Return to Transcripts main page
The Source with Kaitlan Collins
Sources: Trump Unlikely To Dismiss Hegseth But Officials Troubled By Disarray In Inner Circle; Musk Promises To Step Away From DOGE As Tesla Profits Plunge; Trump Says He Has "No Intention" Of Firing Fed Chair. Aired 9-10p ET
Aired April 22, 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]
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
POPE FRANCIS: The fight against poverty and hunger must be fought constantly and on many fronts, especially in its causes.
God bless America.
(APPLAUSE)
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST, ANDERSON COOPER 360: A programming note. I will be back overnight, along with Isa Soares, as Pope Francis' body will be transferred to Saint Peter's Basilica, where he'll then lie in state for three days. Our coverage of the procession, live, begins tomorrow morning, at 03:00 a.m., Eastern. I hope you join us for that.
The news continues right now, with "THE SOURCE" and Kaitlan Collins.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, CNN HOST, THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS: The fallout over the story, revealing that the Defense Secretary, Pete Hegseth, was involved in a second Signal group chat, has been a major focus here, at the White House today, with officials insisting that the President has full confidence in Hegseth as his Pentagon chief. He's very hesitant to fire anyone in his Cabinet, certainly not someone like Pete Hegseth, who they fought so hard to get confirmed in the first place.
But there has been some consternation inside the West Wing that we've been picking up on, from our sources, over the staffing, in the front office at the Pentagon, and who exactly is surrounding Secretary Hegseth, after he fired three of his top officials, pushed out another, and said his chief of staff will be going to a different job, all amid questions about what is happening, going forward, in terms of what that staffing looks like.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Welcome to THE SOURCE. I'm Kaitlan Collins. And tonight, I have new reporting about the Defense Secretary's defense of himself, and how that's being received inside the White House, and the E-Ring at the Pentagon.
Here's what went down in just the last 24 hours. It was in an effort to address the fallout over that new reporting that he discussed military plans in a second Signal group chat. This time, with his wife and brother included.
Secretary Hegseth booked himself on the TV channel, where he previously worked as a host, for an interview. The goal being, tamping down the coverage of that second chat, though, that's not quite how the interview went.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PETE HEGSETH, UNITED STATES SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: Those very same people keep leaking to the very same reporters whatever information they think they can have, to try to sabotage the agenda of the President or the Secretary. So once a leaker, always a leaker, often a leaker.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Instead, as you heard there, Secretary Hegseth, this morning, faced multiple direct questions about his inner circle at the Pentagon being in disarray, after three of his staffers were fired and his chief of staff was removed from his role.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HEGSETH: I don't have time for leakers. I don't have time for the hoax press that peddles old stories from disgruntled employees. We should be talking about the decimation of the Houthis, how we're pushing back the Chinese, how we have a new Defense Area at the southern border. Instead, disgruntled former employees are peddling things to try to save their ass.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: We're learning tonight, according to two people familiar with how that interview was perceived, that the appearance was seen by some officials, as only calling more attention to the story, rather than actually doing less.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HEGSETH: It's my job to protect national security--
BRIAN KILMEADE, FOX NEWS ANCHOR: Right.
HEGSETH: --the President of the United States, and let the investigation go where it is. So when that evidence is gathered sufficiently, and this has all happened very quickly, it will be handed over to DOJ, and those people will be prosecuted--
KILMEADE: Right.
HEGSETH: --if necessary.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Now, that was some of what the Fox News viewers saw, this morning, as Secretary Hegseth was addressing these sudden departures, and recent criticisms from some of them, these people in his own inner circle, as he was accusing them of leaking sensitive information, and also suggesting, at one point, that there could be criminal referrals to the Justice Department.
Now that latter part remains to be seen. We don't really know where this investigation is going, as we've been trying to learn more about it.
And despite all of this, and there is a real concern, inside the White House, that Secretary Hegseth has struggled to contain the dysfunction as his inner circle has imploded. What we do know is that this also has not changed President Trump's confidence in him.
I am told that President Trump is unlikely to dismiss Secretary Hegseth, and has now spoken to him twice, since The New York Times and CNN reported on that second Signal group chat on Monday -- Sunday night.
We can also report that the President has been soliciting feedback from people around him, about Hegseth, and how this entire story has played out. So far, most, if not all, has been positive about the Defense Secretary, as the President has continued to follow this and watched where this is going.
Now, what we do know in the Pentagon chief and how this has gone is that Trump is extremely hesitant to fire any Cabinet official, at this point in his term, much less Secretary Hegseth, given how hard his team fought to get him confirmed in the first place.
And publicly, the White House has been expressing this confidence.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: We are not going to tolerate individuals who leak to the mainstream media, particularly when it comes to sensitive information.
