Return to Transcripts main page
The Source with Kaitlan Collins
Trump: U.S. "Will Take Over" Gaza Strip And "Own It"; FBI Workers Sue To Stop Trump's Promised Purge; Senate Panel Advances RFK Jr.'s Nomination Along Party Lines. Aired 9-10p ET
Aired February 04, 2025 - 21:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[21:00:00]
JOHN KING, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: But it has that Don Bacon district, near Omaha, a Republican who won the district that Kamala Harris carried in the race for president. That's number one.
Number two, it is a red state, right? Is Donald Trump willing to disrupt his farmer friends? Is he willing to disrupt the meat-packing industry by doing this?
So, we want to test Trump policies, as we look forward, yes, mostly in swing states, but also in places that will have competitive elections, that have fascinating stories.
JOHN BERMAN, CNN HOST, ANDERSON COOPER 360: I look forward to hearing so many more of them.
John King, you've been so helpful tonight. Thanks so much for being with us.
KING: Yes.
BERMAN: There is a lot going on. The news continues. "THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS" starts right now.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (voice-over): This is CNN Breaking News.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, CNN HOST, THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS: Good evening. I'm Kaitlan Collins, in Washington, a town that is still digesting tonight one of the most brazen suggestions ever made by a U.S. President in recent years.
I was in the East Room of the White House, earlier this evening, when President Trump stood shoulder-to-shoulder with the Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, and said all 2 million Palestinians should be moved from Gaza to other countries.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: The U.S. will take over the Gaza Strip, and we will do a job with it too. We'll own it, and be responsible for dismantling all of the dangerous unexploded bombs and other weapons on the site, level the site, and get rid of the destroyed buildings, level it out, create an economic development that will supply unlimited numbers of jobs and housing for the people of the area.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Now, Trump had been suggesting, all day, that the entire Palestinian population of Gaza be permanently removed.
But it was only during that press conference there, just a few hours ago, that he made clear the U.S., he believes, should take over the Gaza Strip, which, as of this moment, is still being run by Hamas fighters tonight, and where hostages from the October 7th attack are still being held. A very delicate ceasefire is in place, as of this moment.
We'll own it was Trump's comment there, a statement that triggered a flurry of questions from the White House press corps and, really, some of the leaders in that room, and officials across the world. First and foremost though being, where do those 2 million Palestinians go?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Saying about the Gazans leaving Gaza, going to other countries. One, where exactly are you suggesting that they should go? And two, are you saying they should return after it's rebuilt? And if not, who do you envision living there?
TRUMP: I envision world, people living there. The world's people. I think you'll make that into an international, unbelievable place. I think the potential in the Gaza Strip is unbelievable. And I think the entire world, representatives from all over the world, will be there, and they'll--
COLLINS: But not the Palestinians?
TRUMP: --and they'll live there. Palestinians, also. Palestinians will live there. Many people will live there.
But they've tried the other, and they've tried it for decades and decades and decades. It's not going to work. It didn't work. It will never work. And you have to learn from history. History has, you know, you just can't let it keep repeating itself.
We have an opportunity to do something that could be phenomenal. And I don't want to be cute, I don't want to be a wise guy, but the Riviera of the Middle East, this could be something that could be so -- this could be so magnificent.
COLLINS: But where do those people go in the meantime, Mr. President?
TRUMP: But more importantly than that is the people that have been absolutely destroyed, that live there now, can live in peace, in a much better situation. Because they are living in hell. And those people will now be able to live in peace. We'll make sure that it's done world-class. It will be wonderful for the people. Palestinians, Palestinians, mostly, we're talking about.
COLLINS: But they all want to know where you want them to go in the meantime.
TRUMP: And I have a feeling that, despite them saying no, I have a feeling that the king in Jordan, and that -- the general president, but that the general in Egypt, will open their hearts and will give us the kind of land that we need to get this done. And people can live in harmony and in peace.
Thank you all very much. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: To say that the President's comments are explosive would be an understatement. Like Trump or not, he has proven repeatedly that he is able to push things through, sometimes through the sheer force of sheer will.
But I should note that the context here is really important. Egypt and Jordan have already said they will not take in expelled Palestinians into their nations.
We're hearing from two Arab officials, who spoke to -- with CNN, immediately after the comments from the President tonight, and say it's hard to even grasp or digest what was just said.
The President, at one point, during that press conference, notably refused to rule out sending U.S. troops to Gaza, where, again, is still being run by Hamas and its fighters.
But when he talks about the Riviera of the Middle East, as he calls it, it is not a surprise that the President has his sights on sending potentially real estate developers there, or this grand vision for the Gaza Strip.
