Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

U.S. Official Denies Involvement in Iran Gas Field Attacks; Top Intel Officials Testify in Senate on Worldwide Threats; Mullin: Calling Alex Pretti "Deranged Individual" was a Mistake; Fed Holds Interest Rates Steady & Projects One Rate Cut This Year; Powell Says He Won't Leave Fed Until DOJ Probe Over 3-3:30p ET

Aired March 18, 2026 - 15:00   ET

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

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: ... we honor the voices of those who feel unheard and who report sexual misconduct." Today, the Cesar Chavez Foundation says it's, quote, "Working with leaders in the farm worker movement to be responsive to these allegations, support the people who may have been harmed by his actions, and ensure we are united and guided by our commitment to justice and community empowerment.

A new hour of CNN NEWS CENTRAL starts right now.

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: President Trump's top intel officials in the hot seat as lawmakers demand answers on the decision to go to war with Iran.

Plus, the Federal Reserve decides to hold interest rates steady. Could potential rate cuts later this year also be in jeopardy because of the economic fallout from the war with Iran?

And three American teenagers are now suing Elon Musk's A.I. company, Grok. The teens arguing their images were used to create deepfake sexual content of minors. We'll speak to the attorneys representing them in the case. We're following these major developing stories and many more, all coming in right here to CNN NEWS CENTRAL.

We do start with the breaking news in the Middle East, a U.S. official denying that it was the U.S. who attacked Iran's critical oil and gas facilities, saying that was actually an attack carried out by Israel. If confirmed, though, this would mark the first strikes on the Iranian energy production in this war. Iran's Revolutionary Guard is now warning of powerful action in retaliation.

In the meantime, Israel says one of its strikes in Tehran killed Iran's intelligence minister. The latest attack by Israel on Iran's senior leadership. And U.S. Central Command announced that it has started dropping 5,000-pound bombs to neutralize -- to try to neutralize Iran's missile sites along the Strait of Hormuz. CNN's Jeremy Diamond is tracking all of the latest from Tel Aviv.

Jeremy, some Arab Gulf states say that these attacks on Iran's energy infrastructure are threatening global security and regional stability. What more the U.S. and Israel saying about the strikes?

JEREMY DIAMOND, CNN JERUSALEM CORRESPONDENT: Well, neither the United States nor Israel have officially commented on the record about these strikes, but a U.S. official is telling us that the United States was not involved in these attacks, but was aware of Israeli strikes taking place. And Israeli sources are also saying that this was -- these were Israeli attacks, although one Israeli source indicated some level of coordination with the United States.

The bottom line is that it seems like Israel certainly was the responsible party in carrying out these strikes, which were some of the most significant strikes we've seen on Iranian energy infrastructure since the start of this war. And as you mentioned, it has drawn quite a response from not only Iran, which has indicated that this is crossing a red line, but also from the Qataris, who shared one of these offshore oil facilities with the Iranians and called this a dangerous move.

And they have more reason to be upset now and to -- to respond, because we've just learned from the Qataris that one of their oil facilities has now been targeted by Iran in a missile attack. This is the Ras Laffan Industrial City, where the Qataris say that multiple fires are ablaze right now and serious damage to the facility has been done due to an Iranian attack.

And this is exactly why the Qataris were concerned earlier in the day, because of the fear that Iran would retaliate not just against Israel, but also against the energy infrastructure assets in the region, particularly of countries that host U.S. military bases, such as Qatar, which hosts the largest U.S. air base in the Middle East. Of course, in addition to all of that, we did see as overnight Iran carried out a ballistic missile attack on Tel Aviv. Two people were killed in that attack that appears to be due, once again, to Iran's use of these cluster munitions, which are an indiscriminate weapon. Their use in over-residential areas considered to be a violation of international law.

And today, again, we saw several more impacts. The other thing that we're watching is more attacks from Hezbollah. We've seen multiple rocket attacks from Hezbollah over the course of the last couple of hours aimed at northern Israel, as this conflict is continuing to heat up, Brianna, rather than any kind of diplomatic off-ramp presenting itself.

KEILAR: All right, Jeremy Diamond, thank you so much for the latest from the region. Boris?

SANCHEZ: With the war in Iran raging today, the top U.S. intelligence officials testified on Capitol Hill giving their annual worldwide threat assessment. Senators grilled them over what led to President Trump's decision to strike Iran, while also questioning if he was fully aware of the impact a war would have on the Strait of Hormuz. Here is how the DNI, Tulsi Gabbard, responded.

