Return to Transcripts main page

The Situation Room

Trump Administration Targets Democratic Lawmakers; Winter Storm Threatens Holiday Travel; Deadly Inferno in Hong Kong; Prosecutor Ends Georgia Election Interference Case. Aired 11-11:30a ET

Aired November 26, 2025 - 11:00   ET

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

[11:00:00]

PAMELA BROWN, CNN HOST: "Find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have, because we won the state. And flipping the state is a great testament to our country, because, you know, this is just -- it's a testament that they can admit to a mistake or whatever you want to call it."

So that sort of kicked things off. And remind our viewers, if you would, Elie, why this case was different than the charges that President Trump faced in the Jack Smith probe.

ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Well, so it was largely redundant, and that's part of the criticism.

So both Jack Smith's what we call the January 6 case and this case in Georgia at the state level charged Donald Trump with trying to steal the 2020 election. And, yes, that infamous phone call that Donald Trump made to Brad Raffensperger where he said, I just want you to find 11,780 votes, is a key part of the evidence here.

Now, the timeline is, the feds actually charged their case first. Jack Smith charged his case back in 2023, I believe it was. And then Georgia charged theirs. And so the criticism is -- it really doesn't matter who went first. The criticism is they should have been charged once federally in Washington, D.C.

There's no reason for the state prosecutors in Georgia to pile on. And this prosecutor makes that case here in explaining why he's decided to drop it.

BROWN: I want to bring in our Kristen Holmes. She is live at the White House for us, I believe? Or, no, she's not. She's in Florida. That would make sense because that's where the president is, in Palm Beach.

Kristen, this was once seen as a grave threat to Donald Trump and his political future. And it's a really significant development.

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: It is.

And when you go back and look at what the legal strategy was around Donald Trump, what his lawyers were trying to do, they wanted this result. I mean, you just heard Elie talking about, this idea that the practicality of charging a sitting president is part of why they threw this out.

President Trump's team knew that this would take on a whole new meaning, that all of these lawsuits would take on a whole new meaning if he was in fact elected to be president again, and they were banking on that.

So what you saw in the strategy from his lawyers was pushing this, delaying this, drawing this process out as long as they could to get through the election in November. And the result, what they had hoped for, is exactly what happened here, the idea that it would be unprecedented and likely untenable to charge a sitting U.S. president.

So when you talk about what their strategy was at the time, we reported extensively on this, you're actually seeing it play out now, years later, after they were putting in this effort to try and drag this out as long as possible.

Now, this, of course, was considered a grave threat. You could tell just by how angry President Trump was around this. He mentioned it several times on the campaign trail and for years leading up to that campaign, talking about how this call was a perfect call, that there were lawyers sitting in on this call and that everybody agreed.

Obviously, not everybody agreed. That was the basis for bringing this case, was this -- President Trump at the time asking for the government in Georgia, the officials in Georgia, to find more votes for him.

But it is interesting to see how this strategy ended up playing out. And, of course, we have not heard from President Trump yet. He's currently on the golf course. I assume we will have him weigh in. His team will weigh in. This is something that they expected would likely happen, but they have been watching closely.

But so many of these legal trials and tribulations that we saw President Trump dealing with in the year up to the election, this is a similar path that we have seen from most of them, which is just this kind of falling off. You have seen some of these cases ending, and now you have this prosecutor essentially ending this case against Trump.

BROWN: And this one was seen as the more serious one in Trump's circle because it was a state case, right, Kristen, and therefore wouldn't be subjected to a pardon.

HOLMES: That's right.

And that was something that they had focused intensely on. Now, the lawyers did believe that they had some wiggle room in this case just because of the RICO charges themselves, that it's very hard to actually charge a RICO case. And given the evidence that the lawyers had seen around Trump, there was some speculation that they might be able to work in this case and get Trump cleared at some point.

However, that doesn't change the fact that it was incredibly significant. And they did believe that the prosecutor, Fani Willis, was going to throw everything she possibly could at this case and try and make it stick.

Plus, President Trump doesn't have a lot of relationships -- he does now, but at the time he didn't have a lot of relationships with these Georgia officials, who -- many of whom felt burned by what happened in 2020 when it came to President Trump and were willing to go on the record to testify.

[11:05:08]

Many of them did, at least in front of the grand jury, and were likely to do so in a public trial if that actually is what happened. And that would not have been good for President Trump to have all of these Republican officials also testifying against him in this case.