[21:05:00]
Remember, his son-in-law and his former Mideast envoy, Jared Kushner, once mused, just last year, about the very valuable potential of Gaza's waterfront property, suggesting that Israel could remove the civilians there to clean up the area.
There is no better source to start this hour than our own, Fareed Zakaria, on all of this. And he joins me now.
And Fareed, obviously, just to give everyone -- I was at the White House all day. To catch everyone up, what had happened is, before Prime Minister Netanyahu even got there, Trump was suggesting that Palestinians should leave Gaza, that it's not livable, that it's going to take 10 to 15 years to rebuild, because of all the destruction there from the Israeli strikes since October 7th, since this war started.
Then he repeated it again in the Oval Office, with Netanyahu seated by his side.
And then he came out at that press conference, and that is when he made the news on his own, without being asked by a reporter, about the U.S. taking over the Gaza Strip. Obviously an extraordinary statement from an American president.
What are your takeaways, Fareed?
FAREED ZAKARIA, CNN HOST, "FAREED ZAKARIA GPS": Well, it is, it's breathtaking. And one doesn't really know where to begin.
You asked the central question, Kaitlan, which is, where would these people go? There are 2 million Palestinians in Gaza, who have lived through several wars, several incredibly intense bouts of violence with Israel, because they want to live on their land.
As you say, the neighboring countries, Egypt and Jordan, have both categorically, have repeatedly said that they're not going to take people in.
So, it's not entirely clear how this happens. The United States would have to invade Gaza, would have to expel Hamas, would have to conduct counterinsurgency operations against an insurgency there that would -- that would exist. Would also have to persuade Egypt and Jordan to take these refugees.
And one has to point out, outside of all the geopolitical issues that that raises, this is a president, who came in saying he wanted to focus on America First. He didn't want us engaging in any grand global projects.
Well, I mean, this is another war in the Middle East. And the last war in the Middle East we took part in ended up stretching out much longer, was much more complicated, and cost about $2 trillion.
So, it seems very unlikely that this can go smoothly. You can imagine American power, forcing the Egyptians to do some things, forcing the Jordanians to do something. But you're going to have to put military on the ground to get Hamas to accede power, to get the Palestinians to move, to secure that area. And that is another military -- that is another military intervention in the Middle East.
And I thought President Trump ran, in 2016, explaining that that was precisely why he was running. He wanted to stop America's senseless adventures in the Middle East.
COLLINS: Yes, that's what he has repeated time and time again. He said no new wars on his watch. He has talked about that.
But also, just in this moment, for a region that is going to be waking up to these comments from the President. I mean, I've been messaging with sources already. Even an Israeli official acknowledging how difficult this would be to implement.
What it means for the ceasefire deal that is in place, right now? I mean, if you're Hamas, which is obviously the other party of this agreement, and they see the U.S. President saying, We're going to take over the Gaza Strip? Does this mean the ceasefire deal still holds, or that -- I mean, there are still hostages being held by Hamas there.
ZAKARIA: I suspect that the ceasefire deal has its own problems. As you know, essentially, Israeli troops have to withdraw from certain parts, when you get to phase two. That's a very tough bar for Israelis. The Finance Minister has said he's going to leave the coalition if that happens. So, I think that has its own dynamic.
But you're right to point to the question of Hamas. What will Hamas do? Hamas will dig in. Because Hamas will say, Look, there is a prospect that there is going to be an effort to forcibly displace the Palestinians, which means we are going to dig in, we are going to try to make sure that we are there to launch an insurgency if it needs to happen.
And it's really important to remember that no matter how powerful you are, if you are in a foreign territory against a local insurgency, and you do not have the support of the population? That is a very hard military operation to succeed at. That's what we discovered in Iraq, in Afghanistan, in Vietnam, you know?
So, this is not likely to be that easy. And Hamas, my guess is, is preparing for the prospect that they are going to have to resist some kind of American involvement.
[21:10:00]
Now, whether it gets to all that, you never know. Because with President Trump, he may--
COLLINS: Yes.
ZAKARIA: --he may forget about all this tomorrow.
But it's important to point out, what he is articulating is essentially a kind of Israeli right-wing fantasy that has existed for a long time. That somehow the Palestinians leave Gaza and the West Bank, and that you end up with an Israel from the river to the sea, and you've sort of solved the problem.
The reality is the Palestinians don't want to leave, and I don't think the President said anything that's going to make it more likely that they will want to leave.
COLLINS: And it's not clear at all where they would go.
I mean, to watch Prime Minister Netanyahu's reaction, as this was being said, was remarkable in and of itself.
Fareed Zakaria, couldn't think of anyone better to start the show with. Thank you for joining with your insights.
And my next source tonight is the Israeli journalist, Nadav Eyal.
