Return to Transcripts main page
The Brief with Jim Sciutto
CNN International: Lawmakers Briefed on Controversial Strike; Supreme Court Lets Texas Use Trump-Backed Congressional Map; 2021 Jan. 6 Pipe Bomb Suspect Arrested; Europe's Plan for Gaza; Leader of Anti-Hamas Militia Killed in Gaza; Fear Grips Somali Community in Minneapolis Amid New ICE Operation. Aired 6-7p ET
Aired December 04, 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 to end this hour, U.S. lawmakers hear from the admiral who oversaw the controversial double-tap strike on an alleged drug boat. The FBI arrests a
suspect for allegedly planting pipe bombs at party headquarters the night before the January 6th attack on the Capitol. And the World Cup draw takes
place tomorrow here in Washington. We'll look ahead to what to expect.
We do begin with a fierce public debate over that so-called double-tap strike on a suspected drug boat in the Caribbean. This follows a private
briefing for lawmakers on Capitol Hill today by the admiral who was at the helm of that operation. In recent days, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth
has pinned ultimate responsibility for the second strike on Admiral Frank Mitch Bradley. He's a top Navy SEAL who led Joint Special Operations
Command during that attack which took place on September 2nd.
Today, members of the Senate and House Intelligence Committees viewed video of both of the strikes on that boat. Senate Committee's Republican chairman
said the double-tap, in his view, was, quote, "entirely lawful."
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. TOM COTTON (R-AR): The first strike, the second strike, and the third and the fourth strike on September 2nd were entirely lawful and needful.
And they were exactly what we would expect our military commanders to do.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCIUTTO: House Democrat Jim Himes on the House Intelligence Committee, who also saw that videotape, vehemently disagreed.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. JIM HIMES (D-CT), RANKING MEMBER, U.S. HOUSE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE: What I saw in that room was one of the most troubling things I've seen in
my time in public service. You have two individuals in clear distress without any means of locomotion with a destroyed vessel who were killed by
the United States.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCIUTTO: The Defense Department is making the case for that second strike by arguing that those survivors in the water were, quote, "still in the
fight" as they attempted to get back on the boat after the first strike. Defense officials say they radioed for help, as well. The Department says
that if they had been rescued, they could have, at least theoretically, continued trafficking drugs.
We should note that it is considered a war crime to kill survivors of attacks at sea. The Pentagon's Law of War manual defines them as people,
quote, "in need of assistance and care," who, though, must also, quote, "refrain from any hostile act."
Manu Raju joins me now. And, Manu, I wonder what this public disagreement among Democrats and Republicans on the circumstances of this strike means
for any follow-on investigations. Because after this was first revealed, it was notable that you saw both Republicans and Democrats saying, listen,
this is problematic. We've got to look into it. I mean, is that prospect now gone?
MANU RAJU, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: You know, it remains to be seen, Jim, because there are still a lot of prominent Republicans who
have been silent about what they saw. One of them is Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Roger Wicker, who has had a lot of issues with the
secretary of defense, Pete Hegseth, despite ushering through his confirmation earlier this year. But a number of his actions have caused
major concern with the chairman of that key committee, which oversees the Pentagon. Wicker refused to comment after leaving this closed-door
briefing.
Other Republicans did as well. Mitch McConnell is the former Senate Republican leader who was briefed, would not comment. And there was Susan
Collins, who's the top appropriator on the Senate committee that deals with funding for all federal agencies, including the Defense Department. So,
will those members be ones in particular who could speak up and demand more, demand this information to be revealed publicly? That remains to be
seen.
Now, I did catch up with Senator Mark Warner, who's the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee. He had his own briefing just moments ago. He
left that briefing.
[18:05:00]
And I asked him about the concerns that you heard from Senator -- Congressman Jim Hines there and others, potentially that this could have
violated federal law by attacking -- by the rules of war, I should say, and the laws of war, by attacking defenseless survivors. I asked him if he
believes this was a violation of the law.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RAJU: Senator Cotton said that this was a lawful attack that was carried out. In your view and from seeing the videos here, was this a lawful
attack?
SEN. MARK WARNER (D-VA), U.S. SENATE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE VICE CHAIR: I am -- I think the video was very disturbing. I am not going to weigh in on
all of the questions about lawful, morality, judgments, until I get all the information. I mean the -- some of the accusations that have been made, you
know, whether this kind of action constituted a war crime, I can't think of a more serious accusation that could be made.
