Return to Transcripts main page
The Brief with Jim Sciutto
CNN International: Trump "Optimistic" Ukraine Deal Can be Reached; Pentagon Investigates Dem. Senator Over "Illegal Orders" Video; Judge Dismisses DOJ Cases Against James Comey and Letitia James; Pentagon Launches Investigation into Senator Kelly; Rising U.S.-Venezuela Tensions; Israel Says Hezbollah's Chief of Staff Killed in IDF Strike; Trump and Xi Discuss Trade; Jimmy Cliff Dies at Age 81. Aired 6-7p ET
Aired November 24, 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 ANCHOR, "THE BRIEF": 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, the White House says Donald Trump is now optimistic about reaching a deal to end the war in Ukraine. His counterpart in Kyiv
wants to discuss some very sensitive issues first. The federal judge has dismissed indictments against former FBI Director James Comey and the New
York attorney general, Letitia James., And reggae legend Jimmy Cliff has passed away at the age of 81.
"Completely unconstructive and doesn't suit us," quoted in Russian state media, that's the response of a Kremlin foreign policy aide to Europe's
counterproposal to the U.S. plan to end the war in Ukraine. On Friday, I heard blistering criticism from Ukraine to Europe to Capitol Hill of the
initial 28-point plan revealed by Washington. The criticism, that that plan favors Russia.
The version drafted by the U.K., France and Germany contains an array of changes, which include striking out restrictions of further NATO expansion,
removing territorial concessions to Russia, and capping the size of the Ukraine military at a peacetime limit of 800,000 instead of the 600,000 in
the U.S. proposal. Secretary of State Marco Rubio suggested Thursday's deadline for Kyiv to respond to the U.S. proposal could be flexible. The
White House says President Trump remains optimistic after negotiations in Geneva over the weekend.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Secretary Rubio, Special Envoy Witkoff, the whole team really worked through the points of that 28-
point peace plan that the United States authored with input from both sides, the Russians and the Ukrainians. And ultimately, the vast majority
of these points have been agreed upon. The Ukrainians have worked on language with us together, and you heard that from their delegation
directly yesterday.
So, we feel as though we're in a very good place. Of course, we have to make sure that all of these points are agreed to. And then, of course,
we're going to have to make sure the other party in this war, the Russians, agree to them as well.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCIUTTO: In his nightly video address, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said he will speak with President Trump about, quote, "sensitive
issues" around the U.S. proposal.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY, UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT (voice-over): Today, our team reported on the new draft of steps, and this is indeed the right approach.
I will discuss sensitive issues with President Trump. We must also be aware that Russia will not ease the pressure on us, on Ukraine, on our people.
These days, these weeks, we must be very attentive to air raid alerts and all similar threats of attack. We understand exactly who we are dealing
with.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCIUTTO: Today, I heard some relief from America's European allies. However, one Ukrainian military official told me that for Ukraine, quote,
"it's a vicious cycle of endless deja vus." Joining me now, Republican Congressman Don Bacon. Thanks so much, sir, for being back on the show.
REP. DON BACON (R-NE): Thank you, Jim. Thank you, sir.
SCIUTTO: So, to the best of your knowledge, what happened between Friday when you and others on the Hill and diplomats from Europe to Ukraine were
expressing outrage at the outline of the peace proposal as described on Friday? What happened between then and today? Did European allies push the
administration off giving up too much to Russia?
BACON: I believe the European allies spoke up forcefully. Many people in Congress did. So, I think some common sense prevailed. I also -- and this
is my hunch from people I've talked to, but also reading the news, I think the Secretary of State Rubio got more involved. I think he was sort of cut
out of this initial plan on Thursday. This is more of a Witkoff, maybe the vice president, plan behind it. But let's just acknowledge the Thursday 28-
plan was an appeasement plan. It was a surrender to Russia.
[18:05:00]
It would have left Ukraine vulnerable to Russian invasion for decades to come. It would have been a terrible spot in our history, just like 1938
Munich is for Britain and France. It was an abomination in my view.
I think the outrage was loud. I think it took the White House back. In the end, the European plan that was set out yesterday was 10 times better than
our plan, which is embarrassing. But I'm hoping common sense prevails. America is supposed to be the leader of the free world. We're not acting
like it right now in this case. And we need to be a defender of Ukraine. That's a free country. Democracy is being invaded. We should be clear that
we're on their side.
SCIUTTO: Are you confident that the president ultimately lands on Ukraine's side here? Because I noted over the weekend that the president
was back to using some of the language he used in that notorious Oval Office meeting with Zelenskyy back in February, saying that, you know,
Ukraine is showing no gratitude for U.S. help. Again, talking about Ukraine having no cards in this. I just wonder where you think the president is
going to land?
