Return to Transcripts main page
CNN NewsNight with Abby Phillip
Trump Blinks in Trade War, Delaying Some Tariffs for Month; Trump's Sledgehammer Moves Face Reality in Markets, Courts; Lost Democrats Face Internal Strife Over Strategy, Behavior. Musk Floats An Idea To Pardon Ex-Cop Chauvin. Aired 10-11p ET
Aired March 05, 2025 - 22:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[22:00:00]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SARA SIDNER, CNN ANCHOR (voice over): Tonight, throwing it in reverse. Donald Trump takes the road many say he should not have traveled to begin with, undoing tariffs on allies as the courts put roadblocks in the way of his DOGE-driven agenda.
Plus, protest or pettiness? Democrats put themselves on display. Do Americans like what they see or is the minority missing the moment?
Also, MAGA makes the case to pardon the federal crimes of the former police officer who murdered George Floyd.
Live at the table, Julie Roginsky, Shermichael Singleton, Arthur Aidala, Ana Navarro.
Americans with different perspectives now aren't talking to each other, but here, they do.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SIDNER (on camera): Good evening to you. I'm Sara Sidner in New York in for Abby, Philip.
Let's get right to what America's talking about, tariff whiplash. Tonight, President Trump blinked. Now, he says some of his tariffs are on hold. The president giving automakers a month to figure out how to deal with a 25 percent hit on imports from Mexico and Canada, taxes the big three warned would make manufacturing cars all but impossible. Just Monday, Trump said the tariffs would happen and there was no concession big enough to stop them. But now he's wavering a bit.
The markets that Trump loves to tout don't love him back on this issue. His tariffs forcing investors on a rollercoaster ride they never wanted. Here's what the last three days have looked like for the Dow. A tower of terror style drop when tariffs went into place, you see it there, and then climb back up. Not as high as where it was, but as Trump paused the auto tariffs.
Joining our fifth seat, the master of data, Mr. Harry Enten.
Let's start with this. All right, so I guess the big question is, and this is to you, Ana, first. Did Donald Trump not think this through? Are we just playing by the seat of our pants? Why the switch-o-change out here, do you think?
ANA NAVARRO, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yes, yes, he did not think it through. He's playing by the seat of his pants. It's -- you know, it's -- one day, it's this, one day, it's that. I mean, it changes every hour, it seems. I was literally on the phone with a friend of mine who has a car dealership asking him, is this going to affect you, when the call came in that, when the news came in that he was switching it on cars?
Listen, one of the things that he ran on that was really important to people who voted for him was the price of groceries, right? And one of the things that's going to be most quickly affected are the price of food, because those are perishable items. It's not like a car that can sit on a lot for months. Strawberries, tomatoes, guacamole cannot sit in on a shelf for months and weeks. So, these things need to be replenished. They're going to be hit by these tariffs very, very quickly. And may I remind you, it's not only my guacamole, it's the tequila that I wash it down with that's going to be hit with 25 percent.
And I will also say this, it is incredibly -- you know, it's unnerving. It's weird, painful to see the Canadians removing our U.S. products from their shelves. I mean, what are we doing here? This is the most anti-conservative thing in the world.
ARTHUR AIDALA, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: I don't think he's flying by the seat of his pants. He campaigned on this. He's been talking about this for a long time. I'm not saying there aren't certain things that President Trump does fly on the seat of his pants. This is just not one of them. This is something that he thought about.
NAVARRO: Yes, no, he was imposing tariffs on cars. Today, he isn't.
AIDALA: Because it's all--
NAVARRO: He says he's going to do it in a month.
AIDALA: It's all calculated. Look what he did with Zelenskyy. He threw him out of the White House and now they're going to be best friends in a couple of minutes. So, this is all calculated, all these kinds of big issues. I'm not saying the little things he doesn't fly by the seat of his pants.
JULIE ROGINSKY, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: What's calculated? Tanking the market, that's calculated? I mean, imposing tariffs and making people pay more for groceries and for cars and for longer --
AIDALA: He's looking the big picture. He's not looking at a one-day gain or a one-day loss.
ROGINSKY: One day gain, it's all collapsing. Every single (INAUDIBLE) is collapsing.
SHERMICHAEL SINGLETON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Let's level set here for a minute. UAW released a statement yesterday saying that this was good news because it's going to return jobs back to American workers.
[22:05:02]
In the early 90s, the idea of NAFTA, North Atlantic Free Trade Agreement, was that it was going to rise and lift all boats, that the middle class would expand, it would be better. That was not the case. I spent about an hour on my way up here to New York from D.C. reading all of the old news articles that came out. A couple, maybe a year or two after NAFTA, it decimated middle class families across this country. So, if the president is saying, Canada relies more on us, Mexico relies more on us than we do them, let's start there and level set so that there's some equilibrium, that is absolutely a good thing.
And UAW, they're not Republicans, they're not conservatives. There's no way they would release that statement if they didn't believe it was in the best interest of working class people in this country.
HARRY ENTEN, CNN CHIEF DATA REPORTER: Look, all I can say is I don't know how where things are going to end up six months from now. I mean, trying to predict things in this political era, you know, it was like trying to predict whether or not. You know, the New York Jets will find another quarterback who's over the age of 95, still bitter.
But I do know this. I do know how poorly the tariffs are polling. You know, what are we talking about? 64 percent, nearly two thirds of the country who oppose the tariffs against Canada. What are we talking about? Three fifths of the country that are opposed to tariffs against Mexico. There are plenty of things that Donald Trump does that are popular. This is not one of them.
SIDNER: All right. Let's move on to something else that has caused ruffled feathers. It looks like Elon Musk is in bit of damage control. He is going behind the scenes. We have some reporting that he is talking behind closed doors with Republicans who have for several weeks now been saying, you got to discuss with us some of what you are doing.
Give me some sense of what you think Republicans need to be saying. I'll start with you Shermichael. What Republicans need to be saying to him because DOGE, you've got the numbers, not popular?
SINGLETON: Yes. No, it's not popular. I've seen some of Harry's reporting on it. Look, I actually think we could look back to the 90s to Bill Clinton and look at that playbook and learn a thing or two. Next year, we're going to have midterms coming up. We have a very, very slim majority in the House right now.
So, as a strategist, I'm thinking about what can I equip those members in the house to go back to their districts, some of those Republicans who may be contesting Democratic seats to run on in terms of campaign messaging and say, look, we are trying to shrink the size of government. We're doing it this way through the legislative process.
We have passed buyouts. In the 90s, it was, I think, $25,000. That would be $55,000 a day. There is a process to do this where you bring all Republicans together that I believe strategically would be an advantage of the party writ large.
NAVARRO: Listen, what Republicans need to be telling Elon Musk is control your role, dude. We are a co-equal branch of government. You can't just skate over us. We are the ones who appropriate the money. We are the ones who know the needs of our districts.
I remember when DOGE was first announced. There was actually a bipartisan DOGE caucus. People in Congress wanted to work with him and were happy about the idea of cutting government waste, but the way he's gone about it, firing people who work on the nuclear arsenal, and then scrambling to rehire them, firing scientists who work on avian flu and then scrambling to find them again so they can rehire them, firing people at NOAA, getting rid of 70,000 people at the Veterans Administration, what the hell is he doing?
And you know why this is happening with Republicans? Because people are showing up at their town halls and demanding attention. It is the people who are going to get a change from Republicans. They need to be more afraid of their constituents than they are of Donald Trump and Elon Musk.
SIDNER: Arthur, I want to ask you a question about that, because we have seen at least three of these town halls where things erupted and the Republicans had to sort of respond to some angry constituents. Now we're hearing that some Republicans are canceling those town halls. Is that political suicide or is it smart? Like what do you say to Republicans saying, you know what, we're not going to hold these town halls because we don't want to hear it?
AIDALA: Well, whether it's political or suicide or not, I'll defer. I'm going to look at the law, though, and I can understand if people who don't really study this, and I'm not saying I do. But when the president of the United States puts these people in the cabinet, right, they have to be -- go through this big Senate confirmation, right? They got to be vetted by the FBI and all of that stuff. Somehow or another, Elon Musk has like gone around that.
Now, you know, in the first administration of Trump, his son-in-law and his daughter had all kinds of access. They were never confirmed by the United States Senate. So, there's this like fine line of who the president can have worked for him without Senate confirmation and what he can give them to do without Senate confirmation. And that's what I think the courts are struggling with these decisions that are now coming down from the federal courts.
ROGINSKY: Okay. He's spending money that is appropriated by Congress or not spending money. That's appropriated by Congress. And that's the problem. The problem is that the Congress has the power of the purse and, unfortunately, Donald Trump has decided that Congress be damned, Elon Musk can do whatever he wants with money that, again, has already been appropriated by Congress and sign into law by the previous president. That's the thing. This is the law and they're just flagrantly violating it.
[22:10:00]
And that's -- you know, you're a lawyer. You know that's not legal.
AIDALA: Well, that's why there are all these court cases right now.
ROGINSKY: And that's why --
NAVARRO: (INAUDIBLE) people not having the courage to face the constituents is chicken. It's cowardly. It is so chicken, maybe they can start laying eggs and --
(CROSSTALKS)
ENTEN: Let me just say a few things. Number one, when it comes to government spending, Americans are in love with the idea of cutting government spending much more so than they were five years ago. I think it's like 55 percent of Americans who say they want to cut the size of government, they want to make sure it's doing less, not more. I think the number was reversed was 55 percent, who said it should be doing more back in 2020. So, that's one thing.
But Elon Musk is not a popular guy. I mean, that's the bottom line here. If he is leading this effort, I think it's going to go much -- it's not going to go as far as it would if Congress was leading the effort. And this, I think, is the big question. Can Republicans in Congress actually get their act together? They have such a thin majority. If they can and they're the ones who are in charge of cutting the spending, that would be a much better situation for Republicans going into the midterms than not.
ROGINSKY: But can I just jump in on something you said, because I've been a political consultant for a very long time? And I can tell you, yes, polling shows that people want government cut until you start talking to them specifically about what it is that government should be cutting. And then you start talking about taking away my Medicaid or taking away my Medicare or taking away my Social Security, or doing things, which we all know is the biggest expenditure in Congress and the biggest expenditure in the government, and all of a sudden they don't like it, right? It's fine until it comes for them.
ENTEN: Sure.
ROGINSKY: Right now, it's coming for them.
SINGLETON: But who's cutting Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security? We're not taking that away from anybody.
SIDNER: There is a proposal.
SINGLETON: We're not -- but we're not taking that away from anybody.
ROGINSKY: How could you have voted for the blueprint?
SINGLETON: Democrats keep using this talking point. It's as a scare tactic. Elon Musk, the president, the House majority leader, the Senate leader, we have not cut anyone's Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid.
ROGINSKY: How are you -- excuse me, how are you cutting $880 billion from the Energy and Commerce Appropriation Committee until -- from the Energy and Commerce Committee unless you cut Medicaid.
SINGLETON: Do you think those things will solve it?
ROGINSKY: Excuse me? Do you think --
SINGLETON: It's a simple question.
ROGINSKY: Answer my question.
SINGLETON: It's a simple financial question. Do we not need any level of reform here whatsoever?
ROGINSKY: I'm sorry. Let me ask you a question. You're saying, we're not cutting Medicaid.
SINGLETON: We're not.
ROGINSKY: We're not?
SINGLETON: Where's the legislation that's been passed by Congress, signed by the president where there are cuts?
ROGINSKY: What is this budget blueprint that every single Republican --
SINGLETON: It's an idea. Everybody has an idea, Julie. That doesn't mean the idea has been actualized.
ROGINSKY: It's not an idea. It is a blueprint. That they said, go ahead.
SINGLETON: A scare tactic, Julie. It's a scare tactic.
ROGINSKY: It's not a scare tactic.
SINGLETON: That's what you're doing right now. It's a scare tactic. Oh, we're making cuts. Where have the cuts occurred?
ROGINSKY: Why did Congress bother wasting everybody's time voting for a blueprint that said cut $880 million -- billion dollars, excuse me, from Energy and Commerce? The only way to achieve that is to cut Medicaid. How are they going to do that? Tell me.
SINGLETON: Unicorns exist. Where have we made the cuts? It's a simple question.
ROGINSKY: Where?
SINGLETON: Where have we made the cuts? Where and when?
ROGINSKY: Where or when? You put a blueprint forward to allow Congress to do that. Then why did you waste time doing it? Why?
NAVARRO: Okay. Where have you made the cuts? You've made the cuts, for example, to USAID.
SINGLETON: Which we should.
NAVARRO: It is affecting farmers. It's been done arbitrarily. It is affecting farmers. It is affecting U.S. contractors who had penned contracts with USAID. You are cutting funds by firing thousands and thousands and thousands of government workers, some of them veterans, who we as a country have promised to take care of. And sending them a pink slip through an email and giving them absolutely no recourse, that's where we're cutting from. And I think it's -- no, I think it's -- you don't think it's --
SINGLETON: Let me ask you this question. Clinton in the 90s, cut and fired hundreds of thousands --
NAVARRO: I'm in 2025, Shermichael.
SINGLETON: No. But the point that I'm making, though, if we slow this process down and we do it more methodically, you still would not be happy with that process, I would imagine. I will presume.
NAVARRO: Oh, no. Listen, I think that if we cut -- I think that most Americans would be in favor, and you tell me, of cutting 5 percent, 10 percent, doing it in a methodical way, studied way, so that we are not firing them, people.
SINGLETON: Okay. I would agree with you there. I would agree with you there, that we can at least meet in the middle and figure out who to cut, where to cut and when.
ENTEN: I love that. We just came together right here.
SIDNER: (INAUDIBLE) to stop the train. We will rev it up again after this break.
Ahead, Elon Musk is sharing a MAGA host's desire to pardon Derek Chauvin, the former officer responsible in George Floyd's murder. Now, Floyd's family is responding.
Plus, Democrats are tearing each other apart over strategy and behavior as another moment makes headlines.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. AYANNA PRESSLEY (D-MA): This is procedural right as a member of this committee.
REP. JAMES COMER (R-KY): You can go with Mr. Frost and Mr. Green.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:15:00]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Last night was a very clarifying moment for our country. The Democrats expose themselves as the party of insanity and hate, the party that wants to put America last.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SIDNER: Just 24 hours after the special shirts and the bingo-like paddleboard signs, and a notable outburst from Representative Al Green of Texas, Democrats and Republicans had a shouting match, as Dems still grapple with what their message should be and how to deliver it in response to President Trump.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
COMER: What's the next article?
PRESSLEY: Let me proceed. Data from Texas shows that U.S.-born Americans commit more rape and murder than immigrants.
COMER: Listen, this trend of you all trying to get thrown out of committee so you can get on MSNBC is going to end. We're not going to put up with it.
PRESSLEY: This is procedural right as a member of this committee.
COMER: You can go with Mr. Frost and Mr. Green.
PRESSLEY: I'm reclaiming my time. You do not get to dictate --
COMER: No.
[22:20:00]
Ms. Pressley, I have been very accommodating you. Mr. (INAUDIBLE), start the clock.
PRESSLEY: And I take particular umbrage as a survivor of sexual violence.
COMER: Go.
PRESSLEY: I will enter into record, this is my right.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SIDNER: Okay. So, that happened today, which was a very strong back and forth. Julie, when you look at what happened after the president spoke, you had Democrats doing all manner of things, and they're now -- the Senate -- some of the Senate Democrats are criticizing the House Democrats, what's wrong with the Democrats and their messaging?
ROGINSKY: How much time do you have, because if we want to blow out commercial breaks, I can answer that question? Everything is wrong with Democrats and their messaging. The problem with Democrats, and I said this right after the election, and I continue to say this, is that there is no message. There's no coherent message that is able to explain in plain English to the American people what the Democratic Party stands for.
And in the absence of having that message, they've disappeared. They've thrown stuff at the wall to see what sticks. I don't know what that was yesterday. I'm glad they all wore pink. I don't think anybody outside the beltway understood what they were trying to do unless somebody was really tuned into CNN or other networks to have people explain it to them.
I don't quite understand why nobody in the Democratic Party has come together and said, this is what we're doing. We're not focus grouping every single thing that the president does, and waiting six weeks to figure out how to respond to it. We are coming up with one coherent message and we're preaching from it from the choir book together.
I'm very happy to provide that message to Democrats if they want to listen, but we don't have time for that right now.
NAVARRO: I don't think the message is going to come from elected officials, frankly. And I think part of the problem is that there's no clear leader, right?
ROGINSKY: There's not.
NAVARRO: If you ask any Republican who the clear leader is, they can tell you it's Donald Trump and Elon Musk.
AIDALA: Well, who should it be?
NAVARRO: Well, it should be the people. And I think the message is going to come bottom up.
I think that the reason you're seeing some budging on the Republican side is because it's the people impromptu taking to the streets. You've had impromptu protests.
AIDALA: In my opinion, the Democrat who's ducking is Barack Obama. Bill Clinton's on the older side. Biden, he should be a leader right now. Who's the leader of the Democrats.
SIDNER: He's elected to office.
AIDALA: I don't mean the way -- look, bill Clinton did not disappear after his presidency. He was a tremendous force for the -- he was the leader of the Democratic Party until Barack Obama came, won the nomination. He was the unspoken leader, but there was a lot of leadership by Bill Clinton.
ENTEN: What? Barack Obama. I mean, I've heard some interesting things on the south.
AIDALA: Who else is it going to be? ENTEN: Not him. I mean, he hasn't been --
AIDALA: He's got the stature, he's got the brains, he's got the charisma, he's got everything.
ENTEN: He was the last president when I couldn't even be eligible to run for the United States Senate. That was -- he hasn't been president for nearly a decade.
AIDALA: Well, it can't be -- it should be Biden, but it can't be.
NAVARRO: But I'll tell you this. What I do know is that Democrats are not going to take advice from you on who should be leading them.
AIDALA: You got a problem with Barack Obama? Let's put this on.
NAVARRO: Nobody has a --
AIDALA: She's got a problem with Barack Obama.
(CROSSTALKS)
NAVARRO: Barack Obama is living his best life at this point. The strength from the Democrats has got to come from the people. Because the only thing that the talking heads and the elected officials do is attack each other. Today, instead, of attacking Trump's lies in yesterday's State of the Union, attacking the fact that Trump was making up stories about transgender mice, I guess he thinks the mice are all turning into little Amelia Parises, we are talking about the Democrats and how they are infighting again.
SIDNER: But, Harry, are there any numbers that, I mean, this sort of give you a sense of who might be able to lead the party?
ENTEN: Well, I think the funniest thing is if you look at the 2028 potential Democratic field, the person who leads it is Kamala Harris. Now, that might just be name recognition, but we've learned that sometimes those early polls, when you're polling 35, 40 percent, I remember Donald Trump was polling 35, 40 percent back in 2021, a lot of people --
AIDALA: I want you question. Do you think Barack Obama played any role in pushing Joe Biden off the stage? Because if you say he didn't, you are just naive.
ENTEN: I will tell you this. He went in, how many places did the go during the 2024 campaign and told young black men to get behind Kamala Harris? And how much good did that do him?
SINGLETON: It didn't work.
ENTEN: It didn't work. People don't listen to him anymore.
AIDALA: Well, that's a different story. That's a different point.
ENTEN: Then he's an ineffective leader party. AIDALA: Okay. That's different than you saying --
(CROSSTALKS)
ENTEN: No Democrat has been relevant forever.
SINGLETON: The Democratic Party itself is frankly an irrelevant political party. They don't have a message. Their policy positions have left cities across this country in shambles. I mean, even last night, let's just think about this for a minute, the president highlighted D.J., the young kid who's dealing with cancer, a cancer survivor, they didn't even have enough decency to stand and applaud. He highlighted the mother whose daughter was killed by an illegal immigrant. They didn't stand and applaud. He talked about law enforcement, not the bad guys, but the ones who are doing good work every day across this country, keeping our cities safe. They didn't stand and applaud.
ROGINSKY: Excuse me.
SINGLETON: And it appears to me that the Democratic Party, in my personal opinion, is a party that is in chaos right now.
[22:25:03]
ROGINSKY: Do you think --
SINGLETON: They have no idea which direction to go.
ROGINSKY: Shermichael, with all due respect, you think Democrats are going to --
SINGLETON: Oh, absolutely.
ROGINSKY: Wait, let me say this. You think Democrats should applaud Donald Trump when he talks about law enforcement?
AIDALA: No. When a kid with cancer --
ROGINSKY: Stop. No, excuse me. In that very chamber where Donald Trump's goons try to harm the people that were sitting there applauding, you want Democrats to take advice from Donald Trump about law enforcement?
SINGLETON: It's not about taking advice, Julie. Some things should just simply be above politics.
AIDALA: Right.
ROGINSKY: What --
SINGLETON: And those are three instances (INAUDIBLE) could have simply applauded. You don't have to like the president to say these are good things.
ROGINSKY: This president is cutting funding for childhood cancer. You want to know what he's cutting funding for? The NIH, the CDC. He's got a wacko as the head of HHS. And you want to talk about it. I'm sorry. I'm very happy for that kid. I'm very happy for that kid. I'm glad that his lifelong dream came true and he became, you know, a cop or whatever he wanted to become. But the bottom line is that all it does is accentuate the horrors that Donald Trump is imposing on kids with cancer.
SINGLETON: Democrats seemed pathetic and they seemed petulant in their behavior last night. And if they think that's going to help them going into midterm election, I say, keep going.
SIDNER: But what about the optics, Shermichael, because I know that you look at strategy? And if their constituents, which is basically half of the country, I mean, look at -- Donald Trump did not win in a landslide when you look at the numbers at the end, right, Harry?
ENTEN: Yes, he won, what, by 1.52 percentage points.
SINGLETON: But you know what? We define (INAUDIBLE) as a victory? Win is a win, the victor goes to spoilers.
SIDNER: But I'm just saying there is a half of the country and half of the voters who rejected him. So, if they're standing there and clapping and that's used, you know, by campaigns, that may be -- would that be an issue for you if someone standing up and clapping for Kamala Harris?
SINGLETON: If I were a Democratic strategist, yes, you got to figure out a way to message and turn out your base. They got to figure out why do they lose black men in places like Texas, Pennsylvania, North Carolina. I keep going back to those states because that's where you saw the largest number of black men switch over the Trump. They have to figure out why they didn't perform well with Hispanic men and women. I don't think standing and applauding for good, decent things would shift the needle one way or another for them.
NAVARRO: There's always been an exception and I think where people recognize the tender emotional moments of when the people at the first ladies box get recognized. That doesn't mean that you stand up for the lies. That doesn't mean that you stand up for the stupid policy proposals. But should you stand up and applaud the kid with cancer who's having his center moment, absolutely.
ENTEN: I would just say --
SINGLETON: Thank you, Ana.
ENTEN: -- there's a reason why Congressional Democrats have like a 20 percent approval rating and even amongst their own party has like a 40 percent, the lowest Quinnipiac has ever measured. And I think last night and sort of what's been going on over the past few months is a gosh darn good illustration of that.
ROGINSKY: Agreed.
SINGLETON: Yes. SIDNER: You think it's pettiness, Julie?
ROGINSKY: Agreed.
SIDNER: It comes off as pettiness?
ROGINSKY: It's not that. I agree with what you're saying. I think the Democrats have no message in Congress. I think they have not done anything to help other Democrats at the grassroots level as well, talk about the issues that they're craving to hear from their national leaders. And, you know, look, they have to get it together because there is an election coming up in 18 months. I think Democrats are going to do very well based on the town halls that we're seeing. I think Republicans are feeling a little smug the same way Democrats were in 2010. And look what happened.
SINGLETON: Yes, that's fair point. That's a fair point.
ROGINSKY: So, look, the bottom line is I think the Democratic Party needs to get its act together. I don't know who that leader is. I do know that Hakeem Jeffries and Chuck Schumer, for lack of better people, are leading the party now. It would be nice of them to come forward and actually cohesively tell the Democratic Party their own caucus, some of whom I've spoken to who are frustrated, what the party is running on and what they stand for, and they have not done that.
ENTEN: They'll figure it out, maybe.
SIDNER: All right.
NAVARRO: And we might see an entire new stable of candidates from the grassroots come up.
ROGINSKY: That's right, absolutely.
SIDNER: All right. Coming up next, MAGA now wants to pardon Derek Chauvin, the former officer in George Floyd's murder. Another special guest is going to join us at the table to discuss that, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:30:00]
SIDNER: Tonight, Elon Musk floating another idea for Donald Trump to consider, pardoning the officer who put his knee on George Floyd's neck, murdering him in front of a crowd.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BEN SHAPIRO, CONSERVATIVE COMMENTATOR: If we are issuing pardons, however, there is one person that President Trump should pardon from federal charges forthwith. It would be incredibly controversial, but I think that it's absolutely necessary. That person is Derek Chauvin.
President Trump should, in fact, pardon Derek Chauvin. The evidence demonstrates that Derek Chauvin did not in fact commit murder of George Floyd. George Floyd was high on fentanyl. He had a significant pre-existing heart condition. George Floyd was saying he could not breathe before he was even out of the car.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SIDNER: That is not what a jury decided. And that was conservative, MAGA mouthpiece, Ben Shapiro. And here's what Elon Musk sent out to his 319 million followers, a tacit endorsement of the idea there, reposting it.
Joining us in our fifth seat at the table is Donte Mills. He's a civil and criminal attorney and a law professor at Temple University. Thank you so much for being here. What do you make of this?
DONTE MILLS, NATIONAL TRIAL ATTORNEY: I'm tired of having fake conversations, so we just have to say this is gaslighting, right? So, this guy was convicted by a jury in a state court. So, no matter what Donald Trump decides to do, if he issues this federal pardon, he's going to sit in jail. So, what's the purpose of it? Why would you go down this line, reopen this wound, when it's not going to have any impact whatsoever?
ARTHUR AIDALA, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: You know what, Donte, I don't think they know. I mean, you're 100 percent -- and what he says is absolutely correct.
[22:35:01]
It's a silly conversation. So, the trial -- the trial we all watched on TV was the state court trial. The way Donald Trump does that, or any president, doesn't have the power to pardon anyone in the state court, like he can't pardon himself, and only the governor of the state can do that, it's the same thing here.
So, hypothetically, if Trump did pardon him, what happened was after he gets convicted, he then goes into federal court on civil rights violation and he pleads guilty to 20 years. But it runs concurrently at the same time. So if Trump pardoned him, he's still standing in the state.
MILLS: And what he's doing is, so in the state court case, he was found guilty by a jury.
AIDALA: Correct.
MILLS: In federal court, he pled guilty. So, he acknowledged and accepted responsibility. So, you're going to pardon him despite the fact that he accepted responsibility for something, obviously saying he did it because you have to tell the judge and confirm that you're accepting this plea for a reason and there's not going to be any impact whatsoever.
So, other than to gaslight, other than to reopen these wounds, what's the purpose? Why are we having this conversation? Why is Elon Musk joining in and kind of making this a bigger issue? JULIE ROGINSKY, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: I'll tell you why. I mean,
quite honestly, because we've gotten to a point where I think they want to incite violence. They want to incite protests so that they have an excuse to invoke what Donald Trump wanted to invoke last time but was not allowed to do by some members of his cabinet, which is to incite -- to invoke the Insurrection Act, and take more power.
And I'm sorry I know that sounds cuckoo, you know, for Cocoa Puffs, except that we know he tried to do that last time and -- and was stopped by people in his own cabinet. And so, this is to create dissension. This is to create animosity. This is to create protests in the streets so that he can go out there and put a stop to it and basically do what he was not allowed to do last time.
ANA NAVARRO, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I think we can't avoid the racial message. Yes.
MILLS: Absolutely.
NAVARRO: That is the being sent, the dog whistle. And -- and I think it's a lot about dividing people, otherizing people. And just having this conversation is about that, the way that they're treating Latino immigrants. It's -- it's about that. It's about making certain white people feel better, more powerful than black people, Latino people, immigrants, you name it, but you know --
MILLS: It is that.
NAVARRO: -- that group that you can define.
SIDNER: I spoke with that the brother of George Floyd who was there on the ground for a very long time and i just wanted to read a statement in talking to him. I covered this from the very beginning to the very end, stayed in Minneapolis for about a year and followed the trial and followed the case and was there during the protest.
So, here's what George Floyd's brother said to me. He said, if the President were to do this, "It would hurt us. It is so personal. We saw our brother tortured to death. My niece would have to see him walk freely while her dad is in the ground. If he does this, it will set America back 400 years.
The ones pushing for this are trying to remove any power that black Americans have to get justice. It is disgusting. Why would you do this? Why would you re-injure this family and America?" So why is Musk pushing this idea?
SHERMICHAEL SINGLETON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Look, I think the good news here is, from my understanding, no one at the White House is entertaining this. There isn't any political advantages strategically for the President to even consider such a thing. Sometimes stuff on social media is not --
SIDNER: And Michael, Elon Musk is in the White House.
SINGLETON: Sometimes I think he's a CEO on social media, Sara, I'm just being frank, probably should be ignored. I just got to be honest. I think this guy has had his attorney's attempt to appeal from my understanding. And at every level, they have failed. The justice system appears to have worked the way it was intended to work.
I think the White House is right to ignore this, to keep focusing on other things. If Musk wants to put this out here, he owns Twitter, he can do whatever the hell he wants. But from my perspective as a strategist, the White House needs to just ignore this. Nothing will come from this.
SINGLETON: But Musk is part of the White House, and Musk is retweeting this to 319 million people. So he's putting it out there and when Musk says things, Donald Trump listens. So what do you do about it?
SINGLETON: I don't think the President's going to listen to this.
MILLS: And should we ignore it? Because now we're putting a position where, do we ignore this issue of gaslighting, of trying to incite things and just act like it's not going to happen because there won't be nothing will come of it because he'll still be in jail? Or do we -- do we focus on it and try and make it an issue? So, now you're putting us in a position to decide. Do we want to address this?
AIDALA: Hold on, let's look at where it's coming from. This isn't coming from -- this isn't coming from someone at the Department of Justice. This is coming from an entertainer. That's what he is, Benjamin. He's an entertainer. And look, it worked. It worked. It's a topic tonight on this number one training show on CNN.
SIDNER: It worked though because the head of DOGE --
MILLS: Someone who spoke at the cabinet meeting. Someone who was there yesterday.
AIDALA: We are all driving people to go watch Ben Shapiro right now.
[22:40:01]
We're all driving people -- what do you say? What's going on?
ROGINSKY: Arthur, with all due respect, he puts these kinds of people in positions of influence. Dan Bongino is now the number two guy.
AIDALA: That's your buddy.
ROGINSKY: No, not my buddy. Believe me, not my buddy. At the FBI, right? Pete Hegseth is running the DOD. I mean, these are all people who you could have said six months ago were the same jokers whose job was to go on TV or go on their podcast and get ratings. And now, they're in positions of influence.
(CROSSTALK)
NAVARRO: And he is dismantling -- he has dismantled the civil rights. He has dismantled the civil rights department at the DOJ. The depatments that would be in charge of investigating cases like this at a federal level have ceased to exist, basically.
MILLS: And we can't ignore that. That the person who is now talking about DEI being a problem, dismantling, you know, things at the Department of Justice and everything else, is talking about Derek Chauvin needs to be pardoned. Those things don't happen in a vacuum. They're all bringing -- coming together for a reason, and we can't ignore it.
SINGLETON: Until -- until the Justice Department, until the White House, or Caroline Levitt, the President's spokes, press secretary, says the President is considering this, I think this is a nothing burger, I think we can move on.
Elon Musk tweets a lot of things. Do we debate that President Trump is now considering every single tweet that Elon Musk puts out on X every single day? Absolutely not. I think we should put that in that category and keep it moving.
MILLS: And not speak up and say, hey guys, this shouldn't happen. We don't have the right or we shouldn't do that.
SINGLETON: The White House isn't considering this. The Justice Department isn't considering this. So, as far as I'm concerned, I don't think it's a bad idea.
NAVARRO: And you would think -- and you think it's a bad idea?
SINGLETON: Of course I think it's a bad idea. Most would think it's a bad idea.
NAVARRO: Good. Good.
SIDNER: Let me throw something out here. In hearing from another one of the brothers, he said that prosecutors are now contacting him about the possibility of any of this. They want to discuss with the family as you do, if there is something, whether it's an appeal or whether it's a potential pardon, they're already reaching out. So, someone in the justice system is concerned about it.
MILLS: We can't -- we can't act like Elon Musk doesn't mean anything.
(CROSSTALK)
MILLS: This is an appeal. This is a pardon. So, it doesn't have to be any prerequisite to this.
AIDALA: But let's not forget what we saw. The pardon doesn't do anything. Make sure the viewers understand.
MILLS: It does. It's hurtful --
AIDALA: It's hurtful, okay.
MILLS: -- to the people who went through this situation. It means something when the President of the United States is saying that. AIDALA: But that's not the jury's verdict. It's not the jury's
verdict that they're flipping over. It's his own plea. He's still doing it. The bottom line is everyone should understand. He's still doing 20 years in jail. No matter what the president says.
NAVARRO: I don't agree with you that it doesn't do anything.
MILLS: Absolutely.
NAVARRO: A pardon would be incredibly symbolic.
AIDALA: Okay. I just meant --
NAVARRO: And I think it would be a racial dog whistle telling the white people who thought that Derek Chauvin was unfairly convicted, that he is standing with them.
AIDALA: But I agree, once it becomes an issue, right.
SINGLETON: Your acting as if the president has stated that he's going to pardon this guy.
NAVARRO: No, we're not acting it.
MILLS: Your acting as if Elon Musk doesn't have influence over the President.
SINGLETON: Elon Musk isn't the President of the United States.
MILLS: He has influence over the President.
ROGINSKY: Yes he is. Actually, Shermichael, he pretty much is.
SINGLETON: No, he's not.
ROGINSKY: --he pretty much is.
NAVARRO: He spends more time with, Elon Musk spends more time with Donald Trump than any other human, right? He goes to Mar-a-Lago. He flies on Air Force One. He's at the state dinners. He's at the State of the Union. He's at the Oval Office, by the way, not wearing a suit. I mean --
ROGINSKY: If Melania Trump said this would you take it seriously?
SINGLETON: I probably would.
AIDALA: Yeah, I would.
ROGINSKY: Well, guess what. Well, guess -- guess what. Donald Trump spends more time with him.
AIDALA: Yeah, but it doesn't need to --
SINGLETON: He spends more time with Elon than his own wife.
ROGINSKY: Yeah, he actually does.
SINGLETON: I get your point about the symbolism. I completely agree there. But the only thing that I'm concerned about is until I see something from the Justice Department, until I see something coming out of that White House saying that they're even considering this nonsense, then I think we've got a problem. As of now, we're not getting an inkling of an idea that that's going to happen.
MILLS: I think we're not being real. We're saying Elon Musk says something and it doesn't mean anything. That's not where we are right now as a company. When Elon Musk says something, it has - it has meaning. It has impact.
SINGLETON: Elon Musk post a lot of very controversial things.
AIDALA: Ben Shapiro got exactly what he wanted. Ben Shapiro achieved his goal. We just spent seven minutes on the number one show at 10 o'clock at night and here we are. We did it. There we go.
SIDNER: Okay, we will see because actually, 319 million people is no small number of people that Elon Musk tweeted out to. So -- or x'd out to, whatever you call it these days.
All right, coming up next, Mega World championed Justice Amy Coney Barrett until she made decisions against President Trump. Now, some of them are calling her a DEI pick. Going after her for her decision, we will discuss.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:49:07]
SIDNER: Some on MAGA World on the attack against a Supreme Court justice, they thought would see the world Trump's way. Suddenly, Amy Coney Barrett is being accused of all manner of things after siding with the liberal justices against Trump's move to freeze billions of dollars in federal -- sorry, foreign aid.
Here is a sampling of the social media fury that has befallen Barrett from the MAGA-minded. "Bad Scout SCOTUS nominee". "Big problem". "Evil". "Checked identity politics boxes". "Another DEI hire". All right, Donte, I'm going to -- I'm going to start with you. What do you think about this? People are attacking her, calling her unqualified because she voted in a way that did not go with their sentiments.
MILLS: I think those people should be ignored. This is a profession that I love, that I value, that I hold in high regard, and I don't think a judge should be Democratic or Republican.
[22:50:02]
You're brought in because of your views from the person that nominates or puts you into that seat. However, those views are about the law, not about a party or any kind of individual. So, the one thing about the Supreme Court, they're not supposed to tackle cases one at a time. They're looking at the bigger picture, how is this going to impact
this country moving forward. Because this, whatever we decide here may construct how other cases are viewed for the next 20, 30 years. So she did that, and that's what she's supposed to do.
AIDALA: One of the proudest things that President Donald Trump should feel about his first term should be Amy Coney Barrett. She clerked for Justice Scalia, and Justice Scalia, who was appointed by Ronald Reagan, he said you could burn the American flag with the liberals. He gave the defendants more rights than any Supreme Court justice has in a long time.
As the hardcore right-wing person, you read the law, what the law says, that's what you should decide. Those people, those tweets you put up, you put all of them together. They can't carry Amy Coney Barrett's briefcase into the United States Supreme Court.
NAVARRO: Can I -- can I ask a question, though?
AIDALA: She's a brilliant woman who's a fantastic jurist.
NAVARRO: Well, first, I mean, the worst thing that a "Trumpican" can call you is DEI hire or woke. And that wasn't -- that being used for Amy Coney Barrett wasn't in my bingo card, but I have a question. Okay. So, the Supreme Court has now cited against Trump on this USAID issue. How does he get compelled to actually follow the Supreme Court decision?
AIDALA: That's when things get scary. So they, what they did was they sent it down to the judge in Washington D.C. who originally said -- made this decision and they told that judge, you give this -- instructions to the government what to do with the money. And if they don't follow the instructions --
NAVARRO: Yeah, he and what army? The judge and what army? I want to make him do it?
MILLS: What the judge did is he said, you guys are taking too long to carry out my orders. So, then, he brought them in and issued another order that said, you have to pay this money out in 36 hours.
AIDALA: Right.
MILLS: That's why it went back into the Supreme Court and they said, no, they have to follow these judges' rules. So, let's see if they pay the money. They should, because this is for work that was already done. We're not even talking about whether or not the program should move forward. This is work that was already done. The judge said these people are entitled to that money in 36 hours.
NAVARRO: Paying for work that's already been done hasn't been a specialty of Donald Trump's.
SIDNER: And we will end this conversation on that note. Donte Mills, thank you so much for coming in. Everyone else, stay with me. Next, the panelists give us their nightcaps. They'll tell us what movie endings are unfair in their mind, inspired by a mini rant on the "Titanic".
And a programming note, don't miss a new season of "United States of Scandal" with Jake Tapper. It returns this Sunday at 9 P.M. only right here on CNN.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:57:23]
SIDNER: We're back, Harry's back, all is well. And it's time for the "NewsNight" nightcap, the "Titanic" Jack and Rose edition inspired by this moment.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CELINE DION, SINGER (singing along with Marty Smith): Near, far, where -- come on, you do this, you do this. Wherever you are, I believe that my ball will go on.
MARTY SMITH, ESPN SPORTS COMMENTATOR: Can I get something off my chest? Rose was so selfish to push Jack off the floating door. I've never gotten over that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SIDNER: All right, there's your hot take. Rose was selfish for pushing Jack off the door. Anyway, so you have 30 seconds each to tell us what other movie endings is like the end of "Titanic", seemingly unfair. Shermichael, we'll start with you.
SINGLETON: So, David Fincher, the director of the movie "Seven", came out in the mid-'90s, one of my favorite movies. And Brad Pitt is this detective, he's a hothead, but he has a good heart, he's working alongside Morgan Freeman. And they're chasing after Kevin Spacey, this guy who's committing these gruesome murders, the seven deadly sins.
SIDNER: Yes.
SINGLETON: And at the very end you're like, oh man, they're going to get him. They finally got him and then there's a box. And in the box is Brad Pitt's wife's head.
ROGINSKY: Oh what's in the box? Sorry it's my impression. What's in the box?
SINGLETON: And she was pregnant with their first child. I was like this isn't fair.
ROGINSKY: Wow, well mine's not that heavy.
AIDALA: Yeah. Thank you.
ROGINSKY: Mine's "Pretty in Pink" which Shermichael informed me during commercial break he's never heard of.
SINGLETON: I've never seen it. Which is horrible. ROGINSKY: Horrible. What -- oh, thank you. He's fantastic, but why
would this girl go back to the guy who wouldn't take her to the prom? That has bothered me for 40 years. Why would you go back to the guy who totally dissed you for prom? What about prom, Blaine? What about prom, Blaine?
HARRY ENTEN, CNN CHIEF DATA ANALYST: I believe the original ending was actually that Ducky was going to take her to prom.
ROGINSKY: It was, but he was gay, so it didn't work out.
ENTEN: I'm not good enough at that. Anyway, a little big league movie from 1994. Billy Haywood, a young kid manager, goes to manage the team. They make it all the way to the final game, and then they lose in the final regular season game to the Seattle Mariners and Ken Griffey Jr. That was unjust. They should have gone all the way and won the World Series like a good, happy sports movie.
SIDNER: Ana, give us something else.
NAVARRO: Okay, listen. My answer is, who cares about my answer? Today is 305 day, okay? Miami day and we've got two 305 girls, but it's, okay, I'm forgetting the name. I'm now having like a senior moment. Harry and Louise -- Thelma and Louise.
[23:00:00]
Thelma and Louise, those two broads should have gotten away with it. They should have survived. They should have lived to a ripe old age with young lovers and enjoyed the fruits of their labor.
SIDNER: Agreed.
AIDALA: I was a kid when it came out. I'm an Italian-American. I wish Rocky would have won the first fight. I mean, come on. If Rocky would have won the first fight, it could have been no rematch. Adrian. Adrian. I'm sorry.
SIDNER: All right. We got to go. My hot take was "E.T." phone home. Why didn't he get to stay? Because the kids deserve to have a friend. Sorry. All right. Everyone, thank you so much. Don't tweet me. And thank you for watching "NewsNight". "Laura Coates Live" starts right now.
