Return to Transcripts main page

The Situation Room

Any Moment, Trump Speaks After Vowing D.C. Liberated Today; Judge Rejects DOJ's Bid to Unseal Grand Jury Materials in Ghislaine Maxwell Case; Officials Rush to Finalize Details of Trump-Putin Summit Friday. Aired 10-10:30a ET

Aired August 11, 2025 - 10:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:00:00]

PAMELA BROWN, CNN ANCHOR: Happening now, breaking news, the threat of a federal takeover of D.C. At any moment, President Trump holds a news conference as he launches a surge of federal law enforcement to the nation's capital.

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: And we want to welcome our viewers here in the United States and around the world. I'm Wolf Blitzer with Pamela Brown, and you're in The Situation Room.

And we begin this hour with the breaking news. At any moment now, President Trump is expected to address the critically important issue of crime here in the nation's capital as he threatens a federal takeover of Washington, D.C. Federal agents, Pamela.

BROWN: Have already fanned out across the city. And a source tell CNN that, in an extraordinary move, as many as 130 FBI agents could soon patrol side by side with local law enforcement.

The president's plan also involves relocating the homeless far from the city. He says he wants them removed, quote, immediately.

BLITZER: We have our correspondence covering all the angles of this important story as it unfolds.

Let's begin with CNN's Alayna Treene over at the White House. Alayna, what are you expecting to hear?

ALAYNA TREENE, CNN WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Well, look, I think this press conference, I mean, the president has long tried to paint himself repeatedly as a law and order president. He's also repeatedly pressed the bounds of his executive authority. And I think we're going to see that all on full display when he addresses reporters momentarily.

But we do have some new breaking news, really, Pamela and Wolf. Essentially, we are learning, this is according to our colleagues, Hailey Britzky and Zachary Cohen, that the president is expected to announce shortly that he's going to be activating the National Guard, hundreds of National Guard troops in D.C. Their reporting says that up to roughly 800 troops are expected to be in the D.C. area.

Now, I'd remind you, the National Guard does fall under the president's authority. We've, of course, seen him deploy the National Guard domestically in this term when he sent them to Los Angeles, but also we saw this happen in his first term as well.

And I think we have to note just the level of how unusual this is. You mentioned the 130 FBI officials on the ground here walking the Washington streets alongside local police. That is not typical. And it comes as we've heard the president repeatedly argue that crime is completely rampant in the city. Of course, we have to provide the context that it's actually down this year. Crime in Washington is down this year compared to last year and even more so than when you look ahead to or back two years to 2023.

BROWN: All right. CNN Correspondent Brian Todd is here with us. So, Brian, local officials in Washington, they have been careful to not provoke the president walking this fine line. What are they saying about these plans?

BRIAN TODD, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, finally, yesterday, Mayor Muriel Bowser broke her very pronounced silence on this. She had been silent for days on this issue. She did speak to MSNBC yesterday. She was still fairly restrained. She did not openly criticize President Trump for wanting to ramp up the federal law enforcement presence in Washington, but she did have this to say to MSNBC yesterday.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MAYOR MURIEL BOWSER (D-WASHINGTON, D.C.): There are very specific things in our law that would allow the president to have more control over our police department. None of those conditions exist in our city right now. As I mentioned, we are not experiencing spike in crime. In fact, we're watching our crime numbers go down.

I have believed for a long time that Trump had a view that when he left the White House the last time at the height of COVID, he had a lot of concerns about homelessness, as did we. Those conditions simply don't exist now.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TODD: Now, in addition to Mayor Bowser, we have reached out to all 13 members of the D.C. City Council regarding all of this. All but one of them just either did not comment or did not get back to us. One of them did complain about the lack of nominating some judges to handle the criminal caseload in the city as being part of the problem.

But, guys, city officials very silent on this until Mayor Bowser spoke out yesterday, and she was fairly muted in what she said. She did say that one comment by White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller, that Washington, D.C., is, quote, more violent than Baghdad, in parts of Ethiopia, that that was hyperbolic and false.

[10:05:05] But, again, city officials being pretty restrained right now. We're going to see what the president says, and, again, how will city officials react when those hundreds of National Guardsmen deploy in the city and that that visual is all over the city. Now, what they'll actually be doing is a little unclear, but just that visual and what it's going to do to the city's image, they may have more to say about this.

BROWN: Yes, we shall see if they do.

