Return to Transcripts main page
The Brief with Jim Sciutto
CNN International: Netanyahu Addresses UNGA After Delegates Walk Out; Netanyahu Denies Gaza Genocide Allegation at U.N.; Trump: "There Will be Others" After Comey Indictment; Sinclair and Nexstar to Air Kimmel Again; ICE Agent Relieved of Duties. Aired 6-7p ET
Aired September 26, 2025 - 18:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[18:00:00]
JIM SCIUTTO, CNN INTERNATINAL HOST: Hello and welcome to our viewers, joining us from all around the world. I'm Jim Sciutto in Washington, and
you're watching "The Brief."
Just ahead this hour, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu slams countries for recognizing a Palestinian State as dozens of U.N. delegates
walked out in protest to his speech. Donald Trump says he expects more prosecutions in the wake of James Comey's indictment. And an ICE agent who
shoved a woman to the ground at immigration court is relieved of his current duties.
We begin at the U.N. General Assembly where the Israeli prime minister attacked Iran and Western countries who have recognized a Palestinian State
in a fiery speech. However, he had to watch as dozens of delegates filed out of the Assembly Hall in protest. Netanyahu went on to say Israel is
doing what any self-respecting nation, his words, would do after October 7th and rejected claims that Israel is carrying out a genocide in Gaza.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BENJAMIN NETANYAHU, ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER: While Israel, which does everything it can to get civilians out of harm's way, Israel is put in the
dark. What a joke. You want to hear another one? Israel is accused of deliberately starving the people of Gaza when Israel is deliberately
feeding the people of Gaza. Since the beginning of the war, Israel has led into Gaza more than 2 million tons of food and aid.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCIUTTO: Netanyahu portrayed the war as a stunning military comeback. He vowed to bring home the hostages. He did not mention Israel's occupation of
Palestinian land or the question of annexation. He said this about growing international recognition for Palestinian statehood.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
NETANYAHU: Giving the Palestinians a state one mile from Jerusalem after October 7th is like giving al-Qaeda a state one mile from New York City
after September 11th. This is sheer madness. It's insane. And we won't do it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCIUTTO: Israel's far-right politicians are praising his speech. However, the head of Israel's opposition, Yair Lapid, criticized the Israeli prime
minister for not laying out a path to end the war or to explain why Israel has not yet defeated Hamas, as Netanyahu promised. One Palestinian official
told CNN Netanyahu's speech was full of lies.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MUSTAFA BARGHOUTI, PRESIDENT, PALESTINIAN NATIONAL INITIATIVE: These are the largest ever lies we've ever heard in the general assembly. When he
claimed that there isn't such a loss among the civilian population, although Israeli resources themselves and British resources have indicated
that five out of the six people killed in Gaza, the 65,000 people, are civilians. 20,000 of them are children. We have the names of these
children. They cannot be hidden.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCIUTTO: Joining me now is Mara Rudman, director of the Ripples of Hope project at the University of Virginia, also a former Middle East envoy,
former deputy national security advisor. Thanks so much for joining, Mara.
MARA RUDMAN, DIRECTOR, RIPPLES OF HOPE PROJECT, UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA AND FORMER U.S. DEPUTY MIDDLE EAST ENVOY: Thanks, Jim, for having me.
SCIUTTO: I wonder, watching the Israeli prime minister on the stage there, as those delegates walked out, and also seeing the math of this, right,
that Israel and the U.S., alongside it, are very much on a shrinking island now, being among the few countries that have not now recognized Palestinian
statehood, does that isolation -- growing isolation, does it matter? Is it at all influencing policy in Israel now
RUDMAN: So, Jim, I would distinguish between where the United States and Israel sit on not making the unilateral declarations of Palestinian
statehood and the ways in which President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu used a world stage at the U.N. to speak only to their bases, and
very narrow bases, particularly with respect to Prime Minister Netanyahu's speech, as you pointed out, the extreme right in Israel. So, I think the
question now is what to be done, how to move forward?
[18:05:00]
I am encouraged by some of the words I heard from President Trump earlier today, indicating that his meeting with Arab countries -- I think it was
yesterday, was -- may well lead to laying out a plan, a way forward. And I certainly hope that's the case.
SCIUTTO: Yes. He did say, Trump said, that he said in quite strong terms yesterday that he would not allow, for instance, Israel to annex the West
Bank, as some Israeli politicians have openly pushed for. President Macron, after speaking with Trump, said that Europeans and Americans are on the
same page here in an effort to end the war. Do you believe that President Trump is truly ready to push Israel to a deal, to ending the war? Because
it's not the first time he's complained or said that he's running out of patience. He's been doing so for weeks. And yet, has not, it seems, forced
Netanyahu's hand.
RUDMAN: So, Jim, I think where I differ with you a little bit is I don't think the United States, despite popular perception, can force another
country to do anything. I think what you want to do is mobilize a variety of different actors to be incentivizing along the path that's in your
interest. You know, diplomacy is the art of letting others have it your way.
