Return to Transcripts main page
The Source with Kaitlan Collins
Trump Pauses Military Aid To Ukraine After Zelenskyy Clash; Vance: Was Trying To "Defuse The Situation" With Zelenskyy; Trump: Tomorrow's Address To Congress "Will Be Big." Aired 9-10p ET
Aired March 03, 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]
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST, ANDERSON COOPER 360: President Trump heads to Capitol Hill, tomorrow night, to address the Joint Session of Congress. He's going to share his priorities for the year ahead, and what he believes they have accomplished in just the first six weeks of his second administration. It's not considered a State of the Union, since he just took office.
Several Democrats are expected to bring guests, who are fired federal workers.
CNN's coverage begins tomorrow at 08:00 p.m. Eastern, here on CNN.
That's it for us. The news continues. "THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS" starts now.
KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN HOST: Breaking news from THE SOURCE tonight.
As President Trump is suspending all military aid to Ukraine, effective immediately. What the President wants from Zelenskyy after that historic clash in the Oval Office.
Also, shockwaves are being felt on Wall Street, as Trump's new tariffs on Mexico, Canada and China are set to take effect tonight at midnight. American businesses will feel the squeeze, and American consumers might pay the price.
Also tonight, Trump is signaling it will be no-holds-barred when he addresses Congress, tomorrow night, at prime time. Some Democrats are planning to boycott. I'll ask Rep. Ilhan Omar what she plans to do.
I'm Kaitlan Collins. And this is THE SOURCE.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (voice-over): This is CNN Breaking News.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: We do start with that breaking news, here in Washington, as CNN has now confirmed, the U.S. is pausing all military aid to Ukraine. Without a doubt, the biggest aftershock yet from that Oval Office blow-up between President Trump and Ukrainian president Zelenskyy, last Friday.
A White House official tells CNN tonight that the aid to Ukraine is being reviewed to make sure it is contributing to a solution. That is what we were told by an official, tonight, confirming this pause. This aid, including anti-tank weapons, artillery rounds, rockets, it's been critical in Ukraine's fight to keep its sovereign territory out of Putin's grip.
I'm told this decision was made, late today, and it comes as U.S. officials are looking for an acknowledgement from President Zelenskyy about the breakdown in relations, to say the least, following that blow-up in the Oval Office, on Friday, potentially an acknowledgement in the form of a public apology from the Ukrainian leader. That likely has to happen before this pause is lifted, and also before we could see any movement on the minerals deal that went unsigned after Friday's fight.
But the aftershocks might not stop when it comes to aid to Ukraine, or to this minerals deal. We're learning tonight that the White House is also considering pausing other indirect support, including potentially cutting back on intelligence sharing with Kyiv.
Now, President Trump and his advisers, many of the ones that you saw there in the Oval Office with him, on Friday, have continued to seethe at Zelenskyy.
And Trump himself today sounded quite annoyed, when he was speaking and taking questions from the reporters, about that blunt warning that we heard from Zelenskyy, earlier today, that the end of this war, as Zelenskyy put it, could, quote, Still be very, very far away.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: He said he thinks the war is going to go on for a long time, and he better not be right about that.
It should not be that hard a deal to make. It could be made very fast. Now maybe somebody doesn't want to make a deal. And if somebody doesn't want to make a deal, I think that person won't be around very long. That person will not be listened to very long. Because I believe that Russia wants to make a deal. I believe, certainly, the people of Ukraine want to make a deal.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: It's pretty clear who he was referencing there.
I should note, Zelenskyy did also say today that he wants to pursue all potential avenues, and he has added that, quote, Peace is needed as soon as possible. Now, that comes after a number of Western allies rallied around him, this weekend, including King Charles the Third.
But for any help from the United States, going forward? You saw all the European leaders there. Trump's team has continued to throw the ball back into Zelenskyy's court. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MICHAEL WALTZ, NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER: What we don't have right now is President Zelenskyy saying, I am ready to take the steps necessary and have the conversations necessary and make the compromises necessary to end the fighting, go to a ceasefire.
What we need to hear from President Zelenskyy is that he has regret for what happened, he's ready to sign this minerals deal, and that he's ready to engage in peace talks.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: That is the minerals deal that went unsigned on Friday, after Zelenskyy was kicked out of the White House. And it could have new life, though, because hours before, we learned tonight that Trump was pausing this aid, the President himself said that he did remain hopeful about the minerals deal, and about getting it done.
We also know there's an effort happening, outside the White House, between Washington and Kyiv, to fix that. Republican congressman, Brian Fitzpatrick, wrote today that he had spoken with Zelenskyy's top aide, and that the train will, he said, 100 percent get back on the tracks, and that the deal will be signed in short order.
Trump today teased, an official update could potentially come exactly 24 hours from now, during his address to Congress, tomorrow night.
[21:05:00]
My first source, to start us off tonight, on this breaking news, is Maggie Haberman, The New York Times Senior Political Correspondent, and a CNN Political Analyst.
And Maggie, it's great to have you.
What have you learned about how Trump and his national security officials came to this decision? They've been talking about it. But it wasn't until later this afternoon. Because Trump said today that he had not personally been involved in this, and now this decision has been made.
