Return to Transcripts main page

The Situation Room

Vance, Netanyahu Meet in Israel to Shore Up Ceasefire in Gaza; Trump Prepares to Welcome NATO Secretary General to White House; Trump Says, Could Be Seeking $230 from DOJ for Investigations. Aired 10- 10:30a ET

Aired October 22, 2025 - 10:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:00:00]

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: Happening now, fortifying the ceasefire. U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance is in Israel right now meeting with its prime minister and the president, as Benjamin Netanyahu praises what he's calling the unmatched alliance with the United States.

Plus, payback for probes, question mark, why President Trump says he could be seeking $230 million from his own Department of Justice.

Also, immigration cracked down backlash. Listen.

A chaotic scene in New York City as ICE agents go after illegal street vendors.

And later, pushing for a pause, why a preservation group is urging the White House to immediately stop demolition of the East Wing of the White House as the Trump administration plows full speed ahead.

Welcome to our viewers here in the United States and around the world. I'm Wolf Blitzer. Pamela Brown is on assignment today, and you're in The Situation Room.

New this morning, shoring up the very fragile ceasefire in Gaza, the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu is sitting down with Vice President J.D. Vance in Jerusalem. And this morning, we're learning that Secretary of State Marco Rubio is due to visit Israel tomorrow, and this would mark an extraordinary third visit by top U.S. officials in just two weeks. That's a very strong sign of the Trump administration's commitment to this agreement.

CNN Jerusalem Bureau Chief Oren Liebermann is joining us now. Oren, what are you learning? First of all, what's the latest this morning?

OREN LIEBERMANN, CNN JERUSALEM BUREAU CHIEF: Wolf, Vice President J.D. Vance met Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu this morning in Jerusalem, and expressed optimism that the ceasefire deal itself would hold. He acknowledged it will be difficult, it will take work after saying yesterday that there will be what he called hills and valleys, even skirmishes that might break out between Israel and Hamas, but that the overall ceasefire deal, the U.S.-brokered agreement, will hold.

And you see the effort here by the United States. First, we had President Donald Trump here just a few days ago. Now we have Vice President J.D. Vance here. And tomorrow, Secretary of State Marco Rubio will arrive, according to two Israeli officials. That's remarkable in that it's three of the highest ranking U.S. officials here on separate visits within just a matter of two weeks. And that underscores the amount of political capital the U.S. is expending to make sure that the deal itself holds.

You saw Vance standing in front of a number of flags yesterday at what's called the CMCC, the Civil Military Coordination Center, talk about the countries that are willing to take part in not only the effort to rebuild and secure Gaza but also in the international security force. That's a major U.S. effort that still needs details. It still has to take shape. And that's what the U.S. is clearly trying to push forward here with these visits and with this effort here. You see that moving forward.

In addition though, you also see as Netanyahu crows about coordination between the U.S. and Israel, a weariness of how committed he is to the ceasefire deal. And that's another reason we see these top U.S. officials here to make sure Israel sticks to the deal.

BLITZER: All right. Oren Liebermann in Jerusalem for us with the latest, thank you very much.

Also happening now, President Trump is about to welcome NATO's secretary general to the White House. Mark Rutte's visit comes just days after the President urged Ukraine to consider surrendering very large sections of territory to Russia in order to try to end the war. Rutte and other European leaders have tried to convince President Trump to back Ukraine more forcefully.

We're following all of the angles. CNN's Alayna Treene is joining us from the White House, CNN's National Security Correspondent Kylie Atwood is here with me in The Situation Room.

Alayna, you're over there at the White House. What can you tell us, first of all, about the president's meeting later today with the head of NATO?

TREENE: Yes. Mark Rutte, Wolf, is expected to arrive here around 4:00 P.M. for a meeting with the president. This meeting was actually pretty hastily arranged. It comes after not only the president's phone call, as you mentioned, with the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, on Thursday, but also after a very tense meeting with the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, on a Friday. And, essentially, that meeting, particularly the one with Zelenskyy, is what raised a lot of red flags in Europe among, you know, both the United States, but also Ukraine's allies who are trying to ensure that Ukraine doesn't have to give up too much in a way to negotiate the end to this war.

[10:05:10]

It also comes, of course, as we know, that the president has now tabled this idea of having a meeting with Putin within the next two weeks. He had initially floated that immediate meeting. We're now learning that that is being pushed off, at least for now. And so keep that in mind.

But one thing to note, Wolf, is that Rutte is sometimes considered a Trump whisperer. And so you're going to see some efforts on his part to try and make sure he's still as committed to Ukraine as he has always been.

BLITZER: We'll see how that meeting goes later today.

Alayna Treene at the White House for us, thank you.

I want to go to our National Security Correspondent Kylie Atwood right now. Kylie, President Trump's plans for a second summit with Vladimir Putin appeared to have been stall. There was supposed to be a meeting coming up very soon in Budapest, Hungary, as you know. So, what's the latest, what's going on? Moscow says that might not necessarily be the final word.

