Shownotes Transcript
It's Wednesday, May 7th, and here's what's happening right now on CNN This Morning. Heavy fighting erupts between India and Pakistan. Dozens fear dead as two nuclear powers seem to be marching to the brink of war. Plus, countdown to conclave. In just hours, the cardinals will enter the Sistine Chapel, only to exit when a new pope is chosen. So, who are the top contenders?
And then the Supreme Court gives the green light to a big piece of President Trump's agenda ahead. Why the Pentagon will now be allowed to fire service members who are transgender. And a decision day for the Fed. Will Jerome Powell hold interest rates steady or will he bow to President Trump's insults and pressure?
6 a.m. here on the East Coast. Here's a live look at St. Peter's Square in Vatican City. Of course, we'll be checking on events there throughout the hour as we count down to the conclave later this morning. Good morning, everybody. I'm Adi Cornish. I want to thank you for waking up with me. And I want to begin with the developing story this morning as India launches airstrikes against Pakistan, bringing two nuclear-armed nations to the brink of war.
India says the strikes are targeting terrorist infrastructure in both Pakistan and in a part of Kashmir administered by Pakistan. Just last month, terror attacks in the portion of Kashmir administered by India killed more than two dozen people.
mainly tourists Pakistan's military says India's airstrikes have killed at least 26 people including children and injured dozens more it also claims to have a shot down five Indian military aircraft and is vowing that the attack will not go unanswered it was an unprovoked and blatant act of war was the Indian government on their instructions the Indian Air Force
while they remained within the Indian airspace, violated Pakistan's sovereignty. For more on this story, we're joined now by David Sanger, CNN political and national security analyst. David, good morning. As we mentioned, there was this terror attack last month. But were there other indications that things would escalate so quickly?
Well, the terror attack was not necessarily an act by the Pakistani government. And there's still a fair bit of dispute back and forth about whether the terrorists involved were in fact backed by the Pakistanis, whether the Pakistani intelligence services had any knowledge of it. And we may never resolve that issue.
India had resolved, of course, to retaliate. And when they did so, now they did not do it against any Pakistani military sites, interestingly, but more religious sites and sites that they believe were previously the source of terrorism.
This is, of course, one of the two long-running conflicts that the world most worries about that could break out, the other being, of course, Taiwan and China. But in this case, it's particularly fragile because we have a Pakistani government of somewhat dubious legitimacy in place. It's not at all clear right now whether that government is fully in control of
of the nuclear infrastructure the way previous governments have been. And I know that you've raised concerns in your writing, for example, about the disintegration or undermining of Pakistan's government given its nuclear capabilities and the fact that it's not signed on to any international agreements when it comes to nuclear weapons.
That's right. They are not a member of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, nor is India. But more worrisome is that both countries have developed strategies that would basically roll out tactical nuclear weapons at various moments
to try to scare the other side into not retaliating and so forth. So far, at least from what we hear, we have not seen any movement of their nuclear forces. And we've gone through other moments like this where fortunately that's been avoided.
One thing to be concerned about, when something like this happened in 2001, I remember Colin Powell saying to us frequently that he made sure that there were American officials on the ground, either in Islamabad or in Delhi, constantly thinking that this would make it harder for either side to escalate while the Americans were there talking. And we just don't see that right now, that level of engagement. Maybe we will, but
but we don't see it yet from the Trump administration. - It's David Sanger, CNN political and national security analyst. Thank you. - Thank you, Aida. - Coming up on CNN this morning, the trial of Sean Combs resumes. Today, full jury is expected to be seated ahead, details on what happens next. Plus, if you're heading to the airport, make sure you have got the new real ID or that security screening could take even longer.
And the conclave about to get underway. Right now, the Vatican Cardinals are preparing to enter the Sistine Chapel and cast their votes for the next leader of the Catholic Church. We need to listen to the Holy Spirit. He didn't say anything just yet? He's saying many things, but we need to listen.
I'm Eva Longoria and I'm exploring Spain and its 17 regions to see how the land and its people have created one of the world's most exciting cuisines. Eva Longoria, searching for Spain, Sunday at 9 on CNN. We're learning more about the Supreme Court's decision greenlighting the Trump administration's ban on transgender service members across the military. Shortly after taking office, President Trump signed an executive order that would allow the Pentagon to do this.
