Return to Transcripts main page

The Situation Room

Trump About to Tour L.A. Fire Damage After Threatening to End FEMA; Soon, Senate Vote on Defense Secretary Nominee Pete Hegseth; Ex- Proud Boys Leader on What's Next After Clemency from Trump; NATO Moves To Protect Undersea Internet Cables From Sabotage; DC's Newest Giant Pandas Make Public Debut At National Zoo. Aired 6-7p ET

Aired January 24, 2025 - 18:00   ET

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

[18:00:00]

WOLF BLITZER, CNN HOST: Happening now, breaking news. President Trump just landed in Los Angeles to tour wildfire devastation as he's now threatening to get rid of FEMA and warning that disaster aid from the federal government to California may come with strings attached. I'll get reaction from U.S. Senator and California Democrat Alex Padilla.

Also tonight, the U.S. Senate is nearing what's likely to be a very close vote on confirming Pete Hegseth as defense secretary. With two Republicans now set to vote no, will there be any new GOP defections as allegations of misconduct hang over Hegseth's nomination?

Plus, just days after his release from federal prison, former Proud Boys Leader Enrique Tarrio Talks to CNN about getting clemency for President Trump and whether he and other free January 6th convicts are out for revenge.

Welcome to our viewers here in the United States and around the world. I'm Wolf Blitzer. You're in The Situation Room.

And we begin with the breaking news, President Trump just landing in California to tour wildfire destruction while threatening drastic changes in federal disaster relief. Our correspondents are standing by in both disaster areas the president is visiting today.

First to CNN's Nick Watt in Los Angeles. Nick, as Mr. Trump prepares for this tour, he is already talking about placing new conditions on federal aid to Los Angeles.

NICK WATT, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: That's right, Wolf. The president is saying that he wants voter I.D. laws in California, and also that he wants them to, quote, release the water.

Now, this is a theory that President Trump has, that the governor of California, Gavin Newsom, or Newscum, as President Trump calls him, Trump believes that Newsom signed a document, which in fact doesn't exist, that keeps a lot of fresh water up in the rainier north of California. And Trump believes that if that water was channeled down to the south, it would have been enough to stop these wildfires.

Now, we've spoken to many experts who say that is just not true. They say that this issue with the water staying up in Northern California to save the habitat of the endangered smelt, a little fish that President Trump calls a worthless fish. They say that that has nothing to do with the water that was used to fight these fires down in the south. Actually, they say Los Angeles has above average levels of water.

The issue here, they say, is the municipal water systems. There is no city on Earth, many people have told me, that would be able to fight these fires. Nobody has a water system that's big enough to fight the raging blazes that we saw here in California.

Now, President Trump also said that there weren't any firefighting planes. Also, not true, there were, but in those hurricane force winds, those planes just can't operate.

So, President Trump has landed, he's going to go on an aerial tour, then he's going to take a walking tour around the Alphabet Streets and the Palisades, one of those areas that has just been flattened that looks like a hellscape.

And then there is going to be a round table and a briefing at a firehouse with some local politicians and others. That could be interesting. It could be interesting if some of those local politicians perhaps challenge Mr. Trump on his ideas about conditions tied to federal aid.

Now, the relationship between President Trump and the governor of this, the most popular state, could well be one of the defining relationships of the next couple of years. They have history, this pair. They do not like each other. Remember back in 2018, President Trump criticized California saying that they needed to rake the forests and that would help.

Now, in 2023, California thinned about a million acres. And experts tell us that no amount of thinning would have helped with the devastation we saw here. No amount of thinning could have stopped what happened here. So, it's going to be really interesting to see how these two men interact. You know, you expect after disaster, the president and the governor to be working hand in hand. That's clearly not going to happen. I mean, Governor Gavin Newsom is at the airport to meet President Trump. But we heard from Newsom's aides that there was almost no contact between the two before the president landed here.

[18:05:06]

Wolf?

BLITZER: All right. We'll watch that to be sure. Nick, stand by for us. I want to go to CNN's Jeff Zeleny. He's in Asheville, North Carolina, right now. That's a city still recovering from Hurricane Helene. Jeff, when the president was there earlier today, he floated the idea of actually scrapping FEMA, the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

JEFF ZELENY, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Wolf, this was President Trump's first trip outside of Washington since taking office, and he was starting here before going to California, and that was by design. He said he wanted to start in a red state, of course, a state that he won, before traveling to a blue state of California, a state that he did not.

