Return to Transcripts main page
The Source with Kaitlan Collins
U.S. & Iran Reach Tentative Deal, Need Trump's Final Approval; Bessent: Nothing "Untoward" About Trump's Face On A $250 Bill; Trump: "I Have To Do What's Right" With Iran Despite Midterms. Aired 9-10p ET
Aired May 28, 2026 - 21:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[21:00:00]
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST, ANDERSON COOPER 360: --felt that grief and longing, really, since she was a child, and she also talks a lot about healing, and how she thinks others can heal as well.
I hope you like the conversation. It's available now, wherever you get your podcasts, or on our grief community page at CNN.com/AllThereIs.
That's it for us. The news continues. I'll see you tomorrow night. "THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS" starts now. Have a good night.
KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, CNN HOST, THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS: Tonight. The United States and Iran just reached a tentative deal. But will President Trump sign off? His Vice President just answered that question with a three-letter word.
I'm Kaitlan Collins. And this is THE SOURCE.
As we come on the air tonight, sources at the White House say that President Trump is weighing a big decision. There is a deal with Iran on the table. Not a deal to end the war outright. But a deal that would extend the ceasefire that's in place right now, a deal that would reopen the Strait of Hormuz.
Though we are left with one major question as we come on the air tonight, and that is, what else is in this so-called Memorandum of Understanding between the two countries that the President is considering?
The Vice President, JD Vance, as he was returning to Washington today, offered some clues this evening.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JD VANCE (R), U.S. VICE PRESIDENT: Well, I think it's hard to say exactly when or if the President's going to sign the MOU. We're going back and forth on a couple of language points.
I do think that we've made a lot of progress here. It's very clear that I think the Iranians... they want a deal and they want to open the Straits of Hormuz. We want them to open the Straits of Hormuz. There are a couple of issues on the nuclear stuff, the highly enriched stockpile, and also the question of enrichment. So, you know, we're going back and forth with them.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Those two sides are going back and forth, as sources are telling us here at CNN that this framework would give the parties, both parties, 60 days to hash out the most difficult issues that are facing Iran and the United States.
Both sides have been floating conflicting versions of what this temporary deal would mean for the other big issues, like sanctions relief, or unfreezing Iranian assets, which they very much want to happen. There's also Iran's ballistic missile program, and of course, Israel's operation that's ongoing right now in southern Lebanon.
Any number of those thorny issues could be why the Vice President is signposting that things could still go sideways.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VANCE: I can't guarantee that we're going to get there, but right now I feel pretty good about it.
Hopefully, we'll continue to make progress. The President will be in a position where he can endorse the agreement, but obviously that's still TBD.
So we're not there yet, but we're very close.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: The VP says, TBD.
Here's what the Treasury Secretary told us in the White House Briefing Room as he was facing repeated questions.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SCOTT BESSENT, TREASURY SECRETARY: Everything depends on what the President wants to do. And President Trump is not going to make a bad deal for the American people, for the U.S. And he was very clear at the Cabinet meeting on the -- yesterday, what he wants.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: As a temporary deal is hanging in the balance. Of course, we know here at home, gas prices have soared over the last three months. And we learned today that inflation actually just hit its highest level in nearly three years. As economists say that Americans are burning through their savings.
Much of the economic pain begins at that narrow waterway that right now is under Iran's control. Just today, Iran said that it had fired warning shots at four vessels that were trying to pass through the Strait that you see there, and U.S. Central Command accused Iran of, quote, an "Egregious ceasefire violation," accusing Iran of launching missiles toward a U.S. ally, Kuwait, and what they described as, Unjustified Iranian aggression.
So, even as they're still negotiating to extend this ceasefire right now, as we wait to see what President Trump will say, one might wonder, is there really a ceasefire when they're still firing.
Here's how the Vice President explained it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VANCE: Well, you know, these ceasefires are always a little messy, and sometimes the guys at the lower level aren't communicating with the guys at the top level. Sometimes people make mistakes. But even when the ceasefire is holding, as we've seen not just in Iran, but all over the world, sometimes these things have little flare-ups.
But if you compare the conflict now to where it was five, six weeks ago, I think the President's ceasefire is very much holding.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: My lead source tonight is Global Affairs Correspondent for Axios and a CNN Political and Global Affairs Analyst, Barak Ravid.
And Barak, you broke the deal -- the news about this deal coming together. What have you learned since your reporting came out this morning?
BARAK RAVID, CNN POLITICAL & GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST, GLOBAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT, AXIOS: Good evening, Kaitlan.
