Return to Transcripts main page
The Brief with Jim Sciutto
CNN International: Homan: 700 Federal Agents Leaving Minnesota; Democrats Threaten to Block Funding for Homeland Security; Zelenskyy: 55,000 Troops Have Died Fighting Russia; U.S. Hosts Critical Minerals Conference; Tech Stocks Fall Again; Iran Nuclear Talks are Expected to Take Place in Oman; African Men Lured into Fighting for Russia; Officials Probe Possible Ransom Notes for Nancy Guthrie. Aired 6-7p ET
Aired February 04, 2026 - 18:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[18:00:00]
JIM SCIUTTO, CNN ANCHOR, "THE BRIEF": Hello and welcome to our viewers joining us from all around the world. I'm Jim Sciutto in Washington, and
you're watching "The Brief."
Just ahead this hour, the White House border czar says 700 federal agents are now leaving Minnesota, at least some 2,000 or so still on the ground.
Ukraine's President Zelenskyy says on French television that 55,000 Ukrainian troops have been killed fighting Russia and that a large number
are missing. And the U.S. and Iran are now expected to hold nuclear talks in Oman amid reports that the negotiations have been faltering.
We begin, though, with developments in Minnesota. The White House Border Czar Tom Homan announced that Homeland Security will withdraw hundreds of
personnel from the state.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TOM HOMAN, WHITE HOUSE BORDER CZAR: I have announced effective immediately we will draw down 700 people effective today. My goal with the support of
President Trump is to achieve a complete drawdown and end this surge as soon as we can. But that is largely contingent upon the end of the illegal
and threatening activities against ICE and its federal partners that we're seeing in the community.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCIUTTO: Some 2,000 officers do remain on the ground. Homan says the Trump administration will roll out body cameras for federal agents nationwide.
Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey told CNN, quote, "The drawdown in body-worn cameras are a step in the right direction, but 2,000 ICE officers still
here is not de-escalation."
Kristen Holmes is live at the White House. Whether it's enough for Democrats, they are concrete steps. And Homan even telegraphed there the
possibility of taking the other agents out. What happened exactly? Did the president, did the White House calculate that this was a losing political
issue for them?
KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Jim, that's exactly what happened. They saw the way the tides were turning. I will note
President Trump did an interview with NBC just earlier today in which he was asked specifically, what did you learn from Minneapolis? And one of the
things he said was that they could use a softer touch.
Now, that is a rare concession when it comes to President Trump when he was talking specifically about this immigration crackdown. But it is also what
we have been hearing was happening behind closed doors, this idea that they did not think that the crackdown was going well. They knew it was not good
optics. And it was making a lot of America incredibly angry at the tactics that they were seeing on the ground.
And this is a key issue for President Trump. He truly believes that immigration is something that people can unite and support him on. And
that's just simply not the case if you look at the recent polling. So, they were looking for an off-ramp. They were looking for a way to turn the
temperature down. And that's why they moved Greg Bovino out and Tom Homan in.
Tom Homan, while he is no way an immigration moderate, he is still incredibly conservative. He has been in law enforcement for decades and
worked with both Democrats and Republicans. So, he has been in these back- to-back meetings with these local and state officials trying to, again, stop this from becoming a Tinder point, a flash point, and really
deescalate the situation. They clearly started to do that by removal of at least hundreds of these agents that are on the ground.
SCIUTTO: I suppose we will watch to see what the next steps are. Kristen Holmes at the White House, thanks so much.
Joining me now, Democratic Congressman Suhas Subramanyam. Congressman, thanks so much for taking the time.
REP. SUHAS SUBRAMANYAM (D-VA): Thank you.
SCIUTTO: So, first of all, do you see these initial steps, the 700 personnel leaving Minneapolis, also body cameras as substantive, positive
changes?
SUBRAMANYAM: Yes, I think it's a small step in the right direction, but we need bigger steps in the right direction. For instance, we need
accountability. It's not only been instances over and over again where people are being roughed up and shot and hurt by ICE agents, but then they
try to cover it up afterwards, and this administration is covering up for them and calling the victims, you know, terrorists, domestic terrorists,
right?
[18:05:00]
And so, we need more accountability as well, too. And, you know, body cams is part of it, but only a small part of the reason why the American people
are fed up with ICE and with this administration on immigration.
SCIUTTO: So, now the next step, of course, is the DHS budget funded for two weeks, but still big gaps between what Democrats want and what
Republicans say they're willing to give. Senate Majority Leader Thune said it would take a miracle to get an ICE deal before that next deadline. Do
you think it will take a miracle? Can you see bridging that gap?
SUBRAMANYAM: I don't think it's a miracle to deliver transparency and accountability on ICE to the American people. And what else we also want is
a change in leadership, too. And so, I don't think it takes a miracle to get rid of Kristi Noem. I don't think it takes a miracle to, you know, take
away some of these terrible practices that ICE is participating in. And all it takes is just a few Republicans to join us and actually fix the problem
that's occurring all across the country.
