Return to Transcripts main page
CNN News Central
Madison Mills is Interviewed about the White House Economy Message; Joint Chiefs Lawyer Gives Guidance; Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) is Interviewed about the Epstein Documents; A.I. Chip Lifespan Raises Concerns; Democrats Hope for Tennessee Surprise. Aired 8:30-9a ET
Aired December 19, 2025 - 08:30 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[08:30:00]
KATE BOLDUAN, CNN ANCHOR: Tried to pitch and sell his economic message. This is a state, North Carolina, that he's won in three straight presidential elections and now becomes the backdrop for the latest stop on his affordability tour. One Trump adviser now telling CNN that the White House is, quote/unquote, "trying to keep him focused," and that they need to get the advantage back on affordability issues.
Here with us now, Madison Mills, senior markets reporter for "Axios."
And we just heard from the president Wednesday night in prime time talking about affordability. Reading from the teleprompter. And a lot of people described it as at times yelling at people as if he can't believe he has to convince them that things are better than they think, feel and see. So, what do you expect for tonight?
MADISON MILLS, SENIOR MARKETS REPORTER, "AXIOS": Well, it's interesting that you all have reporting that the White House is sort of trying to keep him on message, because this is his second stop in this affordability tour. He was first in Pennsylvania, focused on these congressional districts that are kind of up in the air heading into the midterms.
BOLDUAN: Right.
MILLS: And in Pennsylvania, he really kind of went on this rant about immigration, which is, to his credit, you know, that's an area where he's polling very well with voters. The economy, his polling numbers have really plummeted. So, kind of makes sense that he's gearing towards a message that he can kind of resonate with voters more on. But the issue that they have is this affordability crisis. And that's what the White House and President Trump specifically needs to convince voters that he's been able to move the needle on over the last year in office.
BOLDUAN: So, this is -- during the speech just even Wednesday night he was saying, like, inflation is done, prices are down, things -- we have entered the golden age. The only policy prescription that he talked about in that speech was this warrior dividend of offering a rebate and a check going out to 1.5 million members of the military. So, when it comes to the affordability issue, what are the solutions that the administration is pointing to or offering up now that's different than them just saying, we got this. We did it.
MILLS: Yes. Well, it's such a great point that you bring up the Warrior Dividend because what's been fascinating in my reporting this week is looking back on other administrations that have offered dividends or stimulus checks.
BOLDUAN: Stimulus.
MILLS: It doesn't tend to work out with voters as well as you might think, because it's kind of a one-time band-aid and it actually can fuel even more inflation. And this goes back to like we typically see Washington dealing with the supply side of supply and demand issues and -- or the demand side, rather. And that doesn't tend to work. It doesn't make prices lower in the long term. And we see that playing out in the polling. Consumers don't tend to feel better about the economy because you give them a one-time band-aid. They want to know prices are really coming down. That's something that Trump said he had already accomplished in his speech. But as we know, that actually has not happened yet. And it's really difficult to get companies to lower prices once they know they've got consumers paying them money.
BOLDUAN: That's a great point. And when they're dealing with an unpredictable tariff policy that is impacting every aspect of their business.
MILLS: Yes.
BOLDUAN: What's coming in and what's going -- what's going out.
They -- there was good news yesterday when it came to inflation with the CPI report. We're showing the slower rate of inflation. Housing costs were up by the smallest margin in four years. Food costs rose by the least since February. But to your point, Madison, when it comes down to it, you see this. How much can a White House, any president, actually control prices?
MILLS: Well, it's incredibly difficult because this is really about companies. And it's not just companies like throwing it out there and saying, OK, let's charge people as much as possible.
BOLDUAN: Right.
MILLS: It's like, their supply chain costs, tariffs making their supplies more expensive and goods and services more expensive. There are so many dynamics that go into it.
And again, we continue to see the White House kind of tackling the demand side, saying, OK, well, let's get people to buy more houses by offering 50 year mortgages. But that doesn't make houses less expensive. So, that's a really important kind of disconnect there.
