Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Musk Threatens Dismissals as Federal Workers Told to Justify Jobs; Interview with Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-VA); Zelenskyy Says He is Ready to Step Down if it Brings Peace in Ukraine. Aired 3-4p ET

Aired February 23, 2025 - 15:00   ET

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

[15:01:26]

FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN HOST: Hello again, everyone. Thank you so much for joining me this Sunday. I'm Fredricka Whitfield.

All right, the clock is ticking for federal workers across the country today as they face a new deadline. Overnight, they received an ultimatum from Elon Musk and the Trump administration to justify their jobs or be fired. This is the e-mail more than two million federal workers got yesterday. It says in part: "Please reply to this e-mail with approximately five bullets of what you accomplished last week and CC your manager." The deadline is tomorrow night.

The e-mail does not mention consequences, but in a social media post, Elon Musk says if they don't reply by the Monday night deadline, it will be viewed as a resignation.

The e-mail sent shock waves and confusion throughout a federal workforce already reeling from the termination of thousands of employees on probationary status.

CNN's Kevin Liptak is joining us right now from the White House.

Kevin, what more are you learning?

KEVIN LIPTAK, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Yes, you're right that this has injected a whole new layer of uncertainty into an already rattled federal workforce, and it is not just rank and file federal workers who are trying to figure out what is going on, it is also senior managers, you know, people who are leading some of these agencies who spent last night and are spending today trying to discern one, whether this e-mail was actually real and legitimate, and two, what exactly they should be telling the workers at their departments on how to proceed.

And just within the last hour, we have seen how The Pentagon is responding to this. They say to their workers, pause any responses to this e-mail. They say the Department of Defense is responsible for reviewing the performance of its personnel and that if and when required, the department will coordinate their own responses, and that is something similar to what we've heard from Kash Patel, the new director of the FBI, also telling members of the FBI to pause responses to this e-mail. Youve also seen workers at the CIA receive similar directives, at

FEMA, certainly, there are some agencies that are encouraging their workers to actually respond, to try and tell the White House and the administration what exactly they're doing, but I don't think it is clear to anyone whether this threat from Elon Musk that if you don't respond, you'll be fired is actually an operable request.

And certainly you have seen people question whether it is even legal, including the head of the federal union that represents federal workers, who has called this cruel, who has said that this is intended, in part to make things hard for federal workers.

You have also heard certain Republicans make a similar argument. Listen to what John Curtis, the Republican senator from Utah, said this morning.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. JOHN CURTIS (R-UT): If I could say one thing to Elon Musk, it is like, please put a dose of compassion in this. These are real people. These are real lives. These are mortgages.

It is a false narrative to say we have to cut, and you have to be cruel to do it as well. We can do both.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LIPTAK: So you're saying there, you're hearing him there encourage the White House not to be cruel, but I think in the end that is part of the strategy here, to make working in the federal workforce such an unpleasant experience for some of these workers that they just resign on their own as they look to rapidly diminish the scale and size of federal workers.

You've already seen 75,000 workers take that buyout offer. You've seen the administration lay off thousands more workers. And now, of course, the future is even more uncertain for those workers who do remain.

[15:05:10]

WHITFIELD: All right, Kevin Liptak at the White House, thanks so much.

All right, with me now to talk more about these developments is Virginia Democratic Congressman Gerry Connolly. He is the Ranking Member on the Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

Congressman, great to see you.

REP. GERRY CONNOLLY (D-VA): Likewise.

WHITFIELD: So I understand you are asking OPM, the Office of Personnel Management, to take down this threat that federal workers don't have to justify their employment via e-mail. How are you leveraging this as a member of Congress?

CONNOLLY: Well, I have the bully pulpit, and I also think we have reason on our side. Elon Musk has no authority to issue the kind of tweet that he issued.

WHITFIELD: But he is doing it. He is doing it and it is rattling people.

CONNOLLY: Well, he is doing it but -- yes, but OPM came out with a different directive. And as you are reporting just indicated, and at the management level, there is a third set of. instructions, including ignore until we get to you.

So what is a federal employee supposed to do? And remember, what Elon Musk has threatened is termination of employment.