[21:05:00]
I think the most interesting thing I heard today from very senior U.S. officials is that at least as of today, around noon, President Trump was leaning towards signing off on this deal. It doesn't mean that he will sign off on this deal. It doesn't mean that he made a decision. But at least today he was leaning towards approving it.
And what U.S. officials heard from the mediators, and through various back channels, is that the Iranians told the mediators that they are ready to sign, meaning that this deal has passed through all the different levels of approvals that they needed to make.
And I think that at least what I heard from a very senior U.S. official today is that it might take another day or two, but I think we're very close to President Trump making a determination whether he wants to take this deal or not.
COLLINS: You know, Barak, people are probably listening to you right now, saying, I've heard this reporting before, that they've gotten close. I've heard from Trump officials that they feel like they're close.
Do you think that this time is different based on what you hear from your sources? RAVID: Well, if people feel that they heard it before, it's because they have, and because that kind of negotiation is a roller coaster, and every time -- and it's the same thing -- was the same thing with the Gaza negotiations, both during the Biden presidency and during the Trump administration.
Those kind of negotiations are roller coaster. One day you feel that you're close and you don't have the deal. Another day you feel that you're far, but then there's a breakthrough. So, I think that's just sort of an -- sort of an evolution of those negotiations. And every time the parties are going closer and closer and closer, I think that they are very, very close to a deal.
I think both sides, I think, matured into the understanding that the alternative to this deal doesn't serve their interests at all. For example, one U.S. official told me that the alternative to this deal is another six to 12 months of crisis in the Strait of Hormuz, of the Straits being closed. This is something that I don't think the U.S. economy or the global economy can stand. So, I think -- and for the Iranians, that's another six to 12 months of U.S. blockade.
COLLINS: Yes.
RAVID: I think that for both sides, it is in their interest to take this deal.
COLLINS: We'll see if they do.
Barak Ravid, thank you for the excellent reporting, as always.
RAVID: Thank you.
COLLINS: Also here with me tonight is CNN's Global Affairs Analyst, and the former Middle East coordinator for the National Security Council, Brett McGurk.
Brett, when you hear this. Obviously Barak makes a good point. Recent history has shown sometimes they've gotten close, and it hasn't happened. What do you make of what you're hearing?
BRETT MCGURK, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST, FORMER MIDDLE EAST & NORTH AFRICA COORDINATOR, NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL: I think in diplomacy, and I've done a lot of that type of work, there's two distinct categories between, There is a deal versus everything else. We're close. It's tentative. Totally different categories. And in the final yards of a negotiation, negotiations fail in the last 5 percent or the last one or two issues. So, until there's a deal, there's not a deal.
So, look, I have great respect for everybody doing this work. I really hope it succeeds to get that Strait open. But I -- we're still dealing with the Iranian regime, and it is still the regime. It is that ideological core that has to cross the Rubicon and say, We're ready to do this deal with the Americans and accept the key term that the Americans are demanding, that the Strait opens status quo antebellum, as it was before the war. And the Iranians are still demanding in their public statements and their state media that the Strait of Hormuz is now their sovereign territory. So, maybe you can fudge that to get the Strait open. But even then, Kaitlan, what we're talking about here is a first stage deal to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. All the nuclear issues, the can is being kicked. Now--
COLLINS: Yes, can they do that in 60 days, you think? The big issues--
MCGURK: Well, I mean, the Trump administration--
COLLINS: --nuclear ambitions, enriched uranium?
MCGURK: They have something going for them, and the fact that the nuclear program, unlike say the JCPOA negotiations, there really is no nuclear program right now, they can't enrich uranium, it's really been knocked out, so we have some time.
And the demand, the U.S. demand of no enrichment. It was interesting, the Vice President kind of just said, of course, we still have to deal with enrichment. That has been the core issue for decades. And the White House demand is, You have to totally suspend enrichment. I really hope the Iranians do that, but that's going to be very tough.
And once the Strait is open and Iran is trading its oil again, they have an economic windfall, and so there's less leverage to actually try to get that, that difficult work done. Very -- very hard to do that in two months. I mean, I think everybody's focused now on trying to get the Strait -- the Strait open.
COLLINS: So, let's say they get this, and the Strait is open, which obviously bodes well for gas prices and all the chaos we've seen from that. But isn't that exactly where things were before the war started?
[21:10:00]
MCGURK: Yes. So, we are negotiating right now to get back to international commerce through the Strait, which obviously was happening before this conflict started.
And this has always been the card we knew Iran had it, and one reason that no president has done this before is if you look at a map, and the Strait of Hormuz, and Iran is right there. And in the age of drones in which we are now, you can shut down the Strait from drones that could be fired from a 1,000 kilometers away. It's a really difficult, gnarly problem. And the Iranians have now demonstrated, We can do this, we can do this.