KYLIE ATWOOD, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Moscow's trying to make the case that there is nothing to look at here. There are preparations that are still underway for this summit that's expected between President Trump and President Putin, saying that there was no date on the calendar, so how could anything have been delayed in the first place, saying that there are active preparations underway. That doesn't negate the reality, however, that President Trump said last week that he expected that he would meet with the Russian leader within two weeks. And now we're hearing from the White House that there are no plans for immediate meeting between the two.

So, it's very clear that the White House is taking stock of the situation. It doesn't mean that there are no plans underway for a potential meeting, but it's not clear right now that that is going to happen within the timeframe that President Trump laid out himself.

BLITZER: Because officials are saying basically publicly that the president is not ready to meet with Putin if it's going to simply be another waste of time.

ATWOOD: Exactly. And Trump said himself that he doesn't want it to be a waste of time. So, if you listen to the president's remarks, it's clear that he's trying to figure out what the best pathway forward is here to make sure that he doesn't have another summit where there isn't really any tangible benefit to trying to end the Ukraine war.

BLITZER: I know you and your colleague, Betsy Klein, my colleague as well, also have some new reporting on the first lady's efforts to return Ukrainian kids, children, from Russian captivity. What are you learning?

ATWOOD: Yes. So, earlier this month, First Lady Melania Trump announced that she had actually worked directly with President Putin and they had secured the release of eight Ukrainian children who were in Russian territory. Now, many advocates have welcomed her involvement here. She cares a lot about children. This seemed to be a natural fit for her. But we have also heard from some concerns about the language that she used when she made this announcement. I want to read to you some of that language, saying, Ukrainian children were residing in Russia, they had been displaced by the frontline fighting. And you talk to people and they say that is not accurately representing the magnificent -- excuse me, the massive issue that they're facing here with 20,000 to 30,000 children who have not just been lost on the frontlines, but abducted by Russia.

So, there're some concerns within the advocate community here that she needs to change her language on this front. We'll watch and see where this goes because President Zelenskyy met with President Trump at the White House last week, and he was actually asked about this. President Trump said that this was an effort Melania wanted to get involved in in her own volition, but President Zelenskyy didn't even speak to this question at all. He just stood there and nodded, speaking to perhaps the delicate nature of this topic.

BLITZER: Yes, it's such a sensitive issue, these kids taken away from their parents and brought to Russia. And the important thing as Melania Trump is trying to do is get these kids back with their moms and dads.

ATWOOD: Of course. And when they go there, a lot of times their identity is completely changed. So, it's not only hard to get them back, but also to find them if their names are changed and things like that.

BLITZER: Yes. Let's hope it works out.

All right, Kylie, thank you very, very much.

Still ahead, chaos on Canal Street, ICE targeting illegal street vendors in New York City, sparking new protests overnight.

And right now, Democratic Senator Jeff Merkley's marathon speech opposing President Trump, 15 hours and counting.

Stay with us. You're in The Situation Room.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:10:00]

BLITZER: New this morning, a preservation group now wants the White House to put demolition of the East Wing of the White House on hold, but it might be too late. Crews tore further into the building on Tuesday to make way for President Trump's proposed White House ballroom.

Still, the National Trust for Historic Preservation sent a letter saying that any construction should be paused until the plans go through the proper legal review processes, noting that the addition would, quote, overwhelm the White House itself. It is 55,000 square feet and may also permanently disrupt the carefully balanced classical design of the White House, end quote. The administration did not respond to our request for comment on this letter.

Also, new this morning, President Trump responding to a New York Times report that he's now seeking, get this, $230 million from the U.S. Justice Department for past investigations into him. Here's what he told CNN's Kaitlan Collins. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Because the New York Times is reporting that your legal team is seeking $230 million from your own Justice Department now in response to the investigations into you. Is that something you want your legal team to do?

DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: I don't know what the numbers are. I don't even talk to them about it. All I know is that they would owe me a lot of money, but I don't -- I'm not looking for money. I'd give it to charity or something. I would give it to charity.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[10:15:00]

BLITZER: The president went on to argue that the investigations have damaged him.

CNN Crime and Justice Correspondent Katelyn Polantz is here with me. Katelyn, can the president actually do this legally?

KATELYN POLANTZ, CNN SENIOR CRIME AND JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Well, Wolf, that is going to be the question we will wait and see if there's an answer to if this Justice Department negotiate and agrees to give Donald Trump money, but put this down as one of those things where we've never been here before. What Donald Trump did in 2023, according to The New York Times, and also in 2024, is he filed forms with the Justice Department saying that he was harmed and that he wanted them to give him money.

Now, this is the type of form that is usually filed because you have some sort of personal injury, death or property loss because of something the federal government did or failed to do, pretty serious claims. What Trump is saying is that in 2023, he said that he deserved money because of the Russia investigation when he was running for office, and then after in 2016. And then in 2024, the claim he filed because of the search of Mar-a-Lago. And he says, we're able to see that claim, the Times published it, he says that because there was an intrusion there by the FBI, approved by the attorney general as well, that that should have been something that he's harmed for and should be getting money out of, but there's major ethics issues here too on whether his own Justice Department would give him money.

BLITZER: And if he were, presumably, I suspect, that's not going to happen, but if he were to get that $230 million from the U.S. Justice Department, would that be considered income for him? And if he donates all that money to charity, could he deduct that charitable contribution and avoid paying any income tax at all?