BROWN: Right.

HOLMES: So there were a lot of concerns around this case in particular.

I will say President Trump continued to bash and say things that were untrue about Fani Willis, trying to get her off the case, and ultimately, unrelated to that, unrelated to what he was saying at the time, she did end up having a conflict that put the entire case in peril.

So that was something that we saw from President Trump really trying to rake her across the coals in a very public way, as he does often try to do, which is, instead of actually trying a case in a courtroom, he wants to try a case in the court of public opinion. We saw that a lot in this case in particular.

BROWN: Yes, we have seen that time and time again. And, as you noted, the origin of this was that phone call that Trump time and time again said was the perfect call.

So let's all listen to audio of that. And then, Kara, I will go to you.

(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: So, look, all I want to do is this. I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have, because we won the state.

(END AUDIO CLIP)

BROWN: And so, Kara, you have some new information on how the prosecutor viewed that call.

KARA SCANNELL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Right, Pam.

I was just reading a section where the prosecutor was evaluating that call and the role of Mark Meadows and Donald Trump for engaging in that phone call with Brad Raffensperger. And what he writes, he says: "While the call is concerning, reasonable

minds could differ as to how to interpret the call. When multiple interpretations are equally plausible, the accused is entitled to the benefit of the doubt and should not be presumed to have acted criminally."

So, that being the heart of this, he is kind of striking a knife through that, saying that he thinks that it could be interpreted different ways. And so that was not sufficient enough evidence that he believed meant that they should have moved forward with the charges against Mark Meadows or Donald Trump and that.

He also says that, as to these other defendants, well, some people might argue that, because he decided not to move forward with the charges against Donald Trump because of the unlikelihood that he would actually be able to go to trial, given how long ago this case was initially investigated, the charges brought, how long it's been, and that Trump will not be out of office for another three years, he said that it might be best served for those other defendants to be looked at by their bar associations, the ones that are attorneys, and how to resolve this moving forward.

But as for this actual call that's at the center of this, he's saying that it could be read multiple ways and that the benefit of the doubt should be given and should not be assumed to have been criminal intent -- Pam.

BROWN: Elie, what do you make of that rationale from this prosecutor who's dropping the case?

HONIG: So, Pam, this motion by the prosecutor, Skandalakis, is not a partisan screed. You would not read this and say, oh, this guy loves Trump, this guy hates Trump.

It's a sort of careful dissection of the evidence, not through the lens of was Trump's conduct good or bad, but was there a supportable criminal case here? Now, this prosecutor tends to lean towards no. He gives, I think, a fairly honest airing of the evidence either way.

But the bottom -line reasons for the dismissal here, first of all, the prosecutor says, look, this is just not an appropriate case to be charged at the state level. It should have been charged only federally, only in D.C. It was charged only federally and only in the -- well, not only, but it was charged federally and in D.C.

And then this case in Georgia essentially was a pile-on. There are constitutional questions -- there were at the time -- about whether it was appropriate for a state prosecutor to bring the case. And then, Pam, above all else, regardless of this prosecutor's view on the evidence, which again, I think is fairly mixed, there's just the practical and constitutional issue.

There is no possible way under our Constitution as it exists to have a trial, a criminal prosecution and trial of the sitting president, especially by a county level prosecutor like this, like Fani Willis...

BROWN: Right.

HONIG: ... was like Skandalakis is.

Imagine if you could do that. Imagine if some Republican or Democratic DA in name your county that happened to be the opposite party of the president could just indict and try the sitting president. It would be chaos. And this prosecutor recognizes that. And that's why he says, we can't move forward today.

And I know there are some folks saying, well, why not when Trump leaves office in January of 2029? And this prosecutor sort of dismisses that. He said it's going to be way too far after the conduct. We're going to have statute of limitations problems. It's over. People need to accept that.

BROWN: So just to take a step back, Elie, I mean, for all intents and purposes, Donald Trump will not face any legal accountability at this point for those alleged efforts on election interference, right? I mean, this is the end of it.

[11:10:14]

HONIG: Well, so he was charged criminally twice, federally and in the state.

BROWN: Yes.

HONIG: Neither of those will ever make it to trial. I mean, did he -- has he faced political accountability? I guess I will leave that to our political experts. There was certainly the congressional hearings. We remember the summer of 2022, the January 6 Committee, which made extensive findings that entered the public record.