[21:05:00]
And the Secretary of Defense is doing a tremendous job, and he is bringing monumental change to the Pentagon. And there's a lot of people in this city who reject monumental change. And I think, frankly, that's why we've seen a smear campaign against the Secretary of Defense, since the moment that President Trump announced his nomination, before the United States Senate.
Let me reiterate. The President stands strongly behind Secretary Hegseth, and the change that he is bringing to the Pentagon. And the results that he's achieved thus far speak for themselves.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: My lead sources tonight are:
New York Times White House correspondent, Maggie Haberman.
And also, Washington Post Pentagon reporter, Dan Lamothe.
And it's great to have you both here.
Maggie, what's your understanding of just how all of this is going down inside the White House, and how they're seeing Secretary Hegseth, this evening?
MAGGIE HABERMAN, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, THE NEW YORK TIMES: Right. As you said, the interview, this morning, was not seen as a home run. I mean, even among Hegseth's allies outside the administration, it was seen as a little disorienting and a little disjointed.
It was also really striking to people that Hegseth was basically describing a process of frog-marching his own people out of the building, while then saying, And, you know, we're doing an investigation now, and we'll see where it leads. And so, that caught a lot of ears as well.
The President has been, in every conversation, I know, that he has had, he has been very, very supportive of Hegseth. He has talked about recruitment numbers. He has talked about morale for the rank-and-file.
Trump does not like bad headlines, as you know. And so, we will see how long this stays in the news. But this morning was not seen as quelling it.
Neither were on-the-record quotes from Joe Kasper, who has been Hegseth's chief of staff at the Pentagon, to Ryan Grim, a journalist, a freelance journalist -- or an independent journalist, basically talking about his own conduct and his relationship with these three people who were fired. None of this is making people in the White House happy.
COLLINS: And he was the chief of staff at the Pentagon. There were questions about whether he was still the chief of staff. Secretary Hegseth confirmed this morning, he is no longer the chief of staff, but it's not clear what his new role is.
I mean, you are very well-sourced inside the Pentagon. What is happening there? How are they receiving all of this?
DAN LAMOTHE, PENTAGON REPORTER, THE WASHINGTON POST: That there's a sense of exhaustion in the Pentagon right now.
You play this out with the first Trump term. Secretary Mattis, Secretary Esper, to the greatest degree they could, tried to shield the building from the politics that were largely just across the river. That's not the case here. The Pentagon has been dragged into it, really, from day one, both with the firings of all the generals that we've seen, and now the firings of Hegseth's own people.
We don't have clarity on what these people that were fired actually did. We know the allegations. There's been no proof to that. And to watch someone like Dan Caldwell and Darin Selnick, that go back with Hegseth for years and years, through numerous previous jobs, to see this now, like these -- this is Hegseth's guys. It's really striking, and it's left a lot of people disoriented.
COLLINS: Yes. I also think there's a question, Maggie, in terms of who's around him, and who he trusts, in terms of Secretary Hegseth. I mean, it is important for the Pentagon chief, obviously, to have people around him that he does have that kind of confidence in, and questions about what that looks like going forward.
And also, in addition to using Signal, and that hasn't -- that has not been denied. No one has said he wasn't actually using Signal, and didn't put his wife and his brother and his attorney who -- the latter two have jobs at the Pentagon, on this group chat.
HABERMAN: Right. And look, there is -- they have maintained that what was -- what he put in Signal was unclassified. I think there has been additional reporting today, suggesting that it came off of a classified system, and it's not exactly clear how it then got copied into these -- into these Signal chats.
But no, they're not denying that he was doing that. They are saying that that doesn't matter, and that that's irrelevant, and that the real focus ought to be on the Pentagon's accomplishments. And those are things that Hegseth has talked about.
But these are -- these are legitimate questions, to ask about how Signal was being used.
COLLINS: Yes. And in our reporting -- we have a story, out tonight, not just from me, but Jake Tapper, Natasha Bertrand, Kevin Liptak. One of the sources, told our team that -- this about Hegseth, saying, quote, he is in, "Full paranoia, back-against-the-wall mode," describing his state of mind over the last month.
I think a lot of this probably has to go back to his confirmation process and how ugly that was, and what a battle it was just to even become the Defense Secretary for him.
LAMOTHE: I mean, yes, I mean, you're really talking just a couple of the senators changing their votes or deciding at the last minute to support them -- to support Hegseth, after they seemed like they were kind of sitting on the fence for a while, and got a lot of pressure from the White House to push that through.
So, he walks in, day one, very angry, seemingly. And now to see this all play out since, you kind of -- you kind of wonder that the bench wasn't deep to begin with in the Pentagon, particularly on the appointee side. How long can this go? How many more people can get removed? It's disorienting and alarming for a lot of the -- particularly, the officers.
COLLINS: Yes, that's a good point about the staffing, and who wants to come work there, what that looks like.
Dan Lamothe, great to have you.
