Return to Transcripts main page

The Brief with Jim Sciutto

CNN International: WH: Trump to "Shock" Listeners with Election Security Info; U.S. Launches New Waves of Airstrikes Against Iran; Russia Struggles to Make Gains Along the Front Line; U.S.-Germany Relations Under Strain Amid War with Iran; Trump Doubles Down on Efforts to Acquire Strategic Island; Extreme Weather Strikes U.S. Aired 6-7p ET

Aired July 16, 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 here in the U.S. and around the world. I'm Jim Sciutto, live at the Aspen

Security Forum in Aspen, Colorado. And welcome to "The Brief."

PAULA NEWTON, CNN ANCHOR: I'm Paula Newton in New York. Just ahead this hour in three hours from now, President Trump addresses the nation. His

speech is expected to be about election integrity in Aspen.

Jim will be hearing from the U.S. ambassador to the European Union, the chairman of the Arctic Commission, the German deputy defense minister and

Democratic Senator Chris Murphy. And a summer of extreme weather in North America with deadly floods in Texas and severe wildfires in Canada. Those

stories and plenty more coming up.

But first, just four months ahead of the U.S. midterm elections, President Trump is expected to address the nation in the coming hours in a speech the

White House says will shock listeners. Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt says the president will reveal new information about the security of the

U.S. elections. This is familiar ground for Mr. Trump, who continues to claim with absolutely no proof that the 2020 election was stolen from him.

This despite his own appointees finding the presidential vote was free of major fraud or foreign interference.

Tonight, though, Karoline Leavitt promises everything the president says will be backed up by facts and by evidence that was all -- that will also

be provided.

Joining me now is Larry Sabato is director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia and co-author of "Campaign of Chaos: Trump,

Biden, Harris and the 2024 American Election." Larry, we heard from Karoline Leavitt. What do you expect to hear in this tonight?

And I do want to point out, I went right back through the investigations about the 2020 election. No one in the U.S. government, in the intelligence

agencies could find any proof of certainly of foreign interference.

LARRY SABATO, DIRECTOR, CENTER FOR POLITICS, UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA AND COAUTHOR. "CAMPAIGN OF CHAOS": That's absolutely correct. And more than 60

judges where various cases were tried or at least brought to them, found anything amiss in this election. And yet, Donald Trump, when the voters are

concerned about affordability and costs and inflation and the war with Iraq, which is becoming increasingly costly, when they're worried about

that, this president is going to be trying to relitigate an election that took place six years ago and he lost it by 7 million votes.

So, he's going to have to find a lot of illegal votes and he's going to have to find them by credible people who have real evidence. And I don't

care what he says in the speech. I'll bet you a dollar to your dime, Paula, that this will all fall apart once it receives the scrutiny it deserves.

NEWTON: And, Larry, given the posture that Americans are in right now, we talk about the affordability crisis so much. There are so many other things

they're thinking about. How do you believe this will hit with them, given the fact that this is now six years ago?

SABATO: Oh, I think most people outside of the MAGA base will find this a waste of time and they will question the president's priorities because his

priorities are clearly not their priorities.

Now, he may mention Iran, he may mention affordability, but clearly the genesis of this speech was the opportunity to convince Americans for the

thousandth time that the election was stolen from him when it most definitely was not. How can people identify with that? The MAGA base is

already convinced of it. They're going to turn out to vote no matter what, because Donald Trump tells them to. He's not going to gain one additional

vote from talking about re-litigating the 2020 election.

NEWTON: How much do you believe this has to do with what are certainly a challenge for him right now in terms of the midterms?

SABATO: Oh, he's looking at data that don't suggest he's going to do very well. Now, the Republicans are confident that they're going to keep the

Senate. Maybe they will, maybe they won't.

[18:05:00]

I would say most Republicans, at least privately, believe that the Democrats will be able to win the House at least by a few seats, whether

they're telling President Trump that or not, I simply don't know.

But, you know, if we were in the position that Donald Trump is in right now and we needed to keep Republicans, his party, in control of Congress, this

is not what we'd be talking about. This is not what we would be giving a national televised address, which is rarely done by Donald Trump, about

this subject. I think he's going to turn a lot of people off.

NEWTON: Yes. And a reminder again, at this very hour, the United States is striking in Iran and this country is at war. Larry, always good to see you.

And we will continue to await that address by the president.

Now, we will also wait to see if President Trump will talk about Iran tonight. But as the U.S. launches a new round of strikes against Iran, the

latest in a series over the past six days, some worry the conflict will soon devolve back into an all-out war.