Whether that hurt or helped Donald Trump is sort of out of my area of expertise. He has been sued by various people for his involvement in January 6, but none of those have resulted in a finding of liability, a criminal -- a civil finding against him.

So with respect to the courts, no, he has not been held accountable for anything that he did in 2020. And, politically, I think is a question that we will continue to debate into the future.

BROWN: Yes.

There's always the legal aspect and there's the political aspect, but, of course, even after all the allegations and everything and this was brought, he was an elected president for a second time, so worth emphasizing that.

All right, Elie Honig, Kristen Holmes, Kara Scannell, thank you so much.

And still ahead here in THE SITUATION ROOM: A record 82 million people are expected to travel over the next few days, but a winter storm could complicate things -- where and when the weather could be a problem. Plus: Construction equipment sparks a fire that spread to multiple

high-rises in Hong Kong, killing several people. And there could still be people trapped inside. We are live from Hong Kong with the latest details.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:16:10]

BROWN: Happening now: A raging inferno is tearing through multiple high-rise residential buildings in Hong Kong. And we know at least 13 people have died.

But, right now, it's not clear how many are trapped inside. How terrifying would that be?

Here's the deputy director of the Hong Kong Fire Department.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DEREK ARMSTRONG CHAN, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, HONG KONG FIRE DEPARTMENT (through translator): Fires in some individual units are very fierce, and our firefighters have encountered extremely high temperatures inside the buildings. Furthermore, there are still cases in the upper floors that we are still unable to reach.

However, our control center is in touch with them by phone. Once we are able to reach the units in the upper floor, we will immediately bring them to safety.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: CNN senior international correspondent Ivan Watson is in Hong Kong.

I know you have been outside tracking all of this. How long have these fires been raging there?

IVAN WATSON, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: More than nine hours since the fire was first reported.

And it was in one area. But the fire department says, by the time they showed up to answer that alarm, the fire had already spread up into the tower of that building and up the bamboo scaffolding and the construction netting around that building.

And in the hours after that, it spread swiftly to seven out of these eight towers behind me right now. And there is no sign that any of those blazes have been brought under control, despite, as you can see, the fire -- the ladders that are spraying water in some of the locations.

The scenario that that fire department official raised of people being in touch by phone from upper levels of these burning towers, I just can't imagine how frightening that could be, given that this is already killed at least 13 people, among those killed, an experienced member of the fire department, somebody with nine years' experience, a 37-year-old who was the leader of one of these fire trucks.

So there are some really big questions about how, in a city with a relatively good safety record, you could have a fire spread this quickly in a public housing estate that is home to more than 4,000 people. There are nearly 2,000 apartments here, Pamela.

And that means thousands of people who've been made homeless in the last couple of hours -- Pamela.

BROWN: Just awful.

What are firefighters doing to rescue the people who could still be trapped inside?

WATSON: From my vantage point, I see -- I mean, there are easily 50 fire trucks here, as well as ambulances and police.

We do see from this side of the housing development that there are two or three hoses blasting the buildings at any one time. There could be more on the other side. But, as the officials have said, the temperatures are so hot inside, how could you imagine climbing stairs?

These are 31-story buildings, right, that are burning from floor to roof. So you have already lost one fireman and had another injured. I don't know how you could conduct a rescue in these conditions, Pamela.

BROWN: Yes, me neither.

Ivan Watson in Hong Kong, just a horrific story. Thank you for your reporting there.

And happening now: It is starting. People are hitting the road for the Thanksgiving holiday, but a nasty winter storm could snarl those plans for millions of travelers.

CNN meteorologist Allison Chinchar is covering this first.

Allison, where is this arctic blast expected to hit? What's going on?

[11:20:01]

ALLISON CHINCHAR, CNN METEOROLOGIST: Right.

So here's a look at what happened yesterday. This was in Minnesota. Again, you can see all the snow coming down, very windy, so the visibility was pretty much zero at times, leading to a lot of traffic problems and some accidents here, this particularly from Clay County, but they weren't the only county to see very heavy snow.

And it's all from this system right through here. Now, this is going to be spreading off to the east as we go through the next 24 hours. We have got rain on the east side, where it's warmer, and that snow where the colder temperatures are starting to infiltrate already.

Where you're likely to see some travel problems the most is going to be as that storm is sliding through. But keep in mind the wind component may cause just as many delays as the winter weather aspect may do. Now, a lot of these areas looking at widespread several inches.