I also want to bring in CNN's Security Correspondent Josh Campbell, because, Josh, you have some reporting that as many as 130 FBI agents will patrol with local police officers. Tell us about this.

JOSH CAMPBELL, CNN SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Yes. You know, this is interesting, and as Alayna and Brian just mentioned, the one key theme that I've been hearing from sources is that crime is down in D.C. And so there is a big question among those in the law enforcement community whether this is maybe symbolic, perhaps this could be some type of effort they believe to distract attention away from another story that's been in the news that the president doesn't like. And so, you know, there is a question here.

And when you look at the numbers, I mean, the D.C Police force has about 4,000 people that work for that department. By comparison, the FBI is so small. We're talking 12,000 agents for the entire country, indeed, the entire world. And so there's a big question about what this impact will be.

Nevertheless, we are hearing that these agents from the FBI, as well as other agencies, will be out there alongside D.C. Police. And I'm hearing two things that are the major issues. The first is a resource issue. The second is safety issue. The resource issue is that, you know, these agents are -- typically, at any given day, they're working counterterrorism cases, counterintelligence cases, cyber crime. They're trying to stop the nation's fentanyl epidemic. And so this is a zero sum equation. If they're not doing that, then who else would be doing that work if they're then pulled over to do, you know, policing on the streets.

And then the second issue was safety issue. FBI agents, federal agents, they're not trained to be cops. These are very different skill sets. They're trained in conducting complex investigations. They're not beat cops. And so there is a question about, you know, whether officers are actually experience -- or agents, rather, are experienced enough to be out there doing that.

And just to point out something, for example, our viewers might not know. It is very, very rare for an FBI agent to conduct a car stop. Because in the FBI, when you arrest someone that's typically well- planned out, you come in with overwhelming force, you try to control that environment. And so again, very different skill sets that they have from an officer on the street who's doing that dangerous work on a day-to-day basis. And so that's one theme I'm hearing from people I'm talking to. What if something goes wrong because you're putting these people out there who aren't trained to do that? One possible solution I'm hearing from people is if you want to increase the D.C. Police force, you know, fund that, get more officers on the beat. But people will be watching and waiting to see what actually happens when you have federal agents patrolling D.C. as though they're police officers, which, of course, they're not.

BLITZER: Josh, I want you to stand by. We're going to be getting back to you.

I also want to bring in CNN's Senior Legal Analyst Elie Honig. Elie, there are, as we all know, very specific limits to the president's using the National Guard in the states, and they include invasion, rebellion, and compromised ability to execute laws. But the District of Columbia isn't a state. So, does President Trump have the authority to bring in the D.C. National Guard?

ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: He does, Wolf, because the President has unusual and very broad authority over the National Guard with respect to the District of Columbia.

Now, as you said, with all the other states, the National Guard is typically under the control of the governor, and the president can only intercede and take over the National Guard in the states under those narrow circumstances that you just laid out, rebellion, insurrection, or, if necessary, to enforce federal laws.

But D.C. is different. The law makes clear that the president does have the power to deploy the National Guard within D.C. And beyond that, Wolf, usually, military officials cannot exercise civilian law enforcement functions. They cannot make arrests, for example.

But the Justice Department issued a memo back in 1989, which is observed ever since. That says that the National Guard in D.C. actually can perform law enforcement functions. So, not only does the president have unilateral essentially authority to deploy the National Guard in D.C., they can do police-like functions within D.C. under this DOJ opinion.

BROWN: All right. Everyone, stay with us. We're going to bring you President Trump's comments when they happen live. Wolf?

BLITZER: It's supposed to begin any moment now. You can see live pictures coming in from the White House briefing room. We'll see the president walk up to those microphones make his statement and answer reporters' questions. We're watching all of this very closely.

There's more breaking news we're watching as well. A federal judge is rejecting the U.S. Justice Department's bid to unseal grand jury materials in the Ghislaine Maxwell case.

Let's go to CNN's Crime and Justice Correspondent Katelyn Polantz. Katelyn, what is the judge saying?

KATELYN POLANTZ, CNN SENIOR CRIME AND JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Well, Wolf, the judge is outright rejecting the Justice Department's bid for transparency around the grand jury transcripts that were behind the indictment of Ghislaine Maxwell in 2021.

[10:10:02]

The judge says that the Justice Department's arguments, they just do not fly. The Justice Department wanted to say there were special circumstances here of public interest to want these transcripts to come out, and the judge over and over again, this is Paul Engelmayer in the Southern District of New York Federal Court, he says that just is not the case. It's not a special circumstance because there's not enough in these grand jury transcripts that would be new to bring to the public anything of substance.

