Return to Transcripts main page

The Situation Room

Trump Meets With British Prime Minister; Jimmy Kimmel Placed on Indefinite Suspension. Aired 11-11:30a ET

Aired September 18, 2025 - 11:00   ET

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

[11:00:02]

CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: Back then, Starmer had said, unless Israel changes its policies in terms of humanitarian aid and the cease-fire and having an ability to get the hostages back, then he was resolved to recognizing, like his confederates, a Palestinian state.

And I got the impression that that hasn't changed. That unless is still hanging out there. There's no change in the siege. There's no change in the ability to get humanitarian aid to the civilians. There's no change in the starvation. And there is on top of that an attack by Israel on a recognized cease-fire location and a mediation location in Qatar, an ally of all of them, and also a furious now Gaza incursion into Gaza City.

So what I heard was, he wasn't going to say when. He said when it happens, it's not dependent on President Trump's visit. So I'm hearing it's going to happen with whoever decides to go ahead somewhat before the actual leaders start talking at the U.N. We will see.

I think on Gaza, clearly, they are slightly different on that. On Russia, very interesting when he keeps saying that Putin has let him down. But, as you know, he keeps saying, if you do this, I will lay the pressure. But until now, President Trump says he will put pressure on Putin, but has not.

U.S. Congress, bipartisan, has a whole raft of sanctions ready to go. They have not yet been imposed. And most people in Europe say, look, at the very least, we need to make it clear to him that violating NATO airspace, continuing the war in Ukraine, killing civilians, attacking government buildings, attacking E.U. buildings, all of that is a nonstarter and we have got to stop him.

As for Bagram, I think that is fascinating. I think perhaps President Trump realizes that a complete withdrawal from Afghanistan, as he demanded and he negotiated back in 2020, has led to this current mess in Afghanistan, as has been pointed out, the humanitarian, the misogynistic policies of Taliban 2.0.

Others said we should leave a small force in Bagram. Taliban didn't want it. We will see if the Taliban now, isolated, agrees to give it back or to be able to have a U.S. base there. So I think all these are incredibly interesting, and many of them will be fleshed out next week at the U.N., and I will be there.

WOLF BLITZER, CNN HOST: The United Nations General Assembly coming up, and it'll be important. World leaders will be there. And, Christiane, we will look forward to seeing you as well.

Jim Sciutto is still with us as well.

It was -- I'm looking at my notes from what President Trump said. "Putin, he's let me down. He's really let me down." What was your reaction to what he's now saying about Russia's invasion of Ukraine and where we go from here?

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: He's willing to criticize Putin, but that's only as far as he's willing to go. And it's not the first time he's said that he's been let down by Putin, disappointed, et cetera.

I saw some quite open daylight here between the U.S. president and the U.K. prime minister on Ukraine. There was a moment there where President Trump said -- and I think that this phrase is going to cause concern in European capitals, but also in Ukraine. He said, it doesn't affect the U.S., describing the Ukraine war, dismissing it as really not our interest.

And then he turned later to...

BLITZER: He said there's an ocean that separates the United States from Ukraine.

SCIUTTO: There's an ocean between us. True. Of course, if you speak to U.S. NATO allies quite close to Russia, they see it quite differently.

Then a few moments later, he turned to Starmer and he said, it doesn't so much affect you either. Starmer didn't contradict him and say, no, you're wrong, Mr. President, but he did go on to say we have to put more pressure on Putin. And he said that not putting that pressure, though it's been threatened -- and threatened by who? President Trump.

That has led to, and these are Starmer's words, an emboldenment or at least a recklessness on Putin's part. So you have the U.K. prime minister saying there, implicitly criticizing Trump's failure to impose those new costs. He's saying that this is emboldening them and that we need to finally apply that pressure.

Later, Trump repeated what is we should acknowledge and point out is a new condition for new action against Russia, this idea that some European nations are still buying Russian oil. That was not a condition for increased sanctions on Russia prior. It's new, just in the last couple of weeks.