Maggie Haberman, as well. Stay tuned. You'll be back, Maggie.
[21:10:00]
Up next. My next source is retired four-star Admiral, William McRaven. He is the former Commander of the U.S. Special Operations Command who oversaw the raid that killed Osama bin Laden. And he has written a new book called "Conquering Crisis: Ten Lessons to Learn Before You Need Them."
And it's great to have you here.
I just -- given this book focuses on leadership in difficult times, and what's important in those moments, I wonder what your assessment is, of what's playing out right now at the Pentagon.
ADM. WILLIAM MCRAVEN (RET.), RETIRED U.S. NAVY FOUR-STAR ADMIRAL, AUTHOR, "CONQUERING CRISIS": First, Kaitlan, thanks for having me on.
And let me start by saying, look, I want Secretary Hegseth to be successful. Every American should want the Secretary of Defense to be successful. But, as you just talked about, I don't think he's surrounded himself with the right people.
In my book, "Conquering Crisis," I talk about how crisis leadership is fundamentally different than day-to-day leadership. Crisis leadership, you have time constraints, you have resource constraints. People's lives are at risk, reputations are at risk, and everybody's watching. Well, that's the situation that Pete Hegseth is in.
And I have a chapter in the book called The Council of Colonels. And in the military, we have a council of colonels for most generals and admirals. And those are generally colonels that are unpromotable. And they are unpromotable, so that they will give the general or the admiral the unvarnished truth.
And so, if I was advising Secretary Hegseth, I would say, find and bring people around you that will tell you the truth, that will ensure that you don't walk into a minefield. Trust the men and women in uniform.
You've got Dan Caine. General Dan Caine is the new Chairman of the Joint Chiefs. Dan is a superb officer, as was CQ Brown. And Dan will give Secretary Hegseth, his very best military advice. Count on those people. Rely on those people. Listen to those people. Have a little humility in the job. You're going to need it.
COLLINS: Yes, and you've emphasized the importance of facing a crisis head-on, when it comes to you--
MCRAVEN: Right.
COLLINS: --and how you respond in that moment, and what that looks like. And I saw that you said that if you don't, it could deteriorate the situation even further.
Do you think that is something that's happening right now, whether it's from the way the Pentagon is handling this, or the White House, in terms of just addressing it head-on?
MCRAVEN: Yes, absolutely. At the end of the day, the truth always comes out.
So every leader, when they're in a crisis, particularly when a crisis may be of your own making, you need, again, you need to confront it, head-on. You need to be honest. You need to be honest with a rank-and- file. You need to be honest with your bosses. And the quicker that you come forward with the truth, the quicker you're going to identify what the problems are and begin to solve them.
And you have to have a little swagger. You have to have a little confidence. But, once again, you better have a little humility going into a job like this, because if you don't, it's going to humble you pretty quickly.
COLLINS: Yes. And on page 84 of your book, you write, and I want to quote now from it. You say, Use truth and transparency through the crisis to show that you understand the problem and that you are taking concrete steps to resolve the issue. It may be uncomfortable, demoralizing... and personally embarrassing, but deception and opaqueness are a whole lot worse.
One thing in this, in terms of how this is being handled, is they haven't seemed to really acknowledge--
MCRAVEN: Right.
COLLINS: --using a platform, like Signal, to share information. They argue it's not classified. We've heard other people say attack plans are classified.
I just wonder what you mean and what you see in terms of how that's been handled?
MCRAVEN: Yes, it has not been handled well. I mean, we got to be honest about this.
Clearly, the information that was broadcast on Signal was classified. Now they weren't war plans. And I think this is a little bit of the nuance of the wording is, Secretary Hegseth has said, We haven't divulged war plans.
Well, war plans in a military context, as you know, Kaitlan, this is the plan to invade Iraq or something broad, and strategic like that. But make no mistake about it, these were operational plans with operational details. They were classified. But you'll also recognize that there was not a single uniformed person on any of those Signal chats. Because I have no doubt that had there been a military officer on those chats, they would have said, Mr. Secretary, it's a bad idea using this. We need to go to our secure network to be able to talk.
Back again to my point about the Council of Colonels. Secretary Hegseth, surround yourself with people that, yes, you can trust, but people that will tell you the truth. And then you, as the Secretary, you, as the leader of this remarkable organization, get out there, tell the truth, accept responsibility, so you can get past this crisis. If you don't do that, it's going to drag on for a long time.
COLLINS: Two things you said there really stood out to me. One, you say you have no doubt that, even if it's not war plans, as you say, that this information was classified--
MCRAVEN: Sure.
COLLINS: --in your view.
MCRAVEN: Of course. I mean, there's really no doubt about that. You're talking about operational details prior to an attack. And when you do that, it's classified. Now, it's timely. So once the strike is over, then the details kind of fade to the back. But there's no doubt in any military mind that those are classified details.