BACON: So, the president's comments on Ukraine have been reprehensible. I know for a fact that Zelenskyy has said many times that he's been grateful.
The people of Ukraine are grateful for our help. But he tends to blame Ukraine for Russia's invasion. I don't get it. And so, I do not have
confidence. The president has periodically said the right things, but more often than not seems to waver back to the Russian camp, the invader camp.
That's why I think the House and the Senate need to take the lead here.
A lot of Republicans are worried about it because they don't want to encroach on the White House. But we need to be clear that we want to be on
the Ukrainian side. That's why I signed the Meeks discharge petition, which is a Democrat in the House. I'm going to sign Fitzpatrick's discharge
petition, the same one that I think 88 senators have supported in the U.S. Senate. And so, we need to force this on the president. He needs to have to
acknowledge that Republicans and Democrats alike, the vast majority, want to support Ukraine. And we're not into appeasing the invader, Putin.
SCIUTTO: Do you believe Republicans, with their Democratic colleagues, will get the votes to pass that discharge petition and therefore force a
vote on a new sanctions package? And I wonder, did you see a sign with the Epstein vote, right, that your Republican colleagues are more likely to
defy the president -- well, on Epstein they did, might they do the same on Russia?
BACON: I think with Epstein, when it became overwhelming that there was going to be a vote in favor of the discharge and releasing these documents,
the president came our way. I hope he'll see the handwriting on the wall here, too. We already know the Senate has a vast majority to support
further sanctions on Russia and more weapons support for Ukraine.
You know, it's a little more fuzzy for me in the House where we're at. But I do know this, every poll I look at, 70 percent of the Americans are for
supporting Ukraine. And the numbers for Republicans have gone up quite a bit in the last six months. I hope the president sees that America stands
with Ukraine and he needs to get on the right side of history.
SCIUTTO: Another topic I want to ask you about before we go, and that is news today that the Department of Defense, which claims to be the
Department of War, although of course that hasn't changed by an act of Congress, that it is investigating Senator Mark Kelly over that Do Not Obey
Illegal Orders video here, right up to and including the possibility of calling him back to military service so that he might face a court-martial.
What's your reaction to that kind of -- let's see if he's still there. Sometimes those Zoom calls go out. Well, we lost the congressman. We do
appreciate him joining us.
The White House says the Justice Department will appeal the dismissal of two indictments against President Trump's perceived enemies. A federal
judge threw out the cases today against New York Attorney General Letitia James and former FBI Director James Comey. She ruled that President Trump's
appointment of Lindsey Halligan, pictured there, as interim U.S. attorney was invalid and therefore that all actions stemming from her appointment
were unlawful.
Halligan, you may remember, obtained a grand jury indictment against Comey for allegedly making false statements to Congress. James was indicted for
allegedly making false claims on a mortgage application. Both she and Comey have been some of the biggest critics of Trump. They both pled not guilty.
[18:10:00]
Kristen Holmes joins me now. Kristen, we heard the statement from the White House saying that this is not over here. Does the White House believe it
still has a legal path to prosecute both Comey and James?
KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, they do, because if you look at how the judge's ruling went, it was essentially done
without prejudice, meaning that anyone can bring charges at any time. It wasn't the charges themselves that the judge found an issue with, it was
the fact that they believe that the person who brought the charges, the interim U.S. attorney, Lindsay Halligan, was not valid in that role because
she had not been confirmed by Senate.
The thing to keep in mind here is President Trump has been really involved in every aspect of this. He hand-chose Lindsay Halligan for this role. We
saw this kind of weird public message to Pam Bondi. Some administration officials had said that it was meant to be a private message where he said
you should get Lindsay Halligan into that role. She is willing to take on Comey and James. We know this is an important part of President Trump's
agenda in the second term is trying to punish his political enemies. And I asked Karoline Leavitt earlier today about what the president's reaction
was to these indictments being dropped. This is what she said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HOLMES: What was President Trump's reaction to those indictments against Comey and James being thrown out?
LEAVITT: His reaction was, we've seen this before. We've seen partisan judges take unprecedented steps to try to intervene in accountability
before, but we're not going to give up. And I know that the Department of Justice intends to appeal these rulings very soon, if they haven't already.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HOLMES: Now, that was a few hours ago, and we still have not seen that the Justice Department has actually put in that appeal. I was told that Lindsay
Halligan, excuse me, the Attorney General Pam Bondi, as well as the Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, were reviewing and deciding what the next
steps were going to be.