I do continue to have concerns that this pattern from Secretary Hegseth of putting our uniformed military in harm's way or under duress, I mean, as we
saw from the Inspector General report.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
RAJU: So, a more measured criticism from the top Democrat in the Senate Intelligence Committee than what you've heard from other Democrats, but
Warner is calling for the release of much more information. He wants it released, the legal justification for these boat strikes among the
documents he wants to release, and he wants more members of Congress to see that video of the second attack because today's briefings, while there were
a number of them, they were only relegated to the top leaders on the key committees overseeing these issues, not the full Congress, and there are
some members, particularly Democrats, who want the video released to the public at large.
So, the pressure will build, particularly among Democrats. But, Jim, the big question is, will Republicans join that pressure campaign and what will
the leadership, the Republican leadership in the House and the Senate do, because so far they've been largely quiet and deferential to the
administration despite these mounting concerns, Jim.
SCIUTTO: Manu Raju, thanks so much.
RAJU: Thank you.
SCIUTTO: Well, joining me now is John Garamendi. He's a Democratic member of the House Armed Services Committee. Congressman, thanks so much for
taking the time.
REP. JOHN GARAMENDI (D-CA): Good to be with you, Jim.
SCIUTTO: So, I'm curious how you look at this Republican argument, or at least argument by some Republican members of the committee, that because
the survivors of this strike were attempting to get back on the boat in the open water, we should note, that they might be trying to get back into the
fight or stay in the fight is the language that they use. Do you believe that the circumstances, as you know them, meet that standard?
GARAMENDI: I've not seen the film, and I don't think the public has seen the film. I've been calling for a public hearing on this, all of the
information being out there, including this particular piece. If they're getting back onto a boat, the boat is basically destroyed. They're probably
trying not -- to find something to hang onto. I don't know. And I don't think the public knows. And it's pretty clear that the Senate, tourists,
and the members of Congress that have seen this don't know either.
So, we need to continue this investigation. We are in the opening pages of a major national scandal. This is not just the issue of these boats being
blown out of the water and the questionable legality of that, but also what in the world is Trump trying to accomplish with some 20,000 troops and the
most advanced military equipment that we have, including our largest aircraft carrier? What is this all about? What is he trying to do in
Venezuela? Never, ever has he explained anything to the Armed Services Committee about what this deployment is about.
So, we got a major question here. The boats and all that took place there, major problem, major issue for us to get to. But then there's a larger
issue. What's going on in Trump's mind with Venezuela? And what does he intend to do?
SCIUTTO: That was going to be my next question. Do you believe that President Trump is going to take the U.S. to war against Venezuela?
GARAMENDI: Well, he's certainly huffing and puffing, pounding his chest. And he set up the necessary military equipment to go to war. However, he
has no authority to do that. There's no declaration of war. There's no declaration to use a military force against Venezuela. And why? What's the
purpose of all of this?
Bottom line of this is the president is way out over his -- over the issue here. And he needs to bring it back and he needs to explain to Congress for
sure and get Congress's approval if he intends to use those military assets in any way against Venezuela.
[18:10:00]
And keep in mind, Venezuela has its own army. This is not going to just be a one-day event if, in fact, we get into a war with Venezuela without
congressional approval.
SCIUTTO: As you know, President Trump often doesn't seem to respect Congress' view or even constitutional powers. And the Republican-led House
and Senate have not oftentimes exercised their own power for oversight of the executive. What actual power does Congress have under those
circumstances to stand in the way of President Trump taking to the U.S. -- taking the U.S. to war in Venezuela?
GARAMENDI: Well, let's first understand President Trump said he would be the dictator on day one of his administration. And he has continued to do
that. He is setting up a dictatorship where he is assuming all of the power. He's assuming the congressional power. He's taking that. And he's
also taking the judicial power with the Supreme Court.
Bottom line here, he is set up to be a dictator and he is acting that way. What can we do? Well, we can put our big boy pants on and use the power
that we have in the Congress. We can't stop it. We can. There are many different ways we could do that, many different pieces of legislation, but
we have to have the courage to stand up to Trump and say, no more. You come to Congress before you even think about going to war in Venezuela.
And beyond that, the other actions that he has taken to basically gut the power of Congress. We need to assert our authority, the Article 1
authority. We have the power of the purse, which we have given to Trump. We literally turned over the power of the purse to Trump. That is absolutely
wrong. We have got to once again assert our power, which we can't.
