Return to Transcripts main page
The Source with Kaitlan Collins
Watchdog Report Debunks GOP Theory FBI Agents Provoked J6 Attack; Trump: "I Want To Get Ideas From" Musk, Bezos & Zuckerberg; Lawmakers Briefed On Mysterious NJ Drone Sightings. Aired 9-10p ET
Aired December 12, 2024 - 21:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[21:00:00]
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST, ANDERSON COOPER 360: --Amazon founder, Jeff Bezos, is expected to meet with President-elect Trump in the coming days. A source tells CNN that Amazon is poised to donate $1 million to Trump's inauguration. Just a latest example of a tech leader, looking for a closer relationship with the President-elect.
CNN previously reported that Meta CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, met privately with Trump at Mar-a-Lago, last month. Meta has also confirmed that it donated $1 million to the inaugural fund.
That's it for us. The news continues. "THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS" starts now.
KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN HOST, THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS: Straight from THE SOURCE tonight.
We are live on Capitol Hill. The scene of the crime on January 6th, and the same place where Donald Trump will regain power in 39 days from now, then pardon the convicted criminals who rioted here. Trump says it will happen within minutes of taking the oath of office.
I'm Kaitlan Collins. And this is THE SOURCE.
Tonight, the President-elect is rapidly accelerating his own timeline for pardoning the very people, who attacked the building that you see behind me right now. When it's lit up, on a night like tonight, it can be almost easy to forget that on January 6th, things looked more like this.
In interview after interview, Donald Trump seems to be eagerly anticipating the moment that he can free the people that you see here storming the heart of U.S. democracy, nearly four years ago.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP (R), FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT AND CURRENT PRESIDENTIAL- ELECT: But I'm going to be acting very quickly.
KRISTEN WELKER, MODERATOR, "MEET THE PRESS," NBC NEWS: Within your first 100 days, first day?
TRUMP: First day. WELKER: First day?
TRUMP: Yes.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Well, Trump no longer says it's not -- no longer just a day one priority. He says that he may even start issuing pardons before the band has practically finished playing at his inauguration.
Trump, who was named as Time's Person of the Year, told the magazine in an interview, and I'm quoting him now, "I'll be looking at J6 early on, maybe the first nine minutes."
He's previously made clear that those pardons, in those first nine minutes, may even include the rioters who assaulted law enforcement on that day.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: --destroyed that city?
RACHEL SCOTT, SENIOR CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT, ABC NEWS: Sir, my question is on those--
TRUMP: What's going to happen to the people that tried to burn--
SCOTT: My question is on those rioters who assaulted officers.
TRUMP: Excuse me. You have to ask--
SCOTT: Would you pardon those people?
TRUMP: --what's going to happen -- oh, absolutely, I would.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Trump holds this notion that those who attacked the Capitol were the victims that day, even after they were convicted in a court of law. And though he has styled himself previously as the law-and- order candidate, a friend to police, he now refers to those rioters as patriots or, even, hostages.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: They're the J6 hostages, I call them, because they are hostages.
The J6 hostages.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Now, this is all coming tonight, as the Justice Department watchdog released a report, undercutting a conspiracy theory that we have seen echoed and championed in Trump's orbit, by many of his allies, including Trump himself, but also including the person that he wants to lead the FBI.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KASH PATEL, PRESIDENTIAL-ELECT TRUMP'S PICK FOR FBI DIRECTOR: The FBI and government agents were using undercover operatives and informants on the day of January 6.
I believe the FBI, like you were saying, spent hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not millions, of taxpayer dollars, putting these people into play.
What was the FBI doing, planning January 6 for a year?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: That is Kash Patel. He has been up here on the Hill, meeting with senators to vie for the FBI job.
Coming tonight as a brand-new independent Inspector General's report in bold type, says, quote, "The FBI Did Not Have Any Undercover Employees at the Ellipse, on the National Mall, or at the Capitol on January 6."
I want to get straight to my sources tonight.
I have Adam Kinzinger here, former Republican congressman and a member of the January 6 committee.
And also, CNN's Evan Perez, our Senior Justice Correspondent, joining me here.
And Evan, just on the pardoning within nine minutes. Is that even possible? I mean, what does that process actually look like?
EVAN PEREZ, CNN SENIOR JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: It is possible. I mean, what they can do is they can have his lawyers, their incoming White House lawyers, draft the pardons, the proclamation, essentially, and have it take effect when he takes the oath of office. So, it can happen within minutes.
I mean, we've had it happen before, where Jimmy Carter, for instance, on his first full day of office, so that was 21st, he pardoned the thousands of people who had evaded the draft, during the Vietnam War. So, there is precedent for doing something like that.
And obviously, in this case, the incoming President has made all kinds of different statements about who exactly would be qualified. He's mentioned, as you said, as broad as possible, but also said that maybe he'll start with some of the non-violent offenders.
COLLINS: Yes, yes, we've seen some Republicans draw a distinction, saying, Sure you can pardon those, but don't pardon the ones who assaulted law enforcement.
Trump himself has not always made that distinction.
PEREZ: No, he's not made all that does -- that distinction very clear.
