Return to Transcripts main page

The Situation Room

Sources Say, Trump Expected To Get Back Classified Documents Taken By FBI; Former USAID Leaders Condemn Trump's Attempts To Dismantle Agency; Trump Admin Tries To Walk Back His Gaza Comments Amid Global Outrage; Police: 100,000 Eggs Stolen From PA Distribution Center As Supply Crunch Sends Prices Soaring; Wolf Blitzer Honored For Excellence In Journalism. Aired 6-7p ET

Aired February 05, 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]

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN HOST: Happening now, the breaking news, President Trump is now expected to get back the classified documents and other materials the FBI seized from Mar-a-Lago. Stand by for details on that, as the new attorney general is carrying out Trump's agenda to overhaul the Justice Department.

Also tonight, as President Trump's plan for a U.S. takeover of Gaza sending shockwaves around the world, his administration is suggesting he didn't mean it when he clearly and very publicly said he thought Palestinians should leave their home permanently.

Plus, new signs of frustration and desperation as eggs are in short supply and prices are soaring, authorities now trying to crack the case of a brazen heist of tens of thousands of eggs.

Welcome to our viewers in the U.S. and around the world. Wolf Blitzer is off today. I'm Jim Sciutto, and you're in The Situation Room.

First to the breaking news here in The Situation Room, sources tell CNN President Trump is now in the process of getting back the classified documents seized by the FBI during the 2022 search of his Mar-a-Lago estate.

Our Chief Legal Affairs Correspondent, Paula Reid, is gathering all the details. Paula, tell us. That's what we're learning and what does the law say about this?

PAULA REID, CNN CHIEF LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Jim. Now, that this case is closed, President Trump is expected to get his stuff back and that is expected to include some classified documents. Now, the FBI searches Mar-a-Lago property back in August 2022, and at that time, the FBI found approximately 100 classified documents mixed in with other stuff, like birthday cards, golf shirts, and even a photo of Celine Dion.

And now that the case is closed, there is a process for him to get much of this back. But I think some people obviously have some questions about the classified materials. But now that he is president again, he has broad discretion over classified materials, which is why he is expected to have those returned when anyone else would not.

SCIUTTO: Paula, you also have some new reporting on Attorney General Pam Bondi's priorities as she takes over the Justice Department.

REID: That's right. Today was her first day on the job and she signed over a dozen memos laying out how the Justice Department will pursue the priorities of the Trump administration.

So, she laid out several different objectives. The first one, the most notable one, is that she's going to review cases that have been brought against President Trump. Not only the two federal cases, the classified documents case we just referenced, the election subversion case, both brought by Jack Smith, but also the case in Manhattan, the so called hush money case where he was convicted, as well as a civil case that he also faced.

She also signed memos dealing with everything from DEI, something we've seen across the government change as Trump has taken office. Not only the internal policies, but externally. She said that the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department will be used to prosecute what she describes as illegal use of DEI in the private sector or educational institutes that accept federal funds.

She also just laid out how their overall priorities will change and how she wants prosecutors to shift their focus to immigration, human trafficking, and protecting law enforcement.

Another interesting change in these memos, changes at the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearm, ATF. They're going to shift their focus away from alcohol and tobacco enforcement and instead use those resources to pursue other priorities, like immigration enforcement, and drug smuggling.

SCIUTTO: Paula Reid, thanks so much.

Our legal and political experts are joining me now. Laura Coates, why would the Justice Department be returning these classified documents? Is there a legal, is there a national security reason to do so?

LAURA COATES, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF LEGAL ANALYST: Well, technically, now that he's the President of the United States, the idea of him having access to classified material is not an unprecedented action. The real challenge here is, of course, they still have not gotten to the bottom of whether or not he misused the data when he was no longer the president of the United States, when he still had them in his possession. That has fallen to the wayside with the dismissal of that case against him in Florida, but he is technically able to access it again.

I do wonder if some aspects of it, though, are performative or trying to simply appease him because surely he will be debriefed and brought up to speed on a whole number of issues that have nothing to do with things that happened four, maybe six years ago.

[18:05:02] So, I suspect that they're giving it to him to suggest that he can now use it for however he'd like to say, see, this is what it was, but will it be revealing as to the extent of what it was? I don't believe so.