I think Senator Curtis unwittingly put his finger on a word that's really important here, "cruelty." Cruelty is, in fact, the point of Elon Musk's whole wrecking ball approach to efficiency in the federal government.

WHITFIELD: Right. I mean, Kevin said that that is part of the strategy, make it so miserable that people will elect to leave. Federal workers will just simply resign.

So the Office of Personnel Management, I mean, it is the Human Resources arm of government. Shouldn't it have already stepped in? And if it didn't, why should anyone trust that it will now, even at your urging?

CONNOLLY: Yes, I think it should have. That's its job and no outside individual like Elon Musk should subvert the whole purpose of having an HR agency like the office of personnel management that serves the entire federal government.

So they've got to get back control and leaving it up to individual departments and individual managers simply sows the seeds of more chaos and more confusion and more disillusionment.

WHITFIELD: Yes.

CONNOLLY: Which may be the object of the game here.

WHITFIELD: Right. I mean, very confusing. If you've got The Pentagon that says disregard, you've got the FBI saying disregard; Homeland Security, NSA, National Security Agency, Department of State, they are all saying, you know, ignore that.

Meantime, federal workers are like, really? Should I ignore that? Or if like that e-mail and social media post say, if I ignore it, it means this is my resignation.

I mean, the protocol has long been --

CONNOLLY: Right.

WHITFIELD: Removal of a federal worker comes with documentation from the agency. I mean, there is a process. This administration is now offering ultimatums, the fork in the road, so to speak. These e-mails, social media edicts, you know, meantime, 75,000 federal workers did take the promised buyouts, an unknown number of federal workers, you know, believed to be in the thousands now have been laid off.

So, so far, legal challenges are the only temporary, you know, stop or delay measures. Do you see that continuing or, you know, should these federal workers be hopeful that at some point Congress will step in?

CONNOLLY: Well, you reported earlier on the town hall meetings, a number of my Republican colleagues are having around the country, and it has got to be shocking to them that there is almost a uniform reaction of revulsion by voters at what is happening and where the authority really is, and the need for the Legislative Branch to reassert itself.

I hope that has a salutary effect on the Republicans because they have essentially abrogated their responsibilities as members of Congress who take an oath to uphold the Constitution and essentially outsourced their legislative responsibilities to an unelected billionaire who has never worked for government.

WHITFIELD: And in fact, I mean, just a few days ago, right, you sent a letter to the Trump administration demanding answers about DOGE leadership, staff, clarity on Musk's role, his lack of transparency and you want answers. Do you expect you'll get those answers by your March 6th deadline, or have you heard any response thus far?

CONNOLLY: Fredricka, I am always hopeful, but I wouldn't be surprised if they miss the deadline like they've missed so much.

I don't think they want accountability. I don't think they want to be answering questions from the Legislative Branch and that's why we need Republican support. We've got to have Republicans and Democrats working in unison to reassert congressional prerogatives and the role of the Congress and the Constitution of the United States.

[15:10:08]

WHITFIELD: What would be your recommendation to federal workers who perhaps are not in those agencies, FBI, you know, at The Pentagon, Homeland Security, where those agencies have said disregard this e- mail or this social media thread. What are you recommending federal workers should do? When they turn on the news today, they hear this and they're like, I've got a deadline by tomorrow night. What? Should I do this?

CONNOLLY: Yes, I hesitate to give personal advice. I guess if you can cover yourself and do the five things you did last week just to be able to say, well, I did it, but you know, that's easier said than done. Remember that because of the size of the workforce, at any given time, people are traveling, people are sick, people are on maternity leave or paternity leave.

People are traveling. People are stuck overseas and they may not have any opportunity or access to e-mails to be able to respond in a timely fashion.

And so this really is a very difficult thing to implement and to give people essentially one workday notice I think is really an unreasonable burden on the federal workforce. There is nothing wrong with saying, well, give me a survey, give me a summary of what you did last week, okay, but to make it contingent upon your continued employment and threatening people that blatantly, I think that is cruel and I think that is an unrealistic expectation for a very dedicated workforce.

WHITFIELD: Congressman Gerry Connolly, glad you could be with us. Thank you so much.