Nadav, we met in Israel, as I was -- as we were covering the aftermath of October 7th, this war that has been raging for 16 months.
What's your initial takeaway? What are you hearing from sources, tonight, on this remarkable announcement from the White House?
NADAV EYAL, AUTHOR, "REVOLT," ISRAELI JOURNALIST: Great to join you, Kaitlan.
Well, first of all, as far as the Israelis are concerned, and specifically Netanyahu and his right-wing coalition, they just won the lottery. This is how they see it.
This is, as Fareed has said, a long-time idea within the hard-right in Israel, I would say, the far-right in Israel, that there will be massive immigration of Palestinian, either from Judea and Samaria, or from the Gaza Strip, and Israel will be able to base itself in these areas.
Now, I should say that the President was quite clear in one of the answers to the questions, that he doesn't think that there should be new settlements at the Gaza Strip. And he was talking about the United States taking ownership of the Gaza Strip.
Well, as far as the Israelis are concerned, this government is concerned, Benjamin Netanyahu -- Ron Dermer, who was in close contact with Steve Witkoff, and with the White House, towards these declarations today, this is a fantastic idea to have the United States there.
I would caution in the sense that if you actually listen to what the Prime Minister has said, and he was standing, sitting beside the President, he didn't say anything about this specific plan at all. He talked about Israel's war aims, the published war aims of Israel, to make sure that the Hamas rule doesn't exist in the Gaza Strip, and the hostages are back home.
COLLINS: Yes, he was saying it was an interesting idea to pursue, and to look at, and to explore. But he didn't say, Yes, I agree that we should fully do this. I was listening very closely to that.
I want you to listen to, when Trump was asked this idea of the U.S. taking over a sovereign territory, his answer to that question from a reporter.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Mr. Prime Minister, do you see this idea as a way to expand the boundaries of Israel, and to have a longer peace, even though the Israeli people know how important that land is to you, and your citizens, just as the space is inherited by the Palestinians as well?
TRUMP: I do see a long-term ownership position, and I see it bringing great stability to that part of the Middle East, and maybe the entire Middle East.
And everybody I've spoken to -- this was not a decision made lightly. Everybody I've spoken to loves the idea of the United States owning that piece of land, developing and creating thousands of jobs with something that will be magnificent.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Now, he did not say which leaders he's spoken with. We know King Abdullah of Jordan is coming here next week.
We've heard Saudi Arabia say previously that they believe any normalization deal between Saudi Arabia and Israel has to include the establishment of a Palestinian state.
What do you think leaders in the region make of this claim?
EYAL: Look, the fear of leaders across the region -- I'm not talking right now about Israel. The fear there, according to my sources, is that this would lead to a sort of destabilization in their own street and local public.
The Palestinian issue, specifically, after more than a year of a war, is something that has been at the top of the news cycle, across the Middle East, as major source of friction and criticism towards different Arab regimes. And now, it seems that those moderate Arab regimes that are allied with the United States, are now hearing from the U.S., an idea about the displacement of Palestinians. This is how Arab leaders are seeing this.
[21:15:00]
And less than an hour ago, the Saudi Foreign Ministry, as you said, Kaitlan, issued another PR notice, saying basically, There should be a Palestinian state. We're not going to have normalization with Israel. We're against any idea of displacing Palestinians.
And, by the way, if you actually listen to what Trump said, he didn't speak about displacing forcibly, expelling the Palestinians. He was talking about a sort of a suggestion, an offer of relocation of sorts. It wasn't completely clear what would be the mechanics of this, what would the Palestinians be offered?
And as far as I know, Israelis don't hold a coherent plan to see this as happening. And they themselves were surprised to the extent of the President's commitment to this idea. So, the idea was floated in talks between Jerusalem and Washington, before this press conference. But the level of commitment showed by the President--
COLLINS: Yes.
EYAL: --to the idea of ownership, was surprising.
COLLINS: Yes, it built throughout the day, and then was an outright declaration, amid questions about the day after in Gaza.
Nadav Eyal, you are going to be very busy. Check in with your sources. Keep us updated with what you're hearing. Thank you. And up next. We're going to have more on this remarkable breaking news out of the White House. What fellow White House reporters are hearing about this proposed takeover from Gaza of the -- by the U.S.
Also tonight, the FBI has just turned over information of about 5,000 employees of theirs who worked on January 6 cases. The attorney who is suing on the behalf of those agents, some of them, is my next source.
[21:20:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: Breaking news tonight, as President Trump is now refusing to rule out the possibility of using U.S. forces, to fulfill his pledge that he made, tonight, in a stunning White House press conference, to have the United States take control of the Gaza Strip.
