Return to Transcripts main page
The Brief with Jim Sciutto
CNN International: Hillary Clinton Testifies in Congressional Epstein Probe; Democrats Demand Trump Testify in U.S. House Epstein Probe; Iran's FM Sees Progress in Talks with U.S.; Source: Iran Will Exercise Right to Peaceful Nuclear Energy; Block Slashes Workforce, Embraces A.I.; Netflix Declines to Raise Offer for WBD; Iranian Students Demonstrate Following January Crackdown; Cuban President Vows To Defend Against "Terrorist" Attacks; Refugee Death Investigation; Anthropic Walks Away from Pentagon Contract. Aired 6-7p ET
Aired February 26, 2026 - 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, Hillary Clinton tells lawmakers in closed testimony she has no recollection of meeting Jeffrey Epstein. Iran's foreign minister
says he and U.S. negotiators discussed elements of an agreement in Geneva and Jack Dorsey, the co-founder of Twitter, is embracing A.I. by cutting
nearly half the workforce at his new fintech company, Block.
We begin in Chappaqua, New York where former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has just finished a closed-door deposition as part of the House
Oversight Committee's probe into Jeffrey Epstein. Here's what she had to say.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HILLARY CLINTON, FORMER U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE: I answered every one of their questions as fully as I could based on what I knew, and what I knew
is what I said in my statement this morning. I never met Jeffrey Epstein, never had any connection or communication with him. I knew Ghislaine
Maxwell casually as an acquaintance, but whatever they asked me I did my very best to respond.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCIUTTO: In her opening statement, the former first lady said, quote, "I had no idea about their criminal activities. I do not recall ever
encountering Mr. Epstein. I never flew on his plane or visited his island, homes, or offices."
Former President Bill Clinton is scheduled to testify on Friday. The committee's Republican Chair James Comer says the Clintons are not accused
of wrongdoing.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. JAMES COMER (R-KY), CHAIRMAN, U.S. HOUSE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE: To my knowledge, the Clintons haven't answered very many, if any, questions about
their knowledge or involvement with Epstein and Maxwell. Again, no one's accusing at this moment the Clintons of any wrongdoing. They're going to
have due process, but we have a lot of questions.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCIUTTO: Democrats on the committee say the precedent has now been set. They're demanding the President Trump testify as well. Joining me now,
Congresswoman Melanie Stansbury. She's a Democratic member of the Oversight Committee. Thanks so much for joining today.
REP. MELANIE STANSBURY (D-NM), U.S. HOUSE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE MEMBER: Absolutely.
SCIUTTO: So, if Republicans on the committee say quite publicly that they don't accuse either Bill Clinton or Hillary Clinton of wrongdoing, why did
they call them to be deposed?
STANSBURY: Well, I want to just provide some context, which is that at the end of July, we subpoenaed both the Department of Justice for the full
unredacted Epstein files, as well as a number of witnesses. And the Clintons were included on an ad hoc list of depositions that the committee
would hold. And so, that's what set this all-in motion. But I think it was very clear from the testimony that Secretary Clinton gave today that she is
not a person of concern in this case.
But what is also clear is that the GOP is deeply unserious in how it is approaching this investigation. They would not allow the press in the room,
but they were leaking images to influencers. They are refusing to call Pam Bondi or the FBI director in front of the committee. They are refusing to
call key cabinet secretaries in front of the committee who clearly have a relationship or had a relationship with Jeffrey Epstein.
And they didn't even bother to show up for a key deposition of Les Wexner, who is a named co-conspirator in the DOJ's case in this case. And they
didn't stand with Epstein survivors, more than a dozen of which showed up for the State of the Union the other day, and in fact, didn't actually say
a thing about them being there.
SCIUTTO: Listen, I'm aware of that. And it's somewhat remarkable, given that it was a large bipartisan majority that passed legislation to release
all the documents. But it seems that they're steering this investigation to the advantage of their party. What power do Democrats on the committee have
now? I know that some of the Democrats earlier today said that they want to call Donald Trump to testify. I can't imagine you consider that a realistic
possibility.
[18:05:00]
STANSBURY: I absolutely do. Donald Trump needs to appear in front of the committee. And part of why I personally voted to hold the Clintons in
contempt is because the day they were appointed to appear is that they didn't show and they sent a letter saying that a former president shouldn't
have to appear in front of Congress.
Well, our founding fathers were very clear that Congress has oversight over the executive branch. And Donald Trump has been implicated in the Epstein
files tens of thousands of times. But as many people are noting, there is an ongoing investigation into a series of documents that DOJ has suppressed
in which the FBI interviewed a woman who accused the president of raping her when she was a minor. And so, the president needs to answer these
questions in front of the committee on the record and answer for whether or not these crimes occurred and what he knows about Epstein and his
operations.