POLANTZ: Wolf, I wish I knew the answer to that question. It is one of those things that we would have to come to if it happens. This is not the type of thing that people are usually doing with that sort of money. Past payments like this are often being made by the federal government, because of injuries people incur when they're in a government-run hospital, in a military hospital, in a V.A. hospital, birth injuries to children, injuries to people who -- families whose relatives have died in mass shootings. And this number that Trump is asking for is much larger than what is normally paid out.

BLITZER: Yes. Well, let's see what happens.

All right, Katelyn, thank you very, very much.

Coming up, a rioter pardon for his actions back on January 6th is accused of threatening to kill the top Democrat in the House of Representatives, Hakeem Jeffries. How investigators were tipped off. We have new information.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:20:00]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They don't even got badges, y'all.

BLITZER: A chaotic scene in the streets of New York City as federal agents carry out President Trump's immigration crackdown. A source now telling CNN ICE agents began arresting illegal street vendors in the city's Chinatown neighborhood triggering protests.

Overnight, hundreds of people showed up to demonstrate near federal buildings in Lower Manhattan just blocks from where the arrests were made.

In Chicago, meanwhile, a court hearing is underway where a judge will decide whether to extend an order blocking the president from deploying U.S. National Guard troops in the city.

I want to bring in CNN's Legal Analyst and former Federal Prosecutor Elliot Williams. Elliot, thanks for joining us.

What's at play in this case and how do you expect the judge out there in Chicago will rule?

ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Right. Well, Wolf, in all of these cases, really, what is at play is how proper was the deployment or is the deployment of the National Guard into these cities? And it really comes down to two questions. One, is there a rebellion or insurrection that the National Guard is required to suppress? Not really. That's not really the case. But more importantly, could it be said that the government cannot carry out its functions without the sort of the introduction of the National Guard there. And that's really the question that all of these courts across the country are considering. Was the deployment proper and did the president overstep his bounds by ensuring that the National Guard was sent there.

BLITZER: In California, as you know, a federal appeals court today is set to hear arguments related to President Trump's deployment of National Guard troops in Los Angeles. They'll decide whether to vacate an earlier ruling that found that deployment violated federal law. What are you expecting?

WILLIAMS: It's just hard to know given sort of how many strange bedfellows seem to be created over this question. Now, you know, obviously the court below had ruled, you know, with -- you know, had issued a ruling here. I think what the appeals court really is going to look at is again that central question of how proper was the deployment.

Now, it can be said that the federal government is still quite capable of carrying out its immigration functions because the fact that the federal government is removing people from the country at a greater rate than has ever happened before.

Now, the argument from the government, and it's a very fair one, is that protests or even violence get in the way of the government carrying out its immigration functions regardless of what anybody thinks of them. And so both -- you know, it's really two very important government interest at issue here.

Just to note, whenever a matter goes to an appeals court in the United States, it goes to a panel of three judges who evaluate the lower judge's rules, and then it can go again to the full court of 11 or 12 judges.

[10:25:07]

So, no matter what gets ruled -- or the Supreme Court -- no matter what gets decided today, it will not be the final word on the deployment of the National Guard in California.

BLITZER: And as you point out, a federal appeals court could reconsider whether to overturn a big victory Trump got earlier this week that actually allowed him to deploy the National Guard troops in Portland, Oregon. What's happening here?

WILLIAMS: Right. It was a little -- it's a fascinating legal question in Oregon because the lower court judge had said that the deployment of Oregon's National Guard was not appropriate. Then authorities deployed National Guard from other states saying, well, look, you'd only said that we couldn't deploy the Oregon National Guard here.

What happens if we introduce the National Guards of other states? They really come down to the same question of, can law enforcement in Oregon or California or Chicago or wherever else, can they carry out their functions? Can they protect federal buildings? Can they ensure that immigration functions are still carried out without this sort of imposition or introduction of federal forces? And it's an important question of federalism. What right does the president have really to tell governors or mayors how to direct their law enforcement personnel? So, it's quite complicated and it's hard to see exactly how the Ninth Circuit is going to come out here.

I will note that appeals court, the Ninth Circuit, has traditionally been a more politically, quote/unquote, liberal one across decades. It has shifted to the right in recent years also because President Trump has put a lot of judges on it. So, it's just hard to handicap at this point from where any of us sit exactly how the Ninth Circuit's going to rule on anything.

BLITZER: All right. Elliot Williams, we'll see how all this unfolds. Lots at stake, as we know, thank you very much.

Also, new this morning, a New York man has been arrested for allegedly threatening to kill the House Democratic leader, Hakeem Jeffries. Christopher Moynihan was convicted of charges related to the January 6th attack on the U.S. Capitol, but President Trump actually pardoned him along with others earlier this year.

And just ahead, with no end in sight to the shutdown, federal law workers who aren't getting paid during this shutdown are now turning to food pantries for basic necessities.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I haven't gotten a paycheck this month.

You got to save every dime at this point. You know, with rent, car note, car insurance, student loans, those are not stopping.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:30:00]