Return to Transcripts main page
Isa Soares Tonight
President Trump Says He'll Speak With Putin On Tuesday About Ending Ukraine War; White House Denies It Violated a Judge's Order To Halt The Deportations Of Venezuelan Gang Members To El Salvador; Brown Univ. Doctor Deported Back To Lebanon; Trump Admin. Deports Hundreds To Prison In El Salvador; Trump Puts Voice Of America Staff On Leave; Rare Footage Of Snow Leopards. Aired 2-3p ET
Aired March 17, 2025 - 14:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[14:00:00]
ISA SOARES, CNN INTERNATIONAL HOST: Hello, and a very warm welcome, I'm Isa Soares. Tonight, we are following two major developing stories for you this
hour. President Trump prepares to talk to Vladimir Putin as the leaders look up to divide up assets. We'll drill down and tell you what really is
at stake.
Meanwhile, the Trump administration's crackdown on immigration is taking a new turn from deportation flights to El Salvador to students being told to
cancel travel plans. We'll have the details on the uncertain new reality for non U.S. citizens. We begin this hour, though, with a planned phone
call that could decide the future of Ukraine.
U.S. President Donald Trump says he'll speak to his Russian counterpart on Tuesday to discuss ending the fighting in Ukraine. The Kremlin has
confirmed that call and says the leaders will also talk about ways to restore dialogue between the U.S. and Russia. On Sunday, Mr. Trump said
discussions have already begun on how to divide up what he's calling assets between Moscow and Kyiv. Have a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We're talking about power plants that's up -- you know, it's a big question. But I think we have a
lot of it already discussed very much by both sides.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You'll ask him --
TRUMP: Ukraine and Russia.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You'll ask him to --
TRUMP: We're already talking about that, dividing up certain assets.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SOARES: You heard it there, while CNN chief international security correspondent Nick Paton Walsh has recently returned from Ukraine, he
joined me in the studio at the magic map to break down what these assets could be.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
NICK PATON WALSH, CNN INTERNATIONAL SECURITY EDITOR: Yes, I mean, look, the word assets is particularly interesting. He didn't say land. For --
SOARES: Yes --
WALSH: Example, one asset that they appear to be talking about, Zelenskyy's apparently mentioned to Trump as well as the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power
plant --
SOARES: Is roughly here --
WALSH: And that is something --
SOARES: Yes --
WALSH: Which is currently under Russian control. We don't know its full condition. It's been the subject of various incidents over the past years.
Do Ukraine want it back or do Russia, who seem to have linked it up to their grid, do the Russians just want the Ukrainians to pull back to,
quote, "make it safer" in their perception.
We don't know. But it's interesting that it's part of this discussion because clearly, big nuclear power plant --
SOARES: Yes --
WALSH: Everyone wants to --
SOARES: Absolutely --
WALSH: Feel safe around that assets too could mean the hundreds of billions of dollars in euros that are currently in European bank accounts that the
Europeans have talked about using to reconstruction in Ukraine or to fund Ukraine's military. So, maybe, Putin's raised that with Trump because he
wants it back. They're going to be a real struggle for the rest of NATO to --
SOARES: Yes --
WALSH: Accept that major bargaining --
SOARES: Yes --
WALSH: Chip, to give the Russians hundreds of billions to refit and regroup. So, that's interesting, too. But land?
SOARES: Yes, let's talk land.
WALSH: Let's talk land.
SOARES: Because they had a map out, they discussed land. What could we be looking at here?
WALSH: Yes, Mike Waltz said that the Jeddah meeting involved a map and trying to work out what the frontline might look like. And let me try and
draw the frontlines here to massive risk at reputation having driven up and down here a lot. Here we go roughly --
SOARES: He's recently returned from Ukraine, so he knows this better, this frontline --
WALSH: Yes --
SOARES: Better than most of us --
WALSH: But this is so wrong, I --
SOARES: His geography, well, we'll see.
WALSH: We'll do it, but anyway -- but this has been heavily fought over. Tiny villages here, thousands of lives lost. You know, a big gain is 10
kilometers over the past year or so. So, the idea, I think of either side suddenly giving up large chunks of territory at the negotiating table to me
feels a bit fanciful.
You may see slight changes along here in terms of who owns what? Who gets to control which particular part? But you have to remember, for the
Ukrainians, this is vital because the last villages and settlements in the east of Ukraine here --
SOARES: Yes --
WALSH: There's not a hell of a lot until you start heading all the way over here in terms of big settlements, until you hit the major population
centers of Ukraine. And so, they're going to be very mindful of trying to hang on to this area here, even though it's been intense Russian pressure
in that area.
