Return to Transcripts main page
Amanpour
Interview with Venezuelan Opposition Leader Leopoldo Lopez; Interview with Futuro Media Reporter and Producer Julieta Martinelli; Interview with The Marshall Project Staff Writer Shannon Heffernan; Interview with The New Yorker Staff Writer Susan Glasser. Aired 1-2p ET
Aired December 11, 2025 - 13:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[13:00:00]
PAULA NEWTON, CNN ANCHOR: Hello, everyone, and welcome to "Amanpour." Here's what's coming up.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MARIA CORINA MACHADO, VENEZUELAN OPPOSITION LEADER AND NOBEL LAUREATE: I am very hopeful Venezuela will be free.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NEWTON: Venezuelan opposition leader and this year's Nobel Peace Laureate Maria Corina Machado makes her triumphant return to the spotlight in Oslo
after months in hiding. We'll get reaction from inside Caracas and from Norway with opposition politician Leopoldo Lopez, who fled Venezuela after
being imprisoned by the Maduro regime.
Then, as Trump's dehumanizing immigration crackdown sweeps America, some organizations are refusing to bow to the pressure. A look inside a one-of-
a-kind hospitality house supporting detainees and their families.
Plus --
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SUSAN GLASSER, STAFF WRITER, THE NEW YORKER: If the goal was to overwhelm, let's just say they're succeeding.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NEWTON: New Yorker staff writer Susan Glasser speaks to Michelle Martin about the whirlwind year in U.S. politics and where she believes we're
headed in 2026.
And a warm welcome to the program, everyone. I'm Paula Newton in New York, sitting in for Christiane Amanpour.
A dramatic moment in Oslo today. After nearly a year in hiding, Venezuelan opposition leader Maria Corina Machado snuck out of her country and
appeared in public after winning the Nobel Peace Prize.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MARIA CORINA MACHADO, VENEZUELAN OPPOSITION LEADER AND NOBEL LAUREATE: I don't think they have known where I have been. And certainly, they would
have done everything to stop me from coming here. And actually, I want to take advantage of your question to thank all those men and women that
risked their lives so that I could be here today.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NEWTON: Machado has spent years pushing for the ouster of Venezuela's Nicolas Maduro, who observers say lost the last election and has unjustly
held onto power. The 58-year-old dedicated her prize in part to President Trump, who was taking an aggressive strategy against the Maduro regime,
blaming it for the flow of drugs into the United States.
Now, on Wednesday, the U.S. ramped up the pressure, seizing an oil tanker off Venezuela's coast. This, of course, after those controversial boat
strikes against alleged drug traffickers.
Following all of this for us from Caracas is Stefano Pozzebon. And it is good to see you, as we've had such historic events, really. That view of
Maria Corina on the balcony, practically iconic. I mean, this for the opposition, a cause for celebration. But now she is technically in exile,
no longer fighting from within Venezuela. Could that make her less effective as a resistance leader, Stefano? You have seen this many times
before.
STEFANO POZZEBON, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Yes, indeed. I think, Paula, that is the number one question on everyone's mind right now in Caracas, isn't it?
Whether she will be able to succeed in where so many other Venezuelan opposition leaders have failed in the past, which is building an
international coalition and finally see through a regime change, see through a liberation, a return for Venezuelans to democracy.
I think that in the first -- like in the short-term, it will be probably better for Maria Corina to actually stay out. She will probably hold
meetings with several world leaders. Surely Donald Trump is on her list. I am aware that they are trying to have that conversation and that she
intends to go to Washington at some time in the future.
But also, let's not underestimate her power to bring together, to bridge a coalition, especially with European powers, maybe other countries here in
Latin America, if she can sort of patch up the different approaches from the European Union, the Holy See, the White House and other countries. I
think of Argentina, I think of Colombia, I think of Mexico and Brazil. Many different countries who have interests in Venezuela and have tried in the
past to mediate for a peaceful solution to the situation here in this country, and yet have always failed. So, in the short-term, probably it
will be better for her to be out and having those conversations face-to- face in person.
[13:05:00]
In the long term, well, we have said that many people have failed before her, perhaps. The long term remains to be seen for sure.
NEWTON: Yes, definitely in doubt, and you do -- you make a good point there, it has been difficult for all the nuance that comes out of whether
it's Latin American allies or those in Europe to really bring this and coalesce around one way for the opposition to really make inroads.
I want to go back to this issue of the oil tanker. President Trump said that other things are happening. Where is this confrontation headed?
Because it is not just Venezuela, but engulfing the entire region at this point.
POZZEBON: Yes, indeed, but you could perhaps see there a change in tactics. Like I think that, you know, the White House has told us that they
went after that particular tanker because it was carrying oil that was, of course, under sanction from Venezuela through Cuba and then on to Iran, and
that that tanker was in particular sanctioned by the Biden administration in 2022.
