Return to Transcripts main page

The Situation Room

Judge Temporarily Blocks Part Of Trump's Federal Aid Freeze; Caroline Kennedy Calls Her Cousin RFK Jr. A Predator; White House Rejects Calls To Reinstate Security For Ex-Officials Bolton And Pompeo Amid Iran Threat; Oklahoma State School Board Approves Rule Requiring Proof Of U.S. Citizenship Or Immigration Status At Enrollment; How Kash Patel's Personal Battles With Intel Officials Shaped His View Of The FBI. Aired 6-7p ET

Aired January 28, 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]

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: Happening now, breaking news, a federal judge has just temporarily blocked part of President Trump's plan to freeze all federal grants and loans. The controversial new rule now on hold through at least Monday.

Plus, one day before Robert F. Kennedy Jr. faces a Senate confirmation hearing, his cousin, Caroline Kennedy, is urging lawmakers to reject his bid to lead the nation's top health agency. Why she is calling him a, quote, predator.

And in Oklahoma, the state school board just voted to enact an immigration crackdown of its own, a new rule that would require families to prove their citizenship or legal status when enrolling their kids.

Welcome to our viewers in the United States and around the world. Wolf Blitzer is off today. I'm Boris Sanchez and you are in The Situation Room.

We start with breaking news tonight. The scramble here in Washington and across the country as a judge pauses the Trump administration's freeze on trillions in federal spending.

Let's get you straight to the White House and CNN's Jeff Zeleny for all the latest details. Jeff, this judge's order just seems to delay the confusion.

JEFF ZELENY, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Well, Boris, this judge's order just coming in within the last hour and it does put a temporary hold on this as these litigants can make a constitutional argument against the Trump administration's decision to put a pause on government spending. But, boy, this certainly has sown confusion throughout the day here in Washington, and indeed in states around the country, about spending, about government programs, about government loans. We often talk about things in these terms, but they were actually programs that affect people's lives, Head Start, Meals on Wheels, Medicaid programs. Now, the White House has said that they are not going to pause spending on any programs that affect people directly but it did create so much confusion. Several states reported that their Medicaid portals were simply not working. Of course, those are the vehicles in which people get Medicaid reimbursements. The White House again saying they are not pausing any programs directly. However, it's an open question because a lot of this Medicaid spending goes to the states and then the state to disperse it.

In any case, it has touched off another conversation and dispute here about the president's authority to essentially dictate what Congress has already decided on programs and funding. So, it certainly is pausing this now until February 3rd, that is next Monday, and then there will be more court cases to come, obviously. But, Boris, it is just the latest example of the president and the Trump administration's exertion of their executive authority.

SANCHEZ: And, Jeff, how are Democrats responding to this order?

ZELENY: Boris, we are about a week and a couple days in, and this was the first sense of Democrats really rallying and forming some type of a coherent resistance to these programs and largely because it is some of the things that the Congress has already passed and set forward. So there is a dispute that is really going to be beginning here with the White House, the executive branch and the legislative branch and Republicans and Democrats alike, of course, in Congress have passed these laws, so they expect the programs to be funded in that way.

But Democrats are certainly rallying specifically around these programs. This is a group of a Democratic -- essentially, these Democratic organizations and groups are filing these lawsuits, governors, attorneys general are as well. So today, for the first time, it felt like Democrats were actually rallying against the president. But there is no question, there are many days to come.

But, again, this pause on these agencies, this is only now temporarily halted. It certainly has not answered the question overall this confusion here, Boris.

SANCHEZ: Jeff Zeleny live for us at the White House, thank you so much.

Our political and legal experts are joining us now live. First to you, Elliot Williams. This freeze is on until Monday. Do you see this going to the Supreme Court? What's the timetable here?

ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: There's a long way to go before the Supreme Court because first the judge would have to rule on it. This is just what's called an administrative hold or administrative stay just to give the parties time to really brief up their arguments that they could bring. And there's a few of them that the parties who are challenging these orders could have. Number one, there's a basic constitutional question, can the president even stop funding at all?

[18:05:04]

The Constitution says that Congress ought to do that.

There's a contract law question, which is if you and I were to form an agreement, Boris, whether you and I are you and I are you and me or if you're the government and I'm a grantee and I break my -- don't hold up my end of that bargain, can I sue you for that? So, that's the other one.