To ensure that we have the most lethal fighting force in the world, we will get transgender ideology the hell out of our military. It's going to be gone.
The ruling is a significant win for this White House following a decision from a lower court against the ban. So the group chat is here to take it on today. Daniela Diaz, congressional reporter for Notice. Charlie Dent, former Republican congressman from Pennsylvania. And Kristen Soltis Anderson, CNN political commentator and Republican pollster. OK, I want to turn to you guys because we've actually talked a lot about how this issue has played before the electorate.
But specifically with this ruling, we don't know their thinking, right? It was an emergency response. But what we do know is it means that the Trump administration can carry out its policy against transgender service members. Why is this particular case significant?
Well, this case is significant, one, because it's showing that the court seems to be very willing to go along with what the Trump administration asks when it comes under a national security type lens. And that's not sort of unexpected. Courts tend to be pretty differential to the executive when they have a national security justification for something they want to do. But the other backdrop to this is public opinion. Of course, that's not what influences the courts. It shouldn't be.
But in terms of public opinion, as recently as 2019, seven in 10 Americans said they were fine with transgender individuals serving in the military, but those numbers have slipped. And even as we've seen in polling, robust support remaining steady for the sort of LGB part of LGBT, there has been a drop in support for
Transgender inclusion in places like the military, not among Democrats, but among independents and Republicans. Yeah, and we should say, just so people understand, the department basically argued that even gender dysphoria as a medical condition was disqualifying for them under their new rules under the executive order.
Charlie, I think that the plaintiffs in this case have something like 70 medals between them all. So these are people who have served their country. Can you talk about, again, like, is there any pushback? Or is it basically like, well, this is the political reality now? Well, when I was in Congress, I voted to repeal the don't ask, don't tell policy. Right. And I...
Because social norms change, right? Correct. Like for a while, "don't ask, don't tell" seemed like the moderate response. But we came to the conclusion that these people were serving honorably and that they shouldn't, you know, part of being honorable and part of serving in the United States Armed Forces is about being truthful. And we were telling people to conceal, you know, their identity. With the transgender, I have some concerns about what the Supreme Court did because
Again, none of this is based on the qualifications of these individuals. If they were able to serve, why are we throwing them out?
And again, I think this decision may have to be revisited at some point. - And I think it will, 'cause what this does is basically says the order stays in place, you guys can keep doing it while it works its way through the courts. - We had a conversation about this when Jim Mattis was Secretary of Defense during Trump One, where there was a move on the transgendered, and the Defense Department made no such recommendation then to have them removed. And there was, I think, a pretty thorough review at the time.
what's changed yeah i think what's interesting is the implications here for other policies and transgender bans in other areas of public life is this something that congress is talking about as well or republicans they're trying to take advantage of the momentum on defense republicans are obviously on trump's side this has been an issue that they campaigned on ahead of 2024
and why they won the majority in the House and the Senate, considering that they were outspoken about this, and this is a popular thing among the Republican base. So while this has been, of course, woven into the NDAA before, this has been an issue that many Republicans have brought up ahead of this decision, now that it's been ruled by SCOTUS, obviously Congress is going to move toward other issues later.
considering that this has been done. - Yeah, okay, I want you guys to stay with us. We actually have a lot more to talk about today. Ahead on CNN this morning, we're gonna talk about India and Pakistan basically coming to the brink. We're live on the ground in Islamabad as India strikes deep into Pakistan. And it accuses its neighbor of killing people in the region of Kashmir.
Plus, the president wants his Gulf of America name change made into law. Why that effort has earned him some rare pushback from Republican lawmakers. And once again, a live look at Vatican City. It's just in just a few hours, the College of Cardinals will enter the Sistine Chapel. They're going to begin voting on the next pope. We're going to have more on what to expect after this. You can't seriously believe that I have the slightest desire to become pope. Come on!
Every cardinal has that desire. In just hours, 133 cardinals from around the world will begin their procession into the Sistine Chapel. This will mark the ceremonial start of the conclave to choose a new pope.