SCIUTTO: Beyond demanding Noem being fired, Democrats want to end these so-called roving patrols. They want to require judicial warrants. They want
to require outside independent oversight of ICE, a number of things. I'm just naming a few here. Would you be willing to and should Democrats be
willing to shut down the government to get the changes you're demanding?
SUBRAMANYAM: So, this would just be the Department of Homeland Security. And as someone who represents a lot of federal workers, including DHS
employees, I don't want to see a shutdown. But this is a crisis. And this is something that we have to address now and we cannot wait.
And so, if we see DHS and Secretary Noem continue these practices without any transparency or accountability, then why should we continue giving them
money to use weapons against the American people and terrorize our streets? And so, I want to see changes before I'm going to continue to fund this
agency.
SCIUTTO: Yes. Shut down the department, not the government, I should have said. ICE already, as you know, has $75 billion of funding through 2029.
That because of Trump's big, beautiful bill. Can you explain the math here that if you deny the department funding, how much of their budget going
forward, you know, separate from the money it already has, how much of its budget is actually affected?
SUBRAMANYAM: That's true. And, you know, one thing I'd like to see is for us to cut some of that ICE funding. It's completely unnecessary. And I
think it makes ICE one of the top funded militaries in the world since it's trying to pretend to be a military right now. And so, I want to see some
changes there as well, too.
But certainly, you know, I don't want to continue funding Secretary Noem's private planes while she goes around in different costumes, pretending to
be, you know, something that she is not. I don't want to continue to see her cover up for some of these crimes. I want to see changes, real changes.
And you outlined some of them.
But in the end, it's not just -- you know, I talked to some of the victims of ICE brutality, and it's not just the brutality itself, but it's the
reaction to it by ICE and by DHS to cover up for the officers, lie to the American people, and call the victims domestic terrorists. That's just as
much a part of the story as the actions.
SCIUTTO: Another issue is whether ICE obeys court orders. The chief judge of Minnesota's federal trial level court said, quote, that ICE has likely
violated more court orders in January 2026 than some federal agencies have violated in their entire existence. I just wonder how that's possible,
right? You know, how the agency, the department, is allowed to do that. Where are the judicial, the legal backstops?
SUBRAMANYAM: Well, it's possible because the president and the DHS secretary, Noem, and others in this administration have made it possible.
They've covered up for ICE. They've let ICE issue their own warrants, make up warrants, these imaginary warrants, so they can go into anyone's house
anytime they want.
And so, it's possible because leadership in this administration make it possible, and that's why we want to see some changes to leadership as well,
because if you don't change the leadership, they're going to continue to cover up for crimes and illegal things that ICE does.
SCIUTTO: Final question, if I can, I want to ask you about President Trump's call to nationalize federal elections. He's doubled down on that,
again, saying he meant what he said. Should lawmakers, and should the American public, take that threat seriously?
SUBRAMANYAM: Oh, absolutely. We should believe President Trump when he says things. And in this case, he's basically saying that he still thinks
the 2020 election was stolen.
[18:10:00]
He wants to essentially do, you know, take over something that the states have been doing for forever now and make it under his purview so he can
influence the results of the election. And so, that is the opposite of democracy, as something that we will never support and never stand for.
I also heard one of his former advisers, Steve Bannon, say that they want to locate ICE agents at polling locations to make sure the election is not
stolen. And so, when you hear rhetoric like that, you have to take it seriously in this administration. And so, we will continue to fight back
against not just the rhetoric, but any potential actions that they take towards that.
SCIUTTO: Congressman Subramanyam, we appreciate you joining the program.
SUBRAMANYAM: Thank you.
SCIUTTO: Well, Ukraine's President Zelenskyy now says that some 55,000 Ukrainian troops have been killed during nearly four years since Russia's
full-scale invasion, considerably less than some independent estimates. During that same interview on France's 2TV, Zelenskyy conceded a large
number of service members remain missing. U.S.-brokered peace talks got underway once again today in the UAE, but not before Russia delivered
another devastating air assault on multiple regions and cities of Ukraine.
Those successive strikes have left thousands of people without power or heat during a bitterly cold winter. The Kremlin, unapologetic as always,
says the war will continue until Kiev makes appropriate decisions. Zelenskyy accuses Moscow of terrorizing his people and not taking diplomacy
seriously.
Joining us now is the Dutch Foreign Minister David van Weel. Thanks so much for joining.
DAVID VAN WEEL, DUTCH FOREIGN MINISTER: Thank you for having me, Jim.
SCIUTTO: First, I want to begin with what brings you to Washington, and that is a U.S. and European and Japanese initiative on rare earths. The
group issued a joint statement today saying that they mutually agreed to enhance resilience and critical mineral supply chains. Can you explain how
you plan to do that?
VAN WEEL: Yes. Well, we all know the critical raw materials are currently being provided by mainly one nation, and that we want to diversify that
supply chain because critical raw materials are being used in every electronics and every part of our economy. So, I think today was the
beginning of setting a new market standard for critical raw materials, whereby we set potentially a price floor to make mining projects more
profitable and more likely to happen, also in other countries.
