Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Texas Gerrymandering Fight Continues; Judge Blocks Release of Ghislaine Maxwell Grand Jury Materials; California Sues Trump Administration Over National Guard Deployment; Explosion at Pennsylvania Steel Plant; D.C. Under Federal Control. Aired 1-1:30p ET

Aired August 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]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:01:00]

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: Federal takeover. President Donald Trump taking control of Washington, D.C.'s police department, as he vows to -- quote -- "liberate" the nation's capital from crime. The statistics, though, tell a very different story. We will dig into the numbers for you.

DANNY FREEMAN, CNN HOST: Plus, land swaps on the table. Ahead of Friday's summit, President Trump spells out what it could take to end the war in Ukraine. But Ukraine has ruled out giving up an inch of land to Russia.

And up in smoke. President Trump weighs loosening the rules on marijuana, a long-awaited decision with big consequences.

We're following these major developing stories and many more all coming in right here to CNN NEWS CENTRAL.

SANCHEZ: We have plenty of news to get to this afternoon, but we do begin with breaking news out of Pennsylvania, where an explosion at a U.S. steel plant has reportedly left workers trapped under the rubble.

These are live images just into CNN. You see the devastation there. This is in the town of Clairton, just some 30 minutes south of Pittsburgh. Our reporting indicates that this is a coking plant, where raw coal is processed into material that is then used to manufacture steel.

We have got CNN's Jason Carroll tracking the latest on this.

Jason, what have you learned?

JASON CARROLL, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Boris, like you have, we have been watching these disturbing pictures coming to us from Clairton, Pennsylvania, over the past hour or so. And we have been getting this word now from the Associated Press that

dozens of people, dozens, again, may be injured. And in addition to that, emergency crews, we are also hearing, still trying to reach some of those people who are trapped there in some of that rubble.

Now, again, we have been watching this video come in. And you can see the result of that explosion, which took place just at about 10.50 a.m. this morning. Some of those people, Boris, who live there in Clairton telling us -- one woman said who lives nearby, she said her house shook very violently. She said she was on the front porch when the explosion happened.

Another man who also lives in Clairton said the explosion to him felt like an earthquake. Again, you can see the vast amount of rubble that is there. Apparently, it started there at the plant at about 10.50 a.m. It started as a fire, the coking plant located just about 20 miles or so from downtown Pittsburgh, the plant located in Allegheny County, just to give some perspective of where the plant is located.

But, again, right now at this hour, you have got emergency crews sifting through all of that rubble there that you see, dealing with high temperatures there on the ground, as they apparently try to rescue some individuals who still are unaccounted for and some who are in need of rescue.

Again, dozens of people injured there at the Clairton Coke Works. And we're going to try to get more information about where the rescue efforts stand at this point. But we have been watching this video coming into us from our affiliate, seeing these emergency crews there on the ground giving their best efforts to do what they can to try to find and rescue those people who are in need of help.

Senator Fetterman has been there on the ground, the local mayor there on the ground as well. Also, the lieutenant governor, Austin Davis, saying that the commonwealth is doing whatever it can to provide whatever resources that they have to get out there, also warning people to stay away from the area, but once again, Boris, the Associated Press reporting dozens of people injured and still some workers there who may be trapped -- Boris.

SANCHEZ: And, as we look at these aerial images, Jason, I just want to let our viewers know that we have learned at least two people are now being treated at UPMC. That's a Level I trauma and burn center which is nearby.

Jason Carroll, please stand by and bring us the latest as you get it.

[13:05:01]

We're going to continue monitoring this breaking news out of Pennsylvania, people trapped in the rubble after an explosion at a coking plant there.

Meantime, today, in the nation's capital, President Trump declaring a public safety emergency, saying he's activated 800 National Guard members in the nation's capital and has now placed the D.C. Police Department under federal control, saying that Attorney General Pam Bondi will -- quote -- "take command."

This takeover is happening as the president says that crime in the city is out of control, despite officials saying that certain crimes in the city have hit a 30-year low. Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I'm announcing a historic action to rescue our nation's capital from crime, bloodshed, bedlam and squalor and worse. If necessary, we're going to move service members directly to joining the Guardsmen, and that will take place very rapidly.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: CNN's Brian Todd is closely following this story for us.