And then the other one is a First Amendment question. Are our groups being punished for the views they hold? These are just the arguments they're going to raise. We will likely see them next week when they fully brief this up.

SANCHEZ: The million dollar question, Elliot. I have a tendency to ask you difficult question.

WILLIAMS: I love -- bring it on, Boris. Bring it.

SANCHEZ: Is it constitutional for the president to say this is money that Congress has set aside for these programs, but actually we're not going to use that money the way that Congress said we should?

WILLIAMS: Probably not. But it's not a yes or no question. In all likelihood somebody wins here because of all the various ways identified there that there are problems in this action that's taken. But, again, these are complicated questions of constitutional law and the separation of powers. Scholars have been fighting about this stuff for a long time and this is probably the most aggressive test of it we have seen in our lives.

DAVID CHALIAN, CNN WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF: You promoted him to Justice Williams.

SANCHEZ: Yes, I did, and we do that often.

WILLIAMS: And I also didn't answer yes or no, so --

SANCHEZ: Probably not. So, David, some of this seems by design, because you have immense uncertainty at the federal level, and then you have real fear and a sense of chaos among these organizations that provide so many important resources to people, Head Start and Meals on Wheels. Do you think Trump was looking for this fight?

CHALIAN: Well, it's clearly by design. I mean, Stephen Miller, the deputy chief of staff, was just on with Jake Tapper and made that plane. I mean, he said point blank, this is Donald Trump, as executive of the executive branch, getting complete control of his government. That is what they see here. So by -- his argument was, by pausing all of this and assessing it and looking at it, which they believe, unlike Elliot, the administration believes they have the constitutional right to do so, it is about getting total control of the government. So, it is definitely by design orders. There's no doubt about that.

SANCHEZ: Lauren Tomlinson and Karen Finney are also with us. Lauren, to you, new Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt had some difficulty clarifying specific portions of what this action meant. The actual initial memo that was released, they had to put out a second version to clarify it further. Was there a space for the administration to say we're going to take a closer look at government spending and taxpayer dollars being spent on these programs without causing all of this confusion?

LAUREN TOMLINSON, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: I think they could have been clearer. The ambiguity of the first memo, I think, is what created a lot of this confusion here that they have thus tried to clean up, right, saying that not all federal spending assistance is going to be paused, that it's only going to be specific programs as it relates to the executive orders that he's released so far. You also saw, you know, Pete Hegseth, as new defense secretary today, do what is very common, I think, in the Department of Defense, which is pause new army contracts for a short time in order to review what money is going out the door as his prerogative as new secretary.

So, I think some of this was intended to be a pause, a true pause and a review. However, the frenzied nature that I think that they put it out with created a lot of confusion and. You know, frankly, members of Congress are going to be hearing about this nonstop because it's going to be affecting their constituencies. So, I think a lot of this is also a test, like you guys were saying, it is definitely a test to see how far that they can push this. I think there's a lot of constitutional questions that they want answered. They want to take this to the court and see how far they can push it.

But I think Congress right now is saying that it's okay, let's see what he wants to -- what he means here. Ultimately, I think they'll hear from their constituents that not all programs should be cut.

SANCHEZ: Some of them, like Don Bacon of Nebraska, has come out, he's in that retreat in Doral, Florida, with President Trump and other Republicans, saying that he's already heard from constituents who are worried about this.

I want to play some sound for you, Karen, from Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer. This is just a short while ago talking about this executive action.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. CHUCK LAWLER (D-NY): This decision is lawless, it's destructive, it's dangerous, it's cruel, it's illegal and it's unconstitutional. Donald Trump has done a lot of bad things in the last week, but nothing's worse than this.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: I'm curious about the messaging here, whether you think it's the right approach given that Donald Trump vowed on the campaign trail that he was going to be a disruptor, perhaps even more so than he was during his first term, and he's essentially following up on a campaign promise?

KAREN FINNEY, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yes. Look, I think we have to be very clear. Donald Trump is doing exactly what he said he would do and a lot of this is Project 2025 coming to life. And I would love to hear my Democrats say that over and over and over again. But here's the thing. polls, we even had a package last week talking with a Trump voter who said, well, I don't think he's really going to do raids. He was talking about immigration. Guess what? He's doing them.

