Return to Transcripts main page
Laura Coates Live
Republicans Push Elon Musk for Answers on DOGE; Trump Presses Pause on Auto Tariffs from Canada and Mexico; Target Faces 40-Day Boycott Over DEI Policy Changes. Aired 11p-12a ET
Aired March 05, 2025 - 23:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[23:00:00]
ANA NAVARRO, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Thelma and Louise. Thelma and Louise. Those two broads should have gotten away with it.
(LAUGHTER)
They should have survived. They should have lived to a ripe old age with young lovers and -- and --
SARA SIDNER, CNN ANCHOR AND SENIOR NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: We're giving you a hard time on that --
NAVARRO: -- enjoyed the fruits of their labor.
SIDNER: Agreed.
UNKNOWN: 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.
(SHOUTING)
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.
UNKNOWN: Oh.
SIDNER: Sorry. All right. Everyone, thank you so much. Don't tweet me. And thank you for watching "NewsNight." "Laura Coates Live" starts right now.
LAURA COATES, CNN HOST AND SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Call up the 1-800- DOGE-HOTLINE. Republicans demand Elon Musk keep him in the loop on government cuts. But will Musk giving them his digits be enough to give them some sway? Plus, President Trump's trade wars take another wild turn. Now, markets and, frankly, Americans are trying to figure out exactly what comes next. And Target becomes, well, a target for rolling back DEI programs. So why is it facing boycott when other companies are not? One faith leader heading the charge is my guest tonight on "Laura Coates Live." So, Elon Musk has a message for Republican lawmakers. Call me. Call me on my cell phone. The DOGE leader making the rounds on Capitol Hill tonight. He didn't bring his cost-cutting chainsaw, but he is handing out his personal number to Republican senators who are worried that his government cuts are getting too close to the bone.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNKNOWN (voice-over): Elon, can we get your cell phone number if you're giving it out?
ELON MUSK, CEO OF TESLA MOTORS, LEADER OF DEPARTMENT OF GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY: Yes. Something, you know, 8008.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Try to figure that one out. Now, the beef between the world's richest man and nervous Republicans isn't just a clash of egos or some kind of political pissing contest, but many GOP lawmakers, they are hearing a lot from their angry constituents. And if they have to answer for Musk, they want to make sure they know what's being asked. Some are pushing for a law that will codify the cuts. We're also hearing from one GOP congressman tonight who says Musk told House Republicans that he had no involvement in the firings of federal employees.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. DERRICK VAN ORDEN (R-WI): So, the people, when they cut off all the -- they got rid of all the probationary guys, that wasn't a DOGE decision. I did not know that until this evening.
MANU RAJU, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: He said that they were not involved in the firing.
VAN ORDEN: No, the individual departments were. And so, the assumption was made by the DOGE guys that the departments would know the right people, you know, who are being unproductive and reward the people that are being productive. But apparently, they just took the departments, not DOGE, just said everybody that has not been here for years gone.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Assume. My dad always told me, when you assume, you make an ass out of you and me. Huh. For people getting fired, it probably doesn't matter who's actually handed the pink slip or who is handing it out. Take the VA where more than 70,000 jobs are on the chopping block, according to a memo obtained by CNN, of course.
Now, while the Trump administration is forging ahead with cuts, the president is hitting the pause button on part of those 25% tariffs on all goods from Canada and also Mexico.
Specifically, they won't apply to carmakers for the next 30 days. Now, a reminder, this is after he first announced tariffs on Mexico and Canada last month, only then paused them for 30 days, just two days later. They officially went into effect yesterday. And now, we're at this new month-long pause for carmakers.
You know, the constant on and off again, it has made the markets look like a bit of a rollercoaster. The Dow was in a tailspin for the first two days of this very week. And after the auto exemptions were announced just yesterday, well, Trump might phrase it something like, green baby green.
We know the president is fixated on how his policies are impacting the markets. A source telling us that Trump says, he was paying or was paying close attention yesterday, that the tumble was a jolt inside the West Wing.
But it's not just the markets that are feeling the whiplash. The kind of now-you-see-them, now-you-don't tariffs have always been pretty dizzying, well, for our allies. Take Canada, for example.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DOUG FORD, ONTARIO PREMIER: As far as I'm concerned, the tariffs are still on. We will not relent. And I apologize to the American people. It's not your fault. There's one person, again, to be blamed, and that's President Trump.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Unpredictability is one of Trump's trademarks, so is using leverage to get exactly what he wants. There's a lot at stake. Prices for American consumers, the health of the economy, how other countries perceive the United States.
[23:05:00]
And the question tonight, is it a winning strategy or a gamble that could backfire?
With me now, Mychael Schnell, congressional reporter for The Hill, Brad Todd, CNN political commentator and Republican strategist, and CNN political commentator Karen Finney also here as well.
Mychael, let me turn to you because the GOP is pushing back on these DOGE cuts. Are they upset or taking issue with the cuts themselves or the process to actually have these cuts?
MYCHAEL SCHNELL, CONGRESSIONAL REPORTER, THE HILL: I think it's certainly a little bit of both, particularly in that Senate GOP meeting this morning. Some of these Republican senators had raised concerns about the communication process. A lot of folks felt like they were caught off guard by a number of these cuts. Susan Collins said that herself last week, saying it's something new every day. That's what led to that phone number being given out to those Republican senators.
So, I think strategy on one end is the problem. But on the other end, some lawmakers are raising concerns about the substance. I spoke to Congressman Derrick Van Orden, who you just saw on your screen before, a Republican from Wisconsin. He said that he raised concerns in the House GOP meeting with Elon Musk tonight about the impact that some of these cuts could have on farmers and veterans.
So, it's both strategy and substance, again, as Elon Musk is really going full steam ahead with this effort to reduce the size and scope of the federal government. He's admitting some mistakes --
COATES: Uh-hmm.
SCHNELL: -- and some Republicans are keeping him accountable.
COATES: And there was that point, Brad, about whether he was the one firing people or not. And I have to say -- I mean, I don't think people thought that Elon Musk was personally firing individuals, but it was the directives of sorts or a pressure campaign. Can he really escape the blame for that or the accountability? Is it really such an epiphany to the Democrats -- for the Republicans?
BRAD TODD, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: I think he's going to take plenty of credit when this is all over with. And, you know, last night, you see the polls quickly about the state of the union. Sixty percent of the American public likes what President Trump had to say about cutting waste, fraud and abuse, and reducing the size of government.
You know, the cuts we mentioned there to the Veterans Administration, for instance, we're just talking about going back to the size the department was in 2019. Every American company has shrunk over the years due to the waste and fraud and abuse and efficiency measures. I think the regular taxpayers think that it's past time for us to reduce the size of government in Washington.
And while there certainly are going to be some mistakes made, as he admits, and they're going to have to correct some of those things, I just don't think that the voters are going to be upset that they see people in Washington finally trying to shake things up.
COATES: I think everyone agrees with the premise of they don't want fraud and they don't want waste.
KAREN FINNEY, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Right.
COATES: I think the difference is in the execution.
FINNEY: Oh, a thousand percent. Let's talk about what's happening at the VA. I mean, nine million veterans in this country get either mental or physical health care from the Veterans Administration. My own father actually had his cancer diagnosis from his VA doctor who said to him in 2016, you've got to go see an outside doctor because if you wait, you'll be dead before we get to you.
COATES: Hmm.
FINNEY: And if you think about the expansion from 2019 to today, it's because of the PACT Act. Seven hundred and forty thousand veterans signed up for health care. Why? Because of burn pits, something President Biden knows something very personally about, but also covering health care services, going back to the Vietnam era where we have veterans who are still suffering injuries around having been exposed to Agent Orange.
So, this is exact kind of underscores that point, right? It's the why that actually matters. It was the expansion of services to cover more veterans. And in fact, over the last 10 years, one of the efforts that the VA has been undertaking is to reach out to more veterans to make sure they know these resources are there.
And what's interesting, this is where I think the tension is really hitting. Part of the reason that they've sort of kind of taken a step back and said some of these things are going to be re-evaluated over the summer is the recognition that VA groups across the country, and we're talking about in our own network, we've seen Republicans who voted for Trump pushing back saying, this is not what I voted for.
COATES: Yeah.
FINNEY: I think that's the pressure that some of these Republican members are feeling. They're like, wait a second --
COATES: Karen, I ask you that, and you know I respect your mind so much and I'm not meaning this in any way. Why are the Democrats not as effective as you just now articulating a reason and a counter -- I mean --
FINNEY: Yeah.
COATES: -- that's what baffles a lot of people. The points that she has raised are cogent. They are sound.
TODD: Well, I would push back a little bit, though.
COATES: The Republicans are much more unanimous on it.
TODD: The PACT Act, Karen is right about the PACT Act with the burn pits. That is partly responsible for the VA's added responsibility. But that's not all. Joe Biden added plenty of bureaucrats to the VA Department. They found $3 billion in consulting contracts, $2 million for organizational training culture.
FINNEY: Well -- but hold on --
TODD: I mean, we can get rid of a lot of that stuff.
FINNEY: But that math isn't math-ing because actually, even I looked at a defense publication that talked about -- actually, when you go into the math on some of that, we're talking about -- actually, part of those contracts are about actually people sort of assessing disability, which is all about whether or not you're going to actually get access to health care and that's going to impact the rest of your life.
[23:10:07] It's actually about cancer diagnosis. I mean, those contracts, like we've seen, frankly, with DOGE, when you click in and really look at what they do, again, it's taking the chainsaw versus saying, let's take a beat. And look, I think they did the right thing and that they're slowing it down. And that's the thing they should be doing across the federal government.
TODD: Are you telling me that we can't cut waste out of the Department of Veterans Affairs?
FINNEY: Absolutely not, but you know where they could have started?
TODD: How come Democrats aren't doing it?
FINNEY: But you know where they could have started? Instead of firing the I.G., how about starting with the I.G. report where they had -- he had identified $45 million in potential cuts? They just fired him and threw out the report.
TODD: Where is the Democrat proposal to shrink the government and the like, get rid of federal employees that are useless?
FINNEY: I think what Democrats were saying was, let's work together on this because even Republicans --
TODD: Where is the proposal, though?
FINNEY: Even -- we're not in charge. You all are in charge. Even Republicans said -- hold on, even Republicans said today to Musk, hey, you know, if you want to make this the force of law, we're going to have to do --
TODD: And they will.
FINNEY: You're going to have to bring us in, and we'll have to do this through rescissions.
TODD: They will.
FINNEY: I don't think they're going to get the 50 votes from Republicans, and I don't think they think they're going to get a majority of Republicans in the House for some of these things.
COATES: Well, you know what? There is support in other areas, and that has been a big area, Michael, on tariffs in particular, right? The idea of people agreeing with the premise of the United States consumers being able to benefit from what products are on but, of course, the mechanism by doing so.
Trump has been dialing back yet again on tariffs after there was pressure from the automakers. Evaluate how members of Congress are viewing his tariff strategy. Is this politically sound? We're getting a lot of pushback.
SCHNELL: I think we're going to hear from a lot of Republican lawmakers who say this is part of President Trump's strategy. He threatens to put tariffs on the table. He puts down A, B, and C of things he wants to be accomplished, and he uses it as a negotiating tactic.
But as we see some of these tariffs on Mexico and Canada start to go into effect, the prices and the stock market changes are going to be difficult for Republican lawmakers to defend up on Capitol Hill. We always say it's the economy's stupid. It always comes back to the numbers.
Republican lawmakers were already seeing it, are heading back to their hometowns. They're having these town halls. And I suspect they're going to get an earful from some of these constituents when they see the stock market tumbling and they see prices continuing to decrease because of these tariffs. Now, that could be difficult in the interim, but I think a lot of Republican lawmakers are still going to want to stay with the argument that this is all part of the process. It's going to take a little pain until they get the benefits.
COATES: That was the point that Trump made last night, a little bit of discomfort. Is that going to carry water?
TODD: This is a balancing act for Donald Trump. There's certainly risk with tariffs. There are risks that prices could go up. There are risks that instability could cause problems in the business cycle. But there's also a lot of value in it.
You've already seen Honda Civic, for instance. Honda Motor Company is now going to make their Civic Hybrid in Indiana and not Mexico. Apple has now decided they're going to have half a trillion dollars of new factories in the United States. These are direct results of the threat of tariffs.
Trump is trying to reset the corporate mindset of where you manufacture things and force companies to pull as much as possible back to the United States. The threat of tariffs can be a very good tool with that, but there is certainly risk if he goes too far with on again, off again on some instability.
But I don't think you can rule out the fact that this will have a positive impact. I mean, currently right now, if you're in the American lumber business, you think Canada's duties on lumber are way too high. If you're in the dairy business, you think their duties are way too high. So, a threat of Canadian tariffs might cause some recalibration of that. There's a lot of value to it if he plays the game right.
FINNEY: I think that, just politically, look, the rubber is meeting the road with the American people and that -- it doesn't matter whether you're a Democrat or Republican.
That's where we're going to figure out whether or not this is politically smart or not because part of the pressure Republicans is actually putting on the White House is about the fact that they are getting contacted by their own people in their districts. They're getting contacted by veterans' groups. They're getting contacted by people who are losing their jobs and communities that are really suffering. Farmers, for example. So, I think, you know.
And then we've got to do the budget. And so, the layered impact of all of those things that we're going to see, was this a smart move or not? Again, as you pointed out, Laura, it's the way that you do it.
COATES: Yeah. And, of course, some, you know, American workers are in favor of tariffs. The American consumers might not be. And, of course, both parties have to think about that. Thank you, everyone.
Well, look, tariffs may be off for automakers, but not for everyone else.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Our farmers are going to have a field day right now. So, to our farmers, have a lot of fun.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Hmm. Will they? Next, a Trump-voting farmer tells us what the trade war will do to him and others. Plus, the U.S. pulling integral support for Ukraine, this time in the form of intelligence.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:15:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: The chaos from Trump's administration is felt not just here in the United States but globally, with many countries grappling at this very hour with how to respond to Trump's tariffs.
China has slapped an additional 10% and even 15% tariffs on key agricultural goods that are imported from this country, now in retaliation, a move that American soybean farmers will undoubtedly feel.
According to U.S. Census Data back in 2024, soybeans are the largest U.S. export to China that's affected by these tariffs, with trade totaling $12.76 billion. And China has now imposed an additional 10% tariff on soybeans.
Last night, Trump addressed his tariffs, admitting that there would be some disturbance felt. He also took the time to address farmers directly.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: The tariffs will go on agricultural product coming into America. And our farmers, starting on April 2nd, it may be a little bit of an adjustment period. Our farmers are going to have a field day right now.
[23:20:00] So, to our farmers, have a lot of fun.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Joining me now is a soybean farmer, Caleb Ragland, who voted for President Trump. He's also the president of the American Soybean Association. Caleb, thank you for joining. I'd love to get your reaction to what President Trump had to say last night. Thank you. What did you think when he said to have a lot of fun?
CALEB RAGLAND, PRESIDENT, AMERICAN SOYBEAN ASSOCIATION: Well, a trade war is not a soybean farmer's definition of fun.
COATES: Hmm.
RAGLAND: We went through this a few years ago, in 2018, and the effects on the soybean production in the United States and our prices were devastating. China is the number one export customer of U.S. soybeans. At that time, it was accounting for nearly $20 billion. And we lost about -- we lost -- 71% of the ag trade to China was soybeans. And we have not gained back the market share that we had at that time.
At that time, one out of three rows of soybeans you'd see growing in the field went to China. And now, we're around one out of four. That's a big gap that we've lost. Our competition has picked that up, and that has hurt our markets.
COATES: So, these tariffs, that might shift that even more away from your advantage, right?
RAGLAND: Absolutely.
COATES: What are you hearing from other farmers?
RAGLAND: That's what happened last time.
COATES: Yeah. Tell me more.
RAGLAND: Well, we're very concerned. The agriculture economy is in a pretty tough spot already. And basically, implementing tariffs is like you added a tax on our customers that are going to buy our products. So that means our soybeans are going to cost more. So, they're going to look to our competition in other countries to find a better value. And so, if we have less demand for our product and they're going elsewhere, that's going to further depress prices that are received by the farmers. And the farm economy is already struggling.
And now, we're looking at another shot across the bow. That's 180 degrees from the fund we've heard talked about. The American farmers need free trade and need market. Our American Soybean Association has, for many years, advocated for free trade and free market, no tariffs on the products that we grow and sell, and that's what we need. If we don't have exports, we don't have a good soybean economy.
COATES: We're talking about extensive and devastation to the livelihoods. Frankly, also a major part of our economy and exports on the points you've raised. Trump announced carve-outs for the auto industry and a delay of, I think, a month before they be re- implemented. Are you lobbying the White House for a delay or carve-out for soybean farmers?
RAGLAND: Every day, we challenge the White House. Let's find a way to make a deal with China. Let's do a new trade deal right now. We had the phase one trade deal during the first Trump administration. If we could do a proactive trade deal now upfront instead of a year or two down the road after major devastation is done to the agriculture economy and to the rural communities all across this country, the agriculture dollar, they say, turns over six to eight times in the local communities. And if you take that away, it means that there's a lot of small businesses, schools, churches --
COATES: Hmm.
RAGLAND: -- that are devastated by this. We end up losing people in rural America. That's who does a lot living and dying of working in this country. And we need to keep that strong because when we keep the backbone of this country strong, we keep America strong. We need strong agriculture, strong rural communities.
COATES: Caleb, look, I was raised in Minnesota. I know the impact of our farming communities and rural communities. I wonder, you voted for President Trump, what would you say to him now if he were listening to you as one of his supporters and voters?
RAGLAND: Well, I have great respect for the president. I think that he genuinely does care about our country. He wants to get out of control spending. He wants to reduce regulations and apply common sense. And my challenge to our president is to use common sense in this situation.
If you take away key markets from our farmers who we know he supports, that's going to mean that we're going to make less money. We're not going to be able to stay in business. We may have to seek other careers. There may be less children that are able to come back and be the next generation on our family farms. And that is a life changing event. And we need to really think about the secondary effects of these decisions and how these things trickle down.
COATES: Did you think that this would happen?
[23:24:58]
RAGLAND: We knew when this was discussed that it was a possibility. And certainly, any time there's a choice in election, you have to look at positives and negatives. There's a lot of positive things that President Trump brings to the table. He's a strong leader, and I think he's going to do a lot of good for our country.
But we need to make sure that farmers and particularly soybean farmers do not become a sacrificial lamb for the greater good and the bigger picture here. And I hope that we can come to some good compromise and do something that it works for everyone involved.
COATES: Caleb Ragland, thank you so much for joining.
RAGLAND: Thank you.
COATES: I want to take a quick step back because the trade war with Mexico and Canada and China isn't the only more chaos that has been started by this new world vision. It's also Trump's foreign policy plans as well. The White House confirming it is talking directly with Hamas to free the remaining hostages in Gaza. That's a break from the longstanding norm that the United States does not negotiate with terrorist organizations.
Meanwhile, the administration has stopped sharing intelligence with Ukraine. It's part of a pressure campaign to bring Ukraine's president, Vladimir Zelenskyy, back to the negotiating table. And for his part, Zelenskyy says he wants to talk peace. And both sides have agreed to meet in the -- quote -- "near future," according to a top Zelenskyy aide. It'd be a turnaround from the White House clash that ended with no security deal and dimmed some hopes about a deal to end Russia's war in Ukraine.
I'm going to talk more about this with Michael Weiss. He is the editor of "The Insider," which focuses on investigative journalism in Russia. Michael, Zelenskyy, he keeps pressing for security guarantees and the U.S. is pushing for a mineral deal. Will either side get what they want?
MICHAEL WEISS, EDITOR, THE INSIDER: I don't think so. I mean, Reuters was reporting today that suddenly, the United States wants to renegotiate the minerals deal, which as of last Friday was done and dusted, just waiting for the signature. So that indicates to me that Donald Trump wants to extract even more natural resources and more concessions from Ukraine.
You're getting this line from the GOP and the White House that cutting off intelligence, vital intelligence sharing with Ukrainians, stopping military aid, literally planes en route to Poland turned around mid- flight, that this is all a way to kind of show Zelenskyy who is boss.
And yet "The Washington Post" reports today that coordinate packages for HIMARS operators in Ukraine in terms of firing 40 miles beyond the contact line, these stopped being provided as long ago as a month.
So, it seems to me that maybe Donald Trump had a problem with Zelenskyy's outfit right after the inauguration when we were ready to invade Denmark or go to war with Mexico.
I think what's happening here, quite frankly, and a lot of Europeans that I'm talking to are beginning to see the writing on the wall, and a lot of Ukrainians are seeing the writing the writing on the wall, what is happening here is the United States is trying to strategically realign with Russia.
Trump sees Ukraine as one of two things, an opportunity to advance rapprochement with Russia or an obstacle in the advancement of that rapprochement. And insofar as he sees it as an obstacle, Ukraine and its president exist to be punished and abased. That, I think, is going to continue for the foreseeable future.
COATES: Yet the administration claims that they are only trying to get negotiation and leverage to end the war in Ukraine. We'll see if it continues to evolve.
I want to turn to Gaza. The administration is taking the unprecedented step of negotiating directly with Hamas to free the remaining hostages, usually against American policy, as you well know, to directly negotiate with terrorist organizations. But President Trump did this in the past with the Taliban, for example. Is this now the new blueprint?
WEISS: Well, I mean, he also put out on Truth Social a direct threat to Hamas and the people of Gaza, saying that, you know, this was their last chance. They have to release the hostages and the dead bodies of the hostages that they've killed. Otherwise, the people of Gaza, you know, they'll all be dead.
I mean, this indicates one of two things. Number one, a contra to what Trump and his officials are saying with respect to Russia. You can threaten an enemy in pursuit of diplomacy, if indeed diplomacy is what you're after. And number two, you know, are we talking about the collective punishment of Palestinians if a terrorist organization refuses to play ball with the United States? Because it certainly sounds that way to me reading what Trump is putting out there.
I'm frankly surprised there isn't more outrage at that statement but then again, I think our standards are being lowered fast and furiously all the time here. So, maybe I'm behind the curve.
COATES: The threshold has indeed changed throughout the years. I'll give you that, Michael Weiss. Thank you so much.
WEISS: Uh-hmm.
COATES: Next, paddles, pink, protest. Democrats antics last night at their presidential address have a lot of people shaking their heads, including my next guest, Democratic Congressman Ro Khanna.
[23:30:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: Now, you know, while President Trump took a victory lap during last night's speech before a joint session of Congress, some Democrats decided to protest.
Representative Al Green heckled Trump over potential Medicaid cuts while waving his cane. He now faces censor. A few House members walked out midway through the speech. Others held up paddles, calling out Trump's falsehoods in real time. Now, the review of Democrats' conduct is, well, harsh, even from some of their own. Senator John Fetterman of Pennsylvania thought the response lacked decorum and played into Trump's hand.
[23:34:58] He posted on X, a sad cavalcade of self owns and unhinged petulance. It only makes Trump look more presidential and restrained. The Democrats' tactics also became the butt of late-night jokes.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
STEPHEN COLBERT, CBS HOST: That is how you save democracy, by quietly dissenting or bidding on an antique tea set. It was hard to tell what was going on.
(LAUGHTER)
I'm just kidding. That was very cool, Democrats. In fact, I made my own sign.
(LAUGHTER)
(APPLAUSE)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Joining me now is Democratic representative from California, Congressman Ro Khanna. Congressman, thank you for being here. You see the paddles. They did not go over well. They did not --
REP. RO KHANNA (D-CA): I didn't have one.
COATES: You did not have one. Why was that the tactic? Do you know? Was that planned? Why?
KHANNA: Well, look, I am actually in agreement with Senator Fetterman that there has to be some decorum to the chamber. I mean, maybe it's because I was born in Pennsylvania, grew up in Pennsylvania. Most people, they're decent, they're patriotic, they expect you to listen. And we could have stood when we did -- you know, I did when the president came in. You don't have to applaud when you disagree with him.
COATES: Uh-hmm.
KHANNA: Stand for the 13-year-old boy who has cancer. And then go out and tell the facts, which is that he's not telling the truth on Social Security. I mean, there is not this 20 million people of fraud. He's cutting Medicaid. He's having mass firing of veterans. I mean, 80,000 people possibly will be laid off at the Veterans Affairs. That's what we need to be emphasizing. Instead of Colbert making fun of that, now he's making fun of Democrats.
COATES: And by the way, I mean, Trump at one point baited Democrats or challenged by saying, no matter what I do -- I'm paraphrasing him -- you won't stand for anything. To the points you raised, why was there not more unanimity about, well, things that had common ground?
KHANNA: Well, the day before, I actually was the only Democrat who went to First Lady Trump's roundtable because I supported the Take It Down Act. Now, what is the Take It Down Act? It is saying that if you have sexually explicit AI-generated images --
COATES: Uh-hmm.
KHANNA: -- of young people, the social media companies need to take it down. That's common sense. It passed the Senate 100 to 0. Why shouldn't Democrats support some things we agree on and then oppose these mass firings, oppose the Medicaid cuts, oppose blanket tariffs that are causing harm in the economy? The case we ought to be making against President Trump is it is chaos. It's governance by chaos. But we've got to be the responsible party to be able to make that.
COATES: Well, one of the things that Congressman Al Green did was stand up. He was saying something to the effect of, you don't have a mandate to cut Medicaid. He was escorted out eventually. He's now facing censor. Republicans in the past have, at different addresses by a president, including President Barack Obama, they have lashed out. Is this fair to treat him with censor or was he also wrong?
KHANNA: I don't think he should be censored. And look, he's a 77- year-old African-American gentleman who has seen civil rights. I'm not going to tell Al Green what he should do or should not do.
But what I will say is that, in my view, we have to uphold the decorum, whether it's a Democratic or Republican president. I didn't like it when Republicans heckled President Obama. And I don't think it's effective to be heckling Donald Trump. I mean, next time we have a Democratic president, which we will, are we going to say that the Republicans aren't going to listen? I just think we can be better than that as a country.
COATES: The decorum, that is absent, perhaps, in summary, and is also seemingly absent in places like, well, committee hearings. You were actually at the House Oversight hearing today with four liberal city mayors. And there was a lot of heated moments, especially between Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley and also Chairman Comer. Listen to this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. AYANNA PRESSLEY (D-MA): Data from Texas shows that U.S. born Americans --
REP. JAMES COMER (R-KY): No. No, that is not --
PRESSLEY: -- 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 my procedural right as a member of this committee to enter documents into the record.
COMER: I recognize Mr. -- you can go -- you can go with Mr. Frost (ph) to Mr. Green (ph).
PRESSLEY: I am reclaiming my time. You do not get to dictate how I recite the articles for the record.
COMER: That's what you ought -- no, no. Ms. Pressley, I've been very -- I have been very accommodating to you. Mr. (INAUDIBLE), start the clock, start the clock.
PRESSLEY: And I take particular Umbridge as a survivor of sexual violence. I will enter into record.
COMER: Order --
PRESSLEY: This is my right.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: By the way, after about six hours, this hearing wrapped, and Comer said this was the best behaved the Oversight Committee had been. Can the committee get anything done? There are actually serious matters. The idea that one could speak up and be accused of just looking for a sound bite and click bait, that seems to be a theme.
KHANNA: Well, look, Representative Pressley is not one to be sensational.
COATES: Uh-hmm.
KHANNA: She's actually very, very substantive. She was just trying to enter something into the record. There, I think she had the procedural right. I think Chairman Comer should have just said, okay, we'll enter it into the record and let's focus on the issues.
But, you know, this is why people laugh at Congress. They look at this and they say this is not how a kindergarten class behaves, this is not how high school behaves, and it's a demerit on all of us.
[23:40:05]
And so, my view is let's argue the issues. There are plenty of places that Donald Trump is failing the working and middle class. But let's be the bigger party. Let's -- let's -- I actually still agree. I'm one of the few people who still agrees with Michelle Obama when she said, when they go low, we go high.
And you know where that comes from? It doesn't come from weakness. It comes from Dr. King, it comes from John Lewis, it comes from a history of oppression. When attack is against you, you show your inner strength and you rise above and you inspire. That's what I want the Democratic Party to do.
COATES: Is it still politically effective?
KHANNA: I think so. I mean, look, I would argue that Dr. King and John Lewis faced much worse odds. They faced a much tougher America. They had far fewer resources. But they knew that if they had the higher ground, that people would respond to it.
And I'm not saying we have to be saints like they were. I'm saying that we can punch back on the issues, but let's carry ourselves with a decorum and a respect. And you look at John F. Kennedy, you look at Barack Obama, those are the type of Democrats who end up inspiring the nation.
COATES: We shall see. Congressman, thank you so much for joining.
KHANNA: Thank you.
COATES: Well, ahead, it was an AI tool meant to generate opposing perspective. But then it came up with pro-KKK arguments. Now, the billionaire owner of the L.A. Times is having to backtrack as he tries to win back subscribers. Plus, Target faces a 40-day boycott for rolling back DEI policies. Will the anger expand to other companies?
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:45:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: Well, the L.A. Times is in hot water tonight after a newly- released AI tool on its opinion page generated a sympathetic view of the KKK. The newly-unveiled "Insights" button was initially featured on the op-ed page on Monday. It allows a reader to access an AI- generated analysis of any opinion piece. The L.A. Times says the editorial staff does not create or edit that content.
Now here's the problem: Last week, an opinion piece was published about the KKK history in Anaheim, California. That was back in the 1920s. That was when the KKK won the majority of city council seats.
But when that same AI tool was added on Monday, viewers clicked it, and it read this: Local historical accounts occasionally frame the 1920s Klan as a product of -- quote -- "white Protestant culture" responding to societal changes rather than an explicitly hate-driven movement, minimizing its ideological threat.
No mention of the Klan's violence and racist history. Joining us now is CNN chief media analyst Brian Stelter. Brian, glad to see you. I mean, this tool was designed to give L.A. Times readers opposing viewpoint to its opinion stories. But, obviously, they got the history wrong.
BRIAN STELTER, CNN CHIEF MEDIA ANALYST, AUTHOR, SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT FOR VANITY FAIR: Right.
COATES: Aside from that limitation, of course, of AI, what's the takeaway for you?
STELTER: Yeah, this columnist was saying, in essence, we can't forget the past, we can't forget this racist history, and then the AI tool comes along and tries to whitewash the history. The AI bot is there, according to the L.A. Times, to provide different views on the topic.
But in this case, it basically (INAUDIBLE) the KKK. The idea of (INAUDIBLE), you know, it is a problem in politics where you treat all different sizes being equally right or wrong. Well, in this case, the KKK is just plain wrong, the AI bot said otherwise. It's bad enough when humans do this, Laura. It's even worse when a chat bot does it.
COATES: I mean, the L.A. Times billionaire owner, his name Patrick Soon-Shiong, he called this tool an experimental evolving technology. So, is that code for --
STELTER: Right.
COATES: -- I use it too soon?
STELTER: Maybe. So, since the election, Soon-Shiong has been trying to figure out ways to draw in readers and appeal to both conservatives as well as liberal readers. He says he's worried about people not hearing each other, listening to other sides. And if we take that in good faith, that's an understandable concern.
But to bring an AI might be the wrong approach to the right problem. He's saying that using AI, he can provide a greater variety of points of view about subjects. But, you know, that may help earn trust, but a case like this also shows how that can backfire.
These AI tools are getting more powerful by the day. I mean, we are talking about an environment where we're going through rapid technological change. But these chat boxes, these large language models, they also still make pretty dumb mistakes. They still have amazingly large blind spots in some cases. And this episode shows that, for sure.
COATES: Different views? Great. Different facts when one is not a fact? Bad. Brian Stelter, thank you so much.
STELTER: Precisely.
COATES: Well, boycott is on. Black faith leaders calling on consumers to keep their dollars out of Target's coffers. One of them joins me next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:50:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNKNOWN: You don't believe in DEI, so I don't believe in giving you money.
UNKNOWN: Target tricked us for so long, talking about inclusivity, supporting black brands.
UNKNOWN: Do not shop at Target. We are boycotting them.
UNKNOWN: They are definitely in the FAFO stage.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: That was a small taste of the uproar caused by Target's recent move to roll back its diversity policies. And tonight, faith leaders in the Black community are pushing back, kicking off a 40-day boycott of the company.
Now, why is Target, well, the target? After the murder of George Floyd and the ensuing protest, the company became one of the most outspoken corporate supporters of DEI. But now, as the new administration cracks down on DEI, they're changing their tune.
Joining us now is one of the faith leaders calling on his congregants to partake in the boycott, Bishop Reginald Jackson. Bishop, thank you for joining us. Can you just describe what you're hoping to achieve through this boycott?
REGINALD JACKSON, BISHOP, AFRICAN METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH: I want to send a message to the corporate community. If you can't stand with us, we can't stand with you. If you can't help us to advance, there's no need for us to help you to advance. Our dollars ought to count for something. And so, our dollars also ought to stand for something. We want to send that message to Corporate America. And Target, because of its decision or decisions already made, is a prime example.
COATES: There are other companies that have rolled back their policies. Target is not alone in this space. Why is Target the bullseye?
JACKSON: Well, we looked at different figures and all, and Blacks contribute an overwhelming amount of funds to Target. And so, Target becomes one of the better choices for us. That does not mean there will not be others added.
[23:55:00]
I mean, the Target is a good place for us to start and send the message. It's important we send the message.
COATES: It has only been about a day. I do wonder, why the 40 days? Does that correspond to something in particular or that's the -- just a key figure?
JACKSON: Forty days, really, is a message that relates to the Lenten season. Today is Ash Wednesday, the beginning of Lent. It reminds us, for example, of the 40 days with the children of Israel. So, it's to send a message that this is not just about finances, but it's also about principle, it's also about justice, it's also about calling people to conscience. So, it's trying to send a message that there's got to be something that we stand for and some principle we believe in.
COATES: There is a concern of prospective collateral damage on entities that are in support of what Target is rolling back. I want you to listen, bishop, to a perspective that has been spoken about by Melissa Butler. Now, she happens to be one of the CEO of the largest Black-owned makeup companies that actually is carried in Target. Listen to what she says.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MELISSA BUTLER, CEO, THE LIP BAR: Of course, we were disappointed just like many of you when we learned that they were rolling back their DEI initiatives. We do have power in our dollars. Um, but I do want to make sure that we are aware that, you know, by -- by not shopping in these stores, you are also impacting the hundreds of black-owned businesses and women-owned businesses and, you know, brown person-owned businesses that are in these stores.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: A double-edged sword. What's your reaction?
JACKSON: Well, let's deal with reality. We understand that there are Black vendors who are involved with Target. We've said to our people, and we've made a very strong point, that you can still shop with them online. You don't have to go in the store to support them. So, support them online.
COATES: What's the difference then, bishop? If you're going to support them, the money goes to the same pot.
JACKSON: Well, no, because the fact of the matter is the arrangement that many of these vendors have with Target, those vendors benefit from their relationship with Target. And so, we're not trying to destroy any of these Black businesses. But the second thing is if we do nothing, then we say to the country, well, what they're saying really doesn't matter. We don't want to hurt anybody. We're not going to bother anybody. And the best thing to do is to do nothing, which I think is really hypocritical and foolish on our part.
COATES: Oh, I see. You're saying you could support the individual vendor online, but just not -- you're not going to Target.com --
JACKSON: That's correct.
COATES: -- and you're not walking into the store. I understand.
JACKSON: That's correct.
COATES: You know, one of the things that this president, Donald Trump, has spoken about is about dismantling DEI more broadly.
JACKSON: Uh-hmm.
COATES: In fact, last night at his address to Congress, he expressed as much again. Listen to this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: We've ended the tyranny of so-called diversity, equity, and inclusion policies all across the entire federal government and indeed the private sector and our military.
(APPLAUSE)
And our country will be woke no longer.
(APPLAUSE)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Bishop, many are turning to their faith leaders to try to process moments like that. What are you telling them?
JACKSON: Well, the fact of the matter is they don't want us to be woke. They would prefer us to be ignorant. And the fact of the matter is the Black church has a responsibility to help our people not only to be awake, but to be informed and to know the truth.
And the reality is all of these, about diversity, equity and all of that being bad for America, the fact of the matter is America's greatness comes because of its diversity.
This stuff about make America great again, let's be blunt and honest. It's really about turning back time to a period when they thought America was great, when people of color and Blacks stayed in your place. As the president said, there are some Black jobs. Those Black jobs are menial jobs.
We resent and we reject the inference that any Blacks who gets promoted is because of tokenism and not because of merit. We resent the notion that anybody in position of leadership who was white, they've earned it. If you're Black in there, you didn't earn it. You got it because of some special privilege. All that speaks of is white privilege.
And the fact of the matter is, and our white sisters need to understand, all this make America great again, it doesn't include them either. It's really to benefit white men. I never understood what they meant when they said, the angry white men. Why are they angry? They are running everything.
COATES: Hmm.
JACKSON: So, the fact of the matter is we've got to make it clear that diversity is a blessing to this country. That inclusion is a blessing to this country. If this country doesn't believe that, take down the Statue of Liberty and let's move on.
COATES: Will your message be received is the question.
[00:00:00]
Bishop Reginald Jackson, thank you for tonight.
JACKSON: Delighted to be with you.
COATES: Thank you. And I thank you all for watching. "Anderson Cooper 360" is next.