So, Brian, take us through President Trump's order and what else he's threatening, because he says he might activate the military?

BRIAN TODD, CNN CORRESPONDENT: That's right, Boris.

He says he's kind of reserving the option to activate additional military units in Washington, D.C., if need be. He then later said he didn't think he would need them, but he's going to keep that option open. He is also keeping -- considering, at least, expanding the National Guard deployment to other cities.

He named Chicago and New York City. But let's see how this plays out in Washington, D.C., first. We do have some source reporting from three sources familiar with the matter saying that both the D.C. mayor, Muriel Bowser, and the D.C. Metropolitan Police chief, Pamela Smith, did not know of President Trump's announcement prior to when he made the announcement.

They were caught kind of unaware of this prior to when he made the announcement this morning. As you see the graphic there, the president plans to mobilize some 800 National Guard members on the city streets here in D.C., to put the D.C. police under federal control. That is unprecedented, by the way.

A president of the United States has never taken control of the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department before. Also, FBI agents are going to be patrolling with the police department here. That is also a very rare occurrence, according to our sources. It's very rare for FBI agents to patrol with police in a local -- with local police in any given city.

Already some pushback here in the district from this, but let's first hear from President Trump. I will get to the pushback in a moment, but here's what President Trump had to say about what he hopes the police could do in the city.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: You see, they fight back until you knock the hell out of them, because it's the only language they understand. You can see they want to get at it. And they're standing there, and people are spitting in their face, and they're not allowed to do anything. But now they are allowed to do whatever the hell they want.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TODD: So the president promising a very tough crackdown on crime here in D.C. And, again, we mentioned some pushback to this.

The D.C. attorney general, Brian Schwalb, has issued this statement -- quote -- The administration's actions are unprecedented, unnecessary, and unlawful. There is no crime emergency in the District of Columbia. Violent crime in D.C. reached historic 30-year lows last year and is down another 26 percent so far this year. We are considering all of our options and will do what's necessary to protect the rights and safety of District residents."

Attorney General Schwalb is correct there when he says that crime is down in D.C. According to the D.C. Metropolitan Police, violent crime is down 26 percent, assaults with a dangerous weapon down 20 percent, robberies down 29 percent, and crime overall is at historic lows in this city, Boris.

We also got some pushback from Councilmember Charles Allen of the D.C. City Council, saying this is -- doing this under the guise of public safety is -- quote -- "wrong. It's an extreme, outrageous, and dangerous move for the city."

That is the first member of the D.C. City Council to push back in earnest to this move -- Boris.

SANCHEZ: Brian Todd, thank you so much for the reporting -- Danny.

FREEMAN: Boris, thank you.

Former FBI Deputy Director and CNN senior law enforcement analyst Andrew McCabe joins us now. We also have former U.S. attorney and former Deputy Assistant Attorney General Harry Litman.

Thank you, gentlemen, for breaking down this very important story.

Andrew, I want to start with you.

From your perspective, is the purpose of this action purely to have just a massive show of force on the streets of D.C. or, in practice, is there anything that will be done differently with the police department under federal control?

ANDREW MCCABE, CNN SENIOR LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST: Well, I mean, it is hard to say exactly what the purpose is, right?

So we know what the ostensible purpose is, the facts that -- or the -- I don't even want to even call them facts, the information that the president cited during his press conference, which, of course, included comparing D.C. to places like Baghdad and Bogota, Colombia, where we have no accurate reporting about what their crime statistics are.

[13:10:02]

The fact is that their -- the crime situation in D.C. is at all-time lows. They were at a 30-year low last year, and it's down an additional 26 percent this year. So there is no crime emergency, per se, in the city. So when you understand that, to try to divine what the purpose is of this deployment of National Guard assets, what this reallocation of things like FBI agent resources to patrol the streets of D.C., really, it raises some important questions, like, what is it?