Before the Alaska summit, Trump said there will be severe consequences if Putin does not agree to peace in Alaska. Putin did not agree to peace. Trump said nothing at that point. Severe consequences if he doesn't agree to peace and if the European nations keep buying some Russian oil. That's become a new barrier to action here. That's the standard.

And he said, I would be willing to do other things, Trump said, but when Europe stops buying this oil. Now, you can debate whether that's a reasonable requirement in advance, but it is a new one. The only other point I would make is this. On TikTok, the president said, these are his words: "I like TikTok. It helped get me elected."

[11:05:07]

And that's quite revelatory because it shows one of Trump's driving forces when it comes to this TikTok decision is he, it appears, does not want to ban the app because he sees political advantage from it. He also said that there's value for the U.S.

But, remember, that contradicts the quite broad bipartisan feeling of U.S. lawmakers who passed legislation saying, TikTok is a national security threat, it must be banned. Trump is saying, it helped get me elected.

BLITZER: Yes, he's acknowledging that. And it's very, very significant.

All right, stand by. I want to bring CNN's chief White House correspondent, Kaitlan Collins. She's also our CNN anchor.

She -- you were inside the news conference. And what struck you the most, Kaitlan?

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN HOST: Well, Wolf, obviously you saw a lot of the questions that these leaders were asked you and Jim were just talking about, whether it was on Ukraine or whatnot, the two issues between them, recognizing a Palestinian state, as the prime minister here in the U.K. is expected to do.

But, Wolf, what stood out to me was to hear not a single United States reporter ask President Trump about one of the biggest stories coming out of the United States right now, and on issue that he ran on going into the White House, which was restoring free speech and banning government censorship.

That is something he signed an executive order on day one that he entered the White House. And you saw him there being asked by a British reporter about Jimmy Kimmel's show being indefinitely suspended for the immediate future as we wait for more details on that. The president simply responded saying that Kimmel was ousted because of poor ratings.

But he did not note the intense pressure that we know and all can see and listen to that his FCC chair, Brendan Carr, has put on ABC regarding Jimmy Kimmel's program and the comments that he made about President Trump's close ally Charlie Kirk and his assassination.

That is not something that was brought up. It is not something that President Trump was questioned on specifically beyond just the fact that free speech is something that you have heard the vice president, J.D. Vance, bring up here in the U.K. and in Europe in general. But when it comes to this issue overall and something that President

Trump himself is on the record talking about at length, Wolf -- I mean, I was looking at comments that he made just back in April after taking office, where he said that he had banned government censorship and restored free speech to the United States.

Obviously, now seeing a host who is ousted from his role, at least on the basis that we know now, was not something that he was pressed on in great manner in any sense at actually at all, Wolf, beyond that one question from a British reporter.

That is just remarkable, because obviously it is a huge story in the U.S. it is something President Trump himself weighed in on in the middle of the night here last night in the United Kingdom just past 1:00 a.m., and yet it is not something that he went into detail about at all.

The other thing that stood out, Wolf, and something that has been a huge headline here in the U.K. is about the British ambassador to the U.S. Peter Mandelson, who was ousted from his role this week because of those e-mails that were unearthed by Bloomberg News, regarding his deep ties to Jeffrey Epstein, which the prime minister said were deeper than he initially knew.

Of course, he did initially note that they have some kind of relationship, but that also was not something that was heavily pressed on in that press conference. And, Wolf, that is just remarkable, given there were multiple questions taken. Obviously, people can ask whatever they would like to ask, but those were two key issues and huge issues for both of these leaders that neither of them got questioned on beyond once during that entire press conference.

BLITZER: And I thought it was significant, Kaitlan, I am sure you did as well, when that question from the British journalist about Jimmy Kimmel's being indefinitely suspended from his late-night TV show, Trump didn't talk about what Jimmy Kimmel actually said. He said he had very bad ratings. He was fired for a lack of talent.