Had I released details like that, when I was on active duty, on an unclassified platform like Signal, it would have been a violation of security.
[21:15:00]
And my only point is, you made a mistake. That's OK. You're going to make mistakes. You're new in the job. You're going to make mistakes. Hold yourself accountable. You're telling all the rank-and-file, you're telling the soldiers, sailors and marines, that you're going to hold them accountable, and you want to hold people accountable. Hold yourself accountable first. That's the first step to being a good leader.
COLLINS: Yes, I mean, and no one would know better than you if it was classified.
The other thing is, you mentioned that no member of the military was on that chat.
MCRAVEN: Right.
COLLINS: The same information, we're told, essentially, was conveyed on that chat as the other one, which we all could read, because Jeffrey Goldberg was on it, and published it.
We're told, on this one, it included the Defense Secretary's wife, his brother, who works at the Pentagon, and his personal attorney, though neither of them are in jobs that would typically be involved in making military plans.
What do you make of the fact that they were on it, and no member of the military was?
MCRAVEN: Well, of course, I haven't seen the Signal narrative. But once again, is it inappropriate to do that? Of course it is.
And, again, if I were Secretary Hegseth, I would say, You know what? I'm new in the job. I'm learning my way. This was an egregious mistake, and a mistake I won't make again. And here's what I'm going to do to fix it, and I own up to it. And now let's move on to going after the Houthis, and taking on the Chinese in the Indo-Pacific, things that he thinks are truly important.
But if he doesn't hold himself accountable, then it's going to be hard when you're running the Department of Defense, to expect the rank-and- file to hold other soldier, sailors, airmen, marines, accountable as well.
COLLINS: How do other militaries, other nations, other officials, how do they watch something like this, as it's playing out. And also, I think, importantly, as you know how it's being handled.
MCRAVEN: Well, of course, every military is watching the United States, writ large.
I mean, my concern, right now, is we have this tone as Americans, that we are transactional. I was at the Munich Security Conference, and the word that was bounced around the most was, America has become transactional.
Well, if we are transactional, if all we're doing is trying to get the best deal? That's not who we are as Americans.
The fact the matter is, we have values. Our values are important. We're a democracy. We're a republic. We believe in the rule of law. We believe in the Constitution and human rights. And this is what should shape our foreign policy. This is what should shape our defense policy.
If all we're going to be is transactional, it's going to be a little hard to ask the great soldiers, and the civil servants, and the military, to continue to sacrifice, to continue to do the hard work, to potentially put their lives on the line, so we can get a better deal out of it.
If you're talking about upholding a democracy in Ukraine, or upholding the democracy in Taiwan, or wherever aligned values are, that's the message. That's what's important. That's why soldiers go to war, is to protect the American values.
But if we're no longer a value-based country, then, again, the world is watching, and we need to underpin everything we do with the values that make us Americans.
COLLINS: On that front. As you know, the President wanted -- wants to get a deal, a peace deal in Ukraine, wants to end the war there. But we've heard officials, in recent days, warn that if they don't see real progress, over the next few days, they may walk away from the negotiating table altogether, U.S. officials.
I wonder what you make of that, and also just how this process has played out, in terms of the back-and-forth with Russia and Ukraine and the United States?
MCRAVEN: Yes, well, I'm strongly in support of Ukraine.
I was out there about 18 months ago, and you can't help but be inspired by the Ukrainian people, and how they have upheld, again, the western values that -- now, they're not perfect, let's be honest. I mean, Ukraine is a struggling democracy, but they are a democracy. And President Zelenskyy was elected the President of Ukraine. We need to stand behind them, we need to continue to support them, against a dictator that is Vladimir Putin.
So I thought, what happened in the Oval Office was egregious. At the end of the day, if you have differences with a head of state, Zelenskyy or anyone, you don't want to air those differences in public, certainly not in the Oval Office. What you need to do is put a public face on it, and then behind closed doors, have a hard discussion with Zelenskyy or others.
But in terms of the negotiations, going forward, again, we need to continue to back and support Zelenskyy and Ukraine as long as we can, in hopes that we will end the carnage.
And I give the President credit. I think he sincerely wants to end the fighting in Ukraine, as does, I think certainly the Ukrainians do, and I would expect the Russians do as well.
So, find a way to bring that to an endgame. But the endgame can't be, We're going to give Russia everything they want and Ukraine nothing. And the endgame, in my opinion, can't be just a bargaining deal with Ukraine on the rare earth minerals, and we're only going to protect them if we, again, have this transactional relationship.
COLLINS: Admiral McRaven, I really appreciate you coming on. It's great to have you.
And just a reminder for everyone, your new book is "Conquering Crisis: Ten Lessons to Learn Before You Need Them."
Thank you so much, Admiral. I really appreciate it.
MCRAVEN: Thank you, Kaitlan.
