Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Former South Korean President Found Guilty on Insurrecting and Leading a Botched Martial Law Attempt; Meta Head Grills on Age Verification and Filters in a Landmark Social Media Addiction Trial. Aired 3-3:45a ET

Aired February 19, 2026 - 03:00   ET

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

[03:00:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ROSEMARY CHURCH, CNN ANCHOR: Hello and welcome to our viewers joining us from all around the world. I'm Rosemary Church.

Coming up, a former South Korean leader is found guilty and sentenced for leading an insurrection. We'll have a live report just ahead.

Tensions are high in the Middle East as there's no diplomatic breakthrough with Iran and the build-up of U.S. assets in the Gulf continues.

Plus, social media on trial Mark Zuckerberg faces angry parents in a lawsuit that could force platforms to change their algorithms.

UNKNOWN (voice-over): Live from Atlanta, this is "CNN Newsroom" with Rosemary Church.

CHURCH: So we begin with breaking news from South Korea where a court has sentenced former President Yoon Suk-yeol to life in prison. Yoon was convicted of leading an insurrection, declaring martial law and ordering troops to storm parliament in December of 2024.

Supporters and opponents gathered outside the courthouse in Seoul to watch the proceedings. Yoon had denied the charges and claimed opposition lawmakers were obstructing government.

CNN senior international correspondent Ivan Watson is following this story live from Hong Kong. He joins us now. So Ivan, what's been the reaction so far to this life sentence for the former President Yoon?

IVAN WATSON, CNN SR. INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, from the small group of demonstrators supporting the former President Yoon outside the courthouse, there was dismay, but very little they could do because their man, the former President Yoon Suk-yeol, was found guilty by this panel of judges of the crime of insurrection. And the judge kind of went through why he came to this conclusion, saying that the decision to declare martial law on the night of December 3rd, 2024, was aimed at paralyzing the National Assembly, that's the legislature of South Korea, for a significant period of time. When you take into consideration that Yoon had ordered the arrest of the chairman of the National Assembly and the leaders of the largest parties, that he had also dispatched troops, soldiers to the National Assembly in helicopters, and as a result he found the former President and his defense minister both guilty of insurrection and added the sentence of life in prison for former President Yoon, as well as 30 years behind bars for his former defense minister.

Now, it's important to note that when he appeared in court prior to this, he testified that the former President Yoon showed no signs of remorse. If anything, he accused the investigation against him of being a political conspiracy. He argued that the shortest martial law, as he put it, in modern Korean history cannot be distorted into an act of insurrection.

Now why was it so short?

Well, because within hours of declaring martial law on the night of December 3rd, 2024, lawmakers pushed past police and the soldiers that had been dispatched to the National Assembly, their supporters barricaded the entries to keep the soldiers out, and they voted overwhelmingly to overturn martial law, and that forced Yoon to reverse his controversial declaration.

Apparently, clearly, former President Yoon's arguments in court didn't hold any water with the judges because, again, they have declared him now guilty. In January, he was found guilty on a separate charge of resisting arrest and sentenced to five years in prison.

Now he gets a sentence of life in prison, and as critics of Yoon would put it, this sends a message to his supporters, and some do exist still in Korea, we've seen them demonstrating on his behalf over the course of the past year that he is not coming back any time soon, and it also arguably sends a message to future potential heads of state not to attempt to subvert decades of democratic rule in the country. Rosemary.

CHURCH: All right, our thanks to Ivan Watson bringing us the latest on that breaking news, I appreciate it.

[03:05:04]

I want to turn now to the Middle East where the U.S. military is prepared to strike Iran as early as this weekend. Top national security officials met Wednesday in the White House Situation Room, but sources say President Donald Trump is yet to make a final decision on the issue, and that he has privately argued both for and against military action and polled advisers about it.

According to new satellite imagery, Iran is rapidly fortifying several of its nuclear facilities. Photos show concrete and large amounts of soil being used to bury key sites in recent weeks. Here's what Democratic Congressman Jim Himes told CNN's Anderson Cooper.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) REP. JIM HIMES (D-CT): The President has now conducted a military attack on Caracas, which went flawlessly, and he's conducted a military attack on the tunnels, you know, the nuclear infrastructure in Iran, that also went flawlessly. So right now the President believes that he can do this stuff without much risk, which is, by the way, a very dangerous frame of mind because there's a lot of risk involved.

I think that both the United States and the Israelis are aware of the fact that the Iranians are doing carefully what they can to sort of restore what was damaged in the initial attacks. And so, yes.