SCIUTTO: Andrew, does the case go away entirely here? I mean, clearly, this Justice Department is not going to investigate it. But is he free and clear for facing any consequences of this, even when he does eventually leave office?

ANDREW MCCABE, CNN SENIOR LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST: Practically, yes. The idea that the Justice Department would come back and revive one of these cases, either the documents case or the January 6th case, is essentially never going to happen. So, this is over.

As far as his access to those documents now going forward, the president of the United States is singularly responsible for the protection of our sensitive national information. All authority, the classification system that we use to protect sensitive information comes from the president's authority.

Technically, he doesn't have a clearance because he doesn't need one. He is the president. So, he's entitled to access any of the government's most sensitive information anytime he wants.

SCIUTTO: Carrie, you were assistant attorney general for national security --

CARRIE CORDERO, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Counsel.

SCIUTTO: Counsel to the assistant attorney general for national security with the national security job and focus here. Precedent is important. What does it mean that in the future a former president can take boxes and boxes of classified documents home, put them in his bathroom, places where there was public access where it was not protected, some of the most sensitive secrets of the country were not protected and do so without legal consequences?

CORDERO: Yes, I think there, there is a precedent here. Hopefully, we can hope that future presidents, future government officials who have access to that type of information will handle it properly when they leave office. There certainly is an opportunity if the Congress wanted to over the next few years to pass a law that provides more details about the mechanics of how these boxes get packed up. You know, we did have instance of former President Biden ended up having classified information. Mike Pence had classified information and they didn't mean to. And so those were resolved because there wasn't the issue that President Trump had where there was this back and forth with the Justice Department of not giving the documents back. You know, had he not refused to give them back, there never would have been a criminal prosecution, in my opinion.

So, I think it pertains more to the issue of proper handling of classified information and there's potentially a role for legislators.

SCIUTTO: And that was the difference between the Biden and Pence cases, right, was that when they were asked to give it back, they gave it back.

CORDERO: Yes. I mean, in my judgment in this case, and Andy's absolutely right, this case is over. It is that investigation is over. And future presidents, I think, will potentially have more to be able to look back on to assert authorities over this.

SCIUTTO: So, Lulu, speaking of cases that are over we now have an attorney general planning to order a review of all the cases brought against Donald Trump including the New York criminal case, but also, of course the January 6th cases, all of them that are now subject to the president's pardons, tell us the significance of that, because, you know, this investigating the investigators thing is the buzzword here. But these were cases with substance. These were cases that grand juries, in fact, saw evidence to indict.

LULU GARCIA-NAVARRO, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: There were certainly cases with substance, and I think the wider context here is that we are not going to see a Justice Department that functioned in the way that the old Justice Department did. We are not going to see an FBI that functioned in the way that the old FBI did, or the CIA. All these institutions that we have come to rely on to act as checks and balances, to act as enforcers of the law, those are not going to be there anymore operating in the same way.

And that is what we're seeing right now. We're seeing loyalists to Donald Trump being put in. We're seeing Elon Musk going through our government, deciding who stays, who goes, an unelected billionaire. And so at the end of the day, the wider context in which all of this sits while we talk about, you know, these cases are not going to be there anymore, blah, blah, blah, the fact of the matter is that what Donald Trump is actually trying to do is refashion the government and fill it with loyalists.

SCIUTTO: And, listen, I know that the criticism from the right will be these were political cases. The question, Laura, is that when you look at this, if you have a Justice Department that will not -- that will take away, in effect, the ability or the desire to investigate anybody currently in government, right? What are the consequences in terms of oversight? And what license does that give to those in power today to act even outside the bounds of the law?

COATES: What you describe is the elimination of oversight and the blurring of the separation of powers. It is critical in any functioning democracy that we have the balance of powers and that people do not feel incentivized politically to take action or politically to refrain from taking action.

What this does is it has the impression for the American people that the overwhelming majority of cases that the FBI, the CIA, the investigators, local prosecutors are handling have to do with a man named Trump or even with January 6th.

[18:10:08]

The overwhelming majority, and I mean to the nth degree of cases that are handled, have nothing to do with that particular discrete date and time or that particular presidential administration or the civilian that was Donald Trump. And so, if you compromise the ability to have autonomy and independence in any of those entities, including in the prosecutorial ranks, then you undermine the ability to pursue justice in an objective and critical way for the overwhelming of Americans who are victimized by people who commit crimes.