However, you know, going after Maduro's purse, which is what you do when you see tankers that sell oil in the black market, is definitely more
palatable for an international coalition that is trying to see the end of the Maduro's government in this country than blowing up alleged narco-
trafficking speedboats without showing any proof.
So, perhaps this change in tactics is also a way for the Trump administration, for the White House, or for the United States as a whole in
taking a more cohesive leadership across the region. While, you know, Trump said yesterday that he thinks Colombia would be next and he wants other
countries to step up their anti-narcotics and anti-drug trafficking programs, but clearly going after Maduro's particular himself, going after
the finances that allow Nicolas Maduro to remain in power here in Venezuela is definitely something that will be better seen, more -- seen more
positively by perhaps Madrid, by France, countries that have shared -- countries that have raised concerns about their strategy so far.
NEWTON: Stefano, grateful to you as you continue to watch events so closely there from Caracas. Appreciate it. And also, in Oslo today,
Leopoldo Lopez, who you may recall was the face of the Venezuelan opposition for years. Lopez's fight cost him his freedom. He was in prison
before fleeing the country in 2020. He told me what this moment means to him.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
NEWTON: Leopoldo Lopez, welcome to the program. Appreciate it.
LEOPOLDO LOPEZ, VENEZUELAN OPPOSITION LEADER: Thank you very much. Thank you.
NEWTON: I really am curious just to hear the emotions that you must be feeling right now. What does it mean to you seeing Maria Corina Machado
appear in Oslo to receive her Nobel Prize?
LOPEZ: Well, it's very emotional for all Venezuelans because it's not just a prize, it's the Nobel Peace Prize. But it's not just a Nobel Peace Prize,
it's a recognition of a fight for freedom. And it's a recognition that there could be no peace if there is no freedom and democracy in Venezuela.
So, for all of us, it's a recognition that this fight that's been going for more than two decades for democracy, freedom and human rights in Venezuela,
it's reaching to a point where we can finally, finally transition to democracy. And, of course, Maria Corina being the voice of this hope for
all of Venezuelans, it's also very empowering for this very difficult struggle that we've had, but with a lot of hope in the near future.
NEWTON: And I hear you on the hope. But, of course, as you said, it has been quite a lengthy struggle and it continues. Maria Machado left
Venezuela, as many migrants have, reportedly traveling through Venezuela in disguise, braving the weather to travel by boat to Caracal. Finally, a
flight to the U.S. and then on to Oslo. I mean, think about that journey. What does it mean for Venezuelans when they see her escape route and what
she had to go through?
LOPEZ: Well, as you say, it's the way that millions of Venezuelans have left our country. Venezuela has a population of 30 million people and 10
million Venezuelans have been forced into exile. It's the largest migration crisis. Venezuelans cross the border and walk from Colombia to Central
America or to Ecuador and other South American countries.
So, it's a struggle that is very intimate to every Venezuelan family. The struggle that we go through in order to leave our country, to find hope.
But as she has said once and again throughout these last hours, she will be back and she will be back to Venezuela, as we will all go back to Venezuela
to reconstruct a democratic and free Venezuela.
[13:10:00]
NEWTON: I will point out the obvious. You are not back yet. You haven't been back. It has been more than five years. There is a lot of, you know,
personal sacrifice and significance. I want to listen now to what Maria said just a little while ago. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MACHADO: I couldn't sleep last night going over and over again that first instant when I saw my children. And for many weeks I had been thinking of
that possibility and which one of them I would hug first. And to tell you something, I hugged them, the three at the same time. And it's been one of
the most extraordinary spiritual moments of my life.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NEWTON: Spiritual moment. I know how much you really can tap into that same emotion, Leopoldo. Can you speak to the sacrifices that she's made in
hiding? Apparently, she has seen hardly anyone in months and months.
LOPEZ: Yes, she was in clandestine for over a year after Maduro stole the election in 2024. Everybody that was a voice against the dictatorship had
to go into hiding. And she, of course, had to go into hiding. But she kept her voice. She kept the spirit of the struggle alive.
And now, that she is out of Venezuela, but with a commitment to go back, as we all will, it strengthens that voice. And it strengthens the commitment,
not just of Venezuelans, but of the free world. Because really what this prize recognition means is a recognition of the free world, of the
democratic world, that there needs to be change.
Yesterday, we heard two tremendous speeches at the Nobel Prize ceremony. And the speech given by the Nobel Peace Prize was an X-ray of what's
happened in Venezuela over the past years and why Nicolas Maduro must go. That's how the Norwegian leader of the Nobel Peace Prize ended his speech
saying that Maduro needs to go. And that has been for years our fight. And now, having that resonate here in Oslo through the Nobel Peace Prize is
very meaningful, very powerful. And we hope and we know it will translate into concrete actions.
Us Venezuelans, we have tried everything. Many of us have gone to prison. I spent seven years in prison and confinement. I was separated from my family
like millions of Venezuelans have. We have taken the streets thousands of times. We have gone to negotiation processes. We have used diplomacy,
sanctions, and, of course, voting and going to an election that we actually won.