ANDERSON COOPER, "AC360" ANCHOR: They are doing that. They're doing what they can to restore it.

HIMES: Yes. Look, they're clearing tunnels, they're restoring electricity, they're doing stuff in tunnels that we can't see. So, I mean, I think they're probably doing everything they can to try to rebuild what was destroyed a number of months ago.

So when you say imminent, is it this week? I don't know.

The president, remember, the President will be satisfied with something that is cinematic, that makes a big boom and destroys and breaks a lot of stuff. That's what happened in Caracas. He doesn't care so much about the longer questions of regime change, which are much more challenging.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CHURCH: For more on this, let's bring in Jasmine El-Gamal. She is a former Pentagon adviser on the Middle East and host of "The View From Here" podcast. I appreciate you joining us.

JASMINE EL GAMAL, FORMER PENTAGON MIDDLE EAST ADVISER, AND HOST, "THE VIEW FROM HERE" PODCAST: Good morning, Rosemary. Good to be with you.

CHURCH: So sources tell CNN that the U.S. military is ready to strike targets inside Iran as early as this weekend, but add that President Trump is yet to make a final decision on that move. Iran is preparing for possible strikes using concrete to bury key nuclear sites. How likely is it, do you think, that the U.S. will strike inside Iran on the weekend or sooner perhaps?

EL GAMAL: Yes. I mean, look, it's looking increasingly likely if you just look at the U.S. defense posture, the military posture in the region, the fact that you have some administration officials basically playing down progress of the talks recently as opposed to the Iranian readout of the talks or the regional readout from the Omanis.

They were both saying, those two parties, that the talks went well, but you're hearing from Israeli sources, you're hearing from the Vice President that the two parties are still quite far apart, that their respective red lines don't seem to be getting closer.

And of course, you have the second aircraft carrier, the USS Gerald Ford, that's been sent to the region. This is an aircraft carrier that's now on its second extension. It was supposed to be back home by now, but has been sent to the region.

And so it is looking increasingly likely. Of course, the question is, if that were to happen, what would it look like? What would the ramifications be?

And of course, Rosemary, with President Trump, you just don't know. We do have to also keep in mind that this all could be a way to intimidate the Iranians into making a last minute concession, although that is looking increasingly unlikely.

CHURCH: That sense of leverage. So if President Trump does go ahead and strike Iran, what's the likely objective here for the U.S. specific new targets, or are we talking regime change, do you think?

EL GAMAL: Well, I mean, here's where you imagine Trump's military planners are sitting down with him and going through several scenarios that could unfold in the case of a military confrontation. You could imagine that the regime has been so cornered and has been hearing talks of regime change.

It is severely weakened, as you and I have talked about before, probably weaker than it's ever been. And it knows that there are parties within the region, sorry, not within the region, within the U.S. administration, that there are figures within the U.S. administration, that there are figures within the Israeli government who sees this as an opportunity to finish off the regime.

[03:09:50]

And so you imagine a party like that to a conflict that is backed into such a corner with no potential off-ramp to be prepared to do what it can to survive and inflict maximum damage on the U.S., its personnel in the region, on Israel, and on military installations in regional countries.

So if the U.S. were thinking that way, the Trump administration would want to strike in a way that neutralizes any offensive capability that the Iranians have right off the bat.

CHURCH: Right, I mean, because I want to ask you about that, because how much risk is involved in a U.S. attack on Iran and what might it mean for the region, given Iran has said, if you hit us, we will come back with a massive strike of our own?

EL GAMAL: That's right. I mean, the Ayatollah Khamenei basically said, you know, it's great that you have this aircraft carrier. It's also a sitting target, in a sense, is what he said.

Now, it's unclear and unlikely that the Iranians have the military capabilities to sink a U.S. aircraft carrier. But that doesn't mean that they can't inflict a lot of damage on that military hardware that is now amassed in the region.

And of course, we saw the damage done to Israel during the 12-day war. We can imagine some scenario like that as well.

So if you're the U.S. president, on one hand, you want to send a message to the Iranian regime that this is it, this is their last chance. At the same time, you want to avoid a war that you know will not go over well with your base, because you are the president of peace and you said there would be no more military conflicts in the Middle East.

You would want to start with such a decisive series of strikes on ballistic missile sites and capabilities, nuclear capabilities, that it would minimize to the greatest extent possible the possibility that Iran would be able to retaliate and inflict that kind of damage that it's threatening to do.

CHURCH: And of course, we have to remember that President Trump and his administration have said that they want to give diplomacy a chance here. So what is deemed in terms of a time frame is giving them a chance. I mean, we're just talking days here then.