[21:05:00]
And here's the thing. I mean, one of the things you hear from Republican members, here on Capitol Hill, is they refer to people as grandmas who were simply walking by and got swept into the Capitol, with the -- with the mob.
And look, there's not very many of those people, who were -- who did not commit violence. There's some people who were trespassing. But there's usually something else that they're chart -- that they're charged with. And so, it's a very much of a misnomer to try to portray that there is anyone who did not have some other crime that was -- that was attached to it.
COLLINS: Yes.
And Congressman, I just wonder your perspective on this. I mean, you served on the January 6 investigative committee. And so hearing Trump, not just saying he would pardon them, but that it would -- it would truly be one of his first acts upon taking office. What is your view of that?
ADAM KINZINGER, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, (R) FORMER ILLINOIS CONGRESSMAN, FORMER JAN. 6 COMMITTEE MEMBER: Well, I mean, look, it's wrong, obviously. This is based -- he's sending a message, not just that, in his mind, January 6 was a beautiful day, like he said.
I lived it. It wasn't a beautiful day.
But I think he's also sending a message that, Look, if you commit violence on my behalf, I will pardon you. That's pretty chilling. That's pretty eerie.
But look, I mean, Kaitlan, he said he was going to do this. I'll give him credit for that. He ran, saying he was going to pardon these folks, and America voted for him. So, it's not a surprise. I think, though history, which usually gets it right, will look back and say, It was a very, very shameful thing that he's planning to do.
COLLINS: Well, and just looking at this in and of itself, Trump is saying he'll help pardon them within nine minutes of taking office, that he's going to carry this out. I don't think that's a surprise, because he's been repeating it, for months now.
But just in the face of him saying that, that people like you, members of the January 6 investigative committee, belong in jail. And it's a pretty striking split-screen.
KINZINGER: Yes. I mean, look, as I've said, is, you know, fine, whatever, if you got to make up charges.
I was in the legislative branch. We were investigating, as per the request from Congress to do that. We obviously came up with answers that embarrassed Trump. He was embarrassed by it. It showed that he was completely complicit for a 187 minutes while violence happened. He frankly wanted his Vice President to be -- had to have violence against him. And that was embarrassing for the President.
Sorry to embarrass you, Donald. But that's -- that's what we were tasked with, was the truth. And history books will record this as the truth. You want to threaten to throw us in jail for that? It just shows how small of a person you really are.
I'm not intimidated. The person that intimidates me, the least of anybody in this country is Donald Trump.
COLLINS: What about the idea, though, of what his second administration looks like, full picture?
Because, I mean, he is taking office. And when I talk to the Trump officials, they're quite confident. They feel they have this level of confidence coming into this second administration, with not just regaining power, but taking office, and knowing how to use those levers of power, as Trump was acknowledging today, in a way that he did not fully realize in 2017, when he first took office.
KINZINGER: Yes, it's true.
And by the way, you notice, whenever Donald Trump talks, or whenever his folks talk, it's always about like, still retribution. I mean, the guy won the presidency again, and all he's obsessed with is retribution. He's not talking about a future vision for American foreign policy, a future vision for the American economy. It's retribution.
And yes, look, they went in there in 2017. They had responsible adults around them. And they had to learn how this stuff works. They know now. They've had four years to stew on it and come up with these ideas.
We were saying this, during the election. America still voted for him. But I'm afraid that what we're going to get out of this -- I don't think Donald Trump is like going to stay President forever, or run a third time, or anything like that. But I do think there's going to be serious damage to the guardrails of democracy. And by the way, Republicans, if there's a day that Democrats decide to do the same thing to you, you won't have a right to complain about it.
So look, I'm going to continue to fight for democracy. That's my job. I've done it for 46 years. But we'll see what happens.
COLLINS: Yes, Congressman.
I want to turn to my next source, who is also joining me here on the Hill tonight. The former FBI Deputy Director, John Pistole, is here.
It's great to have you here.
When you heard that Trump was saying, you know -- obviously he's been pledging to pardon people. It's increased in terms of who exactly that's going to be. But just given your position, as the former Deputy Director of the FBI, what kind of impact does it have, if that's one of the first things a new president does? JOHN PISTOLE, FORMER FBI DEPUTY DIRECTOR: It clearly sets a precedent, Kaitlan. I think, in terms of the action that is being taken, what's important to the President of the United States, to take action like that, to appeal to his base.
[21:10:00]
It also, I think, establishes not only -- clearly, it's within his prerogative, and it's within his privilege and obviously his power. But I also think that it sets a precedent that future presidents may look at and say, Well, President Trump did it back in 2025, and so let's do this, for all my friends, whomever it may be. So, I think that's something that people look at.
And to the men and women of the FBI, and all the task forces, that worked on the investigations, where they collected evidence of criminal activity, and then to the judicial system, where people went to court. I mean, over what, 1,600 charged.
COLLINS: Yes.
PISTOLE: And nearly a 1,000 convicted. Each one of those had admissible evidence that was presented. And either a judge or a jury found those nearly 1,000 convicted, based on admissible evidence.
And so, what does that say to the integrity of the judicial system, to say, Oh, wait a minute, is this a democracy here that that we are -- can rely on the full faith and credit--
COLLINS: Yes.
PISTOLE: --the United States for jury trials and bench trials.
