Return to Transcripts main page

The Situation Room

Push For Peace in Gaza; CIA Conducts Drone Strike on Venezuela. Aired 11-11:30a ET

Aired December 30, 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]

DEREK VAN DAM, AMS METEOROLOGIST: The lead-up to the big ball drop should stay dry. But, again, just after midnight, that's when we think things will get a little bit interesting, with at least a chance of snow in the sky. So...

WOLF BLITZER, CNN HOST: And just want to be precise.

That 70 mile-an-hour gust of wind coming in to Buffalo off of Lake Erie, that's almost like a hurricane, right?

VAN DAM: That's Category 1 hurricane strength. And that's what pushed up the lakeshore so much that it increased the water levels on the eastern shorelines of Lake Erie and Lake Ontario. It was powerful stuff yesterday. And people felt it. That's for sure.

BLITZER: They certainly did. I spoke to my cousins, my friends in Buffalo, and it's a real serious situation.

Derek Van Dam, happy new year, healthy new year. Thanks very much for joining us.

VAN DAM: Thank you. All right.

BLITZER: And the next hour where THE SITUATION ROOM starts right now.

First, there was boat strikes. Now CNN has learned the United States has carried out a secret drone attack inside Venezuela for the first time.

Welcome to our viewers here in the United States and around the world. Pamela Brown has the day off. I'm Wolf Blitzer. You're in THE SITUATION ROOM.

And we begin this hour with a significant escalation in President Trump's campaign against Venezuela. After months of strikes against alleged drug boats in the Pacific and the Caribbean, exclusive CNN reporting now reveals the attacks have moved inside the country of Venezuela.

Sources tell us the CIA conducted a drone strike earlier this month on a port along Venezuela's coast. The Trump administration believes a gang was using the port to load drugs. CNN national security correspondent Natasha Bertrand and CNN senior

White House reporter Kevin Liptak are covering the story for us.

Natasha, you're here with me in THE SITUATION ROOM. You helped break the story for us. Tell us more.

NATASHA BERTRAND, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY AND POLITICS CORRESPONDENT: Well, we're learning that the CIA conducted this drone strike against this port facility in a very remote part of Venezuela, hitting a dock that essentially the administration believed was housing boats that were used to transport drugs.

According to our sources, this strike was successful. It did destroy boats. It destroyed the facility. But according to one of our sources, the strike was largely symbolic, because there are many such ports along the coast of Venezuela that drug traffickers use to load and transport drugs for onward shipping.

Now, this is obviously a very significant escalation, and it's one that the administration likely did not want to be public because it was a CIA covert operation. And it's unclear, actually, if anyone inside the Venezuelan government even knew that it happened before President Trump revealed it publicly over the last several days.

He told a radio host that he had ordered a strike on a facility inside Venezuela. So, as of right now it's unclear whether the CIA is going to continue with these kind of sabotage operations. But it's very interesting that, because it was the agency that did this and not the U.S. military, clearly, it was meant to be kept very much under wraps.

And, of course, now it's not. And so I think that one of the big things we're going to be watching for is how Venezuela's president, Nicolas Maduro, responds to this. Now that it's public, you would expect the Venezuelan government to feel like it has to respond in some way.

And that could, of course, set up a significant escalation between the U.S. and the Venezuelans.

BLITZER: It's a very worrisome situation right now, Natasha. Stand by.

I want to bring in Kevin Liptak right now.

What is the president actually saying about this covert CIA attack that he released publicly?

KEVIN LIPTAK, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Yes, after that radio interview, he's not really saying that much at all. And it is extraordinary really how all of this came to light. If the president hadn't sort of let it slip in this interview, which was with a major Republican donor, it's possible we might not have known that this happened at all, CIA operations obviously shrouded in an enormous amount of secrecy.

We were over at Mar-a-Lago yesterday asking the president more about what he said happened there in Venezuela. Listen to what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: There was a major explosion in the dock area where they load the boats up with drugs. They load the boats up with drugs. So we hit all the boats. And now we hit the area. It's the implementation area. That's where they implement. And that is no longer around.

LIPTAK: Was the facility taken out by the U.S. military, or was it another entity like the CIA?

TRUMP: Well, I don't want to say that. I know exactly who it was, but I don't want to say who it was. But you know it was along the shore.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LIPTAK: So, you see, I asked the president whether it was military or CIA, refusing to answer, seeming to recognize that more information had come out about this than perhaps was intended.