EL GAMAL: That's right. And of course, you know that the holy month of Ramadan has just started in the region and people are wondering whether Donald Trump would really try to strike and potentially start a prolonged conflict during this month. I'm not sure that that factors into his decision making, to be honest with you.

But, you know, in terms of diplomacy, Rosemary, generally speaking, when there are such high stakes negotiations, it's not unusual. And in fact, it's smart to introduce leverage and military threats as a way to push the party that you're negotiating with into making a concession or making a deal.

But the way that the Iranians have been squeezed right now, we haven't at least publicly seen any sort of opportunity for them to take an off ramp that would save face and allow them to claim some sort of victory at home. So it really is looking like a very tense situation where both parties have talked themselves onto a ledge. And it's difficult to see what kind of diplomacy could take them off of that ledge.

CHURCH: All right. Jasmine El Gamal, thank you so much for talking with us and sharing your analysis. I appreciate it.

EL GAMAL: Thanks for having me.

CHURCH: Of course.

We are getting a mixed reaction to the latest round of Ukraine peace negotiations. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy says the talks in Geneva that ended on Wednesday fell short of Ukraine's goals. That applies to what he called sensitive political matters and to possible compromises needed for peace.

But sources tell CNN that military talks held separately from political ones made incremental but significant progress. That includes details of a possible ceasefire and laying the groundwork for future agreements. Ukraine's top negotiator expressed qualified optimism. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RUSTEM UMEROV, UKRAINIAN NEGOTIATOR: There's progress, but no details can be disclosed at this stage. The next step is to achieve the necessary level of consensus to submit the developed decisions for consideration by the presidents.

Our task is to prepare a practical, not merely formal, foundation for this. Ukraine remains constructive. The ultimate objective is unchanged, a just and sustainable peace.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CHURCH: The formal talks lasted for only two hours on Wednesday, but the Russian and Ukrainian negotiators later met separately behind closed doors.

U.S. President Donald Trump is expected to convene the inaugural meeting of his Board of Peace today. A U.S. official says the President will run it like one of his cabinet meetings, but the details are still unclear.

Officials from dozens of countries are expected to be there, either as members or observers. But several major U.S. allies have already rejected membership.

[03:15:08]

President Trump has previewed big announcements for the meeting, including billions of dollars toward rebuilding Gaza and personnel for an international stabilization force.

One of the world's richest men takes the stand. We will talk about the grilling of Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg in a landmark trial against social media companies.

Plus the desperate search for Nancy Guthrie and any clues that might lead to her whereabouts. Why investigators have now briefed officials in Mexico about the case.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[03:20:06]

CHURCH: Welcome back, everyone.

Mark Zuckerberg has been facing tough questions under oath about whether Facebook and Instagram are dangerous for children. The Meta CEO has vehemently defended his company's youth strategy.

The tech billionaire was grilled for more than five hours in a Los Angeles court over whether Instagram is intentionally addictive. And the outcome of this case could set the tone for many other similar lawsuits.

CNN's Clare Duffy explains. (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

CLARE DUFFY, CNN TECH REPORTER: Yes, a huge moment in this trial today with Mark Zuckerberg trying to make the case that he and the company have not put profits over the safety of young users. And we saw some testy moments as he was questioned about what Meta has known about the risks to young users and whether it's done enough to mitigate those risks.

He was asked, for example, about users under the age of 13 accessing Instagram in violation of its policies. He was also asked about beauty filters on Instagram, which experts that Meta consulted with said could be harmful for young people.

And Zuckerberg talked about the need to balance safety with considerations like privacy and freedom of expression. He also tried to make the argument that his goal is to create a long term platform that has long term appeal for users, not something that gets people hooked in the short term and makes them feel bad about themselves.

Now, Meta has denied the claims in this lawsuit. It argues that this young woman, Kaylee, who filed the suit, experienced mental health challenges because of a difficult childhood, not because of Instagram and social media. And interestingly, Kaylee was in the courtroom today for this testimony.

At the end of her lawyer's questioning, he rolled out this big banner, took seven people to hold it, and it was full of hundreds of little pictures that Kaylee had posted on Instagram, really just trying to hammer home what they are calling her compulsive use of this platform.

Now, the other thing to note is that there were parents in the audience, parents who say their children were harmed or died as a result of social media.

And some of them were also in the audience back in 2024 when Mark Zuckerberg testified on Capitol Hill and that moment when he turned around and apologized to families for the harms that their children have experienced on social media. Those parents now, two years later, certainly hoping that this trial will lead to more changes for these platforms. And much of that is going to depend on what the jury makes of Mark Zuckerberg's testimony today.