The President said he sees a, quote, "Long-term ownership position" of the territory, and made clear in a question that I asked him, tonight, during that press conference, that he sees the potential for real estate there.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: We have an opportunity to do something that could be phenomenal. And I don't want to be cute, I don't want to be a wise guy, but the Riviera of the Middle East, this could be something that could be so -- this could be so magnificent.
COLLINS: But where do those people go in the meantime, Mr. President?
TRUMP: But more importantly than that is the people that have been absolutely destroyed, that live there now, can live in peace, in a much better situation. Because they are living in hell.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: My deeply-sourced White House insiders are here to take us behind-the-scenes tonight.
PBS NewsHour's Laura Barron-Lopez.
NPR's Asma Khalid.
And Reuters' Jeff Mason.
All here at the table.
Let me just read what Senator Chris Coons, a Democrat on Senate Foreign Relations, said tonight, to our Morgan Rimmer, when he was asked about this proposal. Now, he is a Democrat. Obviously, he's not Trump's biggest ally. But he said, quote, I am speechless. That's insane. I can't think of a place on earth that would welcome American troops less and where any positive outcome is less likely in this situation. JEFF MASON, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, REUTERS: I mean, I think he's probably channeling more than just Democrats, with that comment, I think. I'll be curious to see what people in the region say tomorrow.
But the idea of U.S. troops being there, the idea of it being a real estate Riviera, from the money quote that you got out of your question, to just the fact that trying to upend history from -- of decades and decades of U.S. policy there, some people, no doubt, do think that's insane.
ASMA KHALID, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, NPR, CO-HOST, "THE NPR POLITICS PODCAST": I mean, you mentioned people in the region. Already, it's the middle of the night in Saudi Arabia. Saudi's Foreign Ministry just issued a statement reiterating that its position is no deal, no normalizing relations with Israel, without a Palestinian state.
MASON: State.
KHALID: They said that their position is unwavering, they are not willing to compromise on that.
And so, that was in stark contrast to what we heard from President Trump, tonight, talking about how everyone was supportive of this plan. The question is, who's everyone?
COLLINS: And what he was articulating -- he declined to say which leaders he had spoken with. What Trump was articulating is his basis from this.
And Nadav made a good point that Trump was not saying they should be forcibly removed, but he was proposing it as this better idea for Palestinians, saying that they don't want to live in an area that has been decimated by Israeli strikes.
But he was essentially arguing that how Gaza and its relationship with Israel has worked in the past decade, since it's existed, under -- through (ph) the years, that essentially it's not worked before, so why keep doing the same thing, was the argument he was articulating tonight.
LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, PBS NEWSHOUR: Right, he's trying to say, why attempt to continue down the path of a two-state solution.
But I mean that, again, to everyone's point, this is not going to go over well in the region. There's already forceful pushback. I mean, you have to wonder, three days ago, Arab nations responded to Trump, when he was floating the idea of Egypt and Jordan taking Palestinians. And they said, No, three days ago.
I mean, is he now, because he has the Prime Minister here, using this as a negotiating tactic, to try to apply pressure on them? I mean, that's one question that this raises.
COLLINS: And it's not just Democrats, I should be clear, that we're hearing from.
Lindsey Graham is a huge ally of President Trump's. He responded tonight to our reporters on Capitol Hill, Jeff, and said, I think most South Carolinians would probably not be excited about sending Americans to take over Gaza. He said, it was problematic, he believed.
But this is kind of something that we -- this real estate aspect of this, when he called it the Riviera of the Middle East, to me, was something that Jared Kushner has articulated before. Obviously, someone who knows this region well. He was Trump's envoy to it, in his last term.
[21:25:00]
MASON: He was applying his world view, and his political view, and his business-perspective world view, to this region. Looking for a place to put hotels, potentially. Looking for solutions that are outside of the box, no doubt.
I mean, it's almost reminiscent of him saying, during the campaign, to Black and Brown voters, Look, what have the Democrats done for you? What do you have to lose? He's kind of saying that in a much different stage, in a much different way, in an area that is -- that's going to affect all so -- so many people.
KHALID: I mean--
COLLINS: This is -- go ahead.
KHALID: Yes, no, I was going to say, but I don't want to sort of minimize what he is saying, because, I mean, whether it's with force or not, I mean, he's talking about the massive movement--
MASON: Yes.
KHALID: --of over 1.5 million people. I mean, this is not something that happens in -- and it's not supposed to legally happen in the modern era.
And I think sort of his way of couching this all in the context of real estate, I don't want to lose the fact that this is something that many nations in the region would say is deeply unethical, it is deeply immoral. And it's just not supposed to happen in the modern context.