And it's also interesting on the inflation data that you all just had up. A source on Wall Street has been saying this week, don't just take that with a grain of salt, take it with the entire salt shaker because --
BOLDUAN: Is that because of the government shutdown.
MILLS: Yes.
BOLDUAN: It's like a bunch of -- you said it's going to be really backward looking, right?
MILLS: Yes. Yes, exactly. It's really backward looking. And also there are just a lot of questions about how the data was gathered because of the government being shut down for so long.
BOLDUAN: Yes.
MILLS: So, it looks like it was cool. But, like, we don't really know. So, it's very difficult to get a sense of where we're at with inflation.
BOLDUAN: Which gets to, like, it comes down -- if you're looking at like consumer confidence and how people are feeling about the economy, all of this, which just feels like -- there's like a little bit here and a little bit here. I don't know. Do we trust it? Can we trust it? It doesn't -- it doesn't help, right?
MILLS: Yes.
BOLDUAN: Like, it doesn't help people feel better about their personal economy.
MILLS: A hundred percent.
BOLDUAN: It's great to see you, Madison. Thanks for coming in.
MILLS: Thanks.
BOLDUAN: All right, we do also now have new CNN exclusive reporting today. Sources telling CNN, the top lawyer for the Joint Chiefs of Staff offering this guidance to the country's top general. If a commander determines that they have received an unlawful order, they should really consider retiring, requesting to retire, not resigning in protest. This comes on the heels of the video we know put out by a handful of Democratic lawmakers last month, publicly reminding and urging U.S. troops to disobey illegal orders.
[08:35:07]
The backdrop, of course, the growing questions about the legality of the U.S. military's strikes targeting suspected alleged drug trafficking boats off of the coast of Venezuela. And, just this morning, President Trump tells NBC in a new interview, says this about the possibility of war with Venezuela. Here's the quote, "I don't rule it out, no."
CNN's Natasha Bertrand has new reporting on all this, joining us now.
There seems to be a lot going on today in this space, Natasha, on this reporting you have about the advice that the Joint Chiefs chairman is getting on what commanders should do. What are you learning?
NATASHA BERTRAND, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Kate.
So, we thought this was really interesting. Essentially what happened was, back in November, those six Democratic lawmakers, of course, they released that video urging troops to disobey illegal orders, essentially reminding them of their duty to do so.
Well, at the time, General Caine, who's the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, he was curious about what the latest legal guidance is on how an order is determined to be lawful or unlawful, and what a commander or senior officer should do if they believe that an order is, in fact, unlawful. So, what happened was, his personal counsel, his -- the chairman's lawyer, who is Brigadier General Eric Widmar, he provided him with this guidance that essentially said, if an order is deemed to be unlawful or determined by a particular officer to be unlawful, then they should, of course, seek additional guidance. They should talk to their lawyers about it. But ultimately, they should consider resigning -- or not resigning, but retiring, requesting retirement. Because resigning in protest of a possible illegal order, that could be seen as a political act.
And so I think that this really sheds light on how the senior levels of the military are thinking about this issue. General Caine, obviously, he's not in the chain of command, but he is deeply involved in operations. He is deeply involved in recommending military options to the president. And so, this guidance was really meant to inform his conversations with other senior military officials. But it's also given current and former officials that we have spoken to, and legal experts, some heartburn because they say that if you are simply encouraging people to retire quietly instead of trying to report an illegal order, for example, up the chain of command, or trying to dissent against an illegal order, then that could really help people evade accountability and perpetuate a culture of silence.
One former senior defense official told us, quote, "a commissioned officer has every right to say, 'this is wrong,' and shouldn't be expected to quietly and silently walk away just because they're given a free pass to do so."
