Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Winter Storm; Luigi Mangione in Court; Scrutiny Grows Over Boat Strikes. Aired 1-1:30p ET

Aired December 01, 2025 - 13:00   ET

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

[13:00:02]

MANU RAJU, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: He said, I don't know. He didn't really know at first, because of the way he -- this is being delivered.

ELI STOKOLS, WHITE HOUSE REPORTER, POLITICO: It's all -- your -- I think your point about this being underplayed or under -- it's hard to focus on all these things at once.

RAJU: Yes.

STOKOLS: But we are seeing this pattern of leniency toward either people that the president knows or crimes that the president thinks the prosecution of what -- he just tends to think that white-collar crimes are not really crimes or that these people are -- the sentences are too much.

So we are seeing this pattern of the president sort of politicizing the Justice Department and really overusing the pardon power compared to his predecessors at this point in his term.

DANA BASH, CNN HOST: All right, thank you all. Appreciate it.

Thank you for watching INSIDE POLITICS.

"CNN NEWS CENTRAL" starts right now.

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: All eyes on the Oval Office, a pivotal meeting scheduled there just hours from now, the president set to sit down with key members of his team as the pressure on Venezuela ramps up and questions mount over whether lethal strikes on alleged drug boats violated laws of war.

And what exactly was in Luigi Mangione's backpack? Lawyers for the man accused of killing the UnitedHealthcare CEO are trying to get key evidence tossed from his state murder case. They say police illegally searched that bag. We're following developments in court.

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: And bah humbug. Americans spent more but got less on Black Friday. What the numbers are telling us about the state of the economy as holiday shopping kicks into high gear.

We're following these major developing stories and many more all coming in right here to CNN NEWS CENTRAL. SANCHEZ: Happening right now: The Trump administration is facing

bipartisan scrutiny over a deadly military strike on an alleged drug boat in the Caribbean, some members of Congress saying it could be a war crime.

Sources tell CNN the September 2 attack did not initially kill everyone on board. "The Washington Post" is reporting that two survivors were clinging to the smoldering wreck, when the U.S. military circled back with a second strike, killing all 11 people on board.

One of the sources told CNN that defense Secretary Pete Hegseth ordered the military to kill everyone on board, though it's unclear whether he knew there were survivors before that second strike. President Trump is now defending his Pentagon.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Number one, I don't know that that happened. And Pete said he did not want them. He didn't even know what people were talking about.

So we will look into it. But, no, I wouldn't have wanted that, not a second strike. The first strike was very lethal. It was fine. And if there were two people around -- but Pete said that didn't happen.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: Secretary Hegseth will be one of several top officials meeting with the president in the Oval Office later today. Sources say that meeting will cover potential next steps for Venezuela.

Let's go to CNN's Alayna Treene, who's live for us at the White House.

Alayna, a briefing said to be under way in just moments. What are you hearing about the meeting that's set to take place later this afternoon?

ALAYNA TREENE, CNN WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Yes, Boris, so our sources told our colleague Natasha Bertrand and I that the meeting is expected to be in the Oval Office at 5:00 p.m. It's going to be with top Cabinet officials, as well as national security officials, on next steps regarding Venezuela.

Now, some of the people that are expected to go include Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, but also the Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman, General Caine, also Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Susie Wiles, the White House chief of staff, as well as the deputy chief of staff, Stephen Miller.

But all of this comes as we know that the United States has really been ramping up pressure on Venezuela, not only with those boat strikes that they have been carrying out over the last several months, but also this discussion that the president himself has been saying would come very soon, potentially on land. Now, it also comes, of course, as there's a lot of scrutiny over those

lethal strikes ordered by Hegseth -- or that's what we're hearing in our reporting Who ordered them? Key questions that we will be asking in the briefing.

But a second strike on that Venezuela boat off the coast of Venezuela back in September, a lot of questions over why it was ordered. We hear bipartisan pushback on Capitol Hill, saying they want to look into it. So, those are going to be some of the key questions as well, particularly, I'm sure, that are addressed later in that meeting.

But also in this briefing that is expected to kick off shortly, and all of it comes as we know that dozens of warships as well as 15,000 troops have been amassing in the region ahead of what the president said could be strikes very soon, so a lot of questions over that.

And, Boris, I would remind you as well that one thing we still need answers on is what exactly was discussed in that phone call between the president and Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro. The president confirmed that call happened, but we have not yet gotten details on whether diplomacy is potentially still an option here.

