Return to Transcripts main page

The Situation Room

NATO Chief Meets With Ministers From Greenland And Denmark; DOJ Investigating Protesters Who Disrupted Church Service; CNN Poll: Democrats Highly Motivated To Vote In Midterms. Aired 11-11:30a ET

Aired January 19, 2026 - 11:00   ET

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

PAMELA BROWN, CNN ANCHOR: -- it's protests around Minneapolis.

[11:00:02]

Well, welcome to our viewers in the United States and around the world. I'm Pamela Brown. Wolf Blitzer is off. And you're in The Situation Room.

And we begin with that breaking news and a presidential message that puts the world on notice. This morning, we are learning about this extraordinary letter President Trump sent about his goal of taking over Greenland in defiance of U.S. allies.

It was sent to Norway's prime minister and it ties his Greenland ambitions to his recent disappointment. The President writes, "Dear Jonas, considering your country decided not to give me the Nobel Peace Prize for having stopped eight wars plus, I no longer feel an obligation to think purely of peace, although it will always be predominant, but can now think about what is good and proper for the United States of America."

It's worth noting that an independent committee, not the Norwegian government, awards the Nobel Peace Prize. Norway is one of eight countries the President is threatening with tariffs unless the U.S. is able to buy Greenland. And European leaders are considering retaliation right now, including the so-called trade bazooka.

CNN international diplomatic editor Nic Robertson is in Greenland. Nic, today, the secretary general of NATO is meeting with ministers from Greenland and Denmark and Brussels. And this is really taking on a renewed sense of urgency here.

NIC ROBERTSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL DIPLOMATIC EDITOR: It absolutely is. And I think everyone is really looking to see what President Trump says next, because after he sent that letter to the Norwegian prime minister, the Danish government announced it was reinforcing its troops here, a substantial number being sent about 200 miles north of here, just inside the Arctic Circle. A base called Kongehuset is where they'll be.

And bearing in mind that just a couple of days ago, when NATO put an additional handful of troops in here, that's what triggered President Trump to threaten the sanctions on the U.K., Sweden, Norway, Finland, France, Germany, who'd all contributed just a handful of troops. They have jointly said that President Trump's threat of tariffs undermines the transatlantic alliance, puts it on a downward spiral, that they're happy and willing to engage. And this is what we're hearing from European leaders, happy and willing to engage with the United States to deescalate, to avoid escalation.

As long as it's in discussion that respects the sovereignty and territorial integrity and the self-determination of the people of Greenland, which is not where President Trump is at on his messaging at all. And that's why I say after that message, the letter that he sent to the prime minister in Norway, Denmark has now taken another step that would appear to be something that's going to be running against what President Trump wants to see.

So I think there's a real pause, if you will, as people wait to see what President Trump says and does next. The effort is to put a lot of pressure on him with the possibility of European Union sanctions and the hope, therefore, from the Europeans that domestically inside the United States, enough voices within Congress, within the Republican Party even, within the financial sector, raise their concerns with the President. That seems to be where we are at this moment.

BROWN: Wow. What a moment it is. Nic Robertson, live from Greenland. Thank you.

Let's continue this conversation with CNN Global Affairs analyst Kimberly Dozier and former NATO Supreme Allied Commander and retired Army General Wesley Clark. Kim, this message that President Trump sent to Norway's prime minister is remarkable on many levels. What is the takeaway for U.S. allies?

KIM DOZIER, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: You know, I heard from one senior European official in Brussels this morning that this for them is crossing a red line or are about to cross a red line in terms of Greenland that has got their pride up, got them so angry that they can't just pacify Trump as they've done before. They are considering the as it's called the trade bazooka option where they do retaliatory tariffs against U.S. products, which could result in a sort of global trade meltdown. It's a really dangerous time.

Meanwhile, you've got two key Russians, Kirill Dmitriev and the former Russian president, Dmitry Medvedev, tweeting gleefully about this breakdown, saying, yes, of course, Russia, of course, the U.S. should take Greenland, because what it does is makes it perfectly logical that Russia wants to seize Ukraine because the U.S. is making the same sort of arguments. It's good for our security. Well, what does that mean about the sovereignty of this independent territory? And it's really got Europeans concerned.

