Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Hegseth Calls Return to Pre-Invasion Ukraine Borders "Unrealistic"; Hegseth Meets With NATO Members After Ruling Out Ukraine Membership; DOGE's Power Expands as Fed Agencies Plan For Large-Scale Layoffs. Aired 2-2:30p ET

Aired February 12, 2025 - 14:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

s

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:00:53]

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: We do begin with breaking news as we have learned that President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin spoke today for about an hour and-a-half. They were discussing, we're told, range of topics including beginning negotiations to end the conflict in Ukraine immediately. We have a team of reporters covering all angles here at home in the U.S. also in Moscow. So let's start with CNN Anchor and Chief White House Correspondent Kaitlan Collins. Kaitlan, it's a big phone call. Tell us about it.

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR & CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, it's a major phone call, especially with the events that we have seen happening in the last 24 hours, Brianna, with the release of the American teacher Marc Fogel, who got back here to the White House at about 10:30 p.m. last night. And also all the activity abroad with so many of the President's top officials meeting with Ukrainian President Zelenskyy this week.

And so now ,this phone call between President Trump and President Putin, the first confirmed call between those two leaders since Trump took office a few weeks ago, is notable. And the Kremlin says it lasted about 90 minutes. And during that, President Trump and President Putin agreed to start negotiations immediately, according to President Trump, to try to end the war in Ukraine, Russia's war in Ukraine that they started, of course, when they invaded in 2020 when President Biden was in office.

Now, there are major questions about what is next here and what this phase is going to look like. One question that I had for the Press Secretary today was about President Trump's note that he and President Putin agreed to meet respectively in each other's nations. That means Trump would be going to Russia. He'd be the first U.S. President to do so since President Obama was in office and went to a summit there.

And during that, the question was, were there any preconditions to that meeting? Does Russia need to withdraw some of its forces for Ukraine or all of them potentially, before Trump agrees to go and meet with the Russian leader? Karoline Leavitt, told me none that she's aware of. She said she would ask, but none right off the bat, obviously, when it comes to what that meeting would look like. But then on the terms of the broader negotiation and agreement that's going to take place, the President has tasked several of his top officials to go and meet with the Ukrainian leader to start this process, including the Secretary of State, Marco Rubio. We know the Vice President is going to be meeting with him as well, in addition to the Treasury Secretary, Scott Bessent.

And so when it comes to what that looks like and the negotiations there, we already saw Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth saying this morning that NATO is off the table, in their view, for Ukraine. He said he doesn't believe membership to NATO, which Ukraine has sought so fervently over the last three years, is realistic. And he also said he doesn't think it's realistic that Ukraine would go back to those 2014 borders, that is, before Russia illegally annexed Crimea.

And then, of course, in 2022, we saw the moves that they took there as well. My question was, aren't you taking the bargaining chips off the table? Those are two things that Russia certainly doesn't want before these negotiations begin. Again, Karoline Leavitt restated that she hasn't spoken in depth with the President about his views of what is on the table here for these negotiations and essentially said it is the team that he tasked earlier this morning that is going to be in charge of handling that.

One other note that when the President made that post, he did not mention his envoy to Ukraine and Russia. That is General Keith Kellogg, part of that negotiating team. Karoline Leavitt was asked about that by a reporter in this room. She said he does remain in the administration. It's unclear whether or not he'll actually be on the ground in Ukraine. But a lot of questions about what these negotiations are going to look like and how soon we could see President Putin in the United States or President Trump in Moscow.

KEILAR: And, Kaitlan, the White House announced the release of another American, this time from a prison in Belarus, which of course takes its cues directly from the Kremlin as well as other prisoners being released. What more can you tell us about this?

COLLINS: Yeah, still questions of what the extent of that trade looks like, who is being traded in in response for that, because typically when we've seen these prisoner swamps happen before, it's either one for one or one coveted prisoner, high profile prisoner that is exchanged for another hostage. In this situation, obviously with Marc Fogel, last night, he was wrongfully detained in Russia. And then they did confirm that a Russian crypto individual who is convicted of money laundering would be returning to Russia.