SOARES: And I suspect, correct me if I'm wrong, that Putin would want exactly that frontline that he'd been -- they've been battling for three --
that long frontline they've been battling for almost for three years or so --
WALSH: Yes, I mean, for future war planning. This -- yes --
SOARES: But Zelenskyy has already said this is a no.
[14:05:00]
WALSH: No, I mean, Zelenskyy is definitely not going to accept -- this is Russia --
SOARES: Exactly, correct --
WALSH: But at the same time, he's probably not going to get it back unless he takes it by force. And that's unlikely too. So, we're probably going to
see that line stay roughly where it is. But in a future imagined world where Russia has regrouped --
SOARES: Yes --
WALSH: Refitted and rebuilt its military and wants another go in, another full-on invasion, then ultimately it's this expanse of territory here that
they might try and race across.
SOARES: Talk to us about Kursk, where we've --
WALSH: Yes --
SOARES: Seen some of the fighting for the past what? Week or so. You've been reporting on this in the last --
WALSH: So --
SOARES: Few days. Tell us about that.
WALSH: So, another tiny embarrassing geographical area there. But it's a small sliver of land that the Ukrainians have taken their great daring,
frankly, was back in August. It was basically many felt a morale issue about trying to change the narrative of the Russians being on their back
foot, but ultimately to a negotiating ploy because they had something of Russia to hand back to the Russians at the negotiating table.
They've since really pulled out over the past days, more or less lost control over key areas there. And so, it may -- some say have been a
decision that the Ukrainians realized there wasn't an awful lot they --
SOARES: Yes --
WALSH: Thought they could trade for it. So, why lose more people trying to hold it or the Russians have also been pushing exceptionally hard there to
kick them out.
SOARES: So, if you're in Kyiv, then Nick, government --
WALSH: Yes --
SOARES: In Kyiv, you're wanting this backstop, potentially, you might not get this backstop. You've got NATO countries on your side looking closely,
figuring --
WALSH: Yes --
SOARES: Out what to do. If you're a NATO country, whether Poland or whatever, how do you prepare for this for whatever may come without a
backstop if the U.S. says we're not in it?
WALSH: That's a very hard question to answer, but there's a reality check here. The Europeans know they need the overarching umbrella of --
SOARES: Yes --
WALSH: American security, but the Russian giant after three years of grueling war against the country it thought it could defeat in three days,
isn't suddenly a 1,000 feet tall. It's really struggling along here. And so, it would have to massively regroup, refit and come back with
extraordinary force against a very unprepared enemy to have a lot of luck. And they would run into here the Baltic states --
SOARES: Yes --
WALSH: Very ready to defend themselves, NATO members too, Belarus is in the way, not always a 100 percent compliant until they reach Poland and then
Romania down here, there was an election recently which almost put in a pro-Russian candidate --
SOARES: Yes --
WALSH: That's been reversed. So, it's not an easy move. And so ultimately, I think however badly the diplomacy --
SOARES: Yes --
WALSH: Goes here on ending the war, I still think the majority of any conflict between anyone who continues to fight here is going to end up
happening around Ukraine in its east, rather than move significantly more westward.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SOARES: And that's Nick Paton Walsh, our thanks to Nick for that. Well, so far, Vladimir Putin's response to the Trump-backed ceasefire proposal has
been ambiguous. The Russian President says that Moscow agrees with the proposal in theory, but he's also demanding land concessions from Kyiv.
American officials have said Ukraine will likely need to cede territory for the conflict to end. Our Fred Pleitgen has more on these high stakes talks
from Moscow.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
FREDERIK PLEITGEN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (on camera): The Kremlin has now confirmed that U.S. President Trump is set to speak to
Vladimir Putin on the phone on Tuesday, and the Russians have so far praised the U.S. President's efforts to try and end the war in Ukraine. But
Vladimir Putin does say that he does still have certain reservations.
Essentially, what has happened is that the Ukrainians have signed on to an unconditional 30-day ceasefire, whereas the Russians say, for their part,
there are still conditions that they want to see met before a ceasefire can go into place. Essentially, the Russians are saying that they want the
underlying causes of the war in Ukraine, as far as they're concerned, to be addressed before the weapons can be silenced.
Now, of course, a lot of that for the Russians pertains to territory. The Russians essentially want to keep all of the territories that they've
already taken from the Ukrainians and possibly even more than that, when you look, for instance, at the administrative borders of places like the
Donetsk Oblast or the Zaporizhzhia Oblast, where the Russians control part of it, but certainly not all of those places yet, even though they are
currently on the move on the battlefield.
Another thing that the Russians also say is that they don't want to see any foreign troops, especially NATO forces on the ground as peacekeepers in
Ukraine, and they don't want Ukraine to become part of NATO in the future. All of that, of course, very difficult to swallow for the Ukrainians. So,
there are still a lot of issues that need to be addressed.