MASON: And is it legal? Something else that he--
KHALID: Right.
MASON: --absolutely did not address tonight.
COLLINS: Which was a question that Kelly O'Donnell posed to him, in terms of the mechanism of how you would just take over a sovereign nation, and what that would look like, essentially going forward, in terms of what the next step is here.
But the one thing that was very clear was Trump was serious. MASON: Sure.
COLLINS: This isn't something that he was just kind of floating out there, and -- I mean, he had been building to it all day long. He meant what he said, essentially. There's no walking this back--
BARRON-LOPEZ: Yes, he meant--
COLLINS: --from the White House podium, tomorrow.
BARRON-LOPEZ: No, he definitely meant what he said. And I think we'll see the White House support him, tomorrow, in the statements that he made.
But yes, I think it should definitely be taken seriously. I think it's also striking that this all comes at a time where the U.S. -- while, he wants to view Gaza as a place of development, which is absolutely just stunning, and for the reasons that Asma just laid out. But at a time when the U.S. is kind of retreating from other areas of the globe, and retreating in terms of humanitarian assistance, across the globe.
COLLINS: Yes, it's not very America-First MAGA non-interventionist Republican Party that we have seen here in Washington, as of late. I mean, this feels very old school, what Republicans may have pushed before.
But Trump prides himself on saying, No new wars. And now, he's not ruling out the idea of sending U.S. forces into the -- into the Gaza Strip.
MASON: It is expansionary, which is a new part of Trumpism. I mean, talking about Greenland, talking about the Panama Canal, now talking about Gaza. It is also aid, which is a little bit the opposite of what the message that he's been sending over the last few days, about getting rid of USAID.
COLLINS: Yes, a remarkable press conference, to say the least. And we have all been there for some pretty remarkable ones.
Great to have you all, and your reporting here, at the table.
Up next, tonight. Also here in Washington, this headline as FBI agents are suing the Trump administration, because the agency has been turning over information about the investigators who worked on January 6 cases, raising questions about potential mass firings. I'm going to speak to the attorney, who is representing some of those FBI agents, ahead.
[21:30:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: Tonight, the FBI has complied with demands, from the Justice Department, to turn over information related to 5,000 agents, approximately, and staff, who worked on the January 6th investigations of the rioters who attacked the Capitol.
Two different sets of agents and employees are now suing the Justice Department.
And my source tonight is Pamela Keith, one of the attorneys representing some of the FBI agents involved.
And it's great to have you here.
Can you just tell us how this lawsuit came about. I mean, I think people have been waiting to see if they would take a step. But can you just tell us how this started?
PAMELA KEITH, ATTORNEY REPRESENTING FBI AGENTS: Absolutely.
Several of our clients, who are long-term FBI agents, got a message on Saturday, or Sunday night, saying, Hey, here's the survey that we want you to fill out, that specifically identifies what you did with respect to January 6 cases. Were you actively involved? Were you a supervisor? How many cases did you work on, in what ways?
And these people have been with the FBI for years, over many different administrations, and they've never been asked anything like that before. So, that's what got our phones ringing.
As we started to look into it, we saw that this was an effort to aggregate information, and identify people who were particularly active on January 6 issues. And that got us very, very concerned.
COLLINS: And did they ultimately fill out this questionnaire?
KEITH: Well, it's a big organization. Some people actually filled it out. Some people's managers filled it out for them. One of our concerns is that there may be people, who are former agents, or former employees, who are now part of this aggregating of information, and don't even know it. So, that is part of the reason why we're suing.
COLLINS: So, even if they didn't fill it out, their name could still be submitted.
We know the list was submitted to the Justice Department. We're told it didn't include the names of the agents, but it had their identifying numbers. Are they concerned that their names will be used, or will get out there?
KEITH: Absolutely. No system is foolproof. No system is hack-proof. We don't know who is going to get access to this information. And the people who get access to this information may not themselves be under any obligation not to share it. Once it's out on the internet, it can't be brought back.
So it's not just the intention of the administration that's at issue. It's that when you aggregate this kind of information, you create a target for malign actors, be they domestic or international.
COLLINS: And do your clients here that you're representing, the agents that are part of this, do they believe that the reason they were asked this question, about their involvement and what they did, is ultimately with the end goal of firing them?
KEITH: I think that's a fair assumption. And given the context, I think we have to assume that's where this is going.
[21:35:00]
Again, we can't ignore that, as candidate, Donald Trump made multiple campaign stops, in which he promised retribution, vengeance, especially with respect to the January 6 cases. He also took no time to fire some of the DOJ attorneys that worked on the January 6 cases. Not all of them, obviously, but many.
And so, you have to ask the question, what is the legitimate business interest in aggregating this information?