CONNOLLY: My pleasure. Thank you.

WHITFIELD: All right, coming up, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy says he is ready to resign if it guarantees peace for Ukraine. We will look at what this could mean for ongoing negotiations to end the war.

Also ahead, we will talk to Major General Spider Marks, about fearful workers at The Pentagon as thousands of civilians face losing their jobs in the coming days from the Trump administration cuts.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:16:58]

WHITFIELD: All right new today, a stunning concession from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY, UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT (through translator): If you really need me to leave for the sake of peace, I am ready to do so. I am focused on security for Ukraine today not in 20 years' time and I am not going to hang around in power for decades.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WHITFIELD: The U.S. has been in early talks with Russia to end the war in Ukraine, talks that have largely excluded Ukraine. A deal for Ukraine's mineral rights is also on the table, as President Trump demands repayment for previous U.S. military aid.

CNN's Nick Paton Walsh is in Kyiv for us.

Nick, you were at that press conference. You actually questioned Zelenskyy. Tell us more about what he said.

NICK PATON WALSH, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Yes, look, it is important to put those contexts about him resigning if it brought peace to Ukraine or if Ukraine got NATO membership in some context. This was in response to a question, and indeed, Ukraine joining NATO is at this point impossible, frankly.

It is at war, and even if a peace came out here, it would still be in the more remote part of possibility. It is something Kyiv desperately wants. So that's unlikely to happen. He is unlikely to resign to make that occur. Secondly, the idea was he would potentially resign if it brought

peace. Now, bear in mind, if the President of Ukraine stepped down, there would have to be elections or he would have to have an anointed successor through some mechanism, which I am not fully aware of, that in itself would usher in extraordinary chaos here, and probably mean that there wasn't going to end up being peace.

So the chances in which he offers this, I think it is fair to say remote at this stage, but it comes after a week of frankly clear acrimony with U.S. President Donald Trump and the idea of him dangling the possibility of stepping aside throws an unexpected element into all of this conversation.

Here is what he said, though when I asked him about the rare earth mineral deal, which the U.S. are pressuring Ukraine to sign at great length and don't appear to be including security guarantees or future aid spelt out in recent versions that have been passed to the Ukrainians. Here is what he had to say.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WALSH: Do you think you can mend your relationship with President Trump? And secondly, have the American side spelt out to you what happens if you don't come to an agreement over this rare earth minerals deal in terms of what it means for U.S. aid.

ZELENSKYY: As I said, we want successful agreement and if we will understand each other with partners, I hope that it will be. We will sign this -- the first agreement or memo -- a memo on which base we will -- I mean, I will prepare other documents.

So I hope that it will not have influence on other steps of the United States, and they will not cancel or stop or freeze any support, especially military support to Ukraine.

This is crucial for us.

WALSH: The president?

[15:20:01]

ZELENSKYY: My relationship with President Trump, it has never was in such best way.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WALSH: Now the laughter there, obviously as a result of the president's delivery, but I think a recognition of how awkward this situation has become, if not difficult or dangerous for Ukraine.

That relationship between Trump and Zelenskyy in freefall during the exchange of, well, derogatory remarks from the White House. False, most of them about Zelenskyy during the last week or so.

And I think that is now turning into something which Zelenskyy has to fast find a way, perhaps to heal in order for something like the rare earth mineral deal to be signed in a way that Ukraine feels comfortable with. He disputed the half a billion dollar -- sorry, $500 billion figure of how much this deal expects Ukraine to repay. He says he wants something more close to a hundred billion. And even then, you know, this is exceptionally not in Ukraine's advantage in terms of the terms Zelenskyy outlined today.

So an exceptionally rocky week for the U.S.-Ukraine relationship. The U.S. officials in Trump's circle very clear that they think they are edging towards a deal with Russia. What does it mean for Ukraine? We don't know and you heard Zelenskyy there talking about I think, hopes that if the rare earth mineral deal isn't signed, other things won't be impacted.

But I think for now, those are hopes -- Fredricka.

WHITFIELD: All right, Nick Paton Walsh, thank you so much in Kyiv.