COLLINS: Up next. Profits at Elon Musk's company have plunged. Hear what he said tonight about tariffs, the President, and also, he says, pulling back from his role in the federal government.
[21:20:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) COLLINS: After Tesla reported a profit drop of 71 percent, in the first three months of this year today, Elon Musk now says he'll be spending a lot less time in Washington, with his federal cost-cutting effort, known as DOGE.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ELON MUSK, SENIOR ADVISOR TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Starting probably in the next month, May, my time allocation to DOGE will drop significantly.
[21:25:00]
I think I'll continue to spend, you know, a day or two per week on government matters for as long as the President would like me to do so, and as long as it is useful. But starting next month, I'll be allocating far more of my time to Tesla. And now that the major work of establishing the Department of Government Efficiency is done.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Tesla's chief executive made that news, on the company's earning call today, perhaps the most anticipated one in the company's history.
Tesla reported that its quarter fell far short of the forecast, with those profits dropping, that 71 percent, compared to a year earlier. The company has been facing increased foreign competition, particularly from China. But analysts also say that Elon Musk's high- profile connection to the President, and his work with the federal government, have hurt the company as well. The company has been warning of more uncertainty expected the rest of the year, given the escalating trade war that is playing out.
Back again with me is New York Times correspondent, Maggie Haberman.
Along with my Washington Post source, tech reporter, Faiz Siddiqui, who has covered Musk for years, and is also the Author of the new book, "Hubris Maximus: The Shattering of Elon Musk," which is in stores now.
And in your book, you write about his allegiance to Trump, and you say, and toward -- and the election, it was a gamble, as you put it, of galactic proportions. I think there are questions tonight about what that gamble looked like, and how it's paid off.
FAIZ SIDDIQUI, TECHNOLOGY REPORTER, THE WASHINGTON POST, AUTHOR, "HUBRIS MAXIMUS: THE SHATTERING OF ELON MUSK": Yes, certainly, in the immediate wake of the election, Musk's wealth soared, and investors saw this as, essentially, a coup for the company that, Tesla would have influence on the presidential administration. They had their in.
And all of a sudden, a few months into this administration, you see the backlash playing out, the skepticism over buying Teslas. Obviously, the demonstrations, which have occasionally broken out into outright vandalism and destruction. Musk is facing significant blowback from his decision to back the President, and align himself so closely with this administration, which he is currently a part of.
COLLINS: Yes, I mean, the Justice Department is investigating a lot of that vandalism. They've called it domestic terrorism, even.
Maggie, it stood out to me, though, when Elon Musk said, starting next month, he'll be spending a lot less time here. Those were not the timelines that we had been hearing inside the West Wing, at least.
HABERMAN: Well, no, we had been hearing that he would probably have another month or so that he was going to do solidly (ph). Now, he said probably in May. So I don't know what that means. That could be -- that could be fungible.
But Special Government employees have a certain set number of days that they can work, 130 days. But you can spread that out over time. And so my take on what he said is that he is going to attempt to do that. He made clear that he is going to try to continue to be involved in the government, as long as Trump will have him.
I mean, I don't -- I don't know that Trump is eager to have Elon Musk continuing on the way he has. There has been constant controversy. There have been complaints from Cabinet secretaries. But I know Trump does like, and a lot of his aides like, a lot of the DOGE team that is in place. And Trump even said at a Cabinet meeting, they're going to stay in place.
I think that Trump is not necessarily going to want to have a direct confrontation with Elon Musk, saying, I think I've had enough. You need to go. So, I suspect Elon Musk can drag this out for a while.
I do want to make one point, though, to your point about how he invested in Trump and it paid out big. And that's clearly true. Some of the blowback on Musk is in how Musk has handled this effort at a supposed government shrinking that he's been working on, and the way he has talked about federal workers. Number one.
The other is one of the areas where they are in conflict on is tariffs. If Elon Musk did not realize that Donald Trump supported tariffs, which is one of the few core beliefs he has had for 40 years, I don't know what he thought was going to happen. But if somebody says over many, many months they're going to do this, you should assume they are.
COLLINS: Yes. I mean, you write about that in your book, that this is one of his longest-held beliefs.
HABERMAN: Yes.
COLLINS: Maybe Wall Street didn't believe him. But obviously Trump -- Trump didn't hide the fact that he loves tariffs.
HABERMAN: Yes. COLLINS: But Elon actually talked about the tariffs tonight, on that call. I want you to listen to what he had to say about his efforts to get him to not implement them.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MUSK: Undoubtedly, I am going to get a lot of questions about tariffs. And I just want to emphasize that the tariff decision is entirely up to the President of the United States. I will weigh in with my advice, with the President, which -- he will listen to my advice, but then it's up to him, of course, to make his decision.