And the -- and the guy who's now in charge of the Revolutionary Guard, Ahmad Vahidi, I mean he is an old school, fought in the Iran-Iraq War, one of the original commanders of the Quds Force, the Guards' expeditionary force before Qasem Soleimani, he's in charge of the Revolutionary Guard. He's the guy that is giving orders: continue laying mines in the Strait, as is still happening as of this week, continue shooting at ships as it happened last night. And I think he's the kind of guy that's not going to want to give that up, other than for a high price.
So, again, I hope this happens, but I still think I am -- I still think I'd give this less than majority odds we're going to have a deal here. And I hope I'm wrong.
COLLINS: Brett McGurk, we will see if those odds bear out.
MCGURK: Thank you.
COLLINS: Also joining us tonight is our congressional source. Democratic congressman from New York, Dan Goldman.
And thank you, sir, for being here.
Even if it's a temporary framework, as we just heard Barak lay out, and Brett's thoughts on that. Would you welcome that?
REP. DAN GOLDMAN (D-NY): Well, look, we have to end this war somehow. But I think, as Brett just said, we are in much worse -- a much worse situation right now than we were before the war started, and that doesn't even include all of the death and destruction that has occurred throughout the world because of this war.
It was a wag-the-dog expedition for Donald Trump, who wanted to distract from the Epstein files, rushed into this, did not have any proper preparation for what, as Brett said, everybody knew was the real possibility of Iran trying to close the Strait of Hormuz.
And now, the President is scrambling just to get back to where we were. He's going to give billions of dollars now, reopen Iranian oil with no guarantee that they will stop enriching. This is a terrible deal because, it was a terrible decision by the President.
COLLINS: Well, there's also been questions about Israel here. President had a phone call with Prime Minister Netanyahu. They've been urging him not to take some kind of deal that they don't see is tough enough.
When you see what's happening in Lebanon and the way they're firing, do you think that that is making things easier or more difficult here?
GOLDMAN: I think the biggest thing is the Strait of Hormuz, as Brett just said, and I think this is a bad situation for everybody. I don't have any good ideas for another way out of it because, Donald Trump got us into this mess without coming to Congress, without presenting what the imminent threat was, and without presenting a plan. And because he didn't do that, he was not prepared.
The reason why Article I war powers exist, or at least a reason why, is so that the administration has to present a coherent, cohesive plan and strategy, which they did not have.
And now, everybody in the -- in the entire region is suffering, as well as here domestically, where gas prices, as you've said, have gone up, where the cost of goods and inflation is skyrocketing, and the American people are not only paying near -- $1.5 billion per day for this illegal war, but they're also suffering at the -- in their -- at the kitchen table, and their wallets.
COLLINS: Yes, and obviously all of that is something lawmakers like you were thinking about, who are running for re-election. Obviously, your Republican colleagues certainly are.
In your primary, you're facing a tough primary, and support for Israel has been an issue. How would you describe the difference between where you stand and where your opponent, Brad Lander, does?
GOLDMAN: Look, I think in a lot of ways, we're very similar. We're both Zionists. We both support Israel. We both support a two-state solution. You know, we're both supported by J Street.
But I think what I hear on the ground, when I am in the public housing developments, and I'm in Chinatown, and I'm with the unions, all of whom are supporting me, is not concern about Israel, 6,000 miles away, but concern about what is coming out of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, and how difficult life is, largely because Donald Trump is not only making the costs and prices go up, but is essentially, looting the government with a slush fund with his corruption.
[21:15:00]
That's what people are talking about in this race, and that's why I am the best candidate because, I have the seniority, I have the experience from leading the first impeachment, and I will be in position to hold Donald Trump accountable, to rein him in when the Democrats win the majority, and we will win the majority, and that is what the voters in my district care the most about.
COLLINS: But your opponent is using this against you, obviously, as you know. I mean, are you surprised that that has become an issue between the two of you in this primary race?
GOLDMAN: Well, my opponent is using that against me because, if we talk about actual substance, or policy, or experience, or productivity, or our record, or our agenda, he loses because, I've been doing the work on the ground, I've brought a tremendous amount of money back for the district, I have helped to pass legislation that is increasing affordable housing, that is bolstering offshore wind, any number of different things.
So, yes, of course, he doesn't want to talk about the real issues that are facing the district because, that doesn't help him. I mean, he just left us in New York City with an $8 billion deficit when he was the city controller. So, he doesn't want to talk about the substance. But that's what this race is about.
COLLINS: Can I ask you. You mentioned the $1.8 billion fund that the President has just created. Do you believe, ultimately, that those payments are going to go out? Or do you think that there is any chance Congress and the efforts that some of you are making will be able to stop it?