SCIUTTO: Let me ask you this before we go, because we just have this news into CNN, and that is that the Supreme Court will allow Texas to use the
new congressional map, which, as you know, was redrawn by Republicans quite unusually in the middle of the decade, not immediately following a U.S.
census to favor Republicans there.
How do you think Democrats should respond to that? Should more states other than California redraw their own maps, blue states, that is?
GARAMENDI: Well, first of all, let's understand the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court is marching side by side with Trump on most every issue. And
here's another example where the Supreme Court simply said, OK, we'll go with Trump on this one.
What can we do? What we're doing it in California as a result of what Texas did. We took this issue to the voters of California and said, we're going
to do a new maps here, the new maps. What do you think you approve? And there was overwhelming approval of the new maps, which do give an advantage
to the Democrats, perhaps as many as five seats to match the five seats in Texas.
Other states are pondering this. Obviously, Trump is very, very involved in pushing legislators in Republican red states to continue to attempt to
redraw the lines to give the Republicans an advantage. He's trying to control the next Congress through the use of the redistricting. It is
wrong. We didn't want to do it in California, but if Trump is going to do this, then we have to fight fire with fire. And we did so. And we would
hope other states would also stand up to Trump and say, no, this is wrong.
SCIUTTO: Congressman John Garamendi, appreciate you joining the program.
GARAMENDI: Thank you.
SCIUTTO: Well, another story we've been following today, there's lots of news. The FBI has now arrested a suspect in a 2021 bombing attempt around
the January 6 attack on the Capitol. Investigators believe that Brian Cole, Jr., pictured there of Virginia, is the man who planted pipe bombs the
night before the January 6 attack on the Capitol. He placed those bombs, they say, near the headquarters of both the Republican and Democratic
national committees here in Washington, D.C.
Federal authorities have been trying to solve this case for years, but even as they looked at these video clips here were hindered because they weren't
able to see his face.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PAM BONDI, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL: Let me be clear. There was no new tip. There was no new witness. Just good, diligent police work and prosecutorial
work.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCIUTTO: Joining me now is former FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe. Good to have you on. I wonder, listen, you've been watching this case as closely
as anyone over the last several years. Do you have any sense as how as to how they were finally able to crack this case?
ANDREW MCCABE, FORMER DEPUTY DIRECTOR, FBI: Not much at this point, because despite the press conference earlier today, we didn't learn very
much about what the new approach was.
[18:15:00]
But what we do know is that in the last few months, the Justice Department, the FBI brought in a new group of advisers to take a fresh look at the case
file and to kind of look at the evidence from a different perspective to try to come up with a different approach or see things that maybe the team
that had been on this since day one maybe wasn't seeing. That is a very usually productive kind of time-honored approach.
It's basically why we have units called cold case units. The idea is you bring in a new team to take a look at a case that's been around for a while
to see if they see things differently. Apparently, that happened here, but we don't know with exact specificity what it was that really tipped them
off.
SCIUTTO: Do we have any information about his motive or are we going to have to wait for the interviews to come with the suspect?
MCCABE: Yes. So, there's really no information on his motive in the indictment that was that was revealed today. The indictment, of course, has
an affidavit. The affidavit is very bare bones. It talks about the sort of data correlation approach that they used to come up with enough evidence to
reach the threshold of probable cause to arrest this person.
And that data was really based on two things. One, they took a look at every single component of the bomb and they identified where those things
had been sold. You're talking about tens of thousands. In one case, in terms of the end caps, hundreds of thousands of articles. And they looked
at -- they identified people who had purchased those separate components. As you layer one component on top of another, all those different data
sets, you cross-correlate that data. A much smaller population of people who happened to buy all of those things begins to emerge. And so, that was
one approach they took.
A second approach they took was they looked at Mr. Cole's cell phone and they determined from cell phone tower records that his phone, the phone
that's used by him, was in the area of the Capitol where we know the bombs were located. They were able to then go back to the videotapes that we've
all seen, that video surveillance, showing him, well allegedly him, someone using his phone in those areas at those moments. That was enough to get a
grand jury to indict Mr. Cole.
SCIUTTO: Fascinating police work. Andy McCabe, thanks so much.
MCCABE: Thanks.
SCIUTTO: Well, we do have breaking news, which I referenced briefly in my interview with Congressman Garamendi, and that is that the U.S. Supreme
Court will now allow Texas to move forward in the upcoming midterm elections with a congressional map backed not only by President Trump, but
by the Republican-controlled legislature in Texas, drawn specifically to increase the number of likely Republican seats. The court blocked a lower
court decision that found the new boundaries were likely unconstitutional because they were drawn based on race.
Joining me now is Joan Biskupic, who of course covers the Supreme Court for us. Did the Supreme Court explain its reasoning here, and is this case a
precedent for other states who are doing the same?
JOAN BISKUPIC, CNN CHIEF SUPREME COURT ANALYST: Yes, it is, Jim. It's good to see you. The Supreme Court, frankly, just picked up where it's left off
in previous claims of racial gerrymandering. It gave this -- the lower court ruling really the back of its hand, said that the district court --
special district court panel that had found that this was a racial gerrymander, that the Texas legislature had divided up voters based on
race, which is unconstitutional, as opposed to partisan gerrymandering, which is allowed. But the district court, after nine days of taking
testimony, going through all sorts of documents, had found that this map was invalid and said that it could not be used.
Just tonight, the conservative majority, over the dissent of three liberals, said, no, this map should be able -- should be -- can be used.
And as you said, it has five potential new districts that could be flipped to the Republican advantage and give a stronger margin in the U.S. House
that Donald Trump has been pushing for, a stronger GOP margin. And what the conservatives said, it was an unsigned order, but it really had the flavor
of what Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito have been saying over the years, that courts have to defer to legislatures. They have
to believe that -- start with a presumption of good faith on the part of the legislatures.
And what the dissenters said -- I want to read you a comment from Justice Elena Kagan, who was joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown
Jackson, about what the majority had done. She writes, what basis does the majority have to thus substitute its understanding of the direct evidence
for the district courts? The short answer is, it has none.
[18:20:00]
So, as I say, this is really important in terms of a line of redistricting battles that are going on politically, but many of which will probably be
tested at the Supreme Court. And so, many other redistricting battles are marching toward us as we head toward 2026 and 2028.
And what this court is saying is, there will be -- no matter what the evidence is, they're going to err on the side of legislatures and a belief
that they have operated in good faith, despite what a special lower court might have found in terms of the racial makeup.
And one last thing, Jim, that I want to mention is that the Trump administration was really backing Texas here start to finish. And one of
the pieces of evidence that the special district court had found to decide that this was an unconstitutional racial gerrymander is that the Trump
administration, its Office of Civil Rights, had sent a letter to Texas legislators saying, you know, get on the ball, do this. And it said, you
need to reconfigure these districts using race. So, there was actually a letter that suggested that racial boundaries should be what they should
follow.
SCIUTTO: That is a remarkable piece of evidence. Now, as you know, multiple states in this country are going through this process, including
blue states, California being the prime example here. Should we assume then that the court's going to look favorably on all of these redistricting
efforts?
BISKUPIC: Well, it would be certainly paradoxical if they start looking at the blue state redistricting different. And in fact, the Trump
administration has filed a claim, a lawsuit against what California has done with its redistricting plan, you know, that's just getting rolling
there and said that they are actually drawing boundaries based on race, which, as I said, is a little bit of a paradox here since they said, no,
Texas wasn't, but California is.
So, this does suggest, at least suggest, we don't know what's going to happen down the road, that the court is going to generally defer to what
states are doing. And if they're going to apply a presumption of good faith to a red state, I would guess that they would apply a presumption of good
faith to a blue state, Jim.
SCIUTTO: Final question.
BISKUPIC: Sure.
SCIUTTO: Does this spell the end of the Voting Rights Act in effect? I mean, is that where the court is heading now?
BISKUPIC: That would be a whole separate line. This came up under like equal protection of the law under the 14th Amendment. Separately, they have
been narrowing the 1965 Voting Rights Act. So, you take them both together, Jim, and protections for racial minorities both under the 14th Amendment of
the Constitution and under the Voting Rights Act of 1965 have really been under attack. And we have a separate case pending from Louisiana that tests
the protections of the Voting Rights Act.
And if this court continues down the path that it's been going for more than two decades, but especially over the two decades that John Roberts has
been chief justice, we'll just see more of a contraction of the kind of protections that were -- became such a milestone of the 1960s in our civil
rights era.
SCIUTTO: Just because the door is open doesn't mean it gets closed -- doesn't get closed. Joan Biskupic, thanks so much.
BISKUPIC: Thank you.