SCIUTTO: Understood. I want to talk to Ukraine because, of course, you've been observing what's been happening in Ukraine, these awful, awful
assaults, deliberately targeting civilians. Let's be frank here yet again. President Zelenskyy has become more critical of both Europe and the United
States, saying, in effect, that how can you trust any security guarantee in any eventual peace agreement if you get there, if Europe and the U.S.
cannot stop Russia now? Is that a fair criticism?
VAN WEEL: Well, I think President Zelenskyy appreciates what we do for Ukraine. I mean, the Ukrainians are very brave people. They're standing up
even in the face of these horrors, living through, fighting through and making sure that Russia doesn't win this horrible war of aggression.
We're trying to keep up. But of course, he is very critical of what needs to be done in order to increase the pressure on President Putin. At the
moment, we see there is no sign from the Kremlin to seriously go to the negotiating table, and we need to do more.
SCIUTTO: When you're here in Washington, what do you hear from U.S. lawmakers, Democrats and Republicans? Because many of them, historically,
you know, in recent years, have been quite supportive of Ukraine. But as you know, U.S. support for Ukraine has really fallen off a cliff. In dollar
terms, yes, the U.S. still sells weapons to Europe, which it then passes on to Ukraine. But the support has decreased significantly.
Do they tell you they're going to do anything about that? And do you have any confidence that the U.S. is going to change that support?
VAN WEEL: Well, fortunately, the U.S. is still supplying weapons that we are buying as Europeans, and we are providing funds for that. We do realize
that we need to step up our support in Europe in order to keep Ukraine going and keep the Ukrainian economy going. My main message here has been
that the big leverage that the U.S. has is to increase the pressure on President Putin. So that means more sanctions, more pressure, and making
sure that he starts to feel that he needs to come to the negotiating table.
SCIUTTO: Tell me about the state of the U.S. relationship with Europe, particularly the U.S. relationship with its NATO allies, following the
deep, deep rift over Greenland. You have said that the damage to the transatlantic trust is undeniable. Is it irreparable?
VAN WEEL: No, it's not. I think that we need to do everything we can in order to maintain our transatlantic bond that has brought us so much over
the past 80 years. So, I believe in NATO. I'm glad that we found a solution for everything we can in order to maintain our transatlantic bond that has
brought us so much over the past 80 years.
[18:15:00]
So, I believe in NATO. I'm glad that we found a solution for Greenland, that we're talking in a NATO context on a mission for the High North, that
Denmark, Greenland, and the U.S. are now entering into diplomatic talks behind closed doors. So, I hope we can leave that chapter behind. What it
will mean and what will be the lasting effect, I think, is that Europe now understands that we need to step up more for our own security.
So, we will create a more equal relationship, also in the field of defense. We will step up our military spending. But still, even if we are on equal
footing, I think we're stronger together.
SCIUTTO: Yes. But you know, and I speak to a number of European officials, that the gap is so great between America's military capabilities and
Europe's, even collectively, that even with that increased spending, it's going to take years, not just not to meet the difference, right, but to
make a significant dent in that difference. What do you do in the meantime?
VAN WEEL: Well, in the meantime, we are still together in NATO, which is our ultimate security guarantee. With all the critics that we heard from
President Trump, he's never questioned in this term Article 5 or the collective defense. So, we are still adhering to that. We're adhering to
the deals that we made, the promises we made to increase our defense spending. And yes, it will take a long time for us to be in a more equal
relationship, but we are moving towards it.
SCIUTTO: Do you trust, though, that if push were to come to shove, if Russia were to attack a NATO ally, and of course, I know it is already
attacking NATO with hybrid warfare, drones, cyber-attacks, you name it, but I'm talking about sending tanks across the border, right, or some other
kinetic attack. Do you truly trust, does Europe still truly trust that the U.S. would come to its defense?
VAN WEEL: Yes, I trust that. All NATO members trust that. But most importantly, I think also President Putin trusts that. I don't think he
will take any chance in venturing into NATO territory because he believes that Article 5 stands and that the U.S., as a NATO ally, will be there to
defend other allies. So, yes, that still stands. It doesn't take anything away about all the criticism on Europe having to do more and all the time,
rightfully so, as you say, that it will take to get there.
SCIUTTO: If Putin is not serious about peace, and that seems to be Europe's view quite publicly, it is certainly President Zelenskyy's view
and the view of many Ukrainians that I speak to, where does that leave efforts to end this war? Or must Ukraine, must Europe in effect prepare
for, I don't want to say an endless war, but at least a war that's not going to end this year?
VAN WEEL: Well, this war has to end. I mean, you saw the figures. The figures on the Russian side are even worse. I talked to Ukrainian
leadership and there are months where they lose more than 35,000 soldiers in one month. They have an attrition rate of around 40,000. So, they're
almost losing more soldiers than they can produce and bring to the battlefield. Those numbers are horrific. Hopefully, that will do something
to the Russian calculus as well, in combination with their economy, which we need to keep tightening the screws on.