Now, sources say Mr. Trump is now weighing an operation to seize Iran's main oil export hub. That would be on Kharg Island. In Tehran, meantime, is

vowing to crush infrastructure throughout the region if the U.S. president makes good on his threat to target Iranian power plants and bridges.

We go now back to Jim. He's in Aspen and joined by U.S. Senator Chris Murphy. He is, of course, the Connecticut Democrat and a member of the

Foreign Relations Committee. Jim.

SCIUTTO: Thanks so much, Paula. Good to have you, Senator Murphy.

SEN. CHRIS MURPHY (D-CT), U.S. SENATE FOREIGN RELATIONS COMMITTEE: Yes.

SCIUTTO: So, the U.S. is now attacking Iran again. I believe the fifth the fifth night of attacks. The president seems to believe that escalation will

bring Iran back to the negotiating table. Is there evidence that that's true?

MURPHY: There's no evidence that that is true. And of course, the question is for what? Right now, the primary purpose of the war seems to be to just

get the Strait of Hormuz open again. Of course, the Strait was open before the war began. And the president seems to be willing to pay almost any

price necessary to get that done, including releasing all of our oil sanctions on Iran.

If that's how this turns out, that we have conducted $100 billion war that's killed over a dozen Americans to set the entire region on fire just

so that we get the privilege of paying Iran billions of dollars to keep the Strait open. That's a terrible deal for Americans.

But at this point, that seems to be the only war end and that we are engaging this escalation not to stop their nuclear program, not to take out

their missiles, but simply to get back to where we were before the war began, a disaster.

SCIUTTO: If we get to that point, right, it's not clear that you do. It's not clear that negotiations, if they were to restart, that they get

anywhere, lead to some sort of lasting agreement. What is the endgame then? What does it look like in the region?

MURPHY: Well, obviously, the president thinks that there is then going to be a follow-on negotiation around Iran's nuclear program. But that's not

going to happen because the two main pieces of leverage that we would have had in a nuclear negotiation, we give up. One, the sanctions relief is

already out the door because that's what the price was to open the Strait. And B, there's no threat of U.S. military action because we already did

that. And Iran survived. The regime survived.

So, there is not likely to be another nuclear negotiation. And we are probably in this permanent game of cat and mouse with the Iranians in which

for a few months the Strait will be open. Then maybe it's closed or maybe it's told. And the price will just mount for American consumers because

every day that there are fewer ships moving through the Strait, that's higher and higher gas prices. And that's probably just the reality for the

rest of Trump's term.

SCIUTTO: When you speak to partners in the Middle East, but also in Europe and perhaps even in Asia, do they see the U.S. as stronger or weaker after

this war?

MURPHY: Well, no doubt they see us as weaker, in part because, you know, we gave Iran our best shot. And not only did the regime survive, and

there's an argument that this regime is worse than the one that we took out. But we didn't make much of a dent in their military program.

Now, Donald Trump will say and Hegseth will say, well, we decimated them. Well, the public reports are that they have 70 percent of their missiles

left, over 50 percent of their drones. And so, we just look a lot weaker. And it means that many of our adversaries now don't fear U.S. military

action. And the Chinese maybe see an opening because we have so significantly depleted our missile supply that the Chinese, who are looking

at Taiwan, maybe see in the next few years an opening and that would be devastating.

SCIUTTO: But do you think China's standing in the region has been damaged because there had been this theory? And there's evidence of this, that

China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, this kind of, you know, access of chaos or whatever you want to call it. But China hasn't exactly come to Iran's

aid in this war or been able to protect it from U.S. strikes.

MURPHY: Yes, of course, there was no promise that China would do that.

[18:10:00]

I mean, China has generally stayed out of the Middle East because it doesn't want to be a security guarantor. Their integration with Iran is

much more significant than it has been in the past, and it will probably remain significant.

But, you know, this is a sign of the game China has been playing for a long time. Rely on the United States to provide the broad guarantee of security

so that oil can move seamlessly to China. China has been a beneficiary of the massive U.S. military footprint in the Middle East for a long time.

SCIUTTO: I want to talk now about the other story leading our broadcast tonight, that is the president's planned national address in which the

White House says he's going to present evidence that there was foreign interference in the 2020 election and presumably claim that this proves

that he was right all along that the election was stolen from him. What's your reaction to that?

MURPHY: I mean, I don't think it's going to get a lot of attention. It's just going to be retread conspiracy theories that if you follow him online,

you've probably seen a million times. You know, his avenues to steal the election are being constrained. The Supreme Court has said, no, you cannot

put troops into the streets. The redistricting fight has been kind of a wash. The SAVE Act, which, you know, seeks to set up a national voter file

that he can use to delegitimize elections is not going to pass.

