Return to Transcripts main page

The Situation Room

Hegseth: Blockade of Iranian Ports "Growing and Going Global"; Sources: U.S. Military Developing Plans to Hit Strait Defenses; Trump Says No Nuclear Weapons Will Be Used Against Iran; Government Watchdog Investigates Epstein Files Release; DOJ Drops Criminal Probe of Fed Chair Jerome Powell. Aired 10:30-11a ET

Aired April 24, 2026 - 10:30   ET

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

[10:30:00]

DEREK VAN DAM, CNN METEOROLOGIST: As a meteorologist, to me, is they talked about how this encroaching front of the wildfire actually creating its own weather patterns, shifting and altering the winds, making it that much more challenging to identify where the forward progress of that flank of the progressing wildfire will go. It actually removes and sucks the moisture out of the air, so the relative humidity values in and around the leading edge of the forest fire actually drop to below five percent and that's so critical because that means that the air is that dry that it can just ignite new and additional spot fires that just will continue to spread this wildfire before we get rain. We have to look to next week before we have any chance of precipitation. Pamela.

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: Derek, it's Wolf, I have one quick question. These wildfires have ravaged southern Georgia. Have they impacted northern Florida big time?

VAN DAM: Yes, there are there are over 20 active large wildfires burning out of control across the southeastern United States. And --

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Please get away from my house. (INAUDIBLE). Don't want nobody near my house. (INAUDIBLE). Get away. Get away.

VAN DAM: You got it, you got it. We are -- OK. Yes, we're going to leave it here.

PAMELA BROWN, CNN ANCHOR: OK. Thank you, Derek, we appreciate it.

BLITZER: Yes, I'm worried about not just southern Georgia but northern Florida as well because it could -- these wildfires could really expand. Let's hope that they don't.

BROWN: Yes, let's hope Derek gets to safety there.

BLITZER: All right. Just ahead a new investigation into how the U.S. Justice Department handled the Epstein files. I'll talk to an attorney representing multiple survivors. That's coming up in a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:35:00]

BLITZER: Growing and going global. That's how the U.S. defense secretary describes the U.S. Navy's blockade of Iranian ports as the U.S. and Iran clearly escalate their standoff in the Strait of Hormuz. Here's what Pete Hegseth said earlier this morning at the Pentagon.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PETE HEGSETH, DEFENSE SECRETARY: No one sails from the Strait of Hormuz to anywhere in the world without the permission of the United States Navy. To the regime in Tehran, the blockade is tightening by the hour. We are in control. Nothing in, nothing out.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: All right. Let's discuss what's going on. CNN global affairs analyst and Iran expert Karim Sadjadpour is joining us and CNN military analyst, retired U.S. Air Force Colonel Cedric Leighton is with us as well. Karim, let me start with you. Iran insists it won't resume talks with the U.S. unless this blockade ends. But sources say the country's foreign minister could be in Pakistan tonight to lead a new round of peace talks with the U.S. Does that suggest Tehran could potentially be softening its public stance?

KARIM SADJADPOUR, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST, IRAN EXPERT AND SENIOR FELLOW, CARNEGIE ENDOWMENT FOR INTERNATIONAL PEACE: Well, the longtime philosophy of Iran's leadership has been that when you're being pressured, coerced into something, you shouldn't give in to that pressure because it's going to project weakness and embolden your adversaries. So, on one hand, that is their public stance that we're not going to cave into pressure. But privately, obviously, it's a regime under enormous economic duress. They don't want to go back to war. So, I think they're going to find a way to split the difference and figure out a way to get back to talks.

BLITZER: Colonel, sources tell CNN that the U.S. military officials are developing new plans to target Iran's capabilities in the Strait of Hormuz if the current ceasefire falls apart. The options include strikes with a focus on what's called "dynamic targeting." That's a quote. How effective do you think this would be and why hasn't the U.S. employed this at least so far during the war?

