'These are the facts': CNN host battles Trump official blaming SNAP on 'radical left judges'

CNN anchor Pamela Brown and Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins, Image via Screengrab / CNN.

CNN anchor Pamela Brown had a difficult time keeping Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins on track and answering questions on a Thursday interview with “The Situation Room.”

One point of contention was whether the Trump administration could indeed move federal money to fund SNAP food for low-income and impoverished families for a year, as ordered by a Rhode Island judge.

“I’m just reading through the court filings, the judge also said … that there was money available in another funding pots like the one that was used for $750 million transferred to WIC,” Brown told Rollins. “… This judge said you didn't do that. You didn't use that. You could have to fully fund SNAP, and you fought it all the way to the Supreme Court.”

“Okay, let's talk about that,” said Rollins. “That judge in Rhode Island is the largest Democrat donor—”

Brown attempted to pull her back to the question but Rollins insisted “Well, it's important.”

“This was a radical left judge who decided that we could take money — listen, there was a ‘No Kings’ rally, but then, all of a sudden, a radical left judge in Rhode Island, of all places, says, ‘oh no, but please make yourself king and find that money out of the clear blue sky and redirect it into the SNAP program.'"

“But there was $23 billion in Section 32 for the child nutrition program. And so this judge says that $4 billion could have been moved from that Section 32 fund to fully fund SNAP. Is that accurate facts?”

“No, that is not facts,” said Rollins. “That money is congressionally authorized. If we had used that money, it would have taken food out of the mouths of school children that came from an entirely different pot of money, non-congressionally authorized.”

“I just want to go back on this because in reading through the court cases ... the government did admit to the judge, and this was, I believe, the judge in Boston, that, yes, it could have dipped into this child nutrition fund that was an available option. This fund, again, had $23 billion in it, right? And even if you took out $4 billion to fully fund SNAP, that pot of money would still feed children through next year," Brown explained.

“Are we serious right now?” demanded Rollins. “Are we really talking about moving billions of dollars from one pot to another to feed children through next year, when the Democrats 15 different times voted not to?”

“I understand you want to keep it on Democrats, but what about the children that are hungry now because they didn't get the full SNAP?” Brown asked.

“Well, they should understand that the Democrats are the ones that are keeping — they even admitted it. ‘This is our greatest leverage point. If planes fall out of the sky, that may be what it takes.’ It was one thing after another, Pamela … I mean, for you to try to put this back on ‘this court said that and this left-leaning judge said that, and you guys, you guys should move this.’ It's completely a false narrative.”

“That's why I'm asking you,” said Brown. “These are just the facts. These are in court cases. This is what the USDA has previously said from the 2019 shutdown.”

From Your Site Articles