[14:05:03]

He's forfeiting his money. But clearly we are seeing other releases happen, and we've seen the slew of this, including with several Venezuelan nationals and when President's envoy -- the President's envoys went to Venezuela as seeing that go back and forth. But still a lot of questions of the details of that agreement. Brianna?

KEILAR: All right. Kaitlan, thank you so much. And let's turn now to CNN Senior International Correspondent Fred Pleitgen, who is live for us from Moscow. Fred, what is the Kremlin saying about this call?

FRED PLEITGEN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, it seems as though the Kremlin is pretty pleased with the way that this call went down. In fact, the spokesman for Vladimir Putin, Dmitry Peskov, texted me after speaking to reporters on the phone and said that the call was, quote, very positive and constructive as far as the Russian side is concerned.

So they feel that it was in a very positive atmosphere. Those are the kind of reactions that we're also seeing from other Russian politicians who are saying that they believe that this is the return to diplomacy between the United States and Russia. Others saying that they believe that this could accelerate what they believe will be their victory in the war in Ukraine as well.

And if we look at the readout from the Russian side, it is actually quite interesting. Kaitlan already alluded to some of the points, like for instance, President Trump saying that he wants negotiations for a possible peace settlement to begin as quickly as possible.

Well, one of the things that the Russians put in their readout is they say that black Vladimir Putin said that the Russians are willing to accept U.S. officials coming here to Moscow to try and iron out some sort of agreement. So at least part of the negotiations, or at least some of that could actually happen here in the Russian capital, obviously, of course, if the Trump administration is willing to do that.

Now, there's one really interesting point that stuck out to us and I want to read part of it to you. The Kremlin saying the topic of settlement in Ukraine was also discussed. President Trump spoke in favor of an early end to hostilities and a peaceful solution to the problem. And then comes this part. President Putin in turn mentioned the need to eliminate the root causes of the conflict and agreed with Trump that a long term settlement will be achieved through peaceful negotiations.

So the Russians are saying, look, these negotiations certainly are not going to be easy. The Russians in the past couple of days have been speaking about some of the red lines that they see. For their part, of course, speaking about the territory that they control in Ukraine, the territory that the Ukrainians control on the Russian side. And then, of course, that big looming question that apparently the Defense Secretary may have answered today about possible NATO membership for Ukraine in the future. Brianna?

KEILAR: Yeah, that is a big one. Fred Pleitgen, thank you very much for the report. Boris?

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOTS: And more breaking news overseas, the backdrop for this call between Trump and Putin. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth meeting with members of NATO for the first time, telling European leaders it's time for them to step up and recognize the world has changed.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) PETE HEGSETH, DEFENSE SECRETARY: We want, like you, a sovereign and prosperous Ukraine. But we must start by recognizing that returning to Ukraine's pre-2014 borders is an unrealistic objective. The United States does not believe that NATO membership for Ukraine is a realistic outcome of a negotiated settlement. Instead, any security guarantee must be backed by capable European and non-European troops.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: Joining me now to discuss is the Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Russia, Ukraine and Eurasia, Evelyn Farkas. She's also the Executive Director of the McCain Institute. Evelyn, thanks so much for being with us this afternoon. First, I want to get your reaction to the release of Alex, Fogel and these three prisoners from Belarus, one of them an American citizen. How does this fit into all of this?

EVELYN FARKAS, FMR. DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECY. OF DEFENSE FOR RUSSIA, UKRAINE & EURASIA: Well, obviously it sets a much friendlier tone in a sense, Boris, because of course, we can show that the United States is still willing to deal with Russia on these hard issues. This may have been something that was actually already underway.

I don't have evidence, but the fact that they made a decision back in June to not sentence the Russian indicates that perhaps the United States was already preparing for some kind of swap. We know that there's been a good turnover of portfolios between the hostage special envoys from Biden to Trump. So this may have been already in the works, but it does set a much more constructive tone, obviously.

SANCHEZ: To that point, what did you think when you heard that Donald Trump may soon visit Russia and that Vladimir Putin may soon visit the United States?

FARKAS: Well, I hope that it's just rhetoric at this point. There's no reason why we should welcome Vladimir Putin, who has an International Criminal Court warrant for his arrest for kidnapping thousands of Ukrainian children and bringing them to Russia against their will.

