Return to Transcripts main page
The Source with Kaitlan Collins
Trump Tells Cabinet Chiefs: "Keep All The People You Want," Then Says If They Don't Make Cuts "Elon Will Do The Cutting"; Trump: "Only I Know" Why Russia Has "No Choice" On Ukraine Deal; Gov. Newsom Breaks With Dems On Transgender Athletes. Aired 9-10p ET
Aired March 06, 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]
JOHN BERMAN, CNN HOST, ANDERSON COOPER 360: --all right. Arne Duncan, former Education Secretary, in the Obama administration, we appreciate your time tonight. Thank you so much for being with us.
ARNE DUNCAN, FORMER EDUCATION SECRETARY: Thank you.
BERMAN: All right, that is all for us tonight.
I will be back on the air, tomorrow at 07:00 a.m., for "CNN NEWS CENTRAL" with me, Kate Bolduan, and Sara Sidner.
In the meantime, "THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS" starts right now.
KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, CNN HOST, THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS: Straight from THE SOURCE tonight.
Did President Trump just rein in Elon Musk? What he told his Cabinet behind closed doors today, with his Special Government Employee in the room, about who has the final say when it comes to slashing the federal workforce.
Plus, that reversal from the President that has the stock market not knowing what is up, and what's down, as he changes his mind, again, on those massive tariffs he put in place, just days ago, against Canada and Mexico. I'll get reaction, tonight, from the head of the United Auto Workers Union.
And one of the Democrats' top stars just made a huge break from his party on transgender rights. The latest tonight, from Governor Gavin Newsom.
I'm Kaitlan Collins. And this is THE SOURCE.
More scalpel, less hatchet, and no mention of a chainsaw. That was the message that President Trump delivered, behind closed doors today, as he convened the members of his Cabinet, many of whom you can see here, entering and exiting the West Wing, earlier, for a meeting that Elon Musk was in on, and also that focused, at length, on what Elon Musk has been doing, his efforts to slash the federal workforce.
The Defense, Health, Transportation, and other secretaries, all seen on the White House grounds, as this 90-minute meeting got underway, and what appears to be an attempt, by the President, to clarify Elon Musk's role, and also to rein in his power.
We have new details from inside the room tonight, including how Trump made clear that while he supports what Musk is doing overall, it's the agency heads who actually have the final say on all the firings that have been upending the federal government.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: I want the Cabinet members to keep good people. I don't want to see a big cut where a lot of good people are cut.
So I had a meeting, and I said, I want the Cabinet members go first, keep all the people you want, everybody that you need.
That's precious, that's very important. And we want them to keep the good people. And so we're going to be watching them. And Elon and the group are going to be watching them. And if they can cut, it's better. And if they don't cut, then Elon will do the cutting.
REPORTER: Is that a reflection that you think DOGE and Elon Musk have been moving too quickly?
TRUMP: No, no, I think they've done an amazing job.
Elon has been really teaching everybody about the numbers that you can do.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Now the President says these meetings are going to happen every two weeks inside the White House, and that Musk is still expected to make those recommendations. And the President made clear, if his department heads weren't making sufficient reductions, the tech billionaire is going to intervene.
Now, none of this is to say that Musk doesn't still have the President's backing. He very clearly does, as you heard Trump say there. But it does make clear that agency heads had concerns about who should have the final say, that the President needed to take this moment to clarify it.
I've heard from sources that there were complaints, actually, during last week's Cabinet meeting, where you'll remember, Musk held court, he spoke at length.
The Cabinet members complained their departments were undermanned. Some of them have quietly grumbled about the moves that he made, that they were not fully read in on beforehand, and only found out as it was happening.
We've also heard that the White House Chief of Staff, Susie Wiles, who was inside that meeting today, I'll note, has also been paying close attention to the criticism and the complaints, that have been coming from Republicans, and business leaders, as quiet as they may be.
So, how does Elon Musk feel about all of this? He wrote on X tonight about that meeting, quote, "Very productive meeting."
My political sources tonight are:
David Axelrod, former Senior Adviser to President Obama.
And Ramesh Ponnuru, Editor of The National Review.
David, you know what it's like inside a West Wing, and how this operates, and what's standard and what's not. What do you make of the fact that Trump gathered these agency heads to kind of walk through, No, it's actually you who does have the final say when it comes to--
DAVID AXELROD, FORMER SENIOR ADVISER TO PRESIDENT OBAMA, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yes.
COLLINS: --to who is making up your agency.
AXELROD: Well let me just, on the premise of your question, I have experience working in a White House. I don't think anybody has a comparable experience to working in this particular White House, because it doesn't operate like any other White House.
COLLINS: That's fair.
AXELROD: So, we would never have had to have a meeting like that, and no one would have been empowered to the degree that Elon Musk has been empowered.
But I have to believe, Kaitlan, this was more than just grumbling from the Cabinet. It was grumbling from members of Congress, who are interacting with their constituents.
[21:05:00]
Americans are very receptive to the idea that government is too bloated, that government -- that waste, and fraud, and abuse, should be eliminated. And on the top line, that's very popular, that's chainsaw stuff.
But then, when you get to the actual impact of some of these things, if they're done indiscriminately, or if they touch stuff that people value, like veterans, for example? Then it becomes a lot dicier. And there are all kinds of downstream impacts of these cuts as well in local communities. I think all of that is beginning to bubble to the surface.
And I think the President wanted to send a signal today that, Yes, I do value good people in government. No, I don't want indiscriminate cuts. And so, maybe the political forces are now being felt a little bit in the White House.
COLLINS: Yes, what's your view of having Elon Musk? He was there in the room, I should note, as all this was happening. RAMESH PONNURU, EDITOR, THE NATIONAL REVIEW, WASHINGTON POST COLUMNIST: It's not just the pushback from the Cabinet. That's as important as it is. There's also, as David was saying, pushback from Congress.
Musk met for about two hours, at lunch time, yesterday, with senators who were -- who were suggesting that there are ways to get spending cuts through Congress on a fast-track basis, where the administration isn't doing these things unilaterally. And that, I think, is very important constitutional pushback, and it means that if DOGE is going to achieve something lasting, this is the way it has to be done.
COLLINS: Yes, but what does it say that -- when you hear Trump in the Oval Office, right after, saying, If they don't make enough cuts, Elon Musk is going to be allowed to make cuts.
I mean, that has been the kind of the concern that these agency heads have had is, Yes, sure, we're for what you're doing, and getting rid of bloat and whatnot. But they also need these agencies to run.
AXELROD: Right.
COLLINS: And they're pretty newly installed in there.
AXELROD: Well, there's an interesting juxtaposition, because he said, I want you to keep all the people you need, I want you -- I want you to have everything you need. But if you don't make the cuts, then Elon is going to bring his chainsaw back. I mean, it's kind of, it is a rare instance in which the President was a little inconsistent.
COLLINS: Yes, and there was -- you know, you pointed out something that also stood out to me, when I was listening to that today, which is how he talked about these federal workers, and still saying that there are good people who are -- who are federal workers.
PONNURU: We have not been hearing that much, the last couple weeks.
AXELROD: Yes.
COLLINS: We've heard from Marjorie Taylor Greene, who said federal jobs aren't -- federal workers' jobs aren't real jobs.
But I think what this has touched is it's affecting veterans. We're seeing people who are worried about Social Security and payments like that. Elon Musk has compared Social Security to a Ponzi scheme. I mean, it's, these are people who are also Trump supporters and Trump voters that this is now touching.
PONNURU: And it's a concession to political reality, right, in that Musk has clearly been a drag on the popularity of this administration, and this idea of indiscriminate cuts.
But it's also a concession to governmental reality. In fact, you do need good people--
AXELROD: Yes. PONNURU: --to run the government. And if you really want to make government more efficient, you try to get rid of the lowest performers, not just make indiscriminate cuts.
AXELROD: The signals that they were sending, at the beginning, we were talking about this before we came out here, was that, If you're in a government employee, it's, you're either corrupt or you're inept, because if you were really sharp, you'd be out there in the world, making money, and that somehow this was a second class kind of job.
That is not fair, it's not true, and it's damaging the morale of the people who remain.
And so, I think that what you saw today was a significant course correction. Whether it follows through in terms of policy, we have to see. But it's an acknowledgement that they went too far.
COLLINS: Yes, and just to look in terms of what that means, in terms of too far, or what we've seen happening, at least. A 101,000 federal workers have been fired from federal agencies so far. That's based on our tracking.
A lot of these are probationary employees, because they're easier to fire. But being probationary doesn't mean you are bad at your job. Some of these are highly-skilled people who were just recently promoted, and put in different positions.
But also, we've seen the court battles that are going on. We've seen the fired workers who are being asked to return for their critical positions. At the CDC, I was reading this, this update, and these people were fired, then asked to come back. But who is checking their email after they have been fired, I mean? And being told, Actually, we would like for you to return to the office.
PONNURU: And this, the Trumpian movement is not your old libertarian anti-government Republican movement. There are things that they want government to do, and that are going to be hard to do. For example, you're just missing people who are in charge of implementing export controls on China. That's not something that is really in keeping with the Trump-Republican agenda or any sensible agenda.
AXELROD: Yes. My mother used to say to me, I love you, I just hate the things you do.
It's the opposite here. They hate government, but they kind of like some of the things that government does. And it won't do it as well if you follow through on some of the things that are going on right now.
[21:10:00]
COLLINS: But -- and I should note, though, hours after this happened, we, you know, we're talking and getting reporting at the White House, on what this meeting looked like, who was there.
We saw DOGE employees coming in that same door that you saw the Cabinet officials going inside earlier. I mean, they very much still have this role and this presence. And yes, the President is offering this clarification. But there's no indication, from what we've heard, that DOGE itself is scaling back.
AXELROD: Yes, well, I don't think, you know -- like I said, there is what is said, and then there is what happens. We don't know what's actually going to happen now. Is Musk's role actually going to be scaled back? And was this for the cameras, or was this for real? We don't know the answer to that.
COLLINS: Yes. And you mentioned the blowback from Republicans. It has been very gentle and quiet. Yes, they asked a lot of questions on Capitol Hill, yesterday. I should note, he gave Senate Republicans his phone number. He did not give it out to House Republicans, and he told them they could consult the website.
PONNURU: Senators love that (ph).
AXELROD: He has learned a few things.
PONNURU: Yes.
COLLINS: Based on what we heard. Yes, the upper chamber, he respects that.
But Tommy Tuberville, senator from my home state, told The Washington Post, I don't want to get in [DOGE's] way... They know what they're doing a hell of a lot more than I do.
PONNURU: Yes, it's, you go back to the founding. The theory was that members of Congress would actually want to guard their powers against the executive branch. And Senator Tuberville, with that quote, is an example of the way in which that hasn't quite worked out.
AXELROD: Feeding Article I into the wood chipper is what I think it's called.
COLLINS: Or the chainsaw. There's -- it's a scalpel to hatchet, a wood chipper, chainsaw, we've got them all.
AXELROD: Yes.
COLLINS: Thank you both for being here, David and Ramesh, great to have you both.
Also, an update on tonight, speaking of Elon Musk. We are seeing another SpaceX launch failure that we're closely monitoring, this evening.
Because get a look at this. The FAA has lifted a ground stop that it stopped all flights going into several airports in Florida, because of falling space debris, for what you saw here.
That space debris is the Starship spacecraft which exploded during its eighth test flight that happened, this evening. It's an uncrewed mission. But it lifted off a few hours ago from Texas. SpaceX then lost contact with it, a few minutes into the flight. You can see here, this is it flying over the Bahamas, before it appears to explode.
Now, the FAA says this evening that SpaceX has to conduct a mishap investigation after the loss of that Starship aircraft, which Musk says will, one day, hopefully, in his view, take people to Mars. We'll continue to update you on that, and that investigation.
Up next. What we are hearing from the White House on tariffs, backtracking again. There's an update from what you heard here, last night, for those tariffs against Canada and Mexico. A new twist.
We'll get reaction from the head of the United Auto Workers Union, who has actually said positive things about these tariff actions, despite his past criticisms.
Also tonight, a Democratic powerhouse making a sharp break from his party on transgender athletes. We'll tell you what Governor Gavin Newsom is saying.
[21:15:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: In the latest twist in his on-again, off-again trade war. Tonight, we are hearing from President Trump largely pausing the tariffs that he just put in place, on Canada and Mexico, two days after his Commerce Secretary said no pause was coming.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HOWARD LUTNICK, COMMERCE SECRETARY: It's not going to be a pause. None of that pause stuff.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Fast forward to today, when in the Oval Office, the President signed one-month exemptions on pretty much all imports from both Canada and Mexico that are covered by his trilateral trade agreement with those two nations. A deal that Trump negotiated and praised, but has now become a point of concern from his top aides, this time around.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: The USMCA is the largest, fairest, most balanced and modern trade agreement ever achieved.
LUTNICK: And USMCA, the President has been crystal clear that he thinks that Michigan and Ohio, the communities of Michigan and Ohio, they've been ravaged by these ideas.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Now, this latest pause creates a carve-out for hundreds of companies and different kinds of products, like groceries and clothing, which might surprise you, if you have been listening to what the Vice President JD Vance has had to say.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JD VANCE (R), U.S. VICE PRESIDENT: I think the President has been very clear here that he wants the tariffs to apply broadly. He doesn't want to have 500 different industries getting 500 different carve-outs.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Now, the administration says this pause that went into effect today only runs until April 2nd. That is when those broader tariffs on multiple countries are going to go into place.
It's a date that the President has says he picked for this reason.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: We're going to do it in April. I'm a very superstitious person. April 2nd, reciprocal tariffs kick in.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: So April 2nd is the day that everything kicks in. That's when the exceptions for the auto workers -- the auto makers, stops. The exceptions for what happened today stops.
But if you're reading the tea leaves from the Commerce Secretary, that date seems to be a bit of a moving target.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LUTNICK: Some tariffs can come straight away. Some can come weeks later. Some can come -- some can take over a month or two to come online.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Now, as for the tariffs on Mexico and Canada, which are paused-ish, we'll say, the President and his team have offered a myriad of reasons for why they put them in place in the first place.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: This is very much about companies and countries that have ripped off this country, our country, our beloved USA.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: That was the President, inside the Oval Office today, arguing that it's about the U.S. being ripped off, as he puts it.
[21:20:00]
His Commerce Secretary, one of several senior aides who have offered different reasons as well, raising questions at times like here on THE SOURCE, last night, for Canadian officials, about what exactly they need to do, to get them lifted.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LUTNICK: This month, right now, is about fentanyl.
This is a drug-related issue. Drugs coming into the United States of America have got to stop.
Right today, let's be clear, today is about fentanyl.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Now, as for whether there will be any more pauses on the tariffs that are set to go into effect on April 2nd, much broader than just Canada and Mexico, this is what the press secretary told me yesterday.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: He feels strongly about that, no matter what, no exception -- exemption.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: If you have questions about all of this, and what that means, and what it portends, the stock market does too. All three major indexes closed lower today, despite the announcement of that pause on most of the tariffs for Canada and Mexico.
My source tonight was a vocal supporter of Kamala Harris, his group now praising Trump's tariff plans. The President of the United Auto Workers, Shawn Fain, is here with you.
And it's great to have you, Shawn. We haven't been able to sit down with you in a minute.
And so, to check in just on what this looks like, the UAW has been applauding this aggressive action that we've seen from Trump, saying he's going to take on tariffs. With this pause, what do you say tonight?
SHAWN FAIN, PRESIDENT, UNITED AUTO WORKERS (UAW): Well, thanks for having me, Kaitlan.
Look, the Trump administration has acknowledged that the USMCA didn't go far enough. And there's an urgency around all this to fix this problem. And the working-class expects action now. So, we're looking forward to the administration putting tariffs on auto in place in April, and working to fix our broken trade laws.
And I know that companies have been communicating that they need time. I mean, you can't just open a plant overnight. So, I know there's some concerns there.
But, at the end of the day, over the last -- you know, since NAFTA's inception, we've seen over 90,000 factories leave this nation. And it's not because it's better for people. It's decimated our communities. You know it's made working-class people live paycheck to paycheck. And so, we have to fix this.
So, it's something we agree on. We disagree on a lot of things, but this is something that we find that, we want to see action.
And tariffs, to me, they're not the total solution. But they are a piece of the puzzle, to get these companies to move.
COLLINS: On those auto tariffs that have been paused until April 2nd. My question yesterday was, is the expectation that these companies are going to shift production in that one-month period? And the White House press secretary said, essentially, they need to get on it.
But, I mean, is that even close to being feasible in -- from your understanding?
FAIN: I mean, I don't think they'll shift. They can't just shut a plant down and move it in a month.
But here's the issue. These companies are making decisions, right now, as we speak.
Right now, in Warren, Michigan, there are 2,000 laid off auto workers at the Warren Truck plant, and Stellantis is shifting production, overflow production, of the Ram Truck to Mexico. They can -- they can change that decision. Warren Truck was the home of the Ram Truck for decades. And so, there's decisions like that that can be made, and they can -- they can shift it pretty quickly.
You talk about John Deere workers, you know? They have a factory that the company is claiming they're going to move to Mexico. You have Mack Truck workers in Pennsylvania. The company committed to build a new truck in Pennsylvania. Now they're saying they're going to take it to Mexico.
So, these tariffs and these actions, we are hopes that it will be a motivator to get these companies to get their butts in gear, and take care of American workers.
COLLINS: What do you say about the uncertainty that some of these companies are facing?
The Big Three were told these tariffs are going into place. Then they got an exception for them. Today, everyone else who makes groceries, oil, fertilizer, all these other things that go back and forth across the border, they got an exception.
What does the uncertainty say about how companies should be preparing for what's coming?
FAIN: Well, the companies, this isn't new. I mean, there's been warnings, for a couple months now, for a month, and since the election was called. I mean, we've heard this. So, they've had time to prepare.
But I look at it this way, you know? What we've seen happen over the years, I mean, workers, consumers, communities, they've paid the price for NAFTA, and for these unfair trade agreements, and they shouldn't have to pay to fix it.
We hear a lot of talk, a lot of fear-mongering about, Tariffs are attacks, Tariffs are going to cause the price to go up. That's a choice on behalf the companies. They don't have to raise the price a penny.
[21:25:00]
That's the same thing we heard during our Big Three strike, It was going to be the end of the world, the sky is falling if we get these contracts. And what happened? We got great contracts, taken care of workers so they get their fair share. Companies are still making billions of dollars, and they're still forking over billions of dollars to shareholders. So, I believe we got to focus on what's right for American people.
The American market is the cash cow for the auto industry. And we've seen, like I said, the exodus of 90,000 factories, since NAFTA's inception.
COLLINS: Yes.
FAIN: And that's got to change.
COLLINS: Some people might be surprised to hear you, praising what Trump is doing on tariffs. I mean, you were one of the biggest, most prominent backers of Vice President Harris. You called Trump a scab, which is not -- that's four letter word that is not nice if you're a big union person, to put it lightly.
What should someone take from this that you're praising Trump's moves here? If he sticks with them.
FAIN: Look, yes, no, I mean, as I said, there is a lot of things we don't agree with. I mean, like the National Institute of Health workers, and all people whose jobs are being cut.
But look, the election is over. No matter who is in charge, our mission doesn't change. Trump is the President, and we all recognize that there is a major issue with our broken trade laws. And we agree on that, and we want to -- we're ready, and want to go to work to fix it.
The working-class in this nation has been hurting for decades, because of unfair trade practices. And they're not concerned with party politics. They want their problems addressed, and they expect leaders to lead.
COLLINS: You called tariffs, the UAW called tariffs, one of the most powerful tools in the toolbox. Are there limits on that though, if the CEOs of these companies, as what happened with Stellantis, and Ford, and General Motors, can call up the White House and get an exemption? Does that bother you at all? FAIN: Well, I mean, I think, look, that's -- it's a rational thing to ask for -- to give them some time. But there's got to be a limit to that time. We can't just have some open-ended thing, where we just let it keep rolling on. And I think that's what the administration is doing. Like I said, there are some decisions happening right now.
COLLINS: Yes. Have you talked to Trump?
FAIN: I'm sorry?
COLLINS: Have you talked to President Trump about any of this?
FAIN: No, not in-person, no. But, like I said, we've been, you know, our team has been communicating with the administration, and have a lot of discussions about how these decisions over the years have impacted workers, and what we would like to see change, and what needs to be addressed. And we're going to continue to do that.
COLLINS: Shawn Fain, keep us updated on those negotiations and those talks. And great to have you back tonight. Thanks for joining me.
FAIN: Thank you. Great to be here. Thanks.
COLLINS: Speaking of the White House, the President had a cryptic answer, inside the Oval Office today, when he was asked about the potential future of a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: A certain different way -- a different way that only I know, only I know.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[21:30:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: After putting a stop, at least for now, to that critical intelligence sharing that has been happening between the United States with Ukraine, which has helped Ukraine know where to attack Russian forces, or if Russian forces were about to attack them. Tonight, President Trump said only he knows why Russia's war on Ukraine will come to an end.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I think what's going to happen is Ukraine wants to make a deal, because I don't think they have a choice. I also think that Russia wants to make a deal, because in a certain different way -- a different way that only I know, only I know, they have no choice either.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: My deeply-sourced White House insiders tonight are: Semafor's Shelby Talcott.
And Reuters' Jeff Mason.
Jeff, what did you make of the President's comment there in the Oval Office, as everyone's kind of reading the tea leaves on what's happening here?
JEFF MASON, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, REUTERS: Well, I think it's hard to read the tea leaves with President Trump, because he uses certain phrases over and over again, including, the deal, like, They want to make a deal.
Well, President Zelenskyy was here last week, and clearly wasn't ready to make a deal, in part because he didn't feel like the deal terms were fair, and that the Vice President of the United States didn't understand who he was dealing with in terms of diplomacy with Vladimir Putin.
So, when the President says they both want to make a deal, I'm not sure that that much has changed since last week, other than the fact that we know, from his address to Congress, this week, that he had received some communication from Zelenskyy.
But broadly, I guess, it's a long way of saying, you have to sometimes, as a reporter, and as a public, take what he says with a grain of salt, because we don't actually know if there's something behind it.
COLLINS: Yes, and they've stopped intelligence sharing, they stopped the military aid. I mean, they have certainly taking more -- taken more punishing actions, since that fall-out from that Oval Office meeting, despite what we've heard from Ukrainian officials.
SHELBY TALCOTT, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, SEMAFOR: Yes, and it's that's part of sort of a pressure campaign, clearly, to try to get Ukraine to come back to the table, which is interesting, because Zelenskyy has said that he's willing to sign this deal. But we've heard from White House officials who say, OK, essentially, I'll believe it when I see it.
But his kind of cryptic comments also reminded me of, out on the campaign trail, over the past two years, when we would hear him say similar things. He would say he had this big plan to end the wars on day one, but he couldn't tell anybody. So this is kind of, I think, typical of Trump, if you followed him for a really long time.
[21:35:00]
COLLINS: And obviously, day one wasn't feasible. It has not happened, because it's a difficult war to solve.
But it stood out to me what we heard from Senator Lindsey Graham today, because after that meeting on, last week, on Friday -- he's obviously been an ally of Ukraine's. He's met with Zelenskyy multiple times. He came out swinging and saying that Zelenskyy should be-- MASON: Yes.
COLLINS: --that he should resign, essentially, or they send someone else to negotiate.
Today, he wrote in a lengthy message, and said, If Putin refuses to seriously come to the peace table, I hope and expect that Trump would unleash more economic sanctions on Russia's banking and energy sectors, and if necessary, apply massive tariffs, because, he says, that impact would force them to the table.
MASON: Well, and that's certainly a contrast with the Trump administration, perhaps looking at reducing sanctions on Russia, which is something that we were reporting earlier this week.
So, also a sign that Senator Graham is pulling back a little bit from the outrage that he expressed, last Friday, about that Oval Office meeting and Zelenskyy's behavior. That said, he wasn't giving Zelenskyy a free pass, but he was putting the onus on President Putin, which is really quite the opposite of what President Trump has done.
COLLINS: With officials meeting in Saudi Arabia, next week. We know the delegations are going there. And President Zelenskyy, I believe, is going on Monday, to meet with the Crown Prince. Do we have any indication on movement here, with the minerals deal and just generally, on getting this relationship back on track, if it does?
TALCOTT: I think it's kind of to-be-determined. And I honestly think it's day by day, and part of it is what mood Donald Trump is in on that particular day.
Because we've heard from White House officials that they want to get this deal done. They have insisted that the President wants to get this deal done, despite last week's blow-up in the Oval Office. Zelenskyy has said recently that he's on board, that he'll sign the deal.
But clearly, when we're seeing all these actions being taken still by the U.S., against Ukraine, there're still details to be sorted out. So, I think it's a day-by-day situation, quite frankly.
COLLINS: You had a great question about NATO, last week, on Article 5, which is the collective defense treaty, if one nation's attacked then the others come to their defense.
President Trump was talking about what the United States would do, if there was an attack on NATO Allies, today in the Oval. And this is what he had to say.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I think it's common sense, right? If they don't pay, I'm not going to defend them. No, I'm not going to defend them. I got into a lot of heat when I said that. You said, Oh, he's violating NATO.
But if the United States was in trouble and we called them, we said, We got a problem, France. We got a problem. A couple of others, I won't mention. Do you think they're going to come and protect us? Hm. They're supposed to. I'm not so sure.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MASON: It injects certainty into -- uncertainty into the very basis of the NATO alliance.
And it's also a 180-degree turn from what he said, to my question, last week, when I asked him, as you mentioned, If he supported Article 5, and I also asked him about what would happen if European forces ended up in Ukraine and perhaps got attacked. He said, I support it, but I don't think we're going to need it. He didn't say he supports it now.
COLLINS: And also, that hypothetical that he just raised there misses -- the one time that Article 5 of NATO has been invoked was after the United States was attacked on 9/11.
MASON: Correct.
COLLINS: We'll have to leave it there and see what happens in Saudi Arabia.
Shelby. Jeff. Great to have you both here.
Up next here for us. There was a notable break by one of the most prominent faces of the Democratic Party, with his party, when it comes to transgender athletes.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GOV. GAVIN NEWSOM (D-CA): The issue of fairness is completely legit.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[21:40:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: California governor, Gavin Newsom, is splitting from his own party tonight, on the issue of transgender athletes in women's sports.
On the first episode of his new podcast, Governor Newsom, who is potentially considering a run for the White House in 2028, judge for yourself when you hear this, spoke about this issue with the conservative activist, Charlie Kirk. And Governor Newsom said, Republicans were able to effectively weaponize this issue against his party.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHARLIE KIRK, AMERICAN POLITICAL ACTIVIST AND AUTHOR: Would you say no men in female sports?
NEWSOM: Well, it's, I think it's an issue of fairness. I completely agree with you on that. It is an issue of fairness.
KIRK: So--
NEWSOM: So, I revere sports. And so the issue of fairness is completely legit. And I saw that -- the last couple years, boy did I saw how you guys were able to weaponize that issue at another level.
KIRK: No, hold on, no.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: My Democratic sources are David Axelrod and Karen Finney.
I believe at that part, Charlie Kirk was saying, they weren't weaponizing it, they were just highlighting it.
What did you make of what Governor Newsom had to say?
AXELROD: Well, I think I made of it, what most people will make of it, which is he read the play -- I mean, he pretty much said it. He was impressed by how they weaponized the issue.
If I were -- here's my advice. If I were giving the Governor advice, I'd say, You know, don't be so overt that people can see the wheels turning.
KAREN FINNEY, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, SENIOR ADVISER TO HILLARY CLINTON'S 2016 CAMPAIGN: Right.
AXELROD: The obvious question would be, Well, you've been governor of California for six years. You were lieutenant governor for many years before that. When did you have this epiphany, you know?
FINNEY: Right.
AXELROD: And it -- and the answer is, when he found that the Republicans could weaponize the issue.
[21:45:00]
FINNEY: The thing that bothered me about the whole incident was it was such an obvious gimmick, right? He needed some headlines to say, Newsom breaks with the left, right?
And so -- and what does he do? He picks the -- of all the people that you could pick to try to say, Hey, I want to talk to somebody who's coming from a different perspective than me. It was such a gimmick. And to David's point, I mean, it's like the thirstiness is dripping off of him, and it's like, just stop it, it's gross.
And he's using the left, basically. And these are the people who have had his back for a very long time. When they tried to recall him, actually. And I just don't think people are not going to take too kindly to it.
On the issue, what bothers me about it? I did college sports. I don't think I would have felt it was fair if a trans person had -- I rode crew. I'm clear about that.
But I would never -- I think the conversation that he could have been having is, you don't have to demonize people. You don't have to demonize children who are trans, and who are vulnerable and have high suicide rates, right?
Instead of sort of gushing at Charlie Kirk about, Oh, you weaponize it--
AXELROD: Yes.
FINNEY: --why not take a stand? Why not--
COLLINS: So, you're bothered by how he did it, not necessarily his argument?
FINNEY: Well, sure. I mean, I also just think it was so obvious. It was just disgusting, the whole thing, honestly.
COLLINS: Well, and what he said was that he believed the most devastating ad against Vice President Harris during the 2024 race, was an ad that the Trump campaign ran about. It was her, from the 2020 primary, where she was essentially saying--
AXELROD: I'm not even sure it was the 2020 primary. I think it may have been her from a race for state office.
COLLINS: OK. So, it was--
AXELROD: It's a little earlier, yes.
COLLINS: --it was maybe even earlier than that. But it was her, on camera, in an interview, saying that she did believe that gender- affirming surgeries should be able to happen to illegal immigrants, or people who are in prison.
AXELROD: No, it was her saying that she fought hard to allow prisoners--
COLLINS: Right, in prison, yes--
AXELROD: --in the state prison, to get the surgery. And that was one of the angles. There was this taxpayer surgery--
COLLINS: And he said the fact that she didn't respond to that ad, he believed was, quote, Devastating.
AXELROD: Yes, well, I think that that ad was devastating. That ad -- you know, she worked very hard to build her story of middle-class roots and middle-class upbringing, sort of mainstream kind of thinking. And that ad was, it separated her from some of the people that she was trying to reach.
But listen, for Democrats, those kind of debates are not useful. When Democrats are arguing about economic issues, and things that affect the broadest number of people? They do better, than on these cultural issues. And that's been true for a very long time.
FINNEY: I agree with that. But David, I think one of the mistakes our party makes? And the part of the reason that ad was so effective, $60 (ph) million from Elon Musk spent in Pennsylvania, doesn't hurt. But they didn't have an answer for it. And I think too--
AXELROD: No, the not responding, was--
FINNEY: Right.
AXELROD: --he was right about that.
FINNEY: Yes. But--
AXELROD: Look, as a political analyst, he was right about everything that he said, as a political analyst. She--
COLLINS: But if that's not--
(CROSSTALK)
FINNEY: So, but hold on--
COLLINS: --that not be said for someone as prominent as him--
FINNEY: But so--
COLLINS: --given this issue, obviously he believed was formidable?
FINNEY: But I think there's a different issue -- I'm sorry--
AXELROD: Yes.
FINNEY: --for Democrats, which is too often we're told, just don't respond. And neuroscience actually, if you don't respond, then people are left to fill in the gaps on their own. And so, he wasn't wrong on that point.
But again, why are you sitting with Charlie Kirk, taking potshots at the VP? Again, you've been the governor of the state, the lieutenant governor, the mayor. Why don't you talk about yourself, talk about your own accomplishments, rather than sitting there and playing political strategist with Charlie Kirk?
AXELROD: Well I think you answered your question earlier. I think that he did it--
FINNEY: Thirsty.
AXELROD: --for purposes of staking out that territory--
FINNEY: Of course.
AXELROD: --on that issue. And look, let's be honest, this isn't a new tactic. We all remember sort of the word, triangulation, from the--
FINNEY: Yes.
AXELROD: --from the 90s.
FINNEY: Did you come up with that one?
AXELROD: No, I was not.
FINNEY: No.
AXELROD: I was not. I did not. I did not.
FINNEY: I'm teasing.
AXELROD: But--
FINNEY: I know you didn't.
AXELROD: But -- so, it's clear what he was doing. He just didn't do it very artfully.
But yes, Kaitlan, the issue -- I agree with both of you. That is a -- it was an issue that had took on outsized importance, and she -- and I agree with you that she never responded to it. And they spent, the Trump campaign spent about a quarter of its resources on that, on a series of ads on that one issue, using her, in her own words.
COLLINS: Yes.
AXELROD: And it was very, very damning.
COLLINS: Well, and I just ask, because he may have 2028 ambitions, obviously. That's part of why he's doing the podcast, to sit down with these more MAGA-aligned voices about this.
[21:50:00]
But Seth Moulton of Massachusetts made similar comments, and was ripped by a lot of Democrats for what he said and his view on this.
FINNEY: Well because--
COLLINS: Even though he thought it was just -- you know, he said, As a Democrat, I'm, quote, Supposed to be afraid to say that.
FINNEY: Well, look, I think what I didn't like about what Seth Moulton said was -- I think one of the things that Democrats don't always learn is stand up for your values.
I mean, I will stand up for the value of people's right if you are trans, if you are LGBTQ, and not demonizing people, even if I disagree with you, as we're talking about, on the issue of, should you be able to play sports? And I think people will respect.
I think too often what Democrats do is say, We're just not going to talk about it.
AXELROD: But isn't -- didn't Seth Moulton say exactly what you said, which is that it's not fair to women, if there are trans athletes--
FINNEY: Sure.
AXELROD: --who have an advantage.
FINNEY: But then he went on to say--
COLLINS: He said, quote, I have two little girls, I don't want them getting run over on a playing field by a male or formerly male athlete.
FINNEY: But he went on to say, As a Democrat, I'm supposed to be afraid to say that.
No, you don't have to be afraid to say that. Stop that nonsense. Say how you feel.
AXELROD: Well, except--
FINNEY: Be honest -- be intellectually honest.
AXELROD: --except, as Kaitlan points out, he took a lot of stuff for it.
FINNEY: Because he didn't say it in the context of trying to say, Look, this is how I feel on the issue.
He was trying to give an explanation about why we may have lost the election. And it was far more complicated, I think, than he was making it out to be in that comment. I know you disagree with me on that.
AXELROD: No, no, no, I mean--
FINNEY: But I think -- I just think--
AXELROD: Listen, I think the Democratic Party needs to get back to fundamentals, in my view. I mean, I've said this many times. Democratic Party has to stop approaching working-people like missionaries and anthropologists with the message, We're here to help you, become more like us.
FINNEY: But here's the thing that so many in our party miss, when they say that working-people, 45 percent of working-people are Black and Brown. They are -- we are not going to get back White non-college educated men thinking that we're going with one message--
AXELROD: Well the biggest -- the biggest loss that--
FINNEY: --instead of with a different message.
AXELROD: The biggest loss Democrats faced were among Hispanics. They--
FINNEY: That's right. You know why?
AXELROD: They lost Black working-class people.
FINNEY: Because we haven't talked to them for three years.
COLLINS: You know what? A lot of great things to talk about.
FINNEY: Yes.
COLLINS: And, luckily, we have two to four years to do so.
FINNEY: Absolutely.
COLLINS: David Axelrod. Karen Finney. Thank you so much.
Up next. A federal judge has just dropped a not very subtle reminder, American presidents are not kings, what her ruling found and why.
[21:55:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: A federal judge has just ruled tonight that President Trump's firing of the National Labor Relations Board Chair was illegal.
In a scathing decision that came out, we heard from the U.S. District Court Judge Beryl Howell, who wrote, quote, "An American president is not a king - not even an 'elected' one - and his power to remove federal officers and honest civil servants like plaintiff is not absolute, but may be constrained in appropriate circumstances, as are present here."
It's the third time in less than a week that we've seen a federal judge rule that President Trump's firing of independent agency heads is unlawful.
My top legal source tonight is CNN's Senior Legal Analyst, Elie Honig.
And Elie, what did you make of the ruling? Were you surprised by this?
ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Not surprised at all, Kaitlan. Because most fundamentally, Donald Trump broke the law, and he doesn't even contend otherwise.
Now, Congress passed a law, saying that this particular NLRB official can only be removed if there's notice, and a hearing, and good cause. Trump didn't care. He just said, You're fired, without regard to any of those things.
But the key thing to keep in mind here is Donald Trump is not playing for the district court, the trial court, where we were today. He's playing for the Supreme Court.
And he knows that this case, or one of the other firing cases, is going to make its way up to the Supreme Court, where he will argue that it's unconstitutional for Congress to pass those kind of laws, because he's in charge of the executive branch, and he will argue, he can do what he wants within the executive branch.
Would not surprise me to see the Supreme Court take one of those cases. Would not surprise me to see Trump win in the Supreme Court.
COLLINS: Yes, we don't know. I mean, obviously everyone has been watching Justice Amy Coney Barrett, especially when it comes to how she sided with the other justices on the USAID funding.
HONIG: Yes.
COLLINS: But on this tonight, what Judge Howell did write is at one point, she said, the President who touts an image of himself as as a king or a dictator, perhaps as his vision of effective leadership, fundamentally misapprehends the role. She accuses him of exactly what you are laying out there, a court to test the presidency and the limits of it.
HONIG: I think that is an overstatement by the judge, and, frankly, a misstatement of Donald Trump's actual legal argument in this case. I think the judge is actually getting quite political there, in a way that undermines her credibility.
Donald Trump is making a perfectly reasonable, good-faith argument that as the elected head of the executive branch, he controls the executive branch. That is very much in dispute. That's a reasonable argument to make.
That's not the same thing as saying he's a king, or in another part of the decision, the judge even refers to his comments that he's a dictator. That's outside stuff, that's political. I think it was inappropriate, and not even correct for the judge to characterize it that way.
COLLINS: Yes, and just to be clear, the context here. We've seen the judges siding against Trump in three rulings. We've also seen with Hampton Dellinger, who has been fighting his way through the court system when it comes to federal watchdogs that are getting fired, he dropped his case today after losing that. We'll see where these limits go.
[22:00:00]
Elie Honig, as always, great to have you. Thank you.
HONIG: Thanks, Kaitlan.
COLLINS: And thanks to everyone joining us tonight.
"CNN NEWSNIGHT WITH ABBY PHILLIP" is up next.