BROWN: And also, Russia just has always wanted to get rid of the Western alliance, right?

DOZIER: Exactly.

BROWN: Use it as a threat. DOZIER: Exactly.

BROWN: And so this idea that there are fractures in the relationship --

[11:05:02]

DOZIER: They love it.

BROWN: -- is exactly what Russia wants. All right, General Clark, I want to bring you in to get your take on this. And this moment we're in, you're a former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO. Today, NATO Secretary General is meeting with Denmark's defense minister and Greenland's foreign minister. What do you think that meeting looks like?

GEN. WESLEY CLARK, U.S. ARMY (RET.): You know, I think they're trying to find a way to deescalate this thing. For the military in NATO, of course, this is a huge dilemma. It's a huge emotional crisis. And I'm sure our men and women in uniform in the United States feel the same way. We certainly don't want a confrontation with NATO allies.

Many of us have lived there. We've trained with these people. We consider ourselves very close to Europe. And so this kind of an issue is very, very painful. I think the leadership in NATO has got to find a way to deescalate it. How can they do this? What is the clever diplomatic artifice that would allow Trump to say that he's got it and Denmark to say they have it? And so that's where this will be worked out, I think.

BROWN: How do you even do that? I mean, how does that work practically?

CLARK: You might define control in a certain way. You might set a date in the future. You might put in something about a plebiscite and the people there. I'm just reaching for ideas. I mean, I've been in discussions like this but never on something like this. And so this is a real crisis.

Of course, it makes Russia very happy, as Kim said. It's exactly what Russia has been advocating. They can get Georgia, Moldova, the Baltic States, Romania, Bulgaria, get their whole defense under the same logic. And so it would be the real step of implementing the new national security strategy, which was announced. It said the U.S. will fall back to the Western Hemisphere.

BROWN: Right.

CLARK: Now, a lot of us have said how dangerous this is. A lot of people in the administration feel it's very dangerous, too. And so even in the NSS, the National Security Strategy, they're speaking with two voices. On the one hand, they're arguing, yes, let's dominate the Western Hemisphere. But on the other hand, they acknowledge that Europe is the greatest single investor, greatest single trade partner of the United States. So why would we want to throw that away? And just think of the lesson this gives to Beijing about its concerns. So this has to be handled really -- it's just a real challenge for diplomatic leadership. And I hope they've got better ideas than I just suggested.

BROWN: Because they're not. Yes, well, Kim, let me bring you on, because one idea that hasn't been taken off the table is, of course, military action against Greenland.

DOZIER: Yes.

BROWN: And so you just have to wonder, how does NATO respond? I mean, does it honor Article 5? An attack against one is an attack against all. I mean, they have to be looking at all of these possibilities right now.

DOZIER: I mean, there's also the possibility that Trump is just trolling everyone. And he's doing this sort of big, dramatic action that gets everyone upset, hoping that then they will come with some sort of offers. General Clark was saying that something that would allow the U.S. to expand its reach into Greenland in some symbolic way beyond what it currently has even though the 1951 treaty with Greenland allows it to put thousands of troops there and open up new bases.

But, you know, the Davos meeting that's coming up that President Trump is supposed to attend this week could be an opportunity. We've had the British prime minister and the leader of Italy, Giorgia Meloni, both try to stay on the cooperative side of things. They will surely be getting him behind closed doors and saying, you know, Donald, what can we do that makes you feel better about U.S. security? Or present him with ideas like, look, you already have the right to do all of these things. Why not this?

But it just feels like he's got this emotional thing that he had in the Trump, in the first administration that he still feels he wants to be able to say that he enlarged American territory to include Greenland. That's going to be tough to talk him out of.

BROWN: Yes. And he spent four years in between stewing about it, right?

DOZIER: Yes. Exactly.

BROWN: Letting that sink in. And now he's emboldened. Wesley Clark, I mean, I wonder what you think about whether that's the real motivation here, because if it's just about national security and it is true that China and Russia, you know, do pose a threat there in the Arctic. But if it's just about that, I mean, the U.S. has rolled back its defensive facilities and forces in Greenland over the last few decades. It could roll that back up, right, and said more today. Do you really think this is just about national security?