SCIUTTO: David van Weel, we appreciate you joining us here in Washington. Thanks so much.
VAN WEEL: Thank you.
SCIUTTO: Still ahead, another big sell-off in tech stocks. Chip stocks in particular fell sharply, as well as software. We'll discuss what comes next
for some of tech's biggest names right after the break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:20:00]
SCIUTTO: Welcome back. In today's Business Breakout, a mostly lower day on Wall Street with fresh weakness in tech. Chip giant AMD was a big loser,
falling some 17 percent. The company posted strong quarterly results, but its outlook for the current quarter came in weaker than expected. Software
stocks fell again on continued fears that A.I. will impact software sales, and video CEO Jensen Huang, however, said that concern is overdone.
After the closing bell, Google parent company Alphabet reported better than expected results. Shares lost ground, though, in after-hours trading. The
company says its spending will almost double this year, due to what, increased investment in A.I.
Paul La Monica joins me now. He's a senior markets writer at Barron's Magazine. Paul, first, I want to talk about this tech sellout, because
there's been a lot of talk about what A.I. will hurt, right? I mean, there's been a lot of talk about taking away human jobs. But what's
interesting here is it seems the market's calculating A.I. is going to take away business from software makers. Can you explain how that's playing out?
PAUL R. LA MONICA, SENIOR MARKETS ANALYSIS WRITER, BARRON'S: Yes, there have been concerns for several months now that companies like Salesforce
and Oracle, big software companies, they are going to be hurt. Part of that is this whole notion of vibe coding, if you will, that, you know, you just
won't need to spend big bucks on these recurring monthly subscriptions or quarterly subscriptions for software when you could just have A.I. write
the code for you. So, that's one of the reasons why software stocks have been crushed.
But now there are, I think, questions about whether or not the chip companies who have been perceived as the beneficiaries, your AMDs, NVIDIAs,
are they going to have to see a bit of a hit as well? Because the run-up in their stock prices was just so far so fast. I mean, AMD, even with that
stock price today, Jim, falling 17 percent, it's still up nearly 70 percent in just the past 12 months.
SCIUTTO: Yes, remember whenever it was like, teach your kids to code? No one says that. A.I. bots are going to do that. Tell me about Alphabet here,
because strong results, but it's going to spend $185 billion in A.I. It just seems like the numbers, investment numbers for all these companies are
so off the charts. I mean, does the concern still remain in the market? They're going to spend way more money, build way more infrastructure than
the market can actually support.
LA MONICA: Yes, I think that is a legitimate concern, whether or not companies like Alphabet, we're going to get results from Amazon tomorrow,
another one of the so-called hyperscalers because of their AWS Cloud unit, Meta platforms, Microsoft. Are they spending too much on A.I. services that
maybe the average consumer or even corporate customer may not necessarily need? That still has to play out and shake out.
The good news for Alphabet, unlike some of the other companies that are spending a lot, they have a very strong balance sheet because, you know,
search is still a cash cow. They are really doing well now in A.I. with Gemini taking market share, I think probably from ChatGPT.
So, Alphabet, I don't think anyone's going to worry that they're not -- they're going to go into the -- you know, the public bond markets and
borrow to fund this A.I. spending. They can probably generate it with cash, but still, it's a staggering sum.
SCIUTTO: Yes. I mean, there's something of a flavor of the month club going on. I mean, ChatGPT was everything with OpenAI, then there was, you
know, concerns about Gemini. Now, Anthropic has this product, which is sparking concerns among software makers. Is Anthropic unique in that space
in terms of potentially taking away business from software makers? I have to imagine lots of folks are thinking of playing that game.
LA MONICA: Yes, I think, you know, people definitely still have to worry about Sam Altman and OpenAI, ChatGPT, what their ultimate aspirations are.
[18:25:00]
But, you know, Anthropic with Claude, what was really interesting is that, you know, companies that a lot of investors probably didn't think too much
about, LegalZoom and Thomson Reuters, these information services providers, their stocks were hammered yesterday because of that concern that, again,
why do you need, you know, a paralegal or first year law student to comb through all these legal documents when Claude can just have its A.I. bot do
it for you?
SCIUTTO: Yes, I mean, it's incredible. Paul La Monica, thanks so much for joining.
LA MONICA: Thank you.
SCIUTTO: Checking now some of today's other business headlines. Employees at one of the most venerable and important U.S. newspapers are reeling from
just massive job cuts. After weeks of speculation and worry, The Washington Post has announced it is cutting one-third of its workforce. It's making
deep cuts in particular to foreign bureaus, the Metrodesk nearly eliminating its sports section. Post employees are criticizing owner Jeff
Bezos for weakening the paper. They fear the cuts are politically motivated as Bezos tries to curry favor with the Trump administration for his many
business ventures, much bigger than The Washington Post.
