Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

U.S., Russia Discuss Ending War But Leave Ukraine Out of Talks; Federal Workers Angry and Confused as Trump Slashes Government Jobs; Fed Judge Denies Democratic Efforts to Block DOGE Access to Data. Aired 10-10:30a ET

Aired February 19, 2025 - 10:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:00:00]

PAMELA BROWN, CNN ANCHOR: Diplomatic spat. President Trump and Zelenskyy are trading jabs. The Ukrainian leader says Trump lives in a disinformation space and that the U.S. is now helping Putin.

Plus, cuts at the Defense Department? New CNN reporting about possible firings among civilian employees at the DOD. We're going to talk about where those cuts could happen.

And then later, Texas fried chicken. It hurts for me to even say that. KFC is leaving my beloved home state of Kentucky. Why the company is saying goodbye to its namesake state after so many years.

Good morning. You are live in the CNN Newsroom. I'm Pamela Brown in Washington.

And we begin with the efforts to end Russia's war in Ukraine. The U.S. and Russia are holding talks over what happens next, but leaving Ukraine out of the conversation. And that's sparking some new tensions as Ukraine President Vladimir Zelenskyy pushes back on President Trump's claims about what started the conflict.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY, UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT: Unfortunately, President Trump, I have great respect for him as a leader of a nation that we have great respect for. The American people who always support us, unfortunately, lives in this disinformation space.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: CNN Chief International Security Correspondent Nick Paton Walsh is in Kyiv. Nick, very strong remarks from President Zelenskyy at a critical moment for his country.

NICK PATON WALSH, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Yes. I mean, I saw a very determined, possibly anxious at times, certainly, I think, angry Vladimir Zelenskyy making those remarks. He also went out to say that the recent Saudi Arabia summit between the United States and Russia had essentially ended the isolation of Putin, one that had been put in place, obviously, by the Biden administration and the west after a full scale invasion in 2022.

But the real issue, I think, here is how does this move forward so we can have this clear rift between the two perceptions of the men, despite Zelenskyy holding out respect, he says, still for President Trump, how does this move the peace process potentially forwards? And we have in Kyiv right now, the Ukraine and Russia envoy to President Trump, General Keith Kellogg, arrived at railway station early this morning, talking about the need to talk about security guarantees.

And I asked President Zelenskyy if indeed the United States doesn't want to see Ukraine in NATO, doesn't want to put troops on the ground. What kind of security guarantees could we be talking about, indeed, that might potentially keep Ukraine feeling safe?

Here's what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WALSH: Mr. President, we've heard the idea of security guarantees again and again from the Americans, but they don't want to put troops on the grounds. They don't want to put you in part of NATO. How would security guarantees potentially look given those restraints? Can you explain what would work?

ZELENSKYY: What will work? I think NATO will work really, but --

WALSH: They won't let you win?

ZELENSKYY: Yes, it's true. It's true, the strongest. But when they said, for example, no boots on the ground, you know, but they have ships, but they have air defense, they really have it, America. They have it. They have air defense. Okay. Can we have 20 systems of Patriot? It's enough. And even we don't need the team to be at these systems. We have our teams. We will train our teams. And so for us, it's not boots on the ground, but it's real help.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WALSH: And now another key point of that press conference he gave was to answer President Trump's false claim that his polling is at about 4 percent popularity. Zelenskyy said it's closer to 57 percent. He said they present polling in the weeks ahead to confirm that yet again.

And I should stress, it's very complex and dangerous, I think, for a wartime leader like Zelenskyy to have a legitimacy questioned. And that's indeed what Moscow's been trying to do for years. And now here he is trying to explain that he doesn't need to have elections, which frankly anyone who looks at elections think could be disastrous in terms of legitimacy, and their sheer functionality in the middle of a war and nightly Russian aerial assaults.

So, a very dangerous moment here, certainly, the idea of that being questioned, but Zelenskyy was appearing confident and, I think, clear that he wanted to rebut what Trump had said the night before.