So, he's desperate. He's very unpopular. He wants to cheat. His avenues are being narrowed. And so, this just may be a guy who needs to yell and scream

on TV for an hour, but it may land with a giant thud.

SCIUTTO: There are concerns among some of your fellow Democrats that this is laying the groundwork for quite serious attempts to interfere in this

election. And the president, even though his wings have been clipped on a number of things, still wields enormous power. Are you concerned that this

will be one of a series of steps to attempt to interfere, overturn, block, question, et cetera?

MURPHY: I certainly am concerned, but the Supreme Court has said you cannot deploy the military. That limits one of the options he may be

talking about tonight. Maybe the biggest danger lies after the election that Republican states will refuse to certify Democrats who win or the

Republican speaker of the house will refuse to swear in Democrats who win. That will likely be litigated in the courts.

The crisis may actually be a post-election crisis as much as a pre-election crisis. No, I'm not trying to downplay the threat. I just don't know that

he's going to say anything tonight that's actually going to be new.

SCIUTTO: All right. Senator Chris Murphy, we appreciate you joining the program.

MURPHY: Thank you.

SCIUTTO: Paula, you heard that there. Certainly, a lot of eyes are going to be watching. The question, of course, is what the substance will be and

how the president might attempt to use any allegations he makes.

NEWTON: And again, the White House claiming that there will be evidence. Jim, thanks so much. Really appreciate it.

Now, the defense minister, many call the architect of Ukraine's successful drone warfare program has now been sacked. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy

decided to dismiss Mykhailo Fedorov as part of a broader cabinet reshuffle. Now, Fedorov, for his part, accuses a top general the president has sided

with of blocking much needed reforms. Mr. Zelenskyy's decision sparked protests in Kyiv with demonstrations saying Fedorov made significant

improvements to the nation's military.

Now, despite its recent attacks on Kyiv, the Kremlin has made little progress on the front lines. CNN's Nick Paton Walsh has our report.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

NICK PATON WALSH, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Huge losses, tiny gains and lies. That's the reality of Russia's war on Ukraine.

It's plain to see in the strategic town of Konstantinovka, where last week Russia planted a flag in its center claiming its capture. But that's not

true. Ukraine still holds lots of it. Yet its fate over the past year lays bare the crisis at the heart of Russia's war.

Konstantinovka sits right on what's known as the fortress belt of heavily defended towns in the Donbas, the capture of which is a key Putin goal.

Take it and the other two remaining towns of Kramatorsk and Sloviansk are well within reach.

But wind back a year, take a look at reliable battlefield maps and you see a story about Moscow's persistence, but also how much tiny gains cost. Last

year, we saw the road in was lined with fishing nets protecting from drones, but the town was under Ukrainian control and safe enough. But by

November it was being hit hard here in the southwest with another drone video showing an airstrike just a few streets away.

Ukraine still had troops casually in the city center and Russia was still really on the contested southwestern outskirts. It's in the first week of

the year that the map records a big leap forwards for Moscow. But remember, their casualties across the whole front are estimated by the west at about

35,000 a month now dead and injured.

[18:15:00]

The Ukrainians are at this time still posting from the Central Railway Station, but by February white phosphorus is being used to horrific effect

in the southwest. Even though the Ukrainians are still very much central.

Jump forward to April and the damage done is horrific. Drone images right where we saw the Ukrainians in November as the Russians have slowly crept

in. We saw how perilous it was to get in and out ourselves. The netting we saw 10 months earlier now a graveyard for so many.

Russian flags central this week, even if the maps show they're far from controlling the town. One year of tiny, tiny steps and doubtless thousands

of Russian dead for a town that is relatively tiny itself. Russia's real weak spot in this war.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

NEWTON: OK. Still to come for us, ties between the U.S. and Germany have taken a beating this year, especially because of the war with Iran. We look

at where things stand.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

NEWTON: So, in a year that has seen a major dispute over tariffs, threats from U.S. President Donald Trump to annex Greenland and disagreements over

Ukraine, one of the most pressing threats facing Europe is that transatlantic rift over NATO.