Nevertheless, the U.S. President has said that he's confident that things are going in the right direction, and he says that he hopes that some sort
of ceasefire could be in place in the coming weeks. Fred Pleitgen, CNN, Moscow.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SOARES: And in about ten minutes or so, I will be speaking with the deputy Prime Minister of Belgium on this and top -- our top story, so do stay with
us for that. In the -- in the meantime, let me turn to the Middle East, because for many in Gaza, hopes to sustain the fragile ceasefire that had
been holding just two weeks ago have now been completely shattered.
A warning, some of what you're about to see is disturbing. Gaza's Health Ministry says at least nine people were killed in an Israeli airstrike,
many of them aid workers. Israel says the strike killed six terrorists. The violence comes on the heels of Israel's decision to cut off electricity to
Gaza.
[14:10:00]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GAVIN KELLEHER, HUMANITARIAN ACCESS MANAGER, NORWEGIAN REFUGEE COUNCIL: The view from the ground here is that yet again, Gaza is being pushed to the
brink of total societal collapse. When you deny the population access to food, you attack the water systems that have been decimated over the last
17 months.
You attack people's homes. More than 92 percent of people's homes are damaged or destroyed. The same for educational facilities. The whole
infrastructure of the Gaza strip has been decimated. Now, we're cutting off food, we're cutting off water supplies, of course, society is going to
struggle to function.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SOARES: Meantime, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says he plans to fire the country's Intelligence chief this week. Critics are slamming
the move as politically-motivated. The announcement follows months of tension between Mr. Netanyahu and Ronen Bar. That's the head of the Shin
Bet Security Service.
Israel's leader has blamed Shin Bet officials for security lapses that led to this October the 7th attack. An internal investigation found the agency
had failed in its mission, but it also concluded that Hamas benefited from Qatari payments that were blessed by the Israeli government. We'll stay
across that story for you.
Well, a Palestinian journalist has appeared in court today after being detained by Israeli police over the weekend. Latifeh Abdellatif was
arrested in Jerusalem. Israel authorities said she was apprehended on, quote, "suspicion of incitement and support for terrorism". Journalists in
Jerusalem have raised concerns with CNN about reporting Palestinian matters, saying they fear indictments.
According to the committee to protect journalists, since October the 7th, 2023, there have been 75 arrests of journalists in Gaza, the West Bank and
Jerusalem. U.S. President Donald Trump is directly threatening Iran with dire consequences if Houthi rebels strike back against U.S., claiming any
retaliation will be met with great force.
And this comes after U.S. strikes on targets in Yemen, if you remember, over the weekend, killed at least 53 people. In retaliation, the Houthis
claimed to have launched missiles and drones at an American aircraft carrier. U.S. officials say there were no injuries or damage. The Houthis
are promising to respond to any American strikes. President Trump warned Iran, the Houthis main backer, as you can see there on Truth Social to
immediately end its support for the group.
Let's get more details then on these escalating tensions from our chief national security correspondent Alex Marquardt. And Alex, we have been
hearing from the White House Press Secretary just in the last few minutes - - did she address this? What did she say?
ALEX MARQUARDT, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: She did, essentially repeating what we heard from President Trump. The spokesperson
Karoline Leavitt essentially chest-thumping, saying that the Houthis should listen to President Trump, and saying that there's a new sheriff in town.
And she took a bit of a jab at President Biden, saying that President Trump is not going to be sitting on his hands while terrorists go after
commercial vessels and U.S. Naval ships. But essentially, she then -- she echoed, and she read the entire statement that President Trump put on Truth
Social, which -- in which she said that every shot fired by the Houthis will be looked upon.
He said from the point -- this point forward is being shot from the weapons and leadership of Iran, and that Iran will be held responsible and suffer
the consequences. Isa, we have heard from the Iranians, the Foreign Minister firing back, saying that the U.S. has no business telling Iran
what to do. And by the way, the U.S. should stop supporting Israel in its genocide and terrorism, he said.
But as you noted, more than 50 people are believed to have been killed in these U.S. strikes, including women and children, according to the Houthi-
led Health Ministry. The Houthis have responded, and they are vowing more of a response. They fired drones, missiles, 18 of them against the USS
Truman, according to U.S. officials.
Talking to CNN, there was no damage on board those ships. But a big question is what -- who the Americans were going after? What leadership of
the Houthis they did kill, because that was a claim that was made by the National Security adviser Mike Waltz. And I think Isa, the point here is
that this will not be isolated. This is the beginning of a longer campaign.
We know that the U.S. is assessing what damage was done, who was killed in this campaign, and then they expect to enlarge and extend it in the coming
weeks and days. They're trying to make the point that President Biden allowed the Houthis to carry out attacks to strangle commercial shipping
and trade around the world, and that they are not going to stand for this.