[10:05:00] BROWN: And I want to also focus on those comments that you are alluding to from President Trump about the start of this war. Let's take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: I have the power to end this war, and I think it's going very well. But today I heard, oh, we weren't invited. Well, you've been there for three years. You should have ended it three years. You should have never started it. You could have made a deal. I could have made a deal for Ukraine that would have given them almost all of the land, everything, almost all of the land and no people would have been killed and no city would have been demolished and not one dome would have been knocked down, but they chose not to do it that way.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: So, Trump's words, they're echoing Russian propaganda and giving Putin a boost. What is the reaction, not just inside the Kremlin, but also among European leaders?

WALSH: Yes. I mean, the Kremlin, Putin has said that the Saudi Arabia meetings meant that he was meeting with officials who seem to have a clearer understanding of what was happening, but that's the Kremlin's talking points here. What's important to address is what President Trump, the most powerful man in the world, is saying about the start of this war. He's saying that, you know, Ukraine should never have started it.

Now, just to remind of you as how this began, this was an unprovoked Russian invasion in 2022, which the Russians denied they were going to do despite troop buildups across the border in which the Biden administration relentlessly warned about his western allies was imminent.

So, there was no sort of moments in which Ukraine decided to let this all happen. And also President Trump suggesting that there was potentially a moment too where a deal could have been done that would have allowed Ukraine to keep nearly all of its land, I don't know what he's talking about. There was never a proposition for that to have occurred. There may have been moments during this war where possibly diplomacy might've swept in and reduced the amount of land that Russia's taken, but their initial game plan had been for frankly, the de-Nazification and demilitarization of all of Ukraine, so a much more maximalist goal.

And so Trump isn't really speaking about a history, which anyone here in Ukraine or in Europe or the world would be familiar with. And I think that's ultimately the complexity here that we are hearing the most powerful man in the world, the commander-in-chief of, you know, the Pentagon, the biggest military force on earth and the biggest made backer to Ukraine saying things that are so much more familiar to the Russian narrative, so distant to the truth of what's occurred here, and I think very jarring for Ukrainians who've seen the U.S. be their greatest backer a month ago, and now it seems in a very unclear moment.

We don't know if this is the final, you know, Trump policy or an iteration of it, but it's a stark departure and many people I've been speaking today, frankly, shocked at what they heard.

BROWN: Nick Paton Walsh, thank you so much.

So let's discuss that and more with Republican Congressman Ryan Zinke of Montana. He is a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Thank you for coming on, Congressman.

So, I want to get your reaction to President Trump blaming Ukraine's Volodymyr Zelenskyy, not Vladimir Putin, for Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

REP. RYAN ZINKE (R-MT): Well, first of all, Ukrainian demands. They demand they're in NATO. They demand Crimean Peninsula. If you roll it back, you know, part of the problem at the very beginning was NATO and Ukraine's entrance into NATO. You know, I'm from Montana. It's really hard for me to say -- to ask kids in Kalispell, for instance, to go to war over the Donbas where they don't know where it is.

And in entering in NATO, Ukraine would have to go through significant political reform to include elections, which is democratic, but they're an oligarchy, and there are many power struggles within Ukraine. It is not a transparent government. It is not, you know, pro- Western. It is corrupt government. So, they need you would have to do some deep reformations and reform.

But also the Crimea Peninsula. You know, you look at the history of the Crimea Peninsula. It is Russia's only warm water port. It's their access to the Black Sea. So, the reason why Russia is there is they feel that they look at that as it's absolutely essential for their security interest of having access, you know, to the Mediterranean and the Black Sea.

So, there's some problems that go through. But Ukraine is not in a terrific position for demands without U.S. help. And, quite frankly, European help has been little to none. Without the U.S., Russia would be in Ukraine. It would be. It would be a part of that.

So, you know, looking at it. I'm an optimist. Trump wants to end the fighting and, you know, to his point, it could have been ended. I think both sides realize that continuing is not in anyone's interest, so that's where we sit.

BROWN: So, just to go back, though, and I hear what you're saying about, you know, issues in Ukraine. There has been a history of corruption, certainly, in Ukraine. But in terms of the president putting the blame on Ukraine for Russia invading it, do you think that that is fair rather than blaming Vladimir Putin for invading Ukraine?