Now, the White House said that they have absolute faith in Lindsay Halligan. It certainly sounded like, from their opinion, they were going to
just do the appeal to say that Lindsay Halligan was valid in that role. However, it seems as though, at least within the Justice Department, there
are still some questions. They have an opportunity here to bring charges again. Just a reminder, that was what the judge ruled. So, they might be
weighing those options more than maybe the White House is, because again, Lindsay Halligan was handpicked by Donald Trump.
SCIUTTO: I mean, that's the thing. I wonder, do White House officials know, to some degree, deep down, that the president's direct involvement is
the problem here, right? I mean, his public comments, his handpicking of Lindsay Halligan, et cetera. I mean, for instance, beyond that, I mean, his
public comments were cited by defense attorneys in the case as saying that this was politically motivated here. I mean, does the White House see at
all that that might weaken rather than strengthen the cases?
HOLMES: I think there are officials within the White House who, yes, of course see that. One, we haven't heard from President Trump today in a
reaction to the fact that these indictments were thrown out. So, that might give you some indication of the fact that he's not responding to literally
everything.
But I will just remind you, Jim, and all of our viewers, that President Trump has had this issue for the better part of a decade, which is that he
tends to get out there too much and say too much. And he's had lawyers telling him for at least eight years to stop talking. And that hasn't
really impacted him in any way. And I doubt it would in this case either, although, again, he hasn't responded yet tonight.
So, there are people, of course, in his orbit who know that it is not helpful when he speaks out like that. But there's also the knowledge that
you can't really stop him. And a lot of people have tried, Jim.
SCIUTTO: Indeed. Kristen Holmes at the White House, thank you. Well, speaking of investigations, the Pentagon launched an investigation into
another Democrat, Democratic Senator Mark Kelly, over what it calls serious allegations of misconduct. The Defense Department says it might recall the
retired Navy captain to active duty to face a court-martial or potentially administrative punishment. This comes after the Arizona senator joined
several other Democratic lawmakers in making a video which urged members of the military to disobey orders if they were illegal, saying they have that
right.
President Trump attacked their actions, calling them seditious and treasonous. He even mentioned that that could bring the death penalty.
Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt says the White House supports the Pentagon's move. Senator Kelly says, quote, I've given too much to this
country to be silenced by bullies who care more about their own power than protecting the Constitution.
Joining me now is Natasha Bertrand. And Natasha, there were several military veterans in those who made that video. Why only Senator Kelly
being targeted here?
NATASHA BERTRAND, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Jim, it's a great question. There were four other veterans in that video. And Secretary
Hegseth actually weighed in on X about this very issue.
[18:15:00]
And he said that the reason why only Mark Kelly is being singled out here is because those four are former military, the four others are former
military, but they're not retired. And they are therefore no longer subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Mark Kelly still receives a
pension from the U.S. military. He is still subject to be recalled to active duty really at any time by the U.S. military in a way that the other
veterans are not.
And so, for that reason, he now faces the prospect of being recalled and court-martialed. Now, that would be an extraordinary step. It's unclear if
it's actually going to get to that. And if it does, there are going to be serious questions, of course, likely raised by his defense attorney about
undue command influence, just given the fact that Hegseth has weighed in on this, has called it seditious, has said that there should be accountability
for his and the lawmaker's words. And, of course, President Donald Trump himself has repeatedly weighed in on this, saying that it was treasonous
and seditious and urging Secretary Hegseth to investigate these lawmakers.
And so, it's unclear what kind of case they're actually going to have or if this is just political retribution theater meant to appease the president.
It remains to be seen. But the Department of Defense now saying that they are indeed investigating this. Mark Kelly, as you mentioned, he does not
seem deterred. He says that, quote, "If this is meant to intimidate me and other members of Congress from doing our jobs and holding this
administration accountable, it won't work." He said, "I've given too much to this country to be silenced by bullies who care more about their own
power than protecting the Constitution," Jim.
SCIUTTO: Is there any precedent here for retired military officers to face military discipline, right up to and including a court-martial, for public
statements?
BERTRAND: It's a great question. There is precedent for retired service members to be recalled to active duty and face a court-martial but it's
usually for offenses that are things like sexual assault, very serious offenses, not as far as we can recall, have there ever been a situation
like this where they were called for political speech? And that is likely, of course, also to be an obstacle in the department's investigation of
Kelly.
SCIUTTO: Natasha Bertrand, thanks so much. All right. So, what does the law say about all this? Joining me now, law professor and former Florida
judge Jeff Swartz. Good to have you, sir.
JEFF SWARTZ, PROFESSOR, COOLEY LAW SCHOOL: Hi, Jim.
SCIUTTO: I know you're not a military lawyer here, but is there a legal basis? Kind of a little bit. Is there a legal basis to bring this guy back
to service to face a court-martial because of his public statements here?