MAGGIE HABERMAN, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST, SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT, THE NEW YORK TIMES: Kaitlan, my understanding is, this was a pretty quick decision. This is where they were headed, over the weekend. We all saw what happened, you were there, on Friday. There has been lots of blame being issued by the White House toward President Zelenskyy for what took place.
And Trump was pretty declarative about it, on Friday, in the Oval Office, which is, You don't have any cards, to Zelenskyy. That's half true. That's half not true. There are Europeans who could step up. Obviously, that's not the only thing that Zelenskyy wants.
But this is what Trump has wanted for a while. He thinks that it doesn't hurt him with his base. I will say, Kaitlan, it is true that support for the effort in Ukraine has dwindled since this first began in 2022. At the same time, support for Russia and support for Putin is not high.
And so, Trump is testing the bounds of how far he can go with this. We know that he has long-questioned aid to Ukraine. He has not treated Ukraine as a necessary ally in Europe. He has not, you know -- he has seen this all as if it is a financial prospect, and he has seen it all through economic lenses. And he has asked virtually no concessions from Putin, while asking many from Zelenskyy.
So, whether this actually changes anything remains to be seen. But this is where this was always headed in the form of, as you say, a pause, not completely ending everything, especially since it's been congressionally-approved. But it's what Trump can do in his power.
COLLINS: And what was your sense of how White House officials felt after that blow-up on Friday?
Because we've seen a lot of Republicans defend what happened, and back Trump up in that matter. Yes, there have been a few Senate Republicans who have questioned it or lightly criticized it. But a lot of it has been support from within his own party on that matter.
HABERMAN: So, I think a couple of things, Kaitlan.
Within the White House, there was pretty unanimous anger at the Ukrainians. There is a lot of frustration, not just with Zelenskyy, but with people around Zelenskyy. And to be clear, I'm not saying that's a valid view, or that that everything that led up to that, that the Trump folks are right. They have a perspective. The Ukrainians also have a perspective. But that is how the White House is seeing it.
And there's a lot of tension between Zelenskyy and JD Vance in particular, because JD Vance has been a skeptic of support for Ukraine for some time, has been critical of Zelenskyy. Zelenskyy has been critical back. And I think it's part of what you saw there.
White House officials have been very frustrated over the course of the last couple of weeks, as this Ukraine minerals deal came together.
The Ukrainians say, that they were presented with a deal at the outset that was not realistic for them, in which they got almost nothing, and they had to, split massively their natural resources to, as the Trump White House was saying, pay back past aid.
COLLINS: Yes.
HABERMAN: And so, I think you're going to see Trump try to condition other agreements that way. They don't (inaudible) anything wrong.
Republicans outside the White House, Kaitlan, if you talk to them privately, many of them are very upset with what Trump did. Even if they criticize Zelenskyy, which most of them do, they're still not happy with how that video looked at the end of the day.
COLLINS: In terms of what Trump wants from Zelenskyy now, is it clear to you what that looks like? Is it -- I mean, Rubio, on this program, Friday night, called for him to apologize. I mean, does he want just a direct apology from him?
HABERMAN: Look, Trump, as you know, treats everything like it's an ongoing negotiation, and he will get something that he can say is an apology and call it a win.
But they are -- they are backing both Zelenskyy and themselves into something of a corner, where it's going to be really hard to move forward, unless there is something where Zelenskyy says something about being wrong, or acting in haste, or something like that, publicly. We will see what that looks like.
But I do believe that Trump does want something that he can say is a peace deal. Whether that is exactly what Zelenskyy wants it to be, I think, is a pretty big question.
COLLINS: Maggie Haberman, thank you for joining us on this breaking news.
Also here joining us is a military source, retired Air Force Colonel, Cedric Leighton.
Can you just talk us through what this looks like in terms of millions -- hundreds of millions of dollars of aid that's going to Ukraine, in terms of this, how long before they start to feel a pause. Now, we don't know how long it's going to last.
COL. CEDRIC LEIGHTON (RET.), CNN MILITARY ANALYST, U.S. AIR FORCE (RET.): Right.
COLLINS: Could be a day. Could be forever.
LEIGHTON: Right.
COLLINS: How long before they feel this on the battlefield?
LEIGHTON: So, this gets to be really interesting, Kaitlan, because there's several different forms of military aid, and several different paths that the aid actually takes to get to Ukraine. So, what you have is things like 155-millimeter ammunition, for example, going into Ukraine, and that will go through several different places.
[21:10:00]
In many cases, the aid that has been actually earmarked for Ukraine is actually aid that was approved under the Biden administration. So that's somewhere around 66 -- a little less than $66 billion worth of aid. A lot of that aid that was approved in the last weeks of the Biden administration is still in the pipeline.
So basically, what President Trump is doing is he is stopping the aid that had been approved by President Biden. No new aid, as far as we know, has been approved by President Trump, at this point, to go to Ukraine. So, in essence, what the administration is doing is they're stopping the Biden administration's promises to Ukraine. This also impacts aid that could arrive even years from now, as there are certain things that the Ukrainians have contracted with defense contractors, here in the United States. Those things, those products, could be anything from aircraft to munitions, some of them take years to get to the front. And in that particular case, you are looking at basically cascading effects that could have a major impact on the ability of the Ukrainians to conduct the war.
