Return to Transcripts main page

Anderson Cooper 360 Degrees

Trump Delays Tariffs on Autos from Canada, Mexico for One Month; Elon Musk Meets with House GOP; Trump Administration Plans to Cut More than 70,000 Jobs at Department of Veterans Affairs, Memo Says. United States Has Paused Intel Sharing With Ukraine; Supreme Court Rejects Trump's Foreign Aid Freeze; U.S. Farmers Say They Feel the Effects of USAID Funding Freeze; King Charles Steps Up Diplomacy, Focused on White House, Ukraine and Canada. Aired 8-9p ET

Aired March 05, 2025 - 20:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

RYAN YOUNG, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Especially with the reduced traffic. There are people actually standing out in front of traffic saying, hey, let's not shop here, these are starting to spread especially on social media.

ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST: All right, thank you very much.

And thanks so much as always to all of you for being with us. We'll be back here tomorrow night. Meantime, now, it's time for AC360.

[20:00:19]

JOHN BERMAN, CNN HOST: All right, tonight on 360, breaking news, the President says trade wars are good and easy to win. That might be so, if you are battling yourself, the new tariffs and even newer concessions.

Also, breaking, Elon Musk on Capitol Hill tonight, meeting with Republican members of Congress, some of whom are telling him they want a say in what he is doing and pointing to the Constitution.

And later, the President is now pausing intelligence sharing with Ukraine why he is doing it and what it could mean for the millions of people who live there.

Good evening, John Berman here in for Anderson. The breaking news tonight, new concessions from President Trump on trade to himself. The chaotic swings of his tariff policy on full display.

In just a little over a month, the President has announced, then paused, then implemented 25 percent tariffs on Canada and Mexico, as well as double the ones on China, but today decided to pause tariffs on automakers in the United States only for a month, though, after two days of huge losses, the markets liked what they saw. Everything was green. Retirement accounts were happy for a change, but in this exchange with our Kaitlan Collins, you can hear there is a catch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: On the reprieve that is being granted to these three automakers for one month on the tariffs on Canada and Mexico. How did the President settle on one month?

KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: The reciprocal tariffs will go into effect on April 2nd. And he feels strongly about that no matter what. No exemption, so, that's where the one month come from comes from.

COLLINS: So, does he expect them to be able to shift production within a month?

LEAVITT: He told them that they should get on it, start investing, start moving shift production here to the United States of America where they will pay no tariff. That's the ultimate goal.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: So, to avoid tariffs permanently and not plunge the markets back into the red, automakers have to start moving and shift production to the United States and they have to do it in a month. Again, that is, if the President doesn't go back on that as he has on other demands.

Now, prior to that exchange, President Trump posted this on his social media site about the negotiations with Canada's Prime Minister, "Justin Trudeau of Canada called me to ask what could be done about tariffs. I told him that many people have died from fentanyl that came through the borders of Canada and Mexico, and nothing has convinced me that it has stopped, but said that it has gotten -- he said, it's gotten better. But I said, that's not good enough. The call ended in a somewhat friendly manner. He was unable to tell me when the Canadian election is taking place, which made me curious, like, what's going on here? I then realized he is trying to use this issue to stay in power. Good luck, Justin."

So yes, that is the President accusing someone else of using tariff policy for political and self-serving purposes. He also repeated something that just isn't true that the U.S. has a major problem with fentanyl coming across his northern border.

According to U.S. Customs and Border Protection, authorities seized only about 0.2 percent of fentanyl at the Canadian border during this last fiscal year, 96.6 percent was seized at the Mexican border.

What's more, the DEA's 2024 national drug threat assessment did not even use the word Canada. It mentioned Mexico 86 times, but the tariff issue does not stop with cars or at our two land borders. Tariffs on steel and aluminum are set to take effect a week from today.

And tonight, French President Emmanuel Macron warned the U.S. about imposing tariffs on Europe, something President Trump spoke about last week and said he would be announcing, quote, "very soon." Macron said tariffs would not go unanswered. Last night, in his address before Congress, the President, who once said that trade wars are good and easy to win, as I noted, kind of changed his tune a little bit.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP (R) PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Tariffs are about making America rich again and making America great again and it's happening and it will happen rather quickly. There'll be a little disturbance, but we're okay with that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: "There will be a little disturbance."

Let's begin with our anchor in chief, White House correspondent Kaitlan Collins, whom you saw questioned the White House press secretary. Kaitlan, we heard you talking to Karoline Leavitt about the timeline of the reprieve for car makers. Is it clear why the President changed his mind?