SWARTZ: There is. There is a basis to bring him back. But one has to remember he's entitled to due process under the Uniform Military Code of
Justice, you know, commonly referred to as the UCMJ. And when the president makes statements, who's the ultimate decision maker, if it gets to that
point, or the secretary of state has already decided that he's guilty, how is he supposed to get a fair trial in front of a court-martial?
So, I'm questioning whether they really want to go here with a pretty popular senator. I just don't see them doing it, but they can. They can
call him back to active duty just to court-martial him.
SCIUTTO: Is a retired military officer's freedom of expression any different than yours or mine? What -- if he were to be brought before a
court-martial, would he have less of an assumption of freedom of expression here? I mean, you know, the ultimate crime alleged here, right, is he said,
hey, military officers out there, if you get an illegal order, you have the right to disobey that order.
SWARTZ: Well, the UCMJ has provisions that we won't find in normal criminal conduct, like saying things about your boss, your superior, doing
things that are offensive to your branch of the government. However, in this particular case, I would say that because he's a United States senator
and because his role as a senator provides him with the ability to speak out on political issues, I think that that probably would make it hard for
him to be convicted of anything involving his speech, of telling the public, as well as officers and enlisted men, something they learned from
the day that they are inducted into the service.
SCIUTTO: OK. I want to ask you, if I can, about other legal issues today, and that is the dismissal of the James and the Comey indictments here. One
quite basic question. The judge had the ability to dismiss them with prejudice, which would have made it harder to impossible, as I understand
it, to re-bring the cases here. The judge did not. Was that the right call on the law in your view?
[18:20:00]
SWARTZ: Yes, it was. In this particular case, dismissing it with prejudice would have had to actually -- you'd have to find prosecutorial misconduct.
He doesn't have the evidence to show that they purposely avoided what they were supposed to do, or she purposely knew that she was not qualified
and/or properly appointed. It was a question that he had to decide.
Now, as it relates to Ms. James, this really isn't going to have a substantial effect for her, because they'll bring in somebody who is
qualified to go to the grand jury and re-indict her. With Mr. Comey, though, this dismissal, even though it be without prejudice, has been
granted at a time that's saying something that happened before the statute of limitations ran, now the statute of limitations has run, and now at this
point they cannot re-indict him on these charges. And that's what his position will be, and I cannot see how the government's going to get around
that.
SCIUTTO: Is there -- are there other legal issues with the cases against either of them, beyond the appointment of the attorney, right? Because you
and I discussed this before, I mean, there were questions about -- I mean, questions about what the grand jury saw, before it indicted.
SWARTZ: Exactly. There are two other motions that are still pending. One is Ms. Halligan's conduct in front of the grand jury, that is that it's
unclear. There's also a third issue that still is pending, and that is the vindictive and or vexatious and improper use of the Justice Department to
punish Mr. Comey as a political opponent of the president. Those two are still pending. Those two are also pending involving Ms. James, and it's
very clear that if those two are granted, then they will be on a factual basis and with prejudice would be the more likely result of those
dismissals.
All three of these will be appealed. And when they are appealed, all three of them will probably be consolidated in front of the fourth circuit. And
then all of them will be piled on top of each other. And there may be an omnibus order from the fourth circuit that says with all of this happening,
there's no way we can let these prosecutions go forward.
SCIUTTO: Professor Jeff Swartz, thanks so much for joining.
SWARTZ: My pleasure, Jim. Have a good day.
SCIUTTO: Still ahead, trade and Taiwan were on the agenda today during a phone call between President Trump and the Chinese leader Xi Jinping. Two
men could be seeing a lot of each other in the new year too. We'll have an update and more coming up.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:25:00]
SCIUTTO: Welcome back. In today's Business Breakout, a strong start to the trading week on Wall Street. U.S. stocks rallied across the board. The
NASDAQ posted the biggest gains up more than 2.5 percent, led by A.I.- related firms perhaps recovering a bit. Shares of Alphabet rose more than 6 percent, close at a record high. Investors are plotting the firm's updated
A.I. model.
NVIDIA rallied after comments from U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick. He says President Trump is weighing the sale of NVIDIA's advanced A.I.
chips to China. That'd be quite a move.
Checking some of today's other business headlines. Shares of European drug maker Novo Nordisk fell to their lowest level since 2021 on Monday. Trials
show the active ingredient in its weight loss medications did nothing to slow the progression of Alzheimer's disease. The company had previously
said this trial was a long shot.
The White House has postponed an announcement on addressing health care costs, the key issue behind the historic government shutdown. The Trump
administration was promising to reveal a proposal on Monday. Millions of Americans are facing a spike in their health care premiums next year if
Affordable Care Act subsidies run out. Senate Republicans have agreed to hold a vote, at least, to extend those subsidies next month. Not clear
Republicans or the president will back it, though.