It's also important to understand that DOJ not only failed to prosecute Epstein in 2006, 2007, but in 2019, as they were preparing for trial, DOJ
asked the state of New Mexico and New York to drop its state cases while Donald Trump was president. So, he has a lot of questions to answer.
SCIUTTO: I understand the case. I'm just saying the president does not appear in any hurry to accept that invitation to testify. And Republicans
don't appear in any hurry to apply pressure to him. And, you know, I spoke to one of your Democratic colleagues yesterday who said that the DOJ is, in
his view, violating the law because they haven't released all the documents as the legislation called for. So, I wonder, while you're in the minority,
what power you have to get this back on track?
STANSBURY: Yes. Well, there is a bipartisan effort, as you know, Thomas Massie is the Republican who led in getting the discharge petition to the
floor. We've had numerous conversations with him about holding the attorney general in contempt of Congress for failure to comply. I think we are
letting this play out as new revelations are coming forward in the current files.
But my colleague Summer Lee, who is the House Democrat on the Oversight Committee, who issued the first subpoena in this case, plans to file
articles of impeachment against Pam Bondi for failing to comply in the next several weeks.
SCIUTTO: Another topic, if I can, the Trump administration or President Trump appears certainly at ready. He hasn't made the decision. He's put the
positions in place to attack Iran. There is some discussion of a vote next week to limit the president's powers to do so. Where do you stand?
STANSBURY: I will vote in favor of the discharge petition because the Constitution is clear that the power to wage war on a foreign country sits
with Congress. This is squarely within our constitutional responsibility. And, you know, we had a nuclear nonproliferation agreement with Iran that
President Trump dismantled in his first administration. And now, he is basically bringing the United States and the entire Middle East to the
brink of war. And that is absolutely unacceptable.
If he wants to make the case to Congress and the American people, he and his administration need to come to Congress and seek the approval of
Congress to do so.
SCIUTTO: Congresswoman Melanie Stansbury, we do appreciate you taking the time.
STANSBURY: Thank you.
SCIUTTO: Well, we're covering Iran as well, as I mentioned, and in Geneva, negotiators for the U.S. and Iran have wrapped up a third round of nuclear
talks. The tone among some of them is optimistic. Iran's foreign minister says there is, quote, "elements" of an agreement on the table, adding that
he expects a fourth round of talks soon.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ABBAS ARAGHCHI, IRANIAN FOREIGN MINISTER (through translator): Regarding a number of issues, we have come to close understanding. In some areas we
have some differences, maybe more than in the past we have seen more seriousness on both sides to reach a negotiated settlement.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCIUTTO: Those comments come as the U.S. continues to ramp up its military presence in the Middle East, an apparent attempt to, well, either prepare
for military action or try to force Iran into a deal.
Joining me now, NATO's former Supreme Allied Commander, retired U.S. Admiral James Stavridis. Good to have you back, sir. Thanks for joining.
ADM. JAMES STAVRIDIS (RET.), CNN SENIOR MILITARY ANALYST, FORMER SUPREME ALLIED COMMANDER OF NATO, U.S. NAVY (RET.) AND VICE CHAIR, CARLYLE GROUP:
Good to see you, Jim.
SCIUTTO: So, I know in a piece that you wrote for Bloomberg, you outlined three options, non-kinetic warfare, limited military strikes and a longer-
term campaign. I don't want to ask you to look at a crystal ball because, you know, all of our crystal balls failed. But based on the indicators
you're seeing now, which outcome do you think is most likely?
STAVRIDIS: I'm going to go with door number two. So, limited strikes. I think when I hear the participants in today's talks in Geneva, it sounds a
lot to me like no real progress. Both sides go back and reassess.
[18:10:00]
A lot will depend on how Donald Trump reacts to the briefing he gets from Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner. I don't think he'll react well. I think he
will correctly assess that the Iranians are just kind of tapping him along. And he will, in my view, 70 percent chance, so two in three launch limited
strikes, as I outlined in the Bloomberg piece. The strikes will probably go after what's left of the Iranian nuclear program, the ballistic missile
program. I hope some of them target the ability of Iran to close the Strait of Hormuz. Look for that maybe over the weekend, 70 percent chance.
I'll close with this, Jim. Let's always close on a positive note. I think there's still a 30 percent chance, a one in three chance that the parties
come back to the table for another set of conversations. But the time is growing quite short for Tehran.
SCIUTTO: Did I hear you clearly that you think it's likely to happen this weekend?