But when you get into some of those funnels of the lake-effect snow, especially downwind from some of the Great Lakes, you could be looking at upwards of a foot of snow before the system finally exits the area.

Here's a look at some of those winds, 40-to-50 mile-per-hour gusts in the Midwest today. That transitions into the Northeast Thursday, especially in the latter half of the day. So keep in mind the parade is tomorrow morning. Now, the good news is it is expected to be dry. Wind is really just going to be the biggest concern for the parade.

You're looking at those wind gusts in excess of 20 miles per hour. The temperatures themselves will be in the 40s. But when you factor in the wind, it's going to feel more like it's in the 30s.

So, definitely bundle up if you have some outdoor plans tomorrow to attend a parade or festival or something like that in your community, because, even down south, take a look what the feels-like temperatures are expected to be tomorrow morning, Atlanta 25, Nashville 23, in the teens for Indianapolis. Same thing for Chicago.

So, again, when you take that temperature, factor in the wind, it is going to feel bitter cold for a lot of areas even all the way down to the Gulf Coast tomorrow morning.

BROWN: All right, Allison Chinchar, thank you so much.

And up next here in THE SITUATION ROOM: Democratic Senator Mark Kelly is responding to being investigated by the Navy.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:26:22]

BROWN: New this morning, Democratic Senator Mark Kelly is firing back after Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said the retired Navy captain is being investigated for a video he and five other Democratic lawmakers made encouraging troops to disobey illegal orders.

Listen to what he told ABC's Jimmy Kimmel last night.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. MARK KELLY (D-AZ): This is the investigation because of what Donald Trump said, from what I can tell.

And I don't know Pete Hegseth well. He's not qualified for this job. And from what I can tell in talking to some of my Republican colleagues, I mean, he just wants to please the president.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: Meantime, the FBI may be about to open its own probe of the video. A law enforcement official tells CNN federal investigators have contacted the lawmakers' offices for interviews, signaling a possible inquiry.

So let's discuss this with retired FBI Special Agent Daniel Brunner.

Hi, Daniel. Thanks for being here.

Do you see any predication here? Do you think what these lawmakers did, warrants an FBI investigation?

DANIEL BRUNNER, FORMER FBI SUPERVISORY SPECIAL AGENT: Well, what's important to understand -- and thanks for having me on, Pam.

The important part is, the predication, that is a very low bar to really open an investigation. There just has to be the belief that a federal crime has been violated to open a federal investigation.

So -- but the important part is -- the other part is the Department of Justice, the United States attorney's office. So an FBI agent like myself, when I wanted to open an investigation, I had to find the information, obtain the information that there was a probable cause that a crime had been committed.

I believe that bar could be met here. There just has to be an investigation. That's the point of the investigation to determine if a federal crime has been committed. But you also have to have United States attorney's office concurrence to open the investigation.

They have to look at the opening communication to say, yes, I believe that this could -- if we were to go to trial, we could win it, or if there is substantive enough. So an FBI investigation really isn't going to open up unless you have the FBI office and the United States attorney's office concurrence.

And the fact that they're requesting interviews to me signifies that investigation has been opened up.

BROWN: Well, what would the potential crime be, the federal crime be, particularly giving First Amendment free speech protections?

BRUNNER: Well, it's important to also understand is, who is behind, who's conducting the investigation?

The fact that Kash Patel shut down Squad CR-15 out of Washington field office at the beginning of his tenure as the director is important, because CR-15 and the Washington field office investigated public corruption. So this is an investigation against individuals of Congress, which CR-15 would have done.

But Kash Patel disbanded that squad and, from my understanding, is -- largely dismissed from the FBI a lot of those experienced agents. So it is to my understanding that another branch of the FBI is investigating this, individuals that may not know exactly the best course of action, the best charges, the investigation.

They're still capable FBI agents, but the Squad CR-15, which investigates public corruption, Congress, members of Washington, D.C., those would have been the best ones. BROWN: Right.

Well, yes, I mean, our understanding is, according to Senator Elissa Slotkin, who helped organize this video, that it was the FBI's Counterterrorism Division, the division that contacted her office. Would that be typical for something like this?

BRUNNER: Absolutely not. It would not be. And, in fact, I have heard the same thing, that it's the Counterterrorism Division.

So there has to be one of two sides. It's the international terrorism, which -- the less likely, or the domestic terrorism squads, that are conducting the investigation. And these are -- I know -- I have been on both of those squads. They're capable, excellent agents, but they're not the best-equipped.