COLLINS: And a lot of them were convicted of felonies.
PISTOLE: Yes, absolutely. Violence.
COLLINS: I mean, when they say that, they draw the distinction, Oh, this person was non-violent. But a lot of them were still convicted of felonies, for what they did that day.
PISTOLE: Sure. And many of them sentenced to the longer sentences than you might think of as a quote, A rioter. So, that's part of that precedent, if you're going to pardon people who're convicted of violent felonies.
COLLINS: Well, and to what you said about what it sends, the message about the rule of law. Philip Grillo is a rioter, who was convicted. He was just sentenced to a year. And as he was leaving the court, this was last week, he shouted, Trump's going to pardon me anyway.
PISTOLE: Yes.
COLLINS: Do you think this -- the way that the justice system and prosecutors went after those, who ransacked the Capitol, broke into people's offices, assaulted over 130 police officers? Do you think that it served as a deterrent, until now, to see how people were prosecuted in this way?
PISTOLE: I think it did serve as a deterrent for future acts of violence similar to that. But given this precedent, if that's what the President does, in terms of these pardons, I think all bets are off.
COLLINS: Yes.
PISTOLE: And so, what does that serve as a precedent if you hope your political boss, if you will, will pardon you?
COLLINS: What was your take on the government watchdog report that came out today?
And just for those, who aren't versed in the language of Washington.
PISTOLE: Yes.
COLLINS: A watchdog report, it's done, it's independent. It's not someone who's a political appointee that is -- they're supposed to be independent, so they can do proper oversight.
PISTOLE: Right.
COLLINS: And saying that there were no FBI undercover agents there. Given, we've heard that echoed so many times by Trump and his allies.
PISTOLE: Right. So, I think it's worth reading the executive summary. It's a 90-page report. So, I've only looked at the highlights, if you will, and the reporting on it.
But I think it's significant from the standpoint, it rebuts the theories that have been expounded and put out there, by people saying, This was all part of an FBI operation, if you will.
And in each of those nearly 1,000 cases that people have been convicted, people had the opportunity to raise whether it's entrapment or something like that, as a defense to say, No, I wasn't acting on my own volition or my own initiation. I was entrapped by this FBI undercover agent.
And they weren't agents. There were some FBI sources that the Inspector General references.
COLLINS: And explain that. That's someone, who is a genuine member of the Oath Keepers, or one of these groups. But the FBI uses them for intelligence process.
PISTOLE: Yes, it could be anybody. It could -- not you, of course, or me. But it could be any person that, that person has relevant information to an FBI investigation. And so, as the FBI was trying to collect information about the possibility of violence on January 6th, those were people who were helping inform that.
But there was nobody directed to conduct any violence.
COLLINS: Yes. PISTOLE: And the Inspector General found that wasn't the case. So, that should clarify. I would encourage every American, who is interested in reading about what actually happened, to read this report.
COLLINS: Yes, we'll see if they do.
PISTOLE: Right.
COLLINS: Mr. Pistole, it's great to have you here, especially in- person.
PISTOLE: Thank you, Kaitlan.
COLLINS: As always, thank you for your expertise.
PISTOLE: Thank you.
COLLINS: Also, to Congressman. And Evan Perez as well for his reporting.
Up next. I have new reporting on who Trump is considering. A second Kennedy that he wants to put in charge at the CIA. Not RFK Jr. He's going to HHS, if confirmed.
Plus, if you are waiting for Trump to deliver on that promise to bring down grocery prices, you need to hear what he said about it today.
[21:15:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: There may be more than one Kennedy in Donald Trump's second administration, as CNN can now confirm tonight that Trump is considering naming Amaryllis Fox Kennedy as the Deputy Director of the CIA.
She herself is a former CIA officer. She is married to RFK Jr.'s son, and she served as his campaign manager before he dropped out of the race, earlier this year, to go on and endorse Donald Trump.
If selected, she would serve under John Ratcliffe, if he's confirmed, ultimately, as the Director. And Ratcliffe actually met with Fox Kennedy today, I'm told.
According to The New York Times, and The Washington Post, this proposition has reportedly raised some concerns, within the CIA, partly because she wrote a book, in 2019, about her time in the agency, and there were concerns about what she disclosed by publishing that book.
But she's also been facing strong pushback, I'm told, from one of Trump's biggest allies, Arkansas senator, Tom Cotton, who I'm told has urged Trump directly not to name her to the role. Obviously, that is notable, given he is a huge Trump ally, but also he's going to be chairing the Senate Intelligence Committee in the next Congress. My sources tonight are:
Shelby Talcott, Politics Reporter for Semafor.
And Jamil Jaffer, the former Counsel to the Assistant Attorney General for National Security.
[21:20:00]
Shelby. Trump-world seems very hot on this, that this is a direction he's leaning in. Not just kind of mulling, as we've heard him do before. What are you hearing from sources about just which direction this is driving in?
SHELBY TALCOTT, POLITICS REPORTER, SEMAFOR: Yes, I mean, again, Donald Trump tends to change his mind very quickly. So, I would caveat that right away.
But they like her, partially because she has been critical of the CIA. And we're seeing a trend in who Donald Trump is considering and ultimately picking with some of these top positions, right? Kash Patel is a big critic of how the FBI is currently managed. Kennedy himself is a big critic of all of the health agencies.