And that's what needs to come about. I think there's a possible grouping of European countries, what Macron said is indicative of that, the Gulf
countries, Jordan, Egypt, along with President Trump and the United States that could show the way forward here.
SCIUTTO: To your point, Israel has proven your point, right, in the past, where the Israeli leaders often ignored American pressure, certainly going
back to the Biden administration. But there are things President Trump can do to pressure, right, you know, for instance, withholding arms sales,
which is something he has shown, even in the midst of his criticism, no appetite for. I mean, that would be the true pressure point, would it not?
RUDMAN: So, I'm not sure. I gesture to say Israel has ignored what various presidents have wanted for decades, well before President Biden. And
there's kind of always a public and a private back and forth. I don't think it's about pressuring on the negative side. I think the arms sales, the
arms agreements the United States has with Israel are in the United States' interest as much as they're in Israel's interest.
And I think it's more about where the incentives are going forward on something like the Abraham Accords that would really support economic and
security frameworks in the region that would benefit Israel, that would benefit the United States, and that will not happen, will not be able to
proceed if we don't have a day after plan for Palestinians.
SCIUTTO: And that remains very much an open question. Mara Rudman, thanks so much for joining.
RUDMAN: Thank you.
SCIUTTO: Well, Israeli forces, meanwhile, are pushing deeper and deeper into Gaza City, setting up loudspeakers on Israel's southern border to
broadcast the prime minister's speech, supposedly in hope that hostages in Gaza might hear it. Local hospitals say dozens of Palestinians lost their
lives in the last 24 hours. More than 65,000 people have been killed in Gaza since the October 7th attacks, nearly 55,000 injured.
A teenager from Gaza is finally getting the medical attention he needs after his jaw was severely damaged by an exploding Israeli tank shell. He's
now in London for surgery. A warning, some of the images in this story are disturbing.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
CHRISTINA MACFARLANE, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): In ten Hours, Majd will get his smile back or think about eating or speaking normally again.
He's about to undergo radical reconstructive surgery, 19 months after an Israeli tank shell exploded near him blowing away his jaw.
MAJD ALSHAGHNOBI, PATIENT (through translator): I'm really happy to be treated here and have my operation.
MACFARLANE (VOICE-OVER): Majd was collecting flour from an aid point when the Israeli tank shell hit, killing the two friends he was walking with.
His wounds so horrific he was presumed dead.
ALSHAGHNOBI (through translator): They took me to Al-AhliBaptist Hospital. They put me in the morgue. When they saw my arm move, they moved me to the
hospital kitchen because there was no space in the operating room.
MACFARLANE (VOICE-OVER): In the kitchen, his life was saved by an emergency tracheostomy, but he was caught just short of death with no chance of
healing without further care. So, his mother had to get him out.
ISLAM FELFEL, MAJD'S MOTHER (through translator): I had been running for a month and a half between Nasser Hospital and al Aqsa Hospital for a month
and a half to be able to make the arrangement for him.
MACFARLANE (VOICE-OVER): He did get out thanks to the charity project, Pure Hope, who privately funded Majd's evacuation and treatment. And thanks to
one of Britain's leading pediatric surgeons who had the difficult task of choosing which Gazan child they should save.
[18:10:00]
DR. OWASE JEELANI, GREAT ORMOND STREET HOSPITAL: As a surgeon, like I said, you know, I'm used to dealing with injuries. But this was something that I
was not used to. But you know, if you sort of pause and look away, you know, this by tomorrow there'll be a dozen, a few dozen more children that
are well at the moment. But will not Be well tomorrow, will not be around tomorrow.
MACFARLANE (VOICE-OVER): Professor Jeelani and nine other surgeons have taken months to meticulously plan this operation. Through the use of 3D
modeling, they will take bone, soft tissue and blood vessels from Majd's leg to close the gap in his jaw.
DR. JEELANI: Majd was the best-case scenario where we feel with our plan, we can really get him close to how things used to be for him and make the
biggest difference in his life.
MACFARLANE (VOICE-OVER): The World Health Organization says hundreds of people have died waiting for medical evacuation, and more than 3,500
children are in need.
Majd is fortunate. His case has drawn attention here in the U.K., even from Prince Harry. But the trauma for his family is not over. In escaping Gaza,
his mother was forced to leave behind two of her sons, Muhammad and Yusuf.
MACFARLANE: What has life been like for your family in Gaza since you've been here in London.
FELFEL (through translator): They're exhausted. They tell everyday that you've left with your favorite child. They're in the north. You know what
the north is like. And they say they could die at any moment. If I knew the war would come back, I wouldn't have left.
MACFARLANE (VOICE-OVER): It took foreign governments, doctors and NGOs working together to bring Majd's jaw back. But Majd is past healing.