Now, we should also note that this is kind of consistent with what Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth has told officers to do if they do not agree with the direction of the military. In September he told a room full of generals and flag officers, quote, if they do not agree with the direction of the Pentagon under his direction, then they should, quote, do the honorable thing and resign.
But, obviously, disagreeing with the direction of the military, very different than viewing an order as patently illegal.
Kate.
BOLDUAN: Great point and great reporting, Natasha. Thank you so much for doing that for us. Really appreciate it.
John. JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: All right, we are standing by for the release
of the Epstein files. By law, the Justice Department is required to release these documents by midnight tonight. Although they are allowed to have some redactions and there are some exceptions.
With us now is Senator Richard Blumenthal, a Democrat from Connecticut.
Senator, great to see you this morning.
What's your expectation for how much will be released by 11:59 p.m. tonight? And what are you looking for first?
SEN. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL (D-CT): My expectation is that there will be something released because absolute, complete defiance of a law that had unanimous approval from the United States Congress is unlikely on the part of the Department of Justice. But what I do expect is very heavy deletions and redactions. In other words, removal of key material. There will be a lot of blanks and dark spaces. And so, we're going to have to scour this submission furiously and immediately with the help of the survivors.
Remember, the reason that were seeing any of this material is because the survivors were so courageous and steadfast, and they have, in effect, a roadmap for a lot of what the Justice Department should provide and probably will conceal because the through line in this administration, when it comes to sensitive issues, like the Epstein files and possible links to Donald Trump, has been hiding and concealment, whether it's this Epstein file, which Trump resisted providing from the start and then reversed himself when he saw the inevitable coming, or the Venezuelan boat strikes.
[08:40:12]
So, we're going to have to be on guard and working literally round the clock as soon as we get any of these materials.
BERMAN: Our MJ Lee is reporting in regards to what House Democrats are doing on the Oversight Committee, releasing some of the information that's been handed over to them by the Epstein estate in kind of a piecemeal, drip, drip, drip, selective fashion. MJ's reporting is that some of the survivors are actually a little bit upset by this, saying they're traumatized by the partial, selective nature of it. What do you say to that?
BLUMENTHAL: I say the survivors well-being comes first. And I can well understand the heartbreak and pain felt by them in these dribs and drabs of piecemeal released material, which is why we should insist on full, complete disclosure at once by the Department of Justice. If we're forcing them to come clean with the American people, who deserve to see this material, it will be a disservice to those survivors.
But I'm hopeful, John, that there will be bipartisan insistence on full disclosure, because remember that there has been bipartisan support, very strong, vehement, consistent, over time for full disclosure. BERMAN: Senator, in the wake of the anti-Semitic attack in Australia
on Bondi Beach, killing people at a Hanukkah celebration, you're provide -- you're proposing increased funding for hate crime prevention. What's your proposal going to do in concrete terms?
BLUMENTHAL: The tragedy in Australia reflects a worldwide rise in extremist ideology, hate-based violence and anti-Semitism. And we need to counter it, not just in rhetoric, but in real action. And that's why I'm proposing $1 billion for three existing programs that I have helped to lead, namely the Community Relations Service, which needs to be reconstituted, the Jabara-Heyer NO HATE Act, passed with unanimous support, and perhaps most importantly and prominently, the Nonprofit Security Grant Program, which provides for the physical security of synagogues, mosques and churches in this holiday time. Particularly important, as well as training and staff, physical enhancements for those institutions and protection of minority communities.
And we also need to support local law enforcement. They often lack the resources to have special units to counter hate crimes. Prevention is so important. And the initial leads that might have been detected in the Bondi Beach hideous travesty and tragedy, I think, have to be pursued by local police and the FBI. We need to give them the resources and the tools to do it.
BERMAN: Senator, you're a Democrat. I don't need to tell you that in 2024 the Democrats didn't do well. They lost the presidential election. They didn't do particularly well with congressional races either.