[15:05:00]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TULSI GABBARD, DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE: I think the Director Ratcliffe made the point here is that this has long been an assessment of the IC that Iran would likely hold the Strait of Hormuz as leverage.

SEN. ANGUS KING (D-ME): My question is, was that communicated to the President in the lead-up to this action?

GABBARD: And -- and it's because of that long-standing assessment that the IC has continued to report that the Department of War took the preemptive planning measures that it did.

KING: Well, they've stated that they did not plan for the Strait of Hormuz.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: CNN's Zach Cohen was listening in on this hearing. And Zach, intelligence officials seem to contradict some of the President's biggest claims about the war.

ZACHARY COHEN, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL SECURITY REPORTER: Yes, Boris, Gabbard and the other top intelligence officials who were testifying today were repeatedly pressed to explain why is the U.S. now at war with Iran, and really had clarity around the Trump administration's evolving explanations and justifications for initiating this conflict.

And Gabbard in particular was under a microscope, because just one day before this hearing, her former top aide, Joe Kent, resigning in protest over the administration's decision to launch this conflict, saying that he did not believe that Iran posed an imminent threat to the United States. And that really is at the core of the Trump administration's justification for starting these joint military operations along with Israel, that Iran posed an imminent threat to the U.S. and U.S. assets around the world.

Gabbard was pressed repeatedly by lawmakers to say, does she agree, and does the Intelligence Community agree with that assessment? And in one notable exchange with Senator Jon Ossoff. Take a listen to what she said in response to those questions.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. JON OSSOFF (D-GA): Was it the Intelligence Community's assessment that nevertheless, despite this obliteration, there was a, quote, "imminent nuclear threat posed by the Iranian regime," yes or no?

GABBARD: It is not the Intelligence Community's responsibility to determine what is and is not an imminent threat.

OSSOFF: Okay. Here's -- here's problem ...

GABBARD: That is up to the President based on a volume of information ...

OSSOFF: ... no, it is -- it is precisely ...

GABBARD: ... that he receives. OSSOFF: ... it is precisely your responsibility to determine what

constitutes a threat to the United States. This is the worldwide threats hearing where, as you noted in your opening testimony, quote, you represent the IC's assessment of threats.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COHEN: So, Ossoff is referring there to a piece of Gabbard's written testimony that she did not deliver when she was speaking during her turn at the opening of the hearing, where she wrote that Iran's nuclear enrichment capability was obliterated during those U.S. strikes last year. Donald Trump has since send -- or said that this conflict is necessary because Iran is close to developing a nuclear weapon.

And, of course, on the question of imminent, that may seem like a subjective timeline, but Gabbard herself in a tweet back in 2020 wrote, if you don't know when and you don't know where, that's not imminent. So, there's always a tweet, as you know, Boris.

SANCHEZ: There's always a tweet. She was asked about why she didn't read that part of her opening remarks by Virginia Senator Mark Warner. And she essentially said, I didn't have time.

COHEN: Ran out of time.

SANCHEZ: Yes. Zach Cohen, thank you so much for walking us through that.

Still to come inside the Federal Reserve's latest decision to hold interest rates in place amid economic uncertainty because of the war with Iran.

Plus, the President's nominee to replace Kristi Noem was in the hot seat today, being grilled by senators for hours. We have key takeaways from that hearing.

And later, Elon Musk's company, X A.I., facing a new lawsuit after sexual images of minors were allegedly created. The lawyers behind the lawsuit will join us live to discuss, that and much more coming your way on CNN News Central.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:12:58]

SANCHEZ: Today, President Trump's new pick for Homeland Security Secretary faced a fiery confirmation hearing on Capitol Hill, and at one point, Sen. Markwayne Mullin was confronted by Democratic senator, Gary Peters, over comments Mullin made about Alex Pretti, the ICU nurse who was shot and killed by federal agents in Minneapolis.

KEILAR: And shortly after Pretti's death, Mullin had described him as a, quote, "deranged individual." Here is Mullin earlier today.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) SEN. MARKWAYNE MULLIN (R-OK): Those words probably should have been retracted. I shouldn't have said that, as Secretary, I wouldn't. The investigation is ongoing, and there is, like I said, there are sometimes I'm going to make a mistake, and I'll own it. That one, I -- I went out there too fast. I was responding immediately, without the facts. That's my fault. That won't happen as Secretary.

SEN. GARY PETERS (D-MI): So, you -- you regret that statement?

