Return to Transcripts main page
The Source with Kaitlan Collins
WH Tries To Distance Musk From DOGE, As Trump Says "Whatever"; Trump Falsely Claims Ukraine "Started" War With Russia; Top Prosecutor Abruptly Resigns Over Order To Freeze Biden Funds. Aired 9-10p ET
Aired February 18, 2025 - 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: And were they work -- I mean, I guess, there's more members out there.
JOHN MILLER, CNN CHIEF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND INTELLIGENCE ANALYST: There are. And the question is where does membership start and stop. If you were a follower of the blog, if you were a fan, what were you willing to do? How deep into it were you? Are you a casual user?
COOPER: Yes.
J. MILLER: Or are you a hardcore member?
But with the main members, which numbers about seven, who are either dead or in jail, you see kind of a real dent in that leadership. We'll have to see where it goes.
COOPER: All right. John Miller, thank you, fascinating.
That's it for us. The news continues. "THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS" starts now.
KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN HOST: Straight from THE SOURCE, tonight.
Let's call it DOGE-ball, as the White House now says Elon Musk is not actually in charge of DOGE, and doesn't even technically work there.
A lot of new questions, tonight, for Senator Bernie Sanders. He'll join me live, in moments.
Also, an FAA employee who says he was just fired by DOGE, and why that makes him, quote, "Scared to death." And also, what these layoffs mean for air safety.
Also, tonight, President Trump is revealing how soon he could sit down with President Putin, while echoing the Russian leader's own words, when it comes to who's to blame for the war in Ukraine. Hint, it's not Russia.
I'm Kaitlan Collins. And this is THE SOURCE.
Tonight, the burning question, here in Washington, is, who is in charge, specifically, at DOGE. As Elon Musk's team is blitzing through the federal government, the White House actually revealed something, quite revealing, in a court filing. Musk is not actually, technically, in charge of DOGE, and doesn't have the authority to make decisions there.
Now, when President Trump was asked about this matter, that was revealed in this court filing, overnight, and asked to clear things up, essentially, this is what the President had to say.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Elon is, to me, a patriot. So you know, you could call him an employee, you could call him a consultant, you could call him whatever you want. But he's a patriot.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Employee. Consultant. Patriot. That still leaves us tonight with a potentially very important question. Who is running the team that's going from agency to agency, digging into budgets, accessing sensitive data, and also recommending the firings of thousands of employees.
That question, which could be key in the legal fights that are playing out, remains unanswered tonight.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN ANCHOR: Who is in charge of DOGE?
STEPHEN MILLER, WHITE HOUSE DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF: The President of the United States.
KEILAR: He's the administrator of DOGE?
S. MILLER: No, the -- DOGE is the what was formerly U.S. Digital Services. It's an agency of the federal government that reports into the office of -- the Executive Office of the President, which reports to the President of the United States.
KEILAR: Does Elon Musk know he's not in charge of DOGE?
S. MILLER: Again, the President runs the government, then the President appoints advisers, including Elon, including myself.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: That still leaves a lot of questions, and doesn't really clear things up as far as who is in charge at DOGE.
What is clear, and what we do know tonight, is the President, who has been asked, time and time again, about who is overseeing potential conflicts of interest for Elon Musk, is not concerned about it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) JONATHAN SWAN, WHITE HOUSE REPORTER, THE NEW YORK TIMES: DOGE and SpaceX employees are now working directly at the Federal Aviation Administration and the Defense Department, agencies that have billions of dollars in contracts with Musk's companies, or that directly regulate--
TRUMP: Yes.
SWAN: --his companies. How is that not a conflict of interest?
TRUMP: Well, I mean, I'm just hearing about it. And if there is, and he told me before I told him, but obviously I will not let there be any conflict of interest. He's done an amazing job.
Any conflicts, I told Elon, any conflicts, you can't have anything to do with that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Now, this major question about Elon Musk's role in the federal government comes tonight, as Democrats themselves are locked out of power, across Washington. They've tried to highlight those potential conflicts, as Jonathan Swan just laid out there, to little avail.
My lead source, tonight, says he is hitting the road, launching what he's calling his fighting the oligarchy tour, starting this week.
Joining me now, Independent senator from Vermont, Bernie Sanders.
And Senator Sanders, it's great to have you here.
When it comes to questions about who is the administrator of DOGE, actually, do you believe that's an important question to have the answer to?
SEN. BERNIE SANDERS (I-VT): No, the issue is not who is technically the administrator, who has the title.
Elon Musk is clearly running the show. The wealthiest person in the world, who has enormous conflicts of interests, who is helping to fund right-wing extremist organizations, all over the world, who is looking forward to get massive tax breaks from Congress, he's running the show.
COLLINS: So, if he's technically, if he's running the show, but not on paper--
SANDERS: Right.
COLLINS: --as they essentially argue. But you say in practice--
SANDERS: Right.
COLLINS: --he basically is.
You're a co-equal branch of government, as a Senator, on Capitol Hill.
SANDERS: Yes, only -- I kind of thought so. But I think you have to explain that to the President.
COLLINS: Do you feel that you have oversight, when it comes to what Elon Musk is doing?