For their part, the Houthis have always said that this is tied to the Palestinian plight in --
SOARES: Yes --
MARQUARDT: Gaza. We saw that these attacks end once the ceasefire went into effect in January. But as the U.S. -- as the Israelis have tightened
control of what's going into the Gaza Strip, the Houthis have vowed to ramp up their attacks again. Isa.
[14:15:00]
SOARES: I know you'll stay across this for us. Alex Marquardt there in Washington. Thanks, Alex. And still to come tonight, the deputy Prime
Minister and Foreign Minister of Belgium, Maxime Prevot joins me live from Brussels. You're going to see that conversation. And as alleged, gang
members arrive in El Salvador from the U.S., questions are asked about a war-time Powers Act used to justify the deportation. We'll look at both
those stories after this very short break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SOARES: More now on our top story this hour. The world awaits for tomorrow's phone call between Donald Trump, President Trump and President
Vladimir Putin. Ukraine and Europe's overall security, as you well know are on the line. Speaking earlier, the White House said as far as it's
concerned, a ceasefire deal is within reach. Have a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: I can say we are on the 10th yard line of peace, and we've never been closer to a peace deal than we are
in this moment.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SOARES: Well, let's get more on this. My next guest is the deputy Prime Minister of Belgium, Maxime Prevot joins us from Brussels. Deputy Prime
Minister, welcome to the show. Let me get your take then on whether you -- what we just heard there from the White House Press Secretary saying we're
on the 10th yard line of peace. Do you agree with that?
MAXIME PREVOT, DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER, BELGIUM: Before agree or not with the State Secretary, I will remind, because it's very important for an
international point of view and also for the Americans that, we all want the war to end. Ukraine, Europe and the U.S. And we know that the country
that attacked Ukraine without being provoked is clearly Russia.
And so, we value the personal engagement of President Trump in this conflict. And -- but we also see that the ceasefire proposed, thanks to the
Jeddah talks, until now, not agreed by the Russian part, they drag their feet and they push Maximalist demands, before being able to say yes, to
this important ceasefire. It's why it's really important to continue to put pressure on the -- on Russia.
SOARES: Let me just play what we heard from the European Union's top foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas. I want to play that sound. We can talk
afterwards, Minister. Have a listen.
[14:20:00]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KAJA KALLAS, EU HIGH REPRESENTATIVE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS: Those conditions that they have presented, it shows that they don't really want peace,
actually, because they are presenting as conditions all their ultimate goals that they want to achieve from the war.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SOARES: So, let me put that to you. If they don't want peace, first, do you agree? Do you think that President Putin is serious about peace?
PREVOT: It doesn't seem to know that he's really serious. We are not naive. And we have seen how little respect Russia had for the Minsk Accords by the
past. Though -- so, this time, Russia is likely to try to impose another set of unacceptable conditions, and only Ukraine should ultimately be able
to decide.
But we are convinced from -- as far as Belgium is concerned, that the proposal for a ceasefire remains a step in the right direction. And
anything that leads to lasting peace is always welcome. But we need, of course, a reaction, a positive reaction from the Russian counterpart. And
this is still not the case today.
SOARES: And let's talk about those unacceptable conditions that you're talking about there, Minister. You know that you probably heard what
President Trump has said just in the last 24 hours, basically saying that negotiators have discussed what he called, quote, "dividing up assets". How
do you interpret those words? Because President Zelenskyy has been very clear in terms of territory.
But how do you interpret dividing up those assets? What would be acceptable, you think, to Ukraine, but also to your -- in Europe's view?
PREVOT: Well, to be honest from a European point of view and perspective, we do not think that this is a commercial negotiation. It's first of all, a
question of principles. I mean, the respect of flow, international law, the respect of territorial integrity and the sovereignty of the different
states of the world. And so, it's really the Belgian compass in order to decide which way we can achieve a peaceful and lasting peaceful agreements.
It's why we are not convinced that the commercial approach is the right one. First of all, we need to reaffirm the importance of the international
law and the rules of the game needs to be the same for every country. And we don't think that it should be acceptable asking to use the minor rules
of a critical materials from a country in order to provide support to this country?
And on the other end, we also think that to be honest, negotiate before -- negotiating before a ceasefire, the fact that some parts of the territory
of Ukraine should be -- leave -- to the Russian -- to Russia is certainly not acceptable.
SOARES: And Minister, what I'm hearing is that you're not convinced, but what you're likely to get out of President Putin that you're also not naive
about what you're likely to get. I mean, that sounds pretty pessimistic in terms of this conversation that President Putin, President Trump are likely
to have.
What do you think then will bring Putin to the negotiating table? What carrots? What sticks do you think will get them over the line if anything
at all, Minister?