Back to you.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

CHURCH: The outcome of this case could help guide around 15,000 similar lawsuits. Earlier, I asked the global head of tech research for Wedbush Securities if this trial will lead to any meaningful change and whether the U.S. Congress should be doing more to protect children.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DAN IVES, GLOBAL HEAD OF TECH RESEARCH, WEDBUSH SECURITIES: Yes, well, Zuckerberg is no stranger to testifying in front of Congress, and this continues to be an issue. I mean, I've seen it front and center, you know, meeting with members of Congress. And this is not going away, it's going to continue to get, I think, more and more of a focus, especially given how many, you know, kids and how many adults and just how many people are spending time on social media.

But what comes out of this case, I think it's important to see what the rulings are, to see what this means going forward. But I do believe that there will be more and more safeguards that this is not something that falls on deaf ears.

CHURCH: Has Congress shown that it's even capable of keeping up on this issue, do you think, and giving those safeguards?

IVES: Look, I think Congress has definitely made traction. Look, obviously, Australia is on the other side, you know, of the sort of coin relative to how they've come very strong in terms of under 16 and underage in terms of what they're trying to go after.

But this is something that Congress hears from their constituents. And this is definitely a growing and growing issue that's out there. And it's something where I think many are watching this case, not just in tech, but in the beltway.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CHURCH: Still to come, the desperate search for Nancy Guthrie and any clues that might lead to her whereabouts. Why investigators have now briefed Mexican border officials about the case.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[03:25:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CHURCH: Welcome back to "CNN Newsroom," I'm Rosemary Church. I want to check today's top stories for you.

The U.S. military is prepared to strike Iran as early as this weekend. But sources say President Donald Trump is yet to make a final decision on the issue and that he has privately argued both for and against military action and polled advisers about it.

Reaction is mixed following the latest round of Ukraine peace talks in Geneva. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy says the negotiations that ended on Wednesday fell short of Ukraine's goals. But sources tell CNN that military talks held separately from political ones made incremental but significant progress in determining how a ceasefire would work.

Lawmakers in Peru have elected Jose Maria Balcazar as the country's new interim president. He is the eighth leader Peru has seen in nearly a decade of political upheaval. The former Supreme Court judge is replacing Jose Jeri. He was ousted this week after being censured by Congress. [03:30:05]

Painstaking work is underway in Arizona, where local and federal investigators are said to be pouring over thousands of hours of video, hoping to find new clues in the case of Nancy Guthrie. A law enforcement official tells CNN authorities had canvassed residences, businesses and government agencies in the Tucson area for surveillance video. More than three weeks since Guthrie's alleged abduction, investigators have not identified a suspect nor her whereabouts.

Meanwhile, a source says authorities on both sides of the U.S. southern border have been asked to watch for any clues that could help in the case. That move, we're told, is part of standard investigative procedures. CNN's Valeria Leon has more now from Mexico City.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

VALERIA LEON, CNN CORRESPONDENT: The disappearance of Nancy Guthrie is not a major news story here in Mexico. In the border state of Sonora, the vice prosecutor says his office has not received any information tying Guthrie's disappearance to Mexican territory.

JESUS FRANCISCO MORENO, VICE PROSECUTOR FOR INVESTIGATIONS OF SONORA: We don't have that information. We'll check it with the communications department.

LEON: But we do have confirmation that authorities on the Mexican side of the border are now also working on the search. Typically, when a disappearance occurs near the U.S.-Mexico border, Mexican authorities are alerted and information is shared with U.S. agencies. Guthrie lives near Tucson, Arizona, which is about 60 miles from the border.

On the streets of Mexico City, most people we spoke with had never heard of Nancy Guthrie.

UNKNOWN (through translator): I don't know much about the case.

UNKNOWN (through translator): I'm not aware of it.

LEON: For many Mexicans, this lack of awareness is not surprising. Mexico faces its own crisis of disappearances.

In Mexico City, there's even a traffic circle where faces of the disappeared are on display, a constant reminder for families still waiting for answers of their loved ones.

MIGUEL ANGEL, MEXICO CITY RESIDENT (through translator): Here, we've had many people go missing, and this shouldn't happen because we all want to make it home.

LEON: In our search, we found very little newspaper coverage. If you take a glimpse at newspapers here, you'll see there's no mention of the Guthrie case on any of their front pages. And with so little information available, people remain largely uninformed about her apparent kidnapping. ISABEL, MEXICO CITY RESIDENT (through translator): That's all I know, that she's been kidnapped. It's been several days already. I don't know how many.