GOLDMAN: Well, look, if Congress does not stop this unbelievable, unprecedented, corrupt slush fund, then I think if I'm a Republican, I have to just hold my head in shame and go home.
What is the point of being in Congress, if you have a constitutional duty and oath to be a check and balance on the administration, when the President of the United States has self-dealt himself a $1.8 billion slush fund to be distributed to anyone he wants to, without any transparency or without any reason. It is -- it is a violation of so many laws and constitutional provisions. But it is really an indictment of Republicans if they do not stand up and stop this.
COLLINS: Congressman Dan Goldman, thank you for joining us tonight.
GOLDMAN: Thank you.
COLLINS: Up next. Iran was not the only thing that the Treasury Secretary was asked about today, though he was asked about it a lot. I also asked him about the President's new $1.8 billion fund.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Is it accurate that the general counsel of the Treasury Department resigned over that?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[21:20:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: When Treasury Secretary, Scott Bessent, filled in at today's White House press briefing, he had one answer, ready to go, on the $1.8 billion, as it's now been described by the administration, Anti- Weaponization Fund, that is facing pushback, even from some Republicans on Capitol Hill.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BESSENT: This is going to be the only question I will take on this matter today. So, there's ongoing litigation, so it'd be inappropriate for me to comment.
President Trump is a great American who has endured more than 10 years, 10 years of non-stop harassment and weaponization from the federal and state government actors. A bad actor at the IRS leaked more than 400,000 tax returns, including the Trump family, all the employees, and that's how we got here now. No American should be targeted for political reasons, and every citizen deserves fair treatment and full protection of the law.
COLLINS: Secretary Bessent. My second question, Secretary Bessent, just to follow up.
BESSENT: No.
COLLINS: My second -- my second question is on what you just commented on there, Mr. Secretary, about the $1.8 billion fund.
Is it accurate that the general counsel of the Treasury Department resigned over that?
BESSENT: I will not be taking any other questions, meaning I will not be taking any other questions.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: This fund, which, as you heard the Secretary reference there, was created as part of a settlement of the President's own $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS. It's already being challenged by at least two separate lawsuits. Lawmakers in Washington, as you heard from Congressman Dan Goldman there, have been trying to figure out a way to stop it if they can.
Joining me now is my next congressional source tonight, the Democratic Senator Chris Coons of Delaware.
And thank you, sir, for being here.
Secretary Bessent said, citing litigation, he was only going to answer that one question on this fund. Given Treasury does have a role in it, why do you think he didn't answer any other questions about it?
SEN. CHRIS COONS (D-DE): Because he doesn't have a good answer. Kaitlan, he dodged your question, just like the acting Attorney General, Todd Blanche, dodged my questions in a hearing last week. They don't have a good answer for how it is legal, how it is appropriate, to take $1.8 billion of taxpayer money as a settlement of a lawsuit President Trump brought against his own government.
This has never happened before, that a sitting president essentially sues himself, and then settles his own lawsuit, and then sets up a fund out of which folks who assaulted Capitol police officers, folks who committed other crimes, members of his family, his donors, could all potentially be given millions of dollars.
[21:25:00]
Think about it. Some of the thugs, who assaulted Capitol Police on January 6th, could walk away with multi-million dollar settlements, in addition to the pardon they got from Donald Trump. Talk about incentivizing violence.
This is just an outrageous act of self-dealing and corruption. And the folks who owe us an answer are also my Republican colleagues. We were supposed to be up all night voting, Thursday, last week.
COLLINS: Yes.
COONS: And I filed several amendments that would have blocked this fund. Republicans left town partly because they were fighting internally over this, and partly because they didn't want to face having to vote on it.
COLLINS: Well, and obviously, you'll all be back in Washington.
What do you make -- he called the idea, stupid, I believe is the word he used, may be dumb, about proposing a 100 percent state tax on anyone who gets payouts from the fund. What do you think of that idea?
COONS: I think that's a great way to deter people from seeking and getting these payouts. And, look, if his own chief counsel of his department allegedly resigned in protest over this, he owes us some better answers than calling that dumb.
COLLINS: There's something else that's been making headlines today. As someone who was the campaign co-chair for President Biden's campaign, I'm sure you've heard this. But I want everyone to hear what the former first lady, Jill Biden, said, about what she felt when watching him on that debate -- in that debate, with CNN, with President Trump.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RITA BRAVER, NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT, "CBS NEWS SUNDAY MORNING": Were you horrified as you saw it unfold?
JILL BIDEN, EDUCATOR AND FORMER FIRST LADY OF THE UNITED STATES: I wasn't horrified, I was frightened because I had never, ever seen Joe like that before or since. Never.