SCIUTTO: So, Laura brought up the FBI. Andy, you, of course, served there. He's now going after FBI agents who investigated anything related to January 6th or himself, threatening to fire many of them. And this is a functioning department that is facing many threats today, domestic terror, foreign terror drug trafficking, you name it.

Can this FBI credibly function and deliver on those priorities and missions when you have the administration going after thousands of FBI agents?

MCCABE: Just the threat of going after thousands of FBI agents will change the way the FBI functions and how effectively or not it pursues and accomplishes its mission. If thousands of agents are actually purged and terminated, the degradation in their ability to accomplish a mission is absolutely unquestionable. They will be able to do less. There are only 12,000 FBI agents in the entire FBI. They've handed over now a list of somewhere in the neighborhood of 5,000 employees.

Not all of those are agents, but still, if you're talking about a thousand or more agents, that's a massive impact to the ability of the organization to protect us from child predators, terrorists, spies to stop the flow of fentanyl across our borders. All the great things that the FBI does every single day, they will do less of.

SCIUTTO: And, by the way, as you list those missions, those are not partisan missions. Those are missions that the American people carry on.

MCCABE: This idea the email that we saw from Emil Bove today that says, despite his assurances that they're not going after people, it still makes it perfectly clear that anyone who has exhibited, you know, partisan tendencies to weaponize the FBI. The idea that the FBI contains some group of rank and file agents who are radical left- leaning partisans who are out there ignoring the directions given to them by their supervisors in order to target Republicans is fantasy. It is a fever dream.

SCIUTTO: Just quickly, Carrie, do any of these legal challenges stand up here? I mean, you have lawsuits, you have temporary restraining orders. Can they protect these agents?

CORDERO: We'll see in the long-term, but I think those cases will take a really long time to sort of work themselves out.

I think the big question that we're going to have to watch to see with respect to the attorney general, though, just briefly is the world events and the types of challenges that the FBI deals with are going to happen no matter what these stated priorities are today or these efforts to do these internal-ish reviews and issues. There is going to be some international event. Hopefully not a terrorist attack but there will be a counterintelligence threat. There will be something from a forward adversary. There will be a cyber attack and those are going to be the responsibilities of the new attorney general and she will have to address them, notwithstanding these other --

SCIUTTO: China won't stop spying, drug smugglers won't stop smuggling and so on, the threats continue.

Thanks so much to all of you.

Just ahead, President Trump's shock and awe proposal for the U.S. to take over Gaza. Some administration officials are trying to clean up his comments. Will the world buy it?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:15:00]

SCIUTTO: Breaking news, five former leaders of USAID from, we should note, across Republican and Democratic administrations are speaking out against President Trump's attempts to dismantle the humanitarian agency.

CNN's State Department Reporter Jennifer Hansler has the details for us. Jennifer, what did they say?

JENNIFER HANSLER, CNN STATE DEPARTMENT REPORTER: Well, Jim, these five former leaders from across Republican and Democratic administrations are speaking out against President Trump's attempts to dismantle the U.S. agency for international development and they are also calling on Congress to protect its statutory authority. These five leaders, who I'm going to name you, Samantha Power, Gail Smith, Andrew Natsios, J. Brian Atwood, and Peter McPherson, who served across administrations, both Democrat and Republican, are also defending USAID's workforce, saying that these are dedicated public servants who have served their careers in the U.S. government. And they are saying an attempt to weaken or even destroy the U.S. Agency for International Development, quote, is to the benefit of neither political party and the detriment of all Americans.

And, of course, this comes after a flurry of actions taken by the Trump administration to dismantle and potentially abolish the independent agency. This is something that Democrats say is not legal. We've seen a number of actions, most recently last night. from USAID saying they are going to put almost all of their employees with a few exceptions on paid leave come Friday and bring back all of their employees from abroad. This has caused fear, it has caused confusion across the workforce who is telling us that they have received almost no information about what comes next.

And now, Jim, a lot of times these people are serving abroad for multiple years. Their children are in schools, their spouses have jobs. So, this is totally throwing a wrench into all of these plans that they thought they had set. for the coming months and years and a lot are asking what is going to happen next with their jobs and what is going to happen with the future of aid, which could have serious, serious consequences for people suffering abroad, be it from starvation, from disasters, as well as for U.S. national security.