So, we know from some of the polling, even some of his own voters kind of thought, ah, yes, he's going to do it, but he's not really.

[18:10:04]

No, he's going to do what he said he's going to do. Right now, we're talking about taking away meals from children. And there's nothing like these kinds of executive orders that have very direct impact on people's lives. Very quickly, I talked with somebody today who is organizing a group to make lunches for kids next week, because there are programs that don't know if they're going to be able to access the funds to pay for the food.

Real quick, people are calling their members offices, and guess what? Those House folks sitting down there in Florida, they have to face voters in two years. Donald Trump doesn't. And so the more people hear from their constituents, as they're sitting there trying to figure out how they're going to pay for these tax cuts for billionaires, when their constituents are saying, hold on, don't cut these programs, I think it means we're going to see more of a fracture with the Republicans as they're figuring out how are we going to do these two things and still win our seats.

SANCHEZ: And part of what Republicans are talking about in Doral, David, has to do with how they're going to approach the midterms, still about two years away, but I imagine some Democrats are seeing this as something that has potential to be part of messaging. How does this go into the next election?

CHALIAN: Well, to your point about the Democrats, I think today was the first day in the week-long Trump administration so far where the Democratic Party all of a sudden felt they had something to grab on to and galvanize around, and I don't mean Chuck Schumer standing at a microphone in the halls of the Senate. You just saw it from governors across a bunch of states really responding.

And you can disagree with me in a second, Karen. I just want to say that, like that what has been a big internal Democratic Party conversation that I have picked up on with sources since the start of the Trump administration has sort of been like, at sea, haven't figured out a way to respond, haven't settled on a pro chair or message. This news with the pause of this spending, and I realized the court now has put that on hold, was a galvanizing moment, as I talked to Democratic sources today, for the party to start standing up and in an organized fashion response.

FINNEY: I just quickly want to make us remember that Democratic A.G.s were ready to go. They were organizing in December. I talked with some of them. They knew that this challenge to birthright citizenship was coming and going to come quick. So, remember, they -- and they won in court already last week on that. So, part of the Democratic coalition is already on it. Governors have already started to prepare as we saw also with these immigration rates. Congress, they're catching up. They had a little more time.

WILLIAMS: The nonprofits that filed that suit also had a suit ready to go today --

FINNEY: Yes, they did.

WILLIAMS: -- about yesterday's action. It was quite remarkable how quickly they got it out

SANCHEZ: One of many legal fights I believe we'll be discussing for quite some time into the future.

Everyone, please stay with us. Plenty more news to come.

Just ahead, why Caroline Kennedy is now calling her cousin, RFK Jr., a predator as she urges the Senate to reject his nomination to lead the nation's top health agency.

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:15:00]

SANCHEZ: Caroline Kennedy has just released a scathing warning about her cousin, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., urging senators to reject his nomination to lead the Department of Health and Human Services. Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CAROLINE KENNEDY, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO AUSTRALIA: I've known Bobby my whole life. We grew up together. It's no surprise that he keeps birds of prey as pets, because Bobby himself is a predator.

I watched his younger brothers and cousins follow him down the path of drug addiction. His basement, his garage, his dorm room were always the center of the action, where drugs were available and he enjoyed showing off how he put baby chickens and mice in a blender to feed to his hawks. It was often a perverse scene of despair and violence.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: Let's bring back our team of political experts. David Chalian, I mean, of the things that have come up about R.F. Kennedy Jr., many of which he's confirmed, this one is especially odd and bizarre.

CHALIAN: Though fits with the pattern, right? I mean, it is, and it's obviously very powerful to hear from his cousin, Caroline Kennedy, who, you know, as she noted in the video, was in a government position and serving as ambassador, U.S. ambassador to Australia, during the Biden administration. So, when Bobby Kennedy Jr.'s family was coming out, you know, against him when he was first running against Joe Biden in the Democratic primary and then running an independent bid for the presidency before he got out and backed Donald Trump, she wasn't sort of leading the charge there, and so it's sort of a new, powerful voice, obviously, to that. But just hearing her words, it makes you step back.