BRAVER: Or since?
BIDEN: Yes. Or since.
BRAVER: You've never seen him like that?
BIDEN: Never. No.
BRAVER: What happened?
BIDEN: I don't know what happened. I mean, when I -- as I watched it, I thought, Oh my God, he's having a stroke. And it scared me to death.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: If that's how she felt in that moment, why do you think she praised his performance publicly, the night of the debate?
COONS: Well, Kaitlan, let's focus on the point she just made. She's never seen Joe Biden have a moment like that, where for a good 15, 20, seconds he couldn't collect his thoughts or communicate. She never saw that before, and she's never seen it since.
I was with them both today at the funeral of a friend, the former mayor of Wilmington, here in Delaware, and Joe Biden is fine.
He had a difficult debate night, where he really froze up. I don't have a clear explanation for why. And frankly, I think she complimented his debate performance, not because she thought those 30 seconds were great, but because she knew what he had accomplished as president and knew that he would be a better president than Donald Trump.
And frankly, Kaitlan, rather than focusing on what happened on a debate stage, nearly two years ago now, we ought to be focused on what comes next for the American people, how we get their costs down, how we get out of this stupid war in Iran, and how we make sure that we are making life better for the American people.
When Donald Trump, in that debate, and afterwards, ran on lowering your costs, making America healthy again, releasing the Epstein files, and not starting any stupid new wars overseas. He's falling down on all four of those counts.
COLLINS: Yes, I mean, Democrats told CNN today in our reporting on this, they were frustrated that she's out and that she's speaking about it because, it's bringing it back up, obviously, in this moment for Democrats.
But let me ask you, Senator. Because you're part of a bipartisan group of your colleagues that has introduced the Protect College Sports Act, which is another attempt that's underway on Capitol Hill when it comes to college athletics, and what this looks like.
And this legislation, as it's proposed now, would give college athletes a federal right to earn compensation for their Name, Image, Likeness, NIL, which has become obviously a huge topic of discussion in college sports.
When you look at this, and you look at the Republicans and Democrats who are on it, do you think that this actually has a chance of getting passed?
COONS: I do. And Kaitlan, I'm honored to join Senators Cantwell and Cruz as an original co-sponsor of this bill, after months of study and engagement and negotiation. They're the Chair and the Ranking Member of the Commerce Committee, and they've achieved a tough but durable compromise.
[21:30:00]
Everybody who's a college sports fan knows that it's in trouble, that between the transfer portal, the costs that are going up, the pay that's going out to both coaches and athletes and agents, there's an arms race going on. And it's putting at risk non-revenue sports, Olympic sports, women's sports, D2 and D3 sports. And college sports are a key part of the American culture, the American college experience, and for tens of millions of us who are fans, who are thrilled by watching college sports.
So, this balances giving college players, student athletes, the protections they deserve to health care, to scholarships, to transparency about their agents, and to putting those NIL rights, as you mentioned, in statute. And it balances by limiting the transfer portal, by limiting coaches' ability to transfer mid-season, and by putting some clear guardrails around eligibility. I think it's a smart balance between a lot of different competing concerns, and I'm hopeful we'll take it up soon in the Senate.
COLLINS: We will see if you do.
Senator Chris Coons, thank you for joining us tonight, as always. COONS: Thank you, Kaitlan.
COLLINS: Up next. As the country is preparing to celebrate its 250th anniversary, the President and the White House is preparing to potentially put his name -- or the President's already planned to put his name on -- and face on coins and passports. There is now something else they are preparing to do, and we'll tell you what the White House told us about it today.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[21:35:00]
COLLINS: Tonight, the Trump administration is preparing to potentially put President Trump's face on a commemorative $250 bill to mark the nation's 250th anniversary.
According to The Washington Post tonight, which obtained this mock-up of what that bill could look like. There are two political appointees within the Trump Treasury Department that have been pushing the office that is in charge of printing money to start making prototypes.
If you're thinking, Wait a minute, it's illegal to do that? Yes, there is an 1866 law that prohibits any living person from appearing on U.S. currency. But of course we're in Washington, and Congress could vote to change that.
I questioned the Treasury Secretary, Scott Bessent, about this, earlier today.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: You said that it's up to Congress, the President's face is on a $250 bill. But it is actually The Washington Post that's reporting two political appointees from the Treasury Department who have asked agencies to be ready to do that.
Do you think politically it's a good idea to put his face on a $250 bill when people are struggling to afford gas and groceries?
BESSENT: Again, you know, I don't really understand this Washington Post article that -- who here is from The Post?