COLLINS: Yes, absolutely.
Colonel, thank you for laying that out for us.
Also tonight, my political sources are here.
Van Jones is a former Obama administration official.
Alyssa Farah Griffin is a former White House communications director in the Trump administration. Also worked at the Pentagon.
Alyssa, just tell me your first reaction to learning that Trump is taking this step tonight, which we know they've been meeting behind closed doors about tonight. As Maggie noted, they've been talking about it over the weekend. Are you surprised that Trump has taken this move?
ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, FORMER TRUMP WHITE HOUSE COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR: It was only a matter of time, Kaitlan.
And keep in mind, Donald Trump did talk about ending aid to Ukraine on the campaign trail. JD Vance infamously said, I don't really care what happens to Ukraine. But I think this is obviously sparked by this blow-up in the Oval Office, which was unlike anything I think any of us had seen.
But here's what I'd say. Listen, sentiment has changed around the Ukraine war, as it's dragged on. It is a legitimate point for Donald Trump to say, Listen, we should be focusing resources on the cost of living and at home.
But that's not what he's arguing. He's saying Ukraine is provoking World War III. Zelenskyy is a dictator. They started this invasion. He campaigned for Kamala Harris.
There's just rounds of disinformation and wrong information around this whole discourse that I think is drastically misleading the public.
Listen, 62 percent of Americans still, to some degree, support aiding Ukraine. And I think there's going to ultimately be blowback if this is a long-held delaying of aid to a critical ally that is fighting our enemy on their soil.
COLLINS: Well, and Van, for -- to that point about what Republicans are saying privately versus publicly. There is one Republican senator tonight, already, who's criticizing this. Senator Susan Collins, said, I do not think we should be pausing our efforts... And I am not backing off my support for Ukraine. I remain convinced that it is not only in Ukraine's interest, but our interest to back Ukraine, because Putin is not going to stop there.
What do you make of the Republican reaction that we have seen so far to that blow-up, on Friday, but also to this move, tonight.
VAN JONES, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, FORMER OBAMA ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Well, it hasn't been exactly a profile in courage.
But I think I feel kind of sad, tonight, because Trump might win this battle of humiliating Zelenskyy, and forcing him to apologize somehow. But we're losing a bigger war, which is, can you trust America?
If you're a European country, can you trust America? If you're a trading partner in Canada or Mexico, can you trust America? If you're an African mom with a sick baby that needs a -- needs a shot, needs a little bit of food? Can you trust America to deliver on these kind of promises? And if you can't, then who are you supposed to trust? Do you turn to China? Do you turn to ISIS? Do you turn to Russia or Iran?
Can you trust America? That's not been a question anywhere in the world in our entire lifetime.
And so, yes, Trump might get Zelenskyy to bow down and kiss the ring. I think Zelenskyy loves his country enough, he'll probably do whatever he needs to do. But we're losing something tonight. We're losing something. And I think it's a very sad night for America. I think it's very -- it's a sad night for the world.
And Donald Trump is a strong leader. And we need his strength to be on the side of the weak. We need his strength to be on the side of the forgotten people around the world who are hungry tonight, people who are afraid of being bombed by Russia tonight. We need his strength on the side of the weak. Not crushing the weak, but lifting the weak up. I've seen him do it. But he's not doing it now, and I think it's a sad night for the world.
COLLINS: Alyssa, here on Friday, we talked to Secretary Rubio, who took a different position than what Van is articulating there. Obviously, he's the Secretary of State. But quite a forceful response, in defense of how the administration is handling this. Here's what he told me.
[21:15:00]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MARCO RUBIO, SECRETARY OF STATE: We're three years into a war that has no end in sight and no exit strategy. The EU doesn't have an exit strategy. I saw the comments tonight from the leader of the EU saying that we need a new leader of the -- of the free world. I mean, these people are just playing silly games and saying these things. What is their exit strategy? What is anybody else's exit strategy? The only person on the planet who is actively trying to bring an end to this conflict is named Donald Trump, the President of the United States.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: I think European leaders might disagree with that.
FARAH GRIFFIN: Kaitlan--
COLLINS: We've seen the British Prime Minister. But yes, Alyssa, what are your thoughts?
FARAH GRIFFIN: Well, Kaitlan, it just seems, to date, the pressure has been from the United States, almost purely on Zelenskyy to come to the table. You don't hear, Putin needs to come to the table. Of course, there have been staff level Secretary Rubio and Lavrov having conversations. But why the pressure completely one-sided on Ukraine here?
And I would note this because this started with yes, we're going to pause aid to Ukraine. I would not rule out, in this moment, that Donald Trump might be reconsidering our long-term membership in NATO.
And I would remind you that it was Secretary Rubio, who actually authored legislation that would require an Act of Congress for the U.S. to withdraw from NATO. This is somebody who, to his core, does understand our alliances. He understands our interest in opposing Russia in that region. He understands we have 20,000 U.S. troops in Poland. If this war expands beyond Ukraine, it is our war as well. So, it's disheartening to see that he's placing all the responsibility at the feet of Zelenskyy.