[10:10:04]

ZINKE: Well, Vladimir Putin, let's be clear, is a war criminal, and it was Russia who invaded. Circumstances and conditions could have ended, probably, but I don't hold Vladimir Putin in anything other than a war criminal status. He is a superpower, though. You know, you say the last super - has not -- has nuclear weapons. It can escalate very quickly out of control. I think that's a concern for us all. Europe has been (AUDIO GAP) in this conflict with exception of Poland has stood out as one of the highlights of strength.

But at the end of the day, this needs to end. And the lines will work out the negotiation, but the main players in this Russia being, I think, the aggressor, the U.S. being the main supporter, and hopefully we can come with an agreement that all parties can live with and stop the fighting.

BROWN: It's interesting. So, you're saying, look, Vladimir Putin is a war criminal. We just heard Roger Wicker, the senator, Republican senator, tell my colleague, Manu Raju, something very similar to what you're saying. Do you think that President Trump sees him as a war criminal? Because one could argue that he is essentially echoing Kremlin talking points and saying exactly what Vladimir Putin wants to hear right now. What do you think about that?

ZINKE: Well, I'm not sure -- I disagree with echoing Russia's talking points.

BROWN: Can I be specific with examples?

ZINKE: Well, for instance, all right, Ukraine Peninsula, of Ukraine's insistence on NATO, of expanding, you know, removing Russia's access to the Black Sea. That's not a talking point. That's a fact.

But the same token, though, you know, you cannot ignore what Russia has done and the violence and the atrocities that have been committed in the territory on the Ukrainian people. I don't think you can walk away with that. You know, the goal is clear to end the war. But look, wars are dirty. I've been in a lot of them in my life. And by the definition of war, they're bloody, a lot of atrocities, and innocent lives, unfortunately, suffer.

BROWN: And just to be clear, I want to be precise here and transparent with our viewers, when I talk about echoing Russia's talking points, I'm talking specifically about saying that Zelenskyy, you know, was to blame for the start of this war, talking about, you know, Ukraine not becoming a member of NATO, questioning the legitimacy of Zelenskyy, talking about how Russia should keep the land that it has seized so far since 2014 with Crimea. So, I want to be really specific, and that's what I was talking about there.

ZINKE: Well, and then the point about the Crimean Peninsula, you know, it was Russian territory for 800 years. There's been at least 12 wars fought over that piece of ground. To me, it's analogous to the Mississippi River in the U.S. I don't think Russia is going to leave the Crimean Peninsula because they consider it a national imperative as far as their national security goes. Of course, they don't want U.S. troops, they don't want NATO troops on their border. I understand that.

Do I think the actions on the military violence that occurred was justified? Absolutely not. Absolutely not. But it's time to end it. Enormous resources are being put in, you know, Ukraine by the U.S., by Russia. They're going broke. Europe is now stepping up a little more than they have. And you look at how much they've participated in percentage of their NATO contribution, there's only a few countries that are in that zone of actually meeting their obligations. I think that's an important concept too.

But, you know, I don't look at narratives. I look at the ground is that - I don't think Russia is going to leave the Crimea Peninsula. Again, that's an imperative. I think they're the ones that -- aggressor, clearly the ones over the bar. But the demands from Zelenskyy in Ukraine, I demand to be in NATO, you're not in a position to demand much.

BROWN: So, I guess in these negotiations, look, I mean, analysts have different viewpoints, right? And I've interviewed some who specialize in studying Russia and study Ukraine who are saying, look, Putin right now is using the U.S., is using Trump and that Putin cannot be trusted. We heard that same sentiment from Roger Wicker.

Of course, other arguments can be made that I've heard is, look, nothing was happening. This war was continuing under President Biden, and he had iced out Russia. So, why not try to bring them in and reach a peace deal? But do you think -- do you see the point about the potential of Putin using the U.S. here, using Trump, and that he shouldn't be trusted?

[10:15:06]

What do you say to that?

ZINKE: Well, you know, I don't trust Putin. I don't believe that President Trump trusts Putin. I think he realizes what Putin is. He's a war criminal. He's also the head of Russia, which needs to be taken seriously. His former, you know, you know, vocation was KGB. Look, Russia is an oligarchy. He's the head oligarch. There's no doubt about it. In Ukraine, also an oligarchy type of government. Zelenskyy is not the most powerful, or at least he's a competitor, but he is not the undisputed leader of all those oligarchs.