MULLIN: I already said that. Yes, sir.

PETERS: Would you want to apologize to the family of Alex Pretti?

MULLIN: Well, sir, I just said I regret those statements.

PETERS: Is that the same as an apology?

MULLIN: I haven't seen the investigation. We'll let the investigation go through, and if I'm proven wrong, then I will absolutely.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: CNN's Priscilla Alvarez is with us now. And Priscilla, the senator spent a lot of the hearing trying to show that he would lead the department differently than Kristi Noem has.

PRISCILLA ALVAREZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, and there were some clear areas that came up over the course of questioning from lawmakers about that, and that included, for example, administrative warrants generally used by immigration officers, but they don't use that to go into private property. But, of course, that interpretation was changed under the tenure of Secretary Kristi Noem, and that earned backlash from Republicans and Democrats.

He said that he would not allow that to happen. He didn't foreclose it completely, saying that, you know, if -- if the person fled onto private property, that might change circumstances, but generally providing a different answer than has been provided before by Homeland Security officials.

He also talked about contracts. Of course, the secretary came under fire over her handling of contracts, including particularly a threshold of a hundred thousand dollars that after that she would have to approve contracts personally, her argument being it was to cut waste and fraud.

[15:15:05]

But, of course, a hundred thousand dollars at the Department of Homeland Security, because the government overall, is like pennies. So that slowed down the contracting process. He said that he would get rid of that.

So, there was a push and pull over the course of the hearing. It was certainly tense because, of course, he's coming into a department that is shut down, a department that also has billions of dollars from a separate piece of legislation for immigration enforcement, and a department that multiple lawmakers made the point has lost public trust given, for example, what happened in Minneapolis and elsewhere.

And in one of the areas of trust that lawmakers touched on was elections, the forthcoming, for example, midterm elections, and whether ICE would be sent to polling locations. That's something that has come up in hearings with Kristi Noem before, and it also did today. Here's what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. ELISSA SLOTKIN (D-MI): If you are Secretary of Homeland Security. Do you feel you have the authority to put uniformed officers at polling locations in 2026?

MULLIN: Ma'am, we -- we said this in your office, the only reason why my officers would be there if there was a specific threat for them to be there, not for intimidation and I said we would be able to share that.

SLOTKIN: So, even though we didn't need it during World War II, we didn't need it during Vietnam or the war on terror, we never had to put uniformed military there. Now, you feel that there's going to be a reason that there's going to be an armed threat to the United States that you need to potentially be there?

MULLIN: No, ma'am, I said -- I can't sit there and guarantee hypothetically what threat would be and not.

SLOTKIN: If we ever get to the point where you are being asked to put armed ICE officers at polling locations, we have lost the plot as a country.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ALVAREZ: Now, if confirmed, you can expect that he is going to continue to face questions over how the department would handle elections. But top line here, the senator clearly trying to distinguish himself if he were to be confirmed as secretary, saying he'd owned up to mistakes, and also that he didn't want DHS to be the lead story in six months if he was confirmed. So. certainly a different approach to the department than has been the case under Kristi Noem.

SANCHEZ: You also have some new reporting, Priscilla, on the Trump administration's incentive program to get undocumented immigrants to leave the United States. What did you learn?

ALVAREZ: Yes. This is a program known as Project Homecoming. Recall the administration launched it last year. It includes a stipend for those returning to their home country, a free flight home, and all of this, or some of this at least, available through the CBP Home app. The administration has talked about it extensively. They've done multimillion-dollar ad campaigns, social media blitz.

But according to documents that my -- that I reviewed along with our colleague Audrey Ash, about 72,000 people have used this program. Now, it's part of a broader push that the administration credits to 2 million people self-deporting. It's unclear what metric they're using, though. And if we look only at this slice of self-deportations, which is to say those who have notified the government that they are departing the United States, that number comes out to be 72,000.

And what was also revealing here is that the majority of them are in Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention. And that matters here because, as I've talked to attorneys, many of these migrants can ultimately feel like they are either facing prolonged detention or they should just voluntarily depart.

Now, I should also note that voluntary departure, as it's known, has existed for years under multiple administrations for noncitizens who are trying to leave the United States and not face future penalties. So, this is an extension of that by the administration, but with financial incentives. And it is one that has included a $950 million contract for that exact purpose, which is why some experts are questioning the efficacy of a contract here when there are already voluntary departures, thousands of them, that have happened over the years. In this case now, questioning whether the argument about it saving the taxpayer money is true, again, because that is -- that is what the administration is saying here.