Some of the choice words from the judge, the grand jury materials would not reveal new information of any consequence. And this is a judge that has reviewed under seal a lot of these records from the grand jury deciding this situation.

Also, the judge is saying in a binder that the Justice Department turned over of things that might not be public, it's only scattered words, clauses, occasional sentences. He says that there would be next to nothing new. There's no there, there.

He also swipes at the Justice Department's reasoning here, this argument that there should be public transparency around these grand jury records. And that's a reason for their lack of -- for them to be released, to wipe away the confidentiality that is so sacrosanct around grand jury records.

And, Wolf, the judge says that there could be a perception that this entire attempt by the Justice Department to unseal these records was aimed not at transparency but at diversion. He says, it's disingenuous and there's been a misleading public characterization of what is in these records. He also looks at victims who were writing to the court asking for transparency and says they have been misled too. They are a reason why there should be transparency, but there just wouldn't be anything if these grand jury transcripts were released. Back to you.

BLITZER: All right. Katelyn Polantz reporting, thank you very, very much. Pamela?

BROWN: All right. I also want to bring in -- bring back CNN Senior Legal Analyst Elie Honig. All right, so, Elie, you're very busy today, obviously, on a lot of fronts. Let's talk about this issue. It goes without saying this is significant. What is your reaction to the judge's rejection here?

HONIG: Well, Pam, it's not a surprise. So, first of all, there are three different motions that DOJ has made to three different judges to unseal various portions of the Epstein prosecutions and the Ghislaine Maxwell prosecution. Now, two of the three judges have rejected DOJ's motion. The Florida judge rejected the motion relating to the original Epstein prosecution, and now one of the New York judges has rejected DOJ's motion to unseal grand jury records on the Ghislaine Maxwell case.

And the reason for that, first of all, grand jury testimony is ordinarily secret. There's a specific federal rule that says you can only unseal grand jury testimony in specific, narrow circumstances. And both judges who have ruled so far found none of those circumstances apply here. Usually, that applies where some other prosecutor or some other defendant needs the materials.

Now, in the case that just came down, DOJ argued, yes, but there's special circumstances. The public has a need for transparency. And as Katelyn just laid out, this judge starkly rejects that. This judge says there's really very little of substance that's new or informative in the grand jury records. Essentially, all of the relevant information is in the indictments themselves.

And it's not surprising, Pam, by the way, because the way federal prosecutors usually indict cases is you just put an FBI agent in the grand jury. We know that's what was done here. The FBI agent gives a broad overview of the case that basically tracks the indictment, and then you have your indictment.

And so it seems that's exactly what happened here. And the judge therefore says, there's no real need for transparency. This wouldn't add anything, therefore the motion's rejected.

BROWN: Let me just follow up very quickly, Elie, because you know, the administration could argue, well, look, we're trying to release all this information, but the judge is blocking. But to be clear, this is a, a small part of the information the administration has is in its possession, right?

HONIG: Very important point, Pam. Yes, the grand jury testimony we're talking about is a sliver of a fraction of the entire file. We know that it's only testimony from two law enforcement agents. All the rest of the files, Pam, all the non-grand jury material, the vast majority of the case itself, that's all within DOJ's control. They have to, of course, redact and protect people's identities, but they could put that out today if they wanted to.

BROWN: All right. Elie Honig, thanks so much.

And new this morning, White House officials are rushing to finalize the details of President Trump's summit with Vladimir Putin. It is set for Friday in Alaska. An exact location has not been announced yet, and we also don't know if Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy will be there. European leaders insist Ukraine must be part of any discussions about ending the conflict.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MARK RUTTE, NATO SECRETARY GENERAL: If Putin is serious and Putin then has to commit to sit down with Zelenskyy. He cannot do this through President Trump. In the end, it has to be, as President Trump has stated himself, a three-way conversation, at least with the Europeans heavily involved.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[10:15:06]

BROWN: CNN Senior International Correspondent Fred Pleitgen is in Moscow. Fred, what are you learning?

FREDERIK PLEITGEN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Hi there, Pamela. Well, first of all, the Russians are absolutely thrilled that the summit is taking place. A lot of them have been talking very positively about it over the past couple of days, over the weekend, especially loving the fact that it's in Alaska, which obviously used to be part of Russia, saying there's still a lot of Russian Orthodox churches in Alaska as well.