COLLINS: Well, and I think there's one argument that we've heard some allies of Trump make, when it comes to leadership at the FBI, and who he wants in that position. But are a lot of your clients here more rank-and-file agents, who were assigned to these cases? Did they seek them out?
KEITH: Absolutely, Kaitlan. This survey was sent to thousands of employees that are not necessarily supervisors. Rank-and-file people, people who have been with the agency for decades, staff, people who are not even agents. People, for example, like IT technicians, and people who work on gathering of crypto information.
These are people who have made a career out of serving the people of the United States, and executing their duties. They shouldn't be on anybody's target list, and they should not be disturbed. Because they don't get to choose which assignments they take up, and which ones they reject, based on political reasons. And so, they shouldn't be targeted for political reasons either.
COLLINS: What happens next here, in this -- in this?
KEITH: Well, we filed a motion for a temporary restraining order to the District Court of District of Columbia. And that procedure asks a judge to put a stop on things, so that there's time to assess what's to do next.
COLLINS: And have they heard anything from their bosses, or from the Justice Department, in terms of ever -- because the deadline was noon today, I believe. Have they heard anything since that happened?
KEITH: My clients have not. And our team is working closely with Democracy Defenders, Norm Eisen and Mark Zaid's group. They're representing the Agent association. And they're a great team to work with. They have not heard any specific information, or intelligence, about what's going to be done with all of this.
We're hoping that we filed in time for the judge to put a stay on publishing or sharing this information.
COLLINS: And can I ask you? You mentioned Norm. Our audience will be certainly familiar with him. He's been on CNN many times.
But to allies of the President, who may look at this and say, These are critics of the President, who are helping the -- helping people file this lawsuit. That you filed today. You yourself have obviously criticized Trump. What would you say to that?
KEITH: I would say that it's irrelevant. My personal feelings about Donald Trump, or his administration, have nothing to do with whether or not this move is lawful, and whether or not it puts at risk the national security of the United States of America. And we believe that it does.
We can say with certainty that the agents are already scared. They're already very concerned. People are afraid of losing their jobs. But they're also afraid of their families and themselves being put at risk. That doesn't help the United States remain safe, and it doesn't help the FBI, in its future efforts, to recruit and train the next generation of agents.
COLLINS: How many agents did you ultimately hear from here? And are you still hearing from more?
KEITH: As of approximately 6 o'clock p.m. today, we still had -- we had 18 additional agents that we had reached out to us from the filing today. So, it's a great deal of people who are reaching out.
There's a tremendous amount of interest in this lawsuit. Because people, I think generally, whether you're Democrats or Republicans, genuinely appreciate the efforts that our FBI, our CIA, our clandestine and intelligence services, really do to keep us safe.
COLLINS: Pamela Keith, thank you for joining. And please keep us updated on what happens next here, and whether they do hear from the senior leadership at the DOJ.
KEITH: Absolutely. Thank you for having me.
COLLINS: Thank you very much, Pamela Keith.
Also here with me now, CNN Legal Analyst, and former federal prosecutor, Elliot Williams.
Elliot, do they have the power to fire people because they worked under -- or worked on this investigation, or?
ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: Well, the Constitution -- the Constitution says the government can't fire you because of your political views. And decades of HR, Human Resources, rules say that there's process for firing somebody. So, no, they can't.
But the simple fact is, who's stopping them, Kaitlan? This is the problem that we are in, right now, and are going to be in for some time. Until somebody steps up, and a court says that they can't? They can fire whoever they want.
COLLINS: But who does the firing here? Is that -- I mean, Pam Bondi is obviously getting confirmed as the--
WILLIAMS: Right.
COLLINS: --the attorney general. What -- Kash Patel has not been confirmed. What does that look like?
[21:40:00]
WILLIAMS: I think what it would look like is terminating the employment of an individual. So, it would come from the HR office within the FBI. And then, as you're seeing here, those employees would then sue to have their rights restored. And they have a -- they have a quite -- quite strong lawsuit here to protect their rights.
COLLINS: But if they -- so, you think they could succeed in court, potentially?
WILLIAMS: I think they can, can succeed in court, because of the First Amendment free speech issue here. These are employees who are, in effect, being punished for what their perceived political views are, right?
COLLINS: It's remarkable.
Elliot Williams, thank you.
We'll continue to see where this goes from here and, of course, what the future of these lawsuits is.
We do have more breaking news this hour. Plenty of it so far. More ahead. New reporting tonight from The Wall Street Journal that the CIA is just offering buyouts to the entire workforce, and what some officials say is a bid to bring the agency in line with President Trump's priorities.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: We're following more breaking news tonight on the Trump administration's blitz through the federal government, now that we are over two weeks into the second Trump term.