COLLINS: Well, a lot of this had to do, John, with the call that the White House and the President's senior advisers had with these big three automakers who were essentially arguing about just what this would do to them in terms of obviously, as a car is made here in North America, it crosses some borders multiple times during just the production of one vehicle alone.

And what they were arguing is, hey, these tariffs have only been in place, put in place against Canada and Mexico. This is going to unfairly put us at a disadvantage with cars that are being made in Europe or in Asia.

Clearly an argument that was appealing to President Trump, and that's what Karoline Leavitt was arguing there, saying that the reason there is a one month reprieve here is that because these reciprocal tariffs that are going in essentially on everyone in about a month from now are going to then affect all of those automakers. So, it will more level the playing field between the three of them.

Obviously, that's not enough for these three automakers who are not going to be able to shift production in one month. You saw there the White House was saying that that is the time that they are giving them to try to make those plans and seek out other options here.

It's a real question, John, though, of course, of what that's going to look like and what's going to happen here.

[20:05:32]

But I think also the nature of what you saw today and the reason why the stocks rose after that press briefing and where she confirmed this announcement was it shows the capricious nature of these tariffs, that there are efforts that people can take and undertake to try to get these exemptions or waivers or making a call to the White House and try to have these conversations. And so, that is really the question here of whether or not this is going to be this across the board kind of promise or the way we've seen the last 24 hours or so, where Trump sends out his Commerce Secretary, Howard Lutnick, who was kind of previewing this announcement and saying, he's not backing off these tariffs, but there could be some exemptions put in place.

That's the real question that I think we've heard from a lot of people on the other side of these tariffs, of whether or not they can find out a way to get around them.

BERMAN: Well, the automakers have, at least for a short period of time. What do we know about the phone call between President Trump and Prime Minister Trudeau?

COLLINS: Well, I mean, the President there clearly arguing that on fentanyl, he has not done enough from Canada. As you noted, its only about 0.2 percent that that is seized at the Canadian border. Something that was highlighted inside the White House briefing today.

Obviously, that's still fentanyl -- a tiny amount of fentanyl can kill someone, but pales in comparison to what is seized at the U.S. Southern border. But these tariffs are being levied equally against Canada and Mexico.

And also, John, I should note, we've heard varying different reasons from varying different officials about why these tariffs are being put in place. Some say it is because of fentanyl. Some say it's because the President feels the United States is being unfairly ripped off by other tariffs that are being put in place.

The President has also blamed the Canadian banking sector, saying that they don't allow U.S. banks. They do, I should note, just certainly they're not you know, it's not ever present in Canada.

But it's a real question of what exactly it is that is leading to these tariffs, which raises the questions for these officials in Mexico and Canada what they can do in order to stave them off.

Mexico was sending alleged cartel leaders to the United States to face prosecution, and that did not stop these from being put in place. So, a lot of questions, obviously, for the leaders of those countries.

BERMAN: Yes, there are. Kaitlan Collins, great to have you with us. See you again on "The Source" at the top of the hour.

I'm joined now by chief data analyst, Harry Enten; senior political commentator David Axelrod; global affairs -- global economic analyst Rana Foroohar; and former Republican from Minnesota Tim Pawlenty.

David, I want to start with you. So, the tariffs were coming then. They were not coming then they're here now. He's backed off them at least for a month.

DAVID AXELROD, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Right, clear as day.

BERMAN: Clear as day. My question to you from a political standpoint is why those swings and to what end? What's the impact of it?

AXELROD: Well, to what end is something I can't answer. The impact, Rana can answer, but I think it's not going to be good for American consumers. And honestly, I think there's a lot of enthusiasm in the business community about the idea of tax cuts and deregulation.

But businesses thrive on predictability and the capriciousness of all of this, I think, has to be really concerning to them. I honestly don't -- I mean, the President loves tariffs. He's made that clear. He said it's the greatest word in the English language and so on and he's believed this for a long time. And he is putting this into practice.

But I'm not sure that he is seeing the end result in terms of why this decision today, I think Kaitlan explained it. This was going to devastate American automakers who are already struggling. And so, I think he looked at that and the stock market, which he observes very closely, and he kind of put the thing in -- he put the brakes on.

BERMAN: The stock market was giving him real time reaction. It was in his face every day.

RANA FOROOHAR, CNN GLOBAL ECONOMIC ANALYST: Yes.