Now, in May the Trump administration announced plans to withdraw 5,000 troops that are stationed in Germany. If the White House follows through on

that plan it will reduce the military presence to around 30,000. It followed these remarks by German Chancellor Friedrich Merz who said Iran

was humiliating Washington.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

FRIEDRICH MERZ, GERMAN CHANCELLOR (through translator): The Americans clearly have no strategy and the problem with conflicts like this is always

that you just don't go in, you also have to get out again. At the moment, I cannot see what strategic exit the Americans are now opting for especially

as the Iranians are obviously negotiating very skillfully or rather very skillfully not negotiating and letting the Americans travel to Islamabad

only to leave again without any results. This entire nation is being humiliated by the Iranian state leadership especially by these so-called

Revolutionary Guards.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

NEWTON: Now, since then, at the NATO summit the Chancellor said he shared U.S. President Donald Trump's assessment of a, quote, "feeling of love in

the air." Merz said Trump acknowledged and valued the efforts of European allies to strengthen their militaries while continues to press them on

defense issues.

[18:20:00]

Now, for a closer look at all of this, we want to get back to Jim in Aspen. He's with Germany's Deputy Defense Minister, Nils Schmid.

SCIUTTO: Mr. Minister, thanks so much for joining the program.

NILS SCHMID, GERMAN DEPUTY DEFENSE MINISTER: I'm pleased to be here.

SCIUTTO: So, your chancellor described the U.S. experience in Iran, now famously or infamously with his word that the U.S. is being humiliated.

Now, the U.S. is back to what appears to be sustained military action against Iran. Is there any evidence to you that the U.S. will get a better

outcome now from military escalation?

SCHMID: Well, it seems that they are on an on-off mode now with regard to Iran when it comes to war fighting. Let me say this, it's rather uncertain

that there will be a better outcome. All depends on the diplomacy which is behind military efforts. Military tactical success needs to go hand in hand

with strategic diplomacy, especially in the Middle East. And there's a lot to do, be it in Iran, in the Gulf, or be it in Israel. So, we have learned

the hard way over the last decades that military success is not sufficient.

SCIUTTO: Bigger picture, Friedrich Merz has more than once described, if not a break in the U.S. relationship with Europe, perhaps irreparable

damage. I mean, he said that U.S. leadership is not just damaged, but possibly lost. And I wonder if you share that view.

SCHMID: Well, these are harsh words. When it comes to NATO, which is still the fundamental setup for us in terms of European security, we are very

confident that the Trump administration is a reliable partner when it comes to the commitment to Article 5, when it comes to nuclear deterrence. So,

the fundamentals are still in place. And we had to accept that we need to take on more responsibility for European security as Europeans. And this

burden shifting is well underway.

And so, I think, yes, it's a different position the U.S. has taken on when it comes to European security. But we are still very, very good partners.

And in the framework of NATO, we count on the Americans. And so, American leadership has evolved.

SCIUTTO: But if it's, if European security is more of Europe's responsibility, but also, and you notice this from the national security

strategy, if the U.S. views Europe as less important, right? You see this language in the strategy. Why do you have confidence that the U.S. is still

committed to Article 5?

SCHMID: Well, the trip Asia (ph) is nothing new to us. So, we should not be surprised to see American administrations looking at Europe in a

different way from the Cold War times or from the immediate aftermath of the Cold War.

Still, Europe is relevant as an economic partner, as a strategic asset when it comes to dealing with challenges coming from China and from other

places. That's why there is a well-understood self-interest by any American government to have European partners on its side. And the main framework

for this is still NATO.

When it comes to conventional forces deployed in Europe, we understand that we need to step in. And that's why Germany has led the European military

rebuilding efforts by increasing military spending tremendously. And we are certain to meet the 3.5 percent target by 2029. And all other European

partners are also going down this way.

So, yes, there's a transformation going on in the transatlantic partnership, but it will remain in place under different circumstances.

NATO will become more European in order to remain a strong transatlantic alliance.

SCIUTTO: But Europe does, NATO's European partners, they lack the size, the heft, the modernization across the board in so many military

capabilities? Even as you meet those targets, Germany in 2029, other nations before, practically, realistically, how many years does it take

Europe to fill the gap as the U.S. pulls back?

[18:25:00]

SCHMID: Well, it will take more years than just up to the year 2029 for sure. When it comes to air defense capabilities, when it comes to deep

precision strike capabilities, we are now developing our own devices, our own weapon systems. But we count on our American friends to develop a sort

of road map so that we can move on in a coordinated manner when it comes to withdrawing some of the capabilities of U.S. forces from Europe.

And what we hear from the Trump team is that this is what they are also doing. So, we have excellent contacts to the Pentagon, and that's why we

are very confident that we will do this in lockstep and that there will be no surprises coming out of Washington in this respect. The important thing

is that we are doing this in a coordinated, concerted manner.