[18:20:05]

Jim?

SCIUTTO: There's so many assignments abroad. I've seen that USAID stamp on aid arriving. Jennifer Hansler at the State Department, thanks so much.

And just ahead, President Trump's shock and awe proposal for the U.S. to take over, to take ownership of Gaza. Some administration officials are trying to clean up his comments. Will the world buy it?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCIUTTO: Tonight, Trump administration officials are attempting to walk back the president's just stunning suggestion that Palestinians should be permanently removed from Gaza so that the U.S. can take it over, in Trump's own words, own it.

[18:25:04]

CNN's Jeff Zeleny is at the White House. Jeff, we heard the president's comments quite publicly last night on camera, repeated multiple times that the U.S. would take over Gaza, push the Palestinians out, they would be on pieces of land donated, he claimed, by Jordan and Egypt. How does the administration claim now he didn't say that?

JEFF ZELENY, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Jim, he certainly talked about the permanent resettlement. And what we heard today was the White House softening its tone somewhat. It's really the administration was scrambling to devise policy around what the president had said just last evening here, of course, those stunning comments, so now talking about a temporary relocation, if you will.

But listen to the sound here from Secretary of State Marco Rubio as well as White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, again, softening their language compared to the president's.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: I can confirm that the president is committed to rebuilding Gaza and to temporarily relocating those who are there, because as I've showed you repeatedly, it is a demolition site.

MARCO RUBIO, SECRETARY OF STATE: So, what he's very generously has offered is the ability of the United States to go in and help with debris removal, help with munitions removal, help with reconstruction, the rebuilding of homes and businesses and things of this nature, so that then people can move back in. But in the meantime, they'll have to live somewhere. (END VIDEO CLIP)

ZELENY: So, a softened tone there, but the point remains that Palestinians are not interested in leaving their homeland. And this received considerable black lash, really, from around the world from European leaders to the Arab nations, as well as Republican senators asking about the commitment for sending money and U.S. forces there as well.

But, Jim, there's also some political backlash from this. Of course, in the election, this was front and center in the president's defeat over Vice President Kamala Harris.

But a key group that certainly we saw in Michigan and elsewhere changed their name today. Take a look at this. A group formerly known as the Arab-Americans for Trump has changed their name to Arab- Americans for Peace. And they said this, we appreciate the President's offer to clean and rebuild Gaza. However, the purpose should be to make Gaza habitable for Palestinians and no one else.

So, Jim, as we sit here tonight, considerably different mood than one day ago, but I am told the president is still committed to this idea. He said nothing else has worked.

SCIUTTO: He certainly has not walked back his own comments.

Jeff Zeleny at the White House, thanks so much.

So, now to the Middle East, where Trump's Gaza plan is adding to the uncertainty and anxiety in an already uncertain and anxious region.

CNN's Jeremy Diamond is there getting reaction.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JEREMY DIAMOND, CNN JERUSALEM CORRESPONDENT (voice over): In the ruins of Gaza, Sammy Ramadan is determined to clear the rubble where his home once stood.

We will not leave. Occupation and colonization will vanish and we will stay, he says. As long as we live on this land, we will stay. We will die here.

Like so many here, he swiftly rejected President Trump's proposal to permanently displace Gaza's 2 million Palestinians in favor of a U.S. takeover, and the president's rationale for doing so.

DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: What's the alternative? Go where? There's no other alternative. If they had an alternative, they'd much rather not go back to Gaza and live in a beautiful alternative that's safe.

DIAMOND: Palestinians say they are undeterred by the scale of the destruction.

I don't care what Trump says or anyone else. Look, my house is completely destroyed. There's not even a roof. But here I am. I'm staying.

Jordan and Egypt, the two countries Trump is pushing to accept Palestinian refugees, reiterating that Palestinians must be able to remain in Gaza amid what will be a years-long reconstruction. While Trump says his proposal is a humanitarian one, human rights experts call it a crime against humanity.

NOURA ERAKAT, HUMAN RIGHTS ATTORNEY AND PROFESSOR, RUTGERS UNIVERSITY: Their removal is equivalent to their forced exile, permanent and forced exile, the ethnic cleansing of Palestine, and the denial of their return, which is already a Palestinian condition.