ALSHAGHNOBI (through translator): I wish Gaza could go back to what it was, that everybody could be reunited, and be together in Gaza as it once was.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SCIUTTO: That poor little boy. Thanks to Christina Macfarlane for the story. "There will be others," that is a quote from President Donald Trump,
after a federal grand jury indicted former FBI Director James Comey.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: It's not a list, but I think there will be others. I mean, they're corrupt. These were corrupt, radical-left
Democrats. Because Comey essentially was -- he was worse than a Democrat. I would say the Democrats are better than Comey. But, no, there will be
others. Look, it was -- that's my opinion. They weaponized the Justice Department like nobody in history. What they've done is terrible. And so, I
would -- I hope -- frankly, I hope there are others. Because you can't let this happen to a country.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCIUTTO: Comey responded quickly on Instagram, saying he was paying the price simply for standing up to Trump.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JAMES COMEY, FORMER FBI DIRECTOR: My family and I have known for years that there are costs to standing up to Donald Trump. But we couldn't imagine
ourselves living any other way. We will not live on our knees. And you shouldn't either. My heart is broken for the Department of Justice. But I
have great confidence in the federal judicial system. And I'm innocent. So, let's have a trial.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCIUTTO: The costs, Comey mentions, other elected officials may have to pay them, too. Take a look at what President Trump posted this past weekend.
Addressed to his own attorney general, what about Comey, Adam Shifty Schiff, Letitia? They're all as guilty as hell, but nothing is going to be
done. We can't delay any longer. It's killing our reputation and credibility. They impeached me twice. Justice must be served now.
Donald Trump was referencing sitting California Senator Adam Schiff, who led his first impeachment trial, as well as the New York attorney general,
Letitia James, who filed a civil fraud case against Trump and his company a few years ago.
One official already paying the price for standing up to Trump, Erik Siebert, the U.S. attorney in Virginia's Eastern District, who was
appointed by Trump. A source tells CNN that Siebert resigned rather than charge James -- Letitia James with mortgage fraud. If that sounds familiar,
it's because it is. Federal officials have also accused Senator Schiff and Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook of mortgage fraud. All have denied those
allegations.
Standing by is Alayna Treene. Alayna, when the president says there will be others, and when an indictment follows the president tweeting, pressuring
his attorney general to prosecute people naming Comey, how does the White House explain that he is not directing these prosecutions and that these
prosecutions are not politically motivated?
ALAYNA TREENE, CNN WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Yes, they are continuing to argue that. We actually saw that argument from the FBI director, Kash Patel,
saying this isn't politically motivated. But, of course, they aren't going there when pressed on this about the behind the scenes.
[18:15:00]
We know from our reporting, and I know from my conversations with people in that building behind me, that the president did urge the attorney general,
Pam Bondi, to bring charges against Comey. And, of course, I would note, you know, from my conversations with people throughout the Trump
administration, they said once they saw that Seaborne, who you just pointed to, had stepped down from his role, he was also pressured to do so, I
should note, by the president, the president then put in one of his closest allies, Lindsey Halligan, his former personal attorney, someone who is
considered a loyalist to the president, put her in that role in the Eastern District of Virginia. That was a sign to many people across the
administration that charges against Comey were likely to come.
And I think -- you know, the thing that I keep picking up from my conversations today in the aftermath of this indictment, Jim, is that this
is something the president has lamented for months now. This idea, and he kind of said it in that post over the weekend, this idea that he was
prosecuted, he was indicted multiple times when he was out of office, he was impeached during his first term twice. These are things that he wants
to see the people who were behind that held accountable.
And he does believe -- I mean, part of this is he does firmly believe that these people somehow violated the law, and that's why he's pushing a lot of
this, but it's still the same, this idea of wanting to seek retribution against political opponents. That is what they tell me, that it's not just
personal, it's something that he believes, but they still will admit that.
And so, I think a key question, of course, is what is going to happen next. I posed that question to White House officials today. One of them told me
you should look for there to be potential prosecution and charges brought against people like Adam Schiff, like Letitia James. Of course, we have to
see what actually happens.
We know that the Justice Department and others are looking into all of that and have their own investigations going. There's a number of other people I
didn't mention, people like Bolton and so many others that the president has tried to target. But all to say we have to see where this leads.
There's no question, though, that he hopes that more are to follow. And he is publicly -- as you saw in that post, publicly pressuring the attorney
general, not just doing it behind the scenes.
SCIUTTO: What's the crime, though? I mean, Schiff followed a legal impeachment process, which is enshrined in the Constitution. By the way,
there was a Republican who voted for conviction in that first impeachment trial and seven Republicans who voted for conviction in the second
impeachment trial. What is the alleged crime that White House officials mention?
TREENE: See, this is what's so fascinating to me because it's not what the president has been really criticizing Comey over. What he's being charged
with is for making false statements during a hearing in 2020, a Senate hearing, essentially about, you know, whether or not he had leaked to the
media details of the Russia investigation and whether the Trump 2016 campaign had colluded with Russia to help him win the presidency.