I think it's really amazing. We're very fortunate to be in Rome at this time. So, yeah, looking forward to it. I have great hope because I think that Pope Francis gave us an incredible legacy to follow and I know that the Holy Spirit will be guiding the Cardinals as they choose the next Pope.
Around 11:30 a.m. Eastern, the Cardinals will take part in the second meditation. It's a private address on the state of the church. Then comes the first vote around 1 p.m. Eastern. All eyes will be on the chimney of the Sistine Chapel. Black smoke means no pope has been selected. White smoke means the world's 1.4 billion Catholics have a new leader.
Kurt Martin joins me this morning. He's a professor at the Catholic University of America, just up the road from us. Thank you for being here. Thank you for having me. Okay, so interestingly, you brought a book because we talked about the prayers, but they're also guided by this. What is this? So this is the Ordo Ritum Conclave. That is the liturgical law of the conclave. And these are the norms. The norms and the rules.
So this is what they're actually. So can you talk about some of the rules? We know under 80 can't vote. Are there any other things that you think are going to be relevant in this moment? Yes. Well, it's a secret ballot. You need a two-third majority at all times. Two-third majority at all times. At all times. So there's no longer the escape route that John Paul II had built in originally that Benedict...
rolled back, it's always a two-third majority, which means if we have 133 cardinals, you need 89 cardinals to have a pope. So there's even a rule change since the last time that they did this. No, there's not a rule change. John Paul II had kind of changed it a little bit that after, if there was a deadlock, after two weeks roughly you could change to an absolute majority.
Benedict rolled that back and said no, no, an absolute majority would mean that someone who's not a compromise figure could make it. So let's go back to the two-third majority that we have had for centuries, absolutely at all times. So if there is a deadlock at one point after two weeks, then it would be a runoff election between the two best placed persons
but they still need a two-third majority and those two could not vote. So if there's a deadlock, runoff elections, we have to remember they are a head of state, they're not just the head of a church. Exactly. I want to play for you two cardinals talking about the conclave process after they had just arrived. I think it will be short, hopefully. Will it be positive? Will it be quick? We will know. We need to listen to the Holy Spirit. He saw it.
He didn't say anything just yet? He's saying many things, but we need to listen. We need to listen. We also know that there is a great deal of conversation amongst the Cardinals themselves. Pope Francis had great influence in the shape of the people in the college this time around. Can you talk about maybe a candidate from Europe, a candidate from the Global South? Give us a sense of the players. So it's interesting. We have a lot of
papabile, as they are called, candidates to be elected. Every news outlet has their own list. Yeah, you even brought that list. This is what we've reduced ourselves to, an Excel spreadsheet. And who's leading, so to speak? So that's hard to say. But if you want to, one from Europe, Cardinal Parolin, the former Secretary of State, is the heir apparent to Pope Francis. Well,
He's the one who was the number two forever since Francis was elected as Secretary of State. He had a great hand in the foreign policy of the Holy See. - Yeah, essentially the Vatican's diplomat. - So he's a diplomat, right? The other one is Cardinal Tagli, who used to be Archbishop of Manila, is now in the Dicastery for Evangelization.
has been in Rome for a number of years, also somewhat of a right hand to Pope Francis. And so the question is with those people who are front runners, all these people that we have on that overview that was prepared by National Catholic Reporter,
Their names, we're not in the conclave. We say that these are frontrunners, but you have to remember one thing, that is whoever goes in the conclave as a Pope, comes out as a Cardinal. The favorite normally never wins.
So it's like with the horses, when you play on the horses, you have to be very careful with that. That's true. One more. There's been such a strong opposition, conservative theological kind of movement within the Catholic Church that they were not pleased with Francis and his leadership. Do they see this as an opportunity to push someone forward who could pull things back in the direction that they wanted?
are hoping for? People will always see that. And is there a bishop that represents that point of view? There are a number of those. There's Cardinal Sarah from Africa who represents that. There's Cardinal Müller from Germany. There's Cardinal Burke from the United States. But it's not what we hope for. We are not there. We don't have a seat at the table. It's the 133 cardinals that are entering the conclave who will be voting for the new pope.
