Return to Transcripts main page

The Situation Room

Brian Walshe Murder Trial Continues; Interview With Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY); Ukraine Talks in Moscow. Aired 11:30a-12p ET

Aired December 03, 2025 - 11:30   ET

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

[11:30:00]

KURT VOLKER, FORMER U.S. SPECIAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR UKRAINE: Well, I'm not sure the peace talks are going to go anywhere, so I wouldn't really press for whether NATO is involved or not, although there should be very close coordination between the United States and our European allies.

But what really needs to happen is more pressure on Putin, as Mark Rutte, the secretary-general, just said. Going and having talks when Putin has made clear that he wants to subjugate Ukraine completely to Russia is just not going to go anywhere. Putin has to feel the pressure.

So that's going to be secondary sanctions on oil and gas trading. It's going to be long-range weapons that can hit deeper inside Russia to take out the military facilities that Russia is using to hit Ukraine, oil refineries, as Ukraine is doing on its own. Putin really has to feel the heat financially, economically, and militarily if we're going to get to a point where he has a cease-fire.

WOLF BLITZER, CNN HOST: The Kremlin says Putin has accepted at least some U.S. proposals on Ukraine and says Russia is ready to keep on talking. Are these negotiations, you believe, going anywhere?

VOLKER: Not at all.

If we remember how we got here, this was Russia producing its own proposals and giving them to Steve Witkoff, who turns around and puts out this 28-point plan, which was horrendous. It was just the Russian position. And then that was modified in negotiations between Marco Rubio, the Ukrainians, and European allies to produce a more reasonable plan. The Ukrainians said, this is passable.

And then the Russians reject that. There are probably a few points that made it into both plans, but they're just the original Russian points that the Russians are saying are OK. Meanwhile, they are not willing to stop the fighting. They're not going to have a cease-fire until they get everything that they want.

They're demanding Ukraine withdrawal from Ukrainian territory. It's really an incredibly maximalist position.

BLITZER: The NATO secretary-general, as you heard, Mark Rutte, offered his full-throated support for President Trump's peace efforts, saying President Trump is -- and I'm quoting him now -- "the only person in the whole world who can break this deadlock."

Should Europe be taking a more active role in the process, Ambassador? And what about other parties, for example, even China?

VOLKER: Yes, I do think Europe could be doing more. They have agreed already to spend a lot more on defense.

They are now coordinating delivery of American arms and ammunition through NATO mechanisms. Those are good steps. More that can be done. We could be integrating Ukraine's air defenses with NATO's own air defenses, so we could be helping them more with air defense.

NATO could have its own extended air defense zone going further toward Ukraine or into -- or covering part of Ukrainian territory to protect NATO populations, who have been exposed to drone and missile encroachments from Russia. They could be providing the frozen assets. They could be seizing those assets, the Russian Central Bank assets, using that to provide Ukraine money for ammunition, arms, and financial support.

So there's a lot that Europe could still be doing more of itself to make itself more relevant and be part of any kind of diplomatic discussions.

BLITZER: The Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy said today the head of the Ukrainian delegation is preparing to meet President Trump's representatives here in the United States. Where do you see this headed?

VOLKER: Well, I think that, for the Ukrainians, they send a delegation to Florida before the trip to Moscow. They want to get a readout, a detailed readout, after the trip to Moscow.

Ukraine has aligned itself with the United States very deliberately. They're willing to have a cease-fire in place, even though it means recognizing or accepting that Russia occupies 20 percent of Ukrainian territory. They are -- they have worked out this minerals deal. So there's a joint U.S.-Ukrainian investment fund.

So we have shared economic interests going forward. So Ukraine is assiduously linking itself to the U.S. and Europe because it wants to be and it will be a sovereign independent European democracy and part of Euro-Atlantic institutions. That's where this heads.

But getting there requires getting Putin to stop the fighting.

BLITZER: Ambassador Kurt Volker, thanks so much for joining us.

VOLKER: It's a pleasure, Wolf. Thank you.

BLITZER: Pamela.

PAMELA BROWN, CNN HOST: All right, up next here in THE SITUATION ROOM, the top House Democrat, Hakeem Jeffries, will join us. We're going to talk to him about the White House's defense of the controversial follow-up strike on an alleged drug boat in the Caribbean.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:39:57]

BROWN: Happening now: Venezuela is bracing for the possibility of land strikes by the U.S. military after President Trump said those could begin -- quote -- "very soon," this as the administration faces bipartisan scrutiny from Congress for conducting a controversial follow-up strike against a suspected drug boat in the Caribbean back in September after the first attack failed to kill everyone on board.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Somebody asked me a question about the second strike. I didn't know about the second strike.

I didn't know anything about people.