But in spite of all of this, Maduro is still in power. Why? Because he's an autocrat. He's a narco-terrorist that uses power to hold on -- uses the gun
and power to hold on to his position.
NEWTON: Leopoldo, you've articulated your sacrifices for so many months. I've been witness to a lot of those sacrifices over many years in Venezuela
and have seen the opposition, unfortunately, even with hope and inspiration, still fail. I know what you're saying, that you believe this
is a pivotal point for Venezuela, but how can you be sure? We've been here before with Venezuela. There is still a risk that it could all end in
failure, is there not?
LOPEZ: Oh, of course there is a risk. But the greatest risk of all is to stop fighting. That's the greatest risk of all. And to stop fighting
because of losing hope, it's also a risk. And when the story about the struggle of the Venezuelan people is written. It will be a story of
resilience. It will be a story of commitment. It will be a story of how we reinvented ourselves over and over to continue the fight.
And let me assure you something. We will continue to fight until Venezuela is free. I know that's the spirit of Maria Corina and that's the spirit of
millions of Venezuelans. We will not stop fighting until Venezuela is free and Venezuela will be a peaceful nation, a prosperous nation, only if
Maduro leaves.
And today, we are seeing another window of opportunity for that. As you say, we have been in third base many times, but scoring freedom is not a
straight line. It's difficult. And that's why we are confronting an autocrat. This is not a democratic election. We are confronting with the
rule of law or with fair game play. We are confronting a narco-terrorist regime that traffics cocaine, that contrabands, that persecutes,
incarcerates, tortures and kills people.
Many of my friends today are in prison. Thousands of families have their loved ones in prison without even having a phone call. In more than a year,
thousands of people have been detained with no contact whatsoever. So, that's what we are confronting. We are confronting a regime that uses force
to stay in power.
[13:15:00]
NEWTON: Leopoldo, I'm glad that you articulated exactly how difficult and how complicated this is. In fact, Bloomberg reports that Maria Corina was
actually aided by members of Maduro's own regime. Can you confirm that? And even if you can't confirm it, what does that say to you?
LOPEZ: Well, that's for Maria Corina to give the details of how she escaped. However, I can tell you that there is a fracture within the
military in Venezuela. I myself was able to escape imprisonment because there was the support from the military and the police in 2019. And now, we
know that the military also wants change.
Why I say this? Because last year we had an election. And in the military bases where the military personnel and their families voted, it was exactly
the same proportion. Edmundo Gonzalez, 70 percent. Maduro, 30 percent. So, the military in Venezuela, the police in Venezuela are Venezuelans. And
they suffer like Venezuelans. And they want change, as all Venezuelans.
However, they are the most looked after and surveilled institution. There are tremendous consequences for the military that even say something that
the regime dislikes. So, this is the case until it's not. Will the military flip? I believe it will. Will there be a fracture? I believe it will. When
will that happen? It will happen when there is an action that might regenerate that reaction. And we have seen that in the past. And we hope
that we see that very soon. And we see it as a definite transition to democracy.
LOPEZ: Now, the U.S. administration and the military are gaming that out for themselves. I don't have to remind you that for the better part of a
generation, you have been steadfast in calling for peaceful resistance.
In that context, how do you justify U.S. actions at sea? They continue to repatriate Venezuelans who risk further oppression by the Maduro regime? I
mean, do you back everything the United States is doing at this hour?
LOPEZ: Well, I believe that the best migration policy towards Venezuela is a transition to democracy. That will, for sure, stop Venezuelans leaving
our country. That, as I said before, a third of the country has left Venezuela over the past 10 years. Hundreds of thousands will return to
Venezuela. And that will be the best migration policy.
And with respect to the deployment of the U.S. Navy in the coast of Venezuela, I believe that it's correct to understand that we are not facing
just an autocrat who violates human rights and who is responsible for a complex humanitarian crisis. We are facing the head of a narco-cartel, and
it needs to be confronted as such.
And this is not new. This is not new. Twelve years ago, alongside with Maria Corina Machado, on January the 23rd of 2014, I said exactly this,
that Nicolas Maduro is a terrorist that represses the Venezuelan people and that leads a drug cartel. And for saying this, 12 years ago, I was
sentenced to 14 years of imprisonment and spent seven years in confinement. So, this is something that we know as a fact in Venezuela. So, we are
confronting the equivalent --
NEWTON: But, Leopoldo, everything that you're saying, as you said, you've said before, the military action that we've seen now is unprecedented by
the U.S. government. Do you back the U.S. government under any circumstances? Because you know more than most that the vulnerable in
Venezuela, if there is any kind of U.S. military land strikes, are the ones who will suffer the consequences.
LOPEZ: Well, not necessarily. I believe that there can be many tactical actions that have no collateral damage, and that has been seen in other
conflicts. I have no precise information of the tactics, but I believe that there can be tactical decisions with no collateral damage that will help to
take out the regime, to transition with the legitimacy of the election that took place in 2024, and that will help the Venezuelan people to be free.