SCIUTTO: Just ahead, we're going to take you to Chile, Norway for a sit down with the country's finance minister, former NATO chief Jens
Stoltenberg. Plus, we'll give you our latest business headlines.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:25:00]
SCIUTTO: Welcome back. In today's Business Breakout, a mixed session for U.S. stocks today. The NASDAQ and S&P closed higher. The Dow largely
unchanged. Salesforce was a big tech winner. The software giant is raising its annual forecast. It says its artificial intelligence products are
selling well.
$2 trillion, that is the size of Norway's sovereign wealth fund, which invests the country's oil and gas revenue so that the country could take
advantage of it, for its people in the future. It dwarfs the wealth funds of the Gulf nations and China, even though Norway is home to fewer than 6
million people.
All of this is overseen by Jens Stoltenberg, Norway's finance minister. If his name rings a bell, it might be because he was also the country's prime
minister and spent a decade as the secretary general of NATO. He spoke to our own Richard Quest about the fund and why he returned to national
politics at home.
And Richard Quest joins me now from Oslo. You know, it's interesting. I did some reporting on that fund years ago, and I remember it had its own
philosopher on staff because they wanted to invest it, you know, in a moral way around the world. I just wonder, as you spoke to him about it, how is
Norway investing and spending this money?
RICHARD QUEST, CNN ANCHOR, QUEST MEANS BUSINESS: That's a really good question because the golden rule, the fiscal rule that they have here is
that basically they don't withdraw any more than the long-term investment return. It's about 3 percent, and that goes into the government coffers and
helps keep the budget in very, very healthy means.
But what's interesting at the moment for Jens Stoltenberg are these issues of ethical investing. For example, people calling for the disinvestment
from Israel. Well, what Jens Stoltenberg is saying is that Norway's fund, which owns about 1.5 percent of all the quoted companies anywhere in the
world, Norway's fund does need to rethink its ethical rules and regulations and also needs to protect itself for the future of the country.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JENS STOLTENBERG, NORWEGIAN FINANCE MINISTER: This is a Sunwealth fund we started to invest in in late 1990s. Last time I was minister of finance, 30
years ago, we had zero installment in the fund at the beginning of that year, and now we have $2 trillion. And we have been able to do that, to
create this fund by saving all the oil and gas revenues. Every cent, every dollar we have earned from oil and gas has been saved. And the only thing
we spend is the expected real financial return.
QUEST: Are you suggesting redefining the amount that is taken from the fund?
STOLTENBERG: No. This is what we call the golden fiscal rule, meaning that we only spend the expected real return, and that will stay in place as it
has very broad political support in Norway. Meaning, that since we only spend the real financial return, the value of the fund will not be touched.
It will actually remain and increase as we put more money into the fund.
QUEST: You're now in a job that you held in the 1990s, and you were one of the world's top diplomats as head of NATO. Why would you come back to
domestic politics?
STOLTENBERG: Because I was asked by the prime minister, who is a close friend, but also served as my chief of staff and also foreign minister, to
serve again and to serve Norway, to be a public servant, to work with the Norwegian economy, to be back and be responsible for the sovereign wealth
fund, where I actually also worked very heavily on this fund back in the 1990s, it's a privilege.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[18:30:00]
QUEST: You know, Jim, Stoltenberg is a giant in Norwegian politics, so to see him coming back in a role he had 30 years ago, to sit in a cabinet with
a prime minister who used to be his chief of staff, the word I used was a bit weird to see it all happen, and really all anybody says here is, what's
Stoltenberg's next job going to be? How long is he going to be in it? But what he has done, he's rescued the prime minister by helping win an
election, and he's got the budget through.
SCIUTTO: No question. Let me ask you before we go, because you've of course reported on other countries that have giant investment funds, I'm
thinking of, well, folks in the Middle East, like Saudi Arabia. And, for instance, in Saudi Arabia you see a lot of spending there on massive
projects, some of which, you know, might not be going so well right now, that big city in the desert. How do they differ? Like, is Norway unique in
the way it spends and doesn't spend its fund?
QUEST: Excellent question. Norway's the granddaddy. Norway's the gold standard. What -- this principle that Norway has of you only take out the
long-term investment return, around 3 percent. This is what all other sovereign funds try to do.
What the Saudis, through PIF, will tell you is that they are catching up. They need to spend the money. Norway's an advanced economy. Extremely
sophisticated economically, healthcare, et cetera, et cetera. So, they would say they are doing the same thing as Norway, but they're just doing
it in a slightly different way.
One point, Jim, by the way. Do you like cheese?
SCIUTTO: I do.
QUEST: I don't know why, because look at this. Yes, well, a bit of Jarlsberg cheese. Did you know, I never knew Jarlsberg cheese came from
Norway. There it is, a piece of Jarlsberg cheese. They make something like 2,000 tons of it here. They also manufacture in the United States and
elsewhere. But this is an example, I'm -- besides just showing you cheese, of the diversified -- look, oil and gas is where the money is. Agriculture,
dairy, all this sort of things, this is the bit that they're having to grow at the same time, along with a piece of cheese.
SCIUTTO: Well, two things. Please bring some home. Second, if only we all had sovereign wealth funds, how easy it would be. Richard Quest, thanks so
much.
QUEST: Well, the U.S. has thought about it, but hasn't quite gotten around to doing anything about it.
SCIUTTO: Yes, you're right. Subject of debate here. Thanks to Richard Quest. Checking some of today's other business headlines. A notable day on
Japan's financial markets. The yield on the country's benchmark 10-year bond hit its highest level since 2007, just before the global financial
crisis. Yields are rising as the Japanese government boosts stimulus spending. Investors are also anticipating an interest rate hike by the end
-- by the Bank of Japan this month.
Shares of Meta, the parent company of Facebook, rallied on a report that it is now planning deep cuts to its once vaunted Metaverse unit. CEO Mark
Zuckerberg once called the Metaverse the next frontier in connecting people. He even renamed his whole company after it. The unit has since
posted tens of billions of dollars in losses.
Russia is cracking down even more on Western social media. The government is now blocking access to Snapchat across the country. It says the app can
be used to carry out terror attacks and other criminal activity. Russia also blocking Apple's FaceTime. It has already restricted the use of
YouTube, WhatsApp and Telegram.
Coming up on "The Brief," Europe's plan for Gaza as the fragile ceasefire continues to hold for now. The E.U. commissioner for the Mediterranean
joins me next live to discuss.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:35:00]
SCIUTTO: Welcome back to "The Brief." I'm Jim Sciutto, and here are the international headlines we're watching today.
The U.S. admiral who oversaw the second strike on a suspected drug boat briefed lawmakers on the operation today. The White House says that Admiral
Frank Bradley gave the order for the second strike on survivors of the first strike. A top House Democrat called video the attack, quote, "one of
the most troubling things I've seen." His Republican counterpart says he's now convinced the strike was justified.
A federal grand jury has declined to indict New York Attorney General Letitia James a second time for alleged mortgage fraud. This, according to
a person familiar with the matter speaking to CNN. This comes just 10 days after a federal judge threw out the initial charges against her. Another
source said there should be no premature celebration because the Justice Department could try to seek an indictment a third time.
The presidents of Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo have signed a new peace agreement ceremony, which took place in Washington, D.C., was
hosted by President Trump. The U.S. brokered agreement aims to end decades of conflict in eastern Congo. A deal signed in June, we should note, failed
to curb the fighting.
Sources tell CNN that the leader of an anti-Hamas militia armed by Israel has died in Gaza. The circumstances of how he died remain unclear at this
time. Israel planned to use his militia to secure reconstruction projects under the next phase of the ceasefire deal. In Jerusalem, Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu and his coalition boycotted a symbolic vote endorsing President Trump's plan for Gaza, which includes a conditional reference to
a pathway towards Palestinian statehood. Opposition sources say the vote aimed to embarrass the far-right coalition and expose internal divisions.
Joining me now is Dubravka Suica. She's the European commissioner for the Mediterranean. Thanks so much for joining.
DUBRAVKA SUICA, EUROPEAN COMMISSIONER FOR THE MEDITERRANEAN: Thank you for having me.
SCIUTTO: So, first, as you watch events in Gaza, do you believe the ceasefire, which is, of course, the first phase of the peace plan, is it
holding as it was intended to?
SUICA: It is fragile, but it is holding. And I would like to have a ceasefire hold because this is precondition for entering the second phase
of this President Trump's agreement.
SCIUTTO: And do you believe that we are moving to the second phase? Do you believe that the pieces are there?
[18:40:00]
SUICA: We have to believe because this is the only way. If you want to have a peace and prosperity in the Middle East and in the Mediterranean, we
really need to move forward to the second phase. And this is but -- as I said, the ceasefire is the most important.
SCIUTTO: So, the parties of course to this include the E.U., includes the U.S. but most crucially Israel and Hamas. What does the E.U. need to see
from Israel to move forward with the plan?