U.S. aviation officials say this will be the busiest Thanksgiving season for airlines in 15 years. The FAA says tomorrow will be the peak travel
day, with more than 52,000 flights scheduled. The Thanksgiving travel season could have been thrown into chaos had the government shutdown lasted
longer. As for car travel, AAA says almost 82 million people will be hitting the roads this week for trips 50 miles or more from their home.
Old Navy is trying to find creative ways to attract budget-conscious customers amid economic headwinds such as tariffs and inflation. Vanessa
Yurkevich reports how the retailer plans to navigate this holiday season by focusing on affordability.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
VANESSA YURKEVICH, CNN BUSINESS AND POLITICS CORRESPONDENT: Zac and Old Navy, did you see it coming?
ZAC POSEN, CHIEF CREATIVE OFFICER, OLD NAVY: Never.
YURKEVICH: OK, so what turned the tide for you?
POSEN: This was the opportunity of a lifetime. This is the brand that dresses America.
YURKEVICH (voice-over): Zac Posen, one of America's most well-known couture fashion designers, is now Old Navy's chief creative officer,
overseeing design, merchandise and marketing at the low-cost retailer.
YURKEVICH Where's the Zac Posen touch?
POSEN: A few places. I will show you. I mean, I'm throughout here. I can see different moments here, beautiful color story on top there. I can't
talk about holiday without talking about our jammies and our Jingle Jammies.
YURKEVICH: Yes.
YURKEVICH (voice-over): Old Navy's holiday pajamas are one of its most reliable moneymakers. It sells millions of them each year during the all-
important holiday season. But, this year, the brand is betting on new to win over shoppers, new occasion-wear, beauty and a designer collaboration.
YURKEVICH Anna Sui, that collection is the first designer collection with Old Navy. Was that you?
POSEN: It was.
YURKEVICH: Yes. And why -- and why...
POSEN: I was really proud. I was really excited.
YURKEVICH (voice-over): This season, retailers are taking bigger swings to stand out in a sea of cautious consumers. Americans are spending more
carefully. Tariffs, sticky inflation, and rising unemployment are creating an unpredictable holiday season.
HORACIO BARBEITO, PRESIDENT AND CEO, OLD NAVY: If there's going to be uncertainty, we will not participate.
YURKEVICH: How do you not participate? It's inevitable.
BARBEITO: Well, because we're hosting customers and we're seeing them coming here and really being happy and engaging with merchandise and
prepare for family moments.
YURKEVICH: But I don't get it. How can you not participate? Because you have to respond to that, the uncertainty.
BARBEITO: Well, we know that they're looking for value. They're looking for -- they're also looking for style.
YURKEVICH (voice-over): Old Navy, owned by Gap Inc., has been a key driver for its parent company. It just reported better-than-expected third-quarter
earnings, with Old Navy's revenue rising by 5 percent year over year. But tariffs remain a significant headwind.
BARBEITO: Tariff is something that is across the industry. Agility is super important. RFID, for example, that we're rolling out in our entire
fleet is giving us that accuracy of inventory position to better flow, better buy, better replenish.
YURKEVICH: Here's how that RFID technology works. A shopper comes to the store looking for an extra small green flannel pajama pant. But it's not
where it's supposed to be. Using antennas in the ceiling and radio frequency to scan merchandise tags on the floor, the associate can locate
those pants anywhere in the store.
YURKEVICH: RFID sounds very efficient, but how does it help the bottom line?
[18:30:00]
BARBEITO: You don't lose sales, or you minimize the sales loss. You don't waste customer trips, which is so important, and especially now that a lot
of customers are coming back to stores.
YURKEVICH (voice-over): But lower-income Americans, part of Old Navy's core customer base, are particularly under pressure. So, the speed at which
the company needs to both provide affordability and broaden their customer base is even more critical.
POSEN: I mean, we're always about the consumer.
YURKEVICH: Right, but I guess in a way that this year may be just a little bit different.
POSEN: Of course. Every year has its challenges.
YURKEVICH: Sure.
POSEN: Sometimes, it's the economy. Sometimes, it's the weather. Sometimes, you know, it's a change of an administration. And at the end of
the day, people want to look good, they want to feel good, and that line continues. And I think, when things can be more challenging, we rise to the
occasion.
YURKEVICH (voice-over): Vanessa Yurkevich, CNN, New York.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SCIUTTO: Coming up on "The Brief," the Trump administration is taking a new step against Venezuela. Designated the country's leader as a member of
a terrorist organization. Why that matters and the details next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SCIUTTO: Welcome back to "The Brief." I'm Jim Sciutto, and here are the international headlines we're watching today.