BERMAN: And Rana, so, David brought you into this here. What would a coherent tariff policy be? And how does this differ or is this a coherent tariff policy?

FOROOHAR: Absolutely not coherent and I would agree with David. Not only is it going to raise prices for consumers, but it's actually rolling back some of the progress that was made not only during Trump won, but during the Biden administration to break away a bit from China and to regionalize trade.

So, one thing that happened and, you know, I was frankly a fan of some of the China tariffs because I think there are mercantilist practices that need to be controlled. We need to build up strategic industries at home, but you can't do that totally alone.

And so a coherent strategy would be to bring back more production regionally. You want Mexico, Canada and the U.S. to be more integrated. And in fact, that's what the China tariffs that were implemented during Trump one and continued during the Biden administration actually did. They brought more trade back regionally.

So, I don't see an economic rationale for this move to break that apart. And it's also incredibly confusing for countries that are trying to decide -- gosh, were in a bipolar world. We've got the China power base here, we've got the U.S. -- Who should we do business with?

Well, when the U.S. is slapping tariffs on adversaries and allies alike, nobody knows what to do and the markets certainly don't know what to do.

[20:10:29]

BERMAN: Governor Pawlenty, you can see Canada from your House. I mean, even if that's not true, you play hockey here. So, my question to you is, even for Republicans who are in favor of tariffs, and there are some and I think that you are supportive in some ways of certain tariffs. Why Canada?

TIM PAWLENTY, (R) FORMER MINNESOTA GOVERNOR: Well, first principles. I think whether it's Canada or globally, there are abuses and there is unfairness in the global trade framework, including many tariffs. And so, being forward leaning and aggressive about addressing those is an appropriate place for President Trump to go, no question about it.

As to Canada, we are very fortunate to have such great neighbors. They are a peaceful democracy. There are some of our best friends in the world, and we should be able to constructively engage them about our concerns without having to have this level of, you know, pyrotechnics around it.

Now, keep in mind, most of the stuff we import from Canada by dollar volume is energy. And guess what? One of the biggest factors for the things that we measure in inflation is energy. So, if Canada wanted to mess with the United States, they could turn off some of the hydropower coming into places like Minnesota and Michigan. I don't think they'll do that. But at the end of the story, is this Canada, I think, could be handled in a more friendly way and get the concerns addressed, whether it's fentanyl, whether its re-shoring auto parts or other concerns.

But simply, you know, hide the ball, put on the tariffs and not be clear about what you want and how you're going to measure that is, I'm sure, very frustrating to the Canadians.

BERMAN: Harry Enten you are our chief data analyst. What does the data say here in terms of the political leeway that President Trump has with these tariffs?

HARRY ENTEN, CNN SENIOR DATA REPORTER: You know, look, we've been looking at this for a month. I've been looking at the polling for a month. I don't get it. This makes entirely no sense to me from a political point of view.

We talk about the percentage of Americans who oppose tariffs on Canada. We're talking about two-thirds of the American public. And what's the number one thing that or number two thing that Americans want Trump to prioritize? Its inflation at 80 percent.

Well, if you know anything about tariffs, it can raise prices further, thereby adding to the inflation problem. So, simply put, it makes no sense to me. It's almost as if Trump is on planet Mars when looking at the political ramifications of this. It's simply put makes zero sense.

BERMAN: David, you know, I've had the Premier of Ontario, Doug Ford, and other Canadians are saying that they are going to reciprocate and they're going to target red states. You know, they're going to go after Kentucky, Bourbon. You know, our apologies to our friend Scott Jennings there. What do you think the impact of that will be? Do you think that's something that could start to have political legs? AXELROD: Look, I think there's a lot of concern among Republican officeholders. Governor Pawlenty could speak more readily to this than me. There are a number of ways in which these things can touch, even without the targeting, just naturally, because Canada is a big supplier of energy, as the Governor mentioned, to the northern tier of the country and so on.

Some of the other tariffs that the President is putting on have agricultural implications, that hits a lot of red states. And, you know, I think that these office holders are going to quietly be lobbying for some relief here. But, you know, they're in a bind because the President has quite a bit of sway in their states.

I'll tell you one thing that's interesting. The place where it has influenced politics is in Canada. Now, Justin Trudeau is not -- he's stepping down. He's going to step down. But there's going to be an election in the next few days for the new Liberal Party leader and then there will be an election.

And the Liberal Party, which was 20 or more points behind before this, is now in contention because the number one issue in Canada no longer is inflation, it's Donald Trump and who can stand up to him?