And, again, in order to go to NATO, they would have to do political reform that is distant in the future, and I do believe in elections. And I think that you can do it -- if there's a question about his legitimacy about extending the elections, even through wartime, I think that can be figured out. If Zelenskyy's popularity is what he says it is, it should be no problem.

BROWN: I guess, you know, you heard Nick Paton Walsh talk there about the concern about questioning his legitimacy and what that can do and the dangers of that. The questioning of legitimacy is essentially coming from Russia and now you know, you're seeing that with President Trump.

ZINKE: Well, you know, the legitimacy is coming from Russia. Yes, because they would have an interest in doing it. But Zelenskyy himself, I mean, again, demanding we're going to be in NATO. You're not in a position to demand. What you are in a position is -- and look, I love freedom. We all love freedom. I want Ukraine to be successful. I want the war to end. I don't want to see civilians get bombed every day, missile attacks, you know, somewhere and lose their life in Ukraine. And I understand JFK, that we will defend freedom. But we will defend freedom the way that United States looks at it and make sure we don't escalate into a nuclear conflict in Europe.

BROWN: Certainly, no one wants that. Congressman Zinke, thank you for coming on to share your perspective on all of this. We really appreciate it.

ZINKE: My pleasure. And your husband is a SEAL, I love him.

BROWN: Oh, thank you. He will be happy that you said that. Thank you. Once a SEAL, always a SEAL, I guess.

ZINKE: Absolutely.

BROWN: Well, this morning, we learned that the U.S. Department of Agriculture is now working to rescind termination letters sent to employees working on bird flu response. Those workers were among the scores of firings at multiple federal agencies, including the U.S. Forest Service.

Joining us now is Amanda Mae Downey. Amanda, thank you for coming on. So, you worked for the Forest Service. Did you ever think you'd be in this position you would be on the chopping block?

AMANDA MAE DOWNEY, FORMER FEDERAL EMPLOYEE, FIRED FROM FOREST SERVICE: So, as a probationary employee, there's always that risk, right? But, I worked hard, and I did my job, and I did not think that this would be something that would happen to someone who goes in under these conditions and proves themselves and works really hard. And that's been a real gut punch for me.

BROWN: I imagine it has been. And from what I read, you know, you have a family that you're trying to support. Tell us about the process of termination, what that was like for you. Are you still being paid? When does your pay end?

DOWNEY: Yes. So, I received a text message from my supervisor asking if I had a minute to talk. I was actually busy helping my daughter move unexpectedly in Grand Rapids from her college apartment. And then he called and left a voicemail. I'm still busy. I missed it. I did call him back. He said that I needed to come in and speak to him before, I believe, it was closed the business on Monday that we had to wrap it up over the weekend.

And so as directed by my union, I sent a message just clarifying that I was going to receive premium pay as a callback to be called in on a holiday. He did respond and confirm that I would be. And so then I went in on Monday to receive my termination letter from OPM, which I believe you guys have a copy of, and was able to pack up my stuff. I had to turn over my accountable property to another employee. I was there for about three hours, I think.

BROWN: So, we're showing it here on the screen. You say, received and accepted under duress. Why was it important to you to add that line?

DOWNEY: It was really important to me because there are so many policies under concern that we don't believe are being followed as employees. And we're, you know, looking to our union for guidance on those things and the possibility that it sounds like with this being such a sheer volume of employees that this is a riff and there are policies that have to be followed if we're under a riff.

[10:20:06]

And you can't just come in and sweep out all the worker bees because that's the easiest thing to do.

BROWN: So -- and going back, and I apologize if I missed this, but I'm just curious, what is the package like for you? Are you given pay through a certain time period? Is your pay cut off immediately? I just want to better understand that.

DOWNEY: Yes, so I apologize. I was so focused on the prior question.

BROWN: That's okay.

DOWNEY: So, there was a lot of concern over the weekend. So, Femi (ph), the national account from where all of our paychecks come from, we were aware there was going to be some maintenance as government purchase card holders, but there was never any mention about our paychecks. And all of our paychecks, most of us, it gets deposited on Friday, Saturday, even Sunday, and it was pending all weekend. Some people said it showed up and then disappeared.