All right, let's continue this conversation with CNN global affairs analyst, Kim Dozier. Good to see you, Kim.

So Ukraine is under a lot of pressure, right, by the U.S. to agree to that mineral rights, you know, kind of deal portion of that deal, as Zelenskyy put it, like the memo.

Have a listen to how a Democrat and Republican are characterizing, let's call it negotiations.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. JIM HIMES (D-CT): It just looks like an episode of "The Sopranos," right? Give us your minerals or we are not going to help you fight a bloody butcher. I mean, is this really what we want? The greatest country in history to be known for? For, like, you know, some mafia thing?

REP. JIM JORDAN (R-OH): You know, as President Trump has been clear, he wants to end the war. He wants to stop the killing. President trump has, I think, a unique way of negotiating, and it is a way that typically gets results.

I mean, you can look at the situation with Canada and Mexico and what he threatened, and then how they suddenly decided, whoa, shazam, we are going to help you with securing the border.

So I think he doesn't always operate in the most conventional way when it comes to negotiating, but the results speak for themselves. And he understands the billions of dollars taxpayers have given to Ukraine.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WHITFIELD: All right, so I wonder, you know, I mean, how do you characterize this? Youve got one member of Congress who says, this is very Tony Soprano like; you've got another who says, this is the key to negotiating. What is going on here? What is this?

KIMBERLY DOZIER, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: Well, the fact of the matter, Fred, is that both of those can be true. When Zelenskyy laid out in that press conference the terms of the deal as offered as he understood them, he explained to the audience, look, this would be being paid back by ten generations of Ukrainians. We would have to pay back $2.00 for every dollar they spent.

Basically, it sounds like a predatory car loan that you get trapped in it and can never get out. And so, you know, he is pushing back and saying this isn't a good deal, but he is letting the public know what's in it so that they don't get mad with him if President Trump storms off and cuts off aid, or does something like that.

WHITFIELD: And it is being called negotiating, but Ukraine hasn't really been at the table, you know, say, for instance, recently when U.S. representatives and Russian representatives, you know, met in Saudi Arabia to talk about things.

I mean, how long can this go on where Zelenskyy isn't really part of the phone calls or, you know, physically at the table with representatives?

DOZIER: Well, at this point, they are engaging in shuttle diplomacy and with two sets of people who are so far apart, that makes sense. It is much like peace negotiations I have seen in the past, whether it is the Israelis and the Palestinians or in Northern Ireland.

It takes a while, it is a trust building process before you can generally get them into the same room.

But at this point, because of the public comments we are hearing from President Trump, it does feel like Ukraine is on the back foot. Also, because of the deal that they're basically being told, walk the plank, you know, you have to sign up to this minerals deal or we are going to get out of here. But European leaders are going to get their chance this week to have chats with President Trump and also quietly have chats and advise Zelenskyy on, you know, whether or not he should let himself get bamboozled into this thing.

[15:25:10]

WHITFIELD: Yes, you're talking about the French President and the British Prime Minister who will be heading to the White House this week to talk you know, about Ukrainian support.

So when you talk to European officials, what are they saying about, I mean, how they are trying to motivate this kind of shuttle diplomacy? Are they having separate conversations with Zelenskyy or, you know counterparts, foreign dignitaries within the Zelenskyy administration to help get conversations going involving the U.S.

DOZIER: Yes, this is basically the fire brigade trying to go in and put out the fire in the White House. The one European official I spoke to who gave me a preview of what Macron would be aiming for. He is going to be stressing to Trump that Europe is ready to stand on its own, take its own security in hand, take responsibility for defending itself and also laying out plans that the French were really the first to talk about for putting European troops into Ukraine to safeguard that territory if there is a peace deal from any future Russian invasion.

The British Prime Minister has also said publicly that he is willing to put tens of thousands of troops in Ukraine. So it will be a one-two punch of the two leaders gently trying to offer President Trump alternatives, while surely also flattering him and not presenting any of this as you've got to do it. But hey, here are options that would preserve your legacy and have you stand up for the little guy, which in this case is Ukraine.

WHITFIELD: All right, Kim Dozier, thank you so much.