[21:05:00]
SANDERS: No, of course not. Look, what we're seeing, right now, Kaitlan, is very dangerous moment. I'm laughing here, but it is -- it is not funny. This country is moving very rapidly, under Trump, into an authoritarian form of society.
The Founding Fathers, way back in the 1770s, these were nobody's fools. And what they -- you know, they had fought the King of England, an autocrat, had all the power, and they said, You know what? We don't want that in the new country. We're going to set up three separate, equal branches of government.
Every kid in the sixth grade knows who they are. But Trump does not. And what Trump is doing now is trying, every day, to usurp the powers of Congress, to challenge the powers of the court. It is a very dangerous moment.
COLLINS: Well, the question, though, when it comes to what this looks like, is we haven't seen a ton of resistance from Capitol Hill.
And we have seen some efforts in the courts. These Democratic attorney -- Democratic attorneys general stepped in.
But today, a federal judge here, Tanya Chutkan, she's well-known to our audience from the Trump trials, she declined to block Musk and his team from getting access, because she basically said she wasn't getting specific enough examples from these A.G.s about how Musk could cause irreparable harm to their state.
And if they can't prove that in court, what does that say?
SANDERS: Well, I'll tell you what I happen to believe. At the end of the day, the struggle against Trump, the struggle against oligarchy, which is led by Elon Musk, the struggle against authoritarianism, the fight to make sure that the working-class of this country gets a fair shake, that is not going to be won here in Capitol Hill.
It's going to be won by millions of people, all over this country, standing up and saying, You know what? We fought and died for democracy. We're not going to move toward authoritarianism. We fought to create a country that works for all, not just the billionaire- class.
That's the struggle. And I'm going to be active, in trying to rally the American people to do just that well.
COLLINS: Well, and you're embarking on this tour, to combat this. It's a national tour. You're starting in Nebraska and Iowa. How do you break through to people, though? There are some people, Trump voters, who are even independent voters, who like what Elon Musk is doing, and say, Yes, the federal government does spend too much money, and it is too bloated.
SANDERS: And true -- the truth is, the federal government is a bureaucracy.
COLLINS: What do you say to that?
SANDERS: We have to acknowledge that. Federal government, perfect? Far from it. Do we need to bring about reforms? Absolutely.
But let us be clear what these guys really want to do. Do you think that Elon Musk is staying up night, just worrying about excessive spending in the CDC? I don't think so. At the end of the day, what these guys want, and what Trump wants, is to cut programs that working-class people need.
They are talking -- the House Budget Committee released their report, their budget. $880 billion in cuts to Medicaid. Do you know what that means?
It's not only that millions of people, kids, are going to be thrown off the health insurance they have. Devastating to nursing homes. 40 percent of the revenue coming into community health centers. 30 million people get their health care at community health centers. That's coming from Medicaid. You cut Medicaid, you're going to dismember an already-broken health care system.
What are they going to do with that money? They're going to give it to tax breaks for the richest people in America. Over a trillion dollars goes, in tax breaks, to the top 1 percent. That is what these guys want. They want more wealth. They want more power. American people are going to have to stop them.
COLLINS: Well, and what you're referencing, this is like the blueprint, essentially, that we got from House Republicans. It's not clear what realistically--
SANDERS: Right.
COLLINS: --they're going to be able to pass here. But they're looking to have 5-point -- $4.5 trillion in tax cuts.
SANDERS: Right.
COLLINS: And basically, this plan instructed the Energy and Commerce Committee, which oversees Medicaid, to find those $880 billion in cuts.
SANDERS: Right.
COLLINS: Realistically, what should voters be worried about, if you hear from some moderate Republicans, who say, We're not going to touch Medicaid, that's not going to be on the table? SANDERS: Well, no one is saying that.
I mean, right now, what we are trying to do, in a House which is almost evenly divided, if two Republicans, two out of 435 members say, You know what? We're not going to vote to give tax breaks to billionaires, and cut programs that children and the elderly and the hungry desperately need? Two Republicans. Their proposal is dead.
And we're going to work hard to make sure not only do we get two, that we get a hell of a lot more than two.
COLLINS: On the Elon Musk front, when it comes to Social Security payments, and what is actually wrong with government, and what's exaggerated. We're hearing this line from the White House that tens of millions of people are getting Social Security, fraudulently.
SANDERS: Yes, but--
COLLINS: Either they're dead or.
SANDERS: Yes, I don't believe that for a second. And I think.
[21:10:00]
COLLINS: Well, we've got no evidence of it. But I looked into this, and what we do know is that there's a lot of people that still remain in the database. But as far as people who were actually getting payments, it was 44,000 who got payments, according to an audit that was done in 2023.
SANDERS: Out of how many millions?
COLLINS: There's tens of millions.
SANDERS: Tens of millions.
COLLINS: So when they say tens of millions--
SANDERS: Look, this is what we are dealing with.
COLLINS: --that would be a third of people who are on Social Security.
SANDERS: We're not only dealing with oligarchy, the incredible power of the very, very rich. We're not only dealing with a move toward authoritarianism. We're dealing with what is new to America.
Politicians have always lied. Nothing new about that. But the level that we're seeing, right now, the big lie, over and over again. And it goes out, there's a big lie. And then it goes out on Musk's Twitter to, what, several hundred million people, repeated over and over again? Now, the word is out there, Oh, people on Social Security, a 150 years of age. Can you believe it? The whole thing is corrupt. It's broken.