And that's really what this is about. It's about whether he made -- you know, whether he perjured himself while testifying, whether there was an
obstruction of justice. Those are the charges. It's not really related to what the president, you know, the broader Russia investigation itself. And
so, that's where I think, you know, watching how this actually plays out in court. I am no legal expert. We have a lot of those at CNN. But from my
conversations with them, they say it's going to be a tall order to see what the judges do, what a grand jury will do when this is actually brought into
the courtroom.
And so, it's going to be very telling to see, you know, whether that also potentially, you know, leads to a different type of motivation in other
cases, whether that makes them, you know, reconsider. I don't know. But what is clear is that the president very much is feeling emboldened with
this. And he's also been celebrating it. I mean, today we saw him post early this morning calling Comey a dirty cop. We've seen a number of
different messages from other top officials, including people in this White House, saying similar things and celebrating that.
So, by and large, they look at this as a win for them, even though a lot of people are criticizing, of course, concerned about what this could mean for
the Justice Department overall.
SCIUTTO: I mean, he's celebrating and he's commenting on an active legal case, right, which is something that, you know, used to be against the
rules.
TREENE: It could ultimately be used against him, too, in this trial. So, we'll see.
SCIUTTO: True. Alayne Treene, thanks so much. Joining me now, former federal prosecutor Gene Rossi. So, Gene used to serve in the Eastern
District of Virginia. The previous U.S. attorney --
GENE ROSSI, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR AND FORMER ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY, EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA: Proudly, proudly.
SCIUTTO: What's that? I got that right, right?
ROSSI: I said proudly, proudly.
SCIUTTO: Yes. So, you had the U.S. attorney there, who I believe was appointed by Trump. He was effectively pushed out because he didn't see
merits of case here. He brings in a Trump loyalist, Lindsey Halligan, and, you know, two days later, the charges come. Do we still have a rule of law
operating in this country?
[18:20:00]
ROSSI: I take a deep breath because I'm sad to say that the rule of law yesterday took a huge hit. The Department of Justice was started around
1870 in the presidency of Ulysses S. Grant. That was a great year for the DOJ. And since that time, the DOJ has had an esprit de corps unmatched in
any federal agency, in my humble view.
Let's talk about the rule of law. When I worked in EDVA for almost 20 years, the rule of law was my north star. It was my moral compass. I
prosecuted people without fear or favor, without bias for anybody, prejudice against anybody, sympathy or empathy. I did what Justice
Sutherland said a U.S. attorney should do, strike hard blows, but they cannot be foul ones.
And the presentation of the indictment yesterday by Lindsay Hartigan, who stands on the shoulders of great U.S. attorneys, including John Marshall,
she struck a foul blow yesterday. And the reason I say that is you mentioned Erik Siebert. He was a phenomenal pick by Donald Trump to be U.S.
attorney. He was vetted by Senators Warner and Kaine, and they had set up a panel of two Republican U.S. attorneys, a Democratic U.S. attorney, and a
federal public defender. And they all strongly recommended Erik Siebert, with whom I worked for about six years from 2010 to 2016. He's impeccable.
He said, because he was following that North Star, he said, I can't do this. We have no case. Therefore, the rule of law, as propounded by Lindsay
Hartigan, is at best an embarrassment and a disgrace.
SCIUTTO: Listen, it's not the first time this happened. And we saw this with the U.S. attorney in New York, right, they, you know, trying to push
cases and they walked out, even ones with conservative bona fides. The president has said in so many words, there will be others. And we should
take him at his word, given that he demanded action this weekend. And a few days later, it happened. What are the fail safes here? What are the stop
gaps?
ROSSI: Jim, I got to say this. Normally, you'd want a gag order in a case. And Patrick Fitzgerald, who's phenomenal, is going to be Jim Comey's
defense attorney. God save those prosecutors. They don't know what's going to hit them. But I would not ask for a gag order. You want to know why?
Because Donald Trump has an insatiable urge to run his proverbial, illogical, insane mouth.
And every time he runs his mouth, whether verbally on the lawn of the White House, or through his stupid tweets, or postings, he is adding fuel to the
following. The motion I would file ab initio at the beginning is a motion for vindictive prosecution and/or selective prosecution. And all of Trump's
comments over the last months about Jim Comey, and you're going to get a lot more, they are going to be exhibit one, they're going to be on one CD,
and you're just going to play them to the judge or the jury, and it's going to be a great day for Jim Comey.
Here's my prediction. Jim Comey will be acquitted, or the case will be tubed by Judge Nachmanoff, who's a really good guy, fair and impartial.
SCIUTTO: Well, we'll have you back, Gene Rossi, to discuss as this moves forward. Thanks so much for joining.
ROSSI: Thanks, Jim.