[11:10:05]

CLARK: I think it's -- well, first of all, I think there is a genuine national security argument --

BROWN: Yes.

CLARK: -- not only from the presence of forces, but also the economics, the access to the rare earths, keeping, let's say, China out of the rare earths business, which they are in already partially in Greenland. So I think there is a legitimate national security argument. I think it's also about President Trump's legacy.

I think it's the idea of the symmetry of you've got Hawaii on the West. You've got the Panama Canal Zone, which he certainly wants. You work in Venezuela on the South. Now you want Greenland there. Maybe there's some kind of like a dual ownership, like the U.S. has a formal protectorate, national security protectorate letter with Denmark that's more formal than just the treaty.

So that Trump can say he's enlarged the perimeter, but it's still governed by Denmark and so forth. There are ways diplomatically to work this. If President Trump is amenable to that, if it's simply we're taking it over, they're going to become American citizens, then you have to -- it'll be like Puerto Rico. It'll be like these people, they won't vote Republican. They don't want to be part of the United States.

You're bringing them in. It's going to be nothing but trouble. It's a sort of a -- it would be difficult politically. These people are living under socialism. They've got, you know, guaranteed medical support, education support. They don't own their own land. You can't buy private property in Greenland. There's so many things about this that you wouldn't want, actually, logically, to bring these people into the United States. You're going to make them very unhappy. You're going to make yourself very unhappy.

And so maybe there's this protectorate status where you can claim a protectorate status, but it really belongs to Denmark. I'm just trying to imagine how you might get out of this.

BROWN: I want to go to you, Kim, on this interview that Trump just did with "NBC News." He said that he doesn't believe that Norway as a country has no sway over the Nobel Peace Prize competition. We should note, for our viewers, the award is decided on by an independent committee, something that the committee reiterated in a statement this past weekend.

But Trump told "NBC," "Norway totally controls it despite what they say." Is that true? And what do you think about the amount of energy the President of the United States is expending on this?

DOZIER: It is just like the Pulitzer Prizes, just like many prizes. It is completely controlled by an independent group that brooks no interference on who they choose. And in Europe, this is being seen as one more temper tantrum. There's a meme going around with Trump's letter to the Norwegian prime minister, but written out in crayon. Because --

BROWN: And who is getting that meme? DOZIER: It's racing around European officials, so it landed in my inbox this morning. It's just one more sign that they think he's acting like a child, and they don't know how to reason with a child. You know, you can't exactly give the President of the United States a timeout. And you can see the Norwegian committee is not likely either to ever give him a prize, no matter what he does, because nobody likes being told what to do.

BROWN: Kim Dozier, General Wesley Clark, what a time we're in. We appreciate your insights. Thank you so much.

We are following breaking news. Spain's president is promising a transparent investigation after two high-speed trains collided. At least 39 people were killed and dozens more injured. Video from the crash site shows train cars twisted beyond recognition. Witnesses describe a horrific scene. Passengers from inside one of the train cars could be seen scrambling to make their way out desperately. And investigators are trying to understand why cars on one train derailed as it passed another train on a straight section of track.

Still ahead here in The Situation Room, what's next for Minnesota as the Pentagon orders 1,500 active-duty troops to prepare for possible deployment to the state?

[11:14:26]

And how fired up are voters for the midterm elections? What brand-new CNN polls are showing? We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BROWN: Happening now, troops on standby. Sources say nearly 1,500 soldiers are ready for a possible deployment to Minnesota, with tensions still high after another week in a protest. Also new this morning, the Justice Department vows to press charges after a group of protesters in Minnesota disrupted services at a church.

CNN's Julia Vargas Jones is right outside that church in St. Paul. And Julia, the protesters, they said they went there because that pastor there is an ICE official. What more are you learning?

JULIA VARGAS JONES, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Pamela, not the pastor who was leading services on Sunday, but another pastor, allegedly. His name is David Easterwood. And what we are learning is that David Easterwood is an acting field office director of enforcement and removal operations for ICE here in St. Paul, Minnesota. That is what those protesters were here to say.