COL. CEDRIC LEIGHTON (RET.), CNN MILITARY ANALYST AND U.S. AIR FORCE (RET.): Yes, this is a really interesting point, Wolf. Yes, dynamic targeting is actually something that can be very effective and something that was employed during the initial stages of the second Iraq war. And it's something that can be done by the U.S. military in a way that would really impact Iran's ability to go after any ships in the Strait of Hormuz.

The effectiveness of this could be quite considerable for the Iranians, including going after their small boats. And dynamic targeting would be something that they would use to go after such vessels because they're really harder to detect. But if you have a dynamic targeting effort, then that dynamic targeting effort can be used in a way that would go after them and it would be able to better detect them as well.

The impact, I think, would be to add to Karim's point, would be to actually make it much more likely that the Iranians would be pressured to go into talks at this point.

BLITZER: And I think it's significant, Colonel, that the Pentagon now publicly says a third U.S. aircraft carrier battle group, the USS George H.W. Bush, has arrived in the Middle East. Analysts say that's the highest number of American aircraft carriers that have been deployed to the region in decades. So, what does that signal to you? Colonel?

LEIGHTON: Yes. So, this is very significant, Wolf, because this is actually the first time since 2003 that three aircraft carriers have been in the Middle Eastern region and conducted combat operations. So, with the Bush being in the Indian Ocean, it's within range of a lot of the target sets that the U.S. would be going after, especially in a dynamic targeting scenario. And that would mean that the U.S. would have the air power to continually fly missions against those targets, possibly even 24/7. And that, again, would be a significant escalation, but also a significant pressure point on the Iranians.

[10:40:00]

BLITZER: And a question to Karim. Karim, as you know, President Trump has previously threatened to eliminate the entire civilization of Iran. Yesterday in the Oval Office, he was asked specifically whether he'd use nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Sir, would you use a nuclear weapon against Iran?

DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: No.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You posted on Truth Social --

TRUMP: No, I wouldn't.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: -- a few weeks ago.

TRUMP: We don't need it.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: That's not --

TRUMP: Why do I need it? I wouldn't use it. A nuclear weapon should never be allowed to be used by anybody.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Does that surprise you that the President is dramatically toning down his earlier rhetoric?

SADJADPOUR: Not necessarily, Wolf. I think that the president has long had mixed messages, because on one hand, he wants to signal to the markets that this war is winding down. Oil prices should come -- should drop. You know, he wants a high stock market and ahead of the midterm elections in the United States.

At the same time, he's wanted to signal resolve to Iran, to say that, actually, this war may not be winding down, and I'm prepared to further escalate. But, you know, he always has had this hang up about the evils of nuclear weapons. That's, in fact, why he's so committed to preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.

BROWN: Good point. Karim Sadjadpour, thank you. Colonel Cedric Leighton, thanks to you as well. Pamela.

BROWN: All right. Wolf. Happening now, an internal watchdog is looking into how the Justice Department handled the production of materials related to Jeffrey Epstein. Lawmakers from both sides of the aisle, along with survivors of the late convicted sex offenders' abuse, have criticized how the DOJ handled the Epstein files, and they argue it over-redacted documents, publicly identified victims, and withheld information, among other issues. The department's inspector general is expected to examine all of this.

So, joining us now is James Marsh. He represents several Epstein survivors and is the founder of Marsh Law Firm. Hi, James. Thanks for coming on.

JAMES MARSH, REPRESENTS SEVERAL JEFFREY EPSTEIN SURVIVORS AND FOUNDER, MARSH LAW FIRM: Good morning.

BROWN: First off, what are you hearing from the women you represent about this development at the Justice Department?

MARSH: Look, we're always eager for transparency and accountability, and certainly the OIG, who is empowered to conduct this kind of internal investigations, is a good start. But part of my concern at this stage is that this office, that has been pretty independent over the years, has also become politicized. And while I don't know the individual in charge of the OIG's office now, what we do know is that early on in this administration, a lot of the OIGs throughout the government got fired.