But, Wolf, the residents on the ground here do not see their disaster aid in red or blue or Republican or Democrat, but there is no question that these disasters actually are quite linked, and here is why. The disaster conversation on Capitol Hill, the aid and the benefit that is going to be part of any spending bill is going to be linked. Of course, Hurricane Helene was some four months ago, but there is no question the Western North Carolina region still needs more money to recover.

You can see behind me here, Wolf, this used to be an art gallery, just one example of many hundreds and thousands of examples across this region. But when the president came here today, he used this backdrop to make his claim for reshaping federal government, including FEMA.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: FEMA just hasn't done the job. And we're looking at the whole concept of FEMA. I like, frankly, the concept when North Carolina gets hit, the governor takes care of it. When Florida gets hit, the governor takes care of it, meaning the state takes care of it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ZELENY: So, that, of course, was not something out of the blue. It was actually something that has been discussed for a long time. It was a key example in the Project 2025, that congressional conservative manifesto, if you will, last year during the campaign, essentially eliminating some elements of the government.

But, Wolf, the challenge with that is the direct understanding of FEMA is it doesn't take care of everything. It assists local and state governments and coordinates disaster relief. Think back to Hurricane Katrina, which you covered, of course, and so many other disasters along the way. FEMA was a key coordinator of all of that.

So, it's not something the president can do on his own, eliminate FEMA. That would have to be an act of Congress. And, Wolf, for all the disagreements in Congress, it's bitterly divided. Largely, FEMA has been something that most sides can agree upon because disasters happen in all places, as we can see now here in red, North Carolina, and in blue, California. Wolf?

BLITZER: Yes, important point. Jeff Zeleny and Nick Watt, to both of you, thank you very much.

And to our viewers, take a look. You're looking at live pictures of Air Force One. It's now on the tarmac. In Los Angeles, momentarily, we're told the President will be walking down those stairs. The California governor, Governor Newsom, is waiting for him at the bottom of the stairs. We'll watch that as it unfolds. We'll see how they react with each other. No great friends, to be sure.

Right now, I want to get some facts about FEMA after President Trump made false and misleading claims about the federal agency.

CNN's Tom Foreman is taking a closer look for us. Walk us through what FEMA actually does, Tom.

TOM FOREMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: FEMA basically does the job of helping communities when they cannot handle things themselves, when it's just too much. You mentioned a minute ago Katrina over here. Katrina in 2005, that cost $201 billion, according to federal agents, to deal with that, $160 billion for Hurricane Harvey back in 2017, and now an unknown amount for the Los Angeles fires. Under the proposal of Donald Trump, the red states of Alabama and Louisiana, for example, they would have had to pay that by themselves and maybe other ways around it.

But what has happened in recent years and what has helped spur this is the fact that spending as we've had bigger disasters, more costly disasters, some of this may be from climate change, also a lot of it has to do with mainly these are hurricane disasters, and we have built and built and built for decades in coastal areas. So, there's a lot more damage being done by these storms, Wolf.

BLITZER: Tom, let's talk a little bit about some of the specifics. What does FEMA's funding actually pay for?

FOREMAN: What it pays for is a variety of things. In a public sense, it helps restore roads and bridges and public buildings and services that people need in a disaster area. It helps get rid of all the debris and the hazards that are there after a big event. And for individuals, it can provide emergency shelter, food and water services and some housing. It does not replace houses. A lot of times after a big disaster people say, well, FEMA came in and they only gave us $45,000. Well, that's all they give. They're not there to replace everything. Insurance is supposed to do that. They're trying to help out. So, that's basically what FEMA does after a disaster, Wolf.

BLITZER: Disaster aid is so important to these states.

[18:10:00]

Thanks very much, Tom Foreman, helping us appreciate what FEMA does.

I want to get reaction to all of this from Senator Alex Padilla, Democrat of California. Senator, thanks so much for coming in. We see the president walking down those stairs right now. He's about to be received by your governor of California, Governor Newsom. There he is. Let's see how they react.

Shaking hands, saying something, clearly no microphones there.

It's clearly a nice gesture on the part of your governor to formally receive the president of the United States on the tarmac there.