I've been on the record many times as saying that I believe lower tariffs are generally a good idea for prosperity. But this decision is fundamentally up to the elected representative of the people, being the President of the United States. So, you know, I'll continue to advocate for lower tariffs rather than higher tariffs, but that's all I can do.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: That's notable, in terms of what you were talking about, the influence people thought he could have. He does have influence, certainly. But in what it also looks like in moments like this.
[21:30:00]
SIDDIQUI: This goes back to the idea of a gamble. I mean, Musk is doing so many things that seem counterintuitive. Trump was never expected to be the pro-electric vehicle president, for example. And yet, Musk gambled that.
If subsidies are cut for EV tax rebates or tax credits, that's going to hurt Tesla's competition more than it's going to hurt Tesla. And similarly, with tariffs, Musk has made the point that Teslas are very domestically-sourced compared to some of their rival vehicles.
And so, he is, again -- you know, I'm not going to act like this is 4D chess, but he is able to make the argument on the earnings call that, We're going to be relatively cushioned from this in comparison to our counterparts.
But the proof is in the pudding, and the stock does not like what it's seeing right now.
COLLINS: Do you think this is a direct correlation, or do you think, I mean, this was pre-planned, Maggie, in terms of his announcement?
HABERMAN: You mean that--
COLLINS: Just the departure, what he said today, in terms of that, I mean, and the 71 percent--
HABERMAN: Oh.
COLLINS: --profit drop. HABERMAN: I mean, yes, I mean, I think that these things are -- I think these things are correlated. And I think in terms of things that Donald Trump does appreciate, he does believe, and he has said this to a lot of people, he thinks that Musk has really suffered, his company has really suffered, on behalf of the work that he has done for Trump. And I do think that's a real thing.
But look, it's been very obvious that Tesla is suffering. I do think that this is planned. I don't know what this looks like, going forward.
COLLINS: Yes.
Maggie Haberman.
Faiz Siddiqui. The new book is "Hubris Maximus: The Shattering of Elon Musk." Congrats on the new book. Thanks for joining us.
SIDDIQUI: Thank you so much.
COLLINS: Up next here for us on THE SOURCE. President Trump is now walking back his threats to fire the Federal Reserve Chair that he called a major loser, yesterday. A question, is it too little too late? What are people saying? We have the Treasury Secretary under President Clinton here next.
[21:35:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: President Trump made news on two key economic fronts today. First, signaling to reporters, inside the Oval Office, that tariffs on China could be lowered substantially from the current 145 percent, in what would be a massive relief, to say the least, for investors.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REPORTER: Are you going to play hardball with them?
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: I'm not going to say -- no, I'm not going to mention COVID. I'm not going to say, Oh, I'm going to play hardball with China, I'm going to play hardball with you, President Xi.
No, no. We're going to be very nice.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Trump softened his stance on those Chinese tariffs, as he also since -- and that's since stock futures, somewhere they have not been a lot lately, in positive territory. But also so did what the President said in the Oval Office about Jay Powell's job.
Now, President Trump has spent days, attacking the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, saying that his termination could not come fast enough, and just yesterday, calling him a, quote, major loser. And then, today, saying this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: No, I have no intention of firing him. I would like to see him be a little more active in terms of his idea to lower interest rates. This is a perfect time to lower interest rates. If he doesn't, is it the end? No, it's not. But it would be good timing.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: My economic source was the Treasury Secretary under President Clinton, and also the Director of the National Economic Council under President Obama.
Larry Summers, great to have you here tonight.
You heard the President there, on Fed chair, Jay Powell. He sounded a lot, over the last few days, like he wanted him out. There are real questions about this. We saw some White House aides changing their views on it. I wonder what you make of what he had to say tonight.
LAWRENCE H. SUMMERS, TREASURY SECRETARY UNDER PRES. CLINTON, NATIONAL ECONOMIC COUNCIL DIRECTOR UNDER PRES. OBAMA: Look, I'm an economist, not a psychologist. I don't understand why the President says one thing, one day, and then the opposite, the next day.
Here's what I know. When the President pursues the distinctive elements of his economic program, more tariffs, more pressure on the Federal Reserve, more challenges to legal institutions, more pressure on the budget deficit, when he pursues his program more aggressively? Markets plummet. When he backs off of all of his ideas, and returns things to normal? Markets rally. That's all one has to know.
And markets look forward. And so, they're making a judgment that the President's new ideas, in economic policy, the tariffs, the Fed- bashing, the challenges to rules of law, are very bad ideas that will do much damage to the economy. And markets recognize that. And capital flees the United States when it looks like he's going to act on those ideas. And when it looks like he was just talking, then there's more confidence, and people pull back and markets normalize.
But it's got to be an unfortunate circumstance, where the President not being true to his word, not carrying through on his promises and threats, is what markets are desperately hoping for. That's the mark of a country that, in a sense--
COLLINS: Yes.