And obviously she's doing this on the eve of his confirmation hearing just at the same moment that it is not clear yet that he has locked up all the votes he needs for confirmation. And there are some very loud voices in the Republican media echo chamber that are weighing in with concerns about him too.

And so, his path to confirmation is not assured. And what Caroline Kennedy is doing here is trying to make sure that the Earth beneath his feet remains tough to navigate in these days ahead.

SANCHEZ: Lauren, I wonder whether you think Republicans are going to stick with him. The president certainly has.

TOMLINSON: At this moment, for sure. But, you know, I think that Republican senators have a real job here to make sure that they thoroughly vet. Because while, you know, RFK is a popular figure, I think, especially a new popular figure in the MAGA movement, right, he used to be a Democrat just a few short years ago, so he doesn't neatly align, I think, with Republicans or with the MAGA movement per se. However, he did bring interesting coalition to this campaign that makes up the new Republican Party.

So, I think that has to be taken account into and that the president definitely deserves to have people around him that he wants advising him. However, I think the senators are going to take a real look at is HHS the right spot for him? And is there somewhere else that he could go?

[18:20:01]

FINNEY: Yes. You know, look, this was a payoff for his support for Donald Trump. But when you have The Wall Street Journal, which also editorialized against him on Monday, I believe, it was, Caroline Kennedy and The Wall Street Journal agreeing, that might be a moment of bipartisanship that we see in these hearings, talking about, frankly, a conflict of interest, not just his bizarre habits or birds of prey, but, you know, his relationship with trial lawyers around different vaccine lawsuits and specifically one regarding the HPV vaccine, where he has said he will continue to get a payout while he serves as HHS secretary. So, that is a real conflict of interest and the journal raised a number of other issues.

So, in addition to you may think he's weird, he's also got some very dangerous beliefs, as Caroline pointed out, vaccinated his own children, but prescribes to people not to vaccinate their children. So, he's got some odd positions that make him dangerous.

SANCHEZ: Some Democrats who seem to flirt with the idea of potentially voting for him. FINNEY: I suspect they will be disabused of that. I mean, you know, from what I'm hearing from activists, there is a lot of activity going on. I think you'll see some protests and people are making their voices heard in their Congressman's offices that they're very concerned about what him at the top of HHS could mean, particularly when -- we could have another pandemic. We don't know. And is this the person that you would want in charge of that very sensitive operation?

TOMLINSON: But I do think that his nomination also -- you know, it lends itself to we do want people who will question what is going on in government. And I think that is another thing, is you don't want someone who's going to go in as part of the industry that's going to rubber stamp everything.

So, you know, does he strike that balance is the question. But I do think it's worth noting that, you know, his vaccine positions while he said he's not definitely not going to ban vaccines, and he's not going to come in with that intent, having someone who will question the norms is definitely on par for this administration and something that the disruption of this election wanted.

SANCHEZ: And we should note John Thune, the majority leader in the Senate, said yesterday that that he felt that RFK Jr. was making progress with Republicans in explaining his positions, whether on the issue of abortion or vaccines or what have you, to get folks comfortable. I thought that was a telltale sign when the majority leader is coming out ahead to sort of assert that he's actually -- he's making it, he's good. That to me was like the first indication, like this is a little rocky at the moment. And so I do think we have to watch how he performs tomorrow very closely. Because to your point with Karen, I do think when we first was nominated was like, oh, he might get an interesting, like cross party coalition here. I'm not sure that's the case.

SANCHEZ: Before we go, I do want to play another part of what we heard from Caroline Kennedy. Let's listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KENNEDY: We are close family. None of that is easy to say. It also wasn't easy to remain silent last year when Bobby expropriated my father's image and distorted President Kennedy's legacy to advance his own failed presidential campaign, and then grovel to Donald Trump for a job.

Bobby continues to grandstand off my father's assassination and that of his own father. It's incomprehensible to me that someone who is willing to exploit their own painful family tragedies for publicity would be put in charge of America's life and death situations.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: Stepping back, David, overall, this is such an unusual circumstance to have the family member of a nominated cabinet secretary come out and basically say, this person cannot be confirmed. CHALIAN: Yes, it is unusual, though not unusual for Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who has experience with his family coming out opposing him and his ideas for years now, literally. And so, this, you know, is a dynamic that has been on display in the family. And sometimes we've seen the family still stand with him as a family member, but disagree with him. Caroline Kennedy is not doing that today.