I thought that was significant that that was the reason that Trump is putting forward why Jimmy Kimmel no longer hosts that show, at least for the time being, as opposed to talking about what Jimmy Kimmel actually said.

COLLINS: Yes, those were the issues he listed first. He did bring up Charlie Kirk after that, saying that he said bad things about Charlie Kirk. That's what invoked the British prime minister then paying tribute to Charlie Kirk's legacy and to how horrible his assassination was and how he thought of President Trump immediately, knowing how they were close.

But on the aspect itself when it comes to Jimmy Kimmel, Wolf, I mean, it's not that ABC just fired him out of the blue or just ended his show out of the blue. This came after we heard hours before that yesterday from Brendan Carr, the chair of the FCC, in an interview with a Trump ally saying that essentially ABC needed to pay attention. He was saying that they could do this -- and there was a quote -- he

said "the hard way or we can do it the easy way." And obviously they're implying what that pressure on ABC was going to look like. The president's own comments long before these Charlie Kirk comments came from Jimmy Kimmel, the president said after they had canceled the Stephen Colbert show that he believed Jimmy Kimmel was next.

He repeated that again in August from the Oval Office. And so that was obviously a key issue here and key questions about whether or not the president knew about this pressure that the FCC chair was putting on ABC when it came to Jimmy Kimmel's program. But, unfortunately, that is not something that the president was asked about at any great length in that press conference just now.

[11:10:18]

BLITZER: Our CNN anchor and chief White House correspondent, Kaitlan Collins, on the scene for us at that news conference.

Kaitlan, I'm glad you're there. Thank you very, very much. We will get back to you, for sure.

I want to bring in CNN senior reporter Daniel Dale right now. He's also our chief fact-checker.

Dan, you heard President Trump speak extensively during this, what, nearly 50-minute news conference. What stood out to you?

DANIEL DALE, CNN SENIOR REPORTER: Well, Wolf, that was like a mini greatest hits list of claims from President Trump that have been debunked for months, some of them for years. We heard him push his usual lie that he won the 2020 election. Of course, he lost fair and square.

He said we have already solved inflation. Inflation is actually rising. It was up to 2.9 percent in August, up from 2.7 percent in July. It's the highest since January. He said, as he has repeatedly, that he inherited the worst inflation in U.S. history. He didn't. He inherited 3 percent inflation, just above what it is now.

It was about a 41-year high in June 2022 under President Biden, but it then plummeted toward the end of the Biden administration. He repeated his favorite imaginary figure on U.S. aid to Ukraine, saying that we're into that war for $350 billion. That figure is not even close to correct.

A think tank that closely tracks the issue puts U.S. aid at less than half of the president's figure. He said again that China is paying a whole bunch of tariffs to the U.S. It is U.S. importers who pay those tariffs, often pass on the cost to U.S. consumers. He also repeated some of his favorite old January 6 nonsense. He said it has emerged it's now clear that Nancy Pelosi, the former House speaker, rejected his offer of 10,000 National Guard troops on that day.

In fact, there's still no evidence that actually happened. He said, again, the January 6 House Select Committee deleted all its evidence, deleted all the records. In fact, in addition to a public report, Wolf, it released a huge volume, it preserved a huge volume of evidence.

And then he turned to immigration. He said he thinks 25 million migrants entered under President Biden. Even his 21 million figure from months ago wasn't even close to true, more than double the truth, even if you don't count the people who were quickly expelled from the country.

He repeated his claim that prisons in the Congo and Venezuela were emptied to release prisoners as migrants into the U.S. Neither he nor his campaign could ever provide any corroboration for that claim. And then this was just a gaffe, but I think worth noting, if people were confused.

He again said that he had a role in resolving a conflict between the countries of Azerbaijan and Albania. Of course, he means Armenia, not Albania.