DIAMOND: So there's no question in your mind that what President Trump is suggesting here is ethnic cleansing?

ERAKAT: There should be no question in anybody's mind. Trump is saying it himself.

DIAMOND: Trump's proposal is being heralded on the right wing of Israeli politics, where lawmakers have long pushed for the forcible displacement of Palestinians.

BEZALEL SMOTRICH, ISRAELI FINANCE MINISTER: Those who carried out the most horrific massacre on our land will find themselves losing their land forever. Now, with God's help, we will work to permanently bury the dangerous idea of a Palestinian state.

DIAMOND: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu calling Trump's proposal worth pursuing. A broad smile making clear he's thrilled by Trump's return.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

[18:30:00]

DIAMOND (on camera): And, Jim, the White House is now partially walking back Trump's proposal for the permanent displacement of Palestinians from Gaza, saying instead that this would only be temporary. But Trump's comments have already reverberated throughout the region and will surely have an impact on what we expected to start this week. And that was the resumption of negotiations between Israel and Hamas over extending this six week ceasefire. Amid all of this hubbub, still no clarity on whether the Israeli prime minister will actually go for that extension and seek to end the war in Gaza. Jim?

SCIUTTO: Jeremy Diamond, thanks so much. Let's break this down now with our political panel. And, Jasmine, you have the advantage of having been in the room yesterday and again today. The White House says today the president was speaking only about a temporary move, just for the sake of folks who may have missed it last night. I'm going to play what he actually said last night.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: The only reason the Palestinians want to go back to Gaza is they have no alternative. It's right now a demolition site. They can live out their lives in peace and harmony instead of having to go back and do it again. The U.S. will take over the Gaza Strip and we will do a job with it too. We'll own it.

Everybody I've spoken to loves the idea of the United States owning that piece of land.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: And if there's any doubt, he also said, I see a long-term ownership position. So, you have the White House and the Secretary of State trying to walk that back today. What is the actual position? What's the actual policy?

JASMINE WRIGHT, REPORTER, NOTUS: Well, I think it's actually a bit unclear. After Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, spoke today trying to kind of clarify and maybe put some more parameters around Trump's comments that didn't exist when he announced it last night. I think it left more questions than necessarily she and Secretary of State Rubio and even Mike Waltz, who spoke earlier today, gave. The fact of, you know, if U.S. taxpayers are not paying to rebuild Gaza, how does it happen? How do we own the Gaza Strip if we don't pay for it? What are the conditions that Trump is going to make the decision on whether or not to put boots on the ground, something that Karoline said that he had not committed to, although his comments last night sounded a bit different.

So, there are a lot of questions around this. It's interesting because I was talking to one person close to both the White House and Capitol Hill, and they said that they weren't surprised that Trump made these comments, but they were surprised that Trump brought it on so quickly within his administration. But Karoline gave a reason basically saying that after talking to Steve Witkoff, the special envoy who came back from Gaza and hearing his stories and hearing the pictures that he took, Trump was really kind of incest to get this process moving.

And so I think that they're going to spend a lot more days clarifying exactly what Trump means, the logistics behind it and really what his intentions are if it is not some of the things that these nation states are kind of accusing him.

SCIUTTO: Erin, the thing is, there's some consistency here. When you look at this proposal for Gaza and Trump saying, again, quite publicly, that he wants Greenland and is pressuring Denmark to give Greenland, that he wants the Panama Canal back and is pressuring Panama to do just that, it seems that the president feels That he has the right and the power to do this, to take over land, foreign land, right, because he sees it as good policy.

ERIN PERRINE, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST, AXIOM STRATEGIES: I'm not sure that he has the power and the authority to do it, but let's look at Panama as the Panama Canal. Let's look at the Panama Canal as an example on this, right? He said that this should not be controlled by the Chinese entities in the way it is, because that is not helpful for the mass transport and the ability for trade to consistently happen.

So, what happens? He puts pressure on Panama. Maybe not the way I would do it, but it's the Donald Trump way of doing it. And what happens? They end their initiative with China. They have seen moves where pressure is working.

I believe, and I'm not speaking on behalf of the White House, but I believe what President Trump is trying to do here, given CNN's reporting that he had been having conversations about this, that he's trying to build an international coalition, and not stick American taxpayers with the bill.