And how they look at the church is going to be a determining factor. And that's not necessarily our analysis. And yes, Pope Francis was probably one of the most opposed popes in recent history. Most opposed. That's something people forget because we're in this moment of remembering him. But that there was opposition. There was opposition for his...
not doctrinal stance on things and actually pope francis never changed doctrine he only told us to be kind to one another which is ultimately the message of the gospel and that's what it is about we forget that this is not an election like on capitol hill or for the presidency we're electing the bishop of rome not we the cardinals are electing the bishop of rome and so it is a church event and that's why you mentioned earlier this book uh that's why it's a lot
It's accompanied by a lot of prayer, liturgy, et cetera. Don't ever forget that. Yes, yes. We're going to point that one more time. This is the book of prayer. Okay, this is what's leading everything. But then here are the rules. So it's actually about faith. It is about faith. It's ultimately about faith. It's absolutely true. It's about God. So I very much appreciate you being here, Kurt Martens. You're very welcome. He's a professor at the Catholic University of America.
All right, coming up on CNN this morning, India and Pakistan edge closer to war. There were airstrikes overnight. We're going to bring you the latest from the region and talk about Pakistan, which has vowed to respond. Plus, a new ban on fluoride goes into effect today in Utah. Are there other states that could follow? Let us pray then that the Holy Spirit, who in the last hundred years has given us a series of truly holy and great pontiffs,
will give us now a new Pope. The leader of the College of Cardinals there praying for guidance as the Catholic Church prepares to select a new leader. Good morning, everybody. I'm Audie Cornish. I want to thank you for joining me on CNN this morning. It's half past the hour on the East Coast, and here's what's happening right now.
133 cardinals from around the world will soon begin the conclave at the Sistine Chapel to elect a new pope. The first vote is expected to take place this afternoon. The world will then watch for black or white smoke signaling whether a pope has been chosen.
Meanwhile, jury selection in the criminal trial of Sean Combs could wrap up sometime today. Lawyers on both sides questioned dozens of prospective jurors to try and narrow down the pool to 12, along with alternates. Opening statements are set for next week. Plus this.
India launching strikes against what it's calling terrorist infrastructure in neighboring Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir. Now, Pakistan says at least 26 people have been killed in India's strikes. Dozens more have been injured.
India is defending the airstrike as proportionate response to last month's terror attack against tourists in India-administered Kashmir that left 26 people dead. It is blaming Pakistan for the terrorist attack, and Pakistan denies it had any involvement.
They focused on dismantling the terrorist infrastructure and disabling terrorists likely to be sent across to India. It was deemed essential that the perpetrators and planners of the 22nd April attack be brought to justice. This is a developing story, so we're going to turn to Nick Robertson, CNN's international diplomatic editor. He is in Pakistan's capital. Nick, what more are you learning there?
Well, the Pakistani government has had a national security meeting that involves senior government officials and senior security officials.
The Prime Minister speaking after that said that the army is authorised to act in self-defence with corresponding actions and he called on the army to avenge the loss of innocent Pakistani lives. Among the dead, we're told, is a three-year-old girl, a 16-year-old girl, an 18-year-old boy. It is, of course, emotionally charged when women and children are injured in these strikes.
India alleges, as you heard there, that this was a strike that was pre-empting a terrorist attack on them and has blamed Pakistan for being involved in that attack on the 22nd. India hasn't provided Pakistani officials, this was what we're told, with evidence that Pakistan was involved in that 22nd of April attack that killed 26 civilians. Neither of these so far provided evidence of
an imminent attack coming from Pakistan. What Pakistan did last night was take down, they say, five Indian fighter jets, at least wreckage of what appears to be one plane falling about 40 miles over the border on the Indian side of Kashmir. And I think it's worth just stating here that
The leader of a militant group in Pakistan, Jaish-e-Mohammed, said that 10 of his family members, including children, were killed in the strike. His most recent Telegram posting was a threat against India, and his group in 2019 claimed an attack that, again, spiked tensions there.
killing 40 Indian security people inside Indian-controlled Kashmir. So India hitting this group called Jaysh-e-Mohammed. Now, Pakistani officials say that one time there was support for that group, but that isn't the case now.