[14:10:10]

They're still being held there in Russia.

And of course, we know the International Criminal Court with the work of international lawyers and investigators, and the Ukrainians is working on many other cases regarding the human rights violations, the criminal acts that were conducted on Ukrainian territory against Ukrainian people by the Russian government led by Vladimir Putin. So there's no reason we should welcome a war criminal to the United States.

And of course, President Trump shouldn't visit him there either, especially because we have not received anything of significant value from President Putin. What normally happens, I'll say, Boris, is that if there is a summit, they meet on neutral territory. That's been a longstanding tradition between the United States and major powers. SANCHEZ: I'm also curious whether you think that the U.S. has potentially given up some leverage with Secretary Hegseth there saying that Ukraine is not going to return to its 2014 borders and also essentially telling NATO leaders that there have to be European and non-European peacekeeping forces there, seeming to say that the United States is taking a much lighter approach with Kiev.

FARKAS: Yeah, tactically it makes you want to scratch your head because if President Trump truly wants peace, and I believe that he wants peace, the way to do it is not to give away what our negotiating position is or where our red lines are, if you (inaudible) and to try to drive them to a compromise.

But by taking off these various -- by making the points that the secretary made, it weakens the American hand and certainly weakens the Ukrainian hand. And ultimately we need to be standing behind the international order, that is to say, sovereignty of borders and a security guarantee for Ukraine, which the secretary thankfully did mention as something the United States wants.

SANCHEZ^ Evelyn Farkas, we have to leave the conversation there. Appreciate your expertise. Thanks for joining us.

FARKAS: Thank you.

SANCHEZ^ Still to come. The next stage of Trump's efforts to reshape the federal workforce. Elon Musk's DOGE is expanding its power set to work with federal agencies to plan large scale layoffs.

And later, a new trial shows a popular weight loss drug could do more than help users shed pounds. We'll explain in just moments.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:17:17]

SANCHEZ: Right now, government agencies are preparing for large scale layoffs and will severely limit hiring as the next stage of President Trump's efforts to slash the federal workforce get underway. This latest executive order signed by Trump expands the already unprecedented role of Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency DOGE, giving the billionaires team even greater power to upend Washington.

Meantime, Trump's cost cutting agenda faces a new legal hurdle today. Eight Inspectors General the President fired are now suing to get their jobs back. It's just the latest among dozens of lawsuits filed against the Trump administration's actions over the past few weeks. Federal judges have slammed the brakes on several pieces of Trump's plans in a battle between the executive and judicial branches. Here's how the White House addressed these moves a short time ago.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: The real constitutional crisis is taking place within our judicial branch, where district court judges in liberal districts across the country are abusing their power to unilaterally block President Trump's basic executive authority. As the President clearly stated in the Oval Office yesterday, we will comply with the law in the courts, but we will also continue to seek every legal remedy to ultimately overturn these radical injunctions and ensure President Trump's policies can be enacted.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: Joining us now is Dave Aronberg, who served as state attorney for Palm Beach County, Florida. Dave, great to see you as always. When Karoline Leavitt there says that the executive is going to seek each possible recourse to overturn these decisions, beyond appealing these judges' orders, is there much they can do?

DAVE ARONBERG, FORMER STATE ATTORNEY FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA: Boris, good to be with you. No, I took some encouragement in what she said because at least that's what you're supposed to do, appeal it, not ignore it. My fear was that we'd have essentially a coup by ignoring federal judges. And to what she said, those aren't liberal activist judges. Those are judges appointed by Republicans, including Carl Nichols, appointed by Donald Trump himself.

I guess in today's parlance, a liberal activist judge is just a judge who disagrees with you. And it's called separation of powers, checks and balances. I would urge Ms. Leavitt to read the Constitution because this is exactly what the framers intended.

SANCHEZ: So I wanted to present the comparison that I've heard from conservatives to you to see how you feel about it. They repeatedly pointed to then President Biden's handling of student loan forgiveness in the wake of a Supreme Court decision. Is it apples and oranges? Does that compare to what Trump is hinting that he might do in ignoring some of these orders?