The Democratic National Committee did this so-called autopsy to figure out what went wrong and ordered this big report that was going to be made public. But just yesterday, the chair of the DNC basically decided not to go public with this release. Jon Favreau, who used to be a speechwriter for President Obama, now is on "Pod Save America." He tweeted, "unreal. The DNC's actual position that if the public knew more about what Democrats got wrong in the last election, it would hurt the party's chances in the next election."
Isn't part of fixing what went wrong, knowing what went wrong in the public?
BLUMENTHAL: I'm always in favor of transparency, John, and greater knowledge about mistakes that may have been made. Frankly, my focus is on the future. I think we know what we have to do to win in 2026, including, by the way, making public more about what the president is doing in that Venezuelan strike. That opinion that was mentioned earlier in your show seems absolutely irresponsible. The legal opinion to the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff that people should retire rather than raise illegalities, which is their responsibility to do as general officers or even privates. That legal opinion should be made public. So should everything relating to the boat strikes.
I've seen that video. America would be shocked and sickened by it. And I think, going forward, our focus in 2026 has to be on everything that the Trump administration is doing wrong, whether it's on affordability or concealment, the Epstein files. [08:45:03]
I think that looking backward sometimes is helpful. I'd like to see the so-called autopsy, but I think what we have to have as our focus is going forward strengthening and fighting for more seats in 2026.
BERMAN: Senator Richard Blumenthal, from Connecticut, thank you so much for being with us this morning.
Kate.
BOLDUAN: One of the big questions hanging over big tech right now is, how long will this massive A.I. spending spree go on? Tech giants pouring hundreds of billions of dollars into data centers, and those chips that power artificial intelligence. But now some are questioning how quickly those chips wear out, whether A.I. will deliver a return on investment fast enough to make it all worth it. The fear being this could be -- you could be looking at early warning signs of an A.I. bubble.
CNN's Clare Duffy joins me now.
This seems to be the eternal fear is like, is this an A.I. -- is the -- is this an A.I. bubble? What are you -- what's your new reporting?
CLARE DUFFY, CNN TECH REPORTER: Yes. So, there are these questions about the lifespan of these chips. And why that's important is because experts tell me that the GPUs, these chips that run A.I. data centers, don't last as long as the CPUs in traditional data centers. So, GPUs are expected to wear out at a rate of about nine percent per year, versus CPUs, five percent per year. And that's in part because A.I. training is a really intensive process. It puts a lot of heat and strain on these chips. But it's also because the chip makers themselves are innovating so quickly and they're making their chips more power efficient with each generation. So, even if your chip can last five or six years, it might not be economical to keep it for more than two or three years before buying the next generation.
And all this speaks to a situation where we've heard about the $400 billion that these tech companies are spending this year alone on A.I. infrastructure. This is not going to be a one-time spending spree and then it's all going to be built. They're going to have to keep upgrading to the latest generation of chips, spending more money. And the question is, how quickly and how often are they going to have to do that, and will we see returns on this A.I. investment quickly enough and large enough to make up for, not just the investment they're currently making, but those future investments in new chips that they're going to have to make down the road.
And if the chips live six years, they have more time to figure that business model out.
BOLDUAN: Right.
DUFFY: But if they only live 18 years to two months, as some -- two years, I should say, as some experts told me, then there's a lot more pressure on these companies to figure out what is the business model for A.I. at a time when, as we've reported this year, we've heard that companies that are trying to roll out A.I. pilots aren't actually seeing it benefit their bottom line.
So, as one expert told me, the extent to which this buildout is a bubble depends in large part on the lifespan of these chips, because it tells you how much time these companies have to figure out their business model.
BOLDUAN: A lot of questions still lingering out there. It's a fascinating little peek into it, though.
It's great to see you, Clare. Thank you so much.
DUFFY: Thank you.
BOLDUAN: John.
BERMAN: All right, this was the video that everyone had so much fun with. Maybe too much fun. The viral "kiss cam" moment from a Coldplay concert. Now the woman in the video is speaking, telling her side of the story. And honestly, it's well worth reading.