SCIUTTO: Still ahead, "Jimmy Kimmel Live!" will be back on the air across the United States tonight after a major reversal from two major
broadcasting groups. Why station owners Nexstar and Sinclair reversed course, right after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:25:00]
SCIUTTO: Welcome back to "The Brief." A major victory for talk show host Jimmy Kimmel, the ABC network and parent company Disney. Sinclair and
Nexstar, the two major TV station groups that preempted Kimmel's show after he returned to the airwaves on the network this week, will allow the show
to be broadcast on their ABC affiliate stations beginning tonight. Sinclair and Nexstar own about a fifth of ABC stations nationwide. Their blackout
meant that Kimmel's return to the airwaves was not seen in dozens of big U.S. TV markets.
Joining me now is Brian Stelter. Listen, this is a big win, right? I mean, is it not? I mean, certainly for Jimmy Kimmel. I just wonder, is there a
bigger victory here, right, for freedom of expression in this country?
BRIAN STELTER, CNN CHIEF MEDIA ANALYST: Yes, this is about free speech and about the free market. You know, these station owners, they had to listen
to the feedback they were getting from viewers. There were a lot of frustrated Kimmel fans who were calling these local stations. Even in red
markets, you know, even in markets that lean Republican, there's still lots of Democrats that wanted to watch Kimmel's show. And this announcement is
partly a result of that pressure.
It's also a reflection of the reality that the national networks have a lot more power than the local affiliates. You know, think about it. ABC
broadcasts Monday night football games. It broadcasts lots of other sporting events that these local stations want and need to have. Nexstar
and Sinclair need programming from L.A. and New York, even as they disdain the liberal politics of those cities.
So, in effect, you do have Nexstar and Sinclair folding here, bringing Kimmel's show back on. But this larger tug of war is not going away. You
see these stations believing they've been somewhat empowered by the Trump administration, wanting to emphasize localism as opposed to national
interests. And we know that Brendan Carr's FCC is going to continue to pressure media companies to try to change content and coverage. This is not
over just because Jimmy Kimmel's back on the air.
SCIUTTO: Let me ask you a question, Brian, because as he was pulled off the air, you had some Republicans say, oh, no, this is purely a business
decision, purely about ratings. You know, Trump likes to talk about ratings. But Nexstar, in its statement, mentioned the First Amendment.
Nexstar remains committed to protecting the First Amendment while producing and airing local and national news that is fact-based and unbiased. Did
they just reveal the actual reason it was taken off the air?
STELTER: Yes, you know, this is the thing about these statements from both companies today. Both of them claim they made their choices on their own
without being pressured by the government. But the government pressure was public for everyone to see and hear. And so, you know, these statements
really do run hollow to me. And yes, both companies are claiming to be First Amendment champions, even though they were blacking out this late-
night show from an outspoken Trump critic.
I think what we're going to continue to see, Jim, is Trump allies and the president himself are very effective at figuring out what levers are most
powerful in any given situation. So, in this case, it was about local TV station licenses, and most importantly, the pending merger between Nexstar
and Tegna. So, you know, Brennan Carr knew exactly what to target.
Look at President Trump in the last hour, targeting Microsoft, going after Lisa Monaco, a former Biden appointee. And in his statement, he
specifically cites the contract that U.S. government has with Microsoft. So, he wants Microsoft to fire Monaco who was just hired. And he
specifically cites the contract.
[18:30:00]
So, in every situation, it seems Trump and his allies know exactly what areas to target. But Disney actually standing up, putting him back on the
air, taking a pretty bold stand, this is going to be remembered. You know, it's the kind of move by Disney this week that other companies are going to
notice. And maybe that stands for other outlets, organizations, law firms, universities, et cetera, the list goes on and on. Other targets of
President Trump's ire.
SCIUTTO: Sometimes standing up works. Brian Stelter, thanks so much. Still coming up on "The Brief", a U.S. immigration officer now relieved of his
duties after violently shoving a woman to the ground for no apparent reason at a New York courthouse. We're going to have the full story right after
the break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SCIUTTO: Welcome back to "The Brief." I'm Jim Sciutto. And here are the international headlines we're watching today.
Benjamin Netanyahu delivered a fiery defense of the war in Gaza today, rejecting accusations of genocide. The Israeli prime minister addressed the
U.N. General Assembly, vowing to finish the job against Hamas. Many delegates boycotted his speech, walking out, as you see there, even before
it began. The head of Israel's opposition said Netanyahu gave a tired and whining speech but did not outline a path to end the war.
President Trump says he expects more of his political opponents to be prosecuted following the indictment of former FBI Director James Comey.
Comey, criminally charged now, indicted with two felonies related to an alleged lie he told testifying before Congress in 2020. The U.S. president
insists the prosecution is not about revenge, just about getting justice.
Local U.S. TV giants Sinclair and Nexstar are ending their boycott of late- night comedian Jimmy Kimmel. They're putting a show back on their ABC affiliate stations beginning tonight. The two major local TV owners dropped
"Jimmy Kimmel Live!" during a controversy over Kimmel's comments on the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk.