BERMAN: You know, Governor Pawlenty, you know, Axe brought you into this. How much political leeway do you think President Trump has here? How much how much room?

PAWLENTY: I think he has some room. But, you know, the frustrations that David just mentioned as they mount any one of them, like Bourbon, may not be dispositive, but if you add them all up over time, it's like a drip, drip, drip, and each of those interest groups is going to be pressuring Washington to take a different approach.

But I think here's the balancing act for President Trump. He has to threaten these and put them on, get the concessions, or at least some of them that he's shooting for, and then declare victory before he reignites inflation. Because these tariffs are potentially inflationary. And the poison pill for this administration is the re- ignition of inflation, and he can't push it that far. That will be a major problem for him.

BERMAN: To that end, I mean, how much of a game theory problem does the President now have here in pulling back now a few times from the harshest threats that he's made?

[20:15:13]

FOROOHAR: Well, you know, when you say game theory, it assumes that there's a theory and I don't see one here. You know, I don't really understand what victory looks like, particularly when it comes to Canada and Mexico. I mean, what concessions are we really looking for? We're talking about mixing trade with fentanyl, 0.2 percent comes in from Canada.

I'll tell you what does come in from Canada, lumber. And I was talking to some home builders today that were saying, you know what, at a time when America has a housing shortage that's driving up prices, we're going to slow building because we don't know what our costs are going to be.

Agricultural products are going to go up. China is retaliating. That's going to put pressure on farmers in red states. I mean, it just doesn't make any sense. And it seems like some kind of a power play that nobody can make sense of.

BERMAN: And the markets were up today, but in general, investors, they're not happy about these things.

FOROOHAR: Oh they're absolutely not and I spent a lot of phone time today with money managers and even pension funds that are saying, okay, wait a minute. You know, first of all, we don't know what's going to happen from day-to-day.

We don't have trust. We're starting to think about should we actually fundamentally rethink the assumptions, frankly, since the 1980s, that you put your money in an index fund, you keep it mostly in the U.S. asset markets, do we need to look more broadly? Do we need to change the entire retirement picture in the U.S.? Big, big questions.

BERMAN: Harry, you've got some numbers here about how they could -- tariffs could impact --

ENTEN: Look these are all estimates, right. Given, you know, Trump says one thing, one day, says something else the entire next day. But you know, if you look at a Yale study, the effect on the median household, what are we talking about? We're talking about cost of the median household, like $1,900.00 a year.

When you're barely able to put food on the table, right? Your living paycheck to paycheck, that could be a tremendous impact and all of the industries that were talking about, right?

What about computers? Computers could be up 11 percent in terms of their price. What about rice? White rice, we're talking about a four percent rise. What about natural gas? We're talking energy. How about a five percent rise there?

The bottom line is its going to cost across a number of different sectors. The American people do not want this and yet Donald Trump pushes forward until of course, perhaps he might pull back a little bit.

BERMAN: All right, all of you, thank you very much. Great discussion.

We do have more breaking news. Elon Musk is meeting with House Republicans at this very moment. Last night they applauded him. Tonight, they want a bigger say in what he's doing. A live report from Capitol Hill next.

Plus, President Trump paused military aid to Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Now, he has paused intelligence sharing. So, what does the President want and could Russia take advantage?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:22:11]

BERMAN: We have more breaking news tonight. Just moments ago, Elon Musk wrapped up a meeting with House Republicans behind closed doors on Capitol Hill. This is hours after he did the same with Senate Republicans. Both say they want a greater role in how Musk's team is making cuts to the federal government.

And just to give you some sense of his power right now, this is how he was greeted last night during the President's address to Congress.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: ... DOGE, perhaps you've heard of it, perhaps.

(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)

TRUMP: Which is headed by Elon Musk, who is in the gallery tonight.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: Our chief congressional correspondent Manu Raju is on Capitol Hill. Manu, I understand you just chased down Elon Musk in the hall.

MANU RAJU, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, he just walked out of this meeting, didn't say a whole lot. But one of the big debates that has been happening on Capitol Hill is whether to give Congress a larger say in all of this, because this has been happening, these cuts and the purge that is happening across the federal government have been happening on an administrative level.

Congress has really been cut out of this process, and that has been a concern from a number of members, particularly ones who are overseeing some of these key committees, want him to slow down, or at least want him to be involved in the consultation process.