The one thing that unites the Venezuelan people above anything else is the hope that Maduro leaves power. And that we -- and that his regime leaves
the control of the Venezuelan institution.
[13:20:00]
That's -- that that hope for freedom, that hope for democracy is what unite the Venezuelan people the most. So, yes, we support uh the pressure that is
being inflicted on the Maduro regime. We support the fact that the oil that was being used to fund this repression machinery, that it's persecuting,
incarnating, torturing and killing people, because that's what money goes for is part of that operation to pressure the Maduro regime.
And this is not the first time I've said this. We've said it many times. But I said it a month ago. And because I said exactly what I am saying now
Maduro took away my nationality. They went to my house and destroyed my house. And now, they are threatening Venezuelans that if they express
themselves in support to the pressure that is being deployed against Maduro there will be consequences.
So, I believe that the most important thing is freedom and democracy to Venezuela and that's what the Nobel Peace Prize is contributing to.
NEWTON: Leopoldo Lopez, we must leave it there. Thank you so much for being on the program again.
LOPEZ: Thank you. Thank you very much.
NEWTON: Stay with CNN. We'll be right back after a quick break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
NEWTON: And now, to the United States where a federal judge has ordered the release of Kilmar Abrego Garcia from ICE custody. Now -- pardon me, he
has ordered that to happen immediately according to a court filing. It's a significant development in the case concerning the Salvadoran man
mistakenly deported this year before being returned to the United States.
Now, the ICE raids across America are leaving a lot of confusion and despair in their wake as families are caught up in the dragnet. One small
project in rural Georgia is hoping to provide support to the loved ones of those detained, so many of whom have no criminal record.
El Refugio is a hospitality house near the Stewart Detention Center. It's believed to be the only such house in the nation. And a new report by
Latino USA Futuro Investigates and the Marshall Project gives us an inside view. It follows the volunteers who run the house and the families they
serve.
Journalists Julieta Martinelli and Shannon Heffernan join me now. And it's good to have both of you on the program. Welcome.
JULIETA MARTINELLI, REPORTER AND PRODUCER, FUTURO MEDIA: Thank you.
SHANNON HEFFERNAN, STAFF WRITER, THE MARSHALL PROJECT: Thank you.
NEWTON: Julieta, I do want to begin with you. There are so many countless ways to cover immigration enforcement right now. Raids, policy, the
numbers. Why this? Why choose to anchor this story in this small rural refuge in Georgia? You know, what did you believe this place could reveal
about what's unfolding in the United States?
MARTINELLI: Yes, as you mentioned, and we've been covering almost every angle of immigration, but I think one of the things that we really wanted
to focus on with this story was looking at sort of the ways that people are coming together to try and resolve some of the issues that come up with the
increased enforcement, the very high number of people that are now in ICE custody.
[13:25:00]
And so, El Refugio is special for a number of reasons, but I think in particular, the fact that Georgia has three large detention centers.
Stewart used to be the largest detention center at one point, and it's not anymore. It's in a very rural place.
And I think that therein lies the challenge, right? When you are isolating people, when you're building detention centers in these very rural areas,
it is very difficult to know what's happening inside. It is difficult for people to get visitors.
And so, I think that for us, we just kind of wanted to be able to explore what was happening in this small town in South Georgia, but also to be able
to talk to the families, to hear from the families, and to hear from the volunteers who are actually going inside the detention center and have a
sense of what's going on.
NEWTON: And we will get to the stories of some of those volunteers and the family members. Shannon, you've covered these detention centers for years
as well. The Stewart Detention Center itself, as we were just mentioning, right, it is one of the largest in the United States. From your reporting,
what makes Stewart so central to understanding this moment in enforcing, in enforcement under Trump's second term? Because this kind of enforcement has
been going on in the United States for decades, but it's different now.
HEFFERNAN: Yes, it is different now. And I think that, you know, many of the conditions we see are conditions that you might have seen under any
administration. We've heard about poor medical care inside detention centers, including Stewart. We've heard about crowded conditions in Stewart
and other places.
But I think one of the things that really stood out to me is how much it feels for a lot of these folks, like the cruelty is the point, that they're
in these detention centers, in these bad conditions, because they're being encouraged to leave the country voluntarily, whether or not they actually
have legal claims to stay.
And I think detention is an essential part of Trump's plans. If he wants to deport as many people as he says he wants to deport, you need these
detention centers there not only to hold people while they're waiting to be deported, but also to coerce people to leave voluntarily and to be as a
kind of warning to folks not to come or to leave if they're here.
NEWTON: And, Shannon, you know, you just said it, cruelty is the point. When you look at Stewart itself, Shannon, this is supposed to be civil
detention, but it looks exactly like a jail from your description. I mean, razor wire, metal toilets, not enough facilities. I mean, people apparently
defecating in showers because there aren't enough toilets. I mean, many people are really confessing to these kinds of conditions, but what
verification have you been able to get that what the conditions that many people face, day in and day out?