PREVOT: But it's certainly the way of thinking, which is a problem, because normally if you want to achieve a ceasefire, first of all, you accept it,
and afterwards you discuss about the condition for a lasting and just peace. But here, the Russian President is demanding some conditions before
having a ceasefire.
It's not the way the -- it's not come from the rules of the game. So, I think that we have seen the last days that the President Zelenskyy was
really open to find a solution for a ceasefire. And it didn't demand some previous condition for that. But it's really not the case for President
Putin.
[14:25:00]
So, it's not acceptable. We need to have a same footing approach for the condition of a ceasefire.
SOARES: Yes, and what I have been hearing here on my show, what has -- Europe has been very clear, we heard from President, we heard from Prime
Minister Starmer, we heard from the French President, is this insistent Europe clearly on this backstop? We haven't heard that so far from the
United States.
But let me get your point of view and what Belgium would be prepared to do here, because I heard your Defense Minister or I should say I read your
Defense Minister's say in an interview with the "Financial Times" that he would be open to be sending -- to sending troops to Ukraine. Just explain
that thought and under what conditions?
PREVOT: It's true. It's of course not fighting troops. We are not studying the fact to send Belgian army to the ground in order to fight against
Russia. But in case there is a lasting ceasefire, and I hope so, a short term or mid-term, a peace process, Belgium will be able to provide with
some troops and support in the mission for the maintain of the peace process.
But it means that we need to have before that an international mandate, United Nations ones or European ones, but to be clear about the belief,
let's say, of the context, and we will analyze which type of support we can give. I think it's not necessary troops on the ground. It should be also,
for instance, marine assistance against the --
SOARES: Yes --
PREVOT: Mine detection, or for instance, support in the air, because we also have F-35.
SOARES: Very briefly, just chess game this out for me. Tomorrow, the call between President Trump and President Putin. What are we likely to see?
What is President Putin going to ask or going to request here?
PREVOT: It would be great if the conclusion of the contact and the call would be that Russia accepts a ceasefire with no extra conditions, and so
that they accept also to have a space for discussing for the future and the different conditions for peace process. But, you know, it's quite different
to be confident because the thing that Russia say on Monday are not especially the same on Wednesday. And so, we will observe this with some
expectations, but with no naive perspective.
SOARES: I hear you, Minister. Really appreciate you taking the time to speak to us. Minister there, Maxime Prevot. Thank you very much, sir.
PREVOT: Thank you for your invitation --
SOARES: Thank you --
PREVOT: Thank you so much --
SOARES: You're very welcome. Thank you. And still to come tonight, a judge asked why the Trump administration used war-time powers to deport hundreds
of alleged gang members from the U.S. to El Salvador. And a doctor at a U.S. University is deported. What immigration officials say led to her
expulsion. Do stay tuned for that.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[14:32:10]
SOARES: Welcome back, everyone. A Brown University doctor was deported back to Lebanon over the weekend. This despite a judge's order to stop the
action. A hearing on the case was abruptly cancelled today.
A source tells CNN the doctor attended the funeral of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah in Lebanon. In a separate case, U.S. secretary of state,
Marco Rubio, is defending his decision to detain a prominent Palestinian activist.
Trump administration revoked Mahmoud Khalil's green card over his role in protest against the Israel-Hamas war at Columbia University. Khalil was
arrested and detained in New York early this month. He remains in custody at an immigration detention facility in Louisianian.
Joining us now is Corey Brettschneider, professor of political science at Brown University, the co-host, "The Oath and the Office" podcast, pardon
me, and author of the book, "The Presidents and the People." And I do want to note, first and foremost, that Mr. Brettschneider, Professor
Brettschneider is speaking on his own behalf and not for Brown University. This is very important.
So, just -- Corey, just start here first. Under -- for our viewers just around the world, under what grounds did they deport the professor here?
COREY BRETTSCHNEIDER, POLITICAL SCIENCE PROFESSOR, BROWN UNIVERSITY, AUTHOR, "THE PRESIDENTS AND THE PEOPLE" AND CO-HOST, "THE OATH AND THE
OFFICE" PODCAST: We're still learning. It's really unclear, frankly, in all of these cases there are normal ways to proceed with deportation or with
the revocation of a visa that would be consistent with due process. That would be hearings. There would be elaborate way of making sure that the
decision was arbitrary -- not arbitrary based on reasons.
But in the case regarding Brown, in the Khalil case, in the case of the Venezuelan deportations, what the government is trying to do is really
claim extraordinary powers beyond due process and even -- and this is the wild part, frankly, and the scary part, I should say, beyond the protection
of free speech.
So, in the Khalil case, for instance, they seem to just be admitting that this is about Khalil's opinions and his protest activity. So, that's what's
different this time. There are normal procedures of due process, and in all these cases, really and including those involving deportation of
Venezuelans, the government is reaching beyond that normal process.