Yes. Terribly written, terribly edited. Because basically what it says is that Treasury is following the law and that we've created the bill, and that it's up to Congress. But that we follow the bill and it's up to -- I didn't really understand what the story was.
COLLINS: So--
BESSENT: But anyway--
COLLINS: --appointees aren't involved in that, two of your political appointees?
BESSENT: Yes, of course, but we prepare for everything if it gets passed. Just like we were ready six months in advance for the One Big Beautiful Bill for tax guidance. So we have to prepare in advance. You can't draw something up the day before.
COLLINS: Politically, do you think it's a good idea, though, when people are struggling to afford gas and groceries?
BESSENT: Look, I think it has -- I think that it's bifurcated that -- do you think we should have a 250th anniversary, the celebration?
COLLINS: Well, that's happening anyway.
BESSENT: But no, no, no, no, no it--
COLLINS: But putting the President's face on a $250 bill is a choice.
BESSENT: No, no, no, no, but Kaitlan, it's not happening anyway. It's happening because it's being funded by private citizens, by the federal government, by state governments, by municipal governments, to celebrate our country.
And I don't think that there's anything untoward about having the President of the United States, that the person who is President of the United States, on the 250th anniversary bill.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: My political sources tonight are:
Xochitl Hinojosa, the former DOJ Director of Public Affairs, who I should note her sister is running as a Democrat for governor of Texas.
And also, Scott Jennings, who does not have any siblings running as Democrats for governor of Texas, but is the former special assistant to President George W. Bush.
Scott, I'll ask you, what I asked the other Scott who was in the Briefing Room today. Do you think politically it's a good idea to put the President's face on a $250 bill right now?
SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, FORMER SENIOR ADVISER TO MITCH MCCONNELL, FORMER SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO PRES. GEORGE W. BUSH, HOST, "THE SCOTT JENNINGS RADIO SHOW" ON SRN: I mean, I think they ought to follow the law, which Scott Bessent clearly laid out. You can't put a living person on money right now. Now, the Congress could vote to change that, and it is right for the Treasury Department to be ready to follow the laws that Congress passes.
And I kind of agree with Scott Bessent. We're having a 250th anniversary. The government's going to do all kinds of things. They've already minted some coins, I think, to commemorate the 250th anniversary. So, putting Donald Trump's face on it wouldn't offend me. I'm sure it would offend people who don't like Donald Trump. I don't think it's the most pressing issue facing the country right now.
But would it surprise me if we did some commemorative items around America 250? No, wouldn't surprise me at all. COLLINS: Would you criticize President Biden if he had been in office and was putting his face on money?
JENNINGS: Look, we put the image of the President of the United States on all kinds of things in this country. I don't -- it doesn't really bother me. They'll name things after Donald Trump. They'll wind up naming things after Joe Biden. They've named things after Barack Obama. I don't -- it doesn't -- it doesn't offend me one way or the other, and I really think this is a bit of a tempest in a teapot.
But I can see why people who don't like Donald Trump like it because, you know, they don't like for his face or his name or for him to be on anything, and so it's another thing for them to complain about.
I also think Democrats generally don't want us to be celebrating the 250th anniversary of the country, and so they're like offended that we're celebrating America right now, and it's another thing for them to be offended about.
COLLINS: Xochitl, you're the Democrat here.
XOCHITL HINOJOSA, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, FORMER DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, DOJ, FORMER COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR, DNC: No one is a -- Democrats want to celebrate the 250th anniversary, Scott, and you know that.
[21:40:00]
I think one interesting thing about all of this is that this isn't the first time. We've seen Donald Trump obsessing over putting his name on the Kennedy Center. He wants to ensure that, while his approval rating is at 30 percent, the reality is, is that he himself is obsessed with his own image.
And so, I think, Kaitlan, your questions were spot on, in the sense that the American people are struggling every single day. They -- $250 is what it costs, in some areas, in order to pump gas. A lot of Americans can't necessarily afford it. And the fact that they're now going to have potentially, unless Congress changes the law, a commemorative sort of $250 bill of Donald Trump is just going to remind them every day about how expensive life has been under Donald Trump.
COLLINS: I want both of you to listen to what the Democratic leader over in the House, Hakeem Jeffries, had to say about this today.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. HAKEEM JEFFRIES (D-NY): It's Monopoly money. It's fantasy. And we are going to do everything possible to make sure that this never happens. I mean, this is the most ridiculous thing in the world. How sycophantic are Republicans when this is what they're focused on, as opposed to actually doing the type of things to address the damage that they've done to the American people?