HEFFERNAN: So, this is a really key point you're bringing up here. First of all, yes, these are not supposed to be prisons or jails, but they're
very, very similar. When the families visit, their loved ones behind a piece of glass and a uniform that looks very much like a prison uniform. It
feels like a prison.
In terms of verification, that's one of the really big challenges right now. A lot of the oversight that has been provided under previous
administrations or even just easier flow of legal representation inside meant that there were more eyeballs who could report back what was
happening. A lot of that infrastructure has disappeared.
So, it becomes harder to verify this information. And we know historically that when there's not a spotlight on a place, when you don't know what's
happening, those are the kinds of conditions in which abuse and misconduct flourish. So, as a journalist, I'm always concerned when oversight
disappears.
NEWTON: Yes, in terms of accountability and oversight, which members of Congress here in the United States have pointed out as a problem. Julieta,
Stewart is a tiny, isolated county, but one that financially benefits from every person detained there. How is this kind of geography of this little
town, Stewart, in the middle of it, how is that part of the story?
MARTINELLI: Yes, it's so interesting, right? So, Stewart has less than a thousand residents. There are, on any given day, 2,000 or more people
inside Stewart. So, when you think about it, this prison actually is double the population of this very small town.
Now, with this very small town that is having a lot of economic issues, when you show up to the town for the first time, the first thing you notice
is there are no grocery stores. There are no hotels, no motels, no short- term rentals. There's nowhere to sleep. There's nowhere to eat. The nearest place to eat and sleep or rent a place to stay overnight for visitation is
about an hour away.
And so, this is incredibly challenging for the families. Some of the families that we met in our reporting have traveled eight or nine hours to
be able to get down to Lumpkin, Georgia. And so, imagine you get there on a Saturday, you have the opportunity to visit the next day because
visitations start over on Sunday, but there's nowhere to sleep. There's nowhere to stay. There's a very tiny gas station with two pumps in town
where people would sometimes park their cars.
[13:30:00]
So, El Refugio, in a way, kind of has sort of created a space to sort of try and solve some of these issues. But I think it's -- in a way, it makes
you sort of realize just how isolated these folks are.
When family cannot get to you, when family cannot travel, when you make the prison so far away, so put in a place that is so inhospitable to visitors,
I think in a way these feeds into what Shannon was saying, right, you have these reports of terrible conditions, but it's very difficult to get the
reports out. It's difficult if people can't speak to their families. There are no lawyers in this town.
NEWTON: Yes. And, Julieta, we are looking at pictures in fact of El Refugio right there. In terms of what this place itself means to these
families, you have been speaking to them. And a reminder that some of the people that are detained, they have been in the United States for decades,
many of them.
MARTINELLI: Yes, that's actually an excellent point. I think one of the things -- I've been covering immigration now almost 20 years. One of the
things that I found the most surprising and shocking was the fact that almost every family that we spoke to that weekend, there were 60 visitors
the weekend that Shannon and I spent at El Refugio.
Almost every single one of those families, the person that was detained had been in the U.S. at least a decade, if not decades. We spoke with a family
whose father arrived in the U.S. when he was very young to work in agriculture and to be a farm worker who is now in his late 50s. So, this
man arrived when he was a child and has been here, built a whole life in this country. So, that's something that we're seeing a lot.
Families that have been here for a very long time are suddenly put in this situation. It's not just people that are crossing the border, it's people
that have families, businesses, and that are doing positive things in the community, and also people that we spoke with that told us that their loved
one had a work permit, had a driver's license when they were detained and arrested, had a green card, had an adjustment application going through
immigration in this moment. So, people that were actually trying to do things the, quote/unquote, "right way," it didn't matter.
NEWTON: Yes, and we do have verified reports that U.S. veterans who served in the military for years and years are at the Stewart Detention Center at
this hour. Shannon, in terms of El Refugio itself, it is really built on this concept of radical hospitality. What does that mean in terms of the
volunteers, how they're trained? When I was reading through some of the documentation, it almost seemed like a place of refuge for the kind of
trauma that some of these families go through when they go see their loved ones.
HEFFERNAN: I'm so glad you're bringing this up because, you know, we've talked a lot about the tragedy of Stewart Detention Center and what people
are facing, but it was also just like really beautiful to be in this place that had opened its doors for anyone who needed their services.
A lot of the volunteers we spoke to talked about how in this moment in the United States, it can be very challenging to see things you disagree with
happening all around you and not knowing how to take action. You know, they weren't able to change the entire immigration system, but they could show
up and do laundry and change bedsheets. They could make a sandwich. They could find some concrete way to serve their neighbors, to serve the people
that they cared about, even if they were strangers.
So, I think that one of the things that was really striking about visiting this place, and the executive director of the hospitality house said this,
is like, in the midst of all this tragedy, there is something you can do. There are ways you can act. I found that very striking. And I thought it
was this sort of radical hospitality meant to them. It wasn't only having food and shelter. There were people there who spoke your language
sometimes, right?