SEN. ALEX PADILLA (D-CA): Yes, absolutely. I mean, despite the rhetoric going back and forth.

BLITZER: The rhetoric is pretty awful, too.

PADILLA: We all have a job to do. And the governor has stepped up, not just in the response these last several weeks to the fires, but if I can put myself in his mind, he's probably telling the president, we meet again, because during President Trump's first term, he actually came out to California to visit other fire-ravaged areas in Northern California.

BLITZER: Senator, hold on for a minute. I want to hear what the president is saying.

TRUMP: We're in very good shape. We have the congressman in charge in Michael Whatley and we're going to do a lot of work. We have the Army Corps of Engineers working as they are here. And I think you're going to see some very big progress. They left them high and dry. And now we're going to be taking a little tour with some of the people from the area.

I appreciate the governor coming out and meeting me. Gavin, thank you very much. And we'll be talking a little bit. We want to get it fixed. We want to get the problem fixed. And there'll be some ways, but it's like you got hit by a bomb, right?

GOV. GAVIN NEWSOM (D-CA): Yes.

TRUMP: Like you got hit by a bomb. Would you like to say something? Go ahead.

NEWSOM: Most importantly, thank you for being here. It means a great deal to all of us. Not just the folks in Palisades, the folks in Altadena that were devastated. We're going to need your support. We're going to need your help. You were there for us during COVID. I don't forget that. And I have all the expectations that we'll be able to work together to get a speedy recovery.

TRUMP: Very well. We're going to get it done. Tremendous numbers of lives have been affected. A lot of real estate has been affected. Nobody's ever probably seen anything like this. You can almost say since the Second World War, when you think of it, I mean, nothing like this has happened. And we're going to get it fixed, so we'll get it permanently fixed, so it can't happen again. And, again, we'll be talking a little bit later, and we're going to work it out, okay?

NEWSOM: I appreciate it, Mr. President. Thank you.

TRUMP: Thank you, Governor.

NEWSOM: Thank you.

TRUMP: Thank you very much.

REPORTER: Mr. President, both of you have disagreed a lot over the past week over what has happened in this state? How do you plan to -- TRUMP: We got to get it finished. We're looking to get something completed. And the way you get it completed is to work together. He's the governor of the state. And we're going to get it completed. They're going to need a lot of federal help. Unless you don't need any, which would be okay.

NEWSOM: We're going to need a lot of federal help.

TRUMP: So, we're going to take care of things, okay?

REPORTER: (INAUDIBLE)?

NEWSOM: I have all the confidence in the world we'll work that out.

TRUMP: Thank you. I guess some of you are coming with us, and some of you not. Thank you very much. Thank you. I'll see you.

BLITZER: All right, we're back with Senator Alex Padilla, Democrat of California. What's your reaction to what we just heard?

PADILLA: I'm certainly hoping that's the start of a good, productive, fruitful visit. I was mentioning before we paused that the president's been out there before. So, it wasn't just a thank you for the federal response to COVID, but to fires during the first Trump administration. And so we're certainly hoping that he'll follow through in a similar fashion after these disasters.

And, frankly, as a Southern Californian, knowing full well that -- look, Southern California is there for every region of the country in their time of crisis, and now we need the country, the federal government, to be there for the Los Angeles region.

BLITZER: Because you clearly need a lot of federal aid to help rebuild these areas that have been totally devastated, there's no doubt about that.

What's your reaction to what we heard earlier today from President Trump suggesting that he was thinking of trying to get rid of FEMA, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which is responsible for providing emergency aid from the federal government to these kinds of situations?

PADILLA: Look, in my mind, that's governmental malpractice, right, and a failure of leadership. To even suggest something like that, especially in the wake of these devastating incidents, not just in Southern California, but he's coming from North Carolina that was devastated by hurricanes. It hasn't been that long since Florida and Louisiana have been devastated, other parts of the regions for tornadoes and floods. That's why we have a federal program. And FEMA's there just for the immediate response and laying the foundation for recovery of these communities. Ultimately, we need state, federal, and local resources in the private sector to completely recover and rebuild.

[18:15:04] BLITZER: Because in these kinds of disaster situations, almost always, the states and the local governments don't have the billions and billions of dollars that the federal government has to try to rebuild.

