicans on the other side of the aisle to acknowledge what a big threat this is. How many other Signal

chats have there been?

GOLODRYGA: Yeah.

CASTEN: How many other times have we had members of the Trump administration sitting in the Kremlin on insecure devices, getting

classified information? How many -- how wide is the barn door open?

GOLODRYGA: No. No.

CASTEN: We can learn that if we had hearings.

GOLODRYGA: We should note that the White House -- yeah. We should note that the White House has said Steve Witkoff, and Steve Witkoff has also stated

that he was given a government-issued device that he was not on his personal device while he was in Moscow. But, that question that you ask, I

also had as well, how often do these Signal chat groups -- how often do they convene amongst such high-level officials and such highly classified

information? It didn't seem like it was the first time many of them had met in that setting.

Let me ask you quickly, while we do have time, another issue that I'm sure weighs heavily with you and your constituents, and that is the new 25

percent tariffs that the President has announced on all foreign-made cars and auto parts. Mark Zandi of Moody's said that this will no doubt lead to

higher car prices for all Americans. He said, if this stays in place, by next year, car prices will be between $5,000 and $10,000 higher, and that

this will also come at the expense of American jobs. What can you do to quell some of the concerns that I'm sure many of your constituents have

when they hear these headlines?

CASTEN: It is undoubtedly true that imposing tariffs raises costs. It's also undoubtedly true that targeted tariffs may be, in some cases,

appropriate. If we've got Chinese slave labor manufacturing devices that could be made in the United States in a more dignified way, but at a higher

cost, that's an appropriate use of tariffs. And we've got a WTO to go and do that.

What the Trump administration is doing does not appear to be very targeted, and I expect it's going to get a lot of pushback from our trading partners,

and the WTO is almost certainly going to lead to retaliatory tariffs. That's going to hurt American exporters. And the White House has broad

authority on tariffs. The fact that they have the ability to destroy the economy doesn't mean that they should.

[11:45:00]

And I think all of us need to make it -- make our displeasure very clear, and particularly make your displeasure clear to those members of the House

and Senate who are not standing up to the White House on this issue, because that's where we start to move public will.

GOLODRYGA: So, you mentioned the WTO, and I do want to ask you quickly to weigh in on what CNN has not been able to confirm as of yet, but is being

reported by Reuters, per three trade sources, that the U.S. has paused financial contributions to the WTO for both 2024 and 2025. If that indeed

is true, how do you respond to that?

CASTEN: I've not heard that news, but it's heartbreaking if it's true. I mean, the United States has, for 75, years been the defender of the post-

World War II order, the rule of law, making sure that we have these international bodies, and if we pull out, that is music to China and

Russia's ears, who would love to be running those processes. We may not like being the cop on the street. But, I want to assure the American people

that if we decide not to take up that duty, we are not going to like the officer who replaces us.

GOLODRYGA: Yeah. Important to hear from you as well, someone who sits on the Joint Economic Committee.

Congressman Sean Casten, thank you so much for the time. We appreciate it.

CASTEN: Thank you.

GOLODRYGA: Still to come for us, President Trump is threatening the livelihoods of some of America's leading law firms. Why he is going after

them and why many are afraid to incur his wrath?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

GOLODRYGA: Two months into Donald Trump's second term, and his administration is facing dozens of federal lawsuits, many of them over the

President's unprecedented flurry of executive orders. Dozens of those rulings have resulted in legal roadblocks, at least temporarily for the

White House. But, as those court lawsuits pile up, the administration is intensifying its attacks on the judiciary, and it's not just the judges.

Large, powerful law firms are also being targeted through executive orders. One of them has agreed to Trump's demands, and the President says it's just

a preview of what's to come.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: You see what we're doing with the colleges, and they're all bending and saying, sir, thank you very much. We appreciate it. And they are --

nobody can believe it, including law firms that have been so horrible, law firms that nobody would believe in this, just saying, where do I sign?

Where do I sign? Nobody can believe it, and there is more coming.

[11:50:00]

But, we really are in the golden age of America.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GOLODRYGA: CNN's Katelyn Polantz joins us now live from Washington. It's not as simple as that if you talk to these employees and partners at law

firms who are very rattled by what is happening and at the pace of these executive orders are directed at them. Can you just explain how unusual,

Katelyn, this is, perhaps maybe even unprecedented?

KATELYN POLANTZ, CNN SENIOR CRIME AND JUSTICE REPORTER: It truly is unprecedented. We've never seen something like this. This is the legal

establishment of Washington. These are the largest law firms, some of the largest employers, the types of institutions in Washington that consult to

both Republican and Democratic administrations, have people in their ranks who have been former solicitor generals practicing before the Supreme

Court. One of the firms once had an NFL commissioner in their partnership. These are extraordinarily well-respected groups of lawyers at these firms.

You don't hear their names that often, but the four that have received executive orders curtailing their ability to do business with the federal

government in different ways.

Those four law firms are Jenner & Block, Perkins Coie, Paul, Weiss, Covington & Burling. So far, Perkins Coie, they're suing over Trump putting

restrictions on them to be able to even enter federal buildings, and the judge has sided with Perkins Coie a little bit so far. Paul, Weiss, they've

cut a deal, and the rest of the legal industry in Washington, they are gripped with fear right now. No one wants to be the next firm on the White

House's list, largely because what Donald Trump is doing to retaliate against these firms, he has not kept it quiet. It is because of politics.

It is because some of them employed even years ago and not even currently, as their employees had lawyers that were affiliated with investigations

around him, the Mueller investigation, the Russia investigation.

And so, now the legal industry is wringing their hands, figuring out what to do, and they are very afraid. No one really wants to stick their neck

out and become the next target of this White House. Bianna.

GOLODRYGA: Yeah, quite chilling. Katelyn Polantz, thank you so much.

And we'll be right back with more.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

GOLODRYGA: A mysterious glowing light was spotted after a SpaceX launch.

[11:55:00]

Take a look at the spiral in the sky. It was seen over several European countries, including England and Croatia. Now, according to the UK

Meteorological Service, the spiral was likely caused by a SpaceX rocket launch and formed when its exhaust interacted with the atmosphere. The

agency says the Falcon 9 rockets frozen exhaust, appeared to be spinning in the atmosphere, and reflecting the sunlight, not an image you see every day

there.

And do stay with us. We'll have more One World after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

END