SUICA: First of all, I think we need to see from Hamas. We need to see Hamas to lay down the weapons. But someone has to pressure Hamas to do it.
So, for us this is the most important in order to move forward. And I hope that this is also a precondition for Israel looking forward to happen. But
it's not easy as you see, on the ground, you see every day different developments but looking forward that this will happen finally. Because the
second phase is very important. We have to know who is going to govern Gaza. This is the most important issue.
SCIUTTO: The issue of disarming Hamas has always struck me as one of the most difficult elements of this because Hamas clearly does not want to give
up its weapons. And to do so it would require other countries risking their forces, right? To enforce this that quite possibly could lead to armed
conflict. Do you see that commitment?
SUICA: So, as far as I know the countries are not ready to have their forces in military activities, but they are ready to deploy different
forces and services to keep security and peace in Gaza. It's about -- so, for example Italy is ready, France is ready but not in military operations.
This is very important.
SCIUTTO: You've committed nearly two billion dollars to support the Palestinian Authority. Of course, it's imagined that the Palestinian
Authority might take over administration in effect of Gaza. The thing is this idea has been floated for some time, right, and you know all the
obstacles that have stood in the way in the past. Do you believe that they have the capability to do so?
SUICA: You know what we put trust in the Palestinian Authority for us. Palestinian Authority is the only interlocutor there. And what we are
doing, the reason why we are putting this money into the Palestinian Authority is exactly because we want to empower them, to strengthen them,
to make them capable of taking over also Gaza not only West Bank. And this is what we are doing.
For us, his is the core for the new, we hope, Palestine State. So, this is a seed for the Palestine State. We believe in two-state solution regardless
what other may believe. But this is important. This is the only way how to bring peace in the Middle East and in the Gaza itself.
SCIUTTO: You believe in a two-state solution. Do you believe that Israel does? And crucially, do you believe the U.S. does?
SUICA: You know, this president's plan -- President Trump's plan is in this direction. They don't mention two-state solution but this is the only
solution in the end. Otherwise, there won't be peace in the region.
SCIUTTO: You have said that Russia and China are growing their influence in the Mediterranean. Tell me how. What do you see?
SUICA: I won't say that they are growing their influence but I want to say that Europe, we as European Union, we want to grow our influence. And this
is the very reason why new portfolio for Mediterranean has been established. So, we are putting a lot of money. It's not only these 2
billion which you mentioned, it's about 42 billion euro which is which is envisaged to be spent in next seven years period for the region, for the
region we call Southern neighborhood. It's Middle East and also North Africa, but Gulf is also part of this.
So, we need Gulf countries on board if we want to have peace. We need the American administration and all of us have to work together. This is the
only way working together. Because nowadays there is no collaboration. You know that there is uncertainty all over the world and we are trying really
to keep this.
So, for us, Russia and China, they are there but we want to be there because we it's our neighborhood. They are our closest neighbor and
neighbors, I mean, southern countries. So, this is very important. So, this is why Europe wants to be player and not only payer. So, we are paying a
lot but we don't have that much influence and we would like to be influential. And we need America for this.
[18:45:00]
SCIUTTO: Before we go, as you know, support for Israel has declined significantly in Europe and here in the U.S. during the course of the war
in Gaza. And you see this manifested in many ways. We were just talking about how Norway, there are concerns there about how it invests its
sovereign wealth fund in Israel.
You have now a number of countries, including Spain, Ireland, Slovenia, the Netherlands, that are threatening to boycott the Eurovision contest. I
don't have to tell you the importance of Eurovision if Israel participates. Do you believe that Europe's relationship with Israel has been
fundamentally damaged by the war in Gaza?
SUICA: We are trying not to damage it, but at the same time we are putting huge pressure on Israel in order to come on board and to understand what is
at stake. So, we are really putting a huge pressure by having contacts with them, by dialogues, but it's not always easy with them, as you know. And we
need also unity within the European Union.
You know that we are 27 and we are -- as you mentioned, we are not always united and we need unanimity in order to bring some decisions. And this is
the very reason why we can't bring some decisions which are floating in the air in the last few months.
SCIUTTO: Dubravka Suica, thanks so much for joining.
SUICA: Thank you for having me.
SCIUTTO: Still ahead this hour, Somali Americans now living in fear as President Trump quite publicly targets their entire community in Minnesota.