PETE HEGSETH, U.S. DEFENSE SECRETARY: I watched that first strike live. As you can imagine, at the Department of War, we got a lot of things to do. So I didn't stick around for the hour and two hours, whatever. I moved on to my next meeting.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Joining us now to discuss this and more, the House Democratic leader, Hakeem Jeffries of New York.

Leader Jeffries, thanks so much for joining us.

What's -- first of all, what's your response to what we heard there from President Trump and Defense Secretary Hegseth about that boat strike?

REP. HAKEEM JEFFRIES (D-NY): Well, there's a lot of explaining that the White House needs to do. Listen, at the end of the day, the buck stops with the president and the so-called secretary of defense.

[11:40:03]

And it's not clear to me that the so-called secretary of defense is being truthful in this instance. And so that's why it's going to be a complete and thorough bipartisan congressional investigation in both the House and the Senate, so we can uncover the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. That's what the American people deserve.

BLITZER: Why do you call him so-called defense secretary?

JEFFRIES: This is the most unqualified secretary of defense in American history.

I called for him to be terminated several months ago in the aftermath of the Signalgate scandal. And there's still some additional information and I think will be revealed to the American people as to why that was so problematic.

BLITZER: Yes, we're covering that as well.

Pamela, go ahead.

BROWN: He has said that everything he has done as the secretary of war has been lawful, but, given what you just said, do you think that he has committed impeachable offenses?

JEFFRIES: Well, there's reason to believe that war crimes may have been committed, and that's why we need a complete and thorough investigation, and I expect that that's exactly what's going to take place.

I'm hopeful that my Republican colleagues in both the House and the Senate will finally decide to act like a separate and co-equal branch of government and a check and balance on this out-of-control executive branch in this instance where there's reasons to be horrified by what took place, a potential extrajudicial killing off the coast of Venezuela.

BLITZER: On another issue that just has emerged within the last several minutes, Leader Jeffries, President Trump has announced a pardon of the Texas Democratic Congressman Henry Cuellar and his wife, who were charged with bribery.

What's your response?

JEFFRIES: Well, Congressman Cuellar is a beloved member of the House of Representatives, loved in his community, particularly in Laredo. I have had the opportunity to spend time with him down in Laredo in South Texas. I look forward to that moving forward.

Listen, the reality is, this indictment was very thin to begin with, in my view. The charges were eventually going to be dismissed, if not at the trial court level, by the Supreme Court, as they have repeatedly done in instances just like this.

BROWN: So, just to follow up on that, you do you agree with the president's pardon here? Do you think that was a good thing then?

JEFFRIES: I don't know why the president decided to do this. I think the outcome was exactly the right outcome.

BROWN: Well, just -- well, Congressman Cuellar, we should note, is one of a handful of House Democrats who sits in a district President Trump won in 2024. So now he has this presidential pardon. Have you had any conversations with the congressman about him potentially switching to the Republican Party?

JEFFRIES: I think Congressman Cuellar is a highly, highly valued member of the House Democratic Caucus, and I expect that he will continue to remain a highly valued member of the House Democratic Caucus.

BROWN: What about reelection plans? Has he informed you of that? JEFFRIES: No, I think the filing deadline in Texas is upcoming in the

next few days. Many of the members of the Texas congressional delegation have yet to file for reelection. I expect that we will see that happen in advance of the Monday deadline.

BLITZER: We will see what he decides.

The U.S. is immediately pausing immigration applications for individuals from some 19 countries, including Afghanistan, and temporarily holding asylum decisions. Do you see any upside at all to these steps by the Trump administration in the wake of that tragic shooting of two National Guard members here in Washington, D.C., by an Afghan national who was vetted and was here legally?

JEFFRIES: Yes, the administration hasn't fully and completely explained their rationale for taking this decision, but here's what I know.

The American people want Donald Trump and Republicans to actually keep their promises on the issues that they said they would focus on, which includes dealing with the affordability crisis that exists here in the United States of America, notwithstanding the fact that Donald Trump apparently believes that the high cost of living in this country is a scam.

It is not a scam. These people promised that they were going to lower costs on day one. Costs aren't going down. They're going up, housing costs out of control, grocery costs out of control, electricity prices out of control.

And now, because Republicans refused to extend the Affordable Care Act tax credits, tens of millions of people are about to experience dramatically increased health care costs that will prevent them from being able to go see a doctor when they need one. These are the issues that the American people want to see progress made on.

House Democrats are prepared to make that progress. But we need partners on the other side of the aisle.

BROWN: And we will get more -- we will get to more on affordability in just a moment, but just to follow up, one of President Trump's key campaign promises was also on immigration, right?

So, even if you disagree with the way this immigration crackdown is happening, according to government data, U.S. Border Patrol has released zero undocumented migrants into the U.S. for six consecutive months and daily average apprehensions at the southwest border are lower now than under Biden.

Are you willing to give President Trump any credit for that?