H. SUMMERS: --is not in reasonable control, not seen as being governed in a serious, and competent way.
COLLINS: Well, I mean, we saw the markets going up after just some comments that the Treasury Secretary had made, behind closed doors today, not even on camera. They were just reported about, in terms of the trade war with China.
[21:40:00]
But what he said on China tonight, I thought, was also really significant, because he called the 145 percent tariffs, that he's put in place here, very high. And, at one point, in the Oval Office, he told reporters, and I'm quoting the President, now, It will come down substantially.
I do think there's a question, to your point there, of does that last? Or does China see that as the damage has been done here?
H. SUMMERS: I can't judge. I don't understand why the Secretary of the Treasury is having meetings, in private, with large groups of investors to give him the benefit of their thinking. That seems very unfair and seems like the stuff of crony capitalism.
I don't know what the President is going to do next. I do, as an economist, have very strong ideas about what's in our country's interest. And the further away we move from the Liberation Day Program, the better it will be for the economic prospects of the country, and the more positively markets will react.
COLLINS: Well, and he was speaking to a private investment conference that was hosted by JPMorgan, here in Washington, in reference to what you said about Bessent.
Can I also ask you, though? Because tonight, one thing that we've been covering here a lot, on the show, is what's been happening in this huge, billion-dollar fight that's playing out with Harvard. You're not only the former Treasury Secretary. You're also the former President of Harvard.
And given this lawsuit that we've seen playing out? Which actually, the list of demands was sent inadvertently, to Harvard, we were told, The New York Times reported. What do you know about how this is shaking out? Is the President there, trying to meet with President Trump directly? What's your view of this?
H. SUMMERS: I would assume that Harvard is insisting on the prescribed procedures contained in law being followed, that there be a notification of the concern with respect to discrimination, that there be dialog and discussion, that there be a tailoring of remedies to the problem, that there be public notification, rather than the government just extra-legally freezing funds.
And so, Harvard is -- just because Harvard is a substantial institution, doesn't mean that it lacks due process rights under the Constitution and under the statute that the Trump administration is invoking.
So I think, Harvard, for now, is insisting on treatment that's consistent with law. And my strong hope and my expectation is that the judiciary will back Harvard on that issue, because it seems to me, plain, to anybody who reads the statute, that Harvard -- that the Trump administration is in massive violation--
COLLINS: Yes. H. SUMMERS: --of the law.
COLLINS: We'll see how this plays out. We've heard some lawyers think that they've a good argument. We'll see.
Larry Summers, appreciate your time tonight. Thank you.
H. SUMMERS: Thank you.
COLLINS: Also, tonight, the Trump administration, as we've been reporting, is holding two graduate students in ICE detention facilities, in Louisiana. Neither have yet been charged with a crime. And my next source did just meet with both of them. Senator Ed Markey will join me on the other side of the break. Don't miss it.
[21:45:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: Tonight, Democratic lawmakers are on the ground, in Louisiana, demanding the release of Mahmoud Khalil and Rumeysa Ozturk. Both have been held by immigration officials for more than a month, despite having no charges.
Immigration officials arrested Khalil, who is a U.S. permanent legal resident, last month. Trump officials have accused him of activities in support of Hamas, for his high-profile role in the protests on Columbia's campus, last year.
And as for Ozturk, she was the Turkish national who was enrolled at Tufts University on a valid academic visa. Remember this video here, where she was pulled off the streets of Somerville, Massachusetts, by six officers, wearing plain clothes. She's been accused by the Trump administration of being a terrorist sympathizer, after she co-wrote an Op-Ed in the university's newspaper, criticizing the school's response to the war in Gaza.
My source tonight just finished meeting with both of them. The Democratic senator of Massachusetts, Ed Markey, joins me.
And Senator, it's great to have you.
What did you hear from the two of them?
SEN. ED MARKEY (D-MA): Well, I visited with Congresswoman Pressley, and Congressman McGovern of Massachusetts. We wanted to go down in order to hear from both of these prisoners, what was the condition under which they were now being held, and what was the story that led them to this point?
And so, for Rumeysa Ozturk, she was swept off of the streets of Somerville, Massachusetts. She told us how she was then moved to New Hampshire, then to Vermont, down to Atlanta, and then over to Louisiana, all on the course of a day. And at each juncture, she asked to be able to call her a lawyer. They would not allow her to call her a lawyer. They would not allow her to understand what her rights were. She actually thought that she was being abducted.
[21:50:00]
And now, she is being held, for four weeks, without any charges having been brought against her, without the charges of a crime being lodged against her, violation of her First Amendment rights of free speech, which the Trump administration believes are easily expendable, and no due process in terms of the protections which she's been given, which is the Fifth Amendment. That appears also to be expendable. But of course, they're indispensable for all Americans.