They are speaking out and say they feel hurt and betrayed. That's next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Leave me alone.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCIUTTO: Just a terrifying moment there for a woman who, we should note, was born here in this country, chased by a group of masked federal agents
all the way back to her home. This took place in Louisiana on Wednesday. A second video shared with CNN shows the woman's stepfather then confronting
the agents outside the home. After they shared some words, those agents eventually left. It is unclear why they were targeting this particular
woman, who says, as we noted, she's a U.S.-born citizen.
On Wednesday, the Department of Homeland Security launched an immigration enforcement crackdown called Operation Catahoula Crunch in the New Orleans
area. We should note that's named after a dog. They say they are targeting undocumented migrants and violent criminals.
[18:50:00]
A New Orleans city council meeting descended into chaos today, as citizens turned out to protest this new crackdown.
Dozens of protesters ended up getting thrown out of that hearing. They called on the city council to declare city property ICE-free zones.
Minneapolis mayor, Jacob Frey, has signed an executive order blocking officials from carrying out raids in city-owned parking lots and other
spaces.
Minnesota Governor Tim Walz blasted President Trump's comments on the state's Somali community. You'll remember he called them garbage. Walz
said, Somali residents in Minnesota, many of them legal U.S. citizens, we should note, are reacting with shock and horror over Trump's comments and
raids now targeting their community. Whitney Wild reports from Minneapolis.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
MOHAMMED AHMED, SOMALI-BORN U.S. CITIZEN (PH): This is a Somali mall. This is the heart of the community in terms of enterprises.
WHITNEY WILD, CNN LAW ENFORCEMENT CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): At Karmel Somali Mall in Minneapolis, halls lined with cafes and shops are normally
bustling. Today, they are quiet.
WILD: And with the news of ice coming into Minneapolis, has that shifted? Has the energy changed in here? Are there fewer people?
AHMED (PH): Yes, there is a certain amount of fear.
WILD (voice-over): Mohammed Ahmed (ph) is a Somali-born U.S. citizen. Now, President Trump is harshly condemning Ahmed's (ph) community, citing a
three-year sprawling $300 million fraud case in which dozens of Somalis were charged.
DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: I don't want them in our country. We're going to go the wrong way if we keep taking garbage into our country.
WILD (voice-over): Those words are especially hurtful. Ahmed (ph) voted for President Trump in 2024.
AHMED (PH): I've been a Republican for over 25 years. I'm not going to stop being a Republican. And now we're being called garbage.
WILD: How did it make you feel when you heard the president say that?
AHMED (PH): I got five children. My children are no garbage.
WILD (voice-over): The Minneapolis mayor says there are more than 80,000 Somalis in the Twin Cities area. Throughout Minnesota, 87 percent of
foreign-born Somalis are naturalized U.S. citizens, and nearly 58 percent of the community were born in the U.S., like this woman who asked us not to
share her name.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I got my passport right here. I'm not going to lie to you.
WILD: You have it right on you?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I have it right on me. I don't even carry an I.D. with me. So, to carry a passport now for my own safety is, I think, not
right.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Oh, yes. You're not welcome.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We know who you are.
WILD (voice-over): The Department of Homeland Security says they are conducting a very targeted operation. Throughout Minneapolis, social media
videos captured stepped-up immigration enforcement in recent days. CNN Reporter Rob Kuznia captured the moment armed federal agents questioned a
man outside a Somali mall, then quickly left.
As we walk through this mall, the people here are suspicious, asking why we're taping or hiding their faces. Then one woman speaks candidly.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Every moment brings some people bad, some people good.
AHMED (PH): We understand.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Right?
AHMED (PH): We understand.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Not all. The Somali people, it's a big name.
WILD: What would you say to the president if he were standing here right now?
AHMED (PH): Mr. President, we campaigned for you. We have hope in you. We see hope in you. Please differentiate between good, bad, and evil.
WILD (voice-over): Whitney Wild, CNN, Minneapolis.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SCIUTTO: One more immigrant community reacts. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:55:00]
SCIUTTO: We were speaking earlier about the ongoing public questions about the legality of deadly U.S. boat strikes in and around the Caribbean. Well,
just in, U.S. Southern Command has announced yet another strike on a boat. This one in the eastern Pacific, allegedly against a vessel carrying drugs.
The military says it killed all four people on board.
This comes after Admiral Frank Mitch Bradley gave a classified briefing to the Senate and House Intelligence Committees over an earlier strike back in
September, a so-called double-tap strike, which Democrats on the committee have said involved unlawfully killing survivors of the first strike. It's a
story we'll continue to follow.
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