He is saying, again, we are -- and I know there are a lot in the media who want to try and say, oh, look, the neocons are excited because we're back to nation building in this old wing of the Republican Party versus Donald Trump. No. What I believe he is trying to say here is that we need to be having a coalition of the world helping rebuild Gaza.

We can take the lead. We can be the ones on the ground saying, let's get this stuff moving. We need other people putting resources in here. It should not be alone on the United States, which is what Donald Trump has pursued. Not the cleanest way that it was rolled out, but, again, this is Donald Trump. Throw the sledgehammer down and let's go.

SCIUTTO: Do you buy that, Maria? Because it's not dissimilar from, for instance, the way folks describe the tariff threat, right? That this is purely a negotiating posture, and he will move towards the center.

MARIA CARDONA, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yes, you know, there's so much spin trying to cover up for the craziness, the insanity, and the chaos that Donald Trump has caused ever since he got elected.

The tariff thing is just ridiculous. What Mexico and Canada agreed to are things they had already agreed to do and then Donald Trump takes credit for it. That's just ridiculous.

[18:35:00]

And it's a weird, weird way to try to put together an international coalition by pissing off all of your international partners, announcing something that is just so off-the-wall nuts in a press conference before you try to bring people together to say, look, we need to look for real solutions here. Here's an idea. What do you guys think about it?

This to me is just a sense of a huge betrayal of the American people who, during the campaign, Donald Trump not only promised them that his priority would be to bring down the cost of groceries, gas and rent, he's doing everything just opposite of that, but he also continued to complain about how the world was on fire. He wanted to lessen America's engagement abroad, wanted to have less entanglements on foreign soil. He is throwing a grenade on embers that are still lit. And this is not the way to demonstrate even keeled leadership. It's just the opposite.

SCIUTTO: And we should note that the president also said yesterday that we'll do what is necessary when he was asked about sending U.S. troops to Gaza, and if it's necessary, sending U.S. troops, he said, we'll do that. Whether he follows through on that is another question. I'm sure we'll be talking about it again.

Thanks so much to all of you.

Just ahead, insight on the newest attempt at a presidential purge with the CIA, offering so-called buyout offers to its entire workforce.

Michigan Senator Elissa Slotkin, former CIA analyst herself, is here live.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:40:00]

SCIUTTO: We're getting new reaction to the breaking news. Five former leaders of the USAID from across Republican and Democratic administrations speaking out against President Trump's attempts to dismantle The entire humanitarian agency.

We're joined now by Senator Elissa Slotkin, Democrat from Michigan. Thanks so much for joining.

SEN. ELISSA SLOTKIN (D-MI): Thanks for having me.

SCIUTTO: So, this is a bipartisan condemnation of this move. I wonder, do you think that this and other efforts so far will stand in the way of this, will rescue USAID's missions?

SLOTKIN: Well, I think for all of the work that's going on right now, for all of the purging of people at the Department of Justice, USAID, I think there are legal cases going up right now in real time, and I think there's some real challenges.

I don't think anyone, certainly home in Michigan, has a problem with us looking at trimming the government. That's not the question. I worked in the federal government. I can tell you there's definitely fat on the bone. But it's the way they're going about it that just has no strategic benefit to the United States, right?

I mean, certainly I believe what General Mattis always said about development, which is, if you're going to cut my aid, you better give me more money for ammunition. You know, it helps us prevent conflict. So, I think legal action plus the visibility is important.

SCIUTTO: Yes. They say in Afghanistan, the Taliban begins where the road ends, right? Some of the projects have a national security implication.

Your Democratic colleague, Senator Brian Schatz, as you know, has announced a blanket hold on Trump's State Department nominees until the attack on USAID is reversed. I wonder if you think Democrats should be doing more of that, for instance, on DOD nominees, et cetera, as a way, given you're in the minority, of course, to attempt to stand in the way of the things you truly disagree with.

SLOTKIN: Yes, I think there's, there is very active conversations happening about that, particularly, I would say, first and foremost, with Treasury, right? I mean, that's where we have Elon Musk inside the bowels of the Treasury with access to taxpayer information, now apparently Medicare information, health stuff, just very sensitive.

