Return to Transcripts main page

The Lead with Jake Tapper

Trump Parrots Putin, Falsely Calls Zelenskyy A "Dictator"; Trump Increases White House Control Of Independent Agencies; Hearing Wraps As DOJ Tries To Drop Corruption Case Against New York City Mayor Eric Adams; RFK Jr. Will "Investigate" Childhood Vaccine Schedule. Aired 4-5p ET

Aired February 19, 2025 - 16:00   ET

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

[16:00:00]

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: She's adorable.

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: And the reason they called it in to the animal control. Because cake, you know, as you know, as a dog owner is very dangerous for dogs and other animals.

They were so concerned they thought, oh, my God, have we poisoned this possum? So they called it in. And unbeknownst to them, they saved the life of the possum for some other reason.

SANCHEZ: Sounds like a heck of a Friday night. Good time.

KEILAR: THE LEAD WITH JAKE TAPPER starts right now.

(MUSIC)

JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: The word of the day, dictator.

THE LEAD starts right now.

President Trump slapping Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskyy with the title of dictator, but applying no such label on Vladimir Putin who has ruled Russia with an iron fist for more than 20 years. Trump also is pushing a Kremlin lie that Ukraine started the war. The remarks have even some Republicans calling him out.

Plus fired, only to be rehired. What's really going on with critical government workers? Who is overseeing this chaotic termination process? Is it time for Congress to step in and provide some oversight?

And, fresh on the job, HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.'s pledge already to examine childhood vaccines. What parents need to be on the look out for before any changes come to a community near you.

(MUSIC)

TAPPER: Welcome to THE LEAD. I'm Jake Tapper. And we begin today with President Trump seeming to upend the domestic and global world order. Let's start with the global world order. This morning, President Trump sending shockwaves throughout Europe when he called Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy a, quote, dictator parroting Russian talking points. This comes on the heels of President Trump falsely accusing Ukraine of starting the war and invasion of Ukraine, and excluding Ukraine, from the peace talks held in Saudi Arabia earlier this week between Russia and the United States.

This is more than just upending the normal way of doing things. This is more than him just breaking with tradition. He's breaking with facts. He's breaking with truth. And in some ways, he's breaking with basic decency. Just as we saw the president look at these images from January 6th and decide, ultimately, that the people beating up the cops are patriots and the FBI agents and prosecutors who went after the cop beaters where -- they were the bad guys.

The president is once again falsely casting Ukraine, the victim of an aggressive and bloody territorial seizure, as the aggressor. And Zelenskyy, who did suspend elections while his country is in the middle of the fight for its life, as permitted by his country's constitution, President Trump called Zelenskyy a dictator, while former KGB officer Vladimir Putin, whose political opponents have a habit of ending up in prison or the morgue -- well, President Trump uses no such words for him.

Back here in the United States, the president making a power grab with a brand new executive order aiming to put all government agencies, even those that are supposed to operate with a degree of independence, under closer control of him and the White House. The order outlining that as of now, all government agencies must consult with the president on their priorities and strategic plans, with the White House calling out certain agencies such as the Federal Trade Commission and the Securities and Exchange Commission, for operating without presidential oversight.

Let's bring in CNN's Jeff Zeleny and Rene Marsh for this story.

Jeff, let's start with Russia. That was a wild Truth Social post from the president today, calling Ukrainian President Zelenskyy elected, calling him a dictator on top of his comments yesterday.

JEFF ZELENY, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Jake, in a bit of context on that, President Trump was traveling from Mar-a-Lago to his golf resort here in Miami as he sent out that message, really re- upping and re, you know, resetting western alliances but and already suspicious and fraught relationship between Donald Trump and Volodymyr Zelenskyy. It really escalated mightily with Trump calling him a dictator. But also that was in reaction clearly to Vladimir Zelenskyy saying that he is getting misinformation and disinformation from Russia.

But I am told by aides to the president, the American president, that he was furious by that remark and furious at the notion that he's being fed talking points by Vladimir Putin. But, Jake, that is exactly how this is all played out. We've seen it with our own eyes. And it really is escalated ever since that phone call one week ago with Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump have, as they reset the Russia- U.S. relationship or worked toward it. They have also reset the U.S. Ukrainian relationship and simply pushed them to the outside.

But Vice President J.D. Vance, in a new interview today, is defending his boss in scolding Vladimir Zelenskyy.

[16:05:07]

Take a look at this. He says the idea that Zelenskyy is going to change the president by badmouthing him in public media. Everyone who knows the president will tell you that is an atrocious way to deal with this administration.

The stakes are too serious, obviously, to say who started it first, but it was not Vladimir Zelenskyy who started this first. Jake, it clearly was President Trump in that meeting in Saudi Arabia. Ironically, President Trump will be here in Miami delivering remarks in the next hour to a Saudi sovereign wealth investment conference. Of course, Saudi Arabia is at the center of this new reset U.S.-Russia relationship.

TAPPER: And, Jeff, turning back to Trump's executive order, what is he trying to do by putting all government agencies under closer, closer presidential control?

It's as simple as expanding presidential power, expanding presidential authority. We have seen it really through the first few weeks of this administration. As we finish the first month of the new Trump administration. But this is the most sweeping order of all.

He signed that executive order at Mar-a-Lago yesterday, late afternoon, without much fanfare. He talked about signing the order for IVF. He did not talk about specifically about this.

But Jake, this has far more reaching effects because all of those quasi-independent agencies like the FCC, the SEC, the National Labor Relations Board, they have always operated under a mandate from Congress, but with some level of independence from the administration. That is no more under this executive order, if the president gets his way, and surely this will end up in the Supreme Court or elsewhere. But this is a major power move, adding to the ones we've already seen by firing some officials on top of these agencies. But this would bring them all under the White Houses authority, which is not how Congress drafted any of this, Jake.

TAPPER: Yeah. And, Rene -- Rene Marsh, who covers regulatory agencies for us and the administration, when President Trump says he wants to have more control over these regulatory agencies such as the FCC, what does that look like practically?

RENE MARSH, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Right. So this executive order dramatically, dramatically changes the DNA of just how government works. Now under this executive order, it now states that agencies have to submit draft legislation to the White House for review. They have to consult with the White House on the agency's priorities and strategy.

The White House has to set agencies performance, status and standards. Russell Vought, who is the head of the Office of Management and Budget and also coauthor of Project 2025 -- well, he will be the one to decide how agencies spend money, potentially limiting the spending of money that Congress has already approved, and only the White House and the attorney general will be able to interpret laws that the agencies base their rules and regulations on.

And one more, these agencies must set up White House liaison offices to regularly consult and coordinate policies and priorities with the White House. So, for example, the Federal Election Commission, which is independent of presidential control so that it can serve its election integrity mission without political influence. This executive order would change that. And the Federal Trade Commission, which Jeff just spoke about, and the SEC, they are charged with defending consumer and investor rights and protecting market integrity. These are agencies that are supposed to be able to do their duties without political pressure from big corporations. This order would chip away at that independence, Jake.

TAPPER: All right. Rene Marsh and Jeff Zeleny, thanks to you.

With us now, former federal prosecutor Elliot Williams. Also joining us, CNN's Kasie Hunt, who's going to anchor a brand new show starting March 3rd, right at this time slot, "THE ARENA WITH KASIE HUNT" as THE LEAD slides to the 5:00 hour.

Kasie, as I said before, welcome to 4:00.

KASIE HUNT, CNN HOST, THE ARENA WITH KASIE HUNT: It's an honor to be the lead into THE LEAD.

TAPPER: And I -- and I hope that -- I hope you find our viewers as lovely as I have. What are you hearing from your sources about Trump's plan here to expand executive authority? Is there any degree of shock and surprise behind the scenes?

HUNT: Yeah, I think the reaction has been one that we have seen kind of unfolding. It feels like it's simultaneously incredibly fast. You can't keep up. And also slow rolling through the entirety of the federal government. I don't think that the people that I've talked to haven't been surprised necessarily that this is something that Trump would do. This is how he has been acting, how he often acts.

But the ramifications of it, I think, are pretty shocking to people.

TAPPER: And, Elliot, first of all, is this executive order? You heard Jeff talk about this probably is going to end up before the U.S. Supreme Court. And he's doing a lot of this. He's testing the limits, all legal. And he's seeing how whether the U.S. Supreme Court will side with him and his expansive view of executive power.

Do you think that this executive authority is going to pass muster with the U.S. Supreme Court?

[16:10:03]

ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: I do -- well, that last clause at the end with the U.S. Supreme Court, that's the tricky one because of the expansive view of executive power that several of the justices have. Certainly, Justice Kavanaugh, Justice Gorsuch, to an extent, they really have a notion of this idea.

HUNT: Justice Roberts, right?

WILLIAMS: And Justice Roberts, in many respects, too, this idea of the unitary executive, a powerful president that has the power to hire and fire people at will. I don't think it's lawful, simply because Congress has been quite explicit that many of these agencies ought to be independent. That's why they set up a scheme where you take the FCC communications.

The commissioners are appointed by presidents of different parties. That system has existed for a long time to maintain a level of independence and not tie to one president. And so, no, I do not think this is proper in any way. And it's certainly going to be challenged in the courts.

TAPPER: And, Kasie, I want to show what the White House posted on Twitter, X today. It's a fake cover of "Time Magazine" showing Trump wearing a crown. And it says, long live the king. He seems it seems like he's trying to invoke a reaction from his detractors.

HUNT: Yeah. He'll be back. Can't you see?

WILLIAMS: Oh!

TAPPER: Yeah, very nice, little Hamilton ref.

HUNT: I mean, its' -- yeah, clearly. I mean, this is -- Donald Trump does this right to try to get a rise out of people. They would call it Trump derangement syndrome and the reaction.

I still think it's -- just the image itself is incredibly remarkable, right, that you would put that out there and you would be the president of the United States and this would be something that would be seen as something that would be politically favorable to you. I mean, that's the part of this that just blows my mind.

WILLIAMS: Forgive me for being the lawyer at the garden party here, but -- but specifically the king image, the point behind why Congress is the first branch of government in the constitution is that America set up its government to avoid having kings. It is not a joke for the president of the United States to appear with a crown, because this is how we were built as a nation, but let me reject that.

TAPPER: Well, let me ask you a question, though, okay? On this, the day he posts this and I'm not taking the bait personally, but on the day he posts this, when this executive order goes before the U.S. Supreme Court, I find it hard to believe that somebody opposing the president isn't going to point to it and say, this is what this is about, this executive theory, the theory of the all powerful executive. Can't it be used against him in this, in the court?

WILLIAMS: I think so, and I think what the court relies on is this is not what the framers intended, number one. And number two, this is not what Congress, a co-equal branch of government, intended. Congress crafted --

TAPPER: You keep talking about Congress. What is Congress?

WILLIAMS: I know, I don't know.

TAPPER: Is this Congress -- it's this group of feckless individuals that is technically elected.

WILLIAMS: Other than a few Democrats here and there. Like I am amazed at the eunuch brigade we have on Capitol Hill. They're just allowing their power to be run over roughshod.

HUNT: Jake, you know, I feel like I want to say I never thought I'd see the day. But having been up on Capitol Hill for years, for the entirety of the first Trump administration, before that, since then, I'm actually not. This has been something that has been happening for years.

TAPPER: Less work, less work for them.

HUNT: Congress, essentially -- honestly, it's driven. It's driven from a place of them being afraid to make tough decisions that then put their own political hides on the line.

I mean, Democrats did it when Obama wanted their permission to, you know, strike back when his red line was crossed in Syria. And they wouldn't do it because they didn't want to be on the hook for their voters, their primary voters who didn't want them to start another war, and obviously, under Trump --

TAPPER: But this is the opposite.

HUNT: It's totally different.

TAPPER: This is -- Obama was escape -- trying to escape, having to make a tough decision for strikes against Syria by giving it to Congress.

HUNT: Right, and I'm saying that they looked at that and they said, I don't want that opportunity.

TAPPER: Right, right.

HUNT: Right?

And they're doing the same thing.

TAPPER: The cowardice is the same. The cowardice is the same.

HUNT: They're doing the same thing.

TAPPER: Yeah.

WILLIAMS: Let's also remember there's three branches of government in this three ring government. We have, Schoolhouse Rock, and -- and I'm fascinated by if this comes to the Supreme Court, how John Roberts regards encroachments on the Supreme Courts authority, if anything, yes, they will be --

HUNT: That will be so intriguing.

WILLIAMS: It'll be so intriguing because John Roberts, more than anybody else, has been a proponent of the idea that the court's integrity ought not be damaged or tarnished or stepped on by the president of United States. And I am genuinely curious about strong precedent versus stepping on our authority.

TAPPER: I will say, the strong president theory only functions when you also have a strong legislative branch. That's the whole idea and judiciary -- judicial branch. But I mean, that's the idea behind it anyway.

HUNT: It's also built on the idea that the president, that the American people are going to pick a president that has a certain set of beliefs about the system itself, right?

TAPPER: Kasie Hunt, Elliot Williams, thank you so much.

And don't forget to look out for Kasie's new show. It's "THE ARENA WITH KASIE HUNT" debuts in this time slot, 4:00 p.m. Eastern on Monday, March 3rd. That's two Mondays from now.

THE LEAD is also on the move. We're going to slide an hour later. We're going to be on the air from 5:00 to 7:00 p.m. Eastern every weekday, only here on CNN.

These days, Republicans are so quick to side with Trump.

[16:15:00]

But will they let him slide on that morning post calling Zelenskyy a dictator and all the suggestions that Ukraine started the war on themselves? Hear what many Republican members of Congress are saying.

Plus, federal employees who work on a veterans crisis hotline fired but rehired. A Purple Heart vet turned U.S. senator will join next with her reaction.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. JOHN KENNEDY (R-LA): Vladimir Putin is a gangster. He's a gangster with a black heart. I don't -- he makes a -- he makes a Jeffrey Dahmer look like Mother Teresa.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: That was Republican Senator John Kennedy from Louisiana, among the Republican lawmakers publicly stating that they disagree with President Trump over his false assertion that Ukraine started the war on Ukraine.

Let's go right to CNN chief congressional correspondent Manu Raju on Capitol Hill.

Manu, we shouldn't overstate the case. There are some Republicans who are siding firmly with Trump.

MANU RAJU, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, no question about it. This is a party divided, but it is also the biggest rift that Donald Trump has opened up with his own party since the beginning of his second term.

[16:20:04]

Republicans pushing back, not just only over that false notion that it was Ukraine that started this war, but also the rosy assessment that Donald Trump gave Vladimir Putin and also calling President Zelenskyy of Ukraine, calling him a dictator. That caused a lot of pushback today on Capitol Hill.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: He called him a dictator, Zelenskyy a dictator.

SEN. THOM TILLIS (R-NC): I didn't hear that. I'll let other people use their words. It's not a word I would have used.

RAJU: He says Putin wants peace. Do you think Putin wants peace?

TILLIS: Putin wants to dictate the world and re-inspire the Russian empire. And he doesn't get that from me.

RAJU: Is it accurate that Ukraine started the war?

SEN. KEVIN CRAMER (R-ND): It's clearly not. I mean, it is so clear that Vladimir Putin, a dictator who wants to reassemble this Soviet Union or his version of it.

RAJU: They took off Ukraine's NATO membership off the table. Was that a good idea?

CRAMER: Well, I don't think so. I wouldn't start eliminating leverage this early. But again, he's the guy that wrote the book.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: But some Republicans clearly aligning themselves with Trump in the aftermath of tens of billions of dollars, really, more than $100 billions of dollars in U.S. aid going to Ukraine. Senators like Eric Schmitt of Missouri say no more money should go. Where is that money going right now? Others, like Tommy Tuberville of Alabama, saying that he believes,

quote, both sides are to blame for what's happened in Ukraine. And Senator John Thune, the Republican leader of the United States Senate, sidestepped questions about Trump's rhetoric, did not pull -- did not attack. Trump, in fact, pulled his punches and said when I asked him directly if he was concerned about any of this rhetoric, Jake, he said, I think what I'm -- what I'm in support of is a peaceful outcome and result in Ukraine. And he said it should give the Trump administration space to achieve that outcome -- Jake.

TAPPER: All right. Manu Raju, thanks so much.

Let's turn now to Democratic Senator Tammy Duckworth of Illinois. She's a member of the Committee on Veterans Affairs and also served honorably in Iraq.

Senator, I do want to talk to you about the firings at the Department of Veterans Affairs. But I do also want to get your reaction to President Trump calling the Ukrainian president Zelenskyy a, quote, dictator and suggesting over the last few days that this war was started by Ukraine.

SEN. TAMMY DUCKWORTH (D-IL): I mean, he is parroting Vladimir Putin's talking points, and it's a complete betrayal of the Ukrainian people, of American leadership and our values. I never thought in the 23 years I served in the military that I would hear the commander in chief of the United States military parroting a Russian talking points, and really, you know, it is astonishing to me that he would also betray our allies in Europe in this way and pave the way for Putin.

He essentially has just surrendered to Putin. And that simply is not acceptable.

TAPPER: On to the topic at hand. The Department of Veterans Affairs has rehired roughly a dozen people who worked on the veterans crisis hotline after the department fired about 1,000 workers last week. Now, you think that these 11 or 12 workers were targeted because of their probationary status, even though they'd been in their jobs for a while, but because of their hiring, preference given to veterans.

Is that what happened? Did you get any answers earlier today when you asked about this?

DUCKWORTH: We're still waiting our way through it. I do know that what happens a lot is that federal government, one agency will hire a veteran from a different agency using veterans preference because they can then hire them on, basically, they're shifting from one federal job to another federal job.

And so then they get labeled as -- as probationary. And then -- so at least two of the veterans who are from Illinois, one, I believe, had five years of federal service, the other had something like 18 years of federal service. And yet they were fired.

And I don't know how many more across the nation were fired, but at least about a dozen that I know of personally that that came, you know, that I heard of through my offices. And they were told -- at least I was told that they were being reinstated. But as of this morning, they had not regained access to their employee portals yet.

And remember that these are the folks who are answering the crisis hotline, that veterans who are contemplating suicide come. And it is really unconscionable that they would lay off these particular employees and, you know, because their -- their job is so vital.

TAPPER: So the direction -- the directive being given by the Office of Personnel Management, put out there by, by DOGE, the Department of Government Efficiency from Elon Musk or whoever's running it, is that probationary employees should be laid off unless they're providing critical services. It's hard to think of something more critical than people trying to prevent our veterans from taking their own lives.

DUCKWORTH: Exactly. And this is the problem you have when you put, you know, folks who don't know what they're talking about in charge of this process.

[16:25:05]

Elon Musk doesn't -- doesn't understand veterans. He doesn't understand the Department of Veterans Affairs or the services it provides.

And then when you have a bunch of coders, you know, 20 year old coders that you put in there and say, okay, just search for the word probationary and fire everyone that's probationary without going through a proper review process. This is what you get.

They did something similar with the air traffic control system. Just so you know, a couple of weeks ago, they sent a letter to air traffic controllers right when there was that crash here in Washington, D.C., telling them, go ahead and quit your jobs, inviting air traffic controllers, air traffic controllers, shortage to quit their jobs. And now they've done it with veterans.

And so we know about the hotline, folks. But what this is going to do with the Department of Veterans Affairs in particular, is a lot of these folks actually work in the benefits portion of V.A., where they help veterans access their benefits. And so veterans are going to see their access to their benefits that they've earned slowed down because of people working to help them get that access has just been laid off.

TAPPER: Senator Tammy Duckworth, Democrat of Illinois, thank you. And thank you for your service.

DUCKWORTH: Thank you.

TAPPER: Federal hearing just wrapped up as the Justice Department is trying to get corruption charges dismissed against New York City Mayor Eric Adams in an alleged quid pro quo. Will the judge go along with the Trump plan? We're going to go live to the courthouse, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:30:49]

TAPPER: Our law and justice lead now. Moments ago, New York Mayor Eric Adams came out of this major court hearing over the Justice Department's request to drop corruption charges against him.

The Justice Department's attempt is being called and appears to be, although they deny it, a quid pro quo with the mayor. Charges dropped in exchange for him helping the Trump administration enforce deportation raids against undocumented migrants in the city. It's called -- caused at least eight prosecutors to resign, and I think four assistants to the mayor. People are so upset about it.

CNN's Paula Reid was at the federal hearings in New York.

And, Paula, any surprises from the hearing? And did the judge give any suggestion on -- on how he might rule?

PAULA REID, CNN CHIEF LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Yeah. Jake, I think the biggest surprise was that throughout the hearing, the judge was clear that he has a little discretion here to reject this motion, to dismiss. And even though he didn't make a formal decision, he signaled throughout the hearing that he is likely to grant this. Now, this is a Biden appointed judge, a relatively inexperienced judge. But he had a lot of questions for the Justice Department and for Mayor Adams' defense attorneys.

He grilled Emil Bove, who is the acting deputy attorney general, who put this all in motion about what was behind this decision. And Bove said, again, as he has said before, that he stressed prosecutorial discretion. He said he had questions about the decision to actually charge Mayor Adams, and also said that he believes that this criminal case hanging over the mayor prevents him from doing his job.

But the judge pushed back and said, well, then how are you going to prosecute a corruption? Because wont this always be a concern? For example, with the police commissioner, if that individual is charged, wont that case interfere with their job?

He also pressed Adams' lawyers to do -- confirm that this is not a quid pro quo, a quid pro quo. One of the lawyers actually volunteered to put his right hand up and testify under oath that it was not.

Now, at the end of the hearing, the judge said that he will likely move quickly. He said it's not in anyone's interest to have this hanging out here, but this is the biggest test so far of how much leeway the federal judiciary will give the Trump Justice Department. But it appears that it is very likely that Trump DOJ will win here.

TAPPER: Yeah. Quid pro quo. Tough to say in zero degree weather, especially.

Paula Reid, thank you so much. Appreciate it.

I want to bring in criminal defense attorney Stacy Schneider and Mimi Rocah. She's a former district attorney for Westchester County, outside New York City, and a former prosecutor for the Southern District of New York.

Stacy, let me start with you.

How notable was it to you that Acting Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove and Mayor Eric Adams attorney, doubled down both of them, asserting there is no quid pro quo?

STACY SCHNEIDER, CRIMINAL DEFENSE TRIAL ATTORNEY: It was fascinating because Emil Bove's basic argument to the judge was, judge, you just put Mayor Adams under oath, and he swore under oath that there was no quid pro quo and he wasn't made any promises underlying this motion to dismiss. And I'm telling you, Judge, that there is no quid pro quo here. My Latin is getting messed up today.

So therefore, you should just dismiss this and we should just carry on. And that's a pretty weak argument. But knowing what's out in the public and knowing that there was this memo from Emil Bove advising the Southern District or ordering them to dismiss the charges, not based on the facts that the grand jury heard when they handed up an indictment, but based on Mayor Adams' willingness and availability to enact Trump's immigration policies, that they should dismiss the case.

And that, as we all have been discussing for the past few days, caused the resignation of the head of that office, Danielle Sassoon, the head of the U.S. attorneys office for the southern district. In protest, as well as all these other U.S. attorneys, all eight of them who protested, because this is just so shady and inappropriate on -- on behalf of the Justice Department.

TAPPER: Yeah. And just to -- just to be clear, Bove, in his memo that you just referred to and that Paula referred to, he said that the charges should be dropped, not because Eric Adams is innocent or not because there was any problem with the prosecution in terms of like, procedure.

[16:35:07]

This is because it improperly interferes with his campaign and because, as you noted, Stacey, that it undermines or restricts his ability to devote his full attention to the illegal immigration and violent crime that escalated during the Biden administration.

And, Mimi, during the hearing, Bove reiterated that. He said, frankly, I think the fact that Mayor Adams is sitting to my left right now is part of the problem. He's not able to be outrunning the city and campaigning. So I think that this motion is actual interference, unquote.

I mean, I guess maybe there's just some part of this that I'm missing, Mimi. But wouldn't that apply to any politician being accused of corruption? That this could be -- involved, this could interfere in his or her reelection campaign, and he can't do his job if he's in court.

MIMI ROCAH, FORMER DISTRICT ATTORNEY, WESTCHESTER COUNTY, NY: Yeah, Jake, absolutely. It would apply to any not only elected official, but public official, like a police commissioner, which the judge actually asked Bove about. Does that mean that if a police commissioner commits in any city, commits something, you know, highly illegal, they cant be prosecuted because or even charged because it would interfere with their ability to protect, you know, the city that they're in charge of.

It makes zero sense. And it's really -- we're seeing such a rotating number of excuses that show how made up every one of them are from the Trump DOJ. I mean, you also had a posting today from another DOJ official saying, well, the case is really just very weak and we would have a hard time the case against Adams. But then you have Bove saying again in court, as he did in his letters. No, it's not based on the merits.

I mean, what they really want and what Bove actually said to the judge, he said, even if you could find a quid pro quo, I still don't think you really have the discretion to dismiss it. They're essentially saying we can do what we want, no matter how corrupt it is.

And you know what? The judge very well may not dismiss it because, as everyone has said, the standard for him to do so is extraordinarily high. It's a high bar, and he doesn't have a lot in the record here.

He could order a hearing and he could allow people to bring other things into the record. And I do think that would be the best thing, but I'm not sure it will happen.

TAPPER: All right. Mimi Rocah, Stacy Schneider, thanks to both of you. Appreciate it.

Coming up next, Elon Musk trying to set the record straight on DOGE, the Department of Government Efficiency. What Mr. Musk claims the main function is, and exactly what the DOGE team is trying to do.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:42:01]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ELON MUSK, TECH BILLIONAIRE: One of the biggest functions of the DOGE team is just making sure that the presidential executive orders are actually carried out. And this is -- I just want to point out, this is a very important thing because the president is the elected representative of the people. So he's representing the will of the people.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: In our money lead, the world's richest man, Elon Musk, defining his role in the Trump administration. Mr. Musk claims to be using DOGE, the Department of Government Efficiency, to simply cut government waste and enforce President Trump's orders.

Joining us now to discuss, CNN contributor Kara Swisher.

And, Kara, I want to play another moment with Musk -- Musk and Trump --

KARA SWISHER, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Sure.

TAPPER: -- praising each other on Fox last night. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEAN HANNITY, FOX NEWS HOST: If you read and believe the media, he's become one of your best friends. He's working for free for you. He's --

MUSK: Well, I love the president. I want to be clear about that.

HANNITY: You don't care about that.

MUSK: No, I love the pre --

HANNITY: You love the president.

MUSK: I think -- I think President Trump is a good man.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Okay, so --

SWISHER: Yeah.

TAPPER: He said it. He's --

SWISHER: He's like --

TAPPER: Go ahead.

SWISHER: Yeah. It's like a sequel to I love you, man, but bad -- like a bad one. It feels like a buddy comedy. It's very -- it's a very -- it's rom-com in some way, although it's not funny. It's very -- it's a very strange -- I thought -- I thought George Bush, if I used his term, that was -- that was weird. That was --

TAPPER: Some weird S. Yeah.

SWISHER: Some weird stuff, yeah, yeah.

TAPPER: So Musk said earlier, I ran the clip that he's just trying. One of the things they're doing is trying to make sure that presidential orders are carried out. For example --

SWISHER: Right.

TAPPER: -- the president ordered, I think, a hiring freeze. And one of the things that doge is doing is making sure that agencies are actually carrying that out. But I don't think anyone really has an issue with that. The issue is, why is this person getting all this access to data and information.

And Trump and Musk dismissed criticism that there might be a conflict of interest. Let's run a little bit of that.

(BEGIIN VIDEO CLIP)

MUSK: I mean, I haven't asked the president for anything ever.

HANNITY: And if it comes up, how will you handle it?

MUSK: Well --

TRUMP: He won't be involved.

MUSK: Yeah, I'll recuse myself if it is.

TRUMP: If there's a conflict, he won't be involved. I mean, I wouldn't want that and he won't want it.

MUSK: Right. And also I'm getting a sort of a daily proctology exam here. You know, it's not like I'm going to be getting away from something in the dead of night.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SWISHER: Oh, dear.

TAPPER: I mean -- well, I mean, I wouldn't say --

SWISHER: Right to that. Okay.

TAPPER: We don't have to talk about the proctological part of it, but -- I mean, I don't think that sitting for friendly interviews is really engaging in the kind of proctological exam that he was talking about there.

SWISHER: No.

TAPPER: Really, you know what I mean?

SWISHER: Yeah, that was a big wet kiss by Sean Hannity I felt. But that's okay. He was there to do PR for them and that's what they were trying to do because they're getting pushback. And so they've got to look like they're friendly. Nothing to see here, sir.

TAPPER: You know everything is on the up and up. Just trust us. Believe us. Whatever we say goes.

It's the first part about doing the hiring freeze. That's one thing. But is it done correctly? Is Congress involved? Is this money already allocated and stuff like that?

[16:45:02] There are processes here and they're just trying to bust through them. And so that's the -- I even question that. It's not a question of reforming the government, its how you're going to reform it.

The second part is he's kind of like the enforcer, right? He's just barreling through. And because he's good at barreling through and he absolutely is. That's why it works well for Trump. And I think unfortunately they don't kind of the niceties of rules and laws and regulations don't matter to these people, including conflict of interest rules.

TAPPER: Well, what is the concern, somebody like you who's well versed on what Elon Musk and look he's a -- he's a the richest man in the world. He's in SpaceX and Tesla. He's' involved in a lot of stuff. That's not a slam on him as to, you know, he -- he's a brilliant man and he's got a lot of hands in a lot of stuff. What are the concerns of potential conflicts of interest?

SWISHER: I mean, so many. He's got billions and billions and billions of dollars with the government. A business with the government, including that's helped him quite a lot over the years. He could get insight into competitors of that government business. There's an enormous redo of the military digitally. There's all these -- there's all this A.I. stuff the government is going to pay for. He has an advantage in every sense.

He's got -- he's got, you know, there's a thing called a God view in Silicon Valley where it's -- whether it's at Facebook or Uber, you can see the whole network. And the ability to have the god view makes you a god, and it gives you this incredible insight and what to do for competitors, for people you don't like, for anything at all.

And he also has so much, you know, government interest, like the things that have been cut. He has -- he -- they've been investigating him. How can he be doing that to an agency? And he's been cutting people that have been investigating him. It's just there are conflicts of interests are -- there's a saying in Silicon Valley, no conflict, no -- no conflict, no interest. That's what's happening here.

TAPPER: Do you think that this relationship, this friendship, partnership, whatever you want to call it, do you think that it is enduring? They're both rather, they both have rather strong egos. They both can be fickle, and quick to anger. Do you have confidence that this is going to continue?

SWISHER: Well, I think they -- they have their interest. They have their self-interest. They're aligned perfectly, right? And that whatever they say, and as long as they stick to the story and I think much of it is quite mendacious, some of it like what you take our word for it about the conflict of interest.

I don't think I will. I think I'd like to see it. I think I'd like someone else to call it someone independent, perhaps from the two of you. No, I think they're -- they're actually helpful to each other. And for Trump, he gets Elon a heat shield. And for Elon, Elon gets this incredible power that he didn't have to

run for office. He didn't have to do anything. He just gets to look over everything. And he tries to do -- I'm trying to help Americans. I'm patriotic and this and that.

But why do it with the lack of transparency? Why do it going around laws? Why? You know, why troll people all the time? Why say you're going to kill someone?

It just -- it's inexplicable. But they do help each other. So I think they're going to stay together for a long time.

TAPPER: Yeah, I agree and I agree with you on, pardon me, on transparency, too, because it's like, when has there ever been a situation where a government has said, trust us, and it worked out? Even if you do, even if you're inclined to trust Donald Trump and Elon Musk, it's never worked out.

SWISHER: Well. The expression hello, he lied, I just don't -- I'd like to see it out front. If it's nothing to hide, then stop hiding.

TAPPER: Kara Swisher, thanks so much.

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is finally in office. He's heading to the Department of Health and Human Services. And of course, on his priority list to examine lifesaving childhood vaccines that he's criticized for years, often with nothing but falsities and ignorance. What could that mean for parents? That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:53:20]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ROBERT F. KENNEDY, JR., HHS SECRETARY: Some of the possible factors we will investigate were formerly taboo or insufficiently scrutinized. A childhood vaccine schedule, whatever belief or suspicion I have expressed in the past, I'm willing to subject them all to the scrutiny of unbiased science.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: In our health lead, infamous science skeptic Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. there, in his welcome speech as the secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, noting his priority to investigate lifesaving childhood vaccines that he's criticized for decades now based on ignorance and lies.

Joining us now, CNN's Meg Tirrell.

Meg, what should parents know if they are worried about what Secretary Kennedy is going to do?

MEG TIRRELL, CNN MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Jake, the childhood immunization schedule, which is what we were talking about there. This is something that is reviewed annually, if not more frequently than that by a team of experts both inside the CDC and outside the CDC.

This is something that pediatricians weigh in on -- vaccine experts, experts in infectious diseases. They get together and they look at any potential new vaccines, and they look at the existing vaccines. They look at all the safety data.

These are vaccines that have been put together and a schedule of vaccinations designed to prevent more than a dozen different childhood diseases. And you can see, this is the vaccine schedule here. And it looks really, really complicated.

And basically, these experts have gotten together to figure out the best way to try to protect children against some of these diseases, which can be incredibly devastating, and many of which we really never see anymore. Things like diphtheria, which are just absolutely terrible diseases.

So this schedule has been put together by these teams of experts with decades of evidence about its safety and about the efficacy of these vaccines in preventing these horrible childhood diseases.

TAPPER: So let's talk about that. What have some of these vaccines helped prevent or eradicate?

TIRRELL: Yeah. So, overall, we're looking at 14 to 16 different diseases that these vaccines protect against. And one study was done that among children born between 1994 and 2023, childhood vaccinations are estimated to prevent more than 500 million cases of illness, 32 million hospitalizations and 1.1 million deaths.

And we're talking about things like diphtheria, measles, polio, rubella. Rubella is something that if a mother gets it when she's pregnant, her baby can have birth defects. I mean, these can be absolutely terrible and deadly diseases. A lot of them we haven't seen in a while.

One, unfortunately, that we are starting to see more frequently, though, is measles. This is a disease that is incredibly contagious. But the vaccine was approved in 1963. You can see there what's happened to cases. It was declared eliminated in 2000. But of course were seeing an outbreak even right now in Texas, New Mexico.

TAPPER: Meg Tirrell, thanks so much.

The Vatican has a new update this afternoon on the pope and his diagnosis of pneumonia. We're going to go live to Rome.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)