All right, coming up, American farmers remain in limbo because of a federal funding freeze by the Trump administration. The President of the National Black Farmers Association joins us next to talk about the personal impact and his long fight, legal fight on behalf of other farmers.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:31:44]

WHITFIELD: Many farmers are still reeling and feeling the pinch after a funding freeze by the Trump administration.

On Thursday, a judge kept a short-term pause to prevent the White House from not distributing money. It was part of a case brought by a group of nonprofits.

Last month, the Office of Management and Budget issued a blanket pause on spending and loans and even though that order was rescinded days later, some farmers say they are still not getting paid adding an extra burden.

We have been interviewing our next guest for years now as he has fought tirelessly to help keep Black farmers in business across the country taking his fight to Washington many times over.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOHN BOYD, JR., FOUNDER, NATIONAL BLACK FARMERS ASSOCIATION: We are out here hurting and I don't understand why more large scale White farmers, the midwestern farmers who supported this president hand over foot, are not speaking out against his policies because I am sure that they are hurting the same way that I am.

It is very disheartening to listen to those comments from Senator Lindsey Graham and I have lobbied him in Congress, both as a congressman and as a senator, about the discrimination that many Black farmers faced, including myself.

At the turn of the century, there were one million Black farm families in the United States. We were tilling 20 million acres of land. We are now down to 3.5 million acres of land and roughly hovering about 50,000 Black farmers.

(END VIDEO CLIP) WHITFIELD: Joining us right now, John Boyd, Jr. He is the founder and

president of the National Black Farmers Association. You've been very consistent over the years.

My look has changed a lot over the years, hair length and all. But great to see you. It was fun to see that kind of montage. You've been with us many times talking about your fight and talking about the plight of Black farmers across America.

So what are you hearing right now from farmers? What kind of impact has this latest funding freeze had on their farms?

BOYD: Well, this is a very troubling time in America for farmers. The administration came right in, Fredricka and announced potential tariffs on China and Mexico and Canada.

The top three commodities that we raise -- that I raise -- corn, wheat and soybeans. Mexico buys corn and China buys 90 percent of the soybeans. All that type of talk that the president is doing is causing uncertainty for America's farmers.

They came right in and froze moneys to the NBFA. So they tied all of that up. And now, farmers are hearing in their local offices that they don't know if they're going to be able to -- if they will be able to extend credit to farm operating loans and it is planting season here in about two weeks.

The only group of farmers that I've heard the President says he supports are White farmers from South Africa that he wants to bring here in the homestead, in more of a resettlement type program, and he says that those farmers have faced discrimination in South Africa, but he won't help America's Black farmers right here at home.

He never got our land out of federal inventory, Fredricka. So right now, things are in a tailspin and this President is at the core of it.

[15:35:05]

You know, someone mentioned mafia, I am going to go a step further. The President is operating almost as if he is a dictator going around Congress. He is going around the courts for the decisions that we coming out of the courts, to me, having been aggressive enough to put this President back in the box so that we can get on with the right type of policies in this country.

WHITFIELD: So how does that make you and other farmers feel in this country that you feel like you're not being prioritized and you know what is happening now to your crops? I mean, every season, there is something very important that you have to be doing and cultivating on your farms and without that funding and with the impact from those tariffs in those countries who are no longer relying on your crops, what are you doing? What are you able to do?

BOYD: Well, we are going to have to organize and there are foundations out here that should be supporting programs like the NBFA. We shouldn't let this president scare everybody back in the corner here. You know, he came out this week, Fredricka and said he wasn't going to

-- he was stopping the scholarship program and one of the programs that I was really involved in you know, getting up, the HN90 Program.

He has pretty much dismantled the program at USDA. You know, the Office of Civil Rights, anything with DEI. They came right in and took all of those things out, and it took me 40 years to get some of those things in place with the assistant secretary for civil rights, I had to go to Congress to get all of these things done.

And this President came right in and went around all of that stuff and pretty much put a halt to 40 years of progress in this country.

So the American people are going to have to rise up and speak out against this and foundations and other companies that believe in righteousness and justice and fairness for all people, they need to pull together and start helping America's farmers.