PADILLA: Look, what President Trump is going to see is that this isn't just another fire. The scale of it, I mean, three times the size of Manhattan, he'll have that perspective. But the level, the intensity of the heat, the homes that are burned, other structures that are burned, he's going to see what looks like a war zone. He made reference to a bomb, but the immense areas that's been impacted before individuals can rebuild, before business owners can rebuild, we need roads, we need water lines, and gas lines, and power lines, and all the core infrastructure cleaned and replaced before the rebuilding begins. So, it's going to be all hands on deck.

BLITZER: It's interesting, because earlier today he also suggested if California wants these kinds of federal assistance, and they need a lot of federal assistance right now, California should require voter I.D. during elections. What's your reaction to that?

PADILLA: I mean, first of all, it's offensive to try to condition or attach strings of any type to disaster aid. We've never done it before as a nation, and we shouldn't start now. Second, can you imagine the outrage from Republicans if President Biden would have suggested, before we help North Carolina or before we help Florida, we need them to change their gun laws. They'd be apoplectic.

And so we have to stay with what we've always done when any part of the country is in crisis, we're all there to help.

BLITZER: Do you think the president's immigration crackdown could have a negative impact on your state's rebuilding right now, given all of the undocumented workers who are going to be involved, presumably, in helping?

PADILLA: You're absolutely right. There's a lot of immigrants, both documented and undocumented, that are victims of the fire, have lost their homes, have lost loved ones. And even if they didn't lose their homes, many have lost their jobs. And as we're increasing the detention, deportation activities that President Trump is doing, you got to wonder, well, what's it mean for the workforce? Nearly 40 percent of the construction workforce in California are immigrants. And so if there's a lot of workers that aren't on the job for rebuilding, it's going to take longer. It's going to be more expensive. There's practical impacts of the president's overly aggressive agenda.

BLITZER: Senator, we got to run, but I take it you decided to stay here in Washington today instead of going out with the president to California because you want to vote in the confirmation process, the nomination process for Pete Hegseth to be defense secretary. How are you going to vote?

PADILLA: Yes. So, I was invited, would have appreciated an opportunity to help educate the president and his staff, but I felt it important to be here to vote no on Pete Hegseth. Unqualified, not prepared, would be dangerous and reckless as a secretary of defense.

BLITZER: Do you think he'll be confirmed?

PADILLA: We're about to find out. The question is really on Senate Republicans. Are there enough of them who are more loyal to the Constitution, their oath of office, and the troops in our Department of Defense, or are they trying to prove their loyalty to Donald Trump? We're about to find out.

BLITZER: We'll watch that vote unfold in the coming hours.

Thank you very much, Senator Alex Padilla of California. I appreciate it. Good luck to all the folks in California right now.

And just ahead, as we just mentioned, the U.S. Senate preparing a very rare Friday night vote on whether to confirm Pete Hegseth as the U.S. defense secretary, as President Trump suggests, at least another possible GOP defection.

Plus, our own Brian Todd is live over at the National Zoo here in Washington, D.C. as the newest pandas make their official debut.

Stay with us. You're in The Situation Room.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:20:00]

BLITZER: There's breaking news up on Capitol Hill right now just ahead of a vote tonight on whether to confirm Pete Hegseth as the U.S. defense secretary. Sources now telling CNN that GOP leaders are uncertain right now how two key senators will vote.

Our political experts are following it all for us. Lauren Tomlinson, let me start with you. What do you think? I know there are at least two Republicans, Senators Murkowski and Senator Collins, who are going to vote no, but you really need four, a simple vote is 53 Republicans, 47 Democrats, so you need four Republicans to vote no. What do you think?

LAUREN TOMLINSON, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: I think Pete Hegseth is getting confirmed tonight. I think all indications are that while there have been discussions that allowed Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins to vote their conscience, I think the rest of the Republican Party is going to be pretty lockstep with getting President Trump's nominee confirmed.

BLITZER: Because there's some speculation that even Mitch McConnell will vote no, and maybe Thom Tillis.

TOMLINSON: I don't think that ends up happening. I would happily -- you know, I may be wrong but the speculation there mostly came from President Trump himself when he was saying, you know, what's Mitch going to do? What's Mitch going to do? I don't think that he'll end up voting for him. He could. He could still not. But I think that the whip count is going to be pretty clear that this is going to happen tonight.