[18:35:00]
U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement, known as ICE, says one of its officers who pushed a woman to the ground has now been relieved of his
duties. The incident was caught on camera. That's key. I want to warn you it's disturbing. You can see the officer shoving the woman first up against
a wall, God knows for what reason, and then to the ground. This was at an immigration court in New York City.
The office for U.S. House Democrat Dan Goldman, who represents that area, says the woman and her family have open asylum claims, adding that they are
here lawfully, though, still as you see there, still being targeted by ICE. In response to the incident, the ICE assistant secretary said, quote, "The
officer's conduct in this video is unacceptable and beneath the men and women of ICE."
The confrontation comes as anti-ICE protesters gathered outside an ICE facility near Chicago, some of them attempting to block vehicles. A number
of authorities appeared in tactical gear. They fired tear gas, pepper balls, trying to disperse the crowd.
Joining me now is John Sandweg, former acting director of ICE, currently a partner at Nixon Peabody. John, here's the thing here. So, ICE fires this
guy, and understandably so. I don't see why this woman had posed any threat to him. The trouble is we're seeing incidents like this in a lot of places
around the country during ICE detentions. So, I wonder, is this a substantive move relating to ICE policy or is it more a PR thing?
JOHN SANDWEG, FORMER ACTING DIRECTOR, ICE AND PARTNER, NIXON PEABODY: The firing of the officer today or --
SCIUTTO: Firing of the officer.
SANDWEG: -- generally? Look, yes, Jim, look, first of all, kudos to ICE for firing this officer. This is unacceptable. I watched that video. It was
hard to watch. You have to be able to do this job and treat people with dignity and respect. And I worry that some of this, you know, rhetoric
where we're dehumanizing immigrants, where we're lumping them all in into the same bucket, right, they're all criminals, they're all -- right? When
that's just not the case, you have people like this who are asylum seekers. I worry that some of that has an effect.
But I will say this, Jim, in my experience, the -- you know, actions like we saw today really are the exception. I know these agents are under a lot
of pressure. I know they're facing a lot of confrontation. I know the administration's policies have really rankled up and amped up these
protests across the country. But the -- but in my experience, I will say that most of the men and women at ICE got into this business for the right
reasons. They want to get bad guys off the streets. And they do it in a manner that respects the dignity and, you know, rights of these
individuals.
I will say, though, this also emphasizes to me how critically important this hiring that ICE is going through right now is. You've got to remember,
Jim, they're hiring 10,000 new agents. They're going to remake this agency. And I certainly have concerns that if we lower our standards or get people
who want to get into this because they want to hurt immigrants or they want to get immigrants out of this country, that's the wrong kind of person. And
I just worry that, you know, the administration is going to kind of expedite things, drop those standards, and we're going to get some of the
wrong people on board.
SCIUTTO: I mean, the thing is, this is not isolated, though, right? I mean, we see -- and it seems to be a policy, right, no insignia, masking. And
this is not the only video where we see ICE agents using what seems to be excessive force. And I certainly don't want to disparage your time at ICE.
But I wonder if the current environment is such where this is becoming a new standard of behavior for these agents, because, you know, a lot of
these incidents are caught on video.
SANDWEG: Yes, I can't speak for the administration and political leadership. I will tell you that in my experience, the front line, the mid-
level supervisors don't condone this kind of conduct. You know, but, Jim, we're in a difficult environment where these guys are under a lot of
pressure. They're under a lot of pressure to ratchet up arrests.
The rhetoric is, oh, these are invaders, right? These are bad guys. These are all criminals. Even though you have all these people who are, you know,
just really -- you have to recognize fleeing, in many cases, persecution, in many cases just fleeing gang violence or economic hardship, seeking a
better life for themselves.
And I appreciate that the administration is committed to enforcing the law. But like I said, you have to do it in a manner that respects the dignity
and respect of the individuals. But I -- look, I recognize this probably is an increase. And I think that is a reflection of the pressure these agents
are under, the rhetoric that they're facing, and then the protest environment, right? This has really rankled the country. And in cities like
Chicago, Los Angeles, you're seeing these protests, you're seeing these assaults, you know, ratcheting it up. They're in a difficult position, the
agents are.
And do -- I don't condone this kind of thing at all, but I do have some sympathy for them, recognizing that they have a tough job that's gotten a
lot tougher over the last six months.
SCIUTTO: Now, listen, I mean, as CNN has reported, you had ICE agents shot at just in the last several days. So, I get that sense of pressure.
[18:40:00]
Another pressure point I have heard is the quotas, right? I mean, you have this White House goal of 3,000 arrests a day, which seems to be adding, to
some degree, to the tactics, right, to your point, because it's not like they're going after hardened criminals in a lot of these cases. They're
going after folks who, you know, are here, maybe they're here because they've got an outstanding asylum request, right, whatever the -- you know,
the reason for that asylum request. Is that an unreachable goal, and does that put pressure that contributes to the problem to have such a quota?