So, whether or not this is going to be a true, transparent, fair investigation or whether it's just another political cover-up is yet to be seen. What I do know is that these kinds of investigations can take years. So, we may not even see the outcome of these efforts until after this administration.

BROWN: Yes. And the inspector general, as you know, is supposed to be a nonpartisan position, but the inspector general was appointed by President Trump. But does it give you hope or confidence that they would even launch this in the first place? I mean, why would they do that if they want this to just, you know, be a political thing?

MARSH: Well, I mean, what we've got right now in the Congress is bipartisan support for accountability, at least with regards to release of the records. So, despite the administration's role or their response or their non-response, there is a great deal of political support for accountability on the release of these records. So, I think we're not in a sort of a one-sided situation. There is a lot of political support for this kind of investigation and a lot of questions about the release of these records.

As everyone knows, these records were promised to be released for years by a lot of the people, some of them now gone, like Pam Bondi. And then, after promising, they didn't deliver. They did it in a haphazard, sort of a disastrous way. And so, now we're left with sort of an investigation of the investigation of the investigation. But clearly, our clients are really happy for any sort of additional accountability that comes out here.

BROWN: I want to ask you about this Republican Congressman Thomas Massie, who has led this effort for the release of the Epstein files, what he said in March. He said, quote, "Men need to be perp walked in handcuffs to the jail. And until we see that here in this country, we don't have a system of justice that's working." What do you say to that?

MARSH: I agree. I mean, that's been one of the big criticisms that you've had. The victims' names have been haphazardly released, redacted, unredacted, records released, records taken back, files disappeared and then appear again. With regards to the victims, and certainly images and personal information, things that never should be released, and yet you see a total absence of any of the possible offenders in these files, or they're scattered throughout the files in sort of a neutral way.

[10:45:00]

And then you have redactions, which make it really impossible to know exactly who, what, where and when. So, I agree. There's a lot of room for further accountability here. And I think we're only going to get answers when we create a commission, like the 9/11 Commission, a nonpartisan, bipartisan, independent commission that can really take a deep dive through all of this material, unredacted, and write a report to the American people about exactly what went down over the years, over the decades that Jeffrey Epstein was empowered. Going back to the mid-'90s, when my client, Maria Farmer, first reported to the FBI.

We don't have anything from that period. We don't have anything from the Tower Financial that Jeffrey Epstein was involved with, or the State Department's litigation against him for a lease. Those records were included in the mandate. They're not there at all. So, there's clearly, clearly decades more of this story that we're missing. And we need an independent commission to uncover all of this.

BROWN: The chairman of the House Oversight Committee, Republican James Comer, told Politico on Wednesday that members of his committee are divided over whether President Trump should pardon Epstein's co- conspirator, Ghislaine Maxwell, in exchange for her cooperation in the oversight panel's Epstein probe. Comer said he is personally against that. But what do you make of this idea, that there are some members of the committee who seem to support a Maxwell pardon in exchange for that information? MARSH: Insulting, stupid, short-sighted. I mean, this woman is a known perjurer. As I have said throughout these investigations, one person and testimony after another after another, these people have no incentive to tell the truth. They have no incentive to be transparent.

And there's some sort of a fantasy here that if you just let her out, she's going to see the light and tell all. What incentive does she have for that after she's pardoned? What incentive does she have for it before she's pardoned? So, I think this is a pipe dream. I can't believe they would even be floating this idea at this point in time. I can't imagine that it will advance anything at all. Nothing that this woman has to say bears any credibility.

She's the only person convicted for sex trafficking in this entire case. Why would she be the person that gets let out of jail? It makes no sense to me.

BROWN: I want to ask you about now former Attorney General Pam Bondi. She declined to appear for a deposition with the House Oversight Committee now that she's no longer serving as AG. That is what she is saying is the reason why she doesn't have to. How do the women you represent feel about that decision?