And, quote, we're not tasing the raccoon. The story of a raccoon who fell out of the ceiling at a restaurant, bit someone, and the chaos that ensued.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But if we tase him, like --
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We're not tasing him.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Knock him out enough to be able to --
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We're not tasing the raccoon. We cannot tase a raccoon.
If we tase him, were not tasing it. Knock him out enough to not take the record. We cannot taser raccoon.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[08:52:27]
BERMAN: All right, this morning we are hearing for the first time from the woman who was on the jumbotron with her boss at a Coldplay concert. The video of Kristin Cabot with her boss went viral earlier this year, receiving more than 100 million views. In a new interview with "The New York Times," Cabot opened up and talked about her side of the story. She told "The Times" she was not in a sexual relationship with her boss before that night. They had never even kissed. She said, quote, "it's not nothing. And I took accountability and I gave up my career for that. That's the price I chose to pay. I want my kids to know that you can make mistakes and you can really screw up, but you don't have to be threatened to be killed for them." She also said she wants her children to know that it's OK to make mistakes. You should go read the full article here. It's really worth knowing what she has to say.
Three children fell into a frozen lake in southern New Jersey after the ice they were walking over collapsed. One boy got out of lake on his own. First responders threw a rope to rescue the two girls stuck in the chest-deep water. All three kids were hospitalized as a precaution, but they're expected to be just fine.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But if we tase him, like --
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We're not tasing him.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Knock him out enough to be able to --
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We're not tasking the raccoon. We cannot tase a raccoon.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BERMAN: All right, not what you want to expect -- what you expect to hear when you're having dinner. But a raccoon found its way into the ceiling of a Wisconsin restaurant, above the people eating there. Officials say the raccoon fell and then bit a guest who tried to catch it. Wildlife control and firefighters arrived on scene, and one fire managed -- firefighters managed to contain the animal under a trash can.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
: I -- if this (EXPLETIVE DELETED) comes on, he's coming at me. I know it.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, let's --
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What's our game plan if this thing starts attacking us?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You guys are welcome to leave if you want. I'll stay in the room with it.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He's getting out.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Coming out. Coming out.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He's getting out.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I need the catch poll.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BERMAN: All right, we want to give you full disclosure here. Warning, this doesn't have a happy ending. Officials say because the raccoon bit someone it was taken to a veterinary clinic to be euthanized.
Kate.
BOLDUAN: So, in deep red Tennessee, a flicker of blue hope maybe is catching fire after a special House election narrowed a once wide Republican margin. Democrats around Nashville appear energized.
CNN's John King takes you into the long-shot fight that could reshape the 2026 midterms.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
JOHN KING, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice over): Music city, Nashville, Tennessee.
[08:55:00]
Yes, a place where stars are born, but also a place where dreams can be crushed.
Just ask a local Democrat.
MEGAN SCHWAIM, TENNESSEE VOTER: While there are moments of hope, for me there are often overwhelming moments of hopelessness as well.
KING (voice over): Yet there's more than coffee brewing here. A new vibe at the liberal ladies social group Megan Schwaim started three years ago. More members and a more ambitious conversation.
SCHWAIM: A caregiver tax credit. So that I'm really excited about.
KING (voice over): Local school board fights brought most of these women here. Now they're excited about 2026 midterm House races where Democrats normally wouldn't have a prayer.
SCHWAIM: When you're here, it's very clear you're in the Bible belt. Beliefs are very different from beliefs in Nashville. And politically it's very different going from Nashville to here.
KING (voice over): This is Mount Juliet, a Nashville suburb in the Fifth Congressional District. Early this month there was a special election in the neighboring Seventh District. Democrat Aftyn Behn lost by nine points. But a year earlier, the Republican won by 22.
SCHWAIM: I mean, the numbers are the numbers. And, you know, if we can keep closing that gap, that's incredible. But gerrymandering makes it nearly impossible to win.