JEFFRIES: Well, let's take the two issues together, right? First, we believe in a safe, strong and secure border. And that's important, and we will continue to stand behind that.

[11:45:05] At the same period of time, we acknowledge, of course, we have a broken immigration system. It needs to be fixed, but it should be fixed in a comprehensive and in a bipartisan way. The American people strongly disagree with the approach that Donald Trump has taken in terms of interior enforcement and immigration, because Republicans promised that they were going to go after violent felons.

We support that. They're not going after violent felons. They're breaking up families, law-abiding immigrant families, in some cases actually deporting citizen children of the United States of America. That's completely and totally unacceptable. And the American people know it, which is why, in the most recent Gallup poll, Donald Trump's approval rating on immigration was underwater by 25 points.

BROWN: And it is true that the polls show, in terms of the tactics used, that the majority don't like the tactics being used, but in terms of the border securing, the border, can you give President Trump any credit for securing the border?

Because, as you know, that was a big issue under the Biden administration, when you had record border crossings. And those border crossings have gone down dramatically. Can you give him credit for that?

JEFFRIES: The border is secure. That's a good thing. It's happened on his watch. He wants to claim credit for it. Of course, he will get credit for that.

In terms of making sure that we actually deal with the issues that matter, including on immigration or beyond, there's a lot that is left to be desired.

BLITZER: You know, another sensitive comment from the president, and I just want to get your reaction, Leader Jeffries, the president ended his Cabinet meeting yesterday by referring to Somalis and Democratic Congresswoman Ilhan Omar specifically, and I'm quoting him now -- he said they were -- quote -- "garbage."

How do you respond to that?

JEFFRIES: Well, it's an outrageous statement from the president directed at a member of Congress who is well regarded, who's a strong advocate, Representative Ilhan Omar, for the communities that she represents in the great state of Minnesota.

But this Is consistent with the type of xenophobic behavior that we have seen from this president, from the administration, from my Republican colleagues, instead of focusing on the issues that matter, because they have no solutions, they have no intention, they have no plans, they have no legislative agenda to actually drive down the high cost of living or fix our broken health care system.

That's why they're losing races all over the country and underperforming, including what we just saw last night in Tennessee.

BROWN: Unaffordability and on health care, House Republicans, tell CNN they're still working to reach a consensus on those enhanced Affordable Care Act subsidies set to expire at the end of this month.

As we know, was it a mistake for, now looking back in hindsight, to agree to end the government shutdown without a resolution to this looming health care crisis?

JEFFRIES: Well, House Democrats are going to continue to fight to address our broken health care system and deal with the Republican health care crisis.

Understand, these people are destroying the health care of the American people in real time. They enacted the largest cut to Medicaid in American history. More than 14 million people are about to lose their health insurance as a result of what Republicans did in their one big ugly bill.

Hospitals, nursing homes, community-based health centers are closing throughout the country. They're attacking the Centers for Disease Control, the National Institute of Health, making vaccines unavailable. Children are going sick. And now they refuse to deal with the Affordable Care Act tax credit extensions.

So we as Democrats, we're going to continue the fight. We have a discharge petition that has the support of all 214 members of the House Democratic Caucus. All we need are four Republicans, just four. There's 219 of them. All we need is four to join us and we can get an up-and-down vote on passing a three-year extension of the Affordable Care Act tax credits to protect and save the health care of working- class Americans.

BROWN: Just to follow up with you, what do you say to the Republicans? Because I know you are criticizing what they have done on Medicaid, but what do you say to Republicans who say that what's going on right now with the health care subsidies is a crisis of the Democrats' own making with the Affordable Care Act and even setting this expiration date, and the fact that these premiums would now go up so much past this month of nothing is resolved in Congress?

How do you respond to what Republicans say about that?

JEFFRIES: Listen, we have made clear overall that there are a lot of challenges with the health care system and we're committed to fixing every aspect of our broken health care system.

But the Affordable Care Act is understandably embraced by the majority of the American people, because they know that it's an important part of making sure that health insurance can remain affordable for working-class Americans, middle-class Americans, and everyday Americans.

We're talking about tens of millions of people, including in many red states across the country. In fact, the states that would be most impacted if the Affordable Care Act tax credits expire are Republican- run states. We're talking about West Virginia, Wyoming, Alaska, Mississippi, Tennessee, South Carolina, Alabama, Texas, North Dakota, and South Dakota. Those are the 10 states most impacted if the Affordable Care Act tax credits expire. [11:50:08]

So, we're fighting to protect the health care of the American people. This is not a partisan issue for us. It is a patriotic issue, because, in this country, wealthiest country in the history of the world, health care can't simply be a privilege available only to the wealthy and the well-off. It's got to be a right that's accessible and available to every single American.