SOARES: And from what I understand, the professor at Brown had a H -B visa. And correct me if I'm wrong here, that is pretty difficult to get. There
would have been very tough checks and balances on that, wouldn't there not?
BRETTSCHNEIDER: Absolutely. And in the Khalil case also, he had a visa. These are cases that we're focusing on not of undocumented people, but
people who were here legally. And I should just say under our constitution, due process isn't a privilege, it's a right. Our Constitution talks about
persons having rights of equal protection and due process.
[14:35:00]
And the same is true for free speech. This isn't a right that is sort of gifted to non-citizens, it has to do with a Constitutional limit on what
government can and can't do. And what government can't do is restrict people's viewpoints. And so, in all these cases, the government is -- you
know, when you add them up together is acting in this kind of extraordinary way.
And they're at -- they're using statutes that should be obsolete. They're still on the books evidently, but they haven't been used regularly. They're
obscure. In the Khalil case, they're using a red scare era law that seems to say that the people can be deported -- non-citizens can be deported if
they've acted contrary to U.S. foreign policy.
And in the case of the Venezuelan deportations and other cases, they're using a 1798 law, Isa, that goes back to my book that we talked about, the
John Adams administration passed a series of laws, including this one, to shut down the opposition. That's what they're reaching back to.
SOARES: And you know, give me a sense then, Corey, what you are seeing, because you're a professor at Brown, I know you're not here to speak, you
don't speak for them in this instance, but can you speak to the mood as we see this administration, as you pointed out there, targeting students and
now warning university students to be careful when traveling either, you know, domestically or internationally. That is pretty scary if you're a
student in the United States right now.
BRETTSCHNEIDER: Yes. So, I mean, the reason for that advice is very sound, which is that it's much easier to defend people's constitutional rights if
they're here. As we saw in the travel ban and other cases that if you're trying to get in the country from outside there are fewer rights and fewer
protections. So, the chance of a due process defense, a free speech defense within the country, including in the Khalil case, for instance, is much
stronger.
On a personal note, I'm happy to speak to that. You know, there's a sense in which some people want to read the Khalil case and say, oh, I don't
agree with his views. This is somebody very different from me. My theme is that case was never about anti-Semitism. It was about shutting down
dissent. And if Donald Trump is not coming for you now, it looks like he's going for some other group. He is coming for you in the future.
And this Brown case, of course, hits home. This is a colleague and, you know, far from being abstract. It's someone who works at the same
University. And I think I'm not the exception here. This is going to be true for lots of people when it comes to a shutdown of the right to
dissent.
SOARES: And put all these pieces that we have been seeing. You and I have been speaking about this for weeks now, but, you know, we've also seen
funds from key universities being withdrawn under this administration. So, put all this together. What image are you seeing? It's quite alarming for
us looking on this side, looking into what's happening in the United States right now.
BRETTSCHNEIDER: It should be alarming. I've talked about how many Latin American countries have seen a collapse of the various separation of powers
and the constitutional rights and legal rights of citizens into the executive and political scientists call that an auto coup or a self-coup.
And that's what we're seeing in the United States. These deliberate attempts to shut down the powers of Congress, to shut down the civil
liberties of citizens into executive power.
And one great example of that, unfortunate example, I should say, is the use of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, a monumental law passed because of free
speech, because of the protests of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and others prevailing on President Lyndon Johnson to pass this law about
nondiscrimination.
And what are they doing, this Trump administration? They're using that same law to try to shut down the free speech of private universities,
threatening the revocation of funds, unless they really shut down academic departments, put them in receivership, and punish speech. It really is not
just ironic, it's an incredible contradiction of our proud democratic history.
SOARES: Corey Brettschneider, very well said. As always, Corey, we really appreciate your insight. Thank you, Corey.
BRETTSCHNEIDER: Thank you, Isa.
SOARES: We're going to stay -- you're very welcome. We're going to stay in the United States because it has been almost two months since President
Trump took office and his immigration policies could soon backfire. There's been backlash from migrant advocates and lawsuits, as we were just
discussing there, over efforts to transfer migrants to the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba.
The White House has also invoked wartime powers, as you heard there from Brett, to speed up deportation of alleged gang members to a prison in El
Salvador. That is despite a court order to halt the move. The White House has denied it broke the order. In a few hours, the judge overseeing this
case is set to demand answers from the Trump administration over these deportations. The White House press secretary last hour defending though
the action. Have a listen.
[14:40:00]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: These are designated foreign terrorists. The president signed a proclamation on February 20, 2025
designating TDA as a foreign terrorist organization that was in consultation with the attorney general. The president has the right to do
that. And I think nobody would argue that Tren de Aragua should be designated a foreign terrorist organization.