And more bad news on the hiring front today. Payroll firm ADP says that private employers added a total of just 22,000 jobs last month. That's
about half the size of what economists were expecting. ADP also revised its December job gains lower.
The chair of the Senate Banking Committee is pushing back against a U.S. criminal probe into the Fed chair Jerome Powell. Republican Senator Tim
Scott says he does not believe Powell broke the law when he testified before Congress last year. Another Republican member of the committee, Tom
Tillis, threatened to hold up confirmation for President Trump's new Fed pick for chair until the Powell probe is resolved.
Coming up, Iran says talks with the U.S. are now back on, expected to take place in Oman. What's it all mean? We're going to bring you the latest
after the break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:30:00]
SCIUTTO: Welcome back to "The Brief," I'm Jim Sciutto and here are the international headlines we're watching today.
It appears the Trump administration is trying to calm some of the anger over federal officers and their ongoing operations in Minnesota. President
Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, today announced he's reducing the number of immigration agents in Minneapolis by 700. Even after that drawdown, though,
about 2,000 agents remain deployed there.
Gunmen have killed nearly 200 people in Nigeria. The armed men attacked multiple villages. It is the latest deadly assault by gangs who raided
towns, kidnapped residents, stole livestock. A local lawmaker says the gunmen rounded up residents and simply executed them before then setting
the village on fire.
British lawmakers have agreed to release documents on the appointment of Peter Mandelson as the U.K.'s ambassador to Washington. Prime Minister Keir
Starmer says Mandelson lied repeatedly about his ties with Jeffrey Epstein before his appointment. Mandelson was then fired from that role here in
Washington last year. He is now under criminal investigation for allegedly leaking government information to Epstein.
Iran's foreign minister has announced that talks with the U.S. will go ahead on Friday as planned and now take place in Oman. Iran has made a
number of last-minute demands, changing the location, just one of them. It also wants the talks to focus solely on the nuclear program, not nuclear
weapons. Those demands, though, putting the negotiations in jeopardy. President Trump fired back earlier in an interview with NBC.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Should the Supreme Leader in Iran be worried right now?
DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: I would say he should be very worried, yes, he should be. As you know, they're negotiating with us.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I know they are, but the protesters have said, you know, where are the Americans? You promised them we would have their back.
Do we still have their back?
TRUMP: Well, we've had their back. And look, that country's a mess right now because of us. We went in, we wiped out their nuclear. So, I didn't
take out, you know, we have peace in the Middle East.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCIUTTO: Joining us now, Barak Ravid, CNN political and global affairs analyst, also with Axios. Barak, good to have you. As we watch this drama
today, the talks were on, they were off, they were on, off, now they're on again. They appear that they're on for Friday, but does that bode well for
the possibility of an agreement, given the back and forth just at this stage?
BARAK RAVID, CNN POLITICAL AND GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST AND GLOBAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT, AXIOS: Well, so let's start with the bottom line. There is
going to be a meeting in Oman on Friday between President Trump's envoys, Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff, and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas
Araghchi. Is this meeting going to lead to an agreement? I think being skeptical is an understatement. I think there are very low chances for a
deal at the moment.
Nevertheless, I think that what we saw over the last 24 hours was part of the arms wrestling around those negotiations with the Iranians, walking
back understandings between them and several regional countries like Turkey, Egypt, and Qatar, who organized talks in Turkey only for the
Iranians to back off and say, no, no, we want those talks to be somewhere else in Oman.
Why did the Iranians do that? They did that because in Oman they wanted to have only bilateral talks with the U.S., when in Turkey the talks were
supposed to take place with other countries in the region. Those countries wanted to discuss not only the nuclear issue, but Iran's activity in the
region with its proxies, Iran's missile program, and the situation of human rights in the country. And the Iranians did not do that -- did not want
that. That's why they pivoted to talks in Oman.
SCIUTTO: You have a number of Middle Eastern countries urging the U.S. president to keep talking, in effect. You have Israel pushing, it seems,
from the other direction, urging military action here. Where does that leave the president, according to your reporting? One can imagine that the
president has enough reason at this point, if he wanted to, to say these talks aren't going anywhere, you know, I'm going to strike. Is it your
sense he'd prefer not to?
RAVID: So, first, the fact is that the talks are still on, which means that President Trump decided for now to try and continue going down the
diplomatic path. So, what happened was that at the beginning, last night, the U.S. position was, you know what, if the Iranians want to do the talks
in Oman, we'll do it in Oman.
[18:35:00]
But then the U.S. realized that it's not the geography here, it's the content. It's what we're talking about. And then the U.S. told the
Iranians, we're out, we're not going to play this game. If you want to have conversation, you need to do it according to our rules. And then the talks
around noon basically broke down.
And what happened then is that several Arab and Muslim countries, the Turks, the Egyptians, the Saudis, the Qataris, the Omanis, started calling
the White House, including to very, very high levels in the White House, and say, listen, we know what you feel about what the Iranians did, but we
still want you to engage with the Iranians. At least go and listen to them. And then the U.S. decided, you know what, we'll do it. And I think this was
a direct decision by President Trump to pursue those talks regardless of what the Iranians did. And I think Kushner and Witkoff will arrive in Oman,
they'll meet the Iranians. The bar is pretty high.