CNN International diplomatic editor Nick Robertson. Okay, with two nuclear armed powers on the brink of all-out war, where does this leave the U.S.? On the campaign trail, President Trump called for an end to the U.S. being the world's policeman. Here's what he's saying now about the unfolding situation between India and Pakistan.
No, it's a shame. We just heard about it just as we were walking in the doors of the Oval. They've been fighting for a long time. You know, they've been fighting for many, many decades and centuries, actually, if you really think about it. No, I just hope it ends very quickly. The group chat is back. You know, with this...
The reason why I want to talk about this is because I am very curious about what is America's role in the world in the era of America first foreign policy, right? Because it's one thing to say that on the campaign trail. It's another thing to say that when
Israel says it is going to conquer Gaza. Russia is now fully raining down strikes on Ukraine. And then an area of the world that a lot of people had hoped would simmer down has boiled over between India and Pakistan. The next question mark is China and Taiwan. And what is this administration's ideal?
idea about what our foreign policy should be. Well, it seems to me that this administration has strategically disengaged in many ways. We've shut down our soft power tools. Meaning gutting USAID? Yes, USAID and all the other elements of soft power. We also are imposing tariffs, which is also a form of disengagement. We're closing ourselves off in many ways.
And, of course, look what's happened with Ukraine and NATO and other key partners and allies. They think we are walking away. And in this case, historically, or at least since the Second World War, we tend to be more aligned with Pakistan. That has changed in recent years. We've grown closer to India. And so how do we navigate this now in this new reality of American disengagement and our shifting priorities and priorities?
And I believe right now we don't even have an ambassador to India. I have to check that. But Eric Garcetti, who had done it, stepped down in January. Daniela and Kristen, I want to bring you in because I feel like you have your finger on the pulse of sort of how people talk about this. You're polling. But you also understand in Congress, especially with Republicans, they have so moved away from this focus on, let's say, a Bush era war hawk focus on being a force.
for good in the world and enforcing good in the world. So in a moment like this, are we just kind of like, well, hope they work it out. So you're right that there has been a big shift in public opinion around this over the last decade or so, that we went from that post 9-11 view that America can do a lot of good for the world. We are best when we are engaged in projecting our power and promoting our values. And a lot of public opinion on right and left kind of curved
old in the wake of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and feeling like, well, when we try to do that, it doesn't necessarily work. And so right now, and you add to that concerns about the fiscal cost of any engagement, and there becomes a really high bar that voters are asking for us to meet in order to spend blood or treasure anywhere around the
world. And same with Congress. There's like a, isn't there a handful of like Navy SEALs who are now Republican lawmakers who have come to the forefront? Do you think that this is something that people are going to be, is foreign policy going to come back as a thing that they're talking about? I think it depends, to add to what Kristen was saying, if people, if voters feel it in their pockets.
This is the problem, is that they felt that they could not care about world issues because they were struggling to pay bills. And that's what led to what happened in the 2024 election, which is how Republicans gained their majority, which is why they don't think that they, they believe in an American first policy. And they think right now we're going to help the voters. We're going to help Americans be able to
to survive. And that's why we shouldn't care about what's happening across the world and these other issues. And that's the issue, the message that they're pushing in Congress. And especially when we're seeing legislation, as we were talking behind in the green room, changing
the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America. What are we focusing on? One last thing I want to bring up. Former President Biden did an interview, I think it was with the BBC, where he was asked about some of Trump's foreign policy moves in the opening day of his second term. And he brought up this idea of like, what are they focusing on mentioning the Gulf of America conversation? And the way we talk about now that, well, it's the Gulf of America. Maybe we're going to have to take back Panama.
Maybe we need to acquire Greenland. Maybe Canada should be... What the hell's going on here? What president ever talked like that? That's not who we are. We're about freedom, democracy, opportunity, not about confiscation.