SANDWEG: Absolutely, Jim. And what it does is this, it forces the agency to go -- you know, adopt operational tactics that result in the arrest of non-
criminals. So, let me explain quickly. This incident happened in an immigration court. So, someone had filed -- the family had filed an asylum
claim. They showed up to court. They were there to have their day in court, where they get to present to the judge that they're eligible for asylum.
But because it's easy for the administration to rack up arrests, it's easy for ICE to rack up arrests in the immigration court. You have the
immigrants have already come in. They come to you. You can make a bunch of arrests in a day. They're targeting people who show up for immigration
court.
Now, there's some complicated legal arguments they have for why they think they're able to do that. But from a policy perspective, if we're really
talking about, as the president says, let's get the worst of the worst. The worst of the worst, Jim, don't show up filing asylum claims and go to
immigration court. They're criminals who are at large, but it's that pressure, the quotas you're talking about, that's driving a lot of these --
you're right. It is contributing to the confrontations because it pushes the agents in immigration court, arresting these more sensitive and much
more sympathetic cases. It pushes them out into these car washes and Home Depot parking lots because they think they can round up lots of people
there.
But again, you don't find your criminals there. And more importantly, that is going to trigger more of the controversy, right? But absolutely, I think
you're -- 100 percent, this pressure on the quotas is a direct contributor to some of what we're hearing about and seeing.
SCIUTTO: Yes. And certainly, a probably good incentive not to show up at court, right, if that's going to happen there. John Sandweg, thanks so much
for joining.
SANDWEG: Exactly. My pleasure.
SCIUTTO: Still ahead, prescription for uncertainty. President Trump's new tariffs on pharmaceuticals as well as trucks and furniture show that his
trade war are from over.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SCIUTTO: President Trump is ushering in a new period, yet one more of trade uncertainty with new tariffs now on pharmaceuticals, trucks, as well as
furniture. The president announced 25 percent tariffs on heavy truck imports over the objections of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, plus tariffs
of as much as 50 percent on selected household items, such as kitchen cabinets.
[18:45:00]
Some furniture items will be tariffed to 30 percent. Trouble keeping up? Well, 100 percent tariffs on branded or patented pharmaceuticals. The
president's drug tariffs do not, however, include generic drug imports, and report reports say they will not apply to drugs made in the E.U. and Japan,
which already have a blanket 15 percent tariff rate. Trump also says drug makers can avoid the higher duties if companies manufacture or plan to
manufacture medications in the U.S. All these new tariffs set to kick in October 1st, just a few days away.
Ernie Tedeschi joins me now. He's director of economics at the Yale Budget Lab, also former chief White House economist. Ernie, good to have you.
ERNIE TEDESCHI, DIRECTOR OF ECONOMICS, THE YALE BUDGET LAB AND FORMER WHITE HOUSE ECONOMIST: Thanks for having me.
SCIUTTO: So, I mean, even as I was reading all those numbers, I'm confused on the drug tariffs, too. Does anybody understand these? And what's the
actual policy goal here?
TEDESCHI: So, we're still waiting for more details about what legal authority these tariffs are under and, you know, how they interact with the
other tariffs that have already been announced. You've already mentioned that the E.U. and Japan will probably not be subject to the pharmaceutical
tariffs because of our prior deals with them.
But look, you know, where it puts us right now is that the average effective tariff rate in the United States goes up by half a point as a
result of all of these announcements last night. So, now, we're at nearly 18 percent. That's the highest tariff rate since 1934 in the United States.
So, all the way back to the Great Depression. That is quite a large amount to tariff. That would come to about $2,400 per household in added burden as
a result of these tariffs.
But it does raise revenue. You know, we estimate that all the tariffs that have been announced in 2025 so far will raise about $2.5 trillion over 10
years. So, you know, there is a deficit, you know, upside from all of this.
SCIUTTO: Yes. The Wall Street Journal is beginning to call these import taxes, right, which is effectively how they operate here. You guys do a
good job there of tracking the effect of things like tariffs on people's pocketbooks. Is there a direct link between the tariffs and the inflation
rate now? And as you gauge things, you talk about $2,400 extra a year, does that expect -- do you expect that to continue to push up inflation going
forward?
TEDESCHI: Yes. So, look, the bottom line is that the price of goods, right, so physical things you buy like TVs, electronics, furniture, those prices
are already higher right now than they would be without the tariffs. Probably overall, when you look at all goods in the economy, they're about
2 percent higher in price than they would be without the tariffs. So, that's -- and, you know, from an economic perspective, that's a meaningful
amount. 2 percent doesn't sound like that much to a normal person.
But when you open up the hood, right, you see that electronics from China are being tariffed at 30 percent. You know, bananas from places like
Central America can be tariffed by, you know, 15, 20, 25 percent. And these are things that are never going to re-shore back to the United States and
create jobs, they -- you know, just because of lower labor costs or in the case of things like banana and coffee, climate.