[11:20:18]

They, in some parts of that video, you can hear them saying to churchgoers, why aren't you protesting ICE? Can you say F ICE? And again, chanting the name of Renee Good, the 37-year-old who was shot by ICE agents on January 7th, and saying ICE out, ICE out, which is what we've heard time and again from those protesters. But then the U.S. Department of Justice then launching this investigation, and then Attorney General Pam Bondi saying that she spoke to that pastor in Minnesota, posting on X, "attacks against law enforcement and the intimidation of Christians are being met with the full force of federal law. If state leaders refuse to act responsibly to prevent lawlessness, this Department of Justice will remain mobilized to prosecute federal crimes and ensure the rule of law prevails."

Now, I will note, Pamela, that over the weekend we saw a very different kind of tactics being used by ICE and federal agents who are here to support ICE operations outside that Whipple Federal Building. Yesterday we saw no pepper spray, no tear gas. The mood seemed to be much more controlled, as the sheriff's department seemed to have a much bigger footprint helping keep those protesters a little calmer, a little bit more pacific over the last 24 hours, Pamela.

BROWN: All right, Julia Vargas Jones, thank you so much.

Up next, right here in The Situation Room, brand new polling shows who has got the most enthusiasm for this fall's midterm elections, but voters aren't so excited about their party leaders. We'll explain more after this quick break. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:26:41]

BROWN: Happening now, new polling ahead of the midterm election shows Democrats are feeling highly motivated to get out and vote later this year. And that could be bad news for Republicans who are hanging on to a slim majority in the House.

So let's go to CNN's chief data analyst, Harry Enten. What exactly are these poll numbers telling us, Harry?

HARRY ENTEN, CNN CHIEF DATA ANALYST: Yes. Oh, my goodness gracious. I can't believe that the first year of the Trump administration already pretty much done. We got a midterm election coming up in November. And what are the poll results showing us? Well, you know, that generic congressional ballot, right, that's matching up the Democrats versus the Republicans and the choice for Congress. And what do we see? We see the Democrats with an advantage on that generic ballot.

Right now they're ahead by five points. And what I think is so interesting is you look at this five point advantage and it's the same exact advantage that Democrats held among registered voters when you went back to Trump's first term in January of 2018 at this point in the cycle. And why is that so notable? Because I don't know if you remember, Pam, but back in 2018, Democrats were looking to pick up the House majority.

Republicans held, of course, the House of Representatives. And Democrats were able to net themselves 40 seats in the House come November. Now, I'm not quite sure they're going to be able to net that many seats this time around. But at least according to our CNN polling at this point, the Democrats lead looks very much the same now as it did back during the 2018 cycle. And that's good news for Democrats.

But that's not the only piece of good news in this poll, because, of course, if you know anything about midterm elections, you know, you know that it's about turnout, right? Turnout is lower in a midterm election than it is in a presidential year. And it's all about that motivation to go out there and vote.

And this is where I think it gets really interesting for Democrats. So if we break it down by motivation of vote, right? If you look at voters overall, Democrats have that five point advantage, which I mentioned. But look at those extremely motivated to turn out and vote, those who would crawl over those hot coals to go out there and vote.

And what do we see? We see the Democrats up by 16 points among those extremely motivated to vote. This makes a lot of sense to me, Pam. Why does it make a lot of sense? Because look at the elections that we had in 2025. We had Virginia governor. We had New Jersey governor. We had those special elections as well, of course, across the congressional special elections, as well as those for state legislative elections.

And what we saw in those elections in 2025 was, were two things. One, that Democrats were far more likely to turn out than Republicans. And two, that resulted in Democrats vastly, vastly, vastly outperforming the 2024 baseline. So I think Democrats look at the voters overall, they say, hey, that's not too bad. But they look at the extremely motivated numbers and they say, ka-ching. Because if that holds towards November, they think, hey, we got a pretty gosh darn good chance of winning back that House majority.

BROWN: Yes, we'll see how those numbers actually translate in reality. And voters are also expressing their level of confidence and their congressional leaders, right?

ENTEN: Yes. So this is where it gets really interesting, right, because we see these generic ballot results and you say, OK, you know what, this is good for Democrats. But then you look OK at the congressional leaders and say, OK, approve of these congressional leaders. For Democrats, just 28 percent, just 28 percent of Americans approve of the job that the Democratic congressional leaders are doing, right?

[11:30:07]

For Republicans, it's 35.