We reported a while ago that the president had authorized the CIA to operate covertly in Venezuela. We had not really known what that agency was up to in that country until now. Really, the focus of the administration had been these strikes on the alleged drug boats.

[11:05:12]

We just got word yesterday of the 31st boat struck. They said it was along narcotrafficking routes, and two narcotraffickers were killed. But it's interesting to contrast how they have messaged these two things, saying virtually nothing about what the CIA is doing versus releasing video and press releases every single time they take out one of these drug boats.

And I think it just underscores certainly that we are now reaching a much more aggressive phase of this pressure campaign on the leader there, Nicolas Maduro.

BLITZER: Yes, good point.

Kevin Liptak and Natasha Bertrand, thanks to both of you for your excellent reporting.

The former NATO Supreme Allied Commander and retired U.S. Army General Wesley Clark is joining us right now.

General, thanks so much for being here.

And, as you just heard, our Natasha Bertrand just reported that the U.S. government believed a Venezuelan gang was using this port to store and transport drugs. Based on what we know so far, do you believe the Trump administration was justified in carrying out this CIA attack?

GEN. WESLEY CLARK (RET.), CNN MILITARY ANALYST: Well, I don't know if it justifies the right word, Wolf. I mean, we're waiting for the War Powers Act to be invoked by Congress and the president to give us a real explanation of what's going on over there.

But, look, this is a part of the pressure campaign against Maduro. The president truly intends to try to drive Maduro out of office. He's using narcotic -- counternarcotic activities as a means of leverage. We have known that there were special operators and agency people inside.

We didn't know exactly what they were doing in there. We don't know if this is the only strike that's been made. We do know it's a very long coastline. It's like 1,700 miles of coast in Venezuela. This is not a little country like Panama. So there are probably many different targets that could be struck like this.

On the other hand, this is not necessarily a regime target. And it may be that the people have paid off some of Maduro's people. Maybe Maduro doesn't know anything about it. So it's just more accumulation of pressure against Maduro.

Is it justified? It's justified if the people of the United States want the president of the United States to clean up the hemisphere and get rid of Maduro.

But, Wolf, it's a little hard for those of us who are looking at the global picture to contrast this with what's going on in Ukraine, where there's active military operations where people are being killed, civilians are being killed every single day in this escalation by Mr. Putin against the civilian people, four years of combat over there.

And that's the main picture of global conflict today, not Maduro. He's a mosquito compared to what's happening in Ukraine.

BLITZER: It's still not clear to many of us, General, if the drone used in this strike, in this mission was owned by the CIA or simply borrowed by the CIA from the U.S. military. Would the CIA need to coordinate with the military for something like this?

CLARK: Yes, there should be some coordination. And I'm sure that, either with SOCOM or with SOUTHCOM, depending on who's running that particular side of the operation, there's an agency cell in there that clears this.

But it doesn't matter really, because, under Title 50, the president has the authority to do these covert operations. Usually, it's briefed to the big eight in Congress, the committee leadership there, and they have to approve it.

We're not sure that they have all been briefed on all the details of this. We just don't know.

BLITZER: President Trump says -- and I'm quoting him now -- "it doesn't matter," his words, doesn't matter if this action was carried out by the military or the CIA. Is he right?

CLARK: Well, he's certainly right in terms of the impact on the ground, in terms of the legal consequences and what it means. If it's carried out by the military, it's an overt operation. And so it signifies greater involvement by the government of the United States.

Typically, an agency operation could be deniable. And so you could say you didn't really do it. And maybe that would take the pressure off Maduro to respond. If it's coming from the U.S. military, yes, it does set up a dynamic in which it's harder for Maduro to turn his back on and say, it didn't matter, it didn't matter.

Now, the president probably wouldn't be unhappy if Maduro tries to escalate. Got plenty of military force down there. He could send out a couple of aircraft to try to do something to our ships. And I'm sure the response would be overwhelming against Maduro and his forces.

[11:10:05]

BLITZER: Over the course of this year, General, we have seen the Trump administration increasingly take more action against Venezuela, including strikes on dozens of alleged drug boats, a blockade of sanctioned oil tankers, and now this drone strike within the country.

What do you think comes next?

CLARK: I think more of the same, and nibbling away at the elements of control of the government. So the blockade is a big one, and then you take out the oil -- you blockade the oil facilities. There's some offshore transshipment points. Those could be shut down.

And you start to then encourage local civil disobedience and demonstrations against what we believe is a government that wasn't legally elected. And, eventually, Maduro has to come to terms with that. And if he doesn't, you force him out.