[14:20:05]

ARONBERG: Well, Biden didn't ignore the orders. He complied. He pulled back his plan and found a different plan that he thought could comply with the court's orders. This is different than we're hearing from J.D. Vance, who says we're just going to disregard the courts because they have no power over the executive branch. That's not how it works. It's supposed to be checks and balances. And that's why it was very dangerous, I think, to make a statement like that.

I do take some solace, though, in what Ms. Leavitt said. She said that we're going to do things like appeal. That's okay. But also, he should just go to Congress if he really wants to freeze funding or to eliminate USAID, there's a way to do it. You go to Congress. You can't do it through executive orders. But as someone said, he's acting like a king because he apparently is too weak to act like a President.

SANCHEZ: To your point about going to Congress, DOGE initially was presented as this advisory group that would offer reports about how to eliminate waste, but they seem to have superseded that authority and actually pausing programs or attempting to freeze spending that Congress had already allocated, only to have it frozen by courts. Under what authority is DOGE doing this?

ARONBERG: It has no authority. It's not even a government agency. This is Elon Musk doing Elon Musk things. And I think we can all recognize that there is fat in our budget. I do think there is a noble mission to try to reduce the massive budget deficits we have and the huge national debt.

But to do it like this is purely political. I mean, to go after an agency like USAID that was investigating Musk, it's unseemly. It's also unseemly for the richest man in the world to be targeting the poorest people in the world who get USAID funding. So I'm very concerned about that. And if they really wanted to slice the budget, you have to look at the Pentagon. I haven't seen them talk about military spending much. So that's why I think this is very political.

And if you really want to do something about fraud and abuse and waste, why would you fire all those inspectors general? Those inspector generals are designed to cut out fraud and waste. So firing them shows that there's something else going on here, and it's a lot more political than anything else.

SANCHEZ: Dave Aronberg, appreciate your analysis. Thanks for being with us.

ARONBERG: Thank you, Boris.

SANCHEZ: Brianna?

KEILAR: And joining us now to discuss is Democratic Congressman Robert Garcia of California. He is a member of the DOGE House Oversight Subcommittee. And sir, there are scores of officials across the federal government, you're well aware they've stepped down or they've been fired since January 20th. More than a dozen inspectors general, the acting treasury secretary, a number of CFPB senior leaders and probationary employees DOJ prosecutors who handle January six cases. Are oversight Dems talking to them? Are you strategizing an approach to capitalize on what you can learn from them?

REP. ROBERT GARCIA, (D) OVERSIGHT DOGE SUBCOMMITTEE MEMBER: We are. And in fact, I think most Democrats will tell you, especially those of us on oversight, that we've had numerous folks from insider these agencies reach out to us, oftentimes whistleblowers, folks who want to tell their stories. And I think what you're hearing, and a lot of it's come out in the public is people are upset, they're frightened, they're thinking about the impacts of their families.

And we're talking about people from across the country. And it's not just federal employees that are essentially getting an email saying oh by the way, you're fired, it's farmers across the country that are seeing their contracts cuts. Its manufacturers are seeing long time contracts with the government that all of a sudden are being ended overnight. So the impact that this is having on the actual economy is also really dangerous.

And of course there's no rhyme or reason. Elon Musk, the richest person on the planet in that been given power to essentially cut any program he and his team want. And these programs are hurting the people that need it the most, the poorest people, working class people. So it's important that we continue to call it out and that we hear from the folks inside the agencies.

KEILAR: You guys, your party, Democrats in Congress are getting a lot of calls from angry constituents. I want to know what you're hearing from them and also how you're reading that frustration that you're hearing, frustration with Democrats who they think can better oppose the Trump agenda.

GARCIA: Well, I think the main thing we're hearing, and I agree is folks back home in our districts want us to fight back and they want to ensure that we're bringing the fire and the same level of energy that the House Republicans and the extremists in Congress are bringing to this fight. So I think it's really important that us as a party listen to the folks on the ground.

We need to be matching that energy and taking on Elon Musk, calling him out every single day and bringing the facts and the actual truth to actual combat all this misinformation that's out there. So we're hearing that. And I'm also hearing from a lot of folks that are saying, yes, keep it going, keep bringing up the truth, keep fighting Donald Trump and Elon Musk.