KING: (INAUDIBLE).
SCHWAIM: At least closing the gap does provide a little more hope for what things might look like in the next election, right?
KING (voice over): There's chatter maybe a moderate would have run even stronger, but no one here sees it that way.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We've been running moderate. It doesn't work. And she built that momentum.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And that hasn't gotten us anywhere yet.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We don't want liberal lite anymore. We want an actual liberal.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We want (INAUDIBLE). The reality --
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I think if they try and run someone more moderate and they lose that progressive vote that they would have gotten with her, they're fooling themselves.
KING (voice over): Everyone here lives within an hour of Nashville, but they are now sprinkled across three congressional districts.
KING: The old Fifth Congressional District included all of Nashville and was reliably blue, represented by a Democrat from 1875 to 2023. That's 148 years. But Tennessee Republicans redrew the lines before the 2022 elections, carving Nashville into three congressional districts that stretch from the city, out to the suburbs, well out into rural Tennessee. And they are reliably red. President Trump, for example, in 2024, carried the Fifth Congressional District by 18 points. The sixth by 35. And here in the seventh, where we are right now, by 22 points, despite getting trounced in Nashville.
CYNDI CORTES, TENNESSEE VOTER: One hot, one ice.
KING (voice over): Cyndi Cortes and her husband own the coffee shop where the liberal ladies meet. They moved from Nashville to Mount Juliet two years ago and are Trump supporters.
LUIS CORTES, MOUNT JULIET, TENNESSEE, RESIDENT: There's something that in these kind of suburbia, Nashville, that we really hold dear, and that's our love for God at first, and then our love for family, and then our love for country.
KING (voice over): Luis Cortes cannot vote. His parents crossed illegally from Mexico when he was a child. They were deported when Luis was 17. He was allowed to stay.
L. CORTES: I'm a DACA recipient, right. I was part of the program that President Obama started with the DACA.
KING (voice over): Luis has permanent resident status now and hopes to one day become a citizen.
C. CORTES: Is your daughter graduating yet?
KING (voice over): Cyndi voted for Obama, then Hillary Clinton. But Trump in 2020 and 2024 because she says being a parent and owning a business have made her more conservative.
Tariffs on coffee and paper goods hurt their bottom line. But they say Trump deserves more time for things to settle. Both like the president's crackdown on illegal crossings, but aggressive deportation roundups give them pause. C. CORTES: The means at which we're getting there is difficult. It's
not comfortable to watch. And it's definitely affected Latin American communities.
KING (voice over): Cyndi's 2026 thinking is important. She voted for Republican Andy Ogles in 2024, but hopes he loses in the GOP primary next year.
C. CORTES: I can't put a vote for a candidate that I just don't feel just embodies the values that matter to us. And a strong character and honest, you know, honest character is important.
KING (voice over): And if Ogles wins the primary.
C. CORTES: I'm not opposed to voting for a Democratic candidate.
KING (voice over): Parnassus Books is in the Fifth District slice of Nashville. Lisa Quigley lives a few miles away in the Seventh District's piece of the city. She was chief of staff to the last Democrat to represent Nashville when it was all one district. He was a centrist, and Quigley's experience tells her moderates have a better shot in the suburbs and the rural counties. But the surge of energy among progressives in the special election was eye-opening.
LISA QUIGLEY, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: And when they turned to see who our nominee was, it was somebody who was fighting, who was talking about affordability, who was very aggressive. And voters here like that.
KING (voice over): Quigley says the new Democratic energy here is real and predicts crowded primaries for the House seats. Yes, that just about guarantees tension between Democratic liberals and moderates. But Quigley believes at least two of the three house seats can be competitive.
KING: You think there's something in the water?
[09:00:00]
QUIGLEY: There's something happening. There's something happening. And so, as long as we are smart enough to put our best players on the field, I think we're going to be able to take advantage of that. And I think that next November