Well, where does that lead you, Kaitlan? What's the next step? If government can't do anything, if Social Security doesn't work, if Medicare doesn't work, if Medicaid does work? We're going to get rid of all those programs, and we're going to give it over to the billionaire-class to run it.
COLLINS: That's what you think they're ultimately trying to do here?
SANDERS: Yes, at the end of the day, not only the--
(CROSSTALK)
COLLINS: Just getting rid of -- getting rid of (ph) Social Security.
SANDERS: --A, they want massive cuts to programs for the working- class, in this country, in order to give tax breaks to the very rich. And then they want to move to the privatization of every important government agency.
Just the other day -- and it's really upset me, because I used to be Chairman of the Veterans Committee, and I feel very strongly about making sure that those men and women who put their lives on the line, to defend this country, get a fair shake. Right away, a 1,000 employees at the VA laid off, at a time when the VA health care system certainly needs more help than they have right now.
So, at the end of the day, yes, they're going to want to privatize Veterans Administration, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.
COLLINS: If President Trump--
SANDERS: And the Post Office, right away.
COLLINS: If President Trump were seated next to you, he might say, Well, I pledged on the campaign trail that I'm not going to touch Social Security.
SANDERS: Yes.
COLLINS: What would you say to voters who've been there (ph)?
SANDERS: Well, I think the President has many attributes, but credibility and honesty are not one of them. So, I would have my doubts.
I think -- I'm not saying they're going to go after Social Security, tomorrow. They're not. But this is the groundwork. I mean, this is what you do. You destroy the credibility of programs, programs that are complicated, programs that have tens of millions of people.
This is the welfare queen, again. Look at this person. They got this. They got that. Kill the whole program.
COLLINS: Well, the interesting part about that is actually, before Trump took office, the Treasury Department clawed back and recovered $31 million in payments from Social Security that shouldn't have gone out that went out. That was something that they were doing over a five-month period to deceased individuals. But they got -- the point is, I think, that what the DOGE team says they're doing was already happening. They were going back and getting the money that was being--
(CROSSTALK)
SANDERS: And all that I would ask the American people to understand is that, when you have programs, dealing with tens of millions of people, is anyone going to say, Hey, there is no fraud, everything is running efficiently? Of course not.
There are going to be problems. Every bloody program out there, there are going to be problems. But you don't throw the baby out with the bath water.
COLLINS: So, what's the solution? The solution--
SANDERS: The solution is--
COLLINS: --when they are concerned about--
SANDERS: The solution is--
COLLINS: --flaw -- fraud and bloat.
SANDERS: The solution is--
COLLINS: What's the answer to that?
SANDERS: --that, of course, we try to get rid of fraud and waste and abuse. And maybe they want to take some of their attention onto the corporate world. The kind of price fixing that goes on are there as well. But we want to get rid of fraud and waste. But at the same time, we want to make sure that programs that people desperately need, like Social Security, remain strong.
And you know what? You go out and ask the American people, whether they want to cut Social Security. They don't want to cut it. They want to expand it. They want to expand Medicare to cover dental, hearing and vision. They want to expand Medicaid.
In fact, as you well know, we're the only major country on earth not to guarantee health care to all people. Health care should be a right. Most Americans agree with that.
COLLINS: You're an Independent, but you caucus with the Democrats.
SANDERS: Right.
COLLINS: We have heard from a lot of Democrats, privately, some publicly, who say, they don't essentially know how to respond to Trump on Capitol Hill. Are there things that you could be doing to respond to them claiming Social Security is--
SANDERS: Yes, of course, we've got to--
COLLINS: --ripe with fraud?
SANDERS: I think there's an effort to bring forth a war room. There's a ton of lies and misinformation going out, to respond to that. But the truth of the matter is--
COLLINS: But is a war room, is that -- is that enough? I mean, Trump was elected, three months ago.
SANDERS: Yes. Well, one of the things--
COLLINS: And he's been in office for nearly a month.
SANDERS: --what's not enough is that Elon Musk could say the most outrageous thing, tomorrow. It goes out to hundreds of millions of people. Democrats do not have that capability.
Which, takes us to a couple of other issues. It takes us to the fact that should a guy, who put, what was it, $270 million into Trump's campaign, now become the most important person in the government? Is that really how democracy is supposed to work? Which, takes you to a corrupt campaign finance system, and the need to overturn Citizens United, among other things.
[21:15:00]
COLLINS: Elon Musk agreed with someone, on Twitter, a conservative influencer, who called you a fraud, recently.
SANDERS: Really? I'm--
COLLINS: Because you -- because you didn't vote for Tulsi Gabbard, someone that--
SANDERS: That makes me a fraud?
COLLINS: Yes, what's your response to that?
SANDERS: I don't want to respond. I've been called many things by Elon Musk. And I think what -- Musk is nervous about is that we're going to rally the American people, to say that there is something profoundly wrong, when a guy that's worth over $400 billion, is cutting programs so that he can get more tax breaks. Enough really is enough.
COLLINS: And how do you do that?
SANDERS: Well, as I said, we're starting off in--
COLLINS: Starting with your tour?