I will say that my check did deposit and finalized today, so I am glad for that. I should have one more paycheck coming to me from this last week for the pay period. And I will -- I have been told I will receive my annual leave. And if I had any credit hours built up, I would receive that. We do not receive our sick time that we have reserved.

BROWN: So, you worked for the Forest Service, which manages and maintains public forests and grasslands and is critical in wildlife protection. What is your biggest concern now that so many of the agencies workers are gone? What do you think the impact will be? Do you think people will feel this?

DOWNEY: Definitely. I think it's going to be a tremendous impact. You know, first it's going to hit us and our families and our amazing co- workers, and that's going to impact our communities. It's going to have a ripple effect. Eventually, you will see that our natural resources and our beautiful public lands will not have the same standard of care, and that's going to affect tourism and our economy.

I have lived and worked and played in this community my entire life and chose to stay here. And I genuinely believe in that. And to see the impact that this is going to have knowing that my community depends so strongly on our tourism is just heartbreaking.

BROWN: Just to be clear, I know we have to go, but did you get any reviews that you weren't performing the way that you should have been or anything like that?

DOWNEY: I received a merit-based pay increase this fall, which if you're an unsatisfactory employee, you would not receive that.

BROWN: Amanda Mae Downey, thank you so much. I appreciate you coming on and sharing your story and best of luck to you.

DOWNEY: Thank you.

BROWN: Still ahead, a legal win for Elon Musk and DOGE, a federal judge refusing to block the group from gaining access to several federal agencies. I'll discuss the reasoning behind the decision with a former federal prosecutor up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:25:00]

BROWN: A federal judge rejected a request from attorneys general in blue states to rein in the power of Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency, even though now the White House says Elon Musk doesn't run DOGE. Specifically, the emergency lawsuit sought and failed to block DOGE from accessing federal data systems at the seven executive branch agencies.

I want to bring in Elliot Williams, a CNN legal analyst and a former federal prosecutor. Elliot, U.S. District Judge, Tanya Chutkan, an Obama-appointee, issued her ruling on a rather narrow line of reasoning, but she said basically the states didn't show that they would suffer irreparable harm if she didn't issue the restraining order. What would states need to show to meet the threshold of being irreparably harmed?

ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: And it's important to use that irreparably harmed language, Pam, because to get a temporary restraining order or a preliminary injunction, which is what these folks were asking for here, they would have to show that some action that they're suing about would harm them permanently in a way that they could never come back from. It's the most basic thing that one has to get when seeking a temporary restraining order.

The judge said that the harms that these states were talking about were speculative. They had said, well, we think that in the future, if this goes through, then we will be hurt. And the judge says, yes, that doesn't quite do it. You have to establish that you're actually harmed or that the harm is so imminent that I as the court have to step in.

They can still come back and they still might. But as of right now, it is a win for the Trump team.

BROWN: And I also think it's notable because we just don't know a lot of what's going on that these judges have said that, you know, the DOGE employees, the staffers aren't using information in a way that could violate privacy laws, because I think a lot of Americans are concerned right now of what are they doing with my data, and that kind of thing. But so far, the judges have said, well, they're not doing anything. We don't see evidence of them doing anything improper with it, right?

WILLIAMS: Yet. We don't see anything of them doing improper with it yet. And that is an important aspect of Judge Chutkan's ruling, come to me with a harm that someone has suffered and I absolutely, you know, will revise this.

Now, again, it's important to note that this is just a preliminary step. This case is not done and she will rule on these issues once again. But, Pam, it's also important to know that privacy issues as a general matter create very strange bedfellows, not just in politics, but in the law too. It is very hard to predict how individual judges are going to rule on privacy issues on right, left, liberal, conservative, just because of how thorny questions of what to do with data are.

So, it'll be an interesting one to watch and see what she and, quite frankly, other judges around the country deal with those questions around data.

BROWN: Right. I want to pivot to something else that I find interesting, and it's this executive order that President Trump signed to claim presidential power over independent government agencies.