And I can tell you, I'm hearing from Michiganders who are like, look, looking at the government and where to trim it is one thing. Access to our data when we don't know your sort of your goals with that data, I think is giving people the heebie-jeebies. And so that I think is a very live conversation about the treasury nominees.

SCIUTTO: The CIA, as you know, has now become the first major national security agency to be offered these buyouts by the Trump administration. You, of course, served in the CIA prior to your time on Capitol Hill. Do you see this administration as running a political purge, in effect, of the CIA? And if you do believe that, does this pose a threat to the country?

SLOTKIN: Yes. I mean, I think, again, things that are going on at the Department of Justice, I think, meet the definition of a purge. You're getting rid of people because of the cases they worked on, again, as civil servants doing their jobs. I think these blanket offers are a different thing. You know, they're trying to shrink the government.

But, again, you know, when you start telling people that they're making these offers to flight safety instructors or the people who test our water and they're not going to be replaced, that's the goal, right? People say, well, wait a minute, is there no rhyme or reason to the way we're doing this?

And for the CIA, I mean, you know, Americans don't know half of what goes on to protect them from threats. They have no idea what goes on in the dark of night. And these are the people doing it. And I think it's just like taking a machete to the federal government without a concern for how it impacts our national security.

SCIUTTO: Yes. I mean, I think of those stars at the headquarters, they're oftentimes not named. You don't even know the names of people who lost their lives defending the country. I want to ask about Gaza, because you've called Trump's Gaza proposal unlawful and unserious. Trump officials are trying to claim he didn't say what he said, but he said, we heard what he said quite publicly here. What happens now? And is there anything that Democratic lawmakers could do to prevent what is, well, according to international law, would be an illegal seizure of land?

SLOTKIN: Yes. I just -- I think he said that. I don't know if that's really his goal, if he's just saying it. That's the problem. We can't tell the difference between where he's serious and where he's just saying things off-the-cuff.

[18:45:00]

He said it. And he's the commander-in-chief. So, we have to take it seriously. It's illegal. It's punitive. It's a horrible thing for Gaza, which so many people are already displaced people from the 1940s. And, of course, in Michigan, this has been a huge issue just today. SCIUTTO: Yeah.

SLOTKIN: I think, you know, you heard the Arab allies in the region just absolutely say, you know, heck no, we're not doing what you're saying. Saudi Arabia woke up in the middle of the night to say hell no. So I think you're hearing that response.

Word on the street is he wants to get the Nobel Peace Prize for the Middle East. If that's his goal, this is not the way that you go about it. So, I think -- and by the way, can I just say? He also suggested sending U.S. troops to occupy Gaza, and, I don't know, a single American who's looking to get into a conflict zone in the Arab world again after our -- our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

I served three tours in Iraq alongside the military. That is not something I think, you know, we thought that he was an isolationist. He didn't want to send troops into harm's way and start new conflicts. That, to me, feels like a recipe for, again, an entrenched conflict zone.

SCIUTTO: Michigan, as you know, of course, is home to many Arab Americans. Dearborn, the nation's largest Arab American community. Trump won in the last election. As we reported earlier, my colleague reported earlier, this group, Arab Americans for Trump, has changed the name to Arab Americans for Peace, in response to this Gaza -- Gaza agreement.

Do you find -- do you -- are you meeting voters in Michigan who regret their vote for Trump based on this issue?

SLOTKIN: Yeah, I mean, certainly, if they're regretting it, they're not coming and telling me about it. But I think, you know, this was the point we were trying to make ahead of time.

You know, people were hurting. They were in pain. They had family members who were suffering. And so it made them, you know, very intense about their vote.

We tried to make the point that, like, we get that there is frustration, but what you're electing is not going to be any better. And in fact could be much worse. And I think that's what we're seeing now.

But I think the pain and the emotion in these issues was driving people to a place that just wasn't as practical as I think we're now seeing.

SCIUTTO: Senator Elissa Slotkin, we do appreciate you joining us tonight.

SLOTKIN: Thank you.

SCIUTTO: Coming up, a brazen crime that has yet to be cracked and a shell shocking move by one of the nation's most recognizable restaurant chains. Guess what we're talking about. We'll tell you after the break. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:51:35]

SCIUTTO: The soaring cost of eggs might have grocery shoppers and restaurant chains scrambling, but it appears thieves are perfectly happy with the higher prices.

Brian Todd has more for us.