And so, Donald Trump, I'm told, likes that aspect that she has been critical of the CIA, and has sort of pushed for reforming it, just like he wants to do with some of these other agencies.
COLLINS: And on the CIA itself. I mean, Kennedy himself, as recently -- RFK Jr., as recently as last year, repeated his view that he believes there is overwhelming evidence that the CIA was involved in his uncle's murder, in JFK's murder.
And his daughter-in-law, was asked about this in an interview, where she seemed to echo those suspicions of the CIA. Listen to what she said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
AMARYLLIS FOX KENNEDY, AMERICAN WRITER AND TELEVISION HOST: I feel something of a responsibility to get to the bottom of that, at least in my lifetime, for my children.
You know, I mean, my daughter, Bobcat, is Bobbie the Fourth. So her great grandfather was RFK. And -- and I don't -- I want to be able to look at her, and for her to know whether or not her own government was involved in these assassinations. And if so, what's been done about it to make sure that that never, ever happens again, that there's never a coup like that in this country again.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: If she's named as the Deputy CIA Director, I mean, what -- I assume, she would have a lot of authority to be able to look into what she is alleging there. JAMIL JAFFER, FORMER ASSOCIATE COUNSEL TO PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH, FORMER COUNSEL TO THE ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR NATIONAL SECURITY, FORMER SENIOR COUNSEL TO HOUSE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE: Yes, absolutely. I mean, look, as the Deputy Director of the CIA, she's essentially the Chief Operating Officer, the number two at CIA, running all operations, ensuring continuity across intelligence collection, intelligence analysis and covert action.
And so, she would have the ability to have access to any of the files at CIA, including historical records. And so, if she wanted to go in, trying to figure out whether this is true, or prove those allegations, CIA had any role? She'd have access to all that material
COLLINS: And what about this book that she has been -- that she's published? And that's why it's given some of the CIA concern. Because obviously, if you're in government, and you publish a book, or if you just left and you publish something? I mean, everyone remembers the massive fight that Ambassador John Bolton had, over what he was trying to report.
What is exactly the issue with that?
JAFFER: So, a couple claims on the table.
One claim is that she talked about things like drone programs that the CIA has allegedly engaged in, but has never publicly disclosed. So, she's said that she had been involved in those type of programs. That's a claim that that's classified information that she wasn't authorized to reveal. She says she was told not -- she would -- that she shouldn't publish it. And she said, I published it anyways.
And then there's questions about an interaction she has with what she refers to as a battle-hardened jihadi, where she's sort of trying to build rapport, and gives him some clove oil to help his daughter. And she says that it's so interesting how even though she's a jihadi, and I'm on the U.S.'s side, we all share these things in common. And that suggests that she may have some amount of sympathy towards the adversary. And I think that's one of the concerns.
COLLINS: Well, and I've heard it's exactly things like that that is the reason Tom Cotton, who, you know, is a major Trump ally, we've had him here on the show many times, is pushing back against her being named as the Deputy CIA Director.
Shelby, which is obviously notable, given, a lot of people don't often push back in real ways, unless they have real concerns about this.
TALCOTT: Absolutely, especially right now. And so, it is extremely notable that he's pushing back. And it may very well work, right? As you said, Tom Cotton is somebody, who typically is a staunch Trump ally, and he is taken seriously internally.
At the same time, I think, as we've seen with other picks, Donald Trump tends to overlook some of these things. This was said a long time ago. Maybe her views have changed. Maybe she is privately talking to people and explaining that away. We don't know that. But I think that there is a -- there is a world in which this is not disqualifying for Donald Trump.
COLLINS: And she's also a close ally of Tulsi Gabbard's, who obviously Trump has selected as his Director of National Intelligence, should she get confirmed by the senators here on Capitol Hill.
When you look at that full picture of maybe a Kash Patel running the FBI, John Ratcliffe at CIA with Amaryllis Fox Kennedy as the Deputy, Tulsi Gabbard as the Director of National Intelligence, what do you -- I mean, what is that going to look like, should all of those people get confirmed?
And I should note, Deputy CIA Director is not a Senate-confirmed position.
JAFFER: Right.
COLLINS: She just has to get picked.
JAFFER: Well, you know, it's interesting. I mean, you've got Tulsi Gabbard, who has said she thinks Edward Snowden, who stole hundreds of millions of dollars of information, now lives in Russia under Vladimir Putin's protection as a Russian citizen, should not be prosecuted by the Department of Justice for stealing all that classified information.
[21:25:00]
She supported Bashar Assad when he was in office, and to go visit and said kind things about him. Has claimed that Ukraine -- that Russia invaded Ukraine because of some alleged relationship between the U.S. and Ukraine on biological weapons, or biological capabilities, at some level.
So, this is the person, who got some interesting thoughts, right? And so, the question is, where does Amaryllis sit in this -- in this dynamic?
And remember, Tom Cotton's wife, a former CIA lawyer herself. So, he's got some inside knowledge coming in as the -- as the potential incoming Chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee as well.
COLLINS: Yes, that's a really good point. And we'll see if his influence works here. It sounds like, right now, it won't. But to be determined.