They said they were going to lower costs on day one. Costs haven't gone down. They've gone up. And yet they're focused on a 250 make- believe bill for Donald Trump?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: I guess, Scott, to that -- to the point that he's making there. When poll numbers show that 77 percent of Americans, including a majority of Republicans, don't think the President's economic policies have done a good job, that they've actually increased their cost of living. How do you think they'll see a moment like this, from Republicans on Capitol Hill?
JENNINGS: Look, I think -- I think we often connect things that aren't connected. They're talking about the concept of making a commemorative item for America's 250th birthday. Whose face is on the money does not change the value of the money, it doesn't change anything about the economy, it doesn't change anything about the cost of groceries or gas or anything else. It's a picture on a piece of paper.
And Democrats are engaged in their biggest skill, their biggest talent right now, which is to be outraged about everything.
I have no idea if the Congress is going to pass this. And if they don't, I won't care. And if they do, I won't care either. But it won't surprise me that the government took steps to do something to commemorate the 250th anniversary of our country.
But to say we're going to put a face on a piece of paper, and that somehow has an impact on the value of that paper as it relates to the overall economy? I mean, that -- I know Democrats are economically illiterate. I didn't know they were that economically illiterate.
HINOJOSA: I mean, the reality is, is that it is sending a signal to the American people that they care more about Donald Trump and his ego than they actually care about providing anything and making their lives easier for them. And I think that is the main point that Democrats are trying to make.
I agree with you, Scott. I think we need to commemorate the 250th anniversary. At the same time, it should not be all about Donald Trump. This is not just about Donald Trump. There is more than -- to the 250th anniversary.
And so, I think that at a time when Americans are struggling, you'll continue to see Democrats trying to talk about those struggles, while you have Donald Trump and Republicans rising costs, and thinking about things like putting Donald Trump's face wherever they can.
COLLINS: Scott.
JENNINGS: Yes, look--
COLLINS: I mean, Hillary Clinton, as she was pointing it out today was saying, you know, when responding to the article, was saying, That's how much it's going to cost to fill up your gas and get groceries by the end of the President's term.
Obviously, that's Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump's former political opponent, saying that. But her point was to the cost of living, that is the very real reality for so many Americans right now.
JENNINGS: Look, I don't have anything to say about the $250 bill beyond what I've already said politically.
I will just say, though, deep down somewhere inside of me, my uber conservative is screaming, Let's not print any more money at all because every time we print more money, it makes the value -- it makes the value of it go down. Lord knows the Democrats spent and printed a bunch of it during the Biden years, and that's what caused the inflation crisis in the first place.
So, maybe we could all agree, let's just print a little less, print a little less money, and make it worth a little bit more. How about that?
HINOJOSA: You should call the White House. They'll listen to you, Scott. Tell them not to print this 2 -- not to go forward with this $250 bill.
COLLINS: Scott Jennings. Xochitl Hinojosa. Thank you both for being here tonight.
Up next for us. Someone special is going to be joining me here on set. ABC's Chief Global Affairs Correspondent, the one and only Martha Raddatz. After decades of reporting around the world, she has a new book about bravery and sacrifice.
[21:45:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REPORTER: What did you think about President Trump's comments in the Cabinet meeting yesterday, saying he didn't care about the midterms?
BESSENT: So, you're calling President Trump a statesman? You're saying that he is taking a statesmanlike position, that he has a core belief, and he believes that the most important thing is for Iran never to have a nuclear weapon.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: That was Treasury Secretary, Scott Bessent, defending President Trump after he said yesterday at the Cabinet meeting, quote, I don't care about the midterms.
It's a sentiment that the President himself echoed today.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: If you wanted to play that game, then you would wait till the midterms are over, and then the following hour you'll attack Iran because they cannot have a nuclear weapon. Most people agree with me on that. But then it gets maybe carried into, you know, the next election, whether it's a midterm or not. So, you have a very short window for doing some -- anything having to do with war. But I don't view that window. I view it, I have to do what's right.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: My next source tonight has spent decades reporting from war zones across the globe. ABC's legendary Chief Global Affairs Correspondent, Martha Raddatz, is here. And her new book is out now, "The Hero Next Door: Stories of Patriotism and Purpose."
And it is so fun to have you here on CNN.
[21:50:00]
MARTHA RADDATZ, CHIEF GLOBAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT, ABC NEWS, AUTHOR, "THE HERO NEXT DOOR": It's great to see you, Kaitlan.
COLLINS: I mean, just given your experience and your reporting, when you hear what you're hearing from the administration on Iran right now, what do you make of the moment that they're in?
RADDATZ: It's confusing. I mean, every day I feel like we've already said what they're saying today, a month ago, or two months ago, or a couple of weeks ago. I was in Pakistan when JD Vance was over there, when it was, you know, We're close, we think we've almost got this. It is very different from any kind of negotiations.