[21:45:00]
The Wall Street Journal reporting that the administration -- the CIA has just offered buyouts to the entire workforce at the CIA. What the reporting says is that employees were offered eight months of pay and benefits, if they leave the intelligence agency, part of Trump's efforts to downsize the government, even the CIA, and put more people in these positions, who are closely aligned with his view.
I'm joined tonight by the veteran journalist, Garrett Graff.
Garrett, on this. I mean, what do you make of this? What was your initial reaction to this report from The Wall Street Journal?
GARRETT GRAFF, JOURNALIST & HISTORIAN, AUTHOR, "WATERGATE: A NEW HISTORY": I mean, it is as shocking as any other development that we are living through right now.
One of the things, I think, is one of the only truths that we have in the Trump era is the inconsistency of the logical consistency of one announcement to another. For a lot of reasons. You could imagine that on the same night that you are announcing that the U.S. might take over Gaza, you would not want to gut the intelligence agencies that help us understand that part of the world, and mitigate risks to the United States, here and abroad.
On the same day that you are also looking at neutering the FBI's entire counterterrorism program, here at the homeland.
That for instance, some of these decisions in one category might have downside risks in another.
COLLINS: Can I ask you about part of this? Because a CIA spokesperson said that this move was part of an effort to infuse the agency with renewed energy, as they put it.
And they also said that Trump's CIA will have a greater focus on the Western Hemisphere, targeting countries not traditionally considered adversaries of the United States, saying, for example, they could use the CIA to use espionage, to give Trump more leverage in his trade negotiations, potentially spying on Mexico's government amid the ongoing spat.
GRAFF: I think quotes like that show how little any of the people involved in this actually understand the mission of any of these federal agencies.
That the CIA and other intelligence agencies, within the United States, like the part and parcel, the opening ante of what they do, is help inform the President's negotiations with foreign leaders. I mean, this goes all the way back to the Snowden revelations, where we were monitoring Angela Merkel's cellphone. Like, this is some of the most basic work that the CIA is already doing.
And I can -- I can tell you, because I have spoken to former officers who are involved in this, but like, that's exactly the type of work that the CIA is already doing.
COLLINS: Which Trump knows about, because he brought up the Merkel surveillance, to her face, at a press conference in his first term, I remember it, in the East Room where he was today.
What happens if everyone at the CIA takes this buyout? Because we heard today, I think it was 20,000 people in the federal workforce that had already taken these offers of buyouts. If the entire CIA, let's just say, for example, if they did, what does that look like tomorrow?
GRAFF: I mean, nothing good for the United States. And that's true, at any one of these agencies.
These workplaces, I think -- you know, I think part of the challenge of this is understanding that the goal here is just the chaos and the wreckage, that I don't think that there is any grand plan beyond these buyouts. It's certainly not a cost-cutting measure to throw away decades of experience, and millions of dollars in training that we have invested in these workforces.
But any one of these federal agencies is like any other workplace. There's a very small number of people on whom sort of the whole operation lies. I mean, the people who know the institutional history, then people who understand how the systems and the operations work. And when those people leave, the whole thing ceases up.
COLLINS: Yes, and we're already just talking in the last segment about FBI workers, who are suing the government, because they feel like they're being unfairly targeted, and about to have a mass purge.
Kash Patel -- as we're watching, basically everyone Trump has lined up on Capitol Hill get confirmed, despite initially thinking maybe they all wouldn't. What does that look like, do you think, when Kash Patel takes over the FBI?
GRAFF: I--
COLLINS: If he is confirmed?
GRAFF: Yes, I think the challenge is -- I've covered the FBI for almost 20 years, at this point. The FBI that I have covered my entire reporting career, the FBI that has existed since the day that J. Edgar Hoover died in May 1972, is already over. That institution is already dead. And we are arguing, right now, over the wreckage of what it might be, when it is rebuilt at some point in the future. And I think that this is -- it is--
COLLINS: But what does it look like for the next four years? I mean, they very clearly have plans that are being -- you know, if you don't like Trump and you're watching this? This is not the chaos of round one in these initial weeks, like we're just in the third week now, two weeks in. They're well-executed, and they are -- they are carrying out exactly what they said they were going to do.
[21:50:00]
So what does that actually look like, do you think?
GRAFF: Let me give you two very specific examples. It looks like 9/11, and it looks like corruption.
It looks like 9/11, because the FBI that is being neutered, right now, particularly the agents working on domestic terror and foreign terror, involved in these January 6 prosecutions, are exactly the people tasked day-in, day-out, with preventing the next 9/11.
COLLINS: That's a remarkable analysis to see what that could look like.