Jamil Jaffer. Shelby Talcott. Great to have you both here, on set, to discuss that.
Up next. I have new reporting about Amazon's role in Trump's inauguration. About to hand him $1 million. What Jeff Bezos may want in return. We have the one and only Kara Swisher here to join us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[21:30:00] COLLINS: Tonight, I have new reporting that Amazon, founded by the tech billionaire, Jeff Bezos, is expected to donate $1 million toward Donald Trump's inauguration fund. This, as Bezos himself is expected to visit Trump in-person, in the coming days, down in South Florida.
And this is news that comes just one day after we learned that Meta, Facebook's parent company, and founded by Mark Zuckerberg, also gave a million bucks to Trump's fund.
Both tech billionaires have their own histories with Donald Trump. But it appears that they are leaving all of that behind, maybe even taking a page out of Elon Musk's playbook. Of course, he himself spent over $250 million, supporting Trump's campaign, catapulting himself directly into the President-elect's orbit.
Now, with only 39 days to go, until Trump is back in office, we are seeing the billionaires working to ingratiate themselves with him, as they are certainly top of mind for him.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: We have great people coming in.
JIM CRAMER, CNBC HOST, "MAD MONEY": Mark Zuckerberg?
TRUMP: Well, Mark Zuckerberg has been over to see me. And I can tell you, Elon is another. And Jeff Bezos is coming up next week.
CRAMER: Right.
TRUMP: And I want to get ideas from them.
CRAMER: Jeff Bezos.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: My source tonight is Kara Swisher, host of the podcasts, "On with Kara Swisher" and "Pivot."
And Kara, as soon as I saw, last night, that Mark Zuckerberg was donating $1 million through Meta. Now tonight, learning that Jeff Bezos is doing the same through Amazon. I wanted to know, what do you think of this?
KARA SWISHER, HOST, "ON WITH KARA SWISHER" & "PIVOT" PODCASTS, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Well, I'm shocked that gambling is going on in this place.
It's just, I'm not shocked at all. They, you know, there -- as I said, well, I think the last time we talked, the reason he was doing some of this is he wants space contracts. He doesn't want to be in the line of fire, as he was in the last administration. He's virtually ignoring that he owns The Washington Post, which is supposed to be an independent newspaper.
And they all want, you know, they want to get out of the line of fire. Mark Zuckerberg was threatened with prison by Donald Trump during the campaign. And so, they saw what happened with Elon, who spent quite a bit more money, and decided just to throw some money in, to look cooperative, I guess.
COLLINS: Do you think this is all being influenced by them watching Elon Musk and seeing, I mean, he's at Mar-a-Lago, all the time. He's with Trump, all the time. He's up here on Capitol Hill often. Do you think it's all really leading back to that itself?
SWISHER: Well, they're probably kicking themselves that they didn't think of it first. I mean, a lot of people in this industry are what I used to call, sheeple. They follow each other in a lot of ways.
And they're seeing the benefits. Elon's wealth has grown $200 billion in the short time period, he's been involved with Donald Trump, especially after the election. And so, it's good for business. It's good for their personal wealth. Again, they stay out of the line of fire.
They've been moving more conservative. They were libertarian more. But this is good for them and good for business, and that's what they're going to do. Good for shareholders.
COLLINS: Well--
SWISHER: And that's what they're going to do.
COLLINS: And just what you -- you mentioned there about Zuckerberg. I mean, this is when Trump said -- he accused him of plotting against him in the 2020 election with Facebook, and said that if he would -- if he did it again, he would, quote, Spend the rest of his life in prison.
SWISHER: Prison.
COLLINS: With Jeff Bezos, I mean, it was so bad that he was joking about sending Trump to space, and not in a nice way, after Trump said he was using The Washington Post as a tax shelter.
SWISHER: Right, yes, yes. Well, there you go.
I mean, I just did an interview with Marc Benioff, who's head of Salesforce, this week, and he obviously put -- he owns Time Magazine. He put -- he made Donald Trump the Person of the Year, which I think is deserved, actually. It's not -- that's not really the issue. But it was quite effusive.
And here's someone that would -- did not go to early Trump stuff, and was very much against Trump. And now, he's sort of in the tank again. I mean, this is what they do. This is what these people do. They want to maintain money, power and influence, and they'll do anything at all to do that.
COLLINS: Well, and on that front -- excuse me, Kara. Trump and his--
SWISHER: That's OK. You OK? COLLINS: I'm OK. I think I swallowed a bug out here.
SWISHER: Oh, dear.
COLLINS: Trump, though, in his time -- I'm kidding.
Trump, in his Time Magazine interview today, was asked about conflicts of interest with Elon Musk, and what that could look like. And I want to read you the quote that he said, in response to that.
SWISHER: OK.
COLLINS: He said, quote, "I think that Elon puts the country long before his company... I think he's one of the very few people that would have the credibility to do it, but he puts the country before, and I've" often "seen it." He puts the country before his company.
SWISHER: Oh.
COLLINS: You know Elon well. You've interviewed him. Is that how you would put it?
SWISHER: No, I would do the opposite.
I think he puts his companies. He's a very aggressive and a very excellent entrepreneur and businessperson, there's no question about that in certain areas. And I think he puts his interests ahead of everybody's.