To your point, Afghanistan was very much a difficult issue for Joe Biden, his handling there. But he's raising something, which is, what are we doing here? What are we focusing on? Who are we? I feel like, Charlie, you come from that era of the freedom, democracy, opportunity conversation with Republicans. Give the last word to you. Well, again, who are we?
Whoever thought we'd be talking about annexing Canada? I didn't hear that during the campaign. I thought the issue was going to be the economy. So I think, you know, Biden's on to something here, you know, going after Greenland, Canada, Panama. We're back to spheres of influence. That's what it feels like. I think we're all very uncomfortable with this. And frankly, I think many Republican members of Congress are very uncomfortable with this whole conversation about the annexation of Canada. Yeah, again, it's a what are we doing here moment? What?
What is the goal here? Absolutely. All right, guys, stay with us, group chat. We're going to be here for a few more minutes. First, I want to note that the Federal Reserve is set to announce its decision on interest rates today. It's widely expected to leave things where they are. That could still set the stage for another clash between the Fed Chairman Jerome Powell and the President because Trump has wanted him to cut interest rates.
Mortgage rates are actually down slightly, even though I have a guy in the Fed that I'm not a huge fan of, but that's all right. These are minor details. Don't tell him I said that, please. He should reduce interest rates. I think I understand interest a lot better than him.
So will the Fed chair bend to that pressure? I'm joined now by business journalist Robin Farzad, host of NPR's Full Disclosure podcast. OK, so I should note that the president has kind of backed off on just the like raw, vulgar insults of Jerome Powell, given market reaction. But can you talk about Trump's interest in cutting interest rates now?
What is it that he thinks that will do for the economy in this moment as his tariff policy is starting to take effect? - Who doesn't love interest rate cuts? I mean, it's a sugar rush. If there's weakness in the system, if there's consternation, if there are people that are worried about his banter with Canada, the back and forth with China, South America, Mexico,
interest rates have been the Fed's cure-all. The problem is that Jerome Powell is not working in service of Donald Trump. He has to keep inflation under control and full employment. And right now, inflation is the bigger concern.
We talked so much about inflation under the last president. Can you talk about what the concerns are now? Why the Fed would hold interest rates steady at this point? Because I think for the average person, they're kind of wondering, well, what does this mean for my loan rates if I want to buy a home, etc.?
You saw that the economy is still creating a great amount of jobs, more than 100,000 jobs monthly. I mean, it's been a really, really resilient comeback after the worst of COVID five years ago. And there are still wage pressures. There are still managers and restaurant owners and hospitality hotel workers that cannot get workers to show up.
up. And that is reflecting in wages and average hourly wages and inflation leading through to menu prices and inflation that consumers are still feeling at the store. They're feeling I mean, the impression is just everywhere. So the Fed really would want to arrest inflation before even getting into the full throated conversation about interest rates cuts, which are stimulative. Right. I mean, you do have weakness in the housing market. You have more inventory there. But do you really have to flood the plane with a lot of money right now?
So what are going to be the red flags? What would get them to do that rate cut? Let's see if the bluster can be muted by Donald Trump, if people can see that he's actually in more of a conciliatory mood. If you looked at Canada in the White House yesterday, it was kind of more charm and trollsmanship about annexing Canada as the 51st state. But there are situations with war. There are situations with consumer sentiment. If you see a credit,
explosion, some sort of banking crisis. That's the kind of thing that typically forces the Fed's hand, not Donald Trump saying, look, this guy that I appointed, I don't much care for him. All right. Thank you so much. Appreciate you this morning. Thank you, Adi.
Next on CNN this morning, countdown to conclave. As soon as this afternoon, the Catholic Church could have a new leader. We're going to dive into the top contenders. Plus, it's time to get real. Today is the deadline to have a real ID if you're planning to fly. So what happens if you don't have one? We're going to have more from the group chat as well. Stay with us. ♪
Right now, all eyes on the Vatican as the conclave is set to begin today. In just a few hours, 133 of the world's cardinals will walk into the Sistine Chapel and vote for their next leader. By early this afternoon, smoke could be billowing from the chimney of the chapel. By now you may know white smoke signals a new pope has been selected. Black smoke means there's going to be voting for another round.