BLITZER: So, let me get Ashley to weigh in. So, you need four Republicans to vote no in order to defeat his nomination, all the Democrats are going to vote no. We know that for sure. What do you think? How does it look?

ASHLEY ETIENNE, FORMER SENIOR ADVISER TO PRESIDENT BIDEN: Well, I mean, I would defer to Lauren whether or not they're going to get the votes. But here's sort of how I see it. It's definitely a test of whether or not competency and character actually matter to Republican senators.

The thing that's most disturbing and most dangerous about Hegseth is what his ex-wife actually said, that he actually drinks more than he doesn't. The fact that -- the one fact that's not been in dispute is that he's an alcoholic.

So, those people who vote for him today are going to have to explain to the American people how they're going to control for his drinking. I mean, this is -- that agency is an issue of life and death. It's a very serious job.

And, you know, so my question is, are they going to take breathalyzers as he walks into the agency? That's really the concern is that he's going to be in charge of the biggest, most active, dangerous military in the world, and we're not sure that he won't be dropped on the sidelines.

[18:25:06]

BLITZER: Lauren, you're a Republican analyst for us. Is this vote so close that it's becoming very worrisome to Republicans?

TOMLINSON: No, I don't think so. I think senators will vote their conscience but Hegseth has done the work I think on the individual interviews and talking to the senators to assure them that he will be able to leave confidently.

He is different. He is a different type of defense secretary than we have normally seen in Washington. But I think that President Trump was elected on different. And so there's a lot of deference to President Trump and him choosing his people to shake up Washington. I think that's what you see reflected here as the senators are saying, okay, Donald Trump has a plan. Let's let him see it through. But have we seen with Donald Trump's previous administration, he -- if there's a problem, he'll let them go.

BLITZER: You know, Ashley, if Hegseth is confirmed tonight, what does that say about Trump's other very controversial picks, including RFK Jr., Tulsi Gabbard, and Kash Patel?

ETIENNE: Well, typically you lose at least one of your nominees. I mean, I'm betting that he's probably going to lose Tulsi Gabbard. I've always advised Democrats to really lean in on Tulsi Gabbard, especially all these questions about whether or not she's compromised. She's going to be in charge of our national secrets. That's a very important job. So you don't want someone in there that is not beyond a reproach.

But here's the thing I just want to point out about Hegseth. You know, I hate to sort of be provocative here, but I think, to some degree, the president does want someone who's incompetent in that particular job, so that he can get the generals that -- to use his line, he can get the generals that he actually wants.

BLITZER: What do you think?

TOMLINSON: I don't know that's necessarily true. I think that there's a recruitment issue with the military. They want someone who hasn't been at the top for so long that they forget what it's like to be a soldier today. And we have to prepare for inevitable conflict probably within the next two years of China and others. So, there's a real need to put somebody in who can shake things up and do things differently because what's going on right now isn't working.

BLITZER: He will certainly shake things up.

All right, Lauren Tomlinson, Ashley Etienne, to both of you, thank you very, very much.

Coming up, the latest moves by the White House on the immigration front, and how the U.S. military is getting involved. We'll talk with the former Homeland Security secretary, Jeh Johnson. He's standing by live.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:30:00]

BLITZER: Tonight, the White House says migrant deportations using U.S. military aircraft are now underway. This as President Trump formally asked state and local officials for help carrying out immigration enforcement.

Let's get reaction to that and much more from the former U.S. secretary of Homeland Security, Jeh Johnson. Mr. Secretary, thanks so much for joining us.

What do you think when you see these images of U.S. military aircraft involved in deporting undocumented immigrants?

JEH JOHNSON, FORMER HOMELAND SECURITY SECRETARY: When I see the images, I think we've militarized our southern border. We've militarized what is fundamentally a domestic law enforcement activity.

Of course, having the military at the southern border is not new. Usually it's the guard in the role of support. Ironically, the numbers of crossings on the southern border are as low as they have been for a very, very long time right now. So, I'm not sure that all this military presence on the southern border is actually needed as compared to two or three years ago.