SANDERS: --Nebraska and Omaha. We're going to Iowa City. And I and others are going to be going all over this country, to make it clear to the American people, what's at stake.
Bottom line is, look, this is America. People fought and died for our democracy. We need a government that works for all of us, not just Elon Musk, and his fellow billionaires. COLLINS: Senator Bernie Sanders, great to have you as always.
SANDERS: Nice to be with you.
COLLINS: Thank you very much. We'll be sure to cover that tour.
Up next. President Trump is blaming Ukraine for Russia's invasion, as he is sending his top diplomats to meet with senior Russian officials about achieving peace. Ukraine was not at that table.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I hear that, you know, they're upset about not having a seat. Well, they've had a seat for three years.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: We also have brand-new video tonight of that moment the Delta plane crash-landed, in Toronto, yesterday. Questions about how this happened.
[21:20:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: Tonight, as the U.S. and Russia officially just held the most extensive talks that we have seen, between these two nations in nearly three years, President Trump is effectively blaming Ukraine for Russia's invasion.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I think I have the power to end this war, and I think it's going very well.
But today, I heard, Oh, we weren't invited.
Well, you've been there for three years. You should have ended it -- three years. You should have never started it. You could have made a deal.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Now, the blame on Ukraine is something that we've heard from President Trump before. It's also an echo of what we often hear from President Putin himself.
Ukraine, of course, did not start this war. Russia did, when it invaded Ukraine.
But Trump's comment is all the more important now, after Ukraine was excluded from that meeting, between senior U.S. officials and Russian officials, in Saudi Arabia, this morning.
My White House insiders tonight are Semafor's White House Correspondent, Shelby Talcott. New York Times White House Correspondent, Zolan Kanno-Youngs.
And CNN National Security Analyst, Beth Sanner, who was the former Deputy Director of National Intelligence, a critical role.
When you hear Trump's tone there. And you and I were talking, last week, after Trump had that 90-minute call with Putin. You were saying, It's not such a bad thing. It's not a hair-on-fire moment. It's a good thing that they're -- that they're speaking.
But what do you hear when you listen to Trump, in the way he talks about Zelenskyy and Ukraine, period?
BETH SANNER, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST, FORMER DEPUTY DIR. OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE UNDER TRUMP: Exactly. What I hear is anger. And that is one of the things that worries me the most, is this anger toward Ukraine, toward the victim in this war.
And it strikes me that it really takes me back to the entire, who's to blame for stealing the DNC servers and influence in the elections, right? That he would blame Ukraine for those things. And so--
COLLINS: Baselessly.
SANNER: Yes. And so, there's this longstanding thing that I thought had been kind of pushed to the side, after some very positive meetings with Zelenskyy. But now, we're seeing kind of the thing emerge again, and it's not at all helpful in terms of the negotiation, obviously.
So, when I said it's a good thing that they're talking? And it doesn't even bother me that they would meet separately. It's the way that all of this is going about. It's the tone of it. It's not talking to the Allies in advance. It's not setting it up in a way that doesn't look like it's completely on Russia's side. So that's one of the big concerns there.
COLLINS: Yes. And Shelby, we saw this meeting, this morning, that happened. Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, National Security Advisor, Mike Waltz, and Steve Witkoff, all came out after, and were talking about this meeting, and essentially how it went, and why Ukraine was not included in this.
What are you hearing from sources about the takeaways from that meeting?
SHELBY TALCOTT, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, SEMAFOR: Well, they're saying privately that they think that it was a positive meeting. But there's also acknowledgement that there's a long ways to go.
And I think you're going to see General Keith Kellogg, he's actually meeting with Ukraine, later this week. I think that's going to be a vital meeting. I think it's even more important now, based on what the President said, earlier today.
So, it's really interesting. I'm told, essentially, there are different factions, and they're all sort of working separately, but also together. And that's the strategy that the White House has decided to take with this, instead of having all of the groups together in one room.
Now, of course, the problem with that is you have Ukraine outside of the talks, right? Ukraine, despite Keith Kellogg going there, and talking to them, later this week, doesn't feel like they're being adequately included in these conversations.
COLLINS: Yes, which led Zelenskyy to delay his own trip to Saudi Arabia, where -- he's been on this tour. He was in Turkey, this morning, I believe. He says he's not going to go there now until March 10th.
But things seem to be moving pretty quickly. I mean, Trump told reporters, he could meet with Putin before the end of this month. That's 10 days away. I don't know. We'll see what actually happens. But in terms of how they are looking at the Putin meeting, that seems to be progressing a lot faster.
ZOLAN KANNO-YOUNGS, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, THE NEW YORK TIMES: Between the U.S. and Russia, right now.
And it raises the concern amongst European allies, including, again, the nation that did get invaded in this case, that not only will they not be at the table, but will they be consulted after a deal?
[21:25:00]
Now, Zelenskyy says that they would not agree to a deal, unless they are a party to these negotiations, unless they come to them, and they have some buy-in here.
But do you have a situation, where, it's clear right now, when you look at the Trump team, that there is more an interest in ending this war than penalizing Moscow, and putting pressure on Moscow. So now, does that translate, in this pursuit to end the war, ceding to Putin's demands as well.