STAVRIDIS: Yes, if President Trump gets a brief tomorrow and they say to him, hey, this isn't going well, they're just kind of stringing us along.
SCIUTTO: Right.
STAVRIDIS: I think it'll be midnight hammer two, meaning a repeat of the strike on the Iranian nuclear facilities back in June. So, I don't wish for
that, Jim. But I think 70 percent chance we're headed toward a strike in the next seven days.
SCIUTTO: The president seems to believe that he can carry out a limited strike and therefore limit the risks of that right and potential
retaliation by Iran. Do you think that that is a plausible assumption or do you do you fear as you look at this that Iran might try to expand this if
it were to retaliate?
STAVRIDIS: Boy, you've put your finger on the absolutely right question, and I can answer that in three words. I don't know. Nobody knows. Not you,
not Tehran, not Washington. This gets very unpredictable very quickly.
Again, better than even chance, I would say, if the president decides to strike, if it is relatively limited, I think there's at least a chance
Tehran would come back to the table. If Tehran really hunkers down or responds in a serious way, say they close the Strait of Hormuz, they go
after U.S. diplomats in the Middle East or worse yet, U.S. civilians, business people in the Middle East. If they launch ballistic missiles and
hit targets in Israel, then it's a technical term here, Katie bar the door, I think at that point, the Trump administration will respond with a very
significant series of strikes, two to three weeks. We could be off to the races in the Middle East. Let's hope not.
SCIUTTO: From a force posture perspective, you've got an enormous force and strain on that force. I mean, particularly one of the carrier strike
groups, it's had to delay, leave for a long time. If you do limited strikes and kind of wait to see what Iran does afterwards. I mean, the question is,
how long can you keep a force of this size in place to keep your options open?
STAVRIDIS: There's two answers to the question. One is if you really, really want to, you could continue to rotate forces. You could send another
carrier over to relieve the two that are on station. What I'm more concerned about in a long campaign is less the ships and the people. It's
the weapons. How many of the precision guided bombs, how many of the missiles do we have? We've depleted a lot in the last year. That would be
concerning. So, watch the ammunition as opposed to the ships and the people.
But I want to make one final point. It's an important one, Jim, you and I have often discussed. It's the stress and the strain on the people who are
for deployed. That carrier, for example, has been now deployed, this is the Ford, since the first of May of last year. I'd invite any listener to
think, what did you do on Memorial Day, Fourth of July, Labor Day, Thanksgiving, Christmas, New Year's. That ship's been out there.
And unless something changes dramatically, they're looking at at least a one-year deployment. That's a tough pull at the oar.
SCIUTTO: Yes, it's a lot. Final question, if I can, because you're a strategic thinker. Is it clear to you what the strategic goal is here?
[18:15:00]
Because we've heard everything from kill the nuclear program right up to remove the leadership. I mean, is it clear to you?
STAVRIDIS: No, I think there are four objectives on the table. You mentioned two of them. The other two would be to take out the ballistic
missile program, take out what's left of the Iranian nuclear program. You want to take out the leadership that's been mentioned and you want to
support the protesters, which is kind of tied to the third one.
Point being, it's a pretty rich stew that you're trying to make on top of the oven here. It's not clear what your principal objective is. Sometimes
in the military, Jim, we say when you attack everywhere, you attack nowhere. I would say for the administration, get focused, decide what you
want to accomplish here, put the forces in play to go after it. I've yet to see that plan.
SCIUTTO: Admiral James Stavridis, thanks so much for joining.
STAVRIDIS: You bet, Jim.
SCIUTTO: Still ahead, fast moving developments in the fight for Warner Brothers Discovery, of course, the parent company of CNN. We're going to
bring you some news right after the break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SCIUTTO: Welcome back. In today's Business Breakout, a mostly lower day on Wall Street with tech heavy NASDAQ falling more than one percent. Shares of
NVIDIA dropped five and a half percent. The A.I. chip giant reported strong quarterly results, as we reported yesterday. But investors are now focused
on the risks to future growth.
A massive bet on A.I. today from Jack Dorsey, the CEO of the payments firm Block. Dorsey announced that he is laying off almost half of his company's
staff, more than 4000 people without jobs. He says the company's A.I. tools make it so that fewer employees are necessary. Block is the parent company
of the payments app Square. The shares are up more than 25 percent on that news in afterhours trading, apparently the market likes it.
Well, big developments in the takeover fight for Warner Brothers Discovery, which is the parent company of CNN. Netflix says it is now walking away
from the months long takeover fight with Paramount's Skydance and will not raise its bid for WBD. It says the deal it struck with WBD. Remember, they
had chosen Netflix as their bidder is, quote, "no longer financially attractive."