What this administration is clearly doing is trying to send a message through imagery to Central America, to South America, to Venezuela, Cuba, Haiti, don't think about coming here. And so the numbers, I'm confident, will be low of border crossings on the southern border for the short-term. But as long as the push factors, Wolf, persist in Central America, the drought, the famine, the poverty, the corruption, they're going to find a way to keep coming one way or another.

BLITZER: Estimates suggest, Mr. Secretary, that the cost of the U S military flying migrants out of the country is significantly higher than the cost of flights involving chartered planes by the Department of Homeland Security, for example. And I asked this question to you as a former general counsel over the Department of Defense before you became secretary of Homeland Security. Is this a misuse of U.S. military resources?

JOHNSON: I'm not prepared to say that in terms of transport. I do know that ICE has aircraft. They have aircraft that they use. I've personally been there to witness the return of migrants to Central America with our aircraft. So, I'm not prepared to make that judgment. I do think that we have to be careful not to militarize what is fundamentally a domestic law enforcement activity.

BLITZER: Let me get your quick reaction to Pete Hegseth, President Trump's secretary of defense nominee. He could be confirmed in just a few hours by the U.S. Senate. And as I previously mentioned, you used to work in the Defense Department, you know the Pentagon. What are you, first of all, hearing from employees and your contacts there about Pete Hegseth becoming the next secretary of defense?

JOHNSON: Anxiety, anxiety that the upper echelons of the U.S. military at the four star level may be politicized. They're not political appointees.

Wolf, if you ask me this simple question, do I believe Pete Exeth is qualified to be secretary of defense?

[18:35:01]

I have to say, in all honesty, no. I was the secretary of the third largest department of our government and I was general counsel of the Department of Defense for four years at the right hand of two extraordinary secretaries, Bob Gates and Leon Panetta. And when I look at their qualifications, and I look at Pete Hegseth's qualifications, I've met him, he seemed like a nice person, I simply do not believe that he is qualified to hold the second most powerful job in the executive branch of our government.

BLITZER: Yes, that's an important point. Mr. Secretary, as you know, President Trump is now weighing, and he said this publicly today, he's weighing the idea of getting rid of FEMA. What do you make of the idea of leaving disaster relief to the states and not letting the federal government get involved?

JOHNSON: Very bad idea. First, FEMA has come a long way from the days of Katrina. In my observation, my experience overseeing that agency, it's remarkable in its ability to provide rapid response, to coordinate between and among states. Disaster relief is a very, very emotional issue. It's never perfect. It's easy to call for the elimination of something, much harder to figure out how to replace it. You know, we saw that with Obamacare. Replacing, repealing Obamacare was a rallying cry, politically. But then when it came time to figure out how to replace it, nobody could come up with a better way to do it.

I would leave FEMA in place. I'm disappointed that the administrator has left in the midst of the California wildfires. Let's not get lulled into the belief that somehow FEMA should be eliminated. FEMA does an extraordinary job in very crucial life dependent circumstances.

BLITZER: It certainly does. Jeh Johnson, the former secretary of Homeland Security, thanks very much for joining us.

JONSON: Thank you.

BLITZER: Thank you. And just ahead, there's more breaking news we're following. CNN speaks with former Proud Boys Leader Enrique Tarrio after his release from prison and pardon from President Trump.

We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:40:00]

BLITZER: All right, there's more breaking news this hour. Enrique Tarrio, the former leader of the right wing extremist Proud Boys group, is speaking with CNN about his release from prison and his pardon from President Trump.

CNN Anchor and Chief Legal Analyst Laura Coates just finished her interview with Tarrio. You asked him about getting retribution. What did he say?

LAURA COATES, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF LEGAL ANALYST: I asked him about that because he'd mentioned that he wanted retribution. I wanted to know what he meant by that. Was it a violent, nonviolent, legal, court related or otherwise? Listen to what he had to say.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ENRIQUE TARRIO, FORMER PROUD BOYS LEADER PARDONED BY TRUMP: So, let's talk about what I, what retribution is, because I did in most interviews, I did clear up what I meant by retribution. I meant investigations. So, they need to be investigated. And if they did everything correct, and they did everything by the book, there shouldn't be anything for them to worry about.

COATES: Who's the thing?

TARRIO: There shouldn't be here. I want to be unequivocally clear that by no means am I asking for violent retribution to anybody. I don't condone any violence towards any elected official. Actually, I don't condone violence to any human being, but I do think that it needs to be -- the process needs to be investigated.