COLLINS: That--
KANNO-YOUNGS: Do you have a situation where Ukraine needs to cede more territory? Those are going to be the questions we have.
COLLINS: And we keep hearing what Ukraine may have to give up. But we're not necessarily hearing what Putin may have to give up.
Trump today was complaining and essentially echoing what we hear from the Kremlin, that Zelenskyy is not a legitimate leader. And Trump was arguing that because they haven't had elections there, the country, of course, has been in martial law. The Ukrainian constitution doesn't allow for elections during martial law.
But this has been a thorny issue, even in Ukraine itself.
SANNER: It has been, and there's certainly people arguing that there should be elections. I personally think that bringing them up now, however, is just weakening Zelenskyy, and his position, going into elections. It's demoralizing the Ukrainians on the front, as we're starting to hear, and it's worrying Ukrainians.
Now, ironically, it might actually improve Zelenskyy's popularity. Trump incorrectly -- I'm not sure who gave him this number of 4 percent popularity, which is just insanely wrong. It's like over 50 percent. And I don't know how that compares to other leaders. But in the middle of a war, that's not going great, I don't think that that's that bad.
So, I just think it's a bad idea to talk about elections, right now. It is a Putin talking point, no doubt.
COLLINS: Can I just quickly also play, when we hear what Trump has been saying about Putin, what we are hearing from Republican senators today?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MANU RAJU, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Do you think that Putin can be trusted in these negotiations?
SEN. ROGER WICKER (R-MS): No. Putin is a war criminal and should be in jail for the rest of his life, if not executed.
SEN. JOHN KENNEDY (R-LA): Vladimir Putin has a black heart. He's clearly has Stalin's taste for blood.
He's an evil man.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: It's a very different message.
TALCOTT: Yes. And there's clearly a disconnect between lawmakers and the White House.
And I also think there's an aspect of this, where Donald Trump fancies himself as a deal-maker and a peacemaker, and he doesn't really see Ukraine as the winner in this. And so, therefore, he feels like they should be making more concessions than Russia..
COLLINS: Yes, we'll see.
Everyone, thank you for that. We'll continue to follow this very closely.
Up next. Another top U.S. prosecutor has just quit, here in Washington, refusing a request from her Trump-appointed superiors, to investigate funding from the Biden administration. We'll tell you the details ahead.
[21:30:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: Tonight, another abrupt resignation is adding to a growing crisis, inside the Department of Justice, this time, here in Washington.
A 24-year-veteran of the department, her name is Denise Cheung, announced that she's stepping down as the top criminal prosecutor in the D.C. U.S. Attorney's Office. She says it comes after she refused a request to open a grand jury investigation into a Biden administration-era contract at the EPA. Now, Cheung says she and other veteran prosecutors determined the evidence just didn't meet the threshold for an investigation.
But this request came from Emil Bove. He is the Department's Acting Deputy Attorney General right now, who before this, you'll remember him, he was President Trump's personal attorney. And also, from Ed Martin, who the President just named and nominated to be the permanent D.C. U.S. Attorney.
Ed Martin, for those who don't know, is an election denier, a one-time organizer of the Stop the Steal movement. But now is about to be elevated to an incredibly powerful position.
My legal sources tonight.
Tom Dupree, former U.S. Deputy Assistant Attorney General.
Shan Wu, former federal prosecutor.
And CNN Legal Analyst, Elliot Williams.
And Shan, you actually worked in this office.
SHAN WU, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR, FORMER COUNSEL TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: Right.
COLLINS: Is it unusual to see someone, who's a 24-year veteran kind of get this request and say, This doesn't jive with how this works, and I'm going to leave over it?
WU: Yes, it's very -- very unusual.
And I think it's an example, from what we're seeing in the reporting, of yet another career prosecutor standing up and saying, We're not going to do things improperly, without evidence, without a good law enforcement reason, to do things, just because we're being told to do that.
And that's really a great example of how the career prosecutors act as the conscience and wisdom of an institution that it doesn't just change from administration to administration.
COLLINS: Well, and Elliot, you also had time in this office.
ELLIOT WILLIAMS, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR, FORMER DOJ DEP. ASST. ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Yes.
COLLINS: What does it have to -- to have to meet the threshold, for a request, like the one that Emil Bove made, of her and her colleagues? WILLIAMS: Well, again, it's not likely or common for headquarters -- and Tom worked there too -- to make any request, frankly, of the day- to-day affairs going on inside an office.
I think what's striking about this one, Kaitlan, is what we don't know about it, the specifics of what she was being really asked to do. Because staff and management have disagreements, all the time, over how to proceed with cases, but they don't rise to the level of resigning.
So either, she was asked to do something that just felt unethical with respect to her law license, or just simply did not comport with the law. It is so rare--
TOM DUPREE, FORMER U.S. DEPUTY ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL: Yes.
WILLIAMS: --for someone at that seniority.
DUPREE: This is unusual by any conceivable metric.
WILLIAMS: Yes.
[21:35:00]
DUPREE: And what it underscores, in my mind, is the profound difference between Trump 1 and Trump 2. From the get-go, we'll know, and Trump won, Trump was pushing back constantly against the political appointees in his Justice Department. I mean, it's on the news every night, all the tension, between Jeff Sessions and Trump.