The Kremlin has rejected a European counterproposal to a U.S. plan to end the war in Ukraine, calling it, quote, "unconstructive." U.S. and Ukrainian
negotiators held talks over the weekend in Geneva with European counterparts as well. The White House says President Trump remains hopeful
and optimistic a deal can be done.
A U.S. judge has thrown out the indictments against two of President Trump's critics, former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney
General Letitia James. A federal judge ruled that President Trump's appointment of Lindsey Halligan as interim U.S. attorney was invalid. And
as a result, all actions taken by the former White House adviser were, quote, "unlawful exercises of executive power." Justice Department says it
will appeal the decision.
[18:35:00]
The president -- the Trump administration, is planning to reinterview certain refugees who were admitted to the United States under former
President Joe Biden, this according to an internal memo and source familiar with the plans, to ensure, in its view, that those refugees do not pose a
national security or public safety threat. President Trump has now largely halted all refugee admissions, with the narrow exception of white South
Africans.
The U.S. has formally designated Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro and his allies as members of a foreign terrorist organization. That move will
authorize the Trump administration to impose new sanctions against them. This, as the U.S. military continues to grow its military presence in the
Caribbean. The Venezuelan leader has denied any involvement in drug trafficking. A new poll finds that 70 percent of Americans oppose the U.S.
taking military action against Venezuela.
Stefano Pozzebon, is live in Caracas. And I wonder, do officials there and does the public there see this terrorist designation as the Trump
administration finding a legal justification to attack Venezuela?
STEFANO POZZEBON, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: I think we could say that, Jim. We could say that that is one further step towards the possibility of a
military confrontation with Venezuela, Jim. However, I don't think that that situation changes dramatically the situation here in the ground. That
designation changes dramatically the situation here on the ground.
Let's remember that Nicolas Maduro has been indicted for drug trafficking for more than five years, frankly. And he currently has and has had for the
past four months or so a $50 million bounty on his head. It's not like the U.S. was holding back in their pressure against the president of Venezuela
before this designation came into place.
But I want to bring your attention to a breaking news that we're receiving here at CNN directly from Washington, where our colleague Kristen Holmes
has been informed that President Trump has been given an option to have direct talks with Nicolas Maduro. We're talking here of a direct phone
conversation between the two leaders. Perhaps it's a last-minute attempt from Donald Trump to try to find a diplomatic solution.
It's a similar report that we have heard throughout the afternoon today, this Monday, from Axios. But Kristen was able to confirm it up at the White
House. And I think that changes the prospect of a military confrontation here dramatically. It looks like President Donald Trump is keen at least to
explore what could be -- what a negotiation directly with Nicolas Maduro could look like.
Nicolas Maduro has sat down with foreign officials and with members of the Venezuelan opposition to try to build legitimacy around his government,
especially since last year he was accused of stealing an election here in Venezuela. He has yet to sit down face to face with Donald Trump or have a
phone conversation with him.
We understand that the president, Donald Trump, has not yet decided whether to take that phone call and that there are conversations happening as we
speak to try to figure out how that would look like, of course, especially after this designation of Maduro himself as an international terrorist.
However, that is, I think, a significant breakthrough that we have received today. And especially it moves the story into yet another territory. It's
back to the carrot and the stick strategy down from the White House, you either speak with me or I have already placed the largest aircraft carrier
in the world directly off your coast.
And just today, by the way, Jim, we did see, we did, we were able to track several fighter jets and B-52 bombers that went very close to the
Venezuelan coast only a couple of hours ago. Jim.
SCIUTTO: I mean, of course, the question is, is that just bluster and signaling or is it genuine preparation for the possibility of military
action? Stefano Pozzebon, thanks so much for the news.
And this just in to CNN as well, a powerful tornado has hit the Houston area. You were looking at drone video showing some of the destructive trail
it left there. Local authorities say more than 100 homes were damaged. More severe thunderstorms are expected tonight as the cold front approaches that
region of Texas. We'll get you more details on the story as soon as we have them.
Lebanon's president is urging the world to intervene forcefully after Israel carried out the first deadly strike in Beirut in months. Israel's
military says it killed Hezbollah's second in command, accusing the chief of staff of leading the group's buildup and armament efforts. Although
strikes on Beirut are rare, Israel frequently targets Hezbollah in southern Lebanon. This despite a nearly year-old ceasefire there. Nic Robertson is
in Jerusalem with more.
[18:40:00]
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
NIC ROBERTSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL DIPLOMATIC EDITOR: This call from the Lebanese president for the International Community to put pressure on
Israel, if it is manifesting itself, it's certainly not happening in a public domain.