Garrett Graff, obviously, we'll stay in touch with you, on this, as we do see what that looks like, as it takes shape. Up next here, speaking of the cabinet, RFK Jr. just closed in on becoming the nation's top public health official, after securing a key vote, despite years of pushing discredited vaccine theories, with the help of a former doctor who spent his career touting the safety of the vaccines. We'll tell you more ahead.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[21:55:00]
COLLINS: Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s confirmation vote to become America's next top Health official is expected to happen next week, after a Senate panel advanced his nomination today, a key step in getting to that.
And the key yes-vote that everyone was watching today was Republican senator, Bill Cassidy. He's a former physician, who had reservations that were very clearly expressed, about Kennedy's anti-vaccine views, and also faced a fierce pressure campaign from both sides of the aisle.
Cassidy ultimately stuck with Republicans, and said he got assurances from RFK Jr.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. BILL CASSIDY (R-LA): Now, Mr. Kennedy, and the administration, reached out, seeking to reassure me, regarding their commitment to protecting the public health benefit of vaccination. To this end, Mr. Kennedy, and the administration, committed that he and I would have an unprecedentedly close, collaborative working relationship if he is confirmed.
These commitments, and my expectation that we can have a great working relationship, to make America healthy again, is the basis of my support.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: And my source tonight is Dr. Richard Besser, the former acting CDC Director under President Obama.
What did you make of what we heard from Senator Cassidy here, given what a critical vote he was, and also how skeptical he seemed of RFK Jr.--
DR. RICHARD BESSER, FORMER ACTING CDC DIRECTOR: Yes.
COLLINS: --in his hearing.
BESSER: I have to say, I was extremely disappointed. I had my heart set on him for a lot of reasons. He's a doctor.
And as a doctor, one of the things that you pledge is to do no harm. And as I look across this administration, and the people who are being selected for cabinet positions, I don't think that there's anyone on that list, who could do more harm, or I expect might do more harm, than RFK.
COLLINS: Were you at all -- did it give you any consolation to hear what RFK -- or what Senator Cassidy said about the assurances that RFK Jr., and people in the administration, made to him about vaccines, or going to the--
BESSER: Yes.
COLLINS: --to the Health committee on Capitol Hill, and talking to them first.
BESSER: Yes, I don't. I think that people will say just about anything to get through their hearings. And it's so important to look at somebody's track record. So, you have someone like RFK Jr., who has done more than just about anybody to undermine parents' confidence in the vaccines that they give to their children.
As a pediatrician -- you know, I was a pediatrician for over 30 years, and now, as head of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, very focused on this idea of trust. And the conversations I would have with parents, they would ask me really good questions, and I would say, Go to the CDC website. It's got information you can trust on the -- on these questions.
To have someone -- to see what's taking place right now with the CDC website is shocking. But to think that the person, who could be the Secretary of Health and Human Services, who oversees that, could be in a position to make sure that on that website is information that gives parents pause.
COLLINS: And you believe he'll use all the powers that are afforded to him in this position?
Because I've heard some Republican senators, who maybe were on the fence, say, Well, there's a lot of people who work there. He's not the only one.
But he is in charge.
BESSER: He is in charge. And what you want to see in that person in charge is that they are relying on the expertise of the people in the agencies. And what we're seeing, right now, is the clearing of -- cleaning house, in so many different departments and agencies.
So, for him to come in with a -- with a strong belief that vaccines are dangerous, that there are no safe and effective vaccines, and to be in that role, is extremely dangerous, and will cause some parents, who want to do the right thing for their children, to make the wrong decision.
COLLINS: Do you think he ultimately gets confirmed, with Cassidy coming across the line to say, Yes, he's going to vote for him?
BESSER: I don't want to say -- I don't want to say that at this point. Because I want every senator to ask that question. Is this the person who is going to do the most to protect the people in my state? And look at what took place in the hearings. Look at his lack of understanding of the health insurance system. 150 million people get their health insurance through Medicaid, Medicare, Children's Health Insurance Program. He didn't understand those programs.
You need someone in that role who's going to ensure that people in this country are safe, that they can lead their healthiest life. And for every senator who is -- who is in that position, you've got to ask yourself that question. Is this the person who is going to keep the people in my state the healthiest? And if not, you have to do your job and vote no.
[22:00:00]
The American people deserve the best and the brightest, in those roles. He has demonstrated that he's neither.
COLLINS: Dr. Besser, we'll see what the Senate decides. Thank you so much for your time, tonight, and your expertise.
BESSER: Thank you.
COLLINS: And thank you all so much for joining us, on what, safe to say, was a very busy news hour.
"CNN NEWSNIGHT WITH ABBY PHILLIP" is up next.