SCIUTTO: Before we go, German officials have said that Germany, that NATO should be prepared for at least the possibility of a Russian attack on NATO

in whatever form by 2029. Is that a genuine risk? Do you look east and say that Germany might, its next move might be to invade a NATO country?

SCHMID: Well, there's an imminent threat coming from Russia. We have seen this in Ukraine in a very brutal manner, and we have indications of that,

military deployments on the western border of Russia. The mobilization of up to 1.5 million active soldiers, that's the official target set by Putin.

Yes, we have to take this very seriously, and that's why it's so important to have a strong deterrence in place. And that's what NATO has always been

about, and that is what NATO will be about in the future as well.

SCHMID: Nils Schmid, Deputy Defense Minister of Germany, we appreciate your joining.

SCHMID: Thank you very much.

SCIUTTO: We now go back to Paula Newton for other headlines we're watching this hour.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:30:00]

NEWTON: And welcome back to "The Brief," I'm Paul Newton. Here are the international headlines we're watching today.

As the U.S. launches new strikes against Iran, President Trump is apparently considering expanding the military operation. Sources tell CNN

he's contemplating the seizure of Karg Island, Iran's main export oil hub. Iran warns it will destroy infrastructure throughout the region if the U.S.

expands its targets.

Protests broke out in Kyiv after Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy removed the country's popular defense minister. One senior European

official tells CNN the surprise decision to sack him could have a negative impact on Ukraine's relationship with allies who see Mykhailo Fedorov as

someone battling corruption within the military and the government.

U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth says he's rolling out a new program to screen troops for testosterone deficiency. The testing will be mandatory

for troops 30 and older. Hegseth says it's needed to allow troops to operate at their absolute best. The Trump administration has been pushing

to make it easier for doctors to prescribe testosterone.

Now, just days ago, President Donald Trump doubled down on his calls for the U.S. to take over Greenland. Now, the U.S. president lashed out at NATO

allies before and during last week's summit in Ankara. President Trump insists the U.S. needs Greenland to protect the world, not just the United

States. He even threatened to pull all U.S. troops from Europe over his disappointment with the alliance.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: I'm not happy with NATO because of what they did with Greenland, and I'm not happy with NATO because of the fact that

they didn't want to help us with the number one state sponsor of terror. That's Iran.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

NEWTON: Now, all of this has reopened discussion around Greenland's mineral resources, its energy security, and its place in geopolitics. We

want to head back to Jim, who is in Aspen. He's with Thomas Emanuel Dans, the chairman of the U.S. Arctic Research Commission.

SCIUTTO: Thanks so much, Paula. Thomas Emanuel Dans, we appreciate you taking the time.

THOMAS EMANUEL DANS, CHAIRMAN, U.S. ARCTIC RESEARCH COMMISSION: Thank you.

SCIUTTO: So, President Trump has said more than once that the U.S. needs Greenland for its security, particularly in the Arctic. Because this is

part of your job as chairman of the Arctic Commission, is the president prepared to take possession of Greenland even over Denmark's objections,

Europe's objections, Greenland's objections?

DANS: Sure. Well, thank you, Jim, and it's great to be here. You know, I think the thing to realize about Greenland and the United States is it's

been part and parcel of our country, really, our history since the earliest days. Even way before 1776, some of our first economic activity was whaling

up in Greenland, built a fleet up there.

So, it's always been kind of, it's part of North America. It's been kind of the front door of what became the United States. We have essentially been

in Greenland providing the security since May of 1940. So, the idea that we would leave it or somehow leave it unprotected, I don't ever see that as a

possibility.

SCIUTTO: But it's sovereign territory of Denmark, a NATO ally.

DANS: Sure. And they're a good ally, and it's important -- and they're in Europe, and they've done a decent job, but not a great job of taking care

of Denmark -- of Greenland, rather. And, you know, there's a lot to be done in Greenland. There is a tremendous amount of investments that's required,

and there are some real pressing security challenges, which really, frankly, the United States is the only country in the world that's prepared

and able to, frankly, provide that. And I think that's what President Trump's leadership is so important, because he's willing to acknowledge

that and push people.

SCIUTTO: When I speak to Danish officials and I speak to officials from Greenland, they say that they are more than willing to increase security

cooperation, security investment, have a greater U.S. military presence there. Is that not sufficient to meet the president's --

DANS: Well, it's great. Talk is one thing. I mean, if you want to dial back again to history, this is still in living memory. I mean, my own

family, my grandfather grew up in a slum apartment in the Lower East Side of New York, didn't even have running water. English, his third language.

He was sent to war in the Arctic to protect Greenland in World War II, and he did the Murmansk Run.

