Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

FEMA Workers Put on Leave; Kevin Hassett is Interviewed about Government Stake in Private Companies; Transportation Department Takes over Union Station; Abrego Garcia Renews Asylum Bid; DHS Denies Wrongdoing in Detainment of 15-Year-Old. Aired 9-9:30a ET

Aired August 27, 2025 - 09:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[09:00:00]

DONELL HARVIN, FACULTY, GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY EMERGENCY AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT MASTERS PROGRAM: And not less of these of these type of agencies and capabilities.

ERICA HILL, CNN ANCHOR: Yes, a really, really important part.

Donell Harvin, really appreciate your insight and your expertise this morning. Thank you.

A new hour of CNN NEWS CENTRAL starts right now.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: All right, new this morning, dozens of FEMA workers put on leave right in the middle of hurricane season after warning Congress that President Trump's changes to the agency could lead to catastrophic failures.

Police save a little boy's life as his home erupts in flames. We have new, dramatic footage.

And he knows how to ball, she knows Aristotle. What we're learning about how Travis proposed to Taylor Swift.

Sara and Kate are out today. I'm John Berman, with Erica Hill. This is CNN NEWS CENTRAL.

HILL: Breaking overnight, multiple FEMA employees placed on leave just one day after they signed a letter warning Congress that the president's overhaul of FEMA is putting American slammed by natural disasters at risk. And, of course, all of this happening as we're really entering the peak of hurricane season. Titled the Katrina declaration, more than 180 current and former FEMA staffers signed that letter. And in it, they say critical reforms made after Hurricane Katrina are now being unraveled. The FEMA staffers also accusing the Trump administration of undermining their capabilities, installing leadership that is unqualified, and they're calling for the agency to be shielded from political interference.

CNN's Gabe Cohen joining us now with his reporting.

So, Gabe, what more do we know about these workers who are now on leave? GABE COHEN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, so, Erica, it was just 24 hours

ago that I was on the show reporting about this open letter of dissent that they had sent to Congress warning about the Trump administration undoing two decades of progress for FEMA since the federal failures in response to Hurricane Katrina. Now, the group of those workers who publicly signed their names to the document appear to be -- have been ousted by FEMA, put on paid administrative leave. Again, many of those signatories remained anonymous. But the dozen or so who put their names on it appear to now be out at the agency.

I spoke to one of them who told me, quote, "I am disappointed, but not surprised. This decision doesn't just affect me, it increases the burden on my colleagues who are already overworked and stretched thin. I'm also proud of those of us who stood up, regardless of what it might mean for our jobs. The public deserves to know what's happening because lives and communities will suffer if this continues."

What they're talking about there, Erica, is that after Katrina, the federal government investigated, and Congress passed reforms that really attempted to strengthen FEMA. They demanded more authority for the agency so that it could have its independence, and also set higher standards for its leadership. And yet, over the last few months, under the Trump administration, we have seen the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees FEMA, put in very strict spending oversights. Anything over $100,000 now needs to get Kristi Noem's approval. And they've installed an official, David Richardson, who came from the countering weapons of mass destruction office, to lead FEMA. No background in emergency management or dealing with natural disasters.

So, Erica, there are concerns from a lot of folks, including those who authored this letter, that we could be heading toward another Katrina- level failure. Of course, FEMA, for its part, officials in the Trump administration do not agree with that. They said about these workers who were put on leave, "it is not surprising that some of the same bureaucrats who presided over decades of inefficiency are now objecting to reform. Our obligation is to survivors, not to protecting broken systems."

Erica.

HILL: Certainly a lot there.

Gabe Cohen, really appreciate the reporting. Thank you.

John.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: This morning, President Trump is finding new ways to test the reach of the federal government after announcing the U.S. is acquiring a 10 percent stake in chipmaker Intel. The president signaled that more deals like that with private companies could be coming. And his commerce secretary suggested the defense industry might be next.

Listen to what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) HOWARD LUTNICK, COMMERCE SECRETARY: If we are adding fundamental value to your business, I think it's fair for Donald Trump to think about the American people.

There's a monstrous discussion about defense. I mean, Lockheed Martin makes 97 percent of their revenue from the U.S. government. They are basically an arm of the U.S. government.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[09:05:00]

BERMAN: With us now from the White House, Kevin Hassett, the president's National Economic Council director.

Thanks so much for being with us, Kevin. Nice to see you.

KEVIN HASSETT, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL ECONOMIC COUNCIL: Thank you, John. Great to be here.

BERMAN: So, what are the plans and what is the logic behind the government taking a piece of some defense companies?

HASSETT: Well, let's go back to the Intel deal for a second, because what happened was that the Biden administration, with the Chips Act, gave billions and billions of dollars to Intel. And if they met hurdles, then they could continue to receive lawfully that money. And Secretary Lutnick and the president talked Intel and said, well, you're not really making the hurdles, you're not making a lot of progress. If you give us 10 percent of your equity, not voting shares mind you, just so that the U.S., the taxpayer, has an upside, then what's going to happen is that taxpayers, instead of just throwing money into Intel, is going to have a stake in their future success.

This is something that's very, very common in governments around the world. There are sovereign wealth funds that invest in equities. That Norwegian Wealth Fund owns a couple percent of the U.S. stock market, for example. And so, having the government make sure that the taxpayer's money isn't wasted and that the government gets something of value in return is something that makes a great deal of sense to everybody.

BERMAN: My question was about defense industries, though, and what the commerce secretary has said freshly about that. Specifically, what are the plans there?

HASSETT: Yes. So far there are -- there are no definitive plans on the defense industry right now.

BERMAN: You know what the criticism is of all of this, right? I mean we've heard from people on the right who say, this isn't conservative, this is anathema to conservative principles. Bret Stephens -- I could have picked a number of editorials or op-eds. Bret Stephens wrote this morning, "American conservatism under President Trump is changing into something unrecognizable, at least to those of us (silly us!) who thought the movement had guiding principles beyond getting, wielding and abusing power. Upteenth case in point: the federal government becoming an equity shareholder in Intel. If a Democratic president did this, Republicans would call it a political shakedown, an assault on capitalism, a loser for taxpayers. They'd be right."

What do you say?

HASSETT: Yes, that -- that -- no, that -- that's a real overreaction. The bottom line is that if Intel doesn't succeed, and we need Intel succeed -- to succeed for natural security -- national security reasons, then there's -- the equity has no value. The bottom line is, every now and then, if there's a national security matter, and the government is doing something to try to, for example, get a Covid vaccine, throwing tons and tons of money at companies in case they get a Covid vaccine, then helping reduce the cost of that program by letting shareholders be taxpayers is something that makes a great deal of sense.

And it's certainly not socialism. Because in a socialist country, what happens is that a government owns the capital and orders it around and makes five-year plans to say what we're going to do. These are publicly traded companies that are getting some help from the government because we need our chip industry to be there in case of a national emergency and we're putting some equity into it is all.

BERMAN: Yes. I guess it remains to be seen -- again, it remains to be seen how much involvement the government takes with some of these companies.

HASSETT: Yes, OK.

BERMAN: I do want to ask you about something else that is true as of today.

HASSETT: Sure.

BERMAN: Tariffs on India have doubled to now 50 percent on India. Half of that is because of its role in selling oil to get -- or buying oil, I should say, from Russia. What -- what's the current state of discussions with India in perhaps reaching a trade deal that will reduce that?

HASSETT: Right. Well, I think that what President Trump is doing is, he's -- he's beginning to put more and more pressure on Russia so that we can get the peace deal that he's working so hard to achieve. And the bottom line is that we've had long trade negotiations with India. They haven't been particularly productive. And so, it's still a work in progress to see where it's going to end up.

BERMAN: You know --

HASSETT: But -- but it's part of a program to put pressure on Russia to get a peace deal.

BERMAN: One of the reasons why you, in the first administration, at the beginning of this administration, reached out so, you know, with so much effort towards India was to isolate China, right? Stronger relationships with India isolates China more. But now you're tough on India, you're, you know, NVidia making deals with China over Nvidia, you know, cutting them slack over TikTok, you know, giving them a long runway in terms of trade negotiations. What happened to being tough on China? Are you still tough on China?

HASSETT: Right. Well -- well, the thing you have to remember, John, is that when you're thinking about the way President Trump handles negotiations, you got to keep your eye on the horizon. You've got to think about what the long run goal is. And there are going to be times when, you know, basically if people don't change their positions, then there's going to be strong repercussions, as we saw, for example, with the Swiss tariffs. And so, I think keeping an eye on the horizon is the right answer right now.

BERMAN: In your own words, why is independence at the Federal Reserve important?

HASSETT: Oh, it's very, very important that the Fed be independent. The academic literature, we nerdy economists have studied it for a long time, have found that if the Fed is not independent, then it tends to lead to higher inflationary outcomes. And one thing we know is that the American people hate inflation. It's something that we saw over the last few years when this Fed let inflation get out of control.

[09:10:04]

BERMAN: And yet the president trying to fire a member of the Fed. And people say this will test Fed independence and maybe even compromise it.

HASSETT: No, I think that the -- what the president believes, that I think that there are a lot of observers that agree with him, is that this Fed hasn't really been independent. That if you look at their movements to let inflation get out of control, to potentially jack up the economy right ahead of the election for Kamala Harris, to begin hiking rates the minute President Trump was elected back in -- or took office in 2017, you know, there was a pretty troubling partisan pattern. And the partisan pattern is in the rhetoric, too.

So, one of the things I think was most interesting about the Jackson Hole meeting with Jay Powell is that the Fed, all the way since January has been saying, contrary to economic theory, that inflation was going to skyrocket because of tariffs, said that they had to have high rates because of tariffs. And as the Council of Economic Advisers report that just came out shows that, in fact, import prices have gone down during the tariff episode. And Jay Powell now admits that they were wrong about tariffs and inflation at the Jackson Hole meeting.

And so, I think that that was a productive -- a productive debate. But what they did is, they stuck themselves into the middle of a partisan non-monetary policy discussion. And they were wrong about it. The president held them to it.

BERMAN: Well, of course, now the president is making political attacks of his own on the Fed, and has for a long time, against Jerome Powell. Now separately, you have him trying to fire Lisa Cook.

Will the president nominate a new person to fill that role even before a judge weighs in?

HASSETT: I -- I think the -- the president is going to respect the -- the judgment of the legal system. And, you know, that's a -- that's a work in progress right now.

BERMAN: So, no nomination before a judge rules here?

HASSETT: Well, the president hasn't made a final call on that yet.

BERMAN: Jobs report coming out next week, Kevin.

HASSETT: Yes.

BERMAN: You going to believe the numbers?

HASSETT: You know, there's a lot of work that needs to be done to make it so that the numbers are more reliable. The extent to which the BLS survey response rates hasn't improved and it made the data very unreliable with huge revisions is something that we need a new team to have a look at. But I think they'll be as -- as good as they can be, but they need to get a lot better.

BERMAN: Again, obviously, the revisions are the ones that have more, the greater response rate, and it was the revisions from last time which showed very weak jobs numbers for May and June.

Kevin Hassett, thank you very much for being with us this morning. Appreciate your time.

HASSETT: Thank you.

BERMAN: Erica.

HILL: Some breaking news here. The Department of Transportation now planning to take over Washington's Union Station. What we're learning as President Trump escalates the deployment of troops in the nation's capital.

And officially in their engaged era. Taylor Swift gets her love story as she and Travis Kelce say yes to getting married. The new details we're now learning about how Travis popped the question.

Plus, is it a bird? Is it a plane? No, no, just a car. A team of pilots now showcasing the future of travel.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:17:47]

HILL: Breaking news at this hour out of the nation's capital after President Trump sent the National Guard into Washington, D.C., and, of course, took over the city's police force. Now, the Department of Transportation is announcing plans to take over management of Union Station, the city's major train and bus hub. The president also announcing overnight that Republicans in Congress are working on a, quote, new "comprehensive crime bill," but didn't offer many details.

CNN's Alayna Treene joining us this morning from the White House.

So, let's start first with this news on Union Station. What do we know about this now takeover that's being announced?

ALAYNA TREENE, CNN WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Yes, I mean this is just the latest escalation, Erica, of what the president is trying to do with crime in this city specifically. And of course, later we can get to some of the other cities that he is targeting.

But let me get into what we're learning, and this is from our great colleagues who cover transportation. So essentially the Department of Transportation is planning to reclaim management over Washington, D.C.'s Union Station, it's train station just here in the city center, and arguing essentially that it has fallen into disrepair and that's why they're moving to make this decision.

I want to read for you a statement that we got from the secretary of transportation, Sean Duffy. He said, quote, "instead of being a point of pride, Washington's Union Station has fallen into disrepair. By reclaiming station management, we will help make the city safe and beautiful at a fraction of the cost."

Now, what we are learning is that the department is essentially planning to renegotiate a cooperative agreement with Union Station's redevelopment corporation and Amtrak and expense (ph) what they're calling a formal action confirming the Department of Transportation's renewed control by September. By September, of course, is just around the corner. And next week September begins. So, this is expected to happen very quickly here.

And the announcement comes, you know, as we know that if you look back to -- to the department's kind of agreement in the past with Union Station, it's been an agreement since the -- the early 1980s, but its control has been reduced under various agreement and leases. And so, this is really what we're seeing now, the Department of Transportation trying to come in, reclaim management of what they argue is a -- is a high traffic area for crime.

[09:20:03]

I can tell you, you know, just driving past the station here in the city, you've seen over the recent weeks tons of National Guardsmen, different federal agents kind of staying outside in the area.

But then I want to turn back to what you also mentioned, which is what we heard the president say yesterday, that he is working with Congress to try and have this comprehensive crime bill. He said on Truth Social last night that essentially he's been in contact with House Speaker Mike Johnson, as well as the Senate majority leader, John Thune, to work on this. He said the bill is, quote, "what our country needs, and now," and says that "more is to follow." We've kind of heard the president leaving hints about this in recent

days, but this is the clearest sign yet that he is really going to be leaning, not only to use whatever power he has in his executive authority, but also on Congress now to try and create a real law to deal with this. And again, also, as we know, that he is considering and likely to send National Guard troops to other cities across the country as well. Next on that list, Chicago.

Erica.

HILL: Yes. Curious to see what sort of details we may get on this plan for this comprehensive crime bill when Congress is back in session.

Alayna, appreciate it. Thank you.

Still ahead here, a federal judge holding a hearing to determine the next steps for Kilmar Abrego Garcia, as the White House's fight to re- deport him heats up again.

And some fresh details emerging about just what happened before a fighter jet crashed in Alaska earlier this year. What the pilot was doing for nearly an hour before ultimately ejecting.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:25:57]

BERMAN: Any moment now, a virtual hearing is set to take place to determine the next steps in the case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia. He was taken back into ICE custody. He's at a detention center in Virginia. This is after being deported to a prison in El Salvador, wrongly deported, and then returned to the United States. Now he has renewed his bid for asylum as the Trump administration is trying to deport him to Uganda. Follow the bouncing ball here.

Let's get right to CNN's Priscilla Alvarez for the latest on what we expect today.

Priscilla.

PRISCILLA ALVAREZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: John, there's certainly a lot happening in this space. And that hearing is now underway. And it is one that is going to give us a bit of a roadmap as to the earliest that Abrego Garcia could be deported.

So, there are two courts at play here, and this is where it can get a bit confusing. So, in federal court right now there is that hearing to schedule out what the proceedings are going to be moving forward. But as that plays out, there's also potentially some action that could happen in immigration court. The reason for that is because his attorneys, Abrego Garcia's, are trying to reopen his asylum bid. He had applied for asylum back in 2019, but it was denied because it came after the 12 months that he had arrived to the United States years earlier. So, they are trying again to see if an immigration judge would grant reopening the asylum bid. If that were to happen, then there would be separate proceedings that

would unfold in immigration court regarding that asylum claim. Meanwhile, in federal court, they are trying to determine how all of this goes together.

Now, both the Justice Department and the attorneys have agreed that this bid to reopen asylum is OK. In other words, there does appear to be an appetite, according to the federal judge, by the Justice Department to allow this bid to unfold. But it can -- you can see here how this patchwork of courts can be quite confusing in terms of where this ends.

So, essentially, the first step here is waiting to see if the immigration judge does allow that asylum bid to be reopened. If so, there will be a track that happens in immigration court. But today the focus at this very hour for the federal judge is to determine how the Justice Department thinks this is going to play out, how his attorneys think this is going to unfold so that she, too, can have her hearings and that everyone can get on the same page, not only as to when Abrego Garcia would be deported from the United States, but also, John, where he goes. And that's really at the crux of all of this. Do -- does he get sent to Uganda, a place he has no ties, or does he get sent to Costa Rica, a place that's already offered him status, or another country all together?

So, his fate still in the balance. But for now, he does remain in ICE custody. And we'll hear more again at this hour from this federal judge as how she thinks the timeline is going to play out here.

But, John, at the end of the day, what we have seen in the filings is that all parties do want this to wrap up, at least within the month.

BERMAN: Step by step.

Priscilla Alvarez, thank you for explaining all of that.

Erica.

HILL: This morning, the family of a 15-year-old boy with special needs says he was wrongfully detained by ICE, and the family is now suing the federal government for $1 million in damages. In the lawsuit it alleges this incident happened two weeks ago outside of a Los Angeles school. So, the family says the boy was pulled out of his mother's car, pulled out at gunpoint, handcuffed and then detained by ICE officers. The lawsuit alleging this was, quote, "unconstitutional racial profiling of a U.S. citizen."

Both the administration and DHS have denied any wrongdoing in the case. They say this was a case of mistaken identity in their immigration crackdown.

Joining me now to discuss, Luis Carrillo and Christian Contreras. They're representing the 15-year-old and his family in the lawsuit.

Thank you both for being with me this morning. Has it been made clear to you at this point how or why officers

mistook your client, as you -- as you've alleged, for a 15-year-old -- he's a 15-year-old, mistook him for the person that they were targeting?

[09:30:01]

CHRISTIAN CONTRERAS, CIVIL RIGHTS ATTORNEY, THE CHRISTIAN CONTRERAS FIRM, PLC: Absolutely. I mean the reason why he was mistaken for a person that they were looking for is because they're engaging in racial