But as far as the substance of the meeting is concerned, there do seem to be a couple of points where, at the very least, President Trump and Russian leader of Vladimir Putin appear to be somewhat at odds. You've talked about one of them, the possible presence of Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the Ukrainian president. It really seems as though the Russians have been pouring cold water on that idea.

The question isn't even whether or not Zelenskyy could be there in Alaska, but whether or not there could be a follow-on trilateral meeting involving Vladimir Putin, President Trump and then Volodymyr Zelenskyy, as well, and Russia's leader over the past couple of days has said that he believes conditions need to be met for that to happen, and that conditions are still very far from that happening. The Russians also saying when the U.S. floated that idea that they didn't even react to that possible idea.

As far as a ceasefire is concerned, we know that that is President Trump's main initiative. He wants to ceasefire in Ukraine as fast as possible. However, the Russians are saying that they want an extended peace process at the end of which there should be a larger peace agreement, obviously meaning that until that is achieved, that the fighting would then still continue.

For the Russians, in general, Pamela, they say that solving the Ukraine crisis is one of the things that's on the agenda, but for them, it's also about a possible complete reset in U.S.-Russia relations. Pamela?

BROWN: All right. Fred Pleitgen, thank you so much. Wolf?

BLITZER: All right, Pamela. Happening now, flood watches are in effect for millions of people across the central plains here in the United States. Heavy rain has been pounding Kansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma. And in Wisconsin, the Milwaukee area is under a flood warning. More than a foot of rain fell there on Sunday. The fire department had to perform dozens of water rescues.

CNN Meteorologist Derek Van Dam is joining us right now. Derek, very dangerous situation in a city that doesn't often see that level of rainfall.

DEREK VAN DAM, CNN METEOROLOGIST: Yes, Wolf. It was a tremendous amount of rain that fell. From Saturday night into Sunday morning, 14.5 inches was registered by a gauge just north and west of Milwaukee. If that's verified by the National Weather Service, that will be a new state record for a 24-hour rainfall rate. Unfortunately, it left to scenes like this.

This is in Milwaukee County. And you can just see some of the debris here being picked up by the flash flooding that turned this road into a river. There's a torrent of water rushing down. There's a construction barrel in the distance. Just terrifying moments as this amount of rain fell in such a short period of time.

There is, just like Wolf mentioned, still a flood warning in effect. And there's the heaviest rain. You can see it just to the north and west of the city of Milwaukee. This flood warning through 10:00 A.M. Central Standard Time or Central Daylight Time, and the reason is because even though it's not actively raining now, all the rivers and streams where that water had to eventually flow to, has been elevated. So, we still have the potential for some flooding across this region.

Now, the rainfall that fell overnight across portions of Kansas and Missouri, that brings us our greatest chance of flash flooding today, so an area we'll monitor closely. Wolf?

BLITZER: All right. Derek Van Dam with the latest on that, thank you very, very much. Pamela?

BROWN: All right. It's a very busy Monday, Wolf. Happening now the Texas House of Representatives is about to reconvene and try to approve new Republican maps that could eliminate five Democratic-held seats in the U.S. Congress. Now it's not clear if enough state lawmakers will be in Austin to get that done. Some Democrats that we have been reporting are still boycotting the vote. But Governor Greg Abbott says his party will pass its redistricting plans eventually.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GOV. GREG ABBOTT (R-TX): This could literally last years because in Texas, I'm authorized to call a special session every 30 days. It lasts 30 days. And as soon as this one is over, I'm going to call another one, then another one, then another one, then another one.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: All right. CNN's Arlette Saenz is here. So, what do we expect to see this afternoon for both Texas Democrats and Republicans, Arlette?

ARLETTE SAENZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, there really does not seem to be a clear end sight for this redistricting standoff in Texas, but this Texas House is expected to reconvene at 1:00 P.M. Central in Austin, where Republicans are trying to once again move forward with redistricting.

But so far, it seems like these Texas House Democrats are sticking to their strategy. Several of them are already planning to hold press conferences outside of Texas, in Illinois, a bit lighter today. So, as of right now, it appears unlikely that they will be able to make quorum and get enough Democrats back to move ahead to voting.

Now, there is a very real time crunch here. This current special session is set to end on August 19th, just nine days away.

[10:20:05]

And so far, there're some Democrats who said they're ready to stay out of the state beyond the special session.