[13:05:03]

So, a lot to consider as this briefing is soon to kick off, but then also as they head into that meeting in the Oval Office at 5:00 p.m.

SANCHEZ: Alayna Treene live for us at the White House, thank you so much -- Brianna.

KEILAR: This double tap strike could also give us some more context around the sudden retirement of two Pentagon officials in October, both of whom had expressed concern internally about the overall operation in the Caribbean.

Back on October 16, we were told that Admiral Alvin Holsey, the commander overseeing U.S. forces in the Caribbean, was retiring just one year into his tenure. It's a highly unusual timeline to do that. CNN reported at the time that tensions had long been simmering between Holsey and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth because of U.S. military action there in the Caribbean.

And, according to sources, SOUTHCOM was -- quote -- "concerned" about the operations not being lawful. A couple weeks later, at the end of October, CNN reported that a three-star general serving on the Pentagon's Joint Staff had been pushed out earlier in the month after sustained tension with Secretary Hegseth.

According to sources, Lieutenant General Joe McGee had frequently pushed back against Hegseth on a range of issues, including U.S. military action in the Caribbean.

We're joined now by retired Army Brigadier General Mark Kimmitt. He served as assistant secretary of state for political and military affairs during President George W. Bush's administration here. And I wonder, General. We're listening to the president saying,

Hegseth says that didn't happen. You hear the reporting. What kind of questions do you have right now about this?

BRIG. GEN. MARK KIMMITT (RET.), FORMER U.S. CENTRAL COMMAND DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR PLANS AND STRATEGY: Well, first of all, I have got questions about what the facts truly are. And that's what the investigations, I would hope, will reveal.

But, clearly, American soldiers, American servicemen don't kill noncombatants. They don't torture prisoners. They don't kill prisoners. That's taught in day two of basic training. So I think we need to really understand what was said, when it was said, and who said it.

I would suspect that, given what we are hearing about -- in the media and seeing in the media, I'm surprised that a number of people have not come out, if true, and resigned. So I think there's a lot of confusion. There's a lot of perhaps intentional bending of the facts.

So let's see what the investigations really reveal.

KEILAR: Given what we're learning about this strike in September, how are you seeing -- you talk about people resigning. How are you seeing these early exits of these top officers?

KIMMITT: Well, again, I don't think they're connected to unlawful orders or failure to abide by legal orders that they didn't agree with.

I think it's probably the latter, because look, all of these people are surrounded by their own lawyers. And while we have individuals walking away from the job, I would expect their lawyers to be going down with the boat as well if they are being asked to do a legal review of an unlawful order.

KEILAR: So you're saying that you expect these early exits, which are perceived as ousters, to have been because they disagreed with legal orders, not because they believed orders were illegal and they couldn't carry them out?

KIMMITT: It may not have even been the orders. It may have been the general policy.

Look, we have seen that people have differences of opinion with the secretary of defense. That may be an understatement. And it is the responsibility of any commander that can't abide by the policy of the secretary of defense, they have the moral responsibility to resign.

I think that's separate from lawful versus unlawful orders. Putting it simply, the SOUTHCOM commander probably just got tired of taking crap from Hegseth, in his words. But we will see. But I don't think it had to do with lawful versus unlawful orders.

KEILAR: As described -- pardon me -- as reported, this idea of striking a boat and just the striking of these boats themselves, there are legal experts who worked in this domain who are raising questions, right, about whether this is legal.

But let's talk about this specific strike as reported in September.

KIMMITT: Sure.

KEILAR: A strike on the boat, killing many people on the boat, two left hanging onto the wreckage of the boat, as reported, another strike on that and on those two people, killing them.

Talk us through what the problem would be with something like that, and how clearly would it be a problem to someone carrying that out?

KIMMITT: Well, first of all, the notion of reattacking a target because it had not been destroyed is common in ground combat, air combat, naval combat. That's part of the assessment process after a strike.

[13:10:11]

What would concern me, if in fact it is true that we had two people on that boat who were hanging onto the side, because, under any definition of the word of war, they would not be considered a threat, nor would they be considered a combatant.

And, as I said from the outset, we don't kill noncombatants, we don't kill prisoners, and we don't torture prisoners. That's beyond the bound, and everybody knows that, which is why I want to see what the facts truly are, because a lot of this seems to be exploding in the media.