If the Iranians are going to come to those talks and say, well, you know, let's have talks for the sake of talks, I think this will be the first and
last meeting. But if the Iranians are going to come to that meeting with something tangible, for example, saying, you know what, we're ready to
discuss all the issues, or for example, you know what, we're ready to give up on our 450 kilograms of highly enriched uranium. If the Iranians will
come with those kinds of tangible deliverables, maybe, just maybe, this thing can actually achieve something.
SCIUTTO: Let me ask you this. Have U.S. officials articulated to you what Trump's strategic objective is here? Because a couple weeks ago, it was
standing up for the protesters. Those awful massacres were carried out, many thousands killed, arguably too late for that unless he wanted to
deliver some sort of punitive blow. Now, he talks about destroying the nuclear program again.
Is it setting back the nuclear program? Is it regime change? Is it punishment for the massacre of rioters? What's the goal here?
RAVID: As far as I understand, we're not in the punishing the Iranian regime situation anymore because, you know, the protest was quashed and
there's no momentum for such a move. On the other hand, I don't think we're in regime change mode either. I think what the president is trying to do at
the moment is to say, you know, we missed our window for a military operation. So, let's try and get some sort of a deal.
And I think that Trump will take almost any deal as long as it addresses his concerns. For example, again, if the Iranians will come and say we're
willing to zero enrichment, we're willing to give up on our highly enriched uranium, I think that's a deal that President Trump will take because,
obviously, it will sort of tie the open knots that stayed after the 12-day war. The 12-day war took the Iranian nuclear program back many, many years,
but it did not end with any deal.
So, the Iranians are now free to do whatever they want. And I think that if President Trump's goal is to try and tie those knots into some sort of a
deal, that will shut down the Iranian nuclear program through diplomacy.
SCIUTTO: Giving up the highly enriched uranium sounds a lot like that JCPOA from 11 years ago, but you know, I won't quibble.
RAVID: Yes, but you know, back at the time, at the time the Iranians had 20 percent enriched uranium. Now, they have 450 kilograms of 60 percent
highly enriched uranium. This is very, very close to a nuclear weapon.
SCIUTTO: One step, one step, as they say, important point, Barak Ravid, thanks so much.
RAVID: Thank you.
SCIUTTO: A CNN investigation is revealing the strategies that Russia is using to lure African men into joining its army. Many are job seekers who
were promised good opportunities and generous pay before finding themselves on the front lines with almost no training. Larry Madowo has the story.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What is your name?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Francis.
LARRY MADOWO, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): This disturbing video appears to show an African recruit in the Russian army with a land mine
strapped to his chest. He is being ordered to storm Ukrainian positions on the front lines. A Russian speaker hurl to racist insult to the man saying
he is being used as a can opener to breach an enemy bunker.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I didn't see it is so traumatizing. Francis, my is my son.
MADOWO (voice-over): CNN traced the man's mother to Kenya. She hasn't been able to reach her son since October 2025, but she recently received another
video of him from an unknown Kenyan number.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Be careful you guys, because people are being taken there, and you end up being taken to the military.
FRANCIS NDARUA, RUSSIAN RECRUIT: And you are taken in front line, front- line battle. And there are -- there is a true killing.
[18:40:00]
MADOWO (voice-over): Francis is a trained electrical engineer who was promised a civilian job in Russia, but his family says he was forced into
the Russian army and to the front lines in Ukraine.
MADOWO: How long was the training?
ANNE NJERI NDARUA, MOTHER OF FRANCIS NDARUA: Three weeks.
MADOWO: They had only three weeks of military training.
A. NDARUA: Only three weeks of military training.
MADOWO: Had he ever been in the police or in the army in Kenya?
A. NDARUA: No, no, no.
MADOWO: Do you know where Francis is.
A. NDARUA: I don't know where he is. I was told he's at -- in Ukraine, but I don't know specific whether he's there or not.
MADOWO (voice-over): Francis is among a growing number of African men currently fighting for Russia, though exact figures are unknown. Some
Africans in the Russian army glamorize their life on social media, encouraging their countrymen to join.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: For those of you in Africa, in Nigeria, they want to come and join the Russian army. It's very, very easy and very good. No
stress.
MADOWO (voice-over): This Ghanaian man posts dance videos and brags about how much money he makes.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: My salary, go feed your father, go feed your mother, go feed your family for like, two years, three years my salary.
MADOWO: Where are you now? Can you say where you are?
MADOWO (voice-over): CNN spoke to a dozen African fighters currently on the front lines in Ukraine. They described being forced into a deadly war
racism from Russian commanders and unpaid salaries, many say they were made to sign military contracts in Russian without lawyers or translation.