SANCHEZ: David, Karen, Lauren, appreciate you all. Thanks so much for joining us.

Coming up, a closer look at how President Trump's freeze of federal grants and loans could affect you with hundreds, even thousands of programs at risk.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:25:00]

SANCHEZ: We are following breaking news tonight, a federal judge temporarily blocking part of President Trump's plan to freeze federal aid money minutes before it was set to take effect. It's a brief reprieve for all the critical programs threatened by the president's order.

CNN's Brian Todd is digging deeper for us. So, Brian, who stands to lose from this freeze?

BRIAN TODD, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Boris, advocates for nonprofits tell us the people who could be impacted range from domestic violence victims to people needing childcare. And we spoke to others who provide food assistance who believe they could be at risk as well.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

TODD (voice over): Anthony Velasquez, a chef at this Meals on Wheels facility in Takoma Park, Maryland, preps for tomorrow's deliveries. This is one of 5,000 Meals on Wheels programs across the U.S., serving more than 2 million elderly and homebound people, which have been worried that they could be affected by the federal freeze on grants and loans.

RUTH MASTERSON, MEALS ON WHEELS OF TAKOMA PARK, MARLYAND: The memo that came out from the White House is causing a great deal of anxiety and confusion and chaos. It puts a lot of our programs at threat and at risk.

TODD: The White House later tried to clarify, implying that Meals on Wheels may not be at risk. But Meals on Wheels does get much of its funding from a grant, and the freeze does affect grants.

PROF. JOAN ALKER, CENTER FOR CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY: There are many, many programs serving infants, toddlers, mothers, families, all across the country that are being affected today, Head Start programs, childcare funds, maternal and infant home visiting programs.

[18:30:02]

There are seniors impacted by this, people living with chronic disease.

TODD: The Trump administration today tried to clarify that. Social Security and Medicare are supposed to be exempt. Also said not to be affected, Pell grants, Head Start, funds for small businesses, farmers, rental assistance, and other similar programs.

KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: People who are receiving individual assistance, you will continue to receive that.

TODD: But still, uncertainty about Medicaid and other grant programs.

REPORTER: No individual now on Medicaid would see a cutoff because of the policy?

LEAVITT: I'll check back on that and get back to you.

TODD: Nonprofit advocates tell CNN school meal programs to combat domestic violence, and suicide prevention hotlines are also at risk, as is the home heating assistance program that helps people pay their heating bills.

MARK WOLFE, NATIONAL ENERGY ASSISTANCE DIRECTORS ASSOCIATION: The timing's terrible. You know, this is a very cold winter. It's also an expensive winter. About a million and a half families have yet to apply. Those families, if the freeze continues, we won't be able to help.

TODD: The uncertainty over what's affected taking a toll.

ALKER: We're already hearing of panic spreading across the country, particularly in programs that are serving moms and babies.

TODD: Tell me what your clients have called and what are they saying?

MASTERSON: Clients are afraid that they're not going to be receiving their meals.

TODD: Other organizations and agencies quick to feel the pinch.

ALKER: These programs, they have very small operating margins. They can't manage without funding, even for a short pause of two weeks. This will create chaos in the lives of many families.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

TODD (on camera): How much would a pause in funding for even one day or a few days mean? Ruth Masterson at that Meals on Wheels program that we visited says there it would have a ripple effect. Not only would people go without meals for that period, she says, but a lot of their food would go bad. So, they'd have to deploy their volunteers to throw out rotten food rather than actually serving people meals. So, Boris, we're getting our arms around this. A lot of people could be affected very negatively. SANCHEZ: Yes, potentially very far reaching effects. Brian Todd, thank you so much for that report.

Joining us now is Senator Ruben Gallego, a Democrat of Arizona, a member of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committees. Senator, thank you so much for being with us.

First, I just want to get your reaction to President Trump's funding freeze, the pause that was put on it by a federal court. Do you think the President has the authority, as the White House says, to take this step?

SEN. RUBEN GALLEGO (D-AZ): Absolutely not. What he's doing is illegal and it's causing chaos. You know, this is money that's been appropriated by Congress, Democratic and Republican members of Congress and Senators and passed into law. And the president doesn't have a right to, you know, just cut whatever he wants.