As you heard from Texas Governor Greg Abbott there, he is ready to continuing calling special sessions until they can get redistricting passed, even if that might take years to come. But Texas Republicans are trying to do everything they can to compel these Democrats to come back to the state.

So, I think one thing to watch is some of the legal action that is happening over the course of the past few days and heading into this week. There is an effort from Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton to ask Illinois courts to enforce those civil arrest warrants for the Texas Democrats. There are also other efforts with the Texas Supreme Court that are threatening to unseat these Texas state lawmakers from their seats if they do not return.

So, some of that action maybe could start to percolate in the coming days, but for the time being, it does not seem that there's an immediate resolution to this redistricting standoff as both a Republicans and Democrats remain firm in their corners.

BROWN: Yes. But you heard Governor Abbott there say he's just going to keep calling a special session until this is resolved, in his view.

All right, Arlette Saenz, thank you so much.

BLITZER: We'll continue to watch that story as well.

We're also watching the White House right now. You're looking at these live pictures coming in from the White House Press briefing room. The president of the United States expected to walk in any moment now, make a statement and answer reporters' questions. He's threatening, as you know, a federal takeover of the nation's capital. We're going to bring all of this to you live as soon as it begins.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:25:00]

BROWN: We are following breaking news from Washington. This right here is a live look at the White House press briefing room. At any moment, President Trump is set to talk about crime in the nation's capital. And what he says is going to be the federal takeover of Washington, D.C. We're going to bring you his re remarks to you live.

BLITZER: He'll be ha opening with a statement, then he'll be answering reporter's questions, and those questions could be on a whole range of issues. So, we'll see what the president of the United States has to say. BROWN: And we should note, you know, as you know, well know, Wolf, as a former White House correspondent, myself as well, like it's unusual. It's a big event if the president takes a podium in the press briefing room.

BLITZER: Right. We'll see what he says.

Also new this morning, the Ukrainian drones hitting a manufacturing plant deep inside Russia again. Officials now say the plant makes parts for cruise missiles.

Meantime, President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin are set to meet this Friday in Alaska to discuss ways to end the war. The White House has not ruled out including Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, but right now he's not set to be there in Alaska for this meeting.

Joining us now is CNN Russian Affairs Contributor and former Moscow Bureau Chief Jill Dougherty. Jill is also the author of the very important new book entitled, My Russia, What I Saw Inside the Kremlin. Jill, thanks so much for joining us.

As you know, major land concessions appear central to Putin's plans and Putin's hopes. It's something Zelenskyy though has completely rejected. What do you think Putin wants to accomplish with this historic summit on U.S. soil in Alaska?

JILL DOUGHERTY, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Oh, Wolf, I think he will push for the maximum that he can get. I mean, there are let's say the issues, concrete issues. But then there's also, I think, you can almost call it the psychology of this meeting, and I think he is going to try to influence President Trump to think of Zelenskyy as the problem. In other words, Putin will say, we want peace, I'm open to peace, et cetera, and the person who is holding it back is Volodymyr Zelenskyy. And he is also, I think, going to try to separate Europe from the United States as much as he can.

I mean, there's a lot of thinking at the Kremlin right now about how they approach this, and it won't be a meeting, at least we don't expect, where they're getting into the nitty-gritty between the two presidents. But the overall message is, again, Putin wants peace and Zelenskyy does not. That's from the Kremlin.

BLITZER: The Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, responded so that the idea that Ukraine could give up land saying his country would not, quote, gift their land to the occupier, no giving up land, he says, now he's going even further saying concessions, quote, do not persuade a killer. What do you make of Zelenskyy's very strong comments about this?

DOUGHERTY: Well, he has to go in strong and that's exactly what he's doing. And it is part of the Constitution of Ukraine that they cannot give up territory to another country. I mean, that could be changed, but that's the way it is right now. And I think the principle that you're hearing from Ukraine and from the Europeans is there cannot be peace if Putin is essentially rewarded for starting this war for his aggression.

So that's -- you know, it's very difficult right now. And the problem I think is Zelenskyy has the -- if he agrees to this, he has domestic political problems. If he doesn't agree with it, he risks angering President Trump. So, it's a really sticky situation for Zelenskyy.

BLITZER: How significant, Jill, is it this summit will be taking place on U.S. soil in Alaska? It looks like that's a win for Putin.

DOUGHERTY: Oh, I would definitely say it is. You know, the Russians, as Fred just said from Moscow, they are pretty much crowing about the idea that Alaska used to belong to Russia.

[10:30:03]