Like we met one family where the grandmother spoke Russian. And since her son had been arrested, there were no other Russian speakers in the
household. She had just not been able to speak to anybody. And there was a volunteer who spoke Russian at the house that weekend. Just to see the
relief on her face, being able to talk to somebody about what had happened to her in the last week, that was really, really meaningful.
NEWTON: Yes. I'm sure a very meaningful point of support for that woman and others. Julieta, you know, Shannon said it, right, the cruelty is the
point, is something that she said in terms of there's something systemic at work here. But, Julieta, I have to ask you, if you pose it from the way
that the Trump administration wants to see results, right? Crossings are down, detentions are up. The administration says deterrence is the point.
If fewer people are attempting to come because of these conditions, does that mean that this strategy is actually successful from the point of the
Trump administration?
[13:35:00]
MARTINELLI: I mean, it's hard to get into the head. I guess you could say that, right, if we're just looking at numbers. But I think the more
important thing is the effects that it's having on American citizens. You know, the vast majority of people that are currently in ICE custody are
members of a mixed status household, which means American citizen, partners, husband, wife, children, businesses that are being run, homes
that are having, you know, to get sold, money that's not going into the economy, right? I think it's very -- you have to kind of weigh it in a
bigger way.
And I will say one thing that I think is really important to think about is what do we want to stand for as a country? You know, what do we want to
stand for? And the promises that Trump made really revolved around detaining people that were criminals.
The promise wasn't just locking people up, it was locking up criminals. And as we know, I believe the current number, the latest number, is that 73
percent of people in ICE custody do not have a criminal record. So, in that sense, I will say it's an utter failure.
NEWTON: And I only have about 30 seconds left, Julieta, but I do want to ask you, some people admit to having voted for the Trump administration,
right, and they now are wondering what their decision has brought to their own families.
MARTINELLI: Yes, and that's one of the stories. One of the people that we spoke to while we were there had a very similar situation. She heard
criminals. She thought, I want to save community. She didn't realize that that would mean her father, who was a refugee.
NEWTON: Julieta Martinelli, Shannon Heffernan, we will continue to follow this story closely. Again, an extension of those detention facilities goes
on in the United States. We are grateful to both of you. Thanks so much.
HEFFERNAN: Thank you.
MARTINELLI: Thanks for having us.
NEWTON: And we'll be right back with more in a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
NEWTON: Now, the Trump administration's immigration crackdown is just one example of the whirlwind changes in Washington this year, from aid and
foreign policy to trade and beyond. Trump has upended U.S. doctrine, transforming institutions and redefining America's place in the world.
Staff writer at The New Yorker, Susan Glasser, joins Michel Martin to cut through the noise and identify the defining themes of the past 10 months.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
MICHEL MARTIN, CONTRIBUTOR: Thanks, Paula. Susan Glasser, thank you so much for joining us once again.
SUSAN GLASSER, STAFF WRITER, THE NEW YORKER: Oh, it's great to be with you.
MARTIN: So, obviously we've called you because you followed, you know, politics and policy in Washington and around the world for many, many
years. What about this year stands out to you? And I know it's hard to pick because there have been so many consequential events this year, you know,
one after another. But when you just think about the year on the whole, what stands out to you?
GLASSER: Yes. I mean, look, if the goal was to overwhelm, let's just say they're succeeding. And then -- you know, if anything, the year has been
characterized by a level of disruption and even at times destruction in Washington, that is something that I suspect we'll all be looking back to
for a long, long time.
[13:40:00]
MARTIN: I'm thinking about, you know, the first part of the year is that, I don't even know what to call it. It's not an agency, this kind of ad hoc
group led by Elon Musk, whose main project seemed to be to destroy, you know, humanitarian aid around the world, as well as, you know, federal
agencies. And then, of course, the tariff policy, the mass pardoning of January 6th defendants on Inauguration Day, these moves to reshape the
federal bureaucracy, particularly with an eye to things that have been disturbing to conservatives for years, like the Department of Education and
things of that sort. Is there anything that constitutes a through line through all of that?
GLASSER: Yes. You know, that is, I think, important for us to try to reckon with. And as I think of it, you know, in some ways, Trump 1.0, you
could say, was the completion of what Trump's son-in-law called the hostile takeover of the Republican Party, and that was accomplished really, you
know, by a couple years into Trump's term, I would say, you know, as figures like John McCain left the scene and were replaced by enablers or,
you know, supporters of Trump and his MAGA movement.
I would say if that was 1.0, Trump 2.0 is the hostile takeover of Washington and the turning of the executive branch of the U.S. federal
government into an extraordinary personal platform for the expanded powers and reach or overreach, as the case may be, of one man. This is something
that, again, I think we'll be studying for many, many decades to come, which is the incredible aggregation of power in the form of one man in the
Oval Office and the idea that the Congress has largely stepped aside, including even abdicating many of its constitutionally assigned functions.
