Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

W.H. Weighs Back Pay For Furloughed Workers Amid Shutdown; FAA Expands List Of Facilities Facing Staffing Shortage; Some Lawmakers See No Off-Ramp to End Shutdown This Week; Senators Grill Attorney General BONDI in Tense Hearing; Sources: Classified DOJ Legal Opinion Justifies Strikes On Cartels. Aired 3-3:30p ET

Aired October 07, 2025 - 15:00   ET

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

MOSHE LAVI, BROTHER-IN-LAW OF HOSTAGE OMRI MIRAN: Through military pressure, through military achievements in the battlefield, but I want to see more of that and I think Trump's plan, a diplomatic plan that is backed by international community, will provide Israel an avenue to achieve much more strength, strength through diplomacy and strength through rebuilding our country truly, rebuilding our communities and that can be achieved only when the hostages are home and when we can finally breathe again, breathe again in a region without that terrible war that is ravaging our region at the moment.

ERICA HILL, CNN HOST: Moshe Lavi, we really appreciate you taking the time to join us today.

LAVI: Thank you.

HILL: Thank you.

A new hour of CNN NEW CENTRAL starts right now.

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: Shutdown and possibly short-changed. A new threat from the White House could be a huge worry for federal workers. It's possible they may not receive back pay for time spent furloughed.

And Deflect and Attack: Attorney General Pam Bondi's strategy as she faces tough questions from Democrats in a hearing on the Hill. We'll get you the details on that.

And later, speaking out against ICE, country music superstar Zach Bryan teasing a new song where he appears to take aim at ongoing immigration raids.

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

President Donald Trump issuing a new warning today about his plans to permanently cut some federal programs. And not only that, the White House is also apparently debating whether to issue back pay to furloughed workers once the government reopens. Here's what the President said just a short time ago.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I would say it depends on who we're talking about. I can tell you this, the Democrats have put a lot of people in great risk and jeopardy, but it really depends on who you're talking about. But for the most part, we're going to take care of our people. There are some people that really don't deserve to be taken care of and we'll take care of them in a different way.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: CNN's Kristen Holmes is live for us at the White House.

Kristen, have officials there given any more clarity on exactly what the plan is? No, or what President Trump meant by that. So, there are a couple things going on here. We know that the White House and President Trump has been threatening these mass layoffs as part of this shutdown, saying it's democratic -- Democrats' fault and that's why they might have to fire an enormous amount of federal workers.

Now, they're taking it to a new step and they're talking about federal workers who are certainly not going to get fired, but saying they might not get their back pay. To be clear, in 2019 it was President Trump who signed into law that federal workers during a shutdown would get their back pay whether they are furloughed or not.

However, what we are hearing now is that there's this new interpretation of the law, or a different interpretation of the law, where it might be that they don't have to pay, or they believe they might be able to look at the law this way, furloughed workers. That means the people who aren't actually working, who are told they have to leave during the government shutdown.

This would be a huge change and would certainly get an enormous amount of pushback from Capitol Hill, but of course what President Trump just said now, what you heard him say, is very different from talking about interpreting the law differently, i.e. that is something that they were looking at legally in a draft White House memo that we were told about earlier today.

Instead, President Trump seemed to think that it was, or seemed to say that it was politically based, and that's who wouldn't get paid -- some people don't deserve to get paid. Those are two very different things. All in all here, Boris, it's very clear the White House is ramping up the threats as this shutdown continues on with no end in sight.

SANCHEZ: Kristen Holmes, live for us at the White House. Thank you so much. Erica?

HILL: Well, just a short time ago we learned that the FAA is now expanding the list of air traffic control facilities dealing with staffing shortages amid the government shutdown. That list expanded to now include Chicago O'Hare International Airport. This is one of the busiest control towers in the country. CNN Aviation Correspondent Pete Muntean is closely monitoring all of this.

So, Chicago now being added, it was already a long list before we added Chicago.

PETE MUNTEAN, CNN AVIATION CORRESPONDENT: Yes, and I just spoke to the union chief of the air traffic controllers union, and he underscored to me that this -- we're only talking about a handful of workers here that have called out sick, but there is already a shortage of controllers, meaning that this is having an outsized impact. Here is the latest, the FAA is issuing warnings of possible delays due to short staffing at two control towers of major airports tonight. Chicago O'Hare will be short staffed from 3:00 P.M. until midnight Eastern Daylight Time. Nashville International Airport will not have all of its controllers from 3:30 P.M. until 6:00 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time.