COLLINS: Yes, it's a good point about that legislation that I believe was passed, when Biden was in office, but saying yes, it would -- they would have to go to Congress, before that could happen.
Van, why do you, from just your perspective, in terms of the pressure has been singularly on Ukraine. And the argument that the White House has made about why they're not calling out Putin, every single day, and saying he's a killer and a dictator, is that that's not effective when it comes to negotiating. But we do see a lot of criticism that they are happy to level Zelenskyy's direction.
JONES: Yes, it's not the right way to go, in that Putin respects strength, not weakness. Putin respects people who are strong.
It's easy to punch down on Ukraine. It's easy to punch down on Panama. It's easy to punch down on Greenland. It's easy to punch down on Google Maps. I mean, you don't need a strong leader to beat those folks up. You need a strong leader to stand up to Vladimir Putin, a strong leaders stand up to China, to Iran, to North Korea, to the people of real threats.
We got a strong leader who's just slapping around all the little people. It's the weirdest thing I've ever seen. And then people go, Well, this guy is a strong leader. Well, why don't you prove it and go after somebody strong? Because right now you're just beating the crap out of little people. I just don't -- I don't -- I don't understand it. It doesn't make any sense.
Everybody knows Vladimir Putin is going to take everything he can get off the table and give nothing, unless somebody stands up to him. And Trump started off standing up to him, saying he was going to put sanctions on him. Haven't heard that for a while. Haven't heard much about the price of the eggs either.
COLLINS: Van Jones. Alyssa Farah Griffin. Thank you both for starting us off.
We have more on this breaking news ahead. We're going to get reaction from lawmakers.
First off, a Republican in Congress.
Later, we'll talk to a Democrat. How do they plan to counter Trump's congressional address tomorrow? There's a guest list that includes federal workers that he just fired from their jobs.
[21:20:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: Back with more on our breaking news tonight, as President Trump has ordered a halt on military aid to Ukraine, with word coming from the White House, this evening, that that is effective immediately.
Now, the question is, how will Congress react to this news.
My first source tonight is Republican congressman, Chip Roy, of Texas.
Congressman, it's great to be here.
Does it strengthen or weaken Ukraine's position, to pause U.S. military aid to Ukraine?
REP. CHIP ROY (R-TX): I mean, look, I'll let experts in foreign policy, and Eastern Europe and Russia, weigh in on that. But I would just say, this is what the President ought to do. Frankly, he could have done that before Friday's interaction with Zelenskyy.
We've spent hundreds of -- you know, we don't even know, by the way, right? So we've spent, allegedly, $300 billion, and Zelenskyy says we've only gotten a $100 billion. Like, where did the rest of it go? So--
COLLINS: Wait. The only person, who says we've spent $300 billion, though, is Trump. And--
ROY: Well--
COLLINS: --there are no numbers to back that up. ROY: Right. But--
COLLINS: And we know -- we know how much has been spent, because it's what Congress appropriated.
ROY: Right, right. But we've -- and we've appropriated a lot more than a $100 billion, and over the course of the entirety of the last three years, and significantly more than a $100 billion. So, if he's only gotten a $100 billion, where's the rest?
But the point is, we ought to know. We ought to know where all those dollars are going. We ought to know whether it's being spent effectively, and we ought to know whether there's any chance of success.
And look, I think the President was right, when he said there's three doors here. Either you're going to lose, or we're going to be drawn into war, or we need a ceasefire. And the President's right to choose a ceasefire.
COLLINS: But we know where it's going, because, one, they track it. And two, when he was -- when Zelenskyy was saying, Where's all this money coming from? He was saying that a lot of that is not coming to them, just in suitcases of cash. It's coming in, as you know very well--
ROY: Sure. In stockpiles of weapons, and -- yes.
COLLINS: --because a lot of this is made in your home state. It's coming in equipment from the United States.
ROY: Sure. But, again, we still don't have a full accounting of how it's being used, exactly. But don't--
COLLINS: But that's not why this is being paused tonight.
ROY: And -- yes but -- what's that?
COLLINS: Can we talk about why this is being paused tonight? Because if there was a concern about what was being sent, and what was appropriated or in the drawdown. This is coming after because of Friday's fight in the Oval Office. Do you think it's a negotiating tactic, a pressure tactic, on Ukraine?
ROY: Well, like I said, I think it could have been, and maybe should have been done, irrespective of what happened, Friday. Because, again, where are we taking this? The President wants a ceasefire. He's been very clear about that. He campaigned on that. He talked about that. He wants peace. And so, right now, he's saying, Have a ceasefire.
And the President was serious about saying, We can sit down, sit down with Russia and try to figure out where the lines will be drawn, figure out Crimea, figure out Donbas. But at the end of the day, we've got to actually know what the path to success is.
[21:25:00]
Ukrainians are dying by the tens of thousands. Our money is being used to fuel that war and continue a war that I'd like to know, where does that lead us?
COLLINS: And who do you--
ROY: Where -- how do we get to success here?
COLLINS: Who do you blame for that war?
ROY: I mean, look, the war started under Joe Biden's watch. He destroyed our energy policies. He empowered Russia. He was siding with Iran and China, which was also helping Russia. All of that stuff--
COLLINS: But do you blame Joe Biden for the war?