[21:35:00]
I don't think that's very different from Jeff Bezos or Mark Zuckerberg or anyone else. The shareholders of which they are the shareholders, in many cases, the controlling shareholders, they put those people first.
I think they want the country not to fail, obviously. And they want what they want, which is no regulation. They want a lot of focus on cryptocurrency, in terms of boosting it.
Everyone has a different thing they want. But they all want freedom from the government. They want the SEC off their backs. They want the IRS off their backs. They want the Justice Department off their back, and the FTC. And that's what's being put into place, is a much less -- well, even almost completely, people that just won't bother them, and that's how they like it.
And so, if they have to be nice to Donald Trump to do so, they will. And when it suits them to turn on him, they will. So, that's the way they are. As I've said, for years, my whole book was about that, but that's the way they are as people. And you can celebrate them as much as you want, as entrepreneurs. But it's always in their self-interest. No question.
COLLINS: Well, you said that -- I mean, they could turn on him. Do you -- could you envision that happening, in this term? SWISHER: If something happened that wasn't in their interest that, you know, not until then -- they're -- you know, the famous quote is no conflict, no interest, right? I mean they don't care about that. They don't care about that.
I mean, they can go on and on about being patriot. I've always found that people that talk about how patriotic they are have something going on that's maybe not as that way. I just -- you don't need to tout yourself as being over country, when you've spent $250 million electing a president, very explicitly.
Now, look, powerful people have been doing this for decades and decades and hundreds of years in the United States. It's just behind- the-scenes. But this is an explicit -- this is explicit pay-to-play kind of thing. It feels like that, or a Coin-Op, or whatever word you want to use.
COLLINS: Yes.
SWISHER: And so, these people want no regulation. And they're going to get it. And that's what they're going to get. And so, why not pile on? Why not give him a $1 million? It's nothing. The money is nothing to these companies. They're so rich, they're the richest and most powerful companies on Earth, and they want a piece of the action.
COLLINS: Yes.
SWISHER: And this is how you do it, so.
COLLINS: Kara Swisher, we'll see if others follow suit. Thank you for joining tonight.
SWISHER: All right. I hope you're OK. All right, thanks.
COLLINS: Thank you.
And of course, that inauguration will be right here at the Capitol, in just a few weeks. Trump just invited one of America's top enemies to join.
[21:40:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: Donald Trump has been very open about what he thinks won him the election.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I won on groceries. It's very simple word, groceries. Like almost -- you know, who uses the word? I started using the word -- the groceries.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: And to his credit, when he was out on the campaign trail, Trump was very clear about what exactly he was promising that he would do.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: We're going to get the food prices down.
You're going to pay half.
Grocery prices will come tumbling down.
(CHEERING)
TRUMP: Bring down the price of everything, from electricity rates to groceries, air fares and housing costs.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Of course. But when it comes to actually executing on that central promise of his campaign, bringing down the price of groceries, Trump told Time Magazine, in an interview, after he won, quote, "I'd like to bring them down. It's hard to bring things down once they're up. You know, it's very hard."
My political sources tonight are:
Republican strategist and pollster, Kristen Soltis Anderson.
And former Hillary Clinton campaign adviser, Karen Finney.
And it's great to have you both here.
Kristen, let me start with you. Because Trump did say, right after that quote, "I think that they will," as in, go down. He said, "I think that energy is going to bring them down. I think a better supply chain is going to bring them down. You know, the supply chain is still broken," he said.
What happens if Trump doesn't? If grocery prices don't come down? Because, I mean, this was kind of the argument, the Biden folks were making was, it's not that easy to -- you can't really control this.
KRISTEN SOLTIS ANDERSON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST & POLLSTER: Yes, expectations are very high. When you look at approval ratings of his transition, right now, they're pretty good. Americans are expecting an awful lot out of this administration.
And so, it really comes down to, it is true, you cannot just wave a magic wand and things get cheaper. But if you can make American energy cheaper, if you can make the supply chain work better, that can go a little ways, toward making the cost of living a little bit more affordable for Americans, it can make things feel a little better.
So, the bar is very high, and he's going to have to meet it. But he does have some plans in place to try to get there.
KAREN FINNEY, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, SENIOR ADVISER, HILLARY CLINTON'S 2016 CAMPAIGN: But it was interesting. Because remember, also in the NBC interview with Kristen Welker, she asked very specifically about prices and the impact of tariffs. And he really backed off there, as well, and said -- she said, Well, can you promise? And he said, I can't promise. And she said, Well, what would you do? Will you do anything to try to hold companies accountable for gouging people? And he really didn't have an answer for that.
And so, I think part of what we're going to see Democrats do certainly is, Let's hold him accountable for what he said he was going to. I think the American people will. But certainly, I think from a policy perspective, you're going to hear Democrats highlighting, He told us he would do these things.
And you saw the -- President Biden, this week, do an economic speech, in part, to lay down some of these markers about, Here's where unemployment is, here's where the economy is. When he comes in, let's see what he does with it.
COLLINS: Yes. And of course, Biden himself made campaign promises that he did not ultimately fulfill. Some people may say, Well, all politicians do this.