I do want to quote from a statement from the Department of Homeland Security where they said to us, quote, "DHS has been consistently clear that those who have used the CBP Home App and utilized Project Homecoming are but a fraction of those who have voluntarily left the country because illegal aliens know President Trump is enforcing our immigration laws.

Here at CNN, we've also talked to migrants who opted not to tell the government that they were leaving. I've also -- also talked to immigrants who didn't know about the program. So, it is possible that this group of people could be larger than 72,000, but if we're looking just at this nearly billion-dollar contract and how many people have used these programs. It comes out to 72,000, the majority already in detention.

KEILAR: All right, Priscilla, thank you so much for the great reporting. We appreciate it.

The Federal Reserve holds interest rates steady for the second time this year but notes that investors and policymakers are bracing for the economic fallout of America's war with Iran.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:24:19]

KEILAR: The Fed just made its first wartime decision, staying the course and keeping interest rates steady as economists had expected them to do. Moments ago, Chairman Jerome Powell noted to reporters that the Fed is, quote, uncertain about what the war will do to the economy. CNN's Vanessa Yurkevich is at the Federal Reserve Board's main office. All right, Vanessa, what more did Powell say?

VANESSA YURKEVICH, CNN BUSINESS & POLITICS CORRESPONDENT: Well, he went along to explain a little bit about why they decided to keep interest rates unchanged, that there has been some weakening, softening in the labor market, but inflation has still persisted much higher than the 2 percent target that they want to make sure that we see inflation.

[15:25:02]

But he also went on to say that there is a war happening right now in the Middle East that is affecting energy prices, oil prices and gas prices for everyday consumers. But he went on to say that there was a lot of uncertainty around that, just how long that would last, and essentially what that would mean for the overall economy.

He did say, though, that this oil shock, as he's describing it, would put downward pressure on spending and employment, but would put more pressure on inflation, so increasing inflation. And those are the two dual mandates of the Federal Reserve trying to balance those. So, this oil shock, this war is making it much more difficult, in his worlds, to balance those two, that dual mandate.

Now, he also went on to talk about how this might affect every day Americans. And he said that it's obviously a burden when energy prices rise for households and for everyday Americans. But they couldn't go on to say just how long this would last and the overall impact on the economy. In this particular meeting, we get economic projections for the year, and he said that, you know, people were having a little bit of trouble in this meeting, exactly deciding what to put down on paper, just where things would go.

He mentioned that there was the pandemic, there were tariffs, and now there's this oil shock, which has made the job of the Federal Reserve very difficult, Brianna, but went on to say that the economy has been really remarkably resilient during all of these different shocks over the last five years, Brianna.

KEILAR: And, Vanessa, Powell also addressed his future at the Board? Tell us what he said.

YURKEVICH: Yes, he said that if Kevin Warsh, who is the next chair nominated by President Trump, is not confirmed by the time that Powell's term ends in May, he would stay on as chair pro tem until Kevin Warsh was confirmed. He also went on to say that he wants to see this DOJ investigation wrapped up before he makes any decisions about his future on the Board. Take a listen to what he said moments ago.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JEROME POWELL, FEDERAL RESERVE CHAIRMAN: On the question whether I will leave while the investigation is ongoing, I have no intention of leaving the Board until the investigation is well and truly over with transparency and finality. On the question of whether I will then continue to serve as a governor

after my term ends and after the investigation is over, I have not made that decision yet, and I will make that decision based on what I think is best for the institution and for the people we serve.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

YURKEVICH: And that is, of course, that DOJ investigation that was launched against Jerome Powell over whether or not he lied to Congress over the handling of the renovations of the Federal Reserve in Washington, D.C., but a federal judge blocked that probe, but the administration has signaled that they are going to go ahead and appeal that decision. So, Jerome Powell is saying that he is going to remain at the Federal Reserve until that gets wrapped up.

Of course, we don't know when that will be, but he is entitled to remain on the board of the Federal Reserve, but he will be ending his term in May as long as Kevin Warsh, his replacement, is confirmed in time. But if he is not, Brianna, Jerome Powell says, according to the law, he will continue as chair pro tem and lead the Federal Reserve. Brianna.

KEILAR: Really interesting. Vanessa Yurkevich, live for us from the Fed. Thank you.

Top national security officials in the hotseat facing questions over the war with Iran. Stay with us for that.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)