If you want to have that argument, I'm happy to do it. These are heinous monsters, rapists, murderers, kidnappers, sexual assaulters, predators who
have no right to be in this country, and they must be held accountable.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What criteria though other than, say, tattoos, or maybe being in the wrong place at the wrong time, are you -- are they using to
determine that someone is actually a member of one of these organizations?
LEAVITT: Intelligence and the men and women on the ground in the interior of our country who are finally being allowed to do their jobs. Their hands
were tied under the previous administration, and as I said, they take their jobs very seriously. They should be trusted and respected by the American
public.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SOARES: Let's get more on this. CNN Politics Senior Reporter Stephen Collinson joins us now from Washington. And, Stephen, just picking up from
what we heard from the White House, I mean, I don't think anyone or none of the journalists I heard there were in any way sympathetic to these
criminals. The questions they were trying to pose is the order that really -- that this administration has ignored. So, how would you sum up how they
managed to really defy this order? On what grounds?
STEPHEN COLLINSON, CNN POLITICS SENIOR REPORTER: Right. Well, Karoline Leavitt there is making a political argument and not a legal one.
SOARES: Yes.
COLLINSON: As you say they want Americans to understand that these are, quote, "bad people" and they shouldn't be in the United States, but that's
not the issue. The issue here is first whether the Trump administration defied an order by a judge who said that flights must not depart and if
they're in the air, after his order, they should be returned to the United States. That's the first question.
The second question is whether the administration is breaking the law by using the Alien Enemies Act, it's an 18th century law that's only been
invoked three times in the United States, all of them in wartime. This allows the government to deport or detain nationals of a foreign country
with which the United States is at war, or if there is an invasion by a foreign government.
Now, Trump often said in his campaign trail appearances that the United States was under an invasion from undocumented migrants. from gang members,
et cetera. But the president doesn't get to decide whether the United States is at war. That is a duty reserved for Congress under the
Constitution to declare war.
So, there's all sorts of real questions here about why the administration legally is using this law. Politically, it's pretty clear because they want
to show that they're tough and they want to get these people out of the United States with as little scrutiny as they can as quickly as possible.
SOARES: Yes, and she was asked as well, and I think it was our Kaitlan Collins who asked about, you know, this is a verbal -- does a verbal order
not carry the same weight as a written order? And she dodged that one. But what we have seen, as I was speaking to Corey Brettschneider before I came
to you, really, Stephen, is Trump really pushing the courts time and time again on many issues, not only immigration? I wonder whether -- on your
insight, on that side, of whether the United States is itself facing a constitutional crisis? And how the courts at this point can keep checks,
you know, can keep him in check here?
COLLINSON: Well, Trump has a hugely expansion -- expansive view of American power, of political power under the presidency itself which a lot of people
don't believe is backed up by the Constitution. But you, you point to a real problem here because although a lot of the executive orders that Trump
has put into practice have been frozen by the courts, the administration is moving so quickly.
For example, in the dismantling of USAID, the international aid agency, the administration shut that down, stopped all its operations cut off medicines
to HIV/AIDS sufferers in Africa, et cetera, very quickly. By the time the courts intervened to say, well, this is probably not legal. We have to go
through the process to work this out. USAID is gone and it's not coming back. So, you can see the amount of destruction the administration can do
before the courts.
Really, what the case is that the court action is retrospective in curtailing the powers of a president. So, what's normally happened, at
least in my experience of covering four or five administrations, is that presidents are acutely conscious that their own constraints are very
important on their own actions because they don't want to go up to the law. What we have now is a president who doesn't see any constraints on his
actions, and therefore, there's a lot he can do before the courts can stop him.
[14:45:00]
A lot of these cases are going to end up going up to the Supreme Court. That takes months. Trump is creating facts on the ground now. They're going
to be very difficult for any future president to reverse.
SOARES: Indeed, he has brought -- you know, broad authority, but you know, where's the separation of powers? That's also another big angle that we've
been discussing. Stephen, as always, appreciated. Stephen Collinson there.
COLLINSON: Thanks.
SOARES: We're going to take a short break. We'll see you on the other side.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SOARES: It's being called a potentially massive gift to America's enemies. Activists and staffers are blasting the Trump administration's move to
dismantle state funded news networks. This, as the Voice of America, falls silent. The U.S. president signed an executive order on Friday slashing
funding for VOA's parent agency, which also runs Radio Free Europe, Radio Liberty, and Radio Free Asia.
VOA got its start in World War II as a means to fight fascist propaganda, and its role grew during the Cold War, broadcasting uncensored information
to countries behind the Iron Curtain. It now reaches 360 million people a week or at least it did.