Let's let the Senate do an investigation. Let's let the lawyers do an investigation.

KEILAR: Because there is a circumstance where striking again would have been acceptable? What is that circumstance legally, in your experience?

KIMMITT: In terms of following up on a target that hasn't been destroyed, it's done all the time in the military. We have a process called the D4 cycle, decide, deduct, deliver, assess.

When you conduct an artillery campaign, when you conduct an air campaign, if you have been given a mission to destroy a target, and it's not destroyed, you attack again. Now, that's different if you see people standing outside that target with their hands up, because, at that point, you can't go back after that target.

KEILAR: Or if it's on fire and it's going to sink, right, in this case, would that change the calculus here?

KIMMITT: If the mission was to sink that ship, and it was not sunk, then there would be a legitimate reason for a re-attack against that to make sure it's sinks.

KEILAR: Brigadier General Mark Kimmitt, thank you very much for being with us. We appreciate it. And still to come: Luigi Mangione appearing in court as his attorneys

try to have key evidence tossed from his New York murder case. We will tell you what they don't want jurors to see.

Plus, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem revealing new details about the Afghan national accused of shooting two National Guard members in the heart of D.C., killing one, one still struggling for his life.

And then later: the FDA planning to change its vaccine approval process based on its claim that COVID-19 vaccines caused the deaths of 10 children.

We will have that and much more coming up on CNN NEWS CENTRAL.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:16:50]

SANCHEZ: Happening now: a high-stakes hearing for Luigi Mangione, the man accused in the targeted killing of health care CEO Brian Thompson nearly a year ago today.

Mangione's lawyers are trying to get a New York judge to toss some critical evidence that investigators allegedly obtained when they arrested him at a fast-food place in Western Pennsylvania days after the killing. Prosecutors say the items in Mangione's backpack that tie him to the killing include a handgun, a loaded magazine and a notebook with handwritten entries.

The defense, though, says that police took those items without a warrant.

Let's get some expert insight from criminal defense attorney Robert Bianchi, who's also a former homicide prosecutor.

Bob, thanks so much for being with us.

I wonder if you think Mangione's lawyers have a strong argument to make for this evidence to be tossed.

ROBERT BIANCHI, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Boris, I know that people tend to do like balls and strikes here in terms of where your ideology is, but I look at it as an attorney.

And from the beginning of this, I have been extremely concerned about the constitutionality of this search. Now, we don't know a lot of facts, but I have been on a lot of murder crime scenes where I see overanxious and understandably well-meaning police officers in a heightened situation.

They're not thinking it through. Maybe they're not in contact with their prosecutors or lawyers. And it's natural and instinct to just kind of open the bag and take a look-see to see what's inside. It happens all the time. And the defense is essentially saying here, the Constitution requires

that every search be done pursuant to a warrant, a judicial warrant, and there are some exceptions to that warrant requirement. And the defense is saying there are no exceptions here.

For example, if somebody consents to having the backpack looked into, then that's an exception to the warrant requirement. So I hope that I'm not going to hear that they just grabbed it. They were excited. They didn't have probable cause. They weren't in fear. They weren't in danger. He was secured and they just looked inside and then afterwards got the warrant.

In New York state law, that may be a problem. You have an easier chance under federal search and seizure law.

SANCHEZ: It sounds like you think that, if this evidence is tossed, the state is going to have a hard time finding him guilty.

BIANCHI: Wow, this is -- I mean, this would be a massive blow to the government. But, then again, let's keep in mind here, we have both state prosecutions and federal prosecutions. And what may be suppressed in state court, again, federal courts more accommodating the prosecutors.

But the evidence in that backpack, even though you don't need motive to prove a homicide case, shows premeditation. It's got the weapon. The weapon is connected to the victim in the case. It shows a cold, calculated, premeditated murder. It is the lock that any prosecutor wants.

Otherwise, they got to go without that evidence on a circumstantial case that's much weaker. In that case, it's going to be interesting to see, really, to be honest with you, Boris, when the law enforcement authorities get together, there's got to be a discussion. Is it better to prosecute them federally first or better to prosecute him statewide?

Now, if there's a suppression of the evidence in state court, you can bet the federal case is going to take precedence.

