Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

White House Says Talks With Iran Going Well, Iran Says They Are Not; Trump Vows to Obliterate Iran's Oil, Power and Water Sites; Airport Security Lines Beginning to Ease as TSA Collects Back Pay; Oil & Gas Prices Stay High as War With Iran Enters Second Month. Aired 2- 2:30p ET

Aired March 30, 2026 - 14:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:00:26]

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN CO-ANCHOR OF "CNN NEWS CENTRAL": We have Breaking News on the war with Iran. Moments ago, White House Press Secretary, Karoline Leavitt speaking out after President Trump said he was making strides with Iran, but then he threatened to completely obliterate their energy sites if Tehran does not reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN CO-ANCHOR OF "CNN NEWS CENTRAL": Notably, Iran has denied Trump's claims of progress and his terms to end the war, but here's what Karoline Leavitt said from the White House podium.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Despite all of the public posturing you hear from the regime and false reporting, talks are continuing and going well. What is said publicly is, of course, much different than what's being communicated to us privately.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: CNN's Kristen Holmes is live for us at the White House, and Kristen, Karoline Leavitt said the American people are smart enough to know which side to believe. This, as Secretary of State Marco Rubio is saying, that it's a probability that there are different factions in Iran that are vying for power right now.

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, and when she's talking about the American people knowing what side to believe, she's specifically talking about whether or not to believe America over Iran, and the fact that the president has said repeatedly that this is going very well, that Iran had agreed to much of the proposal, and then of course Iran is saying that's not true, it's not going very well. We've heard them say at times they're not negotiating with the United States.

But what about when it comes to within the actual administration, within these leaders? You have President Trump on one hand, posting on Truth Social, where he says the United States of America is in serious discussions with a new and more reasonable regime to end our military operations in Iran. Then you have Marco Rubio, the Secretary of State, saying this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MARCO RUBIO, UNITED STATES SECRETARY OF STATE: These people are lunatics. They are insane.

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS, FORMER WHITE HOUSE COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR AND ABC NEWS ANCHOR: You call them lunatics, but the president just had this post where he says we're in discussions with a new and more reasonable regime.

RUBIO: I'm not going to disclose to you who those people are, because it probably would get them in trouble with some other groups of people inside of Iran. And if there are new people now in charge who have a more reasonable vision of the future, that would be good news for us, for them, for the entire world. But we also have to be prepared for the possibility, maybe even the probability, that that is not the case.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HOLMES: I just want to point out that phrase he used, 'that would be good news for us,' indicating that that's not possibly the case, or possibly not the case, even though President Trump had already said it. In addition, Rubio said just moments ago that it wasn't clear how decisions were being made inside of Iran.

But then President Trump told the New York Post that they were negotiating with a parliamentary speaker who in the past has denied negotiating with the United States. So even within the administration, we're getting mixed messages here.

KEILAR: All right, Kristen Holmes, thanks for laying that out for us. We have CNN Military Analyst and retired Air Force Colonel, Cedric Leighton, who is live for us at the Magic Wall, and Kirsten Fontenrose, who is former Senior Director for the Gulf of the National Security Council, with us as well.

Cedric, let's first just kind of go through this threat that President Trump is putting out there, threatening to blow up and completely obliterate all of Iran's electric generating plants, oil wells, and Kharg Island, and possibly all desalinization plants, if a deal is not reached. Tell us what that would look like, what that would mean, how real this may be.

COL. CEDRIC LEIGHTON (RET.), CNN MILITARY ANALYST: Yeah, Brianna, one of the things to look at is the first one you started with, and this is the power plant description here. These are the three main power plants in Iran. The output is almost 3,000 megawatts for the Damavand Plant. Then you've got the Shahid Salimi and the Shahid Rajai plant. Those are the major ones that supply the 10 million plus people in Tehran, and actually it's really 16 million plus people in the metropolitan area right here.

And then you have the oil situation, because what we're talking about here are the different terminals, refineries, and pipelines that really go throughout the country. If any of these are struck, that's going to make a huge difference when it comes to not only their ability to export their main product, oil, but also resupplying their military as well as their civilian needs. So those are the kinds of things that really become important.

And then, of course, you have the nuclear side of things when you have not only the enrichment areas with Natanz and Fordow, plus the research areas including Tehran, Arak, Isfahan, and those areas, plus those are the ones that really handle the weapons-grade uranium or potentially weapons-grade uranium. But you also have the peaceful nuclear power plant, the civilian power plant at Bushehr.

[14:05:00]

So all of those things could potentially be struck, and they could make a huge difference, Brianna.

SANCHEZ: Kirsten, how do you read the leadership structure in Tehran? Is it united? Is it perhaps open to some of Trump's demands? The White House seems to think so, but there's an open question as to who's actually in charge, right?

KIRSTEN FONTENROSE, FORMER SENIOR DIRECTOR FOR THE GULF, NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL: There is an open question about who's in charge and without seeing the Supreme Leader since his naming, you know, he hasn't made a public appearance, he hasn't even made a screen appearance since he was named as the new Supreme Leader. By their constitution, we should be seeing President Pezeshkian be their face in any kind of international negotiation or decision-making. But in Iran's system, he's really just a figurehead. He's window dressing.