COATES: And so who would you be investigating, the prosecutors, the attorney general? What does that look like?

TARRIO: I mean, I'm not in the legal field, but I think we should start from the top to the bottom. I think we should start with Merrick Garland, move our way down to Matthew Graves, and specifically in most of these J6 cases, some of the lead prosecutors in this case.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

COATES: Who I note, of course, were not people who received the pardons that Biden spoke about. So, there was a concern about what that would look like.

He is saying that he wants nonviolence, but, of course, we see the events in his platform that he held as the now leader of the Proud Boys, or perhaps ex-leader, not too sure about that, what it looks like.

BLITZER: How does Enrique Tarrio view Trump's decision to pardon him and the other January 6th defendants, including some who were criminally charged and convicted?

COATES: I was intrigued by this. I asked him that very question about how he viewed all of this. And he said that he believes Trump was pardoning them not because he believed they were innocent or hadn't committed any crimes per se, but because it was a miscarriage of justice. There were miscarriages in the form of how they were tried, and particularly being tried here in Washington, D.C. He spoke about having a venue change as being the only solution to these cases because of the voting behavior of people who were on the jury pool in his case.

But, ultimately, you'll hear from the interview later on, we'll play it in full on my show, where he talks about how that miscarriage of justice, he believes, impacts the way that he should be viewed by other people.

BLITZER: We're going to look forward to watching the interview. Laura, thank you very much for giving us a clip of that.

And you can see the full interview later tonight on Laura's show, Laura Coates Live, at 11:00 P.M. Eastern. Laura, thank you, once again, very, very much.

Just ahead, our in depth report on efforts to protect critical undersea internet cables from Russian sabotage.

Stay with us. You're in The Situation Room.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:48:42]

BLITZER: CNN is getting an in-depth look at a new NATO mission aimed at protecting crucially important undersea Internet cables from Russian sabotage.

Our international diplomatic editor, Nic Robertson, has our report.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

NIC ROBERTSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL DIPLOMATIC EDITOR (voice-over): Sunrise around 100 miles from Russia, on the near freezing Baltic Sea, tension mounts.

UNIDENTIFEID FEMALE: It's a NATO warship, A03, over.

ROBERTSON: NATO is retooling for a new war -- a hybrid war.

Ultra modern, sophisticated tech is being prepped for underwater action. Specialized subsea drones designed to dive deep below the surface.

This is the sharp end of the mission, protecting our Internet is not up there in the sky. It's under the sea.

NATO's mission Baltic Century is a rapid response to an escalating new threat. Multiple cables cut in recent months.

And this is what the undersea internet cables look like, this size -- they're tiny, they're vulnerable. They're easily cut.

[18:50:01]

In these waters between Estonia and Finland and beyond, an unseen enemy is believed to have been targeting Internet and power cables. The subsea drones and the battleships getting eyes on the threat.

COMMANDER ARJEN WARNAAR, NATO MARITIME GROUP 1: A lot of the ships that we found are acting strangely originate in a Russian port, or are going to a Russian port.

ROBERTSON: This ship anchor, suspected of being dragged on the seabed, intentionally damaging cables Christmas day.

How far are these anchors being dragged into the sea?

WARNAAR: I understand a couple of hundred miles.

ROBERTSON: Is that normal?

WARNAAR: No.

ROBERTSON: How does that happen? Can a captain not notice?

WARNAAR: Very good question.

And my guess is no, a captain does know that. And that's probably intentional.

ROBERTSON: Repairs can be complicated, costly, and take months. Worst case, an entire nation can be cut off from the Internet. Under the sea here, there are multiple cables linking Estonia with

Finland. In the Baltic Sea, dozens more, the numbers keep growing across the globe. There are hundreds of cables.

According to NATO more than 800,000 miles of cable carrying $10 trillion of international trade. The mission, critical enough to have expensive fighter jets on tap. Conditions at sea level, though the biggest challenge, as we saw on a relatively calm day.

Each NATO warship bringing its own specialty. This one sonar. Less than two weeks into the mission, commanders at sea increasingly confident who is responsible.

And who is the threat here?

CMDR. ERIK KOCKX, NATO MINE COUNTERMEASURES GROUP 2: Russia. That's for. That's quite clear.