[18:20:00]
The news comes after the WBD board said that Paramount's revised bid, up to $31 a share, was superior to the Netflix offer.
Sara Fischer joins me now. Sara, tell us how this all went down. Because there was a time, and you and I talked about this, when it was clear the
Netflix deal was superior, there were a lot of issues with debt, and so on. And obviously, Paramount raised its bid, and now Netflix is out.
SARA FISCHER, CNN MEDIA ANALYST AND MEDIA CORRESPONDENT, AXIOS: Yes. There are four main concessions that Paramount made in order to get the WBD board
to really favor its bid. The first one was Paramount, about 60 percent of the debt that it's raising is coming from foreign companies or foreign
firms -- funds. You got the Saudi fund, the Qataris, and you have the folks at the UAE. They wanted assurances that those people weren't going to get
voting rights. So, that was number one.
Number two, Paramount basically promised that it would backstop all of its equity financing with Larry Ellison's money. The WBD board wanted to make
sure this deal was going to close. Number three, Paramount made a lot of little concessions, like they would cover the break of fee that WBD would
have to pay Netflix. And then last but not least, I mean, they got that share price offer up so high, Jim.
When Paramount first bid for Warner Bros. Discovery in September, they were offering $19 per share. David Zasloff looks like a genius here because he
was able to get Paramount from $19 to $31 a share. And Netflix looks pretty smart, too. They walk away, but now one of their biggest competitors is
left holding a ton of debt.
SCIUTTO: Was there another factor, Sara, here, an administration that sent signals, it seems, about which of the bidders it favored from a regulatory
perspective? And as you know, the Netflix CEO went to the White House for a visit. I mean, the reporting had been that perhaps he was scoping out the
chances of Netflix surviving regulatory approval. Was that a factor in this?
FISCHER: Maybe, but I don't personally think so, because I think both of these deals, Jim, would have faced similar regulatory scrutiny and
investigations. There was such massive consolidation that the DOJ would have investigated both. Whether or not the DOJ would have sued to block one
over another is a different question.
Now, you could say that the president might have put his finger on the scale and asked his DOJ to sue to block one over another. But ultimately,
even if he did that, that would have to be -- that would have to go to an independent judge in court. And we've seen in the past with the AT&T
attempt to -- or merger with Time Warner, now WarnerMedia, now Warner Post Discovery, that they blocked that.
So, the bigger question is, would international regulators have blocked this? Maybe, but I don't think it's a regulatory issue. I honestly think
that David Zasloff is a smart maneuverer and got one of his biggest competitors to put up an enormous sum for this asset. Warner Brothers
Discovery's stock, Jim, is up, like, well over 60 percent. Since this whole situation started. Meanwhile, Paramount and Netflix were both down.
SCIUTTO: There is a journalistic aspect to this, right? Because CNN is one of a small piece, but it's still a sizable piece of this deal. When
Paramount bought another major media corporation, as you know, there was immediate editorial change at CBS News, which falls inside that company. Is
that something that might be an intention of the Paramount leadership?
FISCHER: It wouldn't surprise me just because they want to get regulatory approval. And clearly, they think that they need to be making these types
of concessions in order to get it. I mean, with the situation with Paramount and Skydance, that was a little bit different because they needed
approval from the FCC. I mean, they wanted to make sure that those broadcast licenses were transferred over. They're now acquiring a cable
company and streaming assets, so the FCC won't be involved. It might be a little bit different, but that wouldn't shock me.
The one thing I do want to note here, though, Jim, is that they need regulatory approval, Paramount, Skydance, from dozens of countries around
the world. It's not just the U.S. And when it comes to who's probing this, ultimately, yes, it will come down to an independent judge in court if the
DOJ sues to block this. But state attorney generals may also look into starting an investigation here. And Democratic state attorney generals have
been very vocal about the concerns of Paramount meddling with CNN.
So, this whole process is not quite over quite yet. You're looking at 12 to 18 months, at least, of regulatory probes here in the U.S. and around the
world before this thing ever closes, if it does.
SCIUTTO: Well, it'll give us more opportunities to talk about it. Before we go, I do want to ask you about this Block news, because, of course, it's
not the first sign of trouble for jobs with the advent of A.I.
[18:25:00]
We've seen a lot of market reaction as A.I. has affected the businesses of many of the major software makers, et cetera. But 50 percent of a staff cut
is enormous. And as you cover this, is this, in your view, the first of many like this?