Now, just imagine if this power was taken over and used by a Democrat to go after Republican priorities. It's too much power that's given to one person. It's against what our founding fathers thought of the separation of powers and we certainly need to stop it, not just because of the constitutional reasons, because this is actually going to hurt people. It's going to cause people to lose a lot of opportunities, potentially veterans to not get the healthcare they need, the mental healthcare they need, as you saw, people that are potentially losing food, you know, energy assistance and even housing assistance.

SANCHEZ: Senator, we understand that some lawmakers have already heard from constituents about this. Have you -- what have you heard from people in Arizona?

GALLEGO: Well, the first thing we heard about was the Medicaid portal being shut down. And that is something that is extremely important in Arizona. We have hundreds of thousands of people that use this Medicaid portal in the state government, essentially, to make sure that people have access to doctors, to the healthcare that they need. The hospitals get paid and reimbursed. And the fact that it was just unilaterally shut down without any warning, really tells us what the priorities of this administration is. And they want to actually show strength, but at the same time, they're just going to cause chaos.

SANCHEZ: I've seen that you've also argued that this could also affect certain funding for law enforcement. Help us understand. Expand on that for us.

GALLEGO: Right. And so this is why, again, the administration was not very clear and has still not, has not been very clear. But I've been very intent on trying to get us millions and millions of dollars of money that we can for our firefighters and police officers in Arizona. Some of this money goes directly from the cities to the police officers. And we have the pass through coming from the federal government to the city.

This directive is not very clear, and we believe it's actually going to stop some of this funding that's going to hire more police officers, to keep police officers, to train police officers. And this is not what the American public wants. The American public does not want this type of chaos. The American public wants their taxpayer dollars to be used to protect them, not to, you know, be some kind of power play that this president is trying to make right now.

SANCHEZ: This is also happening as we're seeing immigration crackdowns all over the country, undocumented immigrants being rounded up in cities across the nation and being deported. I want to get your perspective on a core component of the debate over immigration that came up in the press briefing today, and that is defining whether people in this country without papers, the undocumented, are actually criminals.

[18:35:06]

The law has treated this issue as a civil matter in the past. The definition isn't exactly precise. Karoline Leavitt argued that these are criminals and should be deported. How do you see it and do you believe that your party has a consensus over this definition and this issue?

GALLEGO: Well, look, I know what Arizonans believe as their senator. If you cross the border without any permission, you came in illegally. And we are still very realistic about this. We know that people did cross the border and have been here for 10, 20 years. They have family members and, yes, they can be deported. But is it the best interest of this country for us to be separating families? No. Should we be using our police forces, our ICE agents and other federal government entities to go after criminal aliens? Absolutely. Should we try to figure out a way to make these families and keep them together, give them a work permit, give them access to become eventual legal permanent residents? I think that's something that we have seen Americans really support.

So, let's not get into the details. Americans are very clear. They want more border security, but they also want an opportunity for sane immigration reform that stabilizes and fixes our broken immigration system.

SANCHEZ: You were one of the few Democrats who voted in favor of the Laken Riley Act. It's now headed to President Trump's desk. You actually co sponsored it. You got criticism from some in your party over that. So, I go back to you. Do you think there is going to be consensus among Democrats over this issue that was seen as a liability in the last election cycle?

GALLEGO: Well, look, I think the Democrats need to come to a realization where the American public is, which is very simple. They want border security. They want criminal aliens to be deported, those that are danger to all of our communities, including the immigrant community. But they also want a sane pathway to citizenship.

And the days of Democrats not being for any type of border security and/or a limited type of border security, I think, are gone. We need to compromise. We need to make sure that the president is kept within boundaries so he doesn't engage in mass deportations. But at the same time, there are people in this country that are causing crimes, that are actually exploiting the immigrant communities that they live in and, at the same time, we know that there are communities that we want to stay here. We want them to get work permits. We want them to continue to grow their businesses, and we want them to be part of the American fabric. But the old ways of us thinking about border security and immigration are just not going to work anymore.

SANCHEZ: Senator Ruben Gallego, we very much appreciate you sharing your perspective with us.

GALLEGO: Gracias. Thank you.

SANCHEZ: Thank you.