He's a diplomat, but he's a policy implementer, not a policymaker. So you're looking for who is actually calling the shots, who has the authority to make these decisions. We do know, based on the interlocutors we're talking with, so Egypt predominantly, Pakistan, their relationships with Iran are through intelligence channels primarily.

Not that they're cooperating, but that they do deconfliction, that they've had long-term sort of respect for each other's intelligence apparatus. That tells us that they are speaking with the IRGC, because that is the intelligence apparatus, along with the Interior Ministry inside Iran. That tells us they are still calling the shots.

So no matter who Iran would send to a negotiation, whether it was the president, whether it was the speaker of parliament, who they've talked about, who has a very close relationship with the IRGC, we know that the intelligence apparatus that's operated inside, as well as outside, they're responsible for the missile program we don't want to see anymore. They're responsible for the armed militias we don't want to see anymore. That organization is still calling the shots.

KEILAR: So is he making these threats that Cedric laid out there, and as he's claiming that there's regime change, when at least hearing from Iran, it's the Ayatollah's son, and the IRGC is very much in control, and he's talking about taking Iran's oil. What is your read on what's really happening here? Is it that he's trying for diplomacy, or is he trying to kind of create a condition where he can just clobber Iran militarily?

FONTENROSE: Why not both, right? I think that's what the administration is thinking. So you've heard the old adage from Teddy Roosevelt, speak softly carry a big stick, and you can't really speak softly in an era of social media, but that's kind of what you're seeing.

The big stick is the military buildup and these elite units that are going out, and they are capable of everything from snatching enriched uranium and tubes from underground bunkers, taking any number of Iranian islands, hunting down the regime remnants who are sleeping in their cars and sleeping in tents in the forest.

What you want to do is cause these regime remnants to question, what operation is Trump going to pursue with this military buildup? It forces them to defend across a number of fronts, which spreads them thin. You're also by messaging that, hey, we might be talking to somebody, it might be going well.

If you are a person in the regime, your leadership has been eliminated. You have standing orders that were established before the Ayatollah was killed, but you don't know who's on what side, and you're thinking, what's my family worth? Am I going to be the last one standing? Has that guy already sold me out? Who's having these talks, and should I, for the betterment of my own family, my own interests, maybe I kind of agree with some of these protests, maybe I don't. Where should I be deciding? Because whoever we can flip, that's what you want to do. You want to create factions within an already factionalized leadership, really drive those wedges.

So in a sense, these comments from the administration are weapons themselves, trying to foster dissent among the leadership that's still intact. Colonel Leighton, I wonder of the scenarios and operations that Kirsten just laid out, either taking Kharg Island or a similar outpost in the Strait of Hormuz or in the Persian Gulf, or potentially going inland and going after some of that enriched uranium that's underground, which do you see as perhaps the most likely or most effective move the U.S. can make, or would you suggest that avoiding that kind of operation altogether is best?

LEIGHTON: Well, certainly, I think avoiding everything altogether would be really good for everybody at this particular point in time. But, Boris, let's look at the likelihood of what could happen here. I think the most likely scenario would be, if they go ahead with any type of military operation, is to first do this right here. Basically try to secure the Strait of Hormuz. Now, you can do this in several different ways.

It doesn't necessarily mean that you take control of everything that you see on this map, but controlling Abu Musa Island and Larak Island, those could be the kinds of things that would let you control this waterway, and that's really what you're looking at. Second, I would say Kharg Island would probably be the area right here, that that would be a very common thing for them to do, because 90 percent of Iran's oil is made ready for export at Kharg.

[14:10:00]

The problem with this is this is so far, it's about 400 miles from here to there, but in the northern part of the Persian Gulf. The last thing that I think they would do is go and secure the nuclear materials, the 60 percent enriched uranium. That would become a very hard thing to do. They could do it, it would be a very audacious move, but it would also take a lot of manpower to do that.

SANCHEZ: No doubt. Colonel Leighton, Kirsten Fontenrose, thank you both so much for the perspective. Appreciate it.

Still to come, airport security lines improving as TSA workers are set to get their first full paycheck in more than a month and a half. We're going to check in at the world's busiest airport.

KEILAR: And then later, accused by A.I. Here why a Tennessee grandmother spent more than five months in jail after a facial recognition tool linked her to crimes in a state she says she's never even been to. We'll have that and much more coming up on "CNN News Central."

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:15:10]

KEILAR: Right now, air travelers are getting through security much faster as TSA employees are collecting weeks of back pay. DHS says TSA employees received a retroactive paycheck that covered at least two full paychecks from March and the department is still working on the partial checks that staffers are owed from the end of February. Partial but still substantial checks, as we have heard from TSA union reps.

Now on Sunday, more than 10 percent of TSA workers called out. The payments are rolling out after President Trump signed an executive order that directed DHS to immediately pay workers, but talks on Capitol Hill to fund the department have stalled with lawmakers now on a two-week recess. CNN's Ryan Young is at Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport in Atlanta.