They have hardwired DOJ now, to execute the wishes of Donald Trump. That's how they've built it. We saw that, the whole Eric Adams thing. We saw that today. And this is not going to be the last.
I think we are going to be back here next week, the following week, the week after, with some other instance, where there's a prosecution, an investigation that the politicals are pushing the career people to take, and we're getting pushback and resignations.
WILLIAMS: And you got to ask yourself, what is the value of resigning? At a certain point, it is an important step that people can take. It's sort of like the one act of, I hesitate to use the word, resistance, whatever it might be. But the simple fact is, who is the bulwark against unethical behavior or lawless behavior, if not the people who had been there for 25 years?
COLLINS: But what's the -- I guess, the question is, then, what's the option if you don't resign? Is it to carry out something that--
WILLIAMS: Right.
COLLINS: --that you think is unethical?
And the other part of this, if someone who voted for Trump is watching, the Justice Department responded and said, Refusing a basic request to pause an investigation, as they described it, so officials can examine the potential waste of a government funds is not an act of heroism. It's just a failure to follow the chain of command.
WU: Yes, they seem so obsessed with making sure they point out, This is not heroic. This is not an act of conscience.
That's come up before, in what Bove said to the Southern District of New York's acting Attorney, when she resigned, said, People who romanticize what you're doing as an act of heroism, that's wrong.
They just want to argue, You need to follow orders here. But they're so obviously aware that this kind of taking a stand is really different.
And it's so interesting, when you contrast it to the Watergate era, right? That Saturday Night Massacre? Those are political appointees resigning, taking that stand. The attorney general there, the deputy attorney general.
This is so, to me, more significant because it is the career people taking the stand.
DUPREE: And I'll say, look, the President has the right to have people--
WU: Yes.
DUPREE: --in his administration, who execute his orders. There's no question.
WILLIAMS: Absolutely (ph).
DUPREE: He's the Commander-in-Chief. He won an election.
WU: Yes.
DUPREE: But here's the thing. For purposes of effective law enforcement, you can't begin every prosecution or investigation with a flurry of resignations from your people.
WU: Right.
DUPREE: In other words, if this is going to be kind of the way it's going to happen, it will be very difficult to execute the laws of the United States--
WU: Right.
DUPREE: --if every time a political appointee gives a command, it's proceeded by a flurry of resignations.
WU: Yes, you can't--
DUPREE: It won't work that way.
COLLINS: And there are also questions about who would be named to be the D.C. U.S. attorney.
WILLIAMS: Yes.
COLLINS: Ed Martin has been filling in this job, on an interim basis. It wasn't clear, completely, to people inside, that he was going to actually be named permanent. But he has now been named that by Trump.
What does that tell us about what this office is going to look like, for the next four years?
WILLIAMS: Quite a lot.
And to Tom's point, the President is allowed his people. We've all worked in Republican and Democratic administrations. And look, a Republican president's going to put Republicans in.
The problem with Ed Martin is he simply does not have the qualifications to run this office. He's not been a prosecutor. He's not been a judge. I don't believe he's even been a criminal defense attorney, but I'm not certain about that fact.
He's an activist, politically, and he's a loyalist of the President. That is the criterion that the President is using to put people in the largest, or, if not the largest, the second largest--
WU: The largest--
WILLIAMS: --U.S. Attorney's Office in the country, and the only one that prosecutes both state and federal crimes. It is a serious management job, and a serious prosecutor job, and he's just not fit to have it.
WU: It's actually worse than not having been a criminal defense attorney. He was. He represented one of the January 6th defendants and dismissed the case against.
COLLINS: And he was there at the Stop the Steal rally.
WU: Right.
COLLINS: And he posted that day, Rowdy crowd but nothing out of hand. Ignore the Fake News.
We'll see what that looks like.
Thank you all for being here, all of our legal experts.
Up next. We have new details that we are getting in, this evening, and a new video, of that moment that a Delta plane flipped over and burst into flames.
My next source, also tonight, as we're following all of these stories, here in Washington, as well, he's one of the hundreds of FAA employees who was fired by the Trump administration. We'll ask him why, next.
[21:40:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) COLLINS: Tonight, new videos show the exact moment that a Delta flight crash-landed and flipped over in flames, on a Toronto runway.
(VIDEO - NEW VIDEOS SHOW MOMENT DELTA JET CRASHED, FLIPPED OVER IN TORONTO)
COLLINS: You can see here this view, it's from the cockpit of another plane that was nearby. Experts point out that the plane's rear landing gear is buckling as it makes that hard-landing that you can see here. The right wing then rips away, and a fireball as the aircraft skids over on its belly and rolls over.
Fortunately, as we know tonight, all 80 people on board, passengers and crew, survived, what you are seeing here. Officials tell us that two of the 21 people, who were injured, remain in the hospital. They have non-life-threatening injuries tonight.
As we're getting new video of passengers dangling from their seats, what it looked like inside, and hearing from a survivor who is speaking out about just what a harrowing experience it was, and also how they helped other passengers evacuate.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PETE CARLSON, PASSENGER: And we looked over and the windows were just, there was just liquid pouring over the, you know, the small windows, and suddenly it smelled very strong of what I heard people later call Avgas.