BLITZER: Yes, that was a gaffe indeed. That jumped out at me when he said that as well.

All right, stand by. Daniel. We will get back to you.

Jim Sciutto is still with me here in THE SITUATION ROOM.

What did you think about this ultimatum he's giving these NATO allies? You continue buying oil from Russia, you're going to be sanctioned by the United States.

SCIUTTO: Well, despite the clear differences between the U.S. and U.K. and the U.S. and its other NATO allies on the Ukraine war and its importance to Europe, there was a silver lining for NATO, in that that relationship seems to be solid.

President Trump said he'd like to thank NATO and the wonderful head of NATO, referring to the secretary-general, Mark Rutte, but then noting, as he often has, that the prior commitment of NATO countries was to commit 2 percent of their GDP to defense spending, and that that is now 5 percent. And, as the president said, they pay it. And that is true.

Under President Trump's pressure, NATO allies have increased their defense commitment over time. And the sweetener for Trump, which he mentions here, is that it is NATO buying U.S. weapons to meet that goal, or many U.S. weapons, and that they're paying for it.

BLITZER: And then delivering a lot of those weapons to Ukraine too...

SCIUTTO: Exactly.

BLITZER: ... easing the burden, the financial burden of the United States.

SCIUTTO: That's his way forward for continuing to support Ukraine, because he's made quite clear he doesn't want to make a financial commitment, but he's happy to sell the weapons.

We should note that, prior to this second term, members of Trump's first administration, former members, former senior advisers told me that they feared Trump would out-and-out leave the NATO alliance in the second term. That was a genuine fear there, but also in Europe. That hasn't happened, and now you have him endorsing the U.S. relationship with NATO.

BLITZER: Yes. Well, it's significant going from 2 percent to 5 percent.

SCIUTTO: No question.

BLITZER: And in fairness to Trump, he's been saying they need to spend 5 percent for a long time, and they're finally doing it. He said, when it was 2 percent, they weren't even paying that. Now that it's 5 percent, he said they're devoting 5 percent.

SCIUTTO: They are. And you have heard -- listen, you have heard from Eastern-facing NATO countries, if you talk to the Poles and the Estonians and others. They have been saying for some time, we got to step up, right? The threat is real.

BLITZER: The threat is very, very real.

All right, stand by.

Christiane, you're still with us. The beginning -- right at the beginning of the news conference, they both, the prime minister and the president, touted their tech prosperity deal, and they talked about tariffs. What did you make of those comments?

[11:15:07]

AMANPOUR: Well, look, Starmer had to get something out of this, and he's pretty happy with the tens of billions of dollars that has been publicly pledged by a lot of American tech firms. That's important.

On the other hand -- because it'll create jobs, he hopes. On the other hand, Starmer was also hoping that this 25 percent U.S. tariff that Trump has imposed on British steelmakers would be removed or reduced as well, because that really harms the British steel industry.

And so he's not able to go back to his workers. Remember, he's a Labor prime minister for the workers, for the people. He made all sorts of promises to the people. And this tariff out of the blue of 25 percent from President Trump earlier on has still not been resolved or removed. So I think that's a big issue.

And, again, the major existential problems in terms of foreign policy, as we keep saying, are first and foremost for Europe, the land war in Europe that is being waged by President Putin, with no regard for what President Trump says or anybody else in the NATO alliance says. He just keeps escalating until he gets pushed back firmly.

And I think it was really important that, at the state banquet, the king, who doesn't get into overt politics, but can speak, he basically said in his speech today as tyranny once again threatens Europe: "We and our allies stand together in support of Ukraine to deter aggression and secure peace."

President Trump was seated there. He nodded, but we still, as everybody's saying, have to see the president of the United States using the leverage that only the United States has, only the president of the United States has, to affect these wars in Ukraine and, of course, in the Middle East.