Why this production? Why this kind of Potemkin village of criminal intervention in a city? What is this designed to distract us from? I don't know that I can answer that for you here, but, in effect, taking a federal official and simply calling him the head of the Metropolitan Police Department changes nothing within the Metropolitan Police Department.

Those sworn officers are the only people who are legally authorized to enforce the law outside of the federal properties in D.C. Most of D.C. is not federal property. It is the property of the District of Columbia. And I should also say, to deprive the people, the citizens of the District of Columbia of the representatives who they elected -- they elect a mayor. They elect a city council.

They are entitled to hold those folks responsible for the crime situation and every other situation in D.C. To completely replace that sort of authority with some specious federal authority is really concerning, I think, as a democratic matter, a democracy issue writ large.

FREEMAN: Harry, I want to bring you into the conversation.

Aside from what this may look like on the ground today or tomorrow in D.C., it seems like the thing that actually also caught a lot of people's attention -- and Brian Todd just mentioned it -- was this warning that President Trump basically said that this sort of action might come to other cities across the country?

What do you make of that?

HARRY LITMAN, FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY: Yes, it's really an important point.

Because it's true that he has somewhat greater authority, a fair bit greater authority in D.C. itself, though everything I think that Andy says is accurate, that goes away when he's talking about Chicago, when he's talking about Los Angeles. And, by the way, he mentioned only, of course, Democratic cities. The two highest cities in murder rates are both Republicans. They didn't come out.

But, there, a whole survey of different laws come into effect, including the really important law, it's a mouthful, Posse Comitatus Act, that says you can't do this on the streets. You can't bring in the military. So to the extent he's trying to align it with some grand showing of

what he's going to do in Democratic cities, he is going to be up against much, much higher legal barriers.

FREEMAN: You know, Andrew, we heard pushback, as Brian Todd reported, just after the announcement came, but there wasn't as much pushback from, say, the D.C. mayor leading up to this.

I'm curious if there's anything in particular about this, again, going into practice that worries you, especially if we might potentially see American citizens in any sort of confrontation with, say, FBI agents or National Guard members.

MCCABE: Yes, there's a lot that worries me about this.

First of all, the -- it's hard to explain the lack of pushback by D.C. authorities right now. I would I suspect they're probably trying to get their heads around this entire thing. It's absolutely so bizarre. Apparently, they had no notice of it.

There is also the matter of congressional funding, which basically took away $1 billion from D.C. this year. So they have -- the Senate is trying to restore that. The House is not willing. So there's a there's a very kind of compelling financial/political issue that they're trying to navigate at the same time, which might be having an impact on how vocally they want to push back.

Nevertheless, you are now looking at things like having hundreds of FBI agents -- quote, unquote -- "patrol" the streets of D.C. This is not something that FBI agents do. They're not trained for it. They don't plan on that. They don't have that sort of legal authority intrinsically.

So to understand exactly how FBI agents are going to start making arrests around D.C., again, on areas that are not federal property, that is not something that has been worked out in any way. And now let's think about the opportunity cost.

All of those counterterrorism cases, counterintelligence cases, criminal cases, crimes against children, all the things that we rely on FBI agents to protect us from every day, that work is not getting done, because you have taken that resource, some percentage of it, and shifted it to patrolling D.C., which is something that the FBI does not do and really cannot do in its current state competently or safely for themselves or for the citizens of the District.

[13:15:13]

So, really questionable decisions here that will have major impacts on the safety and security of this country.

FREEMAN: Harry, just really quickly, I want to get your perspective on this, because President Trump also said that he will bring in the military if needed, essentially beyond the National Guard.

Just a quick thought. How much authority does he have to use the military in this sort of way?

LITMAN: Some authority to use it temporarily with congressional notifications. So D.C. is a lot weaker here, but Congress comes to the fore. They're the ones that passed the D.C. Home Control Act, 48 hours, then has to notify, 30 days, then Congress has to pass.

So, basically, he's taking a very limited grant of authority and making a big political case with it, exactly as Andrew specifies.

FREEMAN: It's going to be a very interesting 30 days to come in the nation's capital.

Andrew McCabe, Harry Litman, thank you both for breaking all of that down for us. Really do appreciate it -- Boris.

SANCHEZ: Right now, a legal face-off is kicking off in California. Governor Gavin Newsom is suing the Trump administration for sending thousands of National Guard troops into Los Angeles. They mobilized back in June in response to protests against immigration raids in the city.

Governor Newsom argues that Trump's deployment is an unlawful federalization of the California National Guard.

Let's go to CNN's Julia Vargas Jones, who's monitoring developments for us out of Los Angeles.

Julia, so what's happening in the case right now?

JULIA VARGAS JONES, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, the hearing is just getting under way, Boris. That's in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in San Francisco.

We just heard from Judge Charles Breyer, his opening remarks, where he said he understands that the military cannot be used to enforce domestic law and the objective of this trial will be to determine if they did. Evidence will be presented today and tomorrow, starting with the plaintiffs. And, on Wednesday, court will hear arguments and have a discussion.

U.S. Army official William B. Harrington is now testifying about the activities of Task Force 51, the command post activated to coordinate the deployment of the National Guard troops here to Los Angeles.

But this will be a real testament, a real test of presidential power over the military in national territory. And it's proving to be particularly relevant today with the announcement of another deployment to Washington, D.C., but the legal arguments here are quite different. The White House used this very old law, a rarely used law that allows federalizing the Guard during a rebellion, invasion, or if regular forces can't enforce U.S. laws.

That's section 124063 of the U.S. Code. It was only the second time in history, Boris, that a president used a statue in this way. The first was when President Richard Nixon called on the National Guard to deliver the mail during the 1970 Postal Service strike. The lawsuit from Governor Newsom argues that the president basically had no legal authority to federalize California's National Guard.

And he names not just President Trump, but the Defense Department and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who we also heard this morning citing the way troops were deployed to California as an example to be followed for Washington, D.C.

Now, Newsom's legal team is asking the court to block any future deployments without a governor's consent. And their legal arguments center basically on three claims. One is that sending the Guard violated the Posse Comitatus Act. That was signed into law in 1878 and consists of just one sentence that prohibits the president from using the military as a domestic police force unless explicitly authorized by Congress or the Constitution.

It also says that it infringed on California's rights under the 10th Amendment, which gives states their powers, and that the Defense Department's actions broke administrative law by bypassing the governor entirely.

Now, Trump's lawyers are saying that the troops, along with a small number of Marines that they sent here to Los Angeles, were limited to just guarding federal property and personnel, and they never engaged in policing. And that's the crux of their argument that the president acted squarely within his powers.

But Judge Breyer says that the protest didn't really meet the definition of an insurrection, and he had already ruled that Trump had exceeded his authority in this case. That was later blocked via an appeals court, Boris.

But however the decision comes, it will set the president for how presidents can control the military on U.S. soil.

SANCHEZ: Julia Vargas Jones, thank you so much for an update there. Appreciate it.

Still to come, President Trump's bid for some transparency in the Jeffrey Epstein case hits a setback, a federal judge just issuing a significant ruling.

Plus, the president says he will know within the first two minutes of his upcoming meeting with Vladimir Putin whether peace is possible and reveals what concessions he's willing to make at this week's summit.

[13:20:04]

All of this and more coming your way on CNN NEWS CENTRAL.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: New today, a federal judge has denied the Trump administration's request to unseal grand jury materials from the Ghislaine Maxwell sex trafficking case. Maxwell is serving a 20-year sentence for carrying out a yearslong scheme with Jeffrey Epstein to groom and sexually abuse underage girls. Another federal judge in New York is still considering the Justice

Department's request to unseal grand jury material from an Epstein investigation back in 2019.

CNN crime and justice correspondent Katelyn Polantz joins us now.

[13:25:00]

So, Katelyn, why did the judge decide not to unseal these records?

KATELYN POLANTZ, CNN SENIOR CRIME AND JUSTICE REPORTER: Well, this judge, Paul Engelmayer, in Manhattan he says he's not releasing them because the legal arguments just weren't good enough because there's nothing new here in these filings. The Justice Department had tried to go to this court and say, we want the Ghislaine Maxwell grand jury record.

So that includes things that would have been said in the Epstein grand jury as well. We want them released because they would create a special circumstance. There's a lot of public interest around this. And the judge said, there just isn't anything here that's not public already.

Some choice quotes from this 31-page opinion from the judge today. He says: "These grand jury records are evidence, with only very minor exceptions, a matter of public record already, would not reveal any new information of any consequence. There is next to nothing new. There is no 'there' there."

And he also, in doing the legal analysis of this, said, I do acknowledge that victims came forward. That's very powerful. They asked for transparency around the Epstein files. But, he says, those victims are being misled essentially.

"The victims' interest in reviewing the grand jury materials appears to be premised on the understandable, but mistaken belief that these materials would reveal new information."

So we're not getting these five days of grand jury transcripts and the exhibits. And if we were to have gotten them from the Maxwell case, there wouldn't be much in them that we would be interested in.

SANCHEZ: One of many fronts on this battle to get more transparency on the Epstein files saga.

Katelyn Polantz, thank you so much for the update -- Danny.

FREEMAN: Next hour, the Texas Statehouse will reconvene again to try to meet a quorum so Republicans can push through their redistricting plan. Now, the standoff is entering its second week after Democrats fled the state to prevent a vote on redrawn congressional maps.

Now, if approved, the new maps would flip as many as five U.S. House seats to the GOP. Now, the current special session called by Texas Governor Greg Abbott ends one week from tomorrow. But as Democrats try to run out the clock, Governor Abbott is threatening to keep calling special sessions. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GOV. GREG ABBOTT (R-TX): If they show back up in the state of Texas, they will be arrested and taken to the Capitol. If they want to evade that arrest, they're going to have to stay outside of the state of Texas for literally years, all right? And they might as well just start voting in California or voting in Illinois, wherever they may be.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

FREEMAN: CNN's Ed Lavandera is live from the Texas state capitol in Austin.

Ed, what are we expecting when the legislature tries to gavel back in?

ED LAVANDERA, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, obviously, everyone looking to whether or not there is going to be a quorum.

And that will happen in about 30 minutes, when the House speaker will return here to the floor. The House session will try to go back into session. They tried this three times last week. The Democrats were not here. Kind of expecting the same thing to unfold again today. So it's a question of, how many more times is the speaker going to do this throughout the course of the week?

But to your point of what the governor, Greg Abbott, was talking about there, about this going on for years, should be clear in our reporting and talking to Democrats for the last week-and-a-half now they understand that Republicans ultimately have the votes in all of this. So the idea of this lasting years and years doesn't seem very likely, but for the time being, these Democrats are trying to generate a lot of publicity about the fact that they view this redistricting effort as a threat against democracy.

That's why they're going to states like Illinois and California, trying to drum up support for those states following suit to offset the gains that Republicans would be making here in Texas. And the chairman of the Democratic Caucus, Gene Wu, was asked about this threat of continuous special sessions. And this is how he responded this morning.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

STATE REP. GENE WU (D-TX): If he simply calls another special session to do things that are selfish, things that are for him, things for his buddies, that's up to him. We can't make him be a better leader, but we can always hope.

All we want him to do is actually listen to the people and do what they ask.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LAVANDERA: And as the Texas House tries to reconvene today, what we're also monitoring is how this is playing out in the courts.

Remember, the governor, Greg Abbott, and the attorney general, Ken Paxton, have filed with the Supreme Court to have a number of Texas Democrats removed from their seats. They argue that, by leaving the state, they have vacated those seats. Democrats vehemently argue against that. They do not believe that the governor or the attorney general have the legal authority to be able to request anything like that.

But we're waiting on opinions and how the Texas Supreme Court might rule on that as well. So that's one of the things we will be monitoring today and this week as well -- Danny.

FREEMAN: Ed, thank you so much for that. We will check in with you as the afternoon goes on. Appreciate it.

And coming up next: President Trump says a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine will include a land swap, which appears to be news to Ukraine's leader.