And the latest from the FAA is that there is now a two-hour delay for flights going into Nashville. That does not mean the towers will shut down like we saw at Hollywood Burbank Airport last night, a condition known as ATC ZERO. But these delays are likely in the name of safety, meaning that they need to put these delays in place to keep planes safely separated.

[15:05:03]

The other facilities on this list that is growing now include the approach and departure facilities for the Houston Airport's hobby and Bush. Also, Newark, a place plagued by problems and staffing shortages and controller issues and outages. Also, Las Vegas. Also, flights in the Boston area.

The bottom line here, seven days into this shutdown. This is likely only the start, even though the union representing air traffic controllers underscores there's evidence of a coordinated sick out right now.

Remember all 11,000 air traffic controllers are still required to work without pay during this shutdown and layer that against the fact that so many have been working mandatory overtime for years because of a nationwide controller shortage. So, it just makes sense that only a weekend of this shutdown, some controllers have simply had enough. Here is Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy on Fox News this morning, who said he does not support controllers calling out sick.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEAN DUFFY, SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION: I want our controllers to go to work. That's their job. They're important jobs. Eventually they're going to get paid, but we got to be honest, they're humans and -- and they're under pressure. And I do think this can have a rippling effect. It's a huge problem.

And again, Burbank zero controllers came to work. I don't support that. They should -- they should come to work. They're supposed to come to work.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MUNTEAN: The National Air Traffic Controllers Association, NATCA says it is normal for controllers to call out sick and this is just evidence that the air traffic control system is way too fragile right now. By the way, controllers have not missed a paycheck yet. They got a paycheck last Tuesday. That was their last full paycheck. They get one more paycheck, a partial paycheck on Tuesday. This coming Tuesday, the 14th.

HILL: Right.

MUNTEAN: So, remember, this is kind of what ended the 35-day government shut down ...

HILL: Yes.

MUNTEAN: ... back in 2019, controllers calling out sick in small numbers in some big areas. So, we will see, only day seven of the shutdown and this could sort of have a compounding windfall effect here and the deck of cards could come doubling down.

HILL: Right. Although important to point out from your reporting, there is an evidence at this time that this is any sort of a coordinated effort. This is just -- I mean, people call out sick all the time ...

MUNTEAN: And it's illegal for ...

HILL: ... it happens.

MUNTEAN: ... controllers to sort of take it upon themselves to do some sort of job action.

HILL: Right.

MUNTEAN: They have a lot of rules, and this is not something that they're doing as a coordinated thing.

HILL: Yes.

MUNTEAN: This may be one offs here and there, but it's having a big impact.

HILL: Yes, it absolutely is. Pete, appreciate it. Thank you. Boris.

SANCHEZ: A lot of pressure building on lawmakers right now. Let's get to Capitol Hill with CNN's Arlette Saenz standing by with the latest.

Arlette, you've been talking to some Republican senators about all of this. What are they saying?

ARLETTE SAENZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, this threat of furloughed workers potentially not receiving back pay has really become the latest flash point in this government shutdown fight. But right now, it is not clear whether it will have any impact or push either side to the negotiating table.

Now, House Speaker Mike Johnson is among those saying that he hopes furloughed workers will receive back pay. But he did tell reporters that he thinks this could be another pressure point for Democrats to try to push them to sign onto that GOP continuing resolution. But Senator Thom Tillis, a Republican from North Carolina, says that withholding back pay for furloughed workers would be a strategic mistake. Here is a sampling of Republicans and Democrats and how they've responded to this issue.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. THOM TILLIS (R-NC): I believe it's a strategic mistake to now let those folks know. Arlette, I don't think that they could potentially not get back pay. If I were them, I'd start looking for another. And there's a lot of good, hard-working people out there.

SEN. TIM KAINE (D-VA): The President's team is suggesting that he break his own word and punish people. I mean, I -- I hope they'll remember that this was a bill that he signed. He should implement it.