LEON: That stands in sharp contrast to the United States, where the case continues to generate inside of the border. The disappearance of Nancy Guthrie remains distant.

Valeria Leon, CNN, Mexico City.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

CHURCH: Still to come, India is welcoming the future of A.I. with open arms. We will tell you what world leaders are saying about the A.I. Impact Summit in New Delhi after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[03:35:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CHURCH: Time for your Business Breakout. Let's take a look at the headlines.

A top economic adviser to U.S. President Donald Trump says researchers at the New York Federal Reserve should be disciplined. Kevin Hassett is taking issue with their report that says American businesses and consumers are paying 90 percent of the cost of Trump's tariffs.

Microsoft is planning to invest $50 billion to bring artificial intelligence to lower income countries. The tech giant says the investment will focus on building data centers and extending Internet access by the end of the decade. Microsoft says the commitment aims to address concerns over AI's potential to deepen inequality.

The European Central Bank says President Christine Lagarde has not made a decision about when she'll step down. "The Financial Times" reported Lagarde would leave before the French presidential election in April 2027 to give France's President Emmanuel Macron a say in her successor. Lagarde's term is not supposed to end until October of that year.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi says his country is not scared of artificial intelligence, but rather sees fortune and the future in it. He made those comments at the A.I. Impact Summit in New Delhi today. The Prime Minister also invited attendees to choose India as their hub to design and develop their technologies.

CNN's Hanako Montgomery joins me now from New Delhi with more on this. Hanako, so what is the latest on this story and of course India's A.I. aspirations?

HANAKO MONTGOMERY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, so we spent the last few days at the India A.I. Impact Summit. And today on Thursday, we've heard a lot from world leaders like the French president Emmanuel Macron and also from major power brokers in the A.I. industry.

In fact, just moments earlier, we heard from the OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, who discussed why A.I. needed to be accessible for all. Here's what he said just moments earlier.

[03:40:05]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SAM ALTMAN, OPENAI CEO: We believe that democratization of A.I. is the only fair and safe path forward. Democratization of A.I. is the best way to ensure that humanity flourishes.

On the other hand, centralization of this technology in one company or country could lead to ruin. The desirable future a couple of decades from now has got to look like a world of liberty, democracy, widespread flourishing and an increase in human agency.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MONTGOMERY: Now, there's a lot of excitement about this summit and, of course, about India as a market, especially coming from U.S. tech companies. And that's really for three key reasons.

For one, you have India has already a very huge, talented workforce that's very capable at developing new technology. Two, there's already widespread use and adoption of A.I. among the general public. Three, because India is the largest country when it comes to population, you already have a huge data set that's very valuable when developing new technology and also when trying to make A.I. even better.

So this attention, this investment that's coming from U.S. tech companies is, of course, welcome news for the Indian government, which wants to position India as the next global A.I. powerhouse and as an A.I. leader when it comes to Asia.

But I do want to note that there are several hurdles that still remain before India is able to achieve all of this. Of course, there are the environmental concerns. Data centers needed to develop A.I. require a lot of power and a lot of water.

Also, safety. How are kids supposed to use this technology safely when it comes to education?

Also, job security. I mean, this is a concern felt across the globe.

But we've heard from Altman earlier today, in fact, about how A.I. as a technology will impact job security. Our jobs will look nothing like they do now. And of course, for India's very young and large workforce, that could mean a lot of disruption.

So the summit is very much the beginning of a long conversation about how A.I. can be equitable and accessible for all. Back to you.

CHURCH: And Hanako, billionaire Bill Gates was set to deliver the keynote speech at the summit, but pulled out last minute. What more can you tell us about that?

MONTGOMERY: Yes, so we've asked the Gates Foundation actually for more details about why the tech billionaire decided to pull out last minute, I mean, just hours before he was supposed to develop and really deliver that keynote speech. But they declined to comment. However, we do need to note that the timing of all of this, of course, is significant.

Gates is facing renewed scrutiny over his ties to the late convicted sex offender, Jeffrey Epstein. And of course, documents released by the U.S. Department of Justice just weeks earlier show more questions that need to be answered about Gates' connections to Epstein.

So again, we don't know for certain, but there are still lots of questions and suspicions about why Gates decided to leave just moments before he was supposed to develop that key speech.

CHURCH: Hanako Montgomery, joining us there from New Delhi. Many thanks for bringing us up to date on this story.

And thank you so much for your company, I'm Rosemary Church. Have yourselves a wonderful day. "World Sport" is coming up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[03:45:00]

(WORLD SPORT)