Look, it's true, it's hard, and getting that last mile is the most difficult part. But most often they have a whole lot more figured out before they make announcements about things.
And the biggest thing -- and I've actually been through the Strait of Hormuz in my past with -- on a destroyer, and I know what it looks like, I know what it feels like there, I know how difficult it is. But as small as it is, it's a huge area where if there are mines there, that's a really serious problem, to get those mines out, and how long it would take. And in the end, we really would be going back to where we were before this all started, and that's the most difficult thing.
COLLINS: Well, and the President is so resistant to having any kind of deal that resembles the Obama era nuclear deal.
RADDATZ: It almost looks like they're trying to find any way they can around that. I mean, can Oman say, Look, we're going to charge some kind of tolls, maybe Iran will get something, and the U.S. can kind of divorce itself from that. But it -- they do not want it to look like that nuclear deal at all.
I was over there when that nuclear deal was first announced, and there was joy in the streets about that nuclear deal, and things really started changing a little bit in Iran. Women were not wearing their scarves as low if they didn't want to. You saw some real change over there. But the last couple of years, that has really -- it has changed back. COLLINS: Yes, and you obviously have to feel for the Iranian people as they've been living through this war.
When you are reporting on this book, and you're looking at the world of sacrifice and bravery, and what that looks like for American service members and their families on and off the field. What was it like for you to do this?
RADDATZ: I think this was really a work of love, and I say that I am not objective at all about sacrifice and service.
I've known a lot of people in these books -- in this book, for 20 years. And the thing that really struck me is this is the 9/11 generation, and they are no less great than any other generation of American servicemen and women, and we've kind of forgotten about that. So, I really wanted to show not only what they did on the battlefield or on the home front, taking care of a wounded child or spouse. I wanted to see what they'd done in the -- in the years since to find purpose.
And I really feel strongly that this is a story that everybody can look at. It's not just a story about the military. It is through the prism of the military, but it's about humanity. It's about what these people have done to find purpose and to serve our nation and try to bridge this divide.
COLLINS: Yes, well, I love what you wrote about the stories of these people who do make this sacrifice. Busy news cycles that happen, other stories that appear.
You said, Too often their stories are lost or overrun by the broader narratives of the wars they are sent to fight -- that's the nature of a busy news cycle. But you said that you find it hard to forget or walk away from it.
RADDATZ: You really can't, I mean, and that's true, and that is from my heart. I don't discard people who I have been that intimate with, who have told me about the worst or the best days of their lives, or who were in a battle and shared that with me when they were in tears. I just can't leave them behind in that way. So, as I said, it's like the labor of love. These people, I am close to many of them, and I just want everybody to know about them.
There's -- I mean, when you think about it, Kaitlan, someone lost their legs 15 years ago, they still have lost their legs. I was there a day that a young soldier was brought in by a medevac who did lose his lower legs and have followed him through the years and seen how he has persevered and he is up on prosthetics. There's another one, a doctor who saved the life of my colleague, Bob Woodruff, and he now goes to Ukraine a couple of times a year to operate on the wounded.
COLLINS: It's an amazing book, and everyone should read it.
RADDATZ: Thank you.
COLLINS: So, thank you for writing it. And also, a congratulations in order, since you got your Lifetime Achievement Award last night--
RADDATZ: I did. I did. I was overwhelmed. It was amazing to me. Thank you. Thank you.
COLLINS: That must have been so special.
RADDATZ: It was so special. I really appreciate it. Thanks.
COLLINS: Martha Raddatz, you're the best. Congratulations.
RADDATZ: Thank you.
COLLINS: Thank you for joining us. It's such a treat to have you here.
Her new book, "The Hero Next Door," is out now.
And we'll be right back after this.
[21:55:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: We do have some breaking news tonight, as we have just learned that a Blue Origin rocket has exploded during a scheduled ground test.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
(VIDEO - BLUE ORIGIN ROCKET EXPLODES DURING GROUND TEST)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: You can see, what is a massive fireball build from the rocket's launchpad there.
In a subsequent statement, after that explosion happened, the space company that is owned by Jeff Bezos, shared that the rocket experienced a, quote, Anomaly. Thankfully, Blue Origin says that all of their personnel have been accounted for tonight.
We'll keep you updated on what happened there, and any other statements from Blue Origin.
[22:00:00]
If you missed any of the show, it's available on demand to subscribers on the CNN app, and you can also check out our podcast wherever you get your podcasts. You can also follow me on Instagram and Twitter @kaitlancollins, where I'm always posting and reposting the latest reporting throughout the day.
Thanks for joining us tonight.
"CNN NEWSNIGHT WITH ABBY PHILLIP" starts right now.