BLITZER: I got one final question before I let you go, General Clark. What's your reaction to the fact that it was the president of the United States who disclosed the highly classified, very secret CIA covert operation? Potentially, he could undermine sources and methods, but what's your reaction to that?

CLARK: I think, when he did it, maybe he didn't realize what he was doing, but, on the other hand, it puts more pressure on Maduro. So I think it could be rationalized as saying it just ramps up the pressure.

Now, where it cuts back against the president is, was Congress informed? Were the people who were supposed to know about it and supporting him? Or does this look like he's doing something like a cowboy? We don't know. But are these kinds of statements and this recognition clearly puts more pressure on the Maduro regime.

BLITZER: General Wesley Clark, as usual, thanks so much for joining us. Happy new year, healthy new year as well.

And still ahead: Federal agents are flooding resources into the Twin Cities right now after a video about alleged day care fraud went viral. Plus: the flurry of diplomacy at Mar-a-Lago. What we know about

President Trump's meeting with Benjamin Netanyahu and the push for peace in Gaza.

Stay with us. Tom Friedman of "The New York Times" is standing by live. We will discuss.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:16:42]

BLITZER: New this morning, we're waiting to see the outcome of President Trump's days of meetings with world leaders down at Mar-a- Lago in Florida. He hosted the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, yesterday.

He spoke by phone with the Russian leader, Vladimir Putin. On Sunday. He met with the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Here's what President Trump said about his peace efforts. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: We're very -- we could be very close. There are one or two very thorny issues, very tough issues, but I think we're doing very well. We made a lot of progress today, but really we have made it over the last month. This is not a one-day process deal. This is very complicated stuff.

We have a few very thorny issues, as you can imagine. He knows about thorny issues probably better than anybody in the world. But it's working out. We have a couple of issues that we're going to get resolved, hopefully. And if we get them resolved, you're going to have peace.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: And joining us now is "The New York Times" columnist Thomas Friedman. He's the author of the bestselling book "From Beirut to Jerusalem," a book I have read and millions of others have read as well, and we learned a lot.

How do you view, Tom, President Trump's latest flurry of diplomatic activity down at Mar-a-Lago? What has he accomplished with Israel in particular?

THOMAS FRIEDMAN, "THE NEW YORK TIMES": Well, Wolf, in talking to Israeli analysts this morning, one of my favorite, Nimrod Novik, former national security adviser there, he described basically this situation, where Bibi Netanyahu is today is the rope, OK, in a tug-of- war between Israeli Jewish supremacists, settlers on the right, who Bibi needs their support to stay in power, and Donald Trump on the other side.

And they're pulling him. The logic of the situation, you saw this yesterday, Wolf, where going in, it was all smiles. Bibi: Trump, you're the greatest American president for Israel. Trump: You're the greatest prime minister for Israel.

Contrast that sort of warm, fuzzy talk with the much more sober discussion afterwards. I think that's because that rope, Trump was really pulling it on his side. What is the logic? The logic, Wolf, is that the United States wants Hamas to disarm. Hamas, I think, is under enormous pressure from Palestinians in Gaza to disarm.

But the only way Hamas is going to disarm is in phases by turning its weapons over, I believe, to a combined Egyptian and Palestinian Authority entity, essentially. In order for that to happen, though, Netanyahu is going to have to agree to some form of phased withdrawal from Gaza.

And Israel now controls a little over half, much more phased back toward the border, and letting more aid in. If he does that, on the other side of the rope, the Israeli rightists will pull him in that direction and warn him he will not be elected -- reelected in the next election.

So what you're seeing here is an incredible tug-of-war between the logic of American interests and the only way to get peace in Gaza, something Trump wants for his own legacy, and Netanyahu's political needs.

If there is a connection, Wolf, between that story and the Ukraine story, it's this, I believe. Trump, in both cases, I think, misunderstands both Netanyahu and Putin. In both cases, he thinks Putin and Netanyahu are interested in P-E-A-C-E, when, in fact, they're each interested in P-I-E-C-E.

[11:20:20]

Putin wants a piece of Ukraine, and Netanyahu wants a piece of Gaza and all of the West Bank. I think Trump underappreciates that. That's why both of these are kind of stalled. But that's the situation as I see it right now.

BLITZER: Yes, good point. President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu, Tom, they repeatedly praised and flattered each other's leadership.

But is it clear that the next phase of the Gaza peace plan will, in fact, move forward any time soon? There are specific steps that need to be taken, but they're complex.