And I think as well, you know, it's a ceasefire that was agreed a year ago. It's a ceasefire that has come under increasing strain recently. It's a
ceasefire, the terms of which the Lebanese government always felt that they were going to be under pressure because the terms were that Hezbollah would
pull out of the border area near Israel's northern border and the Lebanese army would be responsible for moving into those areas and ensuring that
Hezbollah didn't come back.
But the Lebanese army has been woefully underfunded, under equipped and fundamentally under ready for this task when it was first handed to it. So,
I think Lebanon has always felt on the back foot in trying to in trying to sort of meet Israel's expectations and sources I've talked to in Lebanon
and said that they think Israel's expectations are disproportionately high.
Nevertheless, the view in Israel is that Hezbollah shouldn't be allowed to regroup. And over recent weeks, we've seen an increasing number of strikes,
Israeli strikes into southern Lebanon, targeting what they say are locations where Hezbollah is either storing weapons or regrouping where it
shouldn't be per the peace agreement.
You know, I think if you look at the dynamic moving forward, it just tells you the level of stress and strain that the ceasefire is under. And Israel
also, you know, on its own side of the border has been having drills, military drills in the north as well as elsewhere to prepare for a possible
Hezbollah counter maneuver. These are drills, by the way, that have been planned for some time. But it's definitely in Israel's mind that there
could be a retaliation from Hezbollah.
But play into that dynamic, if you will, that the Pope is visiting Lebanon next weekend, I don't think anyone would expect a massive crescendo, an
escalation of force in the intervening period. But after that, you know, the question of the ceasefire and the question, and if you will demand from
the prime minister of Lebanon, the president of Lebanon, rather for this international move to sort of put some diplomatic shoulders to it behind
the scenes. I think that will -- the need for that may well come into play more as we get deeper into December.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SCIUTTO: One more ceasefire that does seem to get violated. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:45:00]
SCIUTTO: President Trump discussed a number of issues, including trade today with the Chinese leader Xi Jinping. Trump posted on Truth Social. He
believes the call went well. He says they discussed efforts to end the war in Ukraine as well.
Trump announced he will travel to China in person in April and says he's invited Xi for a state visit back here in the U.S. next year as well. All
this coming during a tense time between China and U.S. treaty ally Japan. The Japanese prime minister, Sanae Takaichi, said this month that a Chinese
invasion of Taiwan could trigger a military response from her nation, or at least the basis for one. China's foreign minister called that comment
shocking over the weekend. Beijing says that Xi stressed to Trump the importance of Taiwan's ultimate return to China.
Joining me now, Bonny Lin, director of the China Power Project, also a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
Thanks so much for joining.
BONNY LIN, DIRECTOR, CHINA POWER PROJECT AND SENIOR ADVISER, CENTER FOR STRATEGIC AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES: Thank you, Jim.
SCIUTTO: So, first, I'm curious about the timing of the call. Would this be connected at all to Trump's renewed effort to try to find a plan to end
the war in Ukraine? Is he trying to enlist Xi's help in that?
LIN: That's a great question. I think it's interesting to know that this call is likely initiated by Xi Jinping on the Chinese side, not the U.S.
side. And that's pretty rare, because most U.S.-China calls at the senior level are initiated by the U.S. So, I think we need to think through why is
China initiating a call to the United States now.
And as you suggested earlier, I think it's a combination of thinking through worrying about what's happening within the United States, but also
thinking through the China-Japan relationship.
SCIUTTO: OK. So, tell me about that, because China was upset that Japan noted that -- well, at least in the view of the prime minister, that
perhaps an invasion of Taiwan could trigger -- you shouldn't say so much a military response, as you know, but the basis for it being a threat to
Japan's national security. Does Xi Jinping, in your view, believe he might have a friend in this with Trump? Because Trump's view as to Taiwan,
certainly not as clear as Joe Biden. Joe Biden said multiple times the U.S. would defend Taiwan militarily in the event of an invasion. Trump has never
said that. What is your best sense of Xi's view of the U.S. position?
LIN: Right. So, let me unpack a little bit about, first, China's concerns with the United States and where we are heading with our Taiwan policy. So,
within a month of the Trump-Xi meeting at Busan, we saw the United States announce two arms sales to Taiwan. One was $300 million, mainly spare parts
for aircraft, and the other a $700 million package for a new missile system for Taiwan. That's really soon after a Trump-Xi meeting. If you go back to
2017, after the first meeting between President Trump and President Xi, it took two months for the United States to provide an arms sale.