The United States, when Greenland -- when Denmark fell to the Nazis in four or six hours, Greenland was left unattended. It was the United States that

moved out a whole full year and a half before we went into World War II to protect Greenland. That's how important it has always been.

[18:35:00]

SCIUTTO: Sounds like you're making the case for the U.S. to take possession of Greenland, as the president does?

DANS: Greenland needs to be protected, and we hope our partners can do that, but we don't ever -- there are no do-overs in the Arctic, right? You

know, there are plenty of analogous situations. I mean, let's go to the other side of the Arctic, the American Arctic today in Alaska, right?

And look at Attu, right? Some of the viewers will know. That actually sits in the eastern hemisphere, right? It has the advantage of being the

furthest point in the 50 states from Washington, D.C., if you can imagine. But today, that -- we lost that island in World War II to a different

force, an invading force from Japan. But we fought -- it was occupied by 11 -- for 11 months, and we fought -- we lost 549 American lives fighting to

take it back. Today, that's abandoned, you know.

So, we need to get out on our fringes. It's the hemispheric defense that we talked about. Greenland is part and parcel of that. And --

SCIUTTO: When I speak to NATO officials, Danish officials, and others, they say that if the U.S. insists on taking -- if the U.S. president

insists on taking Denmark's sovereign territory, that that would break the alliance. That, for them, is a red line, that there's no negotiation on

taking territorial possession.

DANS: Yes. Again, we're getting into hypotheticals. I'm not sure if they're useful. We've got a great team, I'm not part of it, that is talking

with both the Kingdom of Denmark and, importantly, the Greenlanders here. Look, the Greenlanders are a people that really has not really had enough

say in the whole measure. It's their --

SCIUTTO: Well, polls show Greenlanders do not want to become part of the alliance.

DANS: Well, polls are one thing, but every time they've been asked to vote, they've been very declarative that they want to be independent. They

don't see themselves --

SCIUTTO: That's not 51st state.

DANS: No, it's not 51st state, it's -- but it's a recognition that they should have self-determination as a people. We're wholly supportive of it.

You have the most powerful man in the world in the richest and wealthiest country that says, we're fully behind the Greenlanders. We support you. We

support the Danes. The Danes are great partners.

Look, you know, we have a great history together. We have a very important bilateral relationship. Nobody's disrespecting that. But things change.

Things change and the urgency -- look, we weren't at -- you know, Ukraine- Russia happened in '22. The situation in the Arctic has changed dramatically. We have to recognize that. China is afoot in the Arctic.

Russia is working with them. And, frankly, the United States is the only group, again, that can step up with the resources and address it with the

technologies to keep us all safe.

SCIUTTO: The president has not ruled out the use of force to take possession of Greenland, neither have you. Is that still on the table?

DANS: I'm not ruling out force. I just -- I don't think this is a ridiculous scenario. Think about the things that we accomplished in

Greenland, right? The key airport there is Kangerlussuaq. We built that in six months. Americans made these things happen. We built icebreakers when

we needed to -- that went to Greenland, right, in nine months in Los Angeles. We sold them to Russia.

SCIUTTO: Once again, it sounds to me like you're making a case for taking Greenland.

DANS: I'm not saying -- no, we don't need to take Greenland. Greenland -- we need to keep Greenland safe because Greenland, by extension, keeps the

United States safe and the rest of the world safe, all of our partners. If that -- if those command-and-control systems go down or are compromised,

everything -- all bets are off.

SCIUTTO: Would the president be satisfied with greater security as opposed to taking possession?

DANS: You have to ask the president. The president makes all the decisions.

SCIUTTO: Because he said the other day he might withdraw troops from Europe if he doesn't get Greenland.

DANS: The president is in charge. The president is leading America in a way -- in a visionary way that we haven't seen in hundreds of years. And

we're so incredibly thankful for that. And I think Americans realize that without his personality, without his ability to go out every day

indomitably and take on the tough challenges and, frankly, push people, sometimes you have to have partner-level conversations with those you love.

And that's the only way you make these important adjustments. Correct course.

SCIUTTO: Thomas Emanuel Dans, I'm sure it's not the last time we speak about Greenland. We appreciate you joining the program.

DANS: Hey, thank you so much.

SCIUTTO: Thanks so much for taking the time.

DANS: Great to be here.

