Return to Transcripts main page
The Source with Kaitlan Collins
NYT Reports On "Explosive" Trump Cabinet Meeting With Musk; Trump: Anyone In Putin's Position Would Be Bombarding Ukraine; Court- Appointed Lawyer Recommends Judge Dismiss NYC Mayor Eric Adams Case With Prejudice. Aired 9-10p ET
Aired March 07, 2025 - 21:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
NICK WATT, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: It's now below 93 percent. Skepticism is rising. Vaccination rates are falling.
And also, the Department of Health and Human Services, now led by RFK Jr., who, this week, has been promoting alternative therapies, and not explicitly promoting the vaccines.
Anderson.
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST: Yes. Nick Watt, appreciate the report on the ground from there. Thank you.
That's it for us. The news continues. Hope you have a good weekend. I'll see you Monday.
"THE SOURCE" starts right now.
SARA SIDNER, CNN HOST: Straight from THE SOURCE tonight.
Wild, new details on what really happened inside that reportedly explosive meeting with the Trump cabinet and Elon Musk, at least two Trump cabinet members flat-out accusing Musk of lying, before President Trump reined in some of Musk's powers.
Trump being extraordinarily understanding, today, of Russia's new massive attack On Ukraine, saying anybody in that position would be doing that right now. And now, he says Russia is easier to negotiate with than Ukraine.
And for our neighbors to the north, it's not just a trade war. New reporting that President Trump also is threatening to redraw the border with Canada. Taking new U.S. territory?
I'm Sara Sidner, in for Kaitlan Collins. And this is THE SOURCE.
Closer than ever. After reining in some of Elon Musk's powers, and after reporting of a major dust-up with members of his Cabinet, yesterday, Musk is hanging close with President Trump, in the Oval Office tonight. He was also spotted boarding Marine One with him, as Trump and his team headed to Mar-a-Lago for the weekend.
Yet all kinds of new, wild details are coming out on that apparently explosive meeting at the White House, yesterday. That meeting saw President Trump hauling in members of his Cabinet into a room with the DOGE leader, amid growing grumblings about Musk from some of his top appointees.
These new details coming from The New York Times. Several of their sources take us inside that room where Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, and Secretary of Transportation, Sean Duffy, reportedly clashed with Musk.
The Times writing, quote, Rubio was incensed. Elon Musk was letting him have it, accusing him of failing to slash his staff. You have fired nobody, Musk told Rubio -- Rubio. Musk adding that Rubio was good on TV, with the clear subtext being that he was not good for much else.
It was Musk's anger that reportedly caught people in the room by surprise. But that didn't stop Rubio from hitting back, with him, telling the room, Musk was not being truthful.
Rubio had been privately furious with Musk for weeks, ever since Musk's team effectively shuttered an entire agency that was supposedly under Rubio's control. That agency? USAID.
So what was Donald Trump doing during all of this? He was watching it like a ping pong match at first, but eventually intervening to defend Rubio as doing a, quote, Great job, while also making clear he still supports Musk's government-slashing mission.
Today, in the Oval Office, Trump put a rosy spin on the alleged blow- up.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GABE GUTIERREZ, SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, NBC NEWS: Some details have come out about your Cabinet meeting with Elon Musk and some clashes, potentially between Secretary Rubio and Secretary Duffy.
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: No clash. I was there. You're just a troublemaker. And you're not supposed to be asking that question, because we're talking about the World Cup.
GUTIERREZ: But--
TRUMP: Elon gets along great with Marco, and they're both doing a fantastic job. There is no clash.
GUTIERREZ: Who has more authority? Elon Musk or your Cabinet secretaries?
TRUMP: Any other questions?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SIDNER: But insiders tell The Times it's not all sunshine and roses, as Trump seems to suggest, or even Musk assertion that it was, Very productive. The Times reporting, the billionaire apparently also clashed with Transportation Secretary, Sean Duffy, who accused Musk and his young staff of trying to lay off air traffic controllers, saying, quote, What am I supposed to do? I have multiple plane crashes to deal with now, and your people want me to fire air traffic controllers.
Musk, then, is said to have told Duffy, his assertion was a lie. Duffy rebuffed him, saying he had it firsthand. Musk defending himself, eventually saying he had three companies with a market cap of tens of billions of dollars, and that his results spoke for themselves.
Our deeply-sourced White House insiders lead us off tonight.
The Washington Post's Isaac Arnsdorf, and Co-author of the upcoming book, "2024: How Trump Retook the White House and the Democrats Lost America." Along with Politico's Sophia Cai, and Semafor's Shelby Talcott.
Thank you all for being here on this Friday night.
[21:05:00]
All right, Isaac, I'm going to begin with you. Republicans have privately bristled at Musk's influence for weeks. That has been reported over and over again, by just about everybody. But what do you think of what exploded in that room, between some of Trump's cabinet and Musk?
ISAAC ARNSDORF, SENIOR WHITE HOUSE REPORTER, THE WASHINGTON POST: Well, I think the key thing is what you were describing with Trump watching a tennis match.
I mean, we have to distinguish between other people around Trump being frustrated with Musk, and Trump himself, who is very comfortable with conflict. It's actually how he likes to manage. He likes having his advisers hash out ideas in front of him, kind of compete for his favor, and then he sits back and decides.
The real question here is, Elon Musk is used to being in that position, too. How is he going to cope with not being the final decision-maker, and not being the person who is actually in charge, which is actually what Trump made clear, that he does have these other stakeholders in the executive agencies, and in the White House, that he has to negotiate with.
SIDNER: Sophia, President Trump said, and you heard him there, said, there was no clash, everything is fine.
But based off the President's actions alone, restricting Musk and empowering his Cabinet, what does this dynamic look like going forward, do you think?
SOPHIA CAI, WHITE HOUSE REPORTER, POLITICO: Look, I think, for at least a week now, you know we've heard from White House officials that DOGE and the agencies will be using more of a scalpel than a knife. We haven't really seen that yet. This week, we saw GSA put out a list of more than 400 buildings they wanted to cut. That took all of the agencies by surprise. That was a week after OMB put out, an email, asking all of those federal employees to tell them five things that they did the past week, and agencies in the next two days scrambled to give other instructions to their employees, right?
This is a dynamic that's been building and building for some time now. And you have to ask, if these were two interactions, one with Secretary Duffy, the other one with Rubio, that were reported, that did kind of bubble up into the open, how many private frustrations are there from Trump's cabinet?
SIDNER: Yes, I mean, that is a very good point, that some of the things that are said privately often don't come out publicly, but now some of them have.
Shelby, to you. The breakdown between Musk and Rubio is particularly noteworthy because of USAID. It was Rubio who supposedly took control of the agency, and then Musk's team just shut it down, and we saw that extraordinary video of the sign being sort of ripped off using a cherry picker there. What are your sources saying about all this?
SHELBY TALCOTT, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, SEMAFOR: Well, I think it's not entirely surprising, because we've been told that Marco Rubio has been getting pressure, particularly from Democrats, to fix this situation at USAID, and he's been privately assuring them that he will fix it.
And so, clearly, this is a priority for Marco Rubio, and something that he didn't anticipate coming in as a new Cabinet member. And so, this is a particularly difficult job for Marco Rubio, something that he didn't anticipate.
And I also think that the Cabinet meeting itself, and the fact that Donald Trump has said that they're now going to have it apparently every two weeks, shows that the administration is recognizing that these concerns from Republicans, and from Democrats, and from Cabinet officials, are sort of bubbling out into the open, and they're trying to do something to calm that down.
SIDNER: Yes, Isaac, I do have to ask you. Because Musk owns X, there seems to be, and there's a reporting from The New York Times as well about this, that there's a lot of consternation to go up against him, because people are afraid that he is going to blast them on X.
But judging from what we are seeing, from polling, and how Americans feel about what Musk and DOGE has done, how do you think this all plays out? Will that fear be lessened because of what we're seeing in a reaction from some of the Republicans' constituents, particularly?
ARNSDORF: Well, that's right. I mean, in the first term, it was always congressional Republicans living in fear of an angry Trump tweet, or American corporations as well. And now, they've still got to worry about that, but they also have to worry about being put on blast by Elon Musk. Again, the difference here is for Trump himself, who is the only person who would decide whether Musk gets to stay or not, it doesn't necessarily hurt having Musk out there drawing fire away from him, acting as sort of a political heat shield.
And the question is, is that public turn, that public disapproval of Musk and DOGE going to rub off on Trump? Or can Trump keep it at arm's length and say, That's not really me, that's just Musk?
[21:10:00]
SIDNER: Which is fascinating, because he is the one that has given Elon Musk the power that he has. Not Congress, and not anyone else. And yet, you are right, you are seeing people that are standing up with signs against Musk, not necessarily signs that name Donald Trump.
Sophia, to you. The Times is also saying though, that Commerce Secretary, Howard Lutnick jumped in to support Musk against Rubio. And we saw tonight, boarding Marine One together. There are clearly some factions here forming, no?
CAI: Yes, I think for sure. And those were factions that started during the transition. I mean, I had some reporting, during the transition, that Elon and Boris Epshteyn, another very senior Trump adviser, was getting into some arguments over Cabinet appointments, and some of that bubbled into the public.
But I think, fundamentally, Musk is bringing with him, this Silicon Valley fail fast mentality, Let's do it right and do it fast, without actually figuring out what is necessarily the most accurate thing to do. And you saw that when he was taking over Twitter. He felt that it was taking too long for his employees to get rid of some of the data centers, and he went there himself to move these machines.
That just tells you this sort of maniacal focus on doing things fast that Musk brings with him. And when you -- when you kind of move that into this unwieldy government, and apply it to the federal -- to the federal bureaucracy, things might not work. If you cut certain leases in government contracts, it will take years to bring those back.
SIDNER: Yes.
Shelby, this is something that really stood out to me, just judging from the tragedies and the accidents that we've seen in the skies, this dust-up between Sean Duffy, the Transportation Secretary, and Elon Musk.
And in the end, The Times is reporting that at one point, Trump intervened, saying, Duffy should hire geniuses from MIT for air traffic control.
I mean, is that even a reality?
TALCOTT: Yes, that's the ultimate question, right? Who would he hire? Is somebody from MIT? Does that mean that they're qualified to be an air traffic controller? And, again, it goes back to the fact that, particularly when you're talking about someone, like Sean Duffy, and someone like Marco Rubio, the drama around their particular jobs, right now, is already heightened. And then, now they're also having to deal with these cuts, and they're also having to deal with Elon Musk.
They're dealing with confusion over, does Elon Musk take charge, or is it ultimately up to the agencies? And so, these are all the questions that they're clearly trying to figure out, while also dealing with incredibly difficult situations in their own agencies.
SIDNER: Yes, there is a lot of confusion, and there are thousands of federal employees still wondering what's up with their jobs.
Thank you to you all for hanging with me on this Friday night, I really do appreciate it.
All right. Ahead, tariffs may be just the tip of the iceberg with our northern neighbor. New reporting on President Trump threatening to redraw the U.S. border with Canada.
Plus, is Trump playing both sides with Putin, justifying Russia's stepped-up invasion of Ukraine, on the one hand, while simultaneously threatening sanctions against Moscow?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: Right now they're bombing the hell out of Ukraine.
Hitting them harder than -- than he's been hitting them. And I think probably anybody in that position would be doing that right now.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[21:15:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SIDNER: Tonight, President Trump appears to be sympathizing with Vladimir Putin, again. But he's also threatening sanctions against Russia.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: Right now they're bombing the hell out of Ukraine.
I think he wants to get it stopped and settled. And I think he's hitting them harder than -- than he's been hitting them. And I think probably anybody in that position would be doing that right now.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SIDNER: Overnight, Russia launched a massive aerial attack, across Ukraine, dozens of missiles, and nearly 200 drones struck energy facilities and civilian areas. The attack prompted Trump to threaten new sanctions and tariffs on Russia, believe it or not. But hours later, in the Oval Office, Trump suggested it's not Russia preventing peace, even though Putin started this war.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I'm finding it more difficult, frankly, to deal with Ukraine. And they don't have the cards.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SIDNER: My source tonight is David Sanger, White House and National Security Correspondent for The New York Times.
We are happy to have you, this morning -- this evening. I worked this morning and this evening, so I don't know what time it is, to be perfectly honest with you. And I know you've been working these hours too. David--
DAVID SANGER, CNN POLITICAL & NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST, WHITE HOUSE & NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT, THE NEW YORK TIMES: I'll say, Sara, I'm not sure I'm much better, yes.
SIDNER: I know you're not. You're always up.
Trump's got these new talking points, and one of them is that Russia is easier to negotiate compared to negotiating with Ukraine, over the war Russia started. Is that because he's being played like a fiddle by Putin, who knows how to butter him up, or something else?
SANGER: Well, I think it's what's pretty clear about the Ukrainians, is that obviously they want peace. I mean, who wouldn't, after your country has been invaded. But they don't want peace at any price. And that's really what the whole blow-up a week ago was about, and it's what the cut-off of both arms and intelligence to Ukraine has been about.
[21:20:00]
Because the Ukrainians are saying, they want to make sure that whatever peace agreement there is, or even just a ceasefire, has protections built into it, so the Russians simply don't use the time to rebuild their military, fix what's wrong and then launch a new invasion that this time might be successful. That's pretty standard in most -- in most settlements after long wars.
And what's really remarkable here is you never hear the President talk about that. He just makes it sound as if Zelenskyy is not interested in peace.
But today, he went further, because what he said was, Sure, anybody in Putin's position would be bombing Ukraine more heavily, at this moment when the Ukrainians are least able to defend themselves, so that they gain advantage. I mean, there's no sort of moral component to this discussion.
SIDNER: Yes, they're gaining advantage because they have lost the help of the United States, and now Russia is taking advantage of that.
All right. Now, while Trump posted he's considering large-scale banking sanctions and tariffs on Russia, until a peace settlement can be reached, in the interim, he has stopped, as you mentioned, sending aid to Ukraine, blocked intelligence sharing, and today suspended Ukraine's access to key satellite imagery.
Is there any method to this madness?
SANGER: Well, the method is, at this point, that he is going to try to force President Zelenskyy to settle this war on terms that Donald Trump sets.
Now, maybe next week, this will improve. There's a meeting in Saudi Arabia, mid-week. We expect Secretary Marco Rubio and Mike Waltz, the National Security Advisor, and others, to be out, and will meet the Ukrainians, and maybe they'll settle on a common strategy that's acceptable to all.
But right now, all the pressure is being put on the Ukrainians, and none of the pressure is being put on the Russians. I recognize, the President made a threat there about sanctions. First of all, there's not a lot left to sanction in Russia.
SIDNER: Right.
SANGER: And tariffs?
SIDNER: And Russia has said as much.
SANGER: That's right.
SIDNER: They said, it doesn't matter.
SANGER: And -- and tariffs? I mean, what is it that we are buying right now from the Russians? Almost nothing. So there's nothing to tariff.
SIDNER: Yes. One thing is definitely happening is that the Europeans are very worried, the United States won't back them. They are coming together in a way we've never seen before in such a long time.
I do want to ask you this last question, though. After repeatedly berating Joe Biden for being unable to stop the war in Ukraine, Trump always touted that he could end this war in a day. He can't and hasn't. Why does Trump, though, seem to get a pass for the things he says that he doesn't deliver in the way he says he's going to?
SANGER: Well, Sara, in all fairness, I don't think anybody thought he was going to solve this in a day. And by the time they got into office, they said maybe a 100 days, and maybe they will get a ceasefire there.
But you touched, when you mentioned Europe, at the beginning of this, on the cost of doing this. The siding, or apparent siding, with Russia, has so unnerved the Europeans. I just spent several weeks in Europe, talking to European leaders about this. That the leader of Poland, Donald Tusk, came out today, and said that for the first time in their history, they are going to have to think about either getting within France and Britain's, mostly France's, nuclear umbrella, or building nuclear weapons themselves.
The Germans, sooner or later, are going to have to think about either getting under that nuclear umbrella, or building their own. And frankly, France's nuclear force isn't big enough to really cover and protect much of Europe.
So, we have touched off here something much bigger than just the problem of solving the Ukraine war, which is itself a huge problem.
SIDNER: Yes, I was on the border two days after the invasion by Russia into Ukraine, on that border with Poland, and I've never seen anything quite like it, the number of people coming over with--
SANGER: Yes.
SIDNER: --almost nothing, the Polish people sort of accepting the Ukrainians in to their space in any way possible to try to help them.
So this is, like you said, there is a huge shift happening, here in the world. We may not see it or understand it quite yet. But there is something big happening that is leaving the United States sort of out in the cold in the midst of all this, in some ways.
David Sanger, it is such a pleasure to have you on. Thank you for your expertise. I really appreciate it.
SANGER: Great to be with you, Sara.
SIDNER: All right. President Trump caps a whirlwind week off, on, and off again. Trade threats. We have seen this happen over and over again, sliding one way, then another, reportedly with more warnings now for Canada's Prime Minister, including redrawing the northern border, and canceling NORAD. Details on that, coming up.
[21:25:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SIDNER: The President, late tonight, posting on social media, pushing his threat to slap new tariffs on Canada.
[21:30:00]
It's been a dizzying week, to say the least. Just yesterday, he granted Canada a one-month reprieve. Today, he issued new threats of huge tariffs, including a 250 percent tax on dairy.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: Canada has been ripping us off for years on tariffs for lumber and for dairy products.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SIDNER: As we embark on a trade war with Canada, our neighbor and ally, this is what Prime Minister Trudeau thinks is Trump's ultimate goal.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JUSTIN TRUDEAU, PRIME MINISTER OF CANADA: The one thing he has said repeatedly that what he wants is to see a total collapse of the Canadian economy, because that will make it easier to annex us.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SIDNER: If you think that seems absurd, my next guest's reporting may change your mind. The New York Times details how in a pair of calls, in early February, what the public saw was Trump and Trudeau with all smiles at Mar-a-Lago.
You may have seen Trump's repeated social media posts, about making Canada the 51st state.
According to The Times, Trump also wants to kick Canada out of the intelligence sharing group known as the Five Eyes. That's an international security agreement that existed since the end of World War II, where Britain, the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand all work together on security threats.
Trump also apparently want to tear up the deals that govern control of the Great Lakes, and even review whether NORAD should continue to watch the skies for incoming missiles.
Then, there's the actual border itself, the longest one on the planet that, at least since the war of 1812, has always been peaceful. Trump, according to The Times, told Trudeau, he did not believe that the treaty that demarcates the border between the two countries was valid.
My guests who are sitting next to me just took in a huge, deep surprised breath. We will get to them in just one moment.
Matina Stevis-Gridneff is joining me now.
All right. So how serious does President Trump seem to be, about this idea of, first of all, getting rid of NORAD, messing with sort of the Great Lakes, and moving the border, i.e. having the United States gain some of Canada's land?
MATINA STEVIS-GRIDNEFF, CANADA BUREAU CHIEF, THE NEW YORK TIMES: Thanks, Sara.
I mean, those are the multi-trillion-dollar questions, and I wouldn't even dare to pretend that I know how serious President Trump is.
What I can tell you, what New York Times reporting shows, my reporting shows, is that President Trump and some of his top advisers, in repeated communications with Prime Minister Trudeau, and top Canadian officials, have communicated revisionism as to several agreements that sort of organize the relationship between these two allies.
Stuff we take for granted, like that border, like the management of the Great Lakes and other bodies of water, like the cooperation in the Five Eyes, and NORAD, which you just mentioned. And so, is he serious? Is this a negotiating technique? I don't know.
But I can tell you for sure, I'm in Ottawa, the capital of Canada, I've been speaking. I live in Canada. The Prime Minister, you heard what he said. He takes it seriously. Canadians take it seriously, and they would also like Americans to take it seriously.
SIDNER: Yes, Canadians are known for being very nice. I haven't -- think -- we've ever seen them this mad at this point.
You're reporting also on these calls between Canada's Finance Minister and the Secretary of Commerce, Howard Lutnick.
Canada's Finance Minister was actually on the show, this week. And this is what he told Kaitlan Collins, about trying to get a straight answer out, or anything from the Trump administration, given it to them straight.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DOMINIC LEBLANC, CANADIAN MINISTER OF FINANCE & INTERGOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS: You'll remember, the original justification for these tariffs was the fight against fentanyl in the United States and illegal migration.
KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, CNN HOST, THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS: Did they -- did they give you -- have they given you a standard to meet? Do you kind of know what you need to do to get these tariffs lifted from Canada? Or is that still unclear to you tonight?
LEBLANC: That's one of the challenges, Miss Collins, is that, as I said, we worked over the last number of weeks.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SIDNER: All right, so how frustrated are Canadian officials you have talked to, about these moving targets that the Trump team keeps sort of offering up?
STEVIS-GRIDNEFF: I think, at this point, Canadians and the Canadian government are sort of beyond the point of frustration. I think they've moved into anger that's kind of culminating in resolve.
Some of the things we're hearing across the political spectrum here? And it is important. And we're in an election year, and so it's really interesting to watch political parties in Canada coalesce around certain principles. Those are, Diversify our friends, rely less on our southern partner -- former partner, and look to Europe and to other places for friends and for allies, as well as bolster intra-Canadian trade.
Obviously, these are not going to replace the relationship with the United States, which is so vital. But I can tell you that there's a lot of resolve and actually societal-level decision to change that relationship with the United States, which really seems to have been breached and injured in a really serious way.
SIDNER: Matina Stevis-Gridneff, thank you so much for all your great reporting. Appreciate you.
[21:35:00]
STEVIS-GRIDNEFF: Thanks, Sara.
SIDNER: All right. My political sources are here.
Doug, starting with you. With friends like these, who needs enemies. What do you -- what do you make of this?
DOUG HEYE, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: With friends like these, who needs friends? If we're more honest about it.
Look, I think two things are important to remember with Donald Trump. And one thing is consistent, and one isn't. We've seen so often, people really hustling to score points with Donald Trump. Congressional Republicans, certainly.
SIDNER: Yes.
HEYE: We talk about that a lot. Words like kowtow get used.
When Justin Trudeau went down to Mar-a-Lago, we said, Oh, that's really smart of him to be there, and to get in early with Donald Trump. And it probably was.
But Donald Trump isn't somebody who gives points. He only takes him away one at a time. So you can score a point with Donald Trump today, lose it tomorrow, lose another one the next day, as we've seen him go back and forth.
And the other important thing is, this doesn't happen in a vacuum, and international diplomacy and politics don't happen in a vacuum. So when you go back and forth, 10 different ways, with just one ally, and they still are an ally? Your other allies and your adversaries are watching every step of this as well. And what they see is a president who is erratic.
SIDNER: Yes, so is the public, the American public, and the public in Canada, some of whom are so upset, they want the stores, who have already bought alcohol from America, to take them off the shelves. They do not want to see American alcohol, which some of the distributors are saying, That's going to hurt us more than the tariffs at this point.
HEYE: Well, I mean, in fact, more than just that. In some places, they're saying, if you're -- if you come from a Republican-governed state, if your governor is a Republican, we're going to remove that.
SIDNER: Yes.
HEYE: So Jack Daniel's, Tennessee?
SIDNER: Right.
HEYE: You got two Republican senators from Tennessee, a Republican governor.
Tito's Vodka has been removed from some shelves.
SIDNER: Yes.
HEYE: Texas. Pretty Republican state. That's intentional.
SIDNER: Yes, it's intentional, and intended to hurt those who support Donald Trump.
Jamal, to you. The President today said, this latest shift was necessary, it was about protecting dairy farmers in the U.S.
But this is what he said, the last time he was the president.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: The USMCA will substantially boost exports for American dairy farmers -- also very, very big.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SIDNER: All right, can both things be true at the same time, friend?
JAMAL SIMMONS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, FORMER DEPUTY ASSISTANT TO PRES. BIDEN, CO-HOST, "TRAILBLAZE" PODCAST: With Donald Trump, it doesn't seem like it matters very much.
I grew up in Detroit, which is we call it on the Canadian border, right? It's the only place in America where the United States is north of Canada is right--
SIDNER: Right.
SIMMONS: --is at Detroit. And when you, in high school, growing up there, you go back and forth across the -- at least back in the time when I was in high school, you would go back and forth across the border all the time, because you didn't really need a lot of paperwork to do that. You know what changed it? 9/11 changed it.
SIDNER: Right.
SIMMONS: And that was an international assault on the United States, and we had to change the way we interacted. You need a passport to go back and forth, it got to be more complicated.
This isn't result of an international assault. This is just a president who is just assaulting the standard, the status quo, between these two neighbors who get along better than anywhere else. There are parts in the country, in New York and other parts of the Midwest, but they don't even have border officials because they're so close, the border is so long.
SIDNER: Right.
SIMMONS: This is something that's a very big challenge for the American people. Because are we going to be safer? Are we going to be -- have our standing in the nation, in the world, be one where people respect us, they honor us, they think that they want to be like us, and come and be here? And it seems like the longer this goes on, the lesser that is going to be true.
SIDNER: When you have the United States taking away intelligence, from a place like Ukraine, making it so that they can't see the satellite images that the U.S. has? Saying to five different places that have been sort of tight with the United States, including Australia, that they might want to untangle that and get out of that. I mean, what does that mean to the U.S., politically? What does that mean for the people of the U.S.?
HEYE: Well, it certainly hurts our standing within the world. And when you -- when you highlighted Five Eyes initially, you talked about how it's done since World War II.
SIDNER: Yes.
HEYE: It was set up after World War II. So was NATO.
And with everything going on in the world, obviously, in Israel and Gaza, Ukraine, it's easy to forget we're in an unprecedented period of global peace and prosperity. A big reason of that is because of Five Eyes and their cooperation, and NATO and its cooperation. Regardless of whether Ukraine goes into NATO or not, NATO has been fantastically successful, as has Five Eyes.
SIDNER: Yes.
SIMMONS: Let me tell you this, Sara.
SIDNER: Yes.
SIMMONS: The more you mess with people -- the waterways, like the Great Lakes, whether it's the Great Lakes--
SIDNER: Yes.
SIMMONS: --the Chattahoochee River or the Atlantic, people care about those waterways because it's how they fish, it's how they take care of their communities, and they have very sophisticated agreements about how they share. I think if we start screwing around with that, that is going to really mess up the international relations between the countries.
SIDNER: There is a song about the Chattahoochee, but I will not sing it.
HEYE: Please do.
SIDNER: Way down yonder on the Chattahoochee.
I'm ending there.
Jamal Simmons. Doug Heye. It is always a pleasure.
HEYE: Thank you.
SIDNER: I'm glad I got you to laugh, because there's a lot of things that are pretty stressful these days.
All right, coming up next, officials finally releasing the causes of death for the legendary actor Gene Hackman and his wife. Surprising details, ahead.
[21:40:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SIDNER: Tonight, investigators have some answers about the mysterious deaths of Gene Hackman, his wife, and one of their dogs.
A Medical Examiner says the 95-year-old actor died of natural causes, mainly heart disease, and that it likely happened a week after his wife died from a rare illness known as hantavirus.
[21:45:00]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DR. HEATHER JARRELL, NEW MEXICO OFFICE OF THE MEDICAL INVESTIGATOR: The question was, was he aware that Ms. Hackman had died? And I think that question is difficult to answer. But I can tell you that he was in an advanced state of Alzheimer's, and it's quite possible that he was not aware that she was deceased.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SIDNER: The detail's heartbreaking tonight.
My medical source tonight is Dr. Jonathan Reiner, Professor of Medicine and Surgery at George Washington University.
Thank you so much for being here on this Friday night.
Doctor, there has been so much intrigue, around this case, since the couple were found dead in separate rooms of their home, last week. We now know that Hackman's wife, Betsy Arakawa, had hantavirus pulmonary syndrome. What is that?
DR. JONATHAN REINER, CNN MEDICAL ANALYST, PROFESSOR OF MEDICINE & SURGERY, GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIV.: You're right, Sara, this is a very sad story. But it's also a fascinating medical detective story. So hantavirus is a term that describes a group of related rodent-borne viruses. It was first described in 1993 after a cluster of severe respiratory illnesses in the Four Corners area of the Southwest. And basically, these viruses are not transmitted human-to-human. They are transmitted after contact with an infected rodent. Most commonly in the Southwest, although there are occasional cases in the Southeast and Northeast.
And this virus causes a typical viral symptoms. But what is feared about it is that in a significant number of people, it can progress to something called hantavirus pulmonary syndrome, which is basically a rapidly -- a potentially rapidly -- a rapidly lethal process, where the lungs become essentially filled with fluid, and there's a very rapid deterioration in heart function, which leads to basically the collapse of the patient, sometimes in as little as 24 hours.
SIDNER: Wow.
REINER: Patients who get sick with this require very intensive care, very quickly, or they will die.
SIDNER: Wow. I had never heard of it before, so thank you for spelling that out.
The Medical Examiner also said that Gene Hackman died from heart disease, but that Alzheimer's was a contributing factor. Hackman's family is disputing that, telling CNN they believe that that is wholly untrue.
But how would Alzheimer's be a contributing factor?
REINER: Well, as people advance in the sequence of their Alzheimer's disease, they become more and more reliant on a caregiver. And if Ms. Arakawa was his principal caregiver, you can imagine that with potentially severe Alzheimer's, she would be responsible for giving Mr. Hackman his medications, for cleaning him, for helping him to the bathroom, and for feeding him.
So, if his caregiver suddenly died, in which it appears that happened a week before Mr. Hackman, and there were no other providers of care for him, then you can imagine that without his medications and without adequate hydration, particularly in someone who is 95-years-old, and who are -- the medical examiner said had established heart disease, one can see how, sadly, that could lead to his death.
SIDNER: Wow. And we know that his wife was only 65-years-old, so must have been in a position to help him get through each and every day.
REINER: Right.
SIDNER: It is just such a tragedy. We know also that the dog died as well. It was in a crate, all those days.
Dr. Jonathan Reiner, thank you so much for explaining that to us. And it's real tragedy there in New Mexico.
REINER: My pleasure.
SIDNER: Appreciate it.
Coming up. The charges against New York City Mayor, Eric Adams, appear to be one step closer to being dropped. Elie Honig is on the case for us. That's next.
[21:50:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SIDNER: Tonight, corruption charges against New York's embattled mayor may soon be dropped for good. An outside lawyer tasked with arguing against the Justice Department's motion to dismiss the corruption case against Mayor Eric Adams decided that the judge should just end the prosecution altogether.
Former Solicitor General, Paul Clement's recommendation went one step further, though, recommending the courts dismiss the charges with prejudice. Writing, quote, "A dismissal without prejudice creates a palpable sense that the prosecution... Could be renewed, a prospect that hangs like the proverbial sword of Damocles over the accused."
It comes, as sources tell CNN tonight, the Justice Department has placed two New York-based federal prosecutors, who worked on the Adams case on leave.
My source tonight is CNN's Senior Legal Analyst, Elie Honig.
Now we could go ham for hours on all the details of this. But let's start with the refresher of Greek mythology, and what it means, and what these terms mean--
ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST, FORMER ASST. U.S. ATTORNEY, SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NY: Right.
SIDNER: --when it comes to with or without prejudice. Why is that such an important distinction?
HONIG: OK. We're going to work our way up to Damocles here.
SIDNER: OK.
HONIG: So, this all started when the Justice Department came in, the new Justice Department under Donald Trump, and said, We want to dismiss the pending indictment against Mayor Eric Adams.
[21:55:00]
Now, that caused several resignations in protest at the Justice Department, and it resulted in a hearing in front of the judge, because the judge has to sign off.
And what the judge said is, I'm going to bring in this outside expert, this guy, Paul Clement, you just showed him, former Solicitor General, conservative, very respected legal mind, and I need him to tell me what he thinks.
And he filed this paper today, and it was a fascinating document, because what Paul Clement says is two things. One, he says, Judge, you don't have the authority to say no. If DOJ wants to dismiss the case, that's up to them.
SIDNER: Right, it's the prosecution--
HONIG: Separation of powers.
SIDNER: --it's their right.
HONIG: Exactly.
However, now we're going to get into prejudice, what DOJ wanted to do was dismiss the case without prejudice, meaning, We can still bring it back if you're bad, Eric Adams. And what Clement said is, No, you can't do that, because that leaves him with the Sword of Damocles, with this threat, hanging over his head.
So, what Clement said is, If you're going to dismiss the case, it should be with prejudice, meaning it's over, and it can't come back.
SIDNER: It cannot come back. And there, a lot of people saw that as the possibility of quid pro quo.
HONIG: Yes.
SIDNER: And there was a lot of talk about that, right as the Justice Department dismissed the case. OK.
What is pretty wild about this case is the reason that Main Justice used to say it should be dismissed. Was it about merit?
HONIG: No. So this is why -- this is why -- why -- and people say to me, like, What's the big deal?
SIDNER: Right.
HONIG: I mean, I know Eric Adams is a big case, and Mayor of New York.
But the reason this is such a big deal goes way beyond Eric Adams. That case is going to be over. He's never going to get tried. He's never going to go to prison. Maybe it's an injustice. Maybe it's not.
But what makes this so unusual is the Justice Department, for the first time, I think, in its entire history, certainly in the last 50 years, has gone on record, they did not say the reason, We want to get rid of this case is the evidence is faulty, or there's a problem with the legal theory. They said, We want to dump this case because the defendant, Eric Adams, can help us with our political and policy agenda, because he's going to help us with our immigration agenda.
That is why eight experienced prosecutors, including conservatives, resigned. They said, That is a completely inappropriate, dangerous use of the Justice Department's power. You can't use prosecution to enforce your politics. That is why I and so many people in the Justice Department see this as such a bigger deal than just Eric Adams.
SIDNER: I think that is exactly why it's a bigger deal. This is an administration, the Trump administration, who has constantly accused the other side of using politics to prosecute people.
HONIG: Yes.
SIDNER: And now, you're seeing politics, in court, being used as the reason to dismiss this case.
HONIG: Give them -- give them credit for candor, right? At least they didn't go in there with some pretext, and say, Well, we think it's a shabby case.
SIDNER: Right.
HONIG: They just said, No, this is politics, and we're going to do it.
SIDNER: All right. Speaking of currying favor, there has been another case that was absolutely shocking. Sam Bankman-Fried did this interview.
HONIG: Yes.
SIDNER: He was also in the same prison and, I guess, same cell area as Diddy.
HONIG: Yes.
SIDNER: What happened there?
HONIG: Well, so they're both being held in the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn. And, by the way, we -- you and I were saying earlier, How on earth does Sam Bankman-Fried do a video conference?
SIDNER: Yes.
HONIG: That's not anything I've ever heard of.
It now turns out he's being disciplined for that. So, I don't know if he had a contraband phone or what, but--
SIDNER: He is -- he in trouble?
HONIG: Right.
SIDNER: Yes.
HONIG: Sam Bankman-Fried is clearly, and there's been reporting about this, New York Times and elsewhere, is trying to curry favor, so that he can get a pardon from Donald Trump. And I would not say it's out of the question. I mean, I can't say it's likely. But look at what Eric Adams did, right? He went down to Mar-a-Lago. He said, Yes, I'm for -- I'm with you on immigration.
Sam Bankman-Fried is now criticizing Democrats. He's openly supporting things Trump does. He's tweeting, or have some -- having someone tweet for him, in support of DOGE and Elon Musk. You can see him cozying up.
And you know what? If you're Sam Bankman-Fried, and you're looking at -- you've been sentenced to 25 years? It's your best chance. So--
SIDNER: Well--
HONIG: --it's all transactional.
SIDNER: It's all transactional.
Elie Honig, it is a pleasure.
HONIG: Thanks, Sara.
SIDNER: And thank you for joining us.
We are going to look at a little video here, of Sam Bankman-Fried and this actually -- he got in trouble. He ended up in solitary confinement.
HONIG: Solitary, yes.
SIDNER: Because of this.
But here's -- here's the video.
HONIG: Yes.
SIDNER: Just want people to see it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TUCKER CARLSON, AMERICAN COMMENTATOR: So, like, have you made friends there? How -- are you hanging with Diddy? I think he's in there with you.
SAMUEL BANKMAN-FRIED, AMERICAN ENTREPRENEUR CONVICTED OF FRAUD AND RELATED CRIMES: He is, he is. And I -- it's, I don't know, you know, he's been kind.
He's been kind to people in the unit, he's been kind to me. It's also -- it's a position no one wants to be in. You know, obviously, he doesn't, I don't. As you said.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SIDNER: Is that a burner phone?
HONIG: It has to be. So--
SIDNER: I mean, how else would you?
HONIG: So, inmates have phone calls, and they actually have email. But there is no capacity that I'm aware of for a video conference. And I will tell you, burner phones are all over prisons.
SIDNER: Yes.
HONIG: In fact, there was just a bus the other day within that very same prison, 25 people were arrested for importing contraband drugs, weapons and burner phones. Wouldn't shock me if that's what that is.
[22:00:00]
SIDNER: Sadly, you can get just about anything in prison, if you know how it's--
HONIG: How it's--
SIDNER: --who is--
HONIG: It's everywhere.
SIDNER: --if you know the right people--
HONIG: For sure.
SIDNER: --and they know how to get it in.
HONIG: By the way, I know that because I was a prosecutor, who spent time in prison.
SIDNER: Uh-huh. Oh, oh right.
HONIG: Let's just be clear about that.
SIDNER: I know for other reasons, but whatever. We're two pals, we can talk about these things.
Thank you so much, Elie Honig. Appreciate it.
HONIG: Thanks, Sara.
SIDNER: And thank you for joining us.
"CNN NEWSNIGHT WITH ABBY PHILLIP" is next.