Nearly all told CNN they were desperate to escape, but felt trapped. Patrick Kwoba is one of the lucky few. He has made it back to Nairobi after
escaping the Russian military. He is still carrying shrapnel in his body from a Ukrainian drone ambush.
PATRICK KWOBA, KENYAN INJURED IN UKRAINE (through translator): It hit me down here, but my food backpack saved my life. I didn't get burnt in my
back because of my armor vest, but it tore my pants and burnt my buttocks and legs.
MADOWO (voice-over): Patrick is a carpenter who says he was only given basic military training.
KWOBA (through translator): I asked my Russian partner for first aid, but he turned hostile.
MADOWO: So, after you've been hit by a drone --
KWOBA: Yes.
MADOWO: -- and the grenade.
KWOBA: Yes.
MADOWO: You asked for help from your partner?
KWOBA: Yes.
MADOWO: And he sent you away.
KWOBA: Yes. He want to kill me. I'd have to run, my friend.
MADOWO (voice-over): Patrick fled to the Kenyan Embassy in Moscow while on leave to recover from his injury.
MADOWO: So, the only way to leave is to escape?
KWOBA: You need to escape or you die. It's only two ways.
MADOWO (voice-over): CNN has seen adverts, messages and recruitment documents aimed at foreign fighters. They offer African sign on bonuses of
$13,000 salaries up to $3,500 a month in Russian citizenship, after a year.
CHARLES NJOKI, ESCAPED FROM RUSSIAN MILITARY: They are lying to people the money that they tell people they pay that is not true.
MADOWO (voice-over): Desperate for work and with a baby on the way, Photographer Charles Njoki signed up to the Russian army hoping to avoid
active combat. He believed his skills as a drone operator would keep him at a safe distance. Instead, Charles says he was pushed onto the front lines
and was wounded by Ukrainian drone. He says a rescue team refused to come, forcing him to drink his own urine to survive.
MADOWO: You feel that the Africans were being sent to the front deliberately?
NJOKI: Yes.
MADOWO: So, you didn't get the money? You didn't get the citizenship?
NJOKI: And I am here suffering. I have an issue at my spine right now. There is some water I need to go and be removed.
MADOWO (on camera): Russian recruitment networks in Africa have gone underground after recent crackdowns, but despite growing suspicion from
locals, recruits are still signing up.
Larry Madowo, CNN, Nairobi.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SCIUTTO: The Russian government has openly acknowledged recruiting foreign fighters, including Africans, to serve in its army to fight in Ukraine and
has publicized cases in which some were granted Russian citizenship after their service. However, Russia's defense ministry and foreign ministry did
not respond to CNN's request for comment on allegations that some African recruits were misled or coerced into fighting.
Still ahead on "The Brief," what we know about Savannah Guthrie's missing mother as police look into three possible ransom notes sent to media
outlets.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:45:00]
SCIUTTO: Authorities in Arizona say they are now coordinating with the FBI to investigate possible ransom notes for Nancy Guthrie. Officials fear the
mother of NBC's TODAY Show anchor Savannah Guthrie was abducted from her home. The 84-year-old was last seen on Saturday. TMZ says it has turned
over what appears to be a ransom note it received, turned it over to investigators. At least two local newsrooms in Arizona report they also
received ransom notes.
Joining us now, Joshua Campbell from Los Angeles. First question, Joshua, are authorities treating these ransom notes as potentially credible?
JOSHUA CAMPBELL, CNN SENIOR CORRESPONDENT: Potentially is the right word, and the sheriff says that they look at any information that the public
sends in, but they're trying to determine if these are real. I mean, the fact of the matter is, in a high-profile situation like this, authorities
sometimes get a flood of tips. Some are credible, some may be totally irrelevant, and some may just be sent in by people, you know, with sinister
motivations just trying to cause disinformation.
And so, they have to pore over that to determine could this possibly be from someone who might currently have Nancy Guthrie. But the sheriff says
that they are certainly looking into it, treating it very sensitively and seriously as they try to make that determination.
We're also learning new details about the possible timeline here. We know that she was last seen on Saturday evening around 9:30 p.m. and was
reported missing the next day after she didn't show up at church. But we're now learning that her pacemaker last connected with her cell phone at 2:00
a.m. on Sunday, and that is important because her cell phone was left behind. So that could be the moment that she was actually taken from the
house.
Again, authorities trying to figure out exactly what happened and when. That wide, you know, long period of time can be a challenge as they try to
determine, you know, where this person might have gone, how much lead time they might have had. But meantime, you know, they continue to ask the
public if you have any information. They want to hear from you. Notably, Jim, they say that as of this point, they have no known suspects.
SCIUTTO: There were other clues at the scene, blood found inside Guthrie's home, signs of forced entry. How are they connecting those dots?
CAMPBELL: So, they are conducting DNA analysis that they say that they have found from items that were in and around the home. Again, if this
turns out to actually be blood found, they would want to know, does this belong to her? Could it belong to the suspect in this case if there was
indeed some type of struggle? Again, trying to first identify, you know, who that person was.
And interestingly, they're still trying to access security camera footage from inside the residence. And people might be wondering, well, what's
taking so long? We're now into day four. They haven't been able to access the camera footage. This could be a technical challenge sometimes,
especially if a camera feed will loop and then film over itself.
It may not be easily accessible to investigators, but the sheriff says they're actually working with a company that manufactured those security
cameras inside the home to see if they can extract the data potentially in order to, again, give them some optic into what happened, where they went
afterwards.
[18:50:00]
It is worth noting that we're talking about a very remote area here. We've seen in past kidnapping cases, past fugitive cases, that camera footage
proved key, but here it's so remote there aren't a lot of cameras. And even the homes that are there, they're so set off from the street, they may not
have captured anything.
SCIUTTO: Yes, no question. So many cases, right, it's those ring doorbells, et cetera. In highly populated areas you get a lot of images.
Josh Campbell, thanks so much.
CAMPBELL: Yes. You bet.
SCIUTTO: And we'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SCIUTTO: In today's Good Brief, call it a case of Doberman domination at the Westminster Dog Show in New York City. Penny, the Doberman Pinscher,
won the coveted title of Best in Show on Tuesday. It's the fifth time a Doberman has won the top prize in Westminster's 150-year history. Penny
beat out some 2,500 canines who competed this year.
CNN's Harry Enten and John Miller are not only dogged journalists, they're also avid dog lovers. They went to the show this week to check out the
action.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
HARRY ENTEN, CNN SENIOR DATA REPORTER: So, Johnny --
JOHN MILLER, CNN LAW ENFORCEMENT AND INTELLIGENCE ANALYST: Yes.
ENTEN: -- I've decided to take you to one of my favorite places in the world. That is the preliminaries of the Westminster Dog Show. Because you
and I both love dogs tremendously. I've met your dog, Bernie, who, of course, I call Bernaby.
MILLER: He still asks for you.
ENTEN: Oh, my goodness gracious. And of course, I think of my childhood dog, Cody, the Lhasa Apso, who I still think of whenever I want to bring a
smile to my face. Are you looking forward to seeing some dogs here today?
MILLER: I love dogs.
ENTEN: I know.
MILLER: It's going to be my favorite day.
ENTEN: And you work -- and you've got the doggie tie.
MILLER: I wore the dog tie. Yes.
ENTEN: Fantastic. And let's go see some dogs.
MILLER: All right. Let's go see some dogs.
ENTEN: Let's go.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This is Petunia Pugdashian, and this is her boy toy, Otis.
ENTEN: Now, Petunia, what do you think of John Miller? What about me? Do you have anything to say about me?
MILLER: Just gave a big yawn, Harry. I think that sums it up.
ENTEN: Oh, well.
MILLER: Are we getting our hair done here?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Of course, of course.
MILLER: There's a dog in there somewhere?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: There's a dog in here somewhere.
ENTEN: So, do you prefer the smaller dogs or the bigger dogs?
MILLER: I always love a big dog. But if Bernie's watching, I also love the small dogs, too.
ENTEN: Yes, I think I'm a small dog type of guy. I'm of the belief that if a dog, for whatever reason, decides to turn on me, that I want to be able
to control the dog. But I feel like I could take on a Maltese if it came down to it.
MILLER: Probably. Although I might bet on the Maltese.
ENTEN: All right. Johnny, my childhood dog Cody, the Lhasa Apso. Roger, who is waving hello or waving goodbye. I'm not quite sure which it is.
MILLER: Definitely hello. I think he's angling for a kiss, Harry.
ENTEN: Hello, Roger.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: He's named after Roger Federer.
ENTEN: Oh, a champion tennis player and a champion dog.
MILLER: Hey, Brittany (ph). How are you doing? What are you thinking about?
ENTEN: Aw.
[18:55:00]
MILLER: Irish Wolfhound. Does he sleep in bed?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes, he does. Whole bed.
MILLER: Oh, my God.
ENTEN: You should see John's face on that. John looks amazing. All right. So, it's not just about showing of the dogs here at the Westminster Dog
Show. You can pick up apparel for your dog as well. Look at this. This is like climate control. I love you keeping the dogs safe.
MILLER: High visibility.
ENTEN: This is nicer than any piece of clothing that I own.
MILLER: So, what is the filet mignon of dog food?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This is the one they all love.
MILLER: Have you tried it?
ENTEN: I might be tempted.
MILLER: Well, I have to say, today has truly been a treat for me.
ENTEN: John, any time with you is a treat and a half. And we got nourishment as well.
MILLER: Yes.
ENTEN: Can I get an aroo?
MILLER: Aroo.
ENTEN: Aroo.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SCIUTTO: I mean, those dogs are OK. But no dog's better than this dog. It's our family dog, Skye, golden retriever. I think she could win the next
dog show.
Thanks for joining. Send me a message on social media if you think she's a winner. I'm Jim Sciutto in Washington. You've been watching "The Brief."
Please do stay with CNN.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[19:00:00]
END