We all made our way, kind of, I don't know, six to eight feet, and then climbed out. It felt like I was stepping under the tundra.
The most powerful part of today was there was just -- just people, no countries, no nothing. It was just people together, helping each other.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: We're hearing from officials, this evening, who say, Right now, it's still too early to tell if the weekend's extreme weather conditions were what led to the crash. Investigators are still at the site, examining what remains of the fuselage, as you can see here. We'll continue to follow that investigation.
[21:45:00]
Separately, here in the United States, we're hearing, tonight, a warning from one of the several hundred FAA employees who was just fired. Quote, "I'm scared to death. And the American public should be scared too," is what we're hearing from Charlie Stadtlander, who says he was working on an urgent FAA defense program, in Hawaii, to detect incoming cruise missiles.
He thought his job would be spared, because it focused on national security. But on Friday, along with hundreds of other FAA probationary employees, he was fired. And Charlie joins me now.
And thank you for being here. It's great to have you.
Because obviously, this warning, you say that the American public should be scared by your firing, and the hundreds of your FAA colleagues' as well. Why is that?
CHARLES STADTLANDER, FIRED FAA EMPLOYEE: Hey, Kaitlan, thank you so much for having me on tonight, and thank you for giving me the platform to tell my story. I wish I was here under different circumstances. But alas, here we are.
So, I do think the American public does need to be concerned about, not only my firing, but also the firing of so many public safety national security professionals, at the FAA, and within the Department of Transportation, but writ large, also throughout the federal government.
And I just -- I said -- gave that quote, about being scared to death, because, while I can't talk about the specifics of the project I worked on, and what all I was doing, what I can tell you is that the FAA National Defense Program that I was a part of, and was incredibly proud to work for the mission, to accomplish the mission of, has an incredibly important national security role, and I was working on incredibly important national security work.
And by being summarily fired without any warning, actually while I was in the process of working, I think that that is detrimental to national security.
COLLINS: You were at work when you got fired?
STADTLANDER: I was. I had actually just returned from a work trip, a briefing at one of our Air Force bases.
And I was working late into the night, which, again, is, I think, further evidence, I'm just one of hundreds of thousands of federal employees, who work way more than 40 hours a week. And it goes to show that the rumors that are being spread by the administration and DOGE, that federal workers are just leeches on the government, are incorrect.
But with that said, I had just returned home from a briefing, you know, a work trip. I had another one scheduled, actually, for today. And I was working late into the night, after I returned home, to get my notes and my thoughts down, so that I could prepare them to share with my boss, and other folks in my branch, before I actually went to my briefing this week.
COLLINS: Well, and Charlie, I just wonder what you say about this, given you talk about this defense radar system that you were working on. I know you can't go into the details of that.
But the White House defended these cuts by saying, No air traffic controllers, nor any professionals who perform safety critical functions were terminated.
Is that accurate, from what you know?
STADTLANDER: So, again, I was in the FAA National Defense Program. So, I don't really have any knowledge on the air traffic controller side of that.
But I can tell you that the second part of that, regarding public safety, or critical public safety, from my perspective and the work I was doing, is a flat-out false statement.
COLLINS: Charlie Stadtlander, I know that this obviously came as a shock to you. Thank you for coming on, and sharing your experience. It's good to hear from someone, who actually went through this, instead of just looking at the numbers, to actually hear from a person who was affected by this. Thank you for sharing that with me tonight.
STADTLANDER: Thank you so much, Kaitlan.
COLLINS: Absolutely. Charlie, thank you so much.
Also tonight, the fate of New York City's mayor may soon be decided by New York's governor, potentially with a power that we have never seen a New York governor wield before. We'll dig into what Kathy Hochul's options are, right after this.
[21:50:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: Tonight, we are waiting to see what exactly the New York governor, Kathy Hochul is going to do, as she weighs using a remarkable but rare and never-before-used power to remove New York City mayor, Eric Adams, from his post.
Sources tell us tonight that Hochul summoned some of the City's top Democrats to her office today, also made calls to congressional lawmakers, and that includes the House Minority Leader, Hakeem Jeffries, to take their temperatures on all of this.
Tomorrow, we're also going to see a judge consider the Justice Department's motion to dismiss his corruption case that is really the background of everything.
My sources tonight are:
Bill de Blasio, the former Mayor of New York City himself.
And Elie Honig, a former federal prosecutor for the Southern District of New York.
Mayor, just to start with you, in terms of what is before Kathy Hochul right now. As she's meeting with these city's -- city leaders and other officials, essentially what is -- what is before her, when it comes to how big of a decision she has right now? BILL DE BLASIO, FORMER NEW YORK CITY MAYOR: It's an unprecedented decision for a major officeholder in New York State to be removed. Obviously, Mayor of New York City, one of the most prominent positions in the country.
[21:55:00]
I think what's happened, in the last few days, Kaitlan, has been absolutely extraordinary. And I've got -- no parallel that I can remember.
I think the Trump administration and the Justice Department really set, almost, a perfect trap for Eric Adams by saying, Well, we're going to drop the charges for now, but we might revive them. Leaving him looking captive.
And honestly, he had a chance to do something about that, and didn't, in terms of presenting a message, or a plan, that might have reassured New Yorkers. And then seeing his own top aide start to move away from him.
It's an incredibly messy, complex situation. But what the Governor is considering now, literally, no governor has ever done anything like this, certainly in recent memory, it's a very, very intense and, I think, a very careful decision that she's going to have to make.
COLLINS: Elie, if she decides to do this, does that mean it's over for Mayor Adams? Or does he have an option to appeal here? I would imagine, he has some due process in that decision.
ELIE HONIG, FORMER ASST. U.S. ATTORNEY, SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NY, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Yes, so the law is way more complicated than maybe the Governor would want it to be. It's not as if she can simply flip a switch and he's gone.
This is an ancient law. It actually, I have to say, has been used one time. When FDR was the Governor of New York State, in 1932, he used it to remove a guy named Jimmy Walker--
COLLINS: But he didn't--
HONIG: --who was the Mayor of New York City.
COLLINS: Didn't he not have to use it because he actually -- Walker resigned is--
HONIG: Right.
COLLINS: Right.
HONIG: He invoked the law. And you're exactly -- you've got -- Kaitlan, you know everything, man. Yes, he invoked--
COLLINS: I wish.
HONIG: FDR invoked the law. And Walker, rather than go with the process, then resigned.
Now, the process is the big question here, because the law basically says the governor can initiate this, and then has to serve notice on the mayor, and then the mayor is entitled to some type of hearing. But we don't know what. Is it a hearing? Is it a trial? Is there a judge? Is there a jury? Do they submit brief?
So, if Kathy Hochul goes down this road, she's going to have a fight on her hands from Eric Adams. And we have essentially zero guidance as to how this process works.
COLLINS: Mr. Mayor, you initially -- we had you on the night that we found out about this case, against Mayor Eric Adams. You thought the charges were not that strong, if I remember correctly. Tell me if you -- if you think differently.
But when you have seen what has happened, and why this is a conversation that we're having tonight, do you think that Governor Hochul should ultimately remove him?
DE BLASIO: Well, Kaitlan, first of all, as a New Yorker, I have to tip my cap that you know the history of Jimmy Walker in 1932. I proclaim you, a New York City nerd.
COLLINS: Thank you.
DE BLASIO: But the -- the -- look, I'm not going to prejudge the Governor's decision. It's a very complicated decision.
It's not one that should be taken lightly. It really isn't. At one point, when I was Mayor, and her predecessor, Andrew Cuomo, and I had some conflicts during the COVID era, he dangled that threat. It's not even a threat that should be dangled lightly. So, I would say this is a very thoughtful process that the Governor has to bring to it.
I do think the original case was weak. But what changed here, I think, for so many people, was this fascinating sort of turn of the screw by the Justice Department, to not just either drop the case, or say, We're going ahead with the case, or a pardon.
They came up with something none of us expected. We're dropping the case, but maybe we're not really dropping the case.
And again, that put -- that put Adams in a seemingly captive role that the only person could get him out of was him. And then, what does he do? He goes on "Fox & Friends" with Tom Homan, and just doubles down, the fears that people had that he was, in some form or fashion, captive. That's what has set this crisis off. It's not just a legal thing. It's really a political thing as well.
But that said, no governor should ever look at a situation of taking out a democratically-elected official lightly. This has to be very carefully reasoned.
COLLINS: Yes, it certainly doesn't seem that Governor Hochul is here, consulting all these leaders. But Elie, before we -- I mean, I don't know. We'll see when we find out what she has decided here.
There is a court hearing, tomorrow, before a judge, asking the DOJ, why they think this case should be dismissed. Obviously, we've seen how that has played out, with the resignation of a lot of prosecutors over it.
What are we looking for though, tomorrow, in this case?
HONIG: We use the phrase, unprecedented, sometimes. But boy, what's going to happen tomorrow is really going to be unlike anything we've ever seen before.
Because the judge is going to bring in the parties. So, we're going to have Eric Adams and his defense team at one table. And we're going to have DOJ leadership, we don't know exactly who, but perhaps Emil Bove, but people who are aligned with him, at the other table.
And the judge is going to put them on record, DOJ on record, I need to know your reasons for wanting to dismiss this case. The law says the judge has to sign off.
Now, DOJ has very broad discretion, if they want to dismiss a case as to why.
[22:00:00]
But we're going to hear something, I believe, tomorrow, that we've never heard in an American court before, which is, the Justice Department, saying, The reason we want to get rid of this case, dismiss this indictment, Your Honor, is so that Mayor Adams can help support our policy and political agenda on immigration. That's what makes this scandal about so much more than just Eric Adams himself.
The big question is, will the judge accept that? We don't know.
COLLINS: Yes, and that's why, as the Mayor laid out there, it was so notable that this was dismissed, as you lawyers say, without prejudice, Elie, meaning, they could bring it back, potentially.
We'll see what happens, tomorrow.
Thank you for welcoming me to the New York club, Mr. Mayor.
HONIG: Yes.
COLLINS: Elie Honig. Bill de Blasio. Great to have you both. Thank you so much.
HONIG: Thanks, Kaitlan.
COLLINS: And thank you all for joining us.
"CNN NEWSNIGHT WITH ABBY PHILLIP" is up next.