SCIUTTO: Well, to that point, the U.S. relationship with Europe writ large has faced its challenges in recent months, particularly over NATO, the

Ukraine war, and Greenland. Coming up, I'm going to speak to the E.U.'s ambassador to the U.S.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:40:00]

NEWTON: U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio hosted international officials in Washington today to discuss what he calls a resurgence in far-left

political terrorism. The Trump administration claims violent left-wing extremists are a major threat to the U.S. And today's meeting focused on

urging other nations to work with the U.S. to defeat the threat, which critics say is not supported by data. More than 60 countries, mostly from

Europe, took part in the event.

For more on all of this, we want to go back to Jim. He's with the ambassador of the European Union to the United States, Jovita Neliupsiene.

SCIUTTO: Thanks so much, Ambassador. We appreciate you taking the time.

JOVITA NELIUPSIENE, AMBASSADOR OF THE EUROPEAN UNION TO THE UNITED STATES: Thank you.

SCIUTTO: I want to begin. There's much to talk about when it comes to the U.S. relationship with Europe and much of what the E.U. is facing on its

own. But just because I spoke to the chairman of the president's Arctic Commission there, and clearly the president has not let go of his ambition

to take Greenland, whether he does it is another question. But at least publicly, he says he wants it.

What would the E.U.'s reaction be if the president were to insist on attempting to take the territory of an ally?

NELIUPSIENE: Well, the destiny of Greenland can be decided only by Greenlanders themselves and Denmark. And the E.U. and all the E.U.

countries will stand behind Denmark because they are part of the E.U. That's a sovereign territory. That's -- I think this is the core principle

on which our cooperation is actually based. So, there is no choice.

SCIUTTO: Tell me your best assessment of the state of the U.S. relationship with Europe, because it seems to go up and down. I mean, as

you know, prior to the NATO summit, there was great concern about how that would all land. And would the president attempt to take the U.S. out of

NATO again? Then seems to get a warm reception there. He says there's love in the room. Everything is fine for the moment until the next dispute,

right? Is that just the nature of this relationship right now?

NELIUPSIENE: Yes and no. I think, first of all, look, there are people to people contact. And the 250th anniversary of the U.S. actually shows the

deep and strength and the historical depth of the relations. Another thing is that E.U.-U.S. trade relations is the biggest trade relation globally.

E.U. is the biggest foreign direct investor in the United States. This trade and investment creates, on both sides of the Atlantic, more than 6

million jobs, good jobs, which actually produce goods here in the United States, both on our side of Atlantic.

[18:45:00]

And, you know, we heard the requests that we have to do more burden sharing on the defense and security. And while we are doing next year, we will

reach 1 trillion of defense spending if you take all the E.U. allies who are as well a part of NATO. So, on top of that, E.U. spending its own $200

billion.

So, you know, it takes time to ramp up the production, all the procurements, you know, the installations of factories. It takes time. But

I think that we are on the right track. And I think that it really gives us a chance.

SCIUTTO: There is -- well, there's weather here in Aspen, as always, particularly in the afternoon. We'll try not to blow away. Often when you

hear Trump administration officials talk about Europe, they can speak with a dismissiveness and both on the security side, saying it's long past due

time, Europe handling more of its security, but also on the business side. They'll talk about how far behind Europe is on A.I., for instance. And when

you hear that, I wonder what your reaction is.

NELIUPSIENE: Well, you know, some of the things are true. You know, while Americans and the United States are ahead in the developing A.I., or, you

know, in some other technologies, like some technologies in defense. But in order to produce F-35, you need 11 E.U. member states. The components come

from so many countries because we have integrated supply chains.

In order to have A.I. and fast running A.I. to compete with China, for example, you need have chips and you need to produce those semiconductors.

Guess where the machinery comes from? And it's all European. And I think that, again, this is -- we can actually have difficult conversations, more

lighthearted conversations about it, but you -- so far, there is no way the U.S. and you can actually entangle this cooperation.

SCIUTTO: It's been a difficult four and a half years for Europe because Europe has been suffering through the biggest, bloodiest war since World

War II, the war in Ukraine, of course. But there's a sense here at the Aspen Security Conference, and just from sources I speak to in Ukraine and

elsewhere, that the war is turning a corner in terms of Ukraine gaining the momentum, Russia weaker today.

Do you, as a European, does the E.U. see the light at the end of the tunnel on this, perhaps?

NELIUPSIENE: We have to see it, because I think that it's in all our interest to make sure that Ukraine can not only sustain this war, but

actually win the war, because they are defending core principles, which we built our societies on, like democracy, freedom of choice and freedom of

having their own independent country.

You know, but their beauty and actually the miracle what is happening in Ukraine is possibility to produce and to innovate while you are actually at

war and do that in that kind of pace that actually really encourages and lets Ukraine to turn around the corner.