So, Brian, tell us what police are saying about an egg heist?

BRIAN TODD, CNN CORRESPONDENT: That's right. An egg heist in Pennsylvania, Jim. Police are trying to figure out how these thieves made away with $40,000 worth of eggs and exactly what they did with them.

This stems from a shortage of eggs nationwide, a spike in prices, and some real anxiety for shoppers.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

TODD (voice-over): A brazen heist reflects the desperation over eggs in the U.S.

Authorities in southern Pennsylvania investigating the theft of about 100,000 eggs from the back of a truck at this distribution center. The take: worth an estimated $40,000.

It comes as eggs are in much shorter supply and prices are spiking. At Waffle Houses across the country, the menus now say there will be a temporary 50 cent surcharge for every egg you order, a tough hit since eggs are Waffle House's most ordered item.

At grocery stores across the country, shoppers are frustrated.

KALAYAH BROWN, SHOPPER IN WASHINGTON, DC: It's outrageous. I just don't understand why egg price has got to be so high.

TODD: Is it going to change the way you kind of cook and shop?

SHEILA JOHNSON-PARKER, SHOPPER IN WASHINGTON, DC: It is because I don't get that many eggs now.

TODD: The price of eggs spiked two years ago and is now spiking again, jumping 50 cents per dozen just between November and December. And in some places, eggs aren't available at all.

STEVE PHILLIPS, SHOPPER IN SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA: I went in and by God, they had everything but eggs.

TODD: The main culprit, a devastating outbreak of avian flu across much of the U.S., egg laying hens having to be culled by the millions.

EMILY METZ, AMERICAN EGG BOARD: Just in the last year alone, we've had to euthanize more than 40 million birds, and we started this year by euthanizing an additional 15 million birds because of this deadly virus. It's absolutely devastating.

TODD: Also, strong consumer demand has fueled the shortage and the price spikes.

The demand for eggs typically higher during the holiday season. And like many other crises these days, politics has crept in.

President Trump mentioned eggs a few times on the campaign trail last year.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Eggs, all of this stuff. It's gone up at levels that nobody has ever seen before.

TODD: Trump promised to bring food prices down on day one. Now that the egg crisis has persisted, Trump's team has blamed former President Biden.

KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: In 2024, when Joe Biden was in the Oval Office or upstairs in the residence sleeping, I'm not so sure, egg prices increased 65 percent in this country.

TODD: But the reality, analysts say, is that the egg crisis is something no president can really control.

MARK ZANDI, CHIEF ECONOMIST, MOODY'S ANALYTICS: It's not President Biden's fault. It's not President Trump's fault. You know, it's what's going on in the industry and a virus (ph).

TODD: And according to the Department of Agriculture, will have to endure spiking egg prices for a while longer. They're expected to increase another 20 percent this year.

METZ: I wish I could give people a little light at the end of the tunnel, but we need a sustained period where we have no new outbreaks to allow our industry to recover.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

TODD: And we may need to brace for a ripple effect from the spike in egg prices. One marketing exec from a top grocery store chain says products made with eggs, things ranging from pasta to mayonnaise, could also get much more expensive in the months ahead. Jim. Almost every food consumer is affected by it.

SCIUTTO: Well, now you've just made me hungry, Brian.

TODD: Sorry.

SCIUTTO: Thanks so much for that story.

And we'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCIUTTO: Finally, tonight, we want to congratulate our colleague Wolf Blitzer on receiving just an extraordinary honor, the Walter Cronkite Award for Excellence in Journalism. It is a well-deserved recognition of Wolf's remarkable career and the great work he continues to do every day here in THE SITUATION ROOM.

Accepting the award, Wolf spoke about the example that Walter Cronkite set for journalists lessons that are as important as ever amid the rapid changes in the political environment and the way Americans get their news.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WOLF BLITZER, CNN HOST: The method of communication will change but the principles of journalism should not. Walter Cronkite told -- told it like it was. He was once heralded as the most trusted man in America. We know public trust in our institutions is not what it used to be. But Walter Cronkite's legacy remains alive and strong. And I accept this award in Walter Cronkite's honor.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: Wolf, your CNN family is deeply proud. Our congratulations to you.

I'm Jim Sciutto in THE SITUATION ROOM.

"ERIN BURNETT OUTFRONT" starts right now.