Voice of America's director says virtually his entire staff was put on administrative leave. The National Press Club says the move, quote,
"undermines" America's long-standing commitment to a free and independent press. For its part, the White House accuses VOA of being radical and says
taxpayers shouldn't have to fund it.
Joining us now is CNN Chief Media Analyst Brian Stelter. Brian, good to see you. Just explain to our viewers right around the world, why this
administration, why the Trump administration is targeting a Voice of America and really what grounds does it have to try and dismantle, first of
all, the organization?
BRIAN STELTER, CNN CHIEF MEDIA ANALYST: This is part of the Trump administration's broader hostility toward media outlets, toward news
coverage. We've heard President Trump criticize Voice of America repeatedly over the years, and we've also heard Trump allies and pro-Trump websites
try to smear VOA and try to smear some of these other networks as being un- American and full of radical propaganda. Those are some of the words the White House used in a press release over the weekend.
But that language just does not relate, it's not accurate compared to what you see on the VOA website, or what you would hear from some of these local
language services. Some of those channels now, those radio stations, TV channels, they've now either gone totally dark or they've converted to
music stations because they have no news to report.
Viewers can go to voanews.com right now and see how the website's frozen in amber. There's no new articles since Saturday. It's a very strange
situation where the journalists were told on Saturday, stop writing, stop reporting, leave your office, stop doing it, and the place has just
basically been shut down.
What we don't know is whether the Trump administration wants to turn Voice of America into a propagandistic pro-Trump outlet, kind of like Voice of
Trump as opposed to Voice of America. There are some indications that that may be the plan down the road. But for now, staffers have been told to stop
working, some have already been laid off.
[14:50:00]
And as I said, it relates to this broader hostility toward media writ large. This means the contracts for Radio Free Europe, Radio Free Asia have
been canceled. Also, the Open Technology Fund, which tries to provide technology to keep an open free internet and to stop censors around the
world.
So, we've heard from a lot of advocates like Reporters Without Borders who say this is a win for China, for Russia, because of information efforts in
other countries that will continue, even though America has, at least for now, stopped its efforts to export democracy through news coverage around
the world.
Again, we don't know what the long-term plan is. Maybe Trump allies will try to restore some of these, but for now, they've gone dark.
SOARES: Look, the National Press Club said a really strong statement saying, if an entire newsroom can be sidelined overnight, what does that
say about the state of press freedom? So, just expand on that. I mean, are there any -- are there other organizations you think here that receive
federal funding that could be targeted in this? I don't know, PBS, NPR. Are they paying attention to this?
STELTER: Right. PBS and NPR are both in the -- you know, kind of in the sights of Trump administration officials. However, they will -- they don't
have as much vulnerability because they also have lots of other sources of income. Voice of America, Radio Free Asia were essentially totally funded
by the American government. That, of course, was done by Congress. This is an act of Congress. So, it'll be interesting to see if any Republican
lawmakers try to come to the rescue.
So, far though, we have not seen much of that happen. And as we're talking about with Stephen Collinson, Trump is willing and able to push the limits
of his power and let this wrecking ball continue to swing. This is another example of that wrecking ball approach. Going forward, maybe others will
come in to try to fill the gaps.
We've heard some European lawmakers say they'd like to maybe come forward and try to keep Radio Free Europe alive in some form. But at least for the
time being, these stations have gone dark, and that's also in Cuba, where there's the Office of Cuba Broadcasting, Voice of America has stations all
around the world. So, there's this moment of pause.
We don't know exactly what will happen next, but it is striking how many advocates for these groups have come forward, even a few Republican
lawmakers, not very many, not enough to make a difference, but at least some have come forward and said that these assets have been valuable in the
past.
There's an 80-year history of these networks, these stations, and more recently, websites providing news coverage and promoting democratic values.
It's been viewed as a form of American soft power, and Trump is letting that power weaken, at least for now.
SOARES: Indeed. It's what we have seen with many of his decisions in the last few months. Appreciate it. Brian Stelter, great to see you. Thank you.
And still to come tonight, extremely rare video of four snow leopards in Northern Pakistan. We'll bring you that next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[14:55:00]
SOARES: And finally, extraordinary footage of four snow leopards was captured in Northern Pakistan. Let me show you those. One of the world's
most elusive species, snow leopards are often revered. Two as the ghost of the mountains, making the recent video, of course, of the four big cats
even more remarkable.
Sadly, snow leopards are under threat from their sole predator, humans, with poaching, habitat loss, and much more leading to declining figures.
And this rare sighting raises hopes of improving environmental conditions in the area. This is according to the wildlife expert who recorded the
majestic animals only a short distance from his home. Truly beautiful to see.
That does it for us for this hour. Do stay right here in Newsroom with the one and only super cool Max Foster is up next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[15:00:00]
END