[13:20:03]

SANCHEZ: I also wonder about the other evidence his attorneys are trying to suppress. And it involves statements that he made while at that McDonald's in Western Pennsylvania. His attorneys are essentially arguing that officers didn't advise him of his Miranda rights the right way when they began questioning him.

How do you see that playing out?

BIANCHI: Not as crucial as the search and seizure, for sure, because that evidence in that backpack is the lock.

But, of course, if the prosecution wants to use his statements, Miranda requires that you, one, be in custody or the person would have reasonably believed they were not free to leave, that's element number one, and that they're asked a question.

So the issue in this case is going to be -- and we just don't know the facts yet -- was he in fact under the reasonable belief that he was not free to leave and was he asked a question without being given his Miranda warnings? And if that happens, then any statements that he made up until the time he gave his Miranda warnings is subject to being suppressed by the court.

But, again, in this particular case if I were a prosecutor and things were on the line, I'd rather lose on the Miranda side of the case and make sure I win on the search and seizure side, because that's where the case is going to be won by prosecutors, what's in that backpack.

SANCHEZ: Bob Bianchi, appreciate the analysis. Thanks so much for joining us.

Next: new data showing Black Friday shoppers paid more for less. Are the Cyber Monday deals any different?

Plus: a suspected gunman on the run after three kids were among those killed in a mass shooting at a California birthday party -- the details straight ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:26:16]

KEILAR: There's a new powerful storm that is hitting a big swathe of the U.S. on the heels of that weekend system that brought major snowfall to multiple states, the severe weather causing significant delays and cancellations at airports just as millions of Americans head home from the Thanksgiving holiday.

TSA says Sunday was the agency's busiest day in history, 3.1 million passengers screened.

CNN meteorologist Derek Van Dam is tracking this new storm threat.

All right, what are we looking at here, Derek? How bad is this?

DEREK VAN DAM, AMS METEOROLOGIST: Look, it's a large storm, Brianna, and it's getting its act together as we speak.

So what you're looking at behind me are the alerts, the winter weather alerts that span over 1,500 miles over 25 U.S. states. Over 70 million Americans will be impacted by this, but the devil in the detail, right? So you can see New York, Boston, and D.C. are not included within these alerts.

So we will try and break down all the hazards, but check this out. From Kansas all the way to Maine, that's where these alerts are. So, the storm starting to really become a formidable winter storm, gathering in some moisture from the Gulf, but also intersecting with a low pressure that's moving through Missouri right now.

So both of these are going to collide and create a nor'easter along the East Coast. We will call it a bomb cyclone because it's going to drop a certain amount of pressure in a certain amount of time, 24 millibars. So this is the previous storm from this holiday weekend, impeccable timing, right, with these winter storms lining up before the Thanksgiving rush, through the weekend, and then as everybody's trying to get home.

So let's time this out. Critical morning on Tuesday, tomorrow morning, not quite raining yet in New York or Boston, but D.C. certainly could be, but you had a little bit interior from there, interior New England. This is the area we're concerned about with potential for seven to 11 inches of snowfall, some of the Weather Service offices already upping the winter storm watch to a warning, especially for Western Maine, into Vermont, New Hampshire, as well as the Hudson Valley, the Poconos and the Berkshires, these areas.

Grab your skis, man, because we're talking about a foot of snow for some of these mountainous regions. But that critical changeover from snow to rain will likely occur before you reach the coastline, that I- 95 Corridor, just a cold, very damp, kind of a wintry mess of cold rain for the major metropolitans along the East Coast.

So here's a closer look, a lot of rain across the south, maybe an inch to two inches for Atlanta to Jackson. This will be rain again for this I-95 Corridor, but you don't have to travel too far. The Massachusetts turnpike could get dicey on Tuesday, as we travel right through Upstate New York.

This area could see six inches or more of snowfall, favoring the higher elevations. And speaking of the mountainous terrain, the southern tier of the storm has its own winter problems as well. The potential for a full-fledged ice storm exists across portions of Western Virginia, Western North Carolina, and even into portions of West Virginia.

This area where you see that shading of purple could see a quarter inch of ice accumulate, so that could take down tree limbs and power outages as well, so a multifaceted storm we're going to monitor here for the next 24 hours -- Brianna.

KEILAR: All right, we should definitely be on the lookout for that.

Derek, thank you very much.

And next: some new details about when and how the Afghan national accused of shooting two National Guard members was allegedly radicalized.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)