So let's talk about the potential candidates here. CNN Vatican analyst Katie McGrady. Okay, so I've learned a couple things that the Cardinal actually appointed like 108 of the 133 Cardinals in the college and also that it takes a two-thirds of
a vote. Yeah, 89 votes. Who are the frontrunners? So I think it's a mix between are we going to get an Italian, because we haven't had an Italian since the 70s, and they might want it back. Right. Or are we going to see somebody maybe from the global south? Cardinal Tagliatelle's had a lot of chatter. I have my eyes on a couple of... Wait, come back to Cardinal Tagliatelle, because we've made... Yeah, so he's only 67. Archbishop of
and also Charity Network, which I think is in line with what we think of as Francis' legacy. - He was, he was in charge of Caritas. It's notable, there have been a few, you know somebody's maybe advancing in the pack when there are hit pieces, and he's had quite a few hit pieces from secular and some Catholic media in the past few days. - So all of a sudden there's criticism. - Exactly. - Okay. - And he was actually removed from his Caritas position, some say because of potential, oh maybe he doesn't have the chops to manage, but I think he's got the evangelistic spirit
and he certainly has a block of votes walking in there tonight. An Italian that you've mentioned, Cardinal Matteo Zuppi. Zuppi, yeah. So tell me about him, because he actually led a peace mission to Ukraine, and I'm sort of interested in these people who have a diplomatic energy, because Francis was very, you know, into the travel. He was, and Francis would give people he liked
a task and he sent Zupi as an envoy and said, look, I want you to try to broker peace. Zupi actually came to the States and met with the Biden administration to talk about peace and to talk about efforts. And I think it's notable, the Cardinals give a lot of communiques over the course of their meetings.
And you can kind of read between the lines and then listen to some of the chatter. One of the last messages they sent to us from the general congregations was about peace in the world, specifically asking people to pray for peace. And I read that and thought, "Hmm, maybe we're on the verge of a Papa Pache, right? A Pope Peace who can step into the world as this moral voice." Another figure to watch in that lane then would be, and his name is so much fun to say, Cardinal Pierre Battista Pizzaballa.
It's a mouthful. If he chose Pope John, we'd have a Papa John. And I'm glad that you've made the connection. I've thought about this a lot. I appreciate that. But Pete Zabala has been in Jerusalem for a long time. He's a biblical scholar. He offered to take the place of the hostages in Gaza. He's been a man who has been able to
deftly work through some of those challenges in that area. I think they would very much miss him if he were to be brought over to Rome and maybe he would be too destabilizing if we lost him. He's also quite young, but those are the guys I've got my eyes on. One more thing. This is not Conclave the movie. Can we just say that folks? Stop downloading Conclave. Okay. Great film. But like, I shouldn't say that I watched it last night in my hotel.
Did you watch it and think, now I'm prepared? No, I've more intensely watched. In the two weeks running up to this, we've had an NFL draft, the Kentucky Derby, and the Met Gala. Throw that all together and add in the Holy Spirit and you get the conclave. That's what's about to happen. See, we can't do better than that. Touchdown. CNN Vatican analyst Katie McGrady, thank you for being here. And it's now 54 minutes past the hour. Here's your morning roundup.
Starting today, if you want to board a domestic flight, your state-issued photo ID must be Real ID compliant. So you'll know if your driver's license or ID card is good to go if it has a star in the upper right-hand corner. For now, if you don't have that type of ID, you will still be allowed to fly, but you may face additional screening and delays.
Weight Watchers has filed for bankruptcy. The company revolutionized dieting for millions since its founding in 1963, but it's struggled to compete in recent years with weight loss drugs like Ozempic. Weight Watchers says that its services for members will continue and will not be impacted.
And Utah's ban on fluoride in public drinking water is now in effect. Dental health organizations have warned this could lead to medical problems that disproportionately affect low-income communities. On Tuesday, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis said he plans to sign a similar fluoride ban in Florida. And that would take effect this summer.