You know, shame on this President because he went out and really used the American farmers out there, pretty much 99 percent of White farmers voted for this President and he came right in and cast a web of uncertainty on their farming operations. And yes, it is going to hurt Black farmers, but it is going to hurt the White farmers way further in my take, because they have a lot to lose and it looks as though this administration wants to gear up more towards our agriculture, to large scale companies and take the power away from America's farmers.

But I say no to that and I am asking America to rise up and speak out and support the National Black Farmers and support farmers in their community.

WHITFIELD: And then I wonder, you know, how do you believe you and other farmers are going to recover from what you just underscored, 40 years of fighting, of working, and now, just in a matter of weeks, a lot of that work has been undone so as to put you and other farmers in a better position of success.

BOYD: Yes. Well, you know, I have a message for the President today. You know, Black farmers, we survived slavery. We survived Jim Crow, we survived sharecropping and we are going to survive this President, by the grace of God and there is somebody over him, you know, he is out there calling himself the King and all kinds of stuff.

I've got a message for the president, there is somebody higher than you. He is sitting up high and he is looking low, and he doesn't like what you're doing.

And our time, Fredricka is his answer. But as a Black farmer, I am going to get out and organize and see what we can do to pull together, to help ourselves while the government says that they don't want us and they want to help White farmers and all this stuff. We are going to keep fighting the way that we've been fighting in this country for survival.

WHITFIELD: All right, John Boyd, Jr., President of the National Black Farmers Association, always good to see you. Thank you so much.

BOYD: Thank you so much for having me.

WHITFIELD: We will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:43:42]

WHITFIELD: All right, thousands of civilians who work for The Pentagon could lose their jobs in the coming days as President Trump's purge of the federal workforce spreads.

Potentially on the chopping block, up to eight percent of The Pentagon's civilian workforce. That represents as many as 76,000 jobs.

A shakeup already happened this weekend, with Trump dismissing the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs-of-Staff, Air Force General Charles Q. Brown, Jr., as well as the Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Lisa Franchetti.

There is a lot to discuss with CNN military analyst, retired major General Spider Marks. Great to see you.

So how concerned are you about these top leaders being cut when often they may carry over into a new administration?

MAJ. GEN. JAMES "SPIDER" MARKS (RET), CNN MILITARY ANALYST: Well, historically, Fredricka, you're absolutely correct. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and generally those service Chiefs -- Navy, Army and Marine Corps, Air Force will be -- if they are in place during an administration changeover, they will remain in place for the duration of their term.

So it is a tad unprecedented that this President would remove the Chairman and the Chief of Naval Operations. But also bear in mind that that is simply a precedent. The president can do what he wants to do in terms of choosing those leaders for those positions.

[15:45:11]

You serve as a flag officer, flag officers, a General or an Admiral, you serve at the pleasure of the President of the United States. So there doesn't have to be causality. You don't have to have a necessarily a challenge in terms of either competence or in terms of leadership challenges or a failure someplace. The President can come in and say, thank you for your service. You've served honorably and in both cases of Admiral Franchetti and General Brown, those incredible patriots served 40 years each, so they are deeply experienced.

But the President can come in and say, I am looking for my guy, my gal to be the next individual to run that either service or to be the chairman.

WHITFIELD: Sure. But I also wonder what kind of vulnerabilities this might produce when you're talking about top leadership that is dismissed along with now notices that the Department of Defense in general will be hit hard. The Pentagon, civilian and otherwise, will be facing cuts as well.

MARKS: Yes, Fredricka, change like this that we've seen across the government, now, the focus is on the Department of Defense is incredibly disruptive. And I'm not naive to the political milieu that we are in.

But again, let's be honest with each other, the Department of Defense is a monstrous organization that has an enormous amount of fat, can be incredibly laborious and lethargic. It doesn't turn very quickly.

There is 2.1 million servicemembers, those in uniform, reserve component and active component, regular component, as it is called and then the 800,000 civilians that exist. I mean, this is a large organization, and there is some legitimate discussion in terms of where those cuts should take place.

But the litmus test for the Department of Defense is readiness. You know, the ability of the organization, those military services, those formations, those ship commanders, those air squadrons, those maneuver battalions, in order to do their job, they must be ready. And if these cuts directly impact that, then we've got a legitimate concern.