I said, should Congress have a vote here in what you are doing? He said, they already have a vote, referring to the fact that they can vote on spending legislation, but not on the idea of codifying some of these issues into law.

There is that debate in Capitol Hill about codifying those cuts that DOGE is making. I asked him about that on his way out. He said, sure, they could they could do that. So, not totally committal, but at least acknowledging what people are saying here on Capitol Hill.

But there is of this concern, John, among some members to slow things down. They are concerned that things are going too fast and to make sure that there aren't any more mistakes that Musk's team have made. I put that question to Marjorie Taylor Greene, who is the leader of a subcommittee overseeing the DOGE efforts, and I asked her if she agrees with the concerns from some fellow Republicans.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: When you hear some Republicans say he's going too fast, slow down, what do you say to them?

REP. MARJORIE TAYLOR GREENE (R-GA): I have not had any Republican tell me that personally.

RAJU: He told us that.

GREENE: Well, you know, what I have to say to them is they need to grow a backbone. We are $36 trillion in debt and this is how you save the country.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: But one of the big debates here, John, is how to go ahead now that the courts have stopped them on a number of fronts, including on dealing with the USAID funding freeze and how they can actually go about enacting some of these changes.

That was part of the discussion that happened behind closed doors that happened earlier today on the Senate side as well. And John, one of the issues, too, is ensuring that these members know what Elon Musk is up to.

They try to increase their communication with these House and Senate Republicans. One of the things that he did in the Senate GOP meeting today, earlier, John, was give out his cell phone number to every Senate Republican. So, perhaps he's going to be hearing a lot from GOP senators who may be hearing some concerns back home.

[20:25:23]

BERMAN: We'll be texting him what they're hearing at these town meetings that they may or may not be having going forward. Manu Raju, on Capitol Hill, great work as always.

So, more jobs cuts may be coming. According to a memo obtained by CNN, the Trump administration is planning to cut about 70,000 employees at the Department of Veterans Affairs that would put staffing back at 2019 levels.

The Biden administration had increased staff to help expand coverage and eligibility to millions of veterans exposed to toxins and similar hazards. I'm joined now by Paul Rieckhoff, founder and CEO of Independent Veterans of America and the host of "Independent Americans" podcast.

Paul, great to see you. You call this move, this cut of, you know, tens of thousands of employees, potentially a V.A., a misjudgment. Why?

PAUL RIECKHOFF, FOUNDER AND CEO OF INDEPENDENT VETERANS OF AMERICA: Because veterans are maybe the most popular group of people in America. Everybody Republican, Independent, Democrats generally hold veterans on an increasingly high status. They're the patriots. They're the people who hold the line for our country.

And when you fire tens of thousands of them politically, it's very radioactive. I don't care who you are. And I think Elon Musk is going to find out what the reaction is like when veterans start protesting at Tesla dealerships and start protesting, as they already have at V.A. facilities.

But also, they organize. And I think if Trump wanted to create and organize, patriotic, independent group of people to oppose him and DOGE and Musk, he's going to do it by not just firing people at the V.A., but firing government workers because one third of all government workers are veterans.

These are people who want to continue their service in uniform by serving in government, not just at VA, but at the Department of Defense and every other agency in the government.

So, I think it's a political miscalculation, but I also think it's going to be extremely unpopular, and he's going to be hearing from those members of Congress pretty soon.

BERMAN: We did hear from the new V.A. Secretary, Doug Collins, earlier today. Let's listen to what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DOUG COLLINS, U.S. SECRETARY FOR VETERAN AFFAIRS: For many years, veterans have been asking for a more efficient, accountable and transparent V.A. This administration is finally going to give the veterans what they want. We owe American veterans and hundreds of thousands of amazing employee solutions. And mark my words, that is what we will deliver.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: So, is there room to streamline the V.A. some, maybe not, the numbers of cuts he's talking about but cuts somewhere. I mean, how much do you think veterans would tolerate?

RIECKHOFF: Well, I think nobody wants the V.A. to run more efficiently than veterans themselves. I think there's absolutely room for cuts. But there's also, as we know in the military, a need for strategy and to understand what the long term goals are here.

And if they really had a plan, they would have treated veterans with more respect. They'd be candid about their overall strategy and maybe even offer them an off ramp.

Because I'll tell you what this is going to do. It's going to increase the veteran unemployment rate. And it's not like Elon Musk is offering them jobs at Tesla.