Just ahead, President Trump's attempts to pause nearly all foreign aid causing major turmoil at USAID, with dozens of senior officials now on leave. We're going to get reaction from former Trump National Security Adviser John Bolton in just minutes.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:40:00]

SANCHEZ: Tonight, the White House is rejecting calls from Republican allies, like Senator Tom Cotton, to reinstate security for John Bolton and Mike Pompeo, two men who served in the first Trump administration and who now face threats on their lives from Iran. Listen to this exchange.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REPORTER: Is the president open to reconsidering his decision?

LEAVITT: The president was asked and answered this yesterday and he was firm in his decision despite some of the comments that you had referenced. And he's made it very clear that he does not believe American taxpayers should fund security details for individuals who have served in the government for the rest of their lives. And there's nothing stopping these individuals that you mentioned from obtaining private security.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: We're joined now by Trump's former national security adviser, Ambassador John Bolton. Ambassador, thanks so much for being with us.

How do you respond to what we just heard from the White House today?

JOHN BOLTON, FORMER TRUMP NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER: Well, I don't respond. There's no real point to it. I mean, this is a very serious issue. Obviously, it affects me personally, but it affects not only the group of people who worked in the Trump administration on the Qassem Soleimani operation, for which Iran is now threatening us, but for future employees in the executive branch, whether they're Republican or Democratic.

And I've learned just before coming on here that, apparently, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Mark Milley has had his Department of Defense security team pulled by newly installed Secretary Hegseth. So, that's a commentary that, that shows this problem really is quite live and I think should be concerning.

SANCHEZ: Ambassador, President Trump wants to pause nearly all U.S. foreign aid, which encompasses everything from weapons to life saving medicines. What could be the consequences of a move like that?

BOLTON: Well, you know, I speak is an alumnus of the U.S. Agency for International Development in the Reagan administration when we wanted to make major changes in the direction of the agency. And when I became the assistant administrator in charge of policy for the agency, I tried to do something similar to that, maybe without as much effect as is happening now. I think it's legitimate for a new administration to review what's going on in the various departments and agencies of the government.

I don't know the full details of what the Trump administration has done, but it would be irresponsible not to see if there aren't improvements that could be made and to continue simply as if the election had not occurred just doesn't make any sense. I think people need to calm down a little bit before going hyperthyroid about what the effect of a pause.

[18:45:06]

Not a -- not a cancellation, not an effort to impound the money, a pause in the disbursement of money is going to cause if there are specific areas where there's a problem, then it should be addressed. But reviewing the massive amounts of money that we're spending, whether its on foreign aid or domestic programs, I think is responsible government, just everybody should chill out a little bit here.

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: There was also the fact that dozens of senior career officials at USAID were placed on leave amid an investigation into what was described as alleged resistance to President Trump. What does that tell you about the second Trump administration?

BOLTON: Well, I think the first question, which I don't know the answer to, perhaps you do, is what did they do? If -- if they did, in the worst case scenario, say, we're not going to carry out that order, we're going to subvert the Trump administration, then -- then that's a problem, because that's not what civil servants are supposed to do.

If, however, the new Trump team didn't understand what these senior aide officials were trying to do, and they thought they were trying to implement the regulations, then putting them on leave, administrative leave is clearly incorrect decision. But honestly, I don't -- I don't think -- on television, we ought to make a five-second judgment when we don't know the facts, do we?

SANCHEZ: Ambassador John Bolton, appreciate your point of view. Thanks for joining us.

BOLTON: Glad to be with you.

SANCHEZ: Coming up, a new source of concern and fear for immigrants in Oklahoma. The state school board, taking a step toward requiring proof of legal status before enrolling kids.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: Tonight, there's another kind of immigration crackdown in the works. This one in Oklahoma schools.

CNN's Whitney Wild has more on the rule and its potential impact.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

WHITNEY WILD, CNN LAW ENFORCEMENT CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): As protesters gathered outside, the decision was swift inside.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Item passes --

WILD: In a 6 to 0 vote, the Oklahoma board of education approved a new rule requiring parents and legal guardians to show their citizenship or immigration status when enrolling kids in school.

Supporters of the rule insist citizenship data and information is critical for officials to figure out how to allocate resources.