So we have to be hopeful that the readiness of the force will not be negatively impacted.

WHITFIELD: Okay. I want you to also hear how Defense Secretary Hegseth defended The Pentagon firings this morning on "Fox News Sunday."

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PETE HEGSETH, US DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE SECRETARY: The President deserves to pick his key national security and military advisory team. There are lots of presidents who have made changes.

President Trump has given another set of lawful orders, and they will be followed. If they're not followed, then those officers will find the door.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WHITFIELD: Your reaction to that?

MARKS: Yes, that's pretty hardcore, isn't it? I mean, that is a really abrupt angle. I think there really is -- there truly is a human element to this.

But at the end of the day, again, what we are looking for in the military is the ability to execute the missions, the tasks, what's called "the task" and the purpose of those organizations, the how and the what and then the why you are doing it so that you can accomplish -- you can defend the Constitution of the United States, that's what needs to take place.

The concern is that all officers, all noncommissioned officers, you pledge to defend the Constitution. There is no loyalty litmus test. Yet where it appears that many will say we are moving into the direction of a loyalty litmus test to the President of the United States.

WHITFIELD: Because it sounds like, sorry to interrupt you, because it sounds like in what Defense Secretary Hegseth just said, it was about preferences, not the argument or the root of it is not what you said, which is readiness.

MARKS: Well, it is readiness. You know, I can't -- I mean, we can parse Secretary Hegseth's words. The key issue remains the organization of the Department of Defense must be prepared 24/7 to fight tonight and all those cascading requirements. You know, you've got the ability and the requirement to fight, and then everything is a derivative of that, must be in place so that the young soldier on the DMZ in Korea, the young individual who is about to jump in an F-18 can do his or her job as described.

And so you have this large organization and every moment that organization needs to wake up, put feet on the ground and say, what am I doing to enhance the capacity of that young soldier or that young airman or that sailor?

I mean, we understand that. And so is there fluff? Is there excess? Yes. Yes, ma'am, there is.

[15:50:10]

WHITFIELD: All right, Major General Spider Marks, a pleasure having you. Thanks so much.

MARKS: Fredricka, thank you.

WHITFIELD: We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: All right, finally, this hour, First Lady Melania Trump back in the nation's capital and at the White House for the Annual Governors' Dinner.

CNN's Betsy Klein has the invite.

[15:55:05]

BETSY KLEIN, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE PRODUCER: Fredricka, Melania Trump returned to the White House on Saturday after a four-week absence from Washington, and since President Trump took the oath of office on January 20th, the First Lady has not spent significant time at the White House, sources with direct knowledge of her schedule tell me.

Now, she was an active presence during the first days of the president's second term, but after joining her husband on a January 24th trip to natural disaster ravaged North Carolina and California, she hadn't returned to Washington until Saturday, where she hosted an Annual Dinner for the nation's governors. CNN had reported during the presidential transition that the First

Lady was expected to spend a majority of her time between New York and Florida and sources familiar with her thinking insisted at the time that she would still be present at the White House for major events like Saturday's Ball.

But the past month really suggests that her time in Washington may be even more limited than expected, offering a remarkable, if unsurprising break with precedent for a First Family.

Now, even though sources describe her as a constant voice in her husband's ear, giving him advice, she was absent as President Trump welcomed the Prime Ministers of Israel, Japan, and India, as well as the King of Jordan and she has missed countless executive order signings and major events on women's sports, as well as the return of wrongfully detained American, Marc Fogel from Russia and the signing of her husband's first major legislative victory, the Laken Riley Act.

And the First Lady also has yet to embark on any solo travel, foreign or domestic. She has not spoken publicly since returning to office, and she has not offered any hints toward how she plans to continue or expand her Be Best platform.

A spokesperson for the First Lady declined to comment on her whereabouts. But as one ally of First Lady Melania Trump told me, she certainly still has some time to adjust back into the role, but she may have a shorter grace period this time around to get her bearings -- Fredricka.

WHITFIELD: All right, Betsy Klein, thanks so much.

We will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:00:00]