The president of the United States is the only human being on Earth who can have leverage with Prime Minister Netanyahu. And the fact that he's not using that leverage is being noticed by allies and analysts. I mean, they say that this is a president who could do it, and it was alluded to in one question there, but so far hasn't exerted his influence.

You know, no matter, and despite the horror of October 7 -- nobody's diminishing that. In fact, those who say it would be just a reward for Hamas also need to understand that, as Starmer said, Hamas does not want a two-state solution when it comes to the recognition of a Palestinian state. And it would diminish Hamas if there was a proper, globally accepted, globally policed political resolution to what's happening between Israel and the Palestinians.

And yet, UNGA coming up, and the United States has denied visas to the only legitimately recognized by the U.S., by Israel, by the world community Palestinian Authority. Mahmoud Abbas and his delegations are being banned. But there is, I understand, something in the works for them to address by some other means the U.N. General Assembly.

BLITZER: Yes, they're not being granted visas to come to New York to address the General Assembly and to participate in those meetings.

Christiane Amanpour, excellent work, as usual. Thank you very much. We will look forward to your coverage of the U.N. General Assembly in New York.

And to all of our analysts and our reporters, thank you very, very much.

We have a lot more news coming up. Still ahead: off the air. Disney's ABC is pulling Jimmy Kimmel's show indefinitely, their words, indefinitely. Why free speech advocates are calling that foul.

Stay with us. Lots more coming up right here in THE SITUATION ROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:23:12]

BLITZER: Happening now: fallout over ABC's stunning decision to pull late-night host Jimmy Kimmel off the air.

ABC's announcement that Kimmel show would be -- quote -- "indefinitely preempted" came just hours after FCC Chair Brendan Carr publicly pressured the broadcaster to punish Kimmel. The reason for that pressure campaign, according to Carr, comments Kimmel made in reference to the killing of Charlie Kirk.

Listen to all of what Kimmel actually said. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JIMMY KIMMEL, HOST, "JIMMY KIMMEL LIVE": We hit some new lows over the weekend, with the MAGA gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it.

In between the finger-pointing, there was grieving. On Friday the White House flew the flags at half-staff, which got some criticism. But on a human level, you can see how hard the president is taking this.

QUESTION: My condolences on the loss of your friend Charlie Kirk.

May I ask, sir, personally, how are you holding up over the last day- and-a-half, sir?

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I think very good.

And, by the way, right there, you see all the trucks.

(LAUGHTER)

TRUMP: They just started construction of the new ballroom for the White House, which is something they have been trying to get, as you know, for about 150 years. And it's going to be a beauty.

KIMMEL: Yes.

(LAUGHTER)

KIMMEL: He's at the fourth stage of grief, construction.

(LAUGHTER)

KIMMEL: Demolition, construction.

(APPLAUSE)

KIMMEL: This is not how an adult grieves the murder of someone he called a friend. This is how a 4-year-old mourns a goldfish, OK?

(LAUGHTER)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: The FCC is responsible for licensing ABC's local stations, and Carr suggested he could use his role to revoke affiliate licenses as a way to force Disney's hand and punish Kimmel.

[11:25:00] And just moments ago, President Trump doubled down on his criticism of Kimmel, saying he was fired for lack of talent, bad ratings and dismissing suggestions that it was an issue of free speech.

I want to discuss this and more with CNN's chief media analyst, Brian Stelter, and CNN senior legal analyst Elie Honig.

Brian, let me start with you.

How did we get here? What discussions were happening at ABC and Disney over the past 24 hours?

BRIAN STELTER, CNN CHIEF MEDIA ANALYST: Right.

You know, historically, Wolf, station licensing has been a boring backwater part of the FCC. Station licenses are renewed every eight years. It's basically a rubber-stamp process. But when President Trump was campaigning for reelection, he threatened Disney and other media companies over coverage and content he didn't like.

He talked about wanting to revoke these licenses. So even though legally it would actually take a very long time, it probably would not be possible during Trump's term in office, his administration, his FCC chairman, Brendan Carr, is using the possibility of revoking licenses, the rhetoric around the threat of license revocation in order to pressure media companies.

And that is what we have seen in this remarkable instance. This is a story about capitulation to rhetoric, not government action, but mere rhetoric about the possibility of action. And that's partly why somebody are stunned about this as we move into this morning and as we all wait to hear what Kimmel's going to say about it.

Meantime, PEN America and other free speech groups are denouncing ABC. PEN America moments ago saying: "This moment must be recognized for what it is, an extraordinary assault on free speech in the United States."

We're hearing from unions representing writers and musicians on Kimmel's show. We have heard from practically everybody, except for Kimmel himself. So that's what I'm watching for today, Wolf. Meanwhile, ABC still has more questions to answer about whether it plans to bring the show back in some form at some point. We don't even know if Kimmel would want to do that, by the way.

His contract was coming due in a few months and he had made some noise about wanting to retire. So right now, in some ways, the ball is in Kimmel's court, but there are some very serious questions for all Americans about how the government is jawboning, pressuring media companies into changing coverage and content.

BLITZER: Do we have any idea, Brian, when Jimmy Kimmel will actually make a statement, release a written statement or make a public statement?

STELTER: No, we have no indication yet from his camp about that. He was about to tape the episode last night when he was yanked off the air.

And we know that that decision was directly a result of big station owners complaining to ABC. In other words, those station owners like Nexstar and Sinclair, they heard FCC Chairman Brendan Carr saying, we can do this the easy way or the hard way. They heard Carr complaining about Kimmel, talking about wanting to see him suspended, and talking about licenses being threatened.

And then they called ABC and complained about Kimmel. Now, for all we know, those executives at local stations might have had their own concerns before Carr spoke out.

But because this government official was so explicit in his threat, that changed the entire scenario for ABC and for the station owners. And I think it's really important, Wolf, to note these station owners at Nexstar and Sinclair, they have pending business before the government. They have deals that they need the Trump administration to bless and approve.

So there was a lot of money on the line and there is a lot of money on the line for these station owners. That is partly why this is a rather open-and-shut example of private companies being pressured by the government, and, in this case, capitulating to that pressure.

BLITZER: Yes. As they say, money talks. There's no doubt about that.

All right, thanks very much, Brian, for your update. Appreciate it,

Elie, let's talk a little bit about the law, the legal aspects of all of this. What do you make of that apparent threat from Carr telling the broadcasters -- and I'm quoting him now -- "We can do this the easy way or the hard way" in terms of punishing Kimmel?

How does the First Amendment right to free speech play here?

ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: So, right there, that quote from the commissioner, Carr, is where the First Amendment line gets crossed, because the way the courts have defined that line is coercion.

If the government is using its coercive powers, its threatening powers to say, do this or else we will take some government action against you, that's where the First Amendment line is crossed. Now, ABC has apparently chosen -- they're not going to challenge that. They have chosen instead to give in and to suspend Jimmy Kimmel.

But if ABC had wanted to, if they had the fortitude to do it -- or the financial means to do it -- they have the means, but the desire to do it, they could have waited, seen if the FCC actually took action and then challenged them in court. And I think if ABC would have done that, they would have won on a First Amendment basis.

BLITZER: Even if it had gone to the Supreme Court?

HONIG: Well, you don't know what the Supreme Court's going to do, but yes, I mean, there was a case in front of the Supreme Court about the Biden administration recently, two years ago, and they articulated that standard.

They said, it's OK for the government to be in contact with media organizations, and at times to urge them to take things down if they're disinformation, if they threaten national security. But where you get into that, do it our way, or else we're going to come down on you, that's coercion, and that's why this crosses the line.

BLITZER: We will see. A good point, indeed.

All right, don't go too far away. We have more to discuss. There's a lot of legal stuff going on, including your new book, which is excellent as well.

HONIG: Thanks.