So, there has to be a comprehensive strategy to ensure the veterans community is supported. And they're respected because nobody wants to get an e-mail in the middle of the night saying, you've got 24 hours or you're gone. Especially people in the military who value honor, integrity and transparency.

BERMAN: Is there anyone in the veteran's community who has a sense of what that strategy is? Has Elon Musk or have Elon Musk and his people been in contact?

RIECKHOFF: They've been at the V.A., but I haven't heard a public presentation of any kind from him, from the Secretary or from the President.

What we've seen is the flamethrower that is DOGE has long been anticipated to be coming to the V.A. It's at the V.A. now, and there is obviously room for cuts, but it has to be smart, it has to be strategic and most of all, John, it has to be respectful.

We're talking about people who, many of which are disabled veterans who've served their country for decades, and they want to continue to serve their fellow veterans. They are getting thrown out in the street with an e-mail.

A pink slip is not the right way to do it.

BERMAN: We will put the numbers up -- where we discussed the numbers, saying this would put the V.A. back at 2019 levels in terms of staffing. They went way up during the Biden administration. Why? Just explain to people why those increases happened. And if you think they've been effective.

RIECKHOFF: Because they dramatically increase the presumption and the services that are available to veterans who are exposed to burn pits, people like myself who were exposed to burn pits, toxin exposures in Iraq and Afghanistan all the way back to Vietnam veterans who were exposed to Agent Orange.

So, under the Biden administration, they expanded, the folks who were eligible and the service that they could provide, it's called the Pact Act. We all saw Jon Stewart go down to Washington and shame Congress into passing it. Well, that's been implemented over the last few years, and the ramping up of staff and services was to accommodate that increased capacity and that increased need.

So if they slam the door on that now, you're already hearing from every veterans group in the country. There's going to be strong opposition and outrage and veterans are going to suffer. Veterans are going to suffer. Veterans are going to wait, and some veterans are going to die, waiting for care, waiting for services, and waiting for the promise that they were promised by this government.

BERMAN: Very quickly, also, you are a veteran here. There have been changes to the Pentagon with some big generals moved out. What's your feeling on that?

RIECKHOFF: It's an unprecedented, dangerous partisan extreme purge. And I think that's why you heard from five recent Secretaries of Defense from both parties. They're saying that this is unprecedented, canning -- the chairman of the Joint Chiefs and the senior leadership and the JAG Corps is dangerous. It's bad for our National Security, it's disruptive, and it is getting bipartisan condemnation from everybody who's not personally or strongly aligned with Trump.

BERMAN: Paul Rieckhoff, nice to see you in person. Thanks for coming in.

RIECKHOFF: You too, John. Thank you.

BERMAN: All right, next, the Trump administration puts a hold on sharing critical intelligence with Ukraine. I'm going to speak with a member of the House Intelligence Committee about whether that pause is likely to be permanent.

And later, why President Trump's push to dismantle a program responsible for providing aid around the globe could end up hurting farmers back here in the United States.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:35:00]

BERMAN: Trump administration officials confirmed today that the pause on military aid to Ukraine also includes intelligence sharing. CIA Director John Ratcliffe indicated the pause was meant to bring Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy back to the negotiating table, following last week's Oval Office blow up.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOHN RATCLIFFE, DIRECTOR, CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY: President Trump said, is he asked for a pause. In this case, as everyone saw play out, President Trump had a real question about whether President Zelenskyy was committed to the peace process. And he said, let's pause, I want to give you a chance to think about that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: So, any pause in USAID or intelligence could have life and death consequences for Ukrainian soldiers in the battlefield. Our Kaitlan Collins attempted to get clarification from White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt about how long it might go on for.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Director Ratcliffe said today that the president has paused also intelligence sharing with Ukraine. Is that temporary or is that permanent?

KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: I believe what the National Security Council told me in regards to that was that they paused, or they are reconsidering, the funding for Ukraine, as you saw the pause on the funding. As for intelligence matters, I would refer you to either the National Security Council, or the CIA as well.

COLLINS: Are they considering lifting the -- or reinstating the military aid going to Ukraine, which they paused this week?

LEAVITT: Again, it's a pause for a review.

(END VIDEO CLIP) BERMAN: Trump National Security Adviser Michael Waltz projected optimism today that the talks with Ukraine are now moving in the right direction. When and if the pause on military aid will be lifted does remain to be seen. I spoke earlier with Democratic Congressman Jim Himes, who sits on the Intelligence Committee.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BERMAN: Congressman Himes, you've obviously got unique visibility on this, