Return to Transcripts main page
Laura Coates Live
Trump Tariff Whiplash Creates Economic Uncertainty; Trump Tells Cabinet Members They're in Charge of Staff, not Musk; Veteran Fired in DOGE Cuts Speaks Out; Conservative Podcaster Petitions Trump to Pardon Derek Chauvin; Judge Rebukes Trump in Scathing Ruling: "President Not A King." Aired 11p-12a ET
Aired March 06, 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]
ABBY PHILLIP, CNN ANCHOR AND SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: -- work issue devices. That is according to a new memo obtained by CNN. Employees also can't access sports websites or online shopping, and any exceptions will have to be approved by the employee's supervisor. Just in time for March Madness.
Thank you all very much for watching "NewsNight." "Laura Coates Live" starts right now.
LAURA COATES, CNN HOST AND SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: The president who cried tariffs? Well, now, everyone from our neighbors to Wall Street is asking, what's he actually trying to do? Plus, Trump puts Elon Musk in DOGE on a kind of a leash. Why he wants Mr. Chainsaw to now use a scalpel and telling him to get more aggressive. And could Derek Chauvin be pardoned? Conservative commentators latch on to the idea, including one of Trump's most powerful advisers. All tonight on "Laura Coates Live."
All right, everyone, at this point, you are probably asking yourself this very question: Are we in a trade war with our neighbors or are we not in a trade war with our neighbors? It seems like every -- even President Trump doesn't actually know what direction to take because he's hitting the pause button again, delaying most tariffs on Mexico and Canada for now a month. Our allies, frankly, they're confused. Businesses don't know what to do. And the markets, well, they're in the red.
Trump was asked about all of this in the Oval Office.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNKNOWN: Some of these exemptions that have been announced and some of these temporary delays, have you been influencing those decisions because of the market reaction?
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Well, there are no delays at all. No, nothing to do with the market. I'm not even looking at the market.
(END VIDEO CLIP) COATES: No delays? Not quite. He outright delayed the tariffs on Canada and Mexico, if you remember, last month. In the past two days, he has put targeted pauses in place. As far as not looking at the markets, well, it would be hard not to look at this. The Dow is down big. And today, it didn't even rebound when the newest pause was announced because at this point, Wall Street doesn't know what to make of it all, even the countries that are getting hit with those tariffs.
So, are we back to the take Trump seriously, not literally? No. Seriously debate once again? Is it all a head fake, or is it a good negotiation? Will some strategy out of the art of the new deal, perhaps, or art of the deal?
Now, for a deal to be made, we all know that everyone involved needs to actually know what Trump actually wants, and he seems to have been all over the place.
Is it stopping the flow of fentanyl into America? Remember that he slammed Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau for not doing enough there. But Canada accounted for 0.2% of fentanyl seizures at our borders in 2024. That's about 43 pounds.
And as for Mexico, well, President Claudia Sheinbaum brought out a prop today to show how the amount of fentanyl seized at the southern border has dramatically fallen. She actually stood by this chart, citing figures from the United States government. She says Trump didn't know about the drop until Mexico sent him the data.
Now, could the plan be cracking down on illegal immigration? Well, he has said so on the campaign trail, certainly. Well, here's what Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick says about all that today.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HOWARD LUTNICK, UNITED STATES SECRETARY OF COMMERCE: Okay, so, the Mexicans and the Canadians have done a nice job on the border, meaning you have illegal crossings at their lowest level ever.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: And what about moving manufacturing back to America? Here's the problem: Expecting companies to move production to the U.S. in a month is to pie in the sky, pipe dream. We're talking about an undertaking of probably many months, maybe even longer to do that. Whatever Trump is trying to accomplish in the short term or in the long term, all of the uncertainty is certainly causing more Republicans to speak up.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. JOHN KENNEDY (R-LA): You remember the old saying, the danger of rising high is that the air gets thin.
UNKNOWN: Hmm.
KENNEDY: Um, I'm worried about the tariffs. UNKNOWN: Yep.
KENNEDY: I'm -- I'm not saying that tariffs are going to cause inflation. President Trump did them in his first term, and they didn't. I'm saying that we just don't know. We're in very obscure territory. We're in uncharted waters.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Joining me now, Stacy Schneider, opinion contributor at the "U.S. News and World Report" and also a former contestant on "The Apprentice." Also, David Cay Johnson, the author of "The Making of Donald Trump," and Rick Newman, a senior columnist at "Yahoo! Finance." Glad to have all of you here.
David, let me begin with you because President Trump, as you know, is backing down on these tariffs, but he says there's nothing to do with the markets. Now, looking at the markets, what do you think and why does he negotiate like this?
DAVID CAY JOHNSON, AUTHOR: Well, I would argue Donald doesn't really know what he's doing.
[23:05:00]
He's appallingly ignorant. But what he's doing is accruing power to himself. He can grant exemptions and favors to this business or that industry, which we saw him do in his first term, and that simply enhances his power and his belief. You'll recall from his first term -- I have an article, too -- I can do anything I want. It's not what the Constitution says, but that's what Donald believes. He believes he has dictatorial authority.
COATES: Well, he has already talked about a mandate. But the other "M" word of the week has been the market, right? I mean, Rick, businesses, they don't like turmoil. The market, obviously, has dropped more than, I think, 1,300 points in the last four days alone. And the tariffs could be back in a month. So, this is all having an actual impact on our markets. But also, is it undermining confidence in our markets more broadly?
RICK NEWMAN, SENIOR COLUMNIST, YAHOO! FINANCE: It is for the moment. It's -- I mean, temporarily, it is, for sure. I mean, that's why we're seeing this pullback.
And one of the things -- one of the things happening among businesses is they are just putting off decisions about should they spend money, should they make plans to invest money. They're just putting that off because they need to know where they're going to invest the money. Are they going to be punished if they invested in one country or another? So, that's why we're seeing this pullback.
Markets aren't -- just don't know how far Trump is going to go with tariffs, and we're finally seeing the reality of that indecision right now. Trump is contributing to this decision. I think the question for markets is, what is Trump's retreat threshold? How much damage does he have to cause before he actually pulls back? So, we got a hint of that today. Markets are down about 4% this week. They're down about 7% from the peak a few weeks ago. So that gives you some idea. That's the threshold where Trump says, okay, I've done enough damage for now, I'm going to pull back a little.
COATES: You know, Stacy, I heard the word retreat just used, and I have to tell you, that, in the same sentence as a Trump negotiation, I think, is a little bit jarring for people. I mean, you've seen him in a boardroom. Do you think he is indeed retreating or is this somehow part of a strategy that we're missing a forest through the trees?
STACY SCHNEIDER, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR, U.S. NEWS AND WORLD REPORT: No, I don't think we're missing the forest through the trees. It is a retreat but it's a Trump retreat. So, Donald Trump has three negotiating styles. One is my way or the highway. The second one is, take no prisoners. And the third one is, um, he -- it's -- the third one is that he is not going to let anyone loose out of a deal. It's his terms only. And if you don't take those terms, he doesn't like it.
But what's happening now is despite his reply to that reporter who asked him if it's the markets that caught -- that are causing him to back off the tariff situation, and he said, I'm not even looking at that and the American people will be happy, this is a long-term situation and it's going to work out really great for everybody, he is absolutely looking at the markets.
Business is his brand. It has always been his brand and it remains his brand in the White House. And Donald Trump wants to be the darling of Wall Street. He does not want to be the pariah of Wall Street. And these market drops are happening under his watch. And now, he cannot blame Joe Biden for what's going on today because this is -- the buck is stopping with Donald Trump. So, he is retreating from the policy, and it's to save face.
And it didn't help him. Trudeau, the prime minister of Canada, just said a few days ago that these tariffs on Canada and the other countries are a dumb idea. "The Wall Street Journal" said that as well. And Donald Trump is not used to having people who are in the echelons that he plays in criticize him that way publicly.
COATES: Hmm.
SCHNEIDER: It's an embarrassment. So, he's backing away.
COATES: Well, on that point, Rick, I mean, one analysis found that the tariffs on Canada, also Mexico, also China, they could cost families up to $2,000 a year. People are already griping about, justifiably so, about prices being so high. How will Americans afford that?
NEWMAN: Yeah, this is -- this is a great point. Americans, because of the inflation we've had for the last three years, they are extremely sensitive to any price hikes right now.
COATES: Uh-hmm.
NEWMAN: Like, people have just had it. They don't want to see the price of anything go up. They want to see prices come down. That's why Trump won. Trump didn't win because voters were like, hey, we want you and Elon Musk to take a chainsaw to the government. They want -- he won because voters want lower -- lower prices and lower inflation.
So, I -- I -- I do want to caution. If all the Trump tariffs go into effect, we're -- we're not going to have 10% inflation. You know, we might have inflation that goes from 3% to 3.8% or 4%. It -- it's -- it's not going to be ruinous. And on its own, it probably would not cause a recession.
[23:10:02]
But this is the wrong time to be doing anything that raises prices. Americans want prices to come down. Trump has no answer on egg inflation. I mean, this is --
(LAUGHTER)
You know, this is sitting out there like a goose egg. Excuse -- excuse the pun but --
COATES: It's chicken eggs we got a problem with right now. Chicken eggs, not goose.
NEWMAN: -- this is what Americans want.
COATES: I get your point, though. I -- I hear you on that. David, you know, Trump told automakers there will be no more delays. He's vowing to go ahead with the reciprocal tariffs on April 2nd. But what if, to Rick's larger point, what if the blowback is even worse? What then?
CAY JOHNSON: I think he'll come up with another delay and an excuse. And his tariffs are very badly designed in many ways. One of them is there's a tariff on Canadian energy, but he excluded wind. And Donald Trump absolutely detests electricity from wind turbines, but he didn't put a tariff on it.
COATES: You know, forgive me for my non-economic background, but how does one tax the wind? Don't answer. That's a whole different conversation. Thank you, everyone. We'll talk again.
Here to discuss the political fallout, we've got Charlie Dent, a former Pennsylvania Republican congressman, and Emily Austin, a Republican political commentator as well. Glad to have you both.
Let me get with you, Charlie, because the president's decision to suspend tariffs, many are viewing this as a kind of admission that maybe he is looking at the market, that maybe there was a little about getting ahead of his skis. Do you see it that way as well?
CHARLIE DENT, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, FORMER PENNSYLVANIA REPRESENTATIVE: Well, of course, he's looking at the markets. And what I think Donald Trump needs to understand is that what business is like are certainty, predictability, and stability. And with this -- these whips -- this whiplash that we're all getting from these tariffs are -- are unsettling.
And -- and frankly, businesses are -- they're -- they're smart people. They know that these tariffs are going to harm American manufacturing because much of what is imported are inputs for things that we make. That's the hard reality.
And American agriculture knows the challenge here, too. Farmers export so much product, and they will be the objects of retaliation on corn and on pork --
COATES: Soybeans.
DENT: -- and other commodities. Soybeans, other commodities. They know that. So, I -- I can't understand the economics of this. Trump went to the Wharton Business School. I mean, they want their -- they probably want their diploma back because there's no way. These tariffs are going to protect the privileged few at the expense of the many. And I can assure you, it will be inflationary. Prices will go up.
He put a 25% tariff on steel. Well, who uses steel? Oh, people who make cars and trucks and other users. Prices will go up. Steel prices will go up. Oh, they want to stop steel coming in from other countries? Well, domestic producers will raise their prices.
COATES: But, Emily, to this point, the White House and Republican lawmakers, though, they are messaging that people are willing to pay more because these tariffs are willing to do so. Listen to what they've had to say.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. MARKWAYNE MULLIN (R-OK): As American people ready to get the country back on track and do what it -- do what it needs to -- do what it takes to get and make that happen, absolutely, we're going to have to adjust some prices for it.
SCOTT BESSENT, UNITED STATES SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY: Access to cheap goods is not the essence of the American dream.
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: It'll be a little disturbance, but we're okay with that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: I mean, maybe that's the royal we of who's okay with it. But can you reconcile the idea of Americans wanting lower prices, having the economic interest that Charlie and I just talked about, and then this idea of the tariffs?
EMILY AUSTIN, REPUBLICAN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yeah. I also want to remind the viewers and yourself that it was Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen that reaffirmed that tariffs don't, in fact, actually inflate the American economy in defense of tariffs that Joe Biden at the time wanted to emplace. And I also want to point out a few contradictory statements saying, well, Trump is, you know, giving us whiplash on his tariff policies. But on the other hand, I view that as coming into something and not wanting to settle on an imperfect deal.
So, the reason, you know, they're calling it -- what is he? Walking back on it. I'll call it a suspension in the meantime, a little bit of a delay, because he, in fact, is doing this because he wants to protect the farmers, and he wants to protect the auto manufacturing employees and give them some time.
Like you said, they can't do it in a month. You can't possibly make 250,000 American jobs in one month. So, if you delay it, you have the possibility of bringing the work back to the states, which is exactly what he wants to implement.
Now, you asked, well, is he not looking at the markets? I think he has made it quite clear that his goal is to stop the fentanyl crisis, and I don't think you can put a price on one's life.
COATES: No. I -- certainly understand the impact of fentanyl. I think the larger point is, to Yellen point, no one disputes that tariffs are technically going to go to the people who are importing, etcetera, but it's going to impact because the burden will be felt by the American consumer. So, the question is, why now? Why do you think Trump is doing the suspensions now given the fact that he was very invested in having these tariffs and has campaigned on the idea of Americans wanting lower taxes -- lower prices, excuse me?
DENT: Well, he's scared. I mean, he sees -- he sees what's happening to the markets.
[23:15:01]
I mean, he can read. I mean --
COATES: Her point is that he's not afraid. He's actually trying to salvage and help people. What's your take?
DENT: Well, let's -- let's start with the fentanyl issue. It's the Chinese Communist Party that has the problem with -- they're -- they're the ones causing the fentanyl problem here. It's not the Canadians. These -- these tariffs are being imposed on Canada. In the name of national security, we've never had a better friend and ally. There's cemetery in Normandy. The Canadians, right down the road from ours, if anybody needs to understand that better.
But I -- it just seems to me that the president is nervous because there will be inflationary impacts. And the -- and the auto sector in particular, we're talking price increase as much as $10,000 a car, that's not a de minimis impact, that's a real -- that's a real hit.
And when you talk to these farmers, they know what's coming. They're going to lose market share. They're going to have to take this tariff revenue and use it to subsidize farmers for the share. COATES: I've talked to a soybean farmer last night. He's the head of the association. He had that similar notion although he was very still very complimentary of the president and believing that that there was going be good coming out of it. But what's your reaction to that? If this is going to have this great burden on the American consumers, how do you reconcile that if you're Trump?
AUSTIN: You know, I will -- I'll give it a point that Trump is not looking at tomorrow's stock market, and he's looking more long term than short term, because overall, if you look at his tariffs, over the next four years, you'll see you'll see more American-created jobs, you'll see more money into our economy.
I will also want to point out, we discussed a bit in the green room about DOGE. You know, we have our disputes over it but we are, in fact, saving billions of dollars of waste and fraud and eliminating that, which will put money back into the American people's hands. So, you can give and take. There's the pros and cons but, ultimately, it'll level itself out. We can't think short term. We have to see the bigger picture here.
DENT: But -- but I would argue, for every -- if you're trying to protect an industry, take steel.
COATES: Uh-hmm.
DENT: You -- you rate -- you impose tariffs. You will end up costing more jobs for those who use -- for those who use steel than you will save of the -- of the steelmakers. That's the reality. We see this all the time. And the impacts are going to be very negative on the producers in our country, manufacturers and farmers.
I mean, how many times -- we went through this in the 1930s. Smoot- Hawley exacerbated the Great Depression. And you know what? We ran trade surpluses in the 1930s. Did anybody really notice when unemployment was at 20%? I mean, this is what we're dealing with in this country. We should not be returning to the 1930s or the 1890s tariff policy. It's a different world now.
You know, America, we shouldn't be talking about tariffs and subsidies. That's what the Chinese do. Why don't we talk about breaking down barriers, lowering tariffs, helping American producers sell overseas? We're -- we're 20% of global GDP. We're 5% of global population. We didn't do this by selling to each other.
COATES: Well, we'll see. The part of the complaint has been about the absence of reciprocity in tariffs, an idea of fairness, and we'll see how the American people view it. Is it a short term or a long-term proposition? We are only, I know, news flash, less than two months in.
Charlie, Emily, thank you both so much.
AUSTIN: Thank you.
COATES: Two weeks ago, it was this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
(MUSIC PLAYING)
ELON MUSK, CEO OF TESLA MOTORS, LEADER OF DEPARTMENT OF GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY: This is the chainsaw for bureaucracy. Chainsaw.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: But now, Trump is telling his Cabinet that Musk isn't in charge of staffing. Is there a break between the president and the first buddy? Plus, a disabled veteran speaks out after getting cut from the V.A. Department.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:20:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: Well, tonight, President Trump wants his administration to exchange the chainsaw for a scalpel as Elon Musk endorsed slash federal jobs. Trump says Cabinet secretaries are in charge with a caveat.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: And I said I want the Cabinet members go first. Keep all the people you want. Everybody that you need. Elon and the group are going to be watching them. And if they can cut, it's better. And if they don't cut, then Elon will do the cutting.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Hmm. The number of jobs last month that were lost is the highest since July of 2020. Yes, during the pandemic. That's up 245% just since January. Nearly 40% of those cuts came from the federal workforce, AKA DOGE. Now, some Republicans are criticizing the job cuts. Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski calling them -- quote -- "confusing and callous."
With me now, Molly Ball, senior political correspondent for "The Wall Street Journal," and Sara Fischer, CNN medial analyst and senior media reporter for Axios.
Well, Molly, I mean, he -- President Trump is shifting responsibility for slashing jobs to the actual agency heads. But he then says, but if they don't do it, then Musk will. So, I'm not saying the clear distinction between what the current policy is and before, but is this recognition in some way that either there is a lot of fretting as to who's in control or where the blame should actually be?
MOLLY BALL, SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL: I think, you know, everything that we hear from the White House is that the president himself is still very thrilled with the job that Elon Musk is doing. He loved being able to read out, you know, the silly line items at the -- in the speech to Congress on Tuesday night. He thinks that this is all going really well.
But I think what we're hearing is some trickling up of complaints from others in the administration, particularly, you know, these newly- confirmed Cabinet secretaries. You cannot get people more loyal to Trump --
COATES: Right.
BALL: -- than the people he has put in his Cabinet, and so they would like to be in charge of things. And we saw this, I think, for the first time with that first email that Elon sent out, and then immediately some secretaries up to and including, you know, Pete Hegseth at the Pentagon saying, actually, don't answer the email, I'm -- I'm the one who's in charge of, you know, things like performance reviews and deciding who gets cut.
[23:24:56]
So, I think what -- I think the president's comments are more a reflection of the feedback that he's getting from others in the administration than any personal dissatisfaction that he feels because he still feels like this thing that Elon is doing is directionally on the whole good and not making him look bad, and that's ultimately the metric for Donald Trump.
COATES: You've got some new reporting as well as to what agency heads are actually saying about all of this. What can you tell us?
SARA FISCHER, CNN MEDIA ANALYST, SENIOR MEDIA REPORTER FOR AXIOS: Well, I think they're frustrated because when you're going in and you're doing these huge unilateral cuts, you're going to have a lag in which American people are actually impacted, whether they're farmers or they're people who are going to receive benefits from the government. And those are constituents, people who are not just voting, you know, for their local politicians, but they also voted potentially for Donald Trump in this election, but they didn't quite realize how they themselves are going be impacted.
And so, I think one of the things that's bubbling up now to the administration is be careful if you overcut because we all have approval ratings that we need to be mindful of, we need the buy in for the American people, and if we go and we just wipe people out, we're not going to get it.
The other thing you're starting to see, Laura, is that Elon Musk and DOGE are going and they're doing these big cuts, but then great reporting from "The Wall Street Journal", "The New York Times" and other places is showing that these are not actually as effective in cutting money than they claim it to be.
And so, I think Donald Trump has a P.R. goal here. On one hand, you want to tout the DOGE leader board and say, look how much we're cutting. But on the other hand, you don't want to cut so much that your agency heads are pissed at you and you start to lose momentum from the American people because they're being impacted in ways that they had not foreseen. It's a difficult balance, but it's a P.R. balance. Can you prove you're trying to do something without overly doing it?
COATES: Well, speaking of that proof, I mean, there are a lot -- you know, a lot of lawsuits that have been demanding answers about who actually is running the show because, obviously, the special government employee, it's distinct in terms of you have conflicts of interests, requirements and beyond. But is this the White House trying to seek some kind of political or maybe legal cover as well by having -- there'd be many cooks in the kitchen?
BALL: Well, I don't know if there is a legal angle to this. But, look, I think part of the reason that -- you know, people have been forecasting that there's going to be some kind of split between Trump and Musk from the very beginning. But Trump still very much believes that Elon works for him. He still very much sees Elon's efforts as something that he approves of. And so --
COATES: And publicly, Elon Musk has reiterated that.
BALL: That's right. And so, I think, you know, part of what he said today was reflection of that, saying he's basically an advisor. He suggests things. He gets to do things but only because the president lets him do those things. And, potentially, the agency heads let him do those things as well.
Again, I think the only way there's going to be any kind of daylight between the two of them is if Trump starts to think that Elon is making him look bad, and that is not how he feels at the moment.
COATES: I mean, serving at the pleasure of the president, but also the agencies are serving at really the pleasure of who pleases Trump, Elon Musk.
FISCHER: Well, one thing I'll say about DOGE, DOGE is not a real thing. So, we have agencies --
COATES: Tell them that.
FISCHER: There's, like, laws that dictate and govern how independent agencies should function and that they are getting certain budget. There is nothing like that that exists for DOGE. DOGE only exists to be able to guide President Trump in whichever way President Trump wants. But it's not something that any law dictates agency heads have to adhere to.
COATES: But it's very powerful, though, if you're the person who's right beside the president. Even if I don't really truly exist, you are the most influential person.
FISCHER: Yes. He's advising. Of course. But it's not like Elon Musk and DOGE itself is a part of the infrastructure of the U.S. government.
BALL: Well, it is the U.S. Digital Service.
FISCHER: It is, but it's not DOGE itself. It is not an agency. It is not a department. It's a brand-new thing that just got propped up. And so, if you're somebody who's now leading an agency, you're a Cabinet official, you're looking at Elon Musk and DOGE and you're saying, what authority do you really have? Of course, President Trump is blessing you. Do you actually have the authority to unilaterally try to make cuts out of my department? I don't think so.
And that's why things are going to court. That's why these Cabinet officials are pissed. If Elon Musk and DOGE had real true authority, I don't think you would see this much butting of heads. But I don't think he has that kind of authority.
COATES: (INAUDIBLE) question finally answered. Molly Ball, Sara Fischer, thank you so much.
Look, all those complaints you're hearing from agency heads are probably because people like my next guest, they're getting fired. A veteran who worked at the V.A. helping other veterans, he joins me next. Plus, the former Minneapolis police chief responds to right-wing calls to pardon Derek Chauvin.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:30:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: This week, we've been highlighting the stories of veterans who have lost their jobs as a result of Elon Musk's DOGE cuts. A memo from earlier this week revealing the Trump administration's plan to eliminate more than 70,000 employees from the Department of Veterans Affairs. Now, department that tasked with helping and supporting our nation's veterans is now in turmoil.
Joining me now is Tony Ruiz. He's a veteran and was recently fired from the V.A. office in Los Angeles where he worked directly assisting other vets with their benefits, disabilities or even homelessness. Tony, thank you for joining us this evening. Can you tell me how you were notified that you were going to be losing your job, and what did that feel like to you?
TONY RUIZ, FORMER EMPLOYEE, VETERANS AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT: Sure. And first of all, thank you for having me on the show, for all the veterans out there who want help. So, in my case, I got an email one day from my boss directing me to a calendar invite to meet with him, my director, and somebody from DOGE in D.C. And to answer your previous guest, there is a DOGE.
[23:35:00]
And so, I was told I was a failure, today is your last day at the V.A. Yet, like most of my federal employees and vets who are struggling and being punished, I was given an award by the V.A. six months ago in L.A. as "Employee of the Quarter." I was given a thousand-dollar bonus. And I met Josh Jacobs, the V.A. undersecretary.
That tells you a lot that somebody in D.C. picked me out not for being a poor performer, but for being a stand-up performer. And many of us are suffering from this. And DOGE is very much real. And President Musk is very much real.
COATES: You know, just to hear about that, there's certainly -- when you were told that you're being let go and to think back just six months ago, as you've you relayed to us just now, pretty stunning. And you say that you have felt targeted as a federal worker, but also as a Latino. Why?
RUIZ: So, we got some emails when the administration first came in about DEI and turning in employees were DEI. So, when I was terminated, I felt like, okay, they're firing a bunch of DEI folks. I'm fired next for having a Latino surname.
The V.A. picked me out. Again, the "Employee of the Quarter." And I hope you share the picture of Josh Jacobs and I, who, again, highlights the fact that I was a good employee. Yet February 4, I'm now no good to the V.A., I'm a fraud, I'm abused, and we don't want you anymore.
It tells you a lot about something when I have a master's degree in Homeland Security and, by the way, a veteran. So, it makes no sense whatsoever.
COATES: You actually reached out to Republican Congressman Derrick Van Orden, who is a disabled veteran himself, about being fired. What did you say, and how did he respond?
RUIZ: Sure. So, I actually was trained by the V.A. to watch congressional hearings. And I'd always see Van Orden yelling at people, yelling at the V.A. And I noticed that he always had some presence. So, I emailed him and said, hey, on LinkedIn, what is your response to the firings, congressman? No response. And one day before I went to D.C. this week, he sent me a message on LinkedIn threatening to fire me and to report me to either Elon Musk or DOGE, yet I was already fired. So, Congressman Van Orden, a bit too late there, but a good try.
COATES: He's threatening to fire you. Why? Did he say why, as according to you?
RUIZ: He said I was working -- he said I was working at 1346 instead of talking smack about Donald Trump. But he didn't realize, if you looked at the email, I was already fired. And so, once again, a blatant attack on a veteran from somebody, Congressman Van Orden, who talks about veteran first, veterans are the most important thing. But in my case, apparently, he reported me to DOGE/Elon Musk to get me fired. Didn't work, though.
COATES: Well, Veterans' Office provided us with this statement, which questioned how effective the L.A. Veterans' Office is at delivering services and said this truthfully about you, sir.
"While I love the V.A. and get my healthcare there as a disabled veteran, there are problems that need to be addressed. Data from the Los Angeles V.A., where Mr. Ruiz was formerly employed, is a prime example of bureaucrats who are more focused on self-promotion than providing services to veterans, which is their actual job. Mr. Ruiz is the poster child for self-aggrandizement as he exploits his former position at V.A. for public fame and political gain" -- unquote.
What is your response to that?
RUIZ: I will respond to that because he would, you know, make the show. But I'll tell you this much: I was in D.C. this week with a lot of senators. Senator Blumenthal spoke in the Senate floor, and he mentioned all his veterans, fighting for veterans, fighting for our rights. And guess how many Republicans were in the floor that day? Zero.
So, I'm not going to respond to Van Orden. What I'm going to tell you is a lot of federal employees are upset. We want answers. We want our jobs back. And I'm not going to speak on the LAVA. I think Van Orden should call the director of the LAVA, not me. And more importantly, I think senators in D.C, I have some advice for you. Go to the Senate floor and vote for Republicans. Vote for some veterans. Because at this point, all the Republicans have done is you've turned your back on all the veterans that you supposedly love, and that's not good.
COATES: Mr. Tony Ruiz, thank you for your service, and thank you for joining me tonight.
RUIZ: Thank you very much, ma'am.
COATES: George Floyd's family is speaking out today, telling the people who are calling for Trump to pardon Derek Chauvin, stay in your lane.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TERRENCE FLOYD, GEORGE FLOYD'S YOUNGER BROTHER: This is the fifth year. We were supposed to see progress. We were supposed to see progress.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:40:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: George Floyd's family sending a message tonight.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
FLOYD: Stay in your lane. You know, I -- I would just say stay in your lane. You know, your opinion is your opinion. But facts is facts. And the fact is Chauvin's knee was on my brother's neck. The fact is he held him down there to his last breath.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: That was Terrence Floyd, responding to a right-wing push to pardon the police officer convicted of murdering his brother. The push coming from conservative commentator and podcaster, Ben Shapiro, who wrote to President Trump, calling on him to pardon Derek Chauvin.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BEN SHAPIRO, CONSERVATIVE COMMENTATOR, PODCASTER: It's egregious, egregious, egregious. And he should be prosecuted, this officer, to the fullest extent of the law into which the evidence shows. And, by the way, everyone agrees with this.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: A starkly different call for action than we had back in 2020.
[23:44:58]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SHAPIRO: 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 preexisting heart condition. George Floyd was saying he could not breathe before he was even out of the car.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: We have those reversed in terms of the way that he has articulated his changed opinion or his thoughts on this. But this didn't stop there because Elon Musk reposted Shapiro's pardon push on X.
Joining us now is former Minneapolis Police Chief Medaria Arradondo. He has a new book coming out in May titled "Chief Rondo: Securing Justice for the Murder of George Floyd." Chief, thank you for joining. Why do you think this idea of pardoning Derek Chauvin is gaming -- gaining steam now?
MEDARIA ARRADONDO, AUTHOR, FORMER MINNEAPOLIS POLICE CHIEF: Thank you so much, Laura, for having me on your show this evening. You know, I'm not really sure why it's gaining steam now. What I do know is that within a week after the killing of Mr. Floyd, President Trump said that it was a grave tragedy, that it never should have happened, and that it filled Americans with anger, grief, and horror. And I absolutely agree with President Trump's reflection and statement back then.
So, I'm not sure why it's gaining traction now. Mr. Shapiro, although I don't know him personally, he's known to be a highly-intellectual person. He covers a wide range of thought-provoking topics. I'm just not sure, Laura, why this is coming up at this time now.
COATES: You know, a documentary has been making all sorts of conspiracies about the case. Things like Chauvin was persecuted, that he was acting within his training. I mean, you were the police chief at the time. What were the facts? ARRADONDO: Yeah, Laura, the facts were that then former Officer Chauvin, he violated department policy. He certainly violated department training. And above all else, he violated our values. And any civilized police agency in this country would know that the end result of what Derek Chauvin caused in terms of Mr. Floyd's death, it speaks for itself.
I'm someone that believes in the rule of law and due process. In the state court, we had 12 individuals, a jury of his peers, performing their civic and solemn duty to listen to the facts, to listen to the evidence, and they rendered a decision.
And furthermore, Laura, in the federal portion of the civil rights trial, Derek Chauvin himself admitted culpability and pled guilty to that. So, again, I haven't had a chance to speak with Mr. Shapiro, but people who are looking at this from a reasonable, looking at it from a lens of law and evidence and facts, it's -- it speaks for itself.
And I also am concerned, Laura, that this can trigger the trauma for the family. I think about Mr. Floyd's family, what they've had to go through, his dear daughter, Gianna, and police chiefs, and more importantly, police officers around the country who have been trying to repair, rebuild those relationships over the past five years. We owe it to them to help support them to move forward so that this doesn't continue to reignite old wounds.
COATES: Chief, I'm so glad you point out the impact to the family. I mean, even just myself introducing our conversation, just watching that video play even in that small portion, it's difficult, it's so unnerving, and it's just devastatingly tragic to watch even for that moment in time.
You know, you point out there's also the federal and the state. Even if Trump were to pardon Chauvin, he could only do so with respect to a federal charge. But what would it mean symbolically if he were to do that even though it wouldn't impact the state level charges?
ARRADONDO: Well, I think what it would do symbolically for some, there are some that felt aggrieved by the justice system fine working. And I will tell you that for many in our country, for the justice system to work itself out, to come and render a decision based on the facts, based on the evidence, they have not seen that historically ever before.
The murder of Mr. Floyd was by far the singular most historical- impacting incident in our nation. And so, again, the men and women who are out there every day working and serving their communities, they're trying to rebuild trust. They're trying to collaborate with their communities to move forward. And so, I think we owe it to them to sort of tamper down this this sort of rhetoric and to move forward. And, of course, for the family. Again, I think about the family during this time.
COATES: Uh-hmm.
ARRADONDO: They don't need to be retraumatized by this. COATES: I -- I cannot wait to read your book. You -- you detail in it your perspective of the hours, the days, the weeks, frankly the months after George Floyd was killed. Talk to me about what that has been like for you.
[23:50:00]
ARRADONDO: Well, you know, when you're -- when you're leading and certainly when you're leading during a crisis, you just focus on trying to get your city through that. And so that was really first of mine, in front of mine for me.
But I also -- the book really highlights about hope and how important hope is. Regardless of how bad it was getting, I knew that we as a city, as a department, we're going to get through this year.
But it also talks about unconventional allies. We could not have gotten through that without some very important ordinary people doing some extraordinary things, certainly in Minneapolis, but also across the country. And so, the book certainly highlights that. But it's also about hope, Laura, because, at the end of the day, I think we owe that as an obligation to our children, our future generations.
COATES: Well, this mother then thanks you for that optimism that is forthcoming in your brand-new book. Chief Medaria Arradondo, as always, thank you.
ARRADONDO: Thank you very much.
COATES: Up next, a federal judge sending a reminder to President Trump -- "An American president is not a king" -- unquote.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:55:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: New tonight -- quote -- "An American president is not a king." It's a direct quote from a federal judge as she reversed Trump's firing of the former head of the National Labor Relations Board. The ruling comes after Gwynne Wilcox, who was appointed to the NLRB by President Biden, sued the Trump administration, arguing that her ousting violated federal law.
And the judge did not mince words in her ruling, writing -- quote -- "An American president is not a king -- not even an elected one -- and his power to remove federal officers and honest civil servants like Wilcox is not absolute. A president who touts an image of himself as a king or a dictator fundamentally misapprehends the role under the Constitution." Quite a statement to make considering she's speaking about a president who posted this picture captioned, "Long Live the King."
And there's more. Today, another federal judge is extending an order that prevented the White House from freezing billions in congressionally- approved funds to 22 states and Washington D.C., writing that the executive's categorical freeze of appropriated and obligated funds fundamentally undermines the distinct constitutional roles of each branch of our government. Here, the executive put itself above Congress.
Joining us now to discuss, former Miami Dade County court judge, Jeff Swartz. Thank you, judge, for joining. Look, the White House attempts to overhaul federal government, as we're seeing, and the judges have been stopping and stepping in to stop what they assert is overreached by the president, which is, well, literally their job, as outlined in the Constitution.
But Trump keeps attacking them, calling them activists and highly political judges who want us to slow down or stop. What's at risk here, your honor?
JEFF SWARTZ, FORMER JUDGE, MIAMI-DADE COUNTY COURT: What's really at risk here is the separation of powers. We talk about it a lot. And what's really at risk here is the authority of the courts. And he attacks the authority of the courts and their legitimacy because they're really almost the last guardrail that's left. It is the courts that are literally, he is right, going to stop some of the things that are happening now.
And he's not a king. I think a lot of people are using that phrase now since Ketanji Jackson used it when she was on the district court talking about Trump in 2019.
COATES: Elon Musk has repeatedly called for the impeachment of judges. How would that even work? Obviously, he himself, not an elected official, but he's calling for them.
SWARTZ: It won't work. You can impeach federal judges. There are a lot of judges who have been impeached. But even if you get an impeachment, that is charges go through the House, you're never going to come up with 67 votes to remove anyone. And that's what you need. You need a two-thirds majority. So, it's a waste of time, but it's meant to intimidate judges. And hopefully, at this point, change the course of what's happening in the courts right now.
COATES: And judge, we're seeing a lot, a lot of these legal challenges. They're making (INAUDIBLE) to the appellate process as well. Eventually, some will land in the Supreme Court. How do you think they'll go? Trump's way or no?
SWARTZ: This -- well, you know, that's really surprising because the opinion that came out from SCOTUS yesterday had a majority of five to four, and that majority was made up of the four women that included Coney Barrett and the chief justice. And it left the other four with a dissenting opinion that literally was written by Neil Gorsuch, and it's un-understandable. I mean, I've read it several times. I don't understand what he's talking about. They were just very angry.
I also watched Coney Barrett and the chief at the end of the speech last night. And they were --
(COUGHING)
-- excuse me -- and they were talking, and I saw what the president said to the chief. And I saw Coney Barrett shake his hand. There was a look on their face that kind of gave it away. They knew the next day, and I guess it was night before last --
COATES: Uh-hmm.
SWARTZ: -- the next day, there was going to be an opinion that was going to make him very unhappy, and that's exactly what happened. You kind of -- you know, they were taking in the thank you, but I think that we're seeing what might be a solid five-person majority that may stand against many of the things that are going to make Donald Trump unhappy.
COATES: Poker faces indeed after what actually transpired.
SWARTZ: Yeah.
COATES: Judge Jeff Swartz, thank you for joining.
SWARTZ: Nice to be with you. Thank you.
[00:00:00]
COATES: Nice to see you. Thank you all for watching. "Anderson Cooper 360" is next.