FRIEDMAN: Yes, I think it only goes forward in Gaza, Wolf, if, on the one hand, Hamas agrees to disarm, which I think the logic of the situation says Hamas is going to have to, because the population it controls, it controls about 85 percent of Palestinians now living in Gaza, and they are miserable, terrible conditions as winter sets in there.

And so the pressure on them to disarm in order to get this process going will be enormous. But Hamas will only do it if it can retain political influence and turn its arms over to Egypt and the Palestinian Authority. From the other side, Netanyahu, the Palestinian Authority for him is a

no-go because he will lose the right wing of his government going into an election season. And that's why you see this kind of stalemate tug- of-war going on. I believe the reason he came out of that meeting looking much more sober than he did going in is because Trump told him to one degree or another, you're going to have to bite that bullet.

BLITZER: Good point.

The Israeli elections are scheduled for towards the end of 2026, but they could be moved up earlier under Israel's parliamentary system if there's a vote in the Knesset. During his visit, Prime Minister Netanyahu even announced -- and it surprised a lot of us -- that he would make President Trump the first non-Israeli recipient of the Israel Prize for Peace.

I'm curious what you made of that moment and why it matters for the U.S. position in the Middle East.

FRIEDMAN: Well, we live in an age of kings now in the United States, Wolf, where the first thing every foreign leader understands that he must bring tribute to the king, like in medieval times.

And, for Bibi, getting the government to agree to give Trump the Israel Prize was his latest form of tribute. That and 10 cents, though, will buy him a cup of coffee with Trump, because, at the end of the day, Trump wants a Nobel Prize, not the Israel Prize. And the only way he gets the Nobel Prize is if his Gaza peace plan goes forward.

The only way he gets that is if Bibi bites the bullet on the P.A., and if Bibi bites the bullet on the P.A., he will lose his government. Again, I think Trump underappreciates Bibi is a tactician, but he is not a big strategic man of peace. If you haven't figured that out by now, after more than 17 years of his being in power, you as an American official are really deluding yourself.

He is a small man in a big time, and he will never deliver the peace that Trump wants.

BLITZER: Trump said that Israel might not exist if Bibi were not the prime minister of Israel.

And it was interesting, I thought, and I want your reaction, when Netanyahu said that Trump is the best friend Israel has ever had in the White House.

FRIEDMAN: Again, it's all wonderful words. Each one is trying to improve the other's election prospects. They have an interest in that, but underneath it, Wolf, is the American strategic interest.

The American strategic interest is that Israel and Saudi Arabia are able to normalize relations, so that we get a giant arc of pro- American regimes and governments in the region that can put pressure on Iran. That arc, that our alliance of Israel and Arab countries, only happens if the P.A., the Palestinian Authority, is brought into the peace process.

That is the logic. It'll either happen and drive American interest forward, or it won't and American interest will be stalled. And when that happens, trust me, Trump will come for Bibi, as he's come for others in the past.

BLITZER: President Trump, he did acknowledge at least some of the divisions between the U.S. and Israel, for example, on the West Bank. President Trump opposes Israeli annexation of the area, but will that be enough, from your perspective, to deter further Israeli military action, settlement action on the West Bank?

[11:25:01]

FRIEDMAN: Look, Israeli policy in the West Bank, in my view, is insane, I-N-S-A-N-E.

And the logic of it is that Israel will annex the West Bank. And if it continues to hold Gaza, you basically will have nine, 10 million Jews trying to control 9, 10 million Palestinians in perpetuity in an age of social networks, where Israel will slowly, given what -- the images will come off those social networks, basically become a pariah nation.

You already see how youth all over the world in both the Republican and Democratic Party are becoming alienated from Israel. You see the number of Israelis from the center of the country, the really -- the people who keep the country going, the physicists, the scientists, the technologists, the starter-uppers, how many of them are now leaving.

It will be suicide for Israel. Trump may not be interested in Jewish history, Wolf, but Jewish history is interested in Donald Trump, because, at this stage, where he sits at this time, he's the only one who can draw a real red line around Israeli annexation of the West Bank.

But, again, that's going to require a clash with Netanyahu. It will come sooner. It will come later. That is the logic of American interest. Pay no attention to the mutual flattery of yesterday.

BLITZER: All right, Thomas Friedman of "The New York Times," as always, thank you very much for joining us. And keep up the great work that you have always done. Appreciate it very much.

FRIEDMAN: Thanks, Wolf.

BLITZER: And coming up: how a viral YouTube video led to more federal agents swarming Minnesota as part of an investigation into alleged fraud.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)