FISCHER: Oh, yes. First of all, Block stock is way up. So, shareholders are responding positively to this. And they're not really the first to do
this, Jim. You saw Meta made huge cuts. Google's made cuts. Microsoft, Amazon, they've all made cuts citing efficiencies in A.I. So, Block is
coming in hot with a big cut, but it's not the first to do this.
I also think they made a very strategic move by highlighting at the top of this announcement that this is not a financial situation here. We're not
cutting people because we are down in profits. We're doing this because we think it's a strategic advantage. And so, that is why Wall Street is
responding to this so, so, so well. I think other companies are going to continue to do that when they see investors thinking positively of this.
SCIUTTO: Yes, tough message for those 4,000 employees to hear, right? Good for the company, certainly not for them.
FISCHER: Yes.
SCIUTTO: Sara Fischer, thanks so much for joining.
FISCHER: Thank you.
SCIUTTO: Checking some of today's other business headlines. A glimmer of hope for the U.S. housing market. The average 30-year fixed-term mortgage
rate is now below 6 percent for the first time in three and a half years. That could help make U.S. homes more affordable. Economists say the
improvement is probably temporary, though. They point out that the U.S. still suffers from a lack of housing supply, which, of course, has helped
push prices higher.
The CEO of auto giant Stellantis is promising to steer his company back to profitability after a weak 2025. Stellantis racked up a net loss of some
$24 billion in the second half of last year, and it posted its first-ever yearly loss. The parent company of Chrysler is also scaling back its
electric vehicle goals due to weak sales.
Call it a whopper of an announcement from Burger King. The fast-food giant is making changes to its iconic hamburger here in the U.S. It will have a
more premium bun and creamier mayonnaise. The whopper will be served in a box instead of wrapped in paper. Burger King is making the changes after
years of consumer complaints. We'll see if it tastes better. Please stay with us. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:30:00]
SCIUTTO: Welcome back to "The Brief." I'm Jim Sciutto, and here are the international headlines we're watching today.
Former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton testified today as part of a congressional investigation into late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. After
the deposition, she said, quote, "I answered every one of their questions as full as I could based on what I know." In her opening statement, the
former first lady says she has no information on the crimes of Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. Former President Bill Clinton is set to testify on
Friday.
New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani says he held a productive meeting with President Trump on housing. After the meeting, the mayor says he is looking
forward to building more housing in the city. The president called Mamdani a communist in his State of the Union address, then referred to him as a
nice guy.
Negotiators for the U.S. and Iran have wrapped up a third round of nuclear talks in Geneva. Iran's foreign minister says there are, quote, "elements"
of an agreement, adding he expects a fourth round of talks soon. This comes as the U.S. is continuing to ramp up its enormous military presence in the
Middle East.
Protesters have returned to the streets of Tehran despite last month's brutal and bloody crackdown. It's a remarkably brave thing for them to do
this. These university students came out to mark the day, the 40-day mourning period for those killed, estimated in the thousands during the
unrest.
Now, CNN is learning new details about the length and breadth of that crackdown. The families of those killed say they are being pressured to lie
about their loved ones' deaths to help cover up the scale of the violence. Jomana Karadsheh has the details. We should note her story contains graphic
images.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
JOMANA KARADSHEH, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): In grief, they dance, celebrating the life of those they've lost. This is how Iranians are
defying their ruthless clerical regime. It's not only killed thousands in its bloodiest crackdown ever, but one that has also been trying to bury the
truth.
Over the past few weeks, we've collected testimony pointing to a widespread effort by Iranian authorities to pressure families of its victims into
silence and falsifying the circumstances of how those protesters were killed.
RELATIVE OF KILLED IRANIAN PROTESTER AMIRHOSSEIN SAEDI (through translator): The family were visited by Basij paramilitary forces and
Revolutionary Guards. They told the father he was talking too much because he had been saying that his son was shot in front of his eyes. This man
we're not identifying for his safety is in Iran.
KARADSHEH (voice-over): He spoke to us about his relatives, the Saedi family, whose member, Amirhossein, was shot and killed by regime forces. He
says security officials tried pressuring the family to label Amirhossein a quote, ""martyr," supporting the regime's narrative that so-called rioters
backed by the U.S. And Israel, not state forces, killed protesters.
RELATIVE OF KILLED IRANIAN PROTESTER AMIRHOSSEIN SAEDI (through translator): The forces were present at their ceremonies. Basij members
and others stayed nearby. They even went to their house and threatened them, saying, we have to announce your child as a martyr, and you cannot
speak anywhere. You must not say anything unless you want your other child's fate to be the same as this one.
KARADSHEH (voice-over): Amirhossein had never protested before the January uprising, but on that night, not even a medical condition he was struggling
with could stop him.
RELATIVE OF KILLED IRANIAN PROTESTER AMIRHOSSEIN SAEDI (through translator): He suddenly jumped up and down, saying, adrenaline has risen
in my blood. I'm flying tonight. I want to fly.
KARADSHEH (voice-over): Amirhossein bled to death after being shot in the face by security forces, according to his relative. The 19-year-old and his
dad were inseparable. On that night, he died in his father's arms. Iranian regime has long been accused of harassing and intimidating families of
protesters to silence them and coerce statements that aligned with the official Iranian regime has long been accused of harassing and intimidating
families of protesters to silence them and coerce statements that aligned with the official account.
This time, human rights groups tell us it is a systematic campaign that appears aimed at controlling the narrative and concealing the scale of
state violence.
[18:35:00]
KARADSHEH: Memorials like this one outside Iran allow the world to see the faces of some of the victims. Getting first hand testimony from people
inside the country is very hard. It is extremely dangerous to speak out against the regime.
KARADSHEH (voice-over): With the help of Iranian human rights groups and activists, we reviewed voice and text messages from more than a dozen
families. They describe coercive tactics by the regime, including withholding protesters bodies or burial permits.
In some cases, relatives were pressured to attribute deaths to accidents. Many were harassed to accept the martyr designation, and we found that most
were pushed to claim their loved ones were affiliated with state forces bolstering state propaganda.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They said Sam's body would not be handed over until he was declared a a Basij and a martyr killed by terrorists.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: They said his father either had to declare Abolfazi as a Basij or pay $6 billion rials.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They openly threatened that if we said or did anything, other members of the family would suffer the same fate that Peyman did.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They arrested his father and told him he had to say his son was martyred by the MEK Opposition Group or Israelis.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Authorities were forcing the family to call her a martyr or to say that she had been shot by terrorists.
KARADSHEH (voice-over): Also declared a martyr was three-year-old Melina Assadi. Her death weaponized by the regime, which falsely accused agents of
Israel and the U.S. Of killing the toddler. They even deployed new tools this time to reinforce their version of events, airing this disturbing
A.I.-generated video of the moment she was shot. The rights group Hengaw says Melina was killed by the security forces, and her family was made to
appear on state media.
Amirhossein's family was also forced to sit in front of the cameras for this segment, eulogizing so-called martyrs. Like other families, they
gather at their boy's grave, defying the theocratic regime, an act of protest against an oppressor trying to rewrite a blood-soaked history.
Jomana Karadsheh, CNN.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SCIUTTO: Such sad stories. Well, Cuba's president is vowing to defend his country against what he calls terrorist and mercenary attacks, saying that
gunmen on a U.S.-registered speedboat tried to infiltrate the island. Cuba says the boat entered Cuban waters just south of Florida on Wednesday and
fired on a border patrol vessel. It says Cuban forces then returned fire, killing four of those on board. Six others on board were wounded and taken
to a hospital.
Cuba's interior ministry says all were Cubans living in the U.S. who came armed with assault rifles, handguns and Molotov cocktails. The U.S. says
it's conducting its own investigation of the incident and will not rely on Cuba's version of events. Stefano Pozzebon is following developments from
Bogota.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
STEFANO POZZEBON, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Still so many questions surrounding Wednesday's incident of the cost of Cuba. What the government in Havana is
saying is that an armed group, 10 people in total, tried to, quote, ""infiltrate" the island nation with a speedboat here. This area is called
Falcones Cay and it's just over 100 miles from the coast of Florida.
Cuban authorities say when they approached the U.S. registered speedboat, one of the passengers fired at them and Cuban forces retaliated.
Four of the speedboat passengers were killed and the remaining six were wounded. Cuba says they are currently in custody and receiving treatment.
An investigation is ongoing, but the country's interior ministry has been quick to brown the group as terrorists.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE (through translator): According to preliminary statements from those detained, they intended to carry out an infiltration
for terrorist purposes.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
POZZEBON: Cuba says it arrested an 11th man. They said he flew in from the U.S. to, quote, ""guarantee the reception of the armed infiltration." Now,
Washington says whatever this was, it was not a U.S. operation. Secretary of State Marco Rubio also seemingly skeptical of Havana's version of
events.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MARCO RUBIO, U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE: It's not something that happens every day. It's something, frankly, that hasn't happened with Cuba in a
very long time. But we're going to find out. We're not going to base our conclusions on what they've told us. And I'm very, very confident that we
will know the full story of what happened here.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
POZZEBON: The shootout happens as the U.S. is ramping up pressure on Cuba, the island nation facing severe shortages of basic food items, but also
fuel. And that's because Washington has blocked virtually all oil shipments to the country since it captured Venezuelan leader and Cuban ally Nicolas
Maduro in January. The U.S. stricter stance, part of a more ambitious goal for the country.
[18:40:00]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RUBIO: Cuba's status quo is unacceptable. Cuba needs to change.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
POZZEBON: As Cuba and the U.S. both carry out their investigations, more details of this incident should be made public soon, with tensions
seemingly destined to rise even further.
For CNN, this is Stefano Pozzebon, Bogota.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SCIUTTO: Coming up next, the death of a nearly blind refugee in the U.S., and hard questions about how Border Patrol agents handled him and his case.
We're going to speak with a lawmaker who calls the situation, quote, "horrific and heartbreaking."
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SCIUTTO: Officials in New York are demanding investigation into the death of a nearly blind refugee who they say Border Patrol agents simply dropped
off after having picked him up. 56-year-old Nurul Amin Shah Alam, apparently spoke little English. Officials say the agents left him at a
coffee shop in Buffalo on the night of February 19. His body was found five days later.
Shah Alam had just been released from jail where he was awaiting trial on misdemeanor criminal charges. The local DA says the case was resolved as a
misdemeanor plea. Immigration officials were notified before his release, determined he was a legal refugee from Myanmar.
Immigration officials say Shah Alam was offered a courtesy ride, which he chose to accept, but not to his home, to a coffee shop, which those agents
determined to be a warm, safe location. The statement adds he showed no signs of distress, mobility issues, or disabilities requiring special
assistance.
Joining me now is U.S. Congressman Tim Kennedy, who represents Buffalo, New York. Thanks so much for taking the time.
REP. TIM KENNEDY (D-NY): Thank you, Jim.
SCIUTTO: So, my first question to you is, from where you're sitting, did the CBP follow protocol here? Did they do all they needed to do to ensure
his safety when they released him?
KENNEDY: Well, first and foremost, Jim, thanks for having me. Our community is hurting right now. You know, once again, we are seeing the
cruelty of the Department of Homeland Security. We have an individual, a refugee here legally, Mr. Shah Alam, who came here just a little over a
year ago, and he is now dead.
[18:45:00]
The last known interaction that he had was with the Department of Homeland Security and there is a pattern that we continue to see now in the city of
Good Neighbors, Buffalo, New York. His family laid him to rest today. Our hearts, our minds, our prayers are with his family in Buffalo, and I ask
our country to pray for his family and pray for our country. We are better than this.
Mr. Shah Alam, again, a legal refugee, blind in one eye, blurred vision in the other. We're told from his family and his lawyer that he was unable to
navigate on his own. The last known interaction, once again, picked up by the Department of Homeland Security, detained, and then dropped off at a
coffee shop. Whether or not that coffee shop was open or not remains a question. What he was wearing that evening remains a question. There's more
questions than answers, which is why I've called for a full and complete investigation of this incident.
SCIUTTO: As you know, following the violence, the deadly violence, in Minneapolis with the ICE and CBP activities there, the administration said
it was pulling back. I believe the phrasing President Trump used is a softer touch. But we see a case such as this. We saw a student at Columbia
taken out of a dorm today, though she was later released.
From your perch, do you see any evidence that immigration, federal immigration agents, are actually employing a softer touch in these raids,
which they, of course, continue to conduct?
KENNEDY: Well, not with the reports that we're hearing from all over the country. First and foremost, whether it was New Orleans or Los Angeles or
Minneapolis, we know that there was a surge of ICE agents. And certainly, they've argued that they've pulled back. But ICE, the Department of
Homeland Security, the Trump administration, has zero credibility. Zero credibility.
And so, that's why we need an independent, full-scale, transparent investigation of why there is a refugee here legally who fled persecution,
who fled oppression, came to the United States with his family for a better life, and is now dead, dropped off at a coffee shop on a cold winter's
night in Buffalo. His family was not notified. His family waited five days, filed an incident report, could not find this man. He couldn't speak
English. He couldn't communicate. And yet, because of failed policies, they dropped him off to fend for himself miles from his home.
SCIUTTO: Yes.
KENNEDY: So, protocol certainly is called into question. Process certainly is called into question. And certainly, once again, the ineptitude and lack
of leadership all the way to the top in the Department of Homeland Security under Secretary Kristi Noem has already been called into question, which is
why I have called not only for her resignation, but if she doesn't do the right thing and resign, we've called for her impeachment.
SCIUTTO: Do you believe that holding the line on additional funding for DHS is making a difference at all, right? Because, I mean, the raids
continue, and they already have an enormous pot of money from the big, beautiful bill. Is that stand impacting things, in your view?
KENNEDY: Well, Donald Trump and congressional Republicans would rather shut down TSA, shut down the Coast Guard, shut down FEMA, instead of making
accountability measures that the American people are demanding to an out- of-control ICE agency.
And so, we have got to hold their feet to the fire. The American people have demanded accountability within the Department of Homeland Security.
And we must continue to drive that message forward to create that accountability and create trust once again in our government where this
administration has failed our country.
SCIUTTO: Congressman Timothy Kennedy, we appreciate you joining the program.
KENNEDY: Thank you, Jim.
SCIUTTO: Just ahead, the A.I. company Anthropic has walked away from a $200 million contract with the Pentagon. We're going to break down exactly
why after the break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:50:00]
SCIUTTO: This just in, the A.I. company Anthropic is walking away from a $200 million contract with the Pentagon. The Department of Defense had
given Anthropic until Friday to remove guardrails on its A.I. model. Threatening to use the Defense Production Act to force it to comply.
Anthropic says in a statement it was concerned about two things. One, A.I. being used for mass domestic surveillance. Also, for fully autonomous
weapons.
Joining me now, Lisa Eadicicco, tech editor for CNN Business. So, you know, good for Anthropic, right, for holding its line on what it considered a
principled stand here. But the DOD still has the option, as I understand it, to basically force it to comply. Is that an option that they might
exercise?
LISA EADICICCO, CNN BUSINESS TECH EDITOR: So, as we understand it, the deadline is tomorrow at 5:00 p.m. So, theoretically, there is a chance that
perhaps things could change between now and then. But as it stands, Anthropic says that it is rejecting the current language. It says that the
language does not satisfy its concerns around A.I. being used for things like mass surveillance and autonomous weapons.
The company said in its statements that although the new contract was framed as a compromise, that it included legalese that would allow the
Pentagon to kind of disregard those safeguards at will. So, we'll have to wait and see how this plays out.
In addition to what you mentioned, there's another risk at here for Anthropic, which is that it can also be deemed a supply chain risk. That
was the other threat that was kind of imposed upon them. And that would be really critical because it would essentially mean that companies that have
military contracts wouldn't be able to work with Anthropic. And that is a big part of Anthropic's business. It's really making a big push into the
enterprise right now. It's really more of an enterprise company than it is a consumer company. So, I can imagine that would really eat into their
business.
And another thing I want to hammer home here is that the talks aren't necessarily over. Anthropic says that it's still in discussions with the
Pentagon on a way to move forward. So, there is a chance that things could change.
SCIUTTO: And we should note, the Pentagon likes this product. I mean, apparently, they used Claude, the Anthropic A.I. tool to help with the
Venezuela operation. I just wonder what this tells us about where the DOD is headed here. I mean, because are these just hypothetical concerns that
Anthropic has about domestic mass surveillance and autonomous weapons, or do they have a reason to be concerned about that?
EADICICCO: I think that's the really big question here. And I think now that this has come up and that the situation is happening, there is
probably going to be a bigger microscope on how A.I. is used in these situations. And what we do know is that Anthropic has positioned itself so
far as being an A.I. company that really prioritizes safety and has really strong principles formed around that as part of why Anthropic was formed to
begin with.
So, it's not necessarily surprising to see them pushing back so hard on this. But I do agree that it does raise a lot of questions about the use of
A.I. in general in the military moving forward.
SCIUTTO: Yes. And listen, it's a lot of folks that have concerns about that, right? Lisa Eadicicco, thanks so much for joining.
EADICICCO: Of course.
SCIUTTO: Well, police have arrested a 27-year-old for injuring two officers during a snowball fight on Monday in New York.
[18:55:00]
SCIUTTO: In this video, you can see two police officers getting hit with snowballs while walking through Washington Square Park in lower Manhattan.
Earlier this week, New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani said the two officers had received lacerations to their face. However, the mayor also said he
does not think authorities should file charges.
Finally, tonight, she was convicted last year for sneaking on board a transatlantic flight without a ticket. Now, that Russian stowaway has done
it again. According to law enforcement sources, Svetlana Dali has been detained in Italy after she managed to sneak past airline staff again, this
time at Newark Airport in New Jersey, to board a flight for Milan. She got all the way to Milan. The FBI says it is aware of the alleged stowaway.
In 2024, Dali got on board a flight to Paris, getting past border agents at New York's JFK Airport -- boarding agents, we should say. She was arrested
and held in custody for seven months before her conviction. I'm pretty amazed she was able to do that twice.
Thanks so much for your company. I'm Jim Sciutto in Washington. You've been watching "The Brief." Please do stay with CNN.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[19:00:00]
END