Another concern from the Chinese side is there's lots of worry that the Taiwan president, William Lai, will transit the United States before the
end of the year. In fact, if you look at China's ministry of foreign affairs calls, their public, their interactions with the public, they're
fielding a lot of questions about how China would respond to a Lai transit.
And then last week, we saw the U.S. Congress pass the -- sorry, the Senate signed the Taiwan Assurance Implementation Act, which seeks to basically
remove restrictions on U.S. official engagements with Taiwan. So, when China looks at all of this, it has to wonder, where is U.S.-Taiwan policy?
How does that align with where President Trump is on Taiwan?
And then you go to the Japan issues, right? As you mentioned exactly, what Prime Minister Takaichi said does not mean that Japan will necessarily
defend Taiwan in the event of a contingency, but it does -- but she is the first one to say that more publicly and in the diet setting. So, there's
been a lot of experts saying that China is overreacting to what she said, what she has said publicly.
SCIUTTO: Bonny Lin, something to keep watching. Thanks so much for joining.
LIN: Thank you.
SCIUTTO: Well, sad news today, Jimmy Cliff has passed away at the age of 81. We're going to remember the Pioneer's musical legacy in bringing reggae
to the world.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:50:00]
SCIUTTO: Jimmy Cliff, the smooth-voiced singer who helped popularize reggae around the world, has died at the age of 81. A star since the 1960s,
he helped bring the sound of Jamaica to a global audience. His hits include "Many Rivers to Cross" and "You Can Get It If You Really Want," bringing
the genre's message of perseverance to the world.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
(MUSIC PLAYING)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCIUTTO: That's a great one. A Grammy award-winning artist, Cliff was inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame back in 2010. He's the only
Jamaican, apart from of course Bob Marley, to achieve that honor.
Jem Aswad is the executive music editor at Variety. So, Jem, I mean beyond the hits, right -- you know, I was singing along. I'm sure you were to "You
Can Get It," What was reggae like before Cliff? Like what did he do to bring it beyond the audience it had before?
JEM ASWAD, EXECUTIVE MUSIC EDITOR, VARIETY: Well, he was there pretty much from the beginning or almost the beginning. He -- I wouldn't say he
discovered Bob Marley, but he led Bob Marley to the producer, a man named Leslie Kong, who produced some of his earliest records. That was like 1961.
Jimmy Cliff was already recording for the label. He was already working as an A&R scout. So, that alone certainly would have made a difference in
getting reggae out into the world.
He also had some of its earliest hits. He had moved to England and signed with Island Records in the mid-1960s. And his first hit, "Beautiful People,
Beautiful World," I think it was called, went to like number six in the U.K. at the time. That spread across to the United States. And the main
thing that he really did was starring in "The Harder They Come," the 1972 film in which he starred and wrote a lot of the music, including the song
we just heard.
SCIUTTO: Yes. I mean, I was going to ask you about that because, I mean, you say he was a cross-genre star in part because of that. How much of a
difference did that make for him to kind of hit those two streams, music but also the movies?
ASWAD: Well, that movie was his only major role, which is a little surprising in retrospect, because he was so good in it. But that album was
the introduction to reggae music for so many people, especially Americans. I mean, in -- it was where a lot of my friends got to know it. I can
remember seeing the movie in college. My roommate had the album that's got "The Harder They Come" on it. It's got "Many Rivers to Cross." It's got
"You Can Get It If You Really Want." And it's almost a sort of combo platter of the reggae of the time. And I really feel like it introduced
millions of people to it. And he was the front face of all of it.
[18:55:00]
SCIUTTO: Yes. Does it still have that appeal to younger generations of music fans, reggae?
ASWAD: It has been so deeply infused into the musical vocabulary that, you know, I mean, that's almost like saying to a degree, like, you know, what
influence did the blues have? Right. You know, I mean, it's like, you might not hear a lot of blues songs on the radio. You might not hear a lot of
reggae songs there. I mean, for whoever's listening to the radio. But its influence is unmistakable.
And I always say, every time a white rock band or a white musician goes to record in the Caribbean, they think they can play reggae. And they really
can't. It's a very nuanced and subtle form of music that sounds simple, but it isn't. And, you know, I mean, it's whatever -- I hear a reggae rhythm
come in with a rock band, it's sort of like, oh, no, but that just does show how deep its influence has been.
And you look at a band like No Doubt with "Underneath It All," which suffers from that a little bit. But that is a massive, multi-platinum band
playing a reggae song.
SCIUTTO: Yes, no question. Well, few did it better than him. Jim Aswad, thanks so much for joining.
ASWAD: Thank you.
SCIUTTO: And thanks to all of you. I'm Jim Sciutto in Washington. Please do stay with CNN.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[19:00:00]
END