There was a moment recently that was so telling when President Trump said, you know, I feel like I'm the Speaker of the House as well as the
president, too. And in some ways, you can't argue with that.
MARTIN: Of all the things that we're thinking about here, when you think about the year, there are things that are really visible inside Washington.
There are things that are visible outside of Washington. What are the things you think that might be most visible outside of Washington?
GLASSER: He said that he was going to be the president who was going to bring back the economy, the president who was going to stop inflation, the
president who was going to restore kind of the way things were before the COVID pandemic disrupted the U.S. and the world. And that, I think, is
where it's pretty remarkable that he's lost the very people, arguably, who brought him back to the presidency, those kinds of non-frequent voters, the
independents, the young people who thought, OK, well, things aren't going well, and I'm really unhappy about the state of things in the economy. I'm
unhappy about how much I have to pay.
And here we are, not even a year later. And in fact, Americans are even more upset about the state of the economy than they were a year ago when
they elected Donald Trump to fix it. And, you know, he promised a lot of things that he was going to do on day one. He promised he was going to
settle the war in Ukraine in 24 hours. He hasn't done that.
But most importantly, from the point of view, I think, of the American electorate, he promised that he was going to bring prices down on day one
of his second presidency and restore the economy. Instead, where we are is we have essentially the same level of inflation now that we did a year ago
when Donald Trump was campaigning against the Joe Biden economy. He said that 3 percent inflation at that time was literally like the worst
inflation in the history of the world, which, of course, it wasn't.
MARTIN: Let's talk about immigration. His polls have declined, maybe not with his core supporters, because he's got a core group of supporters who
seem to support him no matter what. But it does seem that there are a lot of people who are disturbed by the way his immigration policy is unfolding.
You know, they're seeing these images of people, women, being dragged from their cars. They're seeing parents being arrested in front of their kids
when they drop them of. How do you think this is playing? How do you assess how this is going?
GLASSER: Yes, I think it's really important. It was something not only that Trump campaigned on, but was very much a mobilizing factor for his
core supporters. And I remember very vividly being at the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee. And when he said mass deportation now,
there were pre-printed signs. And it was one of the only things, aside from the mention of his name itself, that that audience really went crazy for.
They were absolutely stirred up and rallied by that. And they held up the mass deportation now signs.
[13:45:00]
The other issue, by the way, that really seemed to energize that core group of supporters, it was any mention of men playing women's sports or, you
know, trans issues. Those were the two things that I think really crystallized the culture war as it played out in the 2024 campaign.
So, flash forward, he's executing on that. As you said, we're now living in this world of these kind of horrible shock videos, right? Do you avert your
gaze? Do you feel that you need to look at them? Because it's what's happening in our country right now. I mean, it's a painful aspect of kind
of the visual backdrop, if you will, to the Trump 2.0 presidency.
You also mentioned Trump's declining poll numbers. And this, I think, is very significant. Again, as I'm looking for differences between the first
term and the second term, Donald Trump in the first term was a very unpopular president. He was a historically unpopular president, the most
unpopular since public polling was taken, OK? Consistently. What's different is that back in the first term, Trump was generally getting
pretty good marks on things like the economy, even where he was seen as personally polarizing or unpleasant to voters.
So, they gave him more credit for at least delivering on the economy in some ways, even if they didn't like what kind of public persona he had and
the polarization. Now, interestingly enough, Donald Trump is even more underwater in the polls on things like the economy than he is overall in
his negative approval ratings.
Gallup just found that Trump had the lowest numbers of his two presidencies, including a 60 percent disapproval rating, but even more
disapproval on the economy, even on immigration, where broadly speaking, even many Democrats and Independents had supported the idea of closing the
border or making it less permeable. I think a lot of Democrats believe their own party screwed up and that Joe Biden screwed up as president, to
be blunt, in sort of allowing out of control, illegal migration into the country.
And so, while there was a residual support in the public, it's these tactics that you mentioned, Michel, I think, that have really begun to
cause a backlash. You know, the idea that it's not just the criminal, illegal migrants that Donald Trump initially told us that he was going to
go after, but that it's reaching into essentially peaceful, civil society in ways that people do not support and did not expect.
MARTIN: The other interesting thing that's happened this week that is related to immigration is the national security strategy was released, and
it cites immigration to Europe as a problem, as the way it was described as, what is it, the erasure of civilization due to immigration. How do you
understand that, and what does this tell us about Trump's kind of view of the relationship that he thinks the United States should have with the rest
of the world?
GLASSER: Yes. I mean, that is a pretty radical document. It's a pretty disruptive document. It has a worldview that is very, very incompatible
with the worldviews of any modern president, whether Democrat or Republican. It essentially abdicates and sort of says, we're moving on from
the idea of the United States as this global superpower and guarantor of the liberal order.