[14:25:02]

And then, of course, there's just a lot of people that are scared. And so I think that's also very concerning. People are actually being harmed. We're hearing from parents, for example, who have children with disabilities that are in our schools. They're actually going to be really impacted if the Department of Education gets eliminated, as Elon Musk wants to do. So it's a mix of things, but people want us to fight back.

KEILAR: And during the Hunter Biden affair, Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, who now chairs this subcommittee, she had put up some censored but still quite revealing photos of the first son who was nude and with alleged prostitutes, photos that she said were taken from his laptop today. Today, you hearken back to that moment with this one in the DOGE subcommittee hearing. I want to play this

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. ROBERT GARCIA, (D) DOGE SUBCOMMITTEE: Now, I find it ironic, of course that our Chairwoman, Congresswoman Greene, is in charge of running this Committee. Now, in the last Congress, Chairwoman Greene literally showed a dick pic in our oversight congressional hearing. So I thought I'd bring one as well.

Now, this, of course, we know, is President Elon Musk. He's also the world's richest man. He was the biggest political donor in the last election. He has billions of dollars in conflicts of interest.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: Let me just ask you, and maybe your last answer is a preview of, I think, what you could say. But I want to hear why. But do you think that calling Elon Musk a dick is effective messaging for confronting what is a potentially irreversible transformation of the U.S. government?

GARCIA: Well, he is a dick, and I think he's also harming the American public in an enormous way. And what I think is really important and what the American public want is for us to bring actual weapons to this bar fight. This is an actual fight for democracy, for the future of this country. And it's important to push back on the chairperson of this Committee.

I mean, Marjorie Taylor Greene talks about having decorum about bipartisanship. This is the person that lies more than anybody else in the entire Congress. And so if she is going to make a mockery of hearings, I want to make sure that us as Democrats are bringing that same level of energy.

And of course, after those comments, we went into exactly what Elon Musk is trying to do. Dismantling the Department of Labor, dismantling the Department of Education, dismantling all of our consumer protection agencies. And so it's all important, but it's also important to get the attention of the American public and call Elon Musk out for what he is and to make people know that Marjorie Taylor Greene is not a serious legislator and she shouldn't be treated as such.

KEILAR: Axios is reporting also that there is some tension between Democratic grassroots group and Congress, that it's led to some finger pointing. We're hearing this. I think this is what we hear when we talk to Democrats, just kind of across the board, whether they're lawmakers or they are advocates or they are constituents.

And Congressman Don Beyer pointedly said something about Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries. He says, quote, we're still looking for that national spokesperson. And it could be that Hakeem becomes that national voice. It hasn't happened yet. Do you have as a party the leadership that you need?

GARCIA: Absolutely. Well, first, let me just say that I think Hakeem Jeffries is our party's best communicator. He's a great leader of the caucus. But I mean, listen, we all agree with our groups. A lot of these groups are on the ground are grassroots activists. They want all of us to engage more. They want Democrats to bring the energy. And I think everyone should recognize that. I think people do.

And I'm proud of Leader Jefferies. He's out there, he's at rallies, he's speaking out, and he's going to be the person leading our negotiations in the weeks and months ahead. And so I'm really proud of our leadership. But it's important for those of us rank and file members, especially us new and newer members like myself, to bring the energy in the fight. I think that's going to be really critical in these months and really years ahead.

KEILAR: Do you feel that there's a broad understanding across your party that that is a strategy that the party is coalescing around? GARCIA: I do. And I think you're seeing that in this, particularly this last few days and last week. I think people understand that we cannot just kumbaya (ph) with our House Republican majority and hope for bipartisanship in this era. These folks are dismantling our institutions. They're dismantling our government. They're damaging our public universities. They want to raid Medicare and Medicaid. That takes a different level of energy and strategy.

And I think it's one that I think us as a party understand. And I think at the center of that is bringing the truth and the fight to the Congress, to the White House and to the public. And I think you're seeing the public react. What happened with the, for example, with the grants, all the other government grants. The public reacted, and Donald Trump had to pull back. So that's going to continue to happen.

KEILAR: Congressman --

End