Now, there's some resistance from House Republicans on the president's Gulf of America push, as some lawmakers now say they're planning to oppose a bill formalizing the name when it hits the House floor later this week. Nebraska Republican Don Bacon told CNN, quote, It just seems juvenile. We're the United States of America. We're not Kaiser Wilhelm's Germany or Napoleon's France. It's just that we're better than this. It just sounds like a sophomore thing to do.
That's not stopping Trump or the bill's backers from trying to push it through. This legislation recognizes the strategic influence America has over this geography, not to mention the existing economic, cultural, and commercial might that we passively exert on the Gulf.
Group chat is back. I mean, Don Bacon pretty much said it in the most direct way possible. Is Don Bacon alone? He's not. There's a handful of moderate Republicans who feel that there's bigger issues happening right now in the House, Adi, that they should be focused on. We were talking about this in the world. But the biggest issue is, of course, that massive reconciliation budget problem.
bill that they're trying to pass with just Republican votes. And while they're discussing potentially cutting Medicaid to a lot of Americans, they're voting on this bill on Thursday to rename the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America. And that's why these Republicans are incredibly frustrated. You could speak to this just as well as I can, talking to them every day.
why they think this shouldn't be something that they're voting on, especially with a light voting schedule already. I know. But when the president came in, he did all these executive orders. He was really feeling himself, right? You can do a lot. And then all of a sudden, you got to actually deal with Congress to codify these things that you want to do, big and small. Charlie, I'm still talking, but your face is just saying so much here.
Is Don Bacon alone and will others join him? No, Don Bacon is not alone and amen to Don Bacon. Yeah, as you just pointed out, Danielle, the economy, tariffs, the world's on fire. And here we are talking about renaming the Gulf. That's what we all call it, the Gulf, right? I mean, it's the Gulf of Mexico. I'm not sure we're allowed to call it anything else. But seriously, I mean, with all these issues happening,
I mean, this is a distraction from the very real challenges that Congress needs to deal with right now. I thought of it as like a power move, right? The president comes in and says, I can do whatever I want, which I think he told Time magazine. I'm going to say it's this and now it's this.
Does this opposition mean anything or is this really just like low hanging fruit? It's the easiest thing for them to oppose without consequences. Well, it's a very, very, very low priority to your average voter. And so that both means that it's a way for someone to say, I oppose it.
not because I'm anti-Trump, but just let's focus on other things. I mean, I believe that this was part of Donald Trump's inaugural address. And I remember at the time thinking, this feels very small. In a big moment, in a big moment in American history, this just feels kind of small. And so I... But isn't it like a two plus two is five kind of thing? Like if you get people...
to do this thing that you want, then it makes other kinds of initiatives easier. You know, the Delaware River separates Pennsylvania and New Jersey. Maybe we should call it the Pennsylvania River. Or, you know, the Delaware Bay. I'm in New Jersey. You know, it's a New Jersey Bay. I mean,
what this is ridiculous that we're having this kind of a conversation I think people think we're losing our minds and we we do this one when there are really consequential things that have to be dealt with so I mean they need to move on from this and I can see why a lot of republicans like Don Bacon are very uncomfortable with yeah you can hear them kind of throwing up their hands both psychologically metaphorically it will literally
I'm sorry we don't have time to talk about what we're keeping an eye on. I think the big thing to keep an eye on is the chimney at the Sistine Chapel, basically, in terms of the next leader of the Vatican, you know, which is the next president.
head of state and head of a church of 1.4 billion. So as we heard today, there could be multiple rounds of voting in that conversation, but that is in fact our collective keep an eye on it. You told us not to watch the movie, but even reportedly Politico EU is reporting that
There are members of the College of Cardinals watching the movie for tips. Oh my God, what is life? Okay, thanks to the group chat. Thank you for waking up with us. I'm Adi Cornish, and you're going to get the headlines with CNN News Central, which starts right now. On the Fear Thy Neighbor podcast from ID, we explore true stories told by the victims and their families and discover what can happen when even the most petty neighborhood disputes escalate to horrific heights and pass the point of no return. Ah!
I knew something very dark was going on and something very bad was going to happen. What happens when the person you fear the most is living right next door? I never would have thought it would have ended that way. Listen to Fear Thy Neighbor wherever you get your podcasts.