But I think with Trump, I mean grocery prices, and that was such a pivotal moment and cut so deep for so many different swaths of voters that he seems to be trying to hedge, to say, We're going to work on it, but there's no guarantee, essentially.
[21:45:00]
SOLTIS ANDERSON: Yes, this is the challenge between pivoting from running for office to governing, is governing is always the hard part, getting the things done. So, the bar is going to be very high for him and his administration.
And we are in a moment, where voters are so frustrated, and that's why we keep having these change elections. You had Donald Trump elected, followed very quickly by that blue wave in 2018. You had -- Republicans now have this really good election. When voters are frustrated, they pivot back and forth.
Right now, Republicans have an exciting coalition. They've brought in a lot of people, who are unconventional Republican voters. But they don't own those voters. Those voters aren't locked in. They have to be earned. And whether Trump can actually deliver is going to be important.
COLLINS: Right. And he's not going to face reelection again. But certainly, to have the midterms go badly. Having control of everything in Washington is much more desirable than losing the House or losing the Senate.
FINNEY: Yes.
COLLINS: But on this, as I was reading through this lengthy interview, I was struck when he was asked by one of the interviewers, about the issue that we were talking about so much during the campaign, which is whether it was bathrooms or anything related to people who are transgender.
And at one point, Trump said, quote, "I don't want to get into the bathroom issue. Because it's a very small number of people we're talking about, and it's ripped apart our country, so they'll have to settle whatever the law finally agrees."
I was just struck by that. And the interviewer seemed to be as well, pushing back, saying that, This was such a big issue for your campaign.
FINNEY: Yes.
COLLINS: And I've talked to some people in Trump world, who said that was one of the biggest winners, they felt like they had.
FINNEY: No question. I mean, in the State of Pennsylvania, I mean, when you talk to people, that ad, in and of itself, was on a constant rotation. I think there was a estimate today, some $216 million was spent on this topic. So, it was a huge topic.
But again, this is, I think there's a couple things going on. Number one, I think he's trying to go back to mainstream media, which he did not do very many mainstream media interviews. Obviously, when you do, this is part of when you are the Time Man of the Year.
But he's trying to, I think, lower the temperature and sound more thoughtful, rational, calm, particularly given the chaos that we've been seeing, right behind us, with his various nominees.
So, it feels like he's trying to project something a little different, a little more moderate than A, what he was saying on the campaign trail, and B, what I expect we will continue to hear from his nominees. Not just as they keep making the rounds on the Hill.
COLLINS: Yes.
FINNEY: But in the hearings.
COLLINS: Well, also he said he agreed with incoming Congresswoman Sarah McBride, who is the first openly trans member of Congress, who also has been the center of attention, because of Nancy Mace pushing to say that, You can only use a certain bathroom, women can only use certain bathrooms. Which, House Speaker Mike Johnson, then later implemented as a rule.
Trump was saying he agrees with McBride that they should focus on the bigger issues that matter to voters.
SOLTIS ANDERSON: Yes, and I think it's important not to overread what that ad that did get so much attention during the campaign was really about.
I think Trump probably pretty wisely recognizes that actually he wasn't elected on that issue. But rather, to the extent that that ad had resonance, it's the end of the ad, Donald Trump's For You. And that's what he's going to be held accountable for as he comes into office.
Is he going to give an inaugural address that says, I'm for you and is unifying? Does he do Trump 2.0, as something that really does get a message across that he's not the divisive figure that people have said, that he is for you? That's what people are going to hold him accountable for.
COLLINS: I just wonder what that says to like Nancy Mace, who has made this her thing now.
FINNEY: I think it says to Nancy Mace, she's going to keep doing it because it's clickbait. It's fundraising.
I think people -- those who used it as a wedge, and those who used it, frankly, and what, I think, in some instances were very dangerous, in terms of demonizing a very vulnerable population in this country? I think they'll keep doing it. I don't think they care necessarily that the President isn't talking about it as much.
What I do think, though, to what you were talking about, Kristen, is, again, I think the hearings of these nominees is going to be very eye- opening, in terms of really getting to the nitty-gritty of the extremism that we might be able -- looking to expect from the Trump years.
COLLINS: Karen Finney. Kristen Soltis Anderson. Great to have you both out here, on our balcony, our news set.
Up next. There is a new mystery tonight that even the FBI has not been able to crack. Who is flying those drones that are as big as cars over New Jersey, and have been for weeks? Confusion has now turned to outrage, even here on Capitol Hill, over the matter.
[21:50:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: Welcome back. I'm live on Capitol Hill, tonight, where, today, lawmakers got a private security briefing, on this ongoing mystery of the unexplained drones that we have seen flying in the skies over New Jersey.
U.S. intelligence and security officials are telling lawmakers that these flying objects that keep getting reported, like this one, seen flying over a football field, in Oakland, New Jersey, have no suspected ties to foreign adversaries.
Lawmakers were also told that many of the recently-reported sightings are believed to have been civilian aircraft that were mistaken for drones.
But New Jersey leaders, and the political leaders there, say that they're still not getting answers on where exactly these objects are coming from, or who is controlling them, or where they're going.
[21:55:00] (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. JOSH GOTTHEIMER (D-NJ): People got enough on their minds, right? They don't have -- they shouldn't have to worry about things flying around that they don't know who they belong to.