You know, I'm old enough to remember when American presidents used to speak of exporting democracy to the world. Donald Trump is now talking about
exporting right-wing racism to Europe, which is really something remarkable. As you might expect, this has occasioned an incredible amount
of both backlash and, I think, really existential-level soul-searching among European leaders, because really, not just since the end of the Cold
War, but since the end of World War II, it's this partnership between the United States and Western Europe that has been the anchor of global
security in many ways.
And what Donald Trump is saying is that, you know, actually, in my first term, I talked about pay more for the security. Now, I'm saying, yes, I'm
not really in on the deal. And it tells you, in many ways, much of what you need to know, that the people who have reacted favorably to the new
national security strategy of the United States of America is the Kremlin.
And you had both the Kremlin spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, and the former president, Dmitry Medvedev, welcoming this national security strategy with
open arms, saying that it was explicitly echoing what Russia itself has said about security. It talks about, you know, ending a world in which NATO
is continuing to expand.
[13:50:00]
It talks about the U.S. essentially destabilizing the governments that it doesn't like of many of its Western European allies and working from within
those countries to depose those leaders. I mean, that's just a remarkable statement.
It led one senior European I spoke with this week to say, you know, my concern isn't so much anymore that the United States is not on this -- you
know, not working to help Ukraine and Europe, but that the United States is now actively switching sides.
MARTIN: The president's, how can we put this, seems to be very committed to enriching himself, if I can put it that way, in this current
administration. I mean, in his first term in office, he said that he'd put his holdings into a blind trust. But in this administration, in this
current term, there doesn't seem to be much concern about appearances of conflicts. It doesn't seem to be much concern about whether his policies
dovetail particularly nicely with his own personal financial interests. Would you say that that's true?
GLASSER: Yes, I'm glad that you brought this up, because I believe that it is very important. The levels of self-enrichment and essentially the
mobilization of the U.S. presidency as a tool for the enrichment of Donald Trump and his family is a really remarkable aspect of the second term. And
again, the scale and scope of that enrichment, we are talking billions of dollars that are coming into the pockets of the Trump family and those in
his inner circle. Like --
MARTIN: And how is that working? How is that happening? Is that visible to the public? Is that the kind of thing that the public can see if they're
interested?
GLASSER: Yes. There's been incredible investigative reporting that has produced some really eye-popping examples. For example, Donald Trump's sons
and Steve Witkoff's sons, Witkoff being his personal golfing buddy, real estate developer, turned peace envoy both in the Middle East and Russia.
At the same time, the Trump family and the Witkoff family are doing business with the Arab Gulf Emirates at the same time that they're
negotiating major international accords and actually twinning these things so that Trump and his family are talking about billions of dollars invested
in a new crypto company run by the Trump kids and the Witkoff kids. At the same time, Trump and Witkoff were in the Middle East for the first foreign
visit of Donald Trump's second term. That's one example of many.
There are new Trump real estate developments in countries around the world, Trump-branded real estate developments in countries around the world that
have major business with the Trump administration. He hosted the people who gave money to a Trump crypto enterprise for dinner at his club outside
Washington, D.C. and then brought them in for a personal tour of the White House.
So, you know, again, it's the co-mingling that is really remarkable. We know, for example, that the Saudi government entities basically gave $2
billion in seed money to Jared Kushner's new investment fund at the end of Trump's first term. Well, did all that money come from Saudi Arabia? Maybe
it's coming from other foreign entities. The answer is that we don't know.
MARTIN: Susan Glasser, thank you so much for talking with us again.
GLASSER: Great to be with you. Thank you.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
NEWTON: And finally, for us, he's graced our screens as a tap-dancing chimney sweep on the streets of London. A father who invents a magical
flying car in the fictional land of Bulgaria and an evil security guard at New York's Museum of Natural History. This week, American actor Dick Van
Dyke turns 100 years old after a lifetime of singing, dancing and jogging his way into the hearts of generation after generation.
Now, back in 2013, he spoke to CNN about his greatest achievements and the enduring impact of his films.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DICK VAN DYKE, ACTOR: "The Dick Van Dyke" show, the five years with Carl and Mary were the most fun I ever had, the most creative period in my life,
because it was just rewriting and it was a party every day. And of course, "Mary Poppins" and "Chitty Bang Bang," for some reason, have lasted. They
kind of have legs. Each generation of kids who come along like the movie. And I'm recognized in the market by little children, which just tickles me
to death.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[13:55:00]
NEWTON: He's right about that. Now, asked about his secret to a long and happy life, he told the Times of London, dance your way to breakfast and
always be on the lookout for romance. Happy birthday to Dick Van Dyke, because "Chitty Chitty Bang Bang," we love you.
And how far would you go to stand up to tyranny? Make sure to tune in to tomorrow's show, where Christiane will examine that question with
journalist and author Jonathan Freedland about his new book, "The Traitor's Circle," an extraordinary story of hidden resistance inside Nazi Germany.
That does it for us. If you ever miss our show, you can find the latest episode shortly after it airs on our podcast. And remember, you can always
catch us online, on our website. and all-over social media. I want to thank you for watching, and goodbye from New York.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[14:00:00]
END