And I think that, you know, we have to learn, because there are a lot of lessons which we have to take, not only that, you know, the drones will be

there -- it's easy to say drones will be there, the possibility how we fight the war of the future, but as well how interoperability works, how we

actually integrate our human and machinery in the war.

And I think that's -- this is where Europeans right now, being the largest and biggest financial supporter, spend already on support for Ukraine, 300

billion. So, we actually, I hope we can use this chance.

SCIUTTO: Ambassador Neliupsiene, we do appreciate your joining us.

NELIUPSIENE: Thank you.

SCIUTTO: Well, considering the weather that's around us here, on the topic of extreme weather, from storms in Texas to wildfires in Canada and the

smoke working its way down to North America, coming up next, a look at a rash of extreme weather across North America.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:50:00]

NEWTON: Now, to go to extreme and deadly weather right here in the United States. At least one person has died in flash flooding in Texas Hill

Country after massive flood waves surged down rivers and creeks. Now, you're looking at body cam footage from the Texas Department of Public

Safety which rescued a young girl, her family, and their two dogs in Uvalde, Texas.

Now, while police now say flooding has receded in most areas of Kerrville, another round of storms is moving across the area, and it comes almost

exactly a year since more than 100 people died in the flooding in that same area.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JEREL HALEY, CHIEF OF POLICE IN KERRVILLE, TEXAS: You know, our community grieves and we grieve hard. We are still reeling from what happened a year

ago. Those are not easily forgotten memories, and to have this happen again so suddenly is literally quite devastating for a lot of us in -- as first

responders, as employees of the City of Kerrville, and as members of this community.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

NEWTON: Again, so many campers in Texas, young girls lost their lives in those floods. Derek Van Dam is at the CNN Weather Center with more on what

the extreme weather will bring in the days to come.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

DEREK VAN DAM, CNN METEOROLOGIST: Catastrophic and life-threatening flash flooding still ongoing with water rescues across the Hill Country of Texas.

This gives you a bird's-eye view, kind of an aerial perspective of what people are dealing with on the ground. These mobile homes and those

vehicles inundated by water.

That just looks like standing water, right? But look to my left, and you can see the force of the water, some of the swollen rivers here taking away

debris. It looks like a large tree trunk. And then downriver, downstream across the Guadalupe River, this was the scene on Thursday afternoon. This

is Ingram, Texas. Look at the RVs flipped on their side vehicles that have been tossed around like toys, lots of debris left on the ground. It is a

muddy mess, and it's going to be quite the cleanup effort. You can see there's also power poles that have been snapped and trees that have been

uprooted because of the force of the water you saw just a moment ago.

This is what happens when you receive over a year's worth of rain in a short period of time. Some of these totals have been impressive, over 675

millimeters of rain in some isolated locations. This has forced that large and deadly flood wave that the National Weather Service was warning about

on two different rivers, the Guadalupe River and the Pedernales River.

This is the Guadalupe River at Comfort. This is a river gauge, and you can see that dramatic spike in the water levels. It rose 25 feet in one hour.

Think about that. That is roughly two-and-a-half story building of water rising here this -- in a short period of time.

There are still several river gauges across the Texas Hill Country that are forecast to stay at major flood stage or become major flood stage as the

water works its way out of the region. There's still isolated showers and thunderstorms in the forecast through about Friday, but then the weekend

looks much more promising.

The other big story that we are monitoring is the degraded air quality because of Canadian wildfire smoke streaming into the East Coast. There's

New York. There's Boston. This is what it looked like earlier on Thursday. Check out Toronto on Wednesday, the orange hue to the skies overhead, this

almost permanent sepia tone in the sky.

[18:55:00]

There is over 100 million Americans under air quality alert stretching from the Great Lakes all the way to the East Coast. A large population density

here along that I-95 corridor, Boston to New York, all the way to D.C. with some of this wildfire smoke still circulating around through a better part

of the weekend. Back to you.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

NEWTON: We certainly hope it clears out soon, because U.S. President Donald Trump, remember, there is this FIFA World Cup final on Sunday in the

New York, New Jersey area. Donald Trump is expected to attend. He's also expected to attend a FIFA reception at Trump Tower in New York City on

Friday.

Now, remember, Spain will face off against reigning World Cup champions, Argentina. President Trump has been a feature of the World Cup process,

recently asking FIFA chief to personally review a controversial red card decision against the U.S. side.

All right. On behalf of Jim Sciutto in Aspen, I want to thank all of you for your company. I'm Paula Newton in New York. You have been watching "The

Brief." Stay with CNN for more news.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:00:00]

END