SEN. MIKE ROUNDS (R-SD): If the Senate Democrats don't feel that these jobs are important enough to work, they'll actually pay them to do it. And if they want to shut down government, he is saying perhaps some of these jobs maybe don't have to be filled in the first place.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SAENZ: So, unclear whether this will actually prompt any movement in these shut down talks. Senator Tillis was one of the Republicans who told colleagues today that he does not see an immediate off ramp for the shutdown happening this week.

SANCHEZ: Arlette Saenz live for us on Capitol Hill. Thank you so much, Arlette.

Still to come, Attorney General Pam Bondi clashing with Democratic senators during a contentious hearing. What she said about the National Guard deployments, the Epstein investigation and more.

Plus, exclusive CNN reporting on a classified DOJ document that would justify the use of lethal force against suspected drug traffickers. And later we talked to a soybean farmer about President Trump considering a massive bailout for American farmers hurt by his trade war. That and much more coming your way next on CNN NEWS CENTRAL.

[15:09:53]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:14:15]

SANCHEZ: Some contentious moments on Capitol Hill as a defiant Attorney General Pam Bondi traded barbs with members of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Bondi was asked heated questions at her first hearing since taking office. Democrats repeatedly blasted her leadership, accusing the A.G. of sparking chaos and weaponizing the DOJ. Bondi, though, answered those attacks with her own insults. Just watch as he responded to Sen. Adam Schiff of California.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. ADAM SCHIFF (D-CA): This is supposed to be an oversight hearing when dozens of prosecutors have been fired simply because they worked on cases investigating the former president. This is and now the current president's ...

PAM BONDI, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL: What about the fires in California, do you care about that, Sen. Schiff?

[15:14:58]

SCHIFF: ... and this is supposed to be -- this is -- excuse me, this is supposed to be an oversight hearing in which members of Congress can get serious answers to serious questions about the cover-up ...

BONDI: Are the riots in L.A. serious?

SCHIFF: ... about the cover-up of corruption, about the prosecution of the President's enemies, and when ...

BONDI: I think you owe the President an apology.

SCHIFF: ... when will it be ...

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: With us now, former Deputy Assistant Attorney General Harry Litman.

Harry, thanks so much for being with us. How did you think that ...

HARRY LITMAN, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Thank you.

SANCHEZ: ... Attorney General Bondi responded to some of these questions?

LITMAN: I -- I -- I would say not just some, but all of them, Boris. She gave no answers, really. Anything she could deflect, she did. But what's really remarkable, there -- you've seen fiery moments with A.G.s at other hearings. She came in guns ablazing with pre-drafted soundbites, and just whenever there was something she needed to answer, she substituted instead this sort of when did you stop beating your wife kind of slurs.

So, you saw just now with Adam Schiff to another senator, she said, how dare you ask that when you've lied about your selective service record. How dare you try to ask me that when you take money from so- and-so. So, they were -- they were prepared, and they all served to deflect, and I mean some -- from some really basic questions that they have every right to ask about.

Just one quick example, $50,000 in a bag that Tom Homan apparently walked away with, where is the money? Ask the FBI, she said acerbically. You supervise the FBI. That's why you're here. Ask the FBI. So, it was a concerted strategy both not to give any responses, but also to have the -- a sort of, you know, outrage bombastic kind of presentation that she was even there, and then I assume she hopes observers who aren't paying a lot of attention just take away from it, oh, there's just a scrum on both sides. But it was remarkably unresponsive and remarkably, like I've never seen anything like it, completely antagonistic and contemptuous to the senators.

SANCHEZ: Not a surprise that the A.G. was asked about the recent indictment of former FBI director James Comey.

LITMAN: Right.

SANCHEZ: She, not surprisingly, wouldn't give details on the investigation, but she did mention that the indictment was handed down by what she described as a liberal grand jury in Alexandria, Virginia. What did you make of that remark?

LITMAN: No idea what it means, and I practiced in the Eastern District of Virginia. I don't think it's considered a liberal enclave, but even apart from that, Boris, it's a pretty good example. She said, I won't say anything, but then proceeded to give details, self-serving details, and then, and only then, shut things down.

In any event, the -- the notion, I -- I -- I think it's just puzzling, but what really was salient to me is, she'll talk a little bit. She'll talk a little bit about Epstein and then shut things down again with personal insults. You know, Schiff was making a real point. It's an oversight hearing. This is where you give us answers. And with this sort of calculated bombast, she refused to give answers at every turn.

SANCHEZ: What did you make, Harry, of the accusation from the A.G. and other Republicans on the committee that the previous administration had weaponized the judicial system, specifically with the revelation from the -- a sitting chairman of the committee, Chuck Schumer, that there had been efforts by the Biden administration to monitor certain communications of sitting members of Congress as part of the January 6th investigation that Jack Smith was pursuing?

LITMAN: Yes. Look, two points, Boris. And this is really important. People tend to forget about it. She said herself, you tried to take Trump off the playing field. There was a reason consistent with DOJ policy and a reason that's just now been abandoned, say with Comey. They had facts and law that suggested the presence of crimes, including, by the way, there was all this back and forth on the day of January 6th with Mark Meadows and members of Congress. That is absolutely part of the investigation that they had to pursue.

And, you know, she advances the conclusion, this weaponized, but really for no reason other than Trump was a subject. But the definitive answer that they've never really tried to parry is the reason he was a subject is because there was probable cause to believe he had committed crimes in front of all of us.

So, that's what I think is flawed about that sort of reflexive answer. And I just want to say again, with Comey and others, they have absolutely brought cases not having the evidence. That's the difference. It's a valid investigation, including of the members of Congress. We've never learned about that. But all kinds of calls with Meadows and the like, as opposed to an invalid investigation that is done just for reprisal.

[15:20:09]

We have to insist on that difference and facts and law to -- you know, when -- when you hear those kinds of charges.

SANCHEZ: And I just want to clarify a moment ago I said Chuck Schumer, different Chuck, Chuck Grassley, the ranking sitting member ...

LITMAN: Right.

SANCHEZ: ... yes, chairman of the committee.

LITMAN: Yes.

SANCHEZ: Yes.

Harry Litman, thank you so much. Appreciate the analysis.

LITMAN: Thank you, Boris.

SANCHEZ: Of course.

Ahead, can President Trump order deadly strikes against cartels and drug traffickers without a legal review or due process? We have some CNN exclusive reporting when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:25:21]

HILL: A CNN exclusive now. Sources telling CNN a classified Justice Department legal opinion is being used to justify lethal strikes on suspected drug cartels. The U.S. military carried out another strike on a boat off the Venezuela coast on Friday, killing four people on board. This comes as multiple military lawyers have said the strikes do not appear to be lawful. CNN Natasha Bertrand joining us now.

So, what does this legal opinion say then?

NATASHA BERTRAND, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Erica. So, this is an opinion that was written by the Office of Legal Counsel at the Justice Department. It's essentially an interpretation of the law that is binding for the entire executive branch. So, essentially this is the prevailing interpretation of how the President is allowed to do these kinds of military strikes on drug cartels. It's extremely broad.

Essentially what it says is that the President is authorized to carry out any kind of deadly force, use deadly force against a broad range of cartels because they pose an imminent threat to Americans because they are armed, because they are carrying drugs into the country and poisoning Americans. That all allows the President to act in self- defense of the nation.

And this has really alarmed a lot of legal experts that we've spoken to just because it is so broad. It is not geographically limited. It could amount to an open-ended war against a very broad range of drug traffickers and narco-traffickers around the world. And importantly, there doesn't seem to be any kind of limit on how long the President has this authority. A temporal limit, right?

And one legal expert actually told me that, quote, "If the OLC opinion is this broad, it essentially means that DOJ has interpreted the President to have such extraordinary powers that he alone can decide to prosecute a war broader even than what Congress authorized after the 9/11 attacks." That was extremely broad power that was given to the President back then. This appears to be even more open-ended.

Now, we did hear from the official who is nominated to be the general counsel for the Army today at a hearing, and he acknowledged that this opinion by the Justice Department does in fact exist. He said that it was the result of an interagency working group that included Justice Department, CIA, State Department, even the JAG Corps in the U.S. military that advises the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

He said, this is the opinion, but I can't release it. The President would have to release it. Of course, that's going to be a problem for Congress because they are really itching to see this legal opinion ...

HILL: Yes.

BERTRAND: ... and just determine how sound it actually is.

HILL: There's a -- there's a lot going on there, to put it mildly, but really important that you've got it.

Natasha, thank you.

Well, President Trump is considering a massive bailout, billions of dollars potentially, to help the farmers hurt by his trade war. We're going to discuss with a soybean farmer from Arkansas who joins us next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)