The same thing is true for Mahmoud Khalil. He, as well, has not been charged with a crime. He, as well, is being held down here in Louisiana, and it's out in the middle of nowhere in Louisiana.
They swept, for example, Rumeysa Ozturk, 1,500 miles from Massachusetts -- Somerville, Massachusetts, down here in Louisiana.
COLLINS: Yes.
MARKEY: The same thing is true with Khalil.
And the reason is that this is the most conservative Circuit Court of Appeals in the United States. They want to have a forum which they know they're going to be able to do whatever they want to do. But it's authoritarianism at its worst, and we were here today to put the spotlight on what Trump is doing.
COLLINS: Yes. And speaking of that location, I know a federal judge in Vermont issued a decision, saying that, I said to move Ms. Ozturk, back to Louisiana -- or -- back to Vermont by May 1st. We'll see if that happens.
As far as Mahmoud Khalil, just in terms of, I mean, what the last few weeks have been like for him, I wonder what he had to say. I know his wife had their baby while he's being held. Did he mention that? Or anything else that stood out to you?
MARKEY: He mentioned that his wife had a baby, yesterday. He had requested that he be allowed to go to New York to be with his wife, as she was delivering the baby. Since he hasn't been charged with a crime, it was a totally reasonable request.
He told them that he would actually go even in shackles if they requested it, but he wanted to be there to see the birth of his baby, and to also be there, to be with his wife, obviously, in this very stressful time. And they just rejected it out of him.
And you know what the reason was? Because Marco Rubio has determined, in his infinite wisdom, that he -- that is that Khalil is a national security threat. Same thing is true for Rumeysa Ozturk. But of course, with no evidence, no proof and no charges yet.
So that's the tragedy of what is happening in the Khalil family. But the lesson for all of America should be, if Trump and Marco Rubio can do this to these people, they can do it to anyone. There are absolutely no limits, in an authoritarian government, with regard to how they can just short-circuit rights, which people have been entitled to since the dawn of our republic.
COLLINS: Senator Ed Markey, I appreciate you coming on and joining us so quickly after your visit. And please keep us updated on what you learned. Thank you so much.
MARKEY: Will do. Thank you.
COLLINS: We're also learning new details tonight, about a story first brought to you here on CNN. The Homeland Security Secretary, Kristi Noem, had her purse stolen by a thief. What the Secret Service is now saying, where that investigation stands, next.
[21:55:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: Tonight, we're learning more about how a thief swiped the Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem's bag, as she was dining at a restaurant, here in Washington, including just how close the suspect got to her on Sunday night.
We've also learned that the stolen bag was a Gucci purse with a Louis Vuitton wallet inside, along with $3,000 in cash, the Secretary's badge to get into the DHS building, and more.
My source is CNN's Chief Law Enforcement and Intelligence Analyst, John Miller.
And John, what can you tell us about what you've learned here?
JOHN MILLER, CNN CHIEF LAW ENFORCEMENT & INTELLIGENCE ANALYST: Well, examination by the Secret Service and the D.C. Metro Police show, she is in there with some of her kids, some of her grandchildren. This is the 7th Street location for Capital Burger. So I think if you walk in, you've got the bar on your left and tables running down, and then a wider set in the back.
They're sitting as a group. An individual comes in at 07:52. He looks around. He's got black pants, white sneakers, a black jacket, a black baseball cap, and he's wearing an N95 (ph) mask, like we saw during COVID. And, it appears, he might be looking for somebody.
As a group of people get up from that table, he sits down at the table next to hers, angles over in her direction. And then, within three minutes of him entering the restaurant, he's taken that seat.
With his left foot, he slides the bag that's next to her chair under his table. He takes the jacket, puts it over the bag under the table, picks up the jacket, looks around the place again, like he's still looking for who he's meeting, then gets up with the jacket and the bag under it and leaves.
COLLINS: Wow.
MILLER: So, he's a smooth operator. He does this for a living. There's no doubt about that.
COLLINS: Does that say anything or give you an indication of whether it was targeted or just random?
MILLER: So, Kaitlan, based on my experience, if I am a professional pickpocket and bag-swiper, when I go into a restaurant, I'm looking for the ones hanging on the edge of the bar stools. I'll have a coat over my arm. I might dip in and see if I can take the purse out.
But when I see a $4,400 Gucci bag, the large one, the Gucci B, with the shoulder strap, that's what's going to make it targeted.
[22:00:00]
If I think, this is a Cabinet-level person, with Secret Service people around and watching her, that's going to make me walk away. I think what drew her to that -- what drew him to that table, was the bag. Because you got a $4,400 bag, you know there's going to be good stuff inside.
COLLINS: Yes, quite a development.
John Miller, thanks for that reporting tonight. Really appreciate it.
And thank you all so much for joining us.
"CNN NEWSNIGHT WITH ABBY PHILLIP" is up next.