ROBERTSON: Russia denies any role. But by this days end, more NATO nations committing forces to Baltic Century. The flotilla growing. NATO HQ commanders facing tough choices.

CAPTAIN NIELS MARKUSSEN, DIRECTOR, NATO SHIPPING CENTRE: The proof, the smoking gun, it's very, very difficult. We have to balance between this moving into something that can become very ugly. And what I mean by that is warfare.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BLITZER: Nic Robertson reporting for us. Nic, thank you very, very much.

Coming up, why politics isn't the only talk of the town in the nation's capital today. We'll tell you. You can see.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:57:03]

BLITZER: Tonight, we're following another huge comeback here in the nation's capital, this one over at the National Zoo, where giant pandas are once again a star attraction.

CNN's Brian Todd is on the scene for us.

Brian, the public is getting its first up close look at two pandas who arrived just a few months ago, right?

BRIAN TODD, CNN CORRESPONDENT: They certainly are, Wolf. Smiles and laughs all around here at the zoo today. Thousands of visitors are expected here over the weekend in the dead of winter, which is unusual. This is a celebration that's been more than a year in the making.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) TODD (voice-over): A bamboo breakfast enjoyed by Bao Li, a giant panda frolicking in his new home. Bao, a three year old male and three year old female Qing Bao, making their public debut today at Washington's Smithsonian national zoo.

Qing Bao is known for her tree climbing exploits. Zoo officials say. And we caught her doing her thing.

And we saw her male counterpart pushing his oversize ball. Exciting and heartwarming moments for zoo-goers who've waited more than a year to see pandas again.

SARAH CHEW, ZOO VISITOR: It's very exciting that they're back at the zoo, and I'm just here to support them.

TODD: In November 2023, the National Zoo's previous set of pandas, Tian Tian and Mei Xiang and their cub were sent back to China as a loan agreement expired. These new pandas will be in Washington for ten years, with the goal of getting them to breed. They won't start doing that for at least a couple more years.

And hey, no pressure. But --

They only have about a 48-hour window each year to breed.

MICHAEL BROWN-PALSGROVE, CURATOR OF PANDAS, SMITHSONIAN'S NATIONAL ZOO: Yes. That's correct. So a female only comes into estrus once a year? Ovulates that one time. And so, really, it is, you know, us against the clock to make sure that we put them together at the optimal time.

TODD: In the meantime, Bao Li and Xing Bao, who are considered the equivalent of teenagers, now need to grow. That means a constant diet of bamboo. Lots of it.

BROWN-PALSGROVE: We offer over 100 pounds of bamboo to each panda every day. They're bringing truckloads, 500,600 pounds, three times a week back to us.

TODD: The two pandas are kept in separate areas. Have had three months to acclimate to their habitat here. And zoo officials say they've developed distinct personalities.

BRANDIE SMITH, DIRECTOR, SMITHSONIAN'S NATIONAL ZOO: Qing Bao, these our female and she is, I'll say, a little more independent. She kind of likes to do her own thing.

Bao Li definitely loves people. He loves his keepers. He talks to them all the time.

TODD: They're part of a diplomatic and scientific cooperation with China that's been around for more than 50 years, since the first pandas, Ling-Ling and Hsing-Hsing, arrived at the National Zoo in 1972, a conservation pact that's brought the pandas back from the endangered list.

SMITH: They are still in trouble, but it is a success story.

TODD: And a wildly popular story. Zoo officials tell us 95 percent of the 2 million visitors this zoo gets every year come to see the pandas, like three month old Erin Morris Thompson dressed for the occasion.

SEAN MARZ, ZOO VISITOR: It's really great that she's going to get to grow up with them in her backyard.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

TODD (on camera): Another measure of the sheer popularity of these animals. Zoo officials tell us that since the last set of pandas left here in late 2023, they had a 20 percent drop off in visitors to the zoo. With the arrival of these pandas, they say they expect to make up that deficit and add another 10 percent -- Wolf.

BLITZER: Like so many others, I'm getting ready. I can't wait to go over to the zoo and see those pandas.

Brian Todd, thank you very much for that report.

And to our viewers, thanks very much for watching. I'm Wolf Blitzer in THE SITUATION ROOM.

"ERIN BURNETT OUTFRONT" starts right now.