MAYOR TONY PERRY, (R) MIDDLETOWN, NEW JERSEY: Until you know the origin and what these drones' intents are -- intent is, how can you tell me that there's no imminent threat?
STATE SEN. JON BRAMNICK, (R) NEW JERSEY: What are these drones doing in New Jersey? I can tell you what they're not doing. If they're Martians, I guarantee you they're not staying because the taxes are way too high.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: My source tonight is the famed astrophysicist, Neil deGrasse Tyson, who has a new book, "Merlin's Tour of the Universe," that is in stores now.
It is great to have you.
I mean, hearing those lawmakers there. I thought one of them raised a good point. If you don't know what it is, how can you tell us what it's not?
I mean, what is your take on what we've been seeing pop up over New Jersey?
NEIL DEGRASSE TYSON, ASTROPHYSICIST, AUTHOR, "MERLIN'S TOUR OF THE UNIVERSE," HOST, "STARTALK": First, I agreed with the sentiment that if people cannot identify what they are, you are in no position to say whether they are or are not a threat. So, I don't get what it means when they say, Oh, don't worry about it, we don't know what it is, but don't worry about it.
But I can tell you this. Yes, if I can't claim to know the motives of aliens, but -- just being an earthling. But of all the places to show up on Earth, they picked New Jersey? That would be odd for me--
COLLINS: Oh.
DEGRASSE TYSON: --to wonder what the aliens are looking for. No offense to New Jersey. I'm just saying, there's the whole earth they could have visited. So yes, it's a mystery. And by the way, drones are more available to people than ever before. So, maybe this is just the new normal, and Jersey is getting the first taste of it.
But I'm a little disappointed that, given that we have a nearly trillion dollar budget for the Pentagon, that nobody knows what these things are. Now, I'm worried about--
COLLINS: Yes. Well--
DEGRASSE TYSON: --national security. COLLINS: One, I got to say for the people from New Jersey who are watching that we're going to -- I'm going to get some complaints from Phil Murphy and others about that comment, saying New Jersey is a great place for Martians to visit--
DEGRASSE TYSON: Great place for -- except for the taxes.
COLLINS: --every single day (ph). It's just so--
DEGRASSE TYSON: Yes, OK, apparently, yes.
COLLINS: I would send him to Alabama, but our football team is not doing so well this year.
But honestly, on this, and your point there about the Pentagon, is a good one. Because we heard from John Kirby today. He used to be at the Pentagon. And he wrote -- he said, It appears that many of the reported sightings are actually manned aircraft, that are being operating lawfully.
But there is such a heightened sense of public concern that what we are hearing, and this has been going on for days now, it's not making anyone feel any better about it.
DEGRASSE TYSON: Yes, well, maybe there's a sensitivity or an awareness factor for lights in the sky, especially after a year and a half of congressional testimony, of people declaring that we're being visited.
So, if this gets people to look up, I'll take it, right? As an astrophysicist, right, my signoff to my podcast is, Keep Looking Up. And if looking up means you're more aware of what's in the sky, and if that can be helpful to lawmakers, to the Pentagon? Then, let's keep doing it.
In fact, there was a committee set up by NASA, to help the Pentagon and lawmakers, be a clearinghouse for people's observations of things they don't understand, by using their smartphone, which has all manner of metadata related to how you use it.
And so, this would be an ideal case for everyone to whip out their smartphones, get data, and see what we can make of it.
COLLINS: You know--
DEGRASSE TYSON: Friend of foe.
COLLINS: That's interesting, because you say, Keep Looking Up. It's good when people are involved and interested. And we have seen such a new kind of rise in engagement with science, and people wanting to look things up, whether it vaccines or what's happening in the skies.
But my producer, Michael, made a good point that a lot of that we're seeing that, it's not just always renewed engagement. It's also being paired with a growing distrust of people, like you, who do what you do for a living, who back things up with data and facts and science. People don't always trust it, if it doesn't confirm their suspicions of something.
DEGRASSE TYSON: Yes, this is a problem going forward. It's the loss of people's trust in experts. I mean, let's put it just out there in that way. And that's odd, because if something happens to the plumbing in your house, are you going to say, I'll fix it. Or do you call an expert? Right?
Just ask yourself, all the ways that you've engaged experts in your life. And then, all of a sudden you have access to the internet, and you say, Well, I'm not going to trust experts, I'm going to trust my own research. That's -- that could have ultimately lethal consequences, if you're making decisions that affect your health and wellbeing.
COLLINS: Yes, that's a great point. And I always trust the plumbers on that. I'm never trying to do anything myself.
Neil deGrasse Tyson, it has been a joy to have you on. Congrats on the new book out. "Merlin's Tour of the Universe." It is out now, and I encourage everyone to read it. Thank you so much.
DEGRASSE TYSON: All right. You got it. Thank you.
COLLINS: Thank you all so much for joining us, live on Capitol Hill, tonight.
"CNN NEWSNIGHT WITH ABBY PHILLIP" is up next.
[22:00:00]
ABBY PHILLIP, CNN HOST, CNN NEWSNIGHT WITH ABBY PHILLIP: Tonight, the President-elect turns a campaign promise on groceries--