So, you know, I think that the goal for a lot of these tariffs is to try to spur industry in the United States. But in a lot of cases, people are
either going to eat the tariffs or, you know, they're going to try to find an alternative from another -- you know, from another country, a lower
tariff alternative to buy instead of buying American.
SCIUTTO: So, is this policy creating any new jobs in this country? Any measurable new jobs today or do you expect to see it over time?
TEDESCHI: So, like, as we've -- you know, we've analyzed these tariffs ever since they were first announced back in February. And one consistent thing
that we found is like, look, you know, these tariffs do over many, many years will probably shift more jobs for manufacturing in the United States.
But the thing you have to remember about the United States is it's a big, rich country, but it's not infinitely big, not infinitely rich. If you do
more of one thing, you still do less of another thing, even in the United States.
And so, these tariffs, while they increase manufacturing employment, they're going to reduce employment in sectors like construction and
farming, because there's just not enough labor to go around. And if you stop, you know, the inflow of immigration into this country, right, that's
only going to exacerbate that problem because you have less labor supply.
[18:50:00]
SCIUTTO: It's a good point. Eric Tedeschi -- Ernie Tedeschi, thanks so much for joining.
TEDESCHI: Thanks for having me.
SCIUTTO: Coming up after the break, a sign of the times if you're single and want to mingle. A woman in San Francisco is on a mission to find Mr.
Right. How she's spelling out her intentions for all to see. That's next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SCIUTTO: It pays to advertise, so they say. And that's exactly what a woman in San Francisco is doing after becoming frustrated with a local dating
scene. You could say she's taking her hunt for a husband to new heights as Luz Pena from ABC affiliate ABC7 News explains.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
LUZ PENA, REPORTER, ABC 7 NEWS (voice-over): This is what taking your chances at finding love to new heights looks like.
LISA CATALANO, SEARCHING FOR A FUTURE HUSBAND: I'm looking for a husband. I'm looking for a committed relationship and hopefully the love of my life.
PENA (voice-over): For almost a month now, Bay Area resident and bachelorette, Lisa Catalano, decided to put herself out there. And when we
say out there, we mean on six to seven billboards on Highway 101 from the South Bay to San Francisco.
PENA: This is pretty bold. What happened that you said, this is the approach that I'm going to take?
CATALANO: You know, every time I got a little frustrated with the dating scene within Silicon Valley and the Bay Area, I would work a little bit on
my website. And it started off kind of as almost a joke. Like, I'm just going to make my own website. Then it just kind of, I was thinking, you
know, maybe that's not that crazy of an idea after all. And so, I decided, OK, well, I got to promote the website somehow. And what's more local than
a billboard?
PENA (voice-over): All hoping the one or someone who may know him leads him to her. Her ads are straight to the point, MaryLisa.com. Her website is her
personal application collection service. This is where her future husband can apply.
CATALANO: I'm looking for somebody who would be compatible with me on things like religious views, politics, you know, healthy lifestyle because
I lead a healthy lifestyle. Things that match up on all of that. And someone who's ready to get married and have kids in the future.
PENA (voice-over): One thing about Lisa, she is not taking any chances and simply relying on billboards. She's also keeping an eye out when she's out
and about.
CATALANO: Have flyers, business cards. You know, just in case I -- I'm somewhere in person and I want a network.
PENA: So, if you see someone that you like, you're like, hey.
CATALANO: Oh, I could definitely do that, yes.
PENA (voice-over): She said her search recently went viral when she posted it on TikTok, leading to an influx of applicants.
PENA: How many applications have you gotten?
CATALANO: Oh, gosh. I don't know because I can -- my phone's been going off.
PENA (voice-over): Lisa says she's hopeful all this will be worth it when she meets the one. And just in case, we wanted to help.
PENA: Your future husband is watching right now. What do you want to say to him?
[18:55:00]
CATALANO: I'm real. This entire project is real. I am serious about finding the love of my life.
PENA (voice-over): For now, the search continues.
In San Francisco, Luz Pena, ABC 7 News.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SCIUTTO: It's quite a personal ad. A breathtaking story now for you in today's Good Brief. The first person ever to ski down Mount Everest without
using an oxygen tank. Andrzej Bargiel did it after a grueling 16 hour climb up the world's highest mountain. Hard with skis on your back.
The 37-year-old from Poland spent just minutes on the summit before strapping on his skis and racing down against the setting sun. His snow
slide paused around 6,400 meters above sea level just for the night. That looks dangerous. His team said he continued down the slope at sunrise.
Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk congratulated him on X saying, the sky is no limit for Poles. And we congratulate him too. I could never do that.
Thanks so much for joining us today. I'm Jim Sciutto in Washington. You've been watching "The Brief." Please do stay with CNN.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[19:00:00]
END