Ryan, are things a little better there?

RYAN YOUNG, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: A lot better at this point, in fact they finally turned the computer screens back on to show everybody the wait times here. The wait time, as you can see behind me, zero minutes and I'm sure there's a lot of people who went through this airport last week who'd have loved to have seen that sign. It's been flowing all day long. The longest wait we've seen so far, it's about four to five minutes. If you look in this direction, you can see all the lanes here at the main security checkpoint.

Those are open and waiting for people to go. A lot of ICE agents work in this side right here, but the TSA agents have been working throughout the day. Something that you did bring up when you talked about the paychecks, we've been told a lot of people woke up this morning to have that pending notification that they were going to make some money in their paychecks, especially if they had direct deposit. But there are some payments in terms of overtime or extra day's works that hasn't hit so far.

They're hoping to have that by Thursday and they believe they'll be paid every two weeks. But as you can understand, there are people who are passengers who are still frustrated with Congress. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

YOUNG: People are mad at Congress because they're like how did you get paid and the TSA agents don't get paid. What do you think about that?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yeah, I'm mad. Yeah, I don't think that they should be holding the American public hostage.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Mad at Congress is appropriate.

(LAUGH)

YOUNG: I like that.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yeah. And they're on their spring break right now, so, and getting paid for it.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I got here at five in the morning and my flight was 11. I mean five in the afternoon and my flight was 11 at night, and I still missed it. I didn't get to the TSA till like 1:30 in the morning.

YOUNG: So you weren't taking any chances today?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Any chances (ph) today.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

YOUNG (on camera): Yeah. And Brianna, we should talk about the impact here. Today, there was another food drive for TSA workers. We're told that was well attended. They did -- were able to get some food there. But on top of that, we have talked to several TSA agents who know of others who are being evicted.

So imagine not getting that pay till today and still finding out that you're going to be evicted from your home, that you're trying to provide for your family and still deal with this fallout. So tough times for folks who work here at this airport who are in charge of our safety.

KEILAR: Yeah, they went so long without getting paid. There is some damage that just getting paid cannot undo --

YOUNG: Real damage.

KEILAR: -- and that is becoming very apparent. Ryan Young, thank you for that report from Atlanta.

Still to come, sky-high energy prices like we're seeing right now have preceded eight of the last nine recessions. So, is that where we're headed? We're going to take a look at the data.

Plus, a Tennessee grandmother spent five months in jail after A.I. software identified her as a potential suspect in a crime in a case hundreds of miles away in a state that she says she's never even been to. We'll have that next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:23:02]

SANCHEZ: Right now, gas is hovering at just under $4 a gallon. Earlier today, worldwide oil prices hit $116 a barrel before slowly coming down a bit. Markets responding to President Trump telling the Financial Times that his, quote, "favorite thing is to take the oil in Iran."

History shows sky-high energy prices precede eight of the nine past recessions. For more on that, let's go to CNN Business Senior Reporter, David Goldman. He just wrote this piece for CNN.com. "A recession is guaranteed, but when?" So, David, what's the answer?

DAVID GOLDMAN, CNN BUSINESS SENIOR REPORTER: Well, I wish I could tell you exactly when. I'm not that good. But you know who else isn't that good? Most economists. We've been predicting a recession pretty much every single year since 2018.

And if you take a look, some of these expectations were all but guaranteed. In 2022, when we had the inflation crisis, there was a 100 percent risk of a recession according to this Bloomberg model. We had 70 percent of economists in 2023 and so on and so forth.

Even last year, there was a 50/50 risk, according to Wall Street banks and we didn't go into a recession last year. It's really, really hard when you have an economy the size of ours, which is over $30 trillion, to go into a recession.

There are a lot of factors at play that basically cancel one another out. When you have a recession in one industry like we had in 2022, when the tech industry was in recession, well, the manufacturing industry was helping to get us out of that. And now, it looks like manufacturing might be in a recession, but the tech industry is helping to get us out of that.

So it's hard to get an economy the size of ours into a recession, but that doesn't mean that we can't get into one.

[14:25:00]

And the risk of a recession is really high right now. The longer this war goes on, the higher the risk of going into a recession is because those gas prices and oil prices are so high, Boris. SANCHEZ: David, you also found experts who were concerned about oil hitting $200 a barrel and gas soaring to $7 a gallon. How realistic is that scenario?

GOLDMAN: Well, it's realistic if this war goes on. I mean, we're at, you said, $116 earlier this morning, a little bit below that now. So if this continues, it means that all of the oil that's locked in the Strait of Hormuz, about 20 percent of the world's oil, that's not getting out.

The world has plenty of oil. It's just locked up right now. And so you can imagine, because of supply and demand, if we don't get that supply and we have all of the demand for oil, then prices will continue to rise. This goes to June, $200 is realistic.

SANCHEZ: David Goldman, thank you so much for that reporting.

Up next, we'll take you live to Cuba, where an oil tanker has docked for the first time since President Trump initiated a fuel blockade. Stay tuned for that.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)