RYAN WALTERS, OKLAHOMA SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION: Our rule around illegal immigration accounting is simply that it is to account for how many students of illegal immigrants are in our schools.

WILD: Skeptics worry the state will capture identifying information. That fear was confirmed during Tuesday's hearing.

KATIE QUEBEDEAUX, BOARD MEMBER: Will you be able to go and look and say this child is legal, this child is not? Or is it anonymous?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We would be able to gather the information.

WILD: In an interview with CNN, Superintendent Ryan Walters made clear this is also an effort to help the Trump administration find families in the U.S. illegally.

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: So which is it? Educational resources or enforcement of immigration policies?

WALTERS: Oh, it's absolutely both. I've been crystal clear on that. I'm saying that we are going to work with the Trump administration to enforce their anti-illegal immigration policy. That includes giving them information about students in our schools, families enrolled in our schools so they can make the decisions on how to deport families together and how to identify criminals in our school system.

WILD: Walters would not rule out raids in schools.

KEILAR: Do you think that would be traumatic for students in schools? And I'm talking about all students.

WALTERS: What my big concern is, is what illegal immigration has done to our education system.

TASNEEM AL-MICHAEL, FORMER UNDOCUMENTED STUDENT IN OKLAHOMA: The idea here is to keep as many young people and to keep as many undocumented people out of public education.

WILD: Tasneem al-Michael was born in Brunei, came to the U.S. as a baby, and says for years he was an undocumented student in Oklahoma.

What are you most afraid of?

AL-MICHAEL: I mean, you said it yourself, afraid. The key term here is instilling fear in the hearts of immigrant children, in the hearts of immigrant parents. It does create a sense of anxiety, chronic and constant anxiety about, am I safe? You know, schools are supposed to be the safest place for a kid to be able to exist.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

WILD (on camera): This is not going into effect immediately. This is far from a done deal. The next stop for this rule is the Oklahoma legislature, Boris.

SANCHEZ: Whitney Wild, thank you so much for that report.

Coming up, how Trump's pick to lead the FBI has battled with officials inside the agenc he now hopes to lead.

We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: President Trump's pick to lead the FBI, Kash Patel, has a long history of battling with officials inside the very agency that he could soon be charged with running.

CNN national security reporter Zachary Cohen has new reporting for us.

Zach, what's driving some of this distrust between Patel and the intelligence community?

ZACHARY COHEN, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY REPORTER: Yeah. Boris, it's clear that the distrust between Kash Patel and the intelligence community runs both ways. Now, a lot of this centers around Patel's efforts during the first Trump administration to declassify and release documents related to the FBI's investigation into connections between Russia and Donald Trump's 2016 presidential campaign, an investigation that Patel believes was driven by -- the so-called deep state.

Our reporting shows this really came to a head in 2020 at the end of Trumps first term when the CIA referred Patel to the Justice Department for a criminal investigation. Now, details of this referral have not been previously reported, but we're learning from our sources that the CIA asked DOJ to investigate whether Patel shared classified information about the Russia probe with people inside the government who lack the proper level of security clearance to see that information.

Now, it's important to note, Patel was never charged criminally by either Trump or Biden's DOJ, and there is no indication that national security prosecutors at DOJ took steps to escalate the referral beyond an initial review.

Patel also denies that he ever mishandled classified information. But we're also learning that intelligence officials placed what is known as a red flag on Patel's security clearance file to document their broader concerns about his handling of classified information during Trump's first term.

Now, we have a statement from a spokesperson for Patel saying, quote, the leaking of years old bogus referrals is evidence our government is in desperate need of reform. It's ironic that the same people who try to stir up the phony narrative that Kash would abuse power are the very ones abusing power to attempt to damage Kash.

Now, to be sure, all this and more will come up during Kash Patel's Thursday confirmation hearing on Capitol Hill. He's going to face a lot of tough questions from senators before he's ultimately confirmed as the next FBI director.

SANCHEZ: One of many confirmation hearings that we are set to hear from Trump nominees that could be extremely controversial.

Zach Cohen, appreciate the reporting. Thanks so much.

And thank you so much for joining us this evening. I'm Boris Sanchez in for Wolf Blitzer in THE SITUATION ROOM.

"ERIN BURNETT OUTFRONT" starts right now.