MARSH: Well, once again, it's political theater. It's a little bit of a charade. She probably has more vulnerability to a subpoena now that she's out of the administration than she was within the administration, because now she's an independent citizen, just like the other people that they're calling Bill Gates. So, I think she is definitely subject to subpoena. Whether or not she's going to have any clear answers or any insights, I mean, clearly, it's an investigation of the investigation.

She promised to release the records. She bungled it. You know, I think it's just part of the ongoing trauma that my clients are exposed to of constant mismanagement, malfeasance, and we're really not getting to the core issues here. So, whether she testifies or not, I mean, great, put her on the stand, get some answers for her. But I don't think there's going to be any huge revelations from her, just like there are not going to be any huge revelations from any of the other people they're calling to testify.

BROWN: All right. James Marsh, thank you for your time.

MARSH: Great. Thanks for having me on.

BROWN: Wolf.

BLITZER: And, Pamela, coming up here in the Situation Room, we're getting brand new details about the deadly collision last month between a passenger jet and a fire truck at LaGuardia Airport in New York, the communication failures that officials now say led to the tragedy.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:50:00] BROWN: Breaking news. The Justice Department is dropping its investigation of Fed Chair Jerome Powell. The DOJ launched this probe in January. And President Trump accused Powell of impropriety and incompetence regarding the $2.5 billion Fed renovation.

BLITZER: Let's go to CNN's Senior Justice Correspondent Evan Perez. Evan, what does this mean for Powell and for the Federal Reserve for that matter?

EVAN PEREZ, CNN SENIOR JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Well, it means that this -- the nomination of Kevin Warsh to replace Jerome Powell can now go forward. As you know, Thom Tillis, who is one of the senators who has been raising concerns about this investigation, has essentially said this is not going to go forward if this investigation is still ongoing because of the concerns that this -- that there was no evidence to support this investigation. And this is not just the Senate saying this, but also a judge who looked at a subpoena that the Justice Department issued in this investigation and tossed it and said there was no evidence. I think we have some sound from Tillis, you know, describing his objection.

BROWN: A few days ago, actually, at this hearing with Warsh. Let's take a listen to what he said.

PEREZ: OK.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. THOM TILLIS (R-NC): Let's get Warsh in there. Let's get Chair Powell comfortable with actually exiting at some point, not to 2028, and do that by eliminating a bogus investigation that started this whole drama.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[10:55:00]

BROWN: So, it seems to be after the hearing, but it is notable the timing of this. You have Senator Tillis saying that this week and now the investigation is dropped.

PEREZ: And look, there's been signs that this investigation really wasn't about a real investigation and more about the political pressure that it could bring to Jerome Powell. We know that because the FBI was not actually involved in any of this investigation. The FBI was not doing this.

And, Pamela, you know from covering the Justice Department for many years that if you're doing a criminal investigation, the FBI is the one that does witness interviews. They are the ones that do the fact- gathering. And so, the question here has always been when would this happen? And so, the -- I should read just a little bit of what the U.S. attorney, Jeanine Pirro, said. She said she expects a report from the inspector general from the Fed in short order that she believes will wrap this up. She also said, however, I will not hesitate to restart a criminal investigation should the facts warrant so. So, she's essentially trying to find an easy way, an off-ramp for this nomination to be able to go forward.

BROWN: Interesting development. Evan Perez, thanks so much.

BLITZER: I assume the nomination will go forward. Now, there will be a new chair for the Federal Reserve. We want to spend a moment to give a big, a huge congratulations to our own Priscilla Alvarez. She was just named a Star to Watch at the 2026 Washington Women in Journalism Awards. Priscilla is critical to CNN's reporting on immigration, is truly one of the standouts on our team. She's often here in the Situation Room. So, this is a well-deserved honor indeed. I was there at the awards ceremony last night. Congratulations, Priscilla.

And the next hour of the Situation Room begins right after a short break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK

[11:00:00]