ROY: This all started under Joe Biden.
COLLINS: But who started the war?
ROY: Well, but my point is that, but that war wouldn't have started if Donald Trump's in the White House, if we have a strong hand in the White House. Joe -- Vladimir Putin does not -- Putin does not go into Ukraine. That's just the truth. We had a weak hand in the White House.
COLLINS: Well but that's not the truth. That's your -- that's your--
ROY: Joe Biden let it happen, destroyed our energy policy.
COLLINS: That's your analysis and your view, but you don't know that for sure. And secondly--
ROY: All I know is there weren't a lot of wars--
COLLINS: But the -- but the answer to that question--
ROY: --getting started under President Trump.
COLLINS: But my point is--
ROY: In his four years, what war started under President Trump?
COLLINS: My point of the answer to that question was that Putin started this war, and Russia started this war. Do you disagree with that?
ROY: Well, Putin obviously invaded Ukraine. But the reason that happened was because of weakness from the United States. Like that -- our foreign policy matters. When we absolutely give away the field on energy, when we've made bad decision in terms of who we're siding with around the globe, and we strengthen the hand of Putin? Then he walks into Ukraine.
Then, we throw money at Zelenskyy, and say, OK, here you can have all the resources you need to keep funding a war, which -- you know, but where was Europe in a lot of that? Yes, I know they contributed some, but we were funding the lion's share of that.
And then, you wonder, Well why is this getting perpetuated when Ukrainians are dying, and now they can even recruit enough people to fight a war?
COLLINS: But -- OK. But -- OK. I'm not going to argue this point. But it is well-known that Putin has long-believed that Ukraine is part of Russia. He does not think Ukraine is a sovereign nation. He thinks it belongs to them. That was his position, long before Joe Biden took office--
ROY: Sure he did. Sure.
COLLINS: --and he started amassing troops near the border.
ROY: And for the four years of President Trump, he didn't go into Ukraine, did he? And, look, again, your policies--
(CROSSTALK)
COLLINS: But he didn't give Crimea back, did he?
ROY: Well, but you could -- you wonder whether or not you're going to have a war.
COLLINS: But did he give Crimea? He didn't -- he didn't give back the other land that he had taken illegally when Obama was in office.
ROY: But the -- but the -- well, that raises the issues under Obama.
The point is, when you have weakness in the United States, when you have weakness in the White House, then you're going to have people around the globe who act.
And people are saying, Well, he loves to side with Putin. No. President Trump wants to make sure we have a strong America that is siding on the side of righteousness, but to deliver results. If you have a ceasefire here, where we can get to the table, instead of having Ukrainians getting killed, because we're fueling a war that Zelenskyy, nor Europe leader -- European leaders--
COLLINS: Are we--
ROY: --have ever given us a path to success. The President is leading us down the path of peace.
COLLINS: Yes, well we'll see. But Zelenskyy's point in the Oval Office, on Friday, was Putin has violated dozens of ceasefire agreements before that. They didn't have enough enforcement. That was his point.
ROY: Sure.
COLLINS: But let me ask you on this, just because I do want to get to this. We had Speaker Mike Johnson on, last week.
ROY: Yes.
COLLINS: And he was saying that he does believe eventually, what Congress is going to do in two weeks, to keep the government funded is to do a clean CR. Are you going to vote for that?
ROY: Well, we'll see, first of all, whether something is actually a clean CR or not. But I have put out my support to say that I believe that a freeze in spending, which is what a actually clean CR, let's be very clear. In D.C. parlance, they're not always that clean.
But an actually clean CR that continues funding at current levels, which would freeze spending, give Elon, DOGE, the White House, OMB, room to go do what they're doing, to find waste, fraud and abuse, identify the cuts that need to be put in place? I'm a 100 percent in favor of going down that road. And then we have a full debate about FY26.
COLLINS: So, you're--
ROY: Remember, Kaitlan--
COLLINS: OK. So, you're fine with it, not having the DOGE anomalies, the cutouts for what DOGE decide is fraud.
ROY: Well there'll be some anomalies in there for Defense, because I think -- I think, Pete Hegseth--
COLLINS: No, on -- on USAID--
ROY: Yes.
COLLINS: --and all these other programs that--
(CROSSTALK)
ROY: I think, right now, it's very--
COLLINS: You're fine without voting for that?
ROY: I think the -- and it is clear that the President, right now, has every intention to go find those cuts that we need to put in place. The executive branch is already halting a lot of that funding, identify those cuts for FY26. But right now, I think we're in a better place, if we freeze spending and give him the power to do that. I think that's the strongest negotiating position for the President.
Democrats are jumping (ph) for a shutdown. They've all but said so. They would love to shut down Elon. I think we ought to empower the White House and the President, empower Elon, to go find those cuts and put those in place in FY26.
COLLINS: OK. It's notable to hear you say that.
Congressman Chip Roy, as always, thank you for your time tonight.
ROY: Thanks, Kaitlan. COLLINS: Great to have you.
Up next, when we come back. President Trump is preparing that address to Congress, tomorrow night. Our White House insiders are here to talk about what's at stake.
Also, we have new reporting on one of Trump's special guests, who will be there tomorrow night.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Elon Musk will be there in attendance with the President. And that comes, of course, as Elon Musk has been at the forefront of the fight in Congress, over his efforts to dramatically reshape the federal government, by eliminating spending, and also federal workers.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[21:30:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: Just a few minutes ago, we heard from Vice President JD Vance, for the first time, since he took the lead in chastising President Zelenskyy on Friday, triggering that Oval Office blow-up between the two of them, and President Trump, and now tonight, a pause on all military aid from the United States to Ukraine.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JD VANCE (R), U.S. VICE PRESIDENT: What I tried to do originally was actually try to defuse the situation a little bit. Because I'm like, you know, we're having this meeting. Obviously, there are a 100 television cameras here. Let's try to have this conversation in private.
[21:35:00]
And then the President, as we kept on going back and forth, I tried again to say, Well, maybe we should have this conversation in private. And the President was like, Nope, actually, I don't want to have it in private anymore, I want to have this actual conversation in public for the American people to see.
And I do think that there was just a certain sense of, there was a lack of respect, there was a certain sense of entitlement. And most importantly, look, we can look past all that stuff. But the President has set a very clear goal for his administration. He wants the killing to stop.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: My White House insiders are here tonight.
Semafor's Shelby Talcott.
And Jeff Mason of Reuters.
It's great to have you both.
Jeff, what do you make of Vance saying there.
When he's saying he tried to defuse it. He was answering a question from a reporter who was basically asking Trump if he was more on Ukraine's side or Russia's side.
And then Vance spoke up and said, We're not doing the name-calling, we're not doing all that with Putin, because it didn't work with Biden. So we're trying a different tactic.
And then Zelenskyy was -- asked, Can I respond to you? And Vance said, Sure.
JEFF MASON, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, REUTERS: Yes.
COLLINS: And that is really when the match -- that is the precise moment, from my understanding, since I was right behind that couch, that was when the match was really lit.
MASON: Yes, absolutely. And then it was the Vice President who came back and said, Have you said thank you once? And said that he was being disrespectful. I mean, that's really when voices started to get raised was then.
I also thought it was interesting that he just said in that interview that, We can get past some of these things, like not being grateful. I don't know that that's true. At least, I don't know that that's the position of the President of the United States. I think he wants to hear that gratitude. He wants to hear that praise. He wants to see some movement on the side of Ukraine that's beyond just saying, I'm willing to deal with Putin.
COLLINS: Well, and what Trump has been saying lately, including today, to reporters, is basically implying he doesn't think Zelenskyy wants a peace deal.
Now, Zelenskyy hasn't given reason for that. Zelenskyy has just said, That's not a peace deal, if there's not security guarantees. They view it very differently.
But Trump is continuing to push that.
SHELBY TALCOTT, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, SEMAFOR: Yes, the White House has made pretty clear that their view of this is that Zelenskyy isn't ready for a peace deal.
And we've heard Trump say repeatedly, including today as well, that, sort of lamenting about how Zelenskyy isn't grateful enough. So that is clearly an issue with Donald Trump.
Now, what's interesting, though, is when I've talked to several White House officials today, about this situation, and it's not clear exactly what Ukraine has to do in order to get these talks back on board.
You talk to one White House official, they say, He needs to issue a public apology.
You talk to another White House official, they say, No public apology needed. He just needs to sign that minerals deal. He needs to make clear that he wants peace.
So, it's not even really clear between White House officials, it feels like, what has to happen next.
COLLINS: Yes. And this all comes as tomorrow night, Trump seemed to be saying, maybe there could be an announcement on the minerals deal, tomorrow night. I mean, we'll see what that looks like when he is addressing Congress. He's said it many times. This is the first time since he's taken office, this time.
There's a lot to talk about tomorrow night. And Elon Musk will be there. He has been at the forefront of either praise from Republicans, or criticism, or maybe privately some questions about what he's doing, from both parties.
MASON: Yes, so lots of focus, both on the President and on Elon, and obviously, what the -- what the President says. And what he'll say about Ukraine will be closely watched, what he says about domestic policy. There's been a lot of focus, obviously, in the last few days about Russia. But he's got a full agenda.
And we've got some polling showing that some people don't believe, or some of his own supporters, and certainly Democrats, don't believe he's focused enough on bringing prices down. Will he address that? Will he talk about inflation? Or will it be kind of a victory lap, which he also likes to do when he has the cameras on?
COLLINS: Yes. What have you heard about tomorrow night?
TALCOTT: I think it's going to be, in part, a victory lap. You can expect the President to talk about what he's done over the past five weeks. He's going to talk about foreign policy. Ukraine will be a topic, I'm told.
He's also going to talk about the economy. I think that's going to be particularly notable for Republicans, because we've talked to Republicans, over the last week or two, who are growing a little bit concerned about that aspect. Because, remember, Donald Trump doesn't have to face the voters again, but these Republican lawmakers do. So, they're going to be looking at what he says on the economy.
So it's kind of going to be, in the White House's eyes, his best hits over the last five weeks. And that's what I think we can expect.
COLLINS: Melania Trump will also be there.
She was actually on Capitol Hill today. We heard from her publicly, really, one of the first few times, since Trump took office. She was there to talk about how to protect people from deepfakes and this revenge, the kind of relationship stuff that we have seen, that Ted Cruz has championed these efforts.
But she also took a dig at Democrats. This is what she had to say.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MELANIA TRUMP, FIRST LADY OF THE UNITED STATES: I expected to see more Democrats -- leaders -- with us here today to address this serious issue. Surely, as adults, we can prioritize America's children ahead of partisan politics.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: What did you make of that, Jeff?
[21:40:00]
MASON: Well, I think Democrats are not eager to work with the administration on really anything right now. And if they felt like there was an olive branch on any of the things that they cared about, that they also think should have bipartisan support, then maybe they would have a little bit more room for bipartisan support on this.
In fairness, I do believe Congressman Ro Khanna was there, but I think he was the only Democrat in the room.
COLLINS: Jeff Mason. Shelby Talcott. We'll see both of you, tomorrow night.
Up next. How are Democrats going to respond? They'll be there as well. Some are boycotting, but a lot of them will be there. My next guest will. Some of them are putting fired federal workers front and center. Congresswoman Ilhan Omar is here to join me next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[21:45:00]
COLLINS: In this hour, tomorrow night, President Trump will be standing in front of both chambers of Congress, and the American public, for the first time since his return to office. It comes after a head-spinning 43 days, and also at a critical time for the President, as Republicans are trying to turn his agenda into law.
The President, declaring earlier, on Truth Social, Tomorrow night will be big. I will tell it like it is.
And how will Democrats respond to that?
My next source is Democratic congresswoman from Minnesota, Ilhan Omar.
And it's great to have you here.
Some of your Democratic colleagues are skipping tomorrow night. You are not. Why not?
REP. ILHAN OMAR (D-MN): Well, I think it is really important for us to be in the People's House, to stand in defiance, to make sure that we're not ceding any ground, and to be there to bear witness to the lies that he's going to tell, so that we can make sure the American people understand that this man is not keeping the promises that have a real impact in their lives, that he is constantly creating, not just a constitutional crisis, but legalizing corruption, and the chaos is there to distract the American people's attention, while they're literally stealing their money.
COLLINS: What do you mean, stealing their money?
OMAR: Well, we know that in many cases, the favors that he is making for billionaires to take tax dollars. I would consider that stealing from the American people.
COLLINS: You mean, like the tech billionaires who have surrounded themselves with Donald Trump and--
OMAR: Yes. Or--
COLLINS: --and his top aides?
OMAR: --or financing crypto with taxpayer dollars. Those are supposed to be dollars that are supposed to be going to the American people.
COLLINS: You think that crypto initiative that he announced, this morning, where he picked essentially five of -- five of the companies that will be able to be included in that, you think that's?
OMAR: Yes.
COLLINS: What questions do you, as a member of Congress, have about that?
OMAR: We have a lot of questions. But the problem is that there is no transparency. We're not getting any answers back from the administration.
I would also say, you think about the tariffs and the problems that they've created in tanking the stock market. That is the American people's money. That's investments that people have made.
COLLINS: I want to ask you about the tariffs.
But you are bringing a fired federal worker with you, tomorrow night.
OMAR: Right.
COLLINS: Is that going to be a strategy we see from multiple of your colleagues? What -- should we expect there to be a lot of federal -- fired federal workers there, tomorrow night? Or what is that going to look like, in your initiative?
OMAR: Yes, you will see a lot of fired federal employees, many of whom are our veterans. As you know, 30 percent of the federal workforce are veterans, who have served our country, who get priority, oftentimes, in hiring because of the sacrifices that they have made. My guest, Chris, is a Air Force veteran who served in Iraq. We actually first got to meet him, while he was trying to help some of the translators get resettled back into the United States, which is now, as you know, halted.
But Chris was the assistant director of the Small Business Administration. This was somebody who was trying to make sure small business entrepreneurs were getting the resources that they needed, in order to make an impact in their communities.
COLLINS: And we'll see what that message looks like, tomorrow night.
On the tariffs. We were talking about this. Because they go into effect at midnight. Trump says there's no way for Canada and Mexico to kind of get the -- talk their way out of it, or anything like that.
Your state, when it comes to Canada, is one of the largest trading partners, and imports $14.4 billion worth of goods. What is the impact going to look like on that?
OMAR: Yes. I mean, it's, in totality, it's about $22 billion trade for Minnesota.
COLLINS: With Canada?
OMAR: With Canada. Just in my own district, it's over $600 million.
COLLINS: So, with 25 percent tariffs, what does that do?
OMAR: That is going to have impact on our farmers. That's going to have impact on multiple industries. That might mean the closing of refineries. It might mean the shutting down of different plants. That means people are going to lose their jobs. That means that our economy is going to severely struggle.
[21:50:00]
And, as you know, we're on the grid. Canada is threatening to cut off energy sources. Outside a few states, most of the states in our country will be impacted. That might mean we experience black-outs. To him, it's a punishment for Canada. But what it would ultimately be is a punishment on Minnesota workers, Minnesota farmers, and Minnesota industries.
COLLINS: We'll see what that looks like.
Congresswoman, thank you very much. And we'll see you, tomorrow night, with Chris, at the State of the Union -- congressional address.
OMAR: Yes.
COLLINS: Thank you very much for being here.
Also, speaking of politics and comebacks. Andrew Cuomo is preparing one. The former Governor is now running for mayor. The man who once held that office, Bill de Blasio, will weigh in, next. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[21:55:00]
COLLINS: Former New York governor, Andrew Cuomo, says in a 17-minute video that he is running for Mayor of New York City.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ANDREW CUOMO, FORMER NEW YORK GOVERNOR, LAWYER AND FORMER UNITED STATES SECRETARY OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT: We know that today our New York City is in trouble.
The city just feels threatening, out of control, and in crisis.
It won't be easy, but I know we can turn the city around, and I believe I can help.
And that is why I announced my candidacy today for Mayor of New York City.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: This potential comeback comes after Cuomo resigned from office in 2021, over a sexual harassment scandal, allegations that I should note he has denied.
My inside source tonight is the former New York City mayor, Bill de Blasio, who joins me now.
You were mayor when he was governor. You know New York politics. What do you make of this effort at a comeback?
BILL DE BLASIO, FORMER NEW YORK CITY MAYOR: You know, it's funny. I don't even recognize the city he is describing in that video. I have to start with that.
This is a city that was heroic during COVID. And the people of New York City, we were the epicenter, and people stood up, helped each other. This city came back. It's vibrant again.
We have some problems, that's for sure. But I don't recognize this kind of Gotham City, he's portraying this, like hellscape. And I actually think that's going to ring hollow to a lot of people.
So, it's funny, when I dealt with him a lot of the time, he almost had a New York City of the 1970s in his mind. I'm talking in -- I won't go into too much detail. But in private conversation, this funny, kind of, like, stuck-in-time sense of New York City, like the fiscal crisis, and the Bronx is burning. And I don't think he ever really updated it.
Because, by and large, I mean, you can't afford an apartment in New York City right now, so obviously someone wants to live there, and it's -- I wish people could afford more. But it's obviously a place that's popular. The restaurants are full. People are coming in from all over the world. So, I think the very rationale is problematic, to begin with.
COLLINS: What does it say, though, if that is his pitch to voters about where his view is of where Democrats, maybe generally, but also New Yorkers themselves are at?
DE BLASIO: Well, look, New Yorkers, I love my people. But let's face it. People of New York will be passionate. They'll express their views. And we certainly have some issues we're dealing with. But let's be clear, crime has come way down. The jobs came back after the pandemic. There's a lot to be proud of, too.
I think people, of course, are looking for something right now. They're looking for some change. They certainly are very worried about the impact of the Trump administration on New York City, and the threats that we're seeing directed at New York City. A lot of people in New York City feel personally fearful because of the dynamics around immigration, for example, and we're the ultimate city of immigrants.
But that said, the interesting question is going to be, what does change look like to the voter? I did a little research today. I know you love your history. There's been a Cuomo, on the ballot, in New York City and New York State, every decade for the last six decades.
Now, that could mean people are like reassured by that -- no, you know, like How comfortable, how wonderful. Or, it could say to people, That's the ultimate status quo, and if you don't like the way things are, you don't have to look very far to know where they came from.
That's what this campaign's going to be fascinating. I think there's going to be a real prosecution of that question, Who is the status quo candidate? Who is the change candidate?
COLLINS: And also, just in terms of knowing New York, and also knowing politics yourself. When I say comeback, it's not just that he left office and he's coming back.
Obviously, when he left office, there was the investigation by the New York Attorney General that found in their report that he sexually harassed 11 women, and created a hostile work environment for women. He denied those allegations, but obviously left office.
Also, the nursing homes. You mentioned COVID, and how that was handled when he was in office. They obviously -- he's testified on Capitol Hill about that, and faced so much scrutiny from lawmakers.
How do you overcome that? Is it something you think he can, or what's your view on that?
DE BLASIO: I think it's going to be a lot harder than he and his partisans think.
Now, look, he's a very skilled politician, and he certainly has some achievements to his name. But if you think about it, how many elections have we seen, where someone walks in the door with so many challenges and so many negatives? The 11 women who came forward, it actually turned into 13 when the Justice Department did a further investigation. And then the question of the nursing homes were clearly policy decisions led to the loss of life, and then there was not honesty about it. There was actually an effort to cover that up. That's just a couple of the things we could talk about.
[22:00:00]
So, I think, you're talking about a very skilled politician with a great family name. And at the same time, you're talking about negatives that most politicians would never have to confront, just one of them, let alone a whole bunch of them together. I think this means you're going to have a very dynamic election, and someone is going to emerge as the alternative.
COLLINS: We shall see what the voters decide.
DE BLASIO: Amen.
COLLINS: Former New York City mayor, Bill de Blasio, great to have you.
DE BLASIO: Thank you, Kaitlan.
COLLINS: Thanks for joining us, in Washington, not in New York for once.
DE BLASIO: Special opportunity to be here in our nation's capital.
COLLINS: And thank you all so much for joining us.
"CNN NEWSNIGHT WITH ABBY PHILLIP" is up next.