BLITZER: The House Democratic leader, Hakeem Jeffries, thanks so much for joining us. We will continue these conversations, to be sure, down the road.

And we will have more news right after this.

BROWN: Appreciate your time.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:55:17]

BROWN: Happening now: The murder trial of Brian Walshe is back in session in Massachusetts. Walshe is accused of murdering his wife, Ana, on New Year's Day, 2023, and he admits he disposed of his wife's body, but he insists he did not kill her, saying he found her dead in their bed that night.

Prosecutors have shown the jury pages of evidence showing Walshe allegedly searched online for information on how to dispose of a body and how to clean up blood stains around the time his wife disappeared.

CNN illegal analyst and defense attorney Joey Jackson joins us now.

So, Joey, two days into the trial, how are things going?

JOEY JACKSON, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Yes, Pamela, good to be with you.

It seems as though the prosecution is putting on a very compelling case with regard to him having murdered his wife. Why? They're putting it on because you look at the Google searches, for example.

And what I mean is that he was Googling things on New Year's Day in the wee hours at 5:00 in the morning in terms of how to dispose of a body with regard to how to conceal DNA on a knife, with regard to the smell and decomposition and how you get rid of it, and then, the day after, how to hacksaw your wife, how to really saw someone, and get rid of the body.

And it goes on and on and on. And so the timeline they're putting on seems to leave no doubt that this raises issues of consciousness of guilt. Does a normal person make these searches, and is it suggestive of the fact that he killed her?

The critical issue though, Pamela, and the prosecution has to prove is that it was done in a premeditated way. And we heard in the cross- examination of the defense of, yes, we have these Google searches, but did they not come after the fact? There is nothing that would suggest planning and preparation, and there would be Google searches in this regard prior to him killing her, is the defense's argument if this was a preplanned, meditated murder.

So I do believe the prosecution is putting on a very compelling case as to him being involved in her death. The critical inquiry is whether or not the jury believes, Pamela, that this was a premeditated murder or was it something else? And that's going to be left for them, of course, the jury, to determine.

BROWN: So Walshe has admitted to disposing of his wife's body, but he says he didn't kill her. People wonder, well, why didn't you call 911? You're a defense attorney. How would you be arguing this case?

JACKSON: So, I think that what the defense did here, Pamela, is, they're making the calculus that they can get their client off completely.

And what they're doing in that regard is, they're saying she died of sudden death, right? She just died. It's not explainable. It's this syndrome where people do die. That's a heavy lift, and it's a heavy lift because of a couple of things.

The first thing is, is that she certainly, all indications, a healthy person, a person who was living her life vivaciously, no indications to this point of any prior medical history or issue. And so it kind of defies common sense of how she would just die.

The other reason it's a heavy lift is because, if that is the case and you found her in the bed dying of a death like that, would you not call 911? Would you not shout to the mountaintops? Would you not go get a neighbor? Instead, he chops her up and disposes his -- body, which he pled guilty to, as you noted, all around the town.

He just chops her up and puts her in different garbage bags and disposes of her. And then he lies to the police about what happened, lies to the police about her having left, et cetera. So I think what they're doing does not comply with common sense.

I think a far better strategic play is to argue the issue potentially of heat of passion, to argue that something went amiss, to argue the death was accidental. But to suggest, hey, I just don't know what happened, she just died suddenly, I think that could be a significant miscalculation and it could lead the jury to believe that he's actually guilty, he's conscious of that guilt, and that's why he's doing these horrific Google searches that he is.

So I think it's a misstep, but it'll be up to the jury to make that determination. And, by the way, Pamela, that's critical because, if it's first-degree murder, it's life without parole. If it's heat of passion because they have gotten to an argument, it's 10 to 20 years. And if it's second-degree murder, which is it's not preplanned, but it is in fact the death, then, of course, you can still get out of jail.

And he's 50 years old. So we will see what the jury says.

BROWN: What do you make of the searches of a ring and a Porsche that the prosecutors have been talking about?

JACKSON: So what the defense is arguing is, is that the search of a ring and a Porsche would be suggestive of him loving his wife, would be suggestive of him wanting to preserve the relationship. And that's because he really, really loved her.

From the perspective of the prosecution, she was involved in an affair and that was a motivation, her affair, for her to kill him. In addition, the prosecution argues a financial incentive. She has this life insurance policy.

[12:00:04]

So, like anything else, it cuts both ways, but certainly the prosecution is making the argument that, because of that affair, he killed her, because of the financial motivation, he killed her as well. We will see if it resonates with the jury as the trial unfolds.

BROWN: All right, Joey Jackson, thanks so much -- Wolf.

JACKSON: Thanks, Pamela.

BLITZER: And, to our viewers, thanks so much for joining us this morning.

"INSIDE POLITICS" with our friend and colleague Dana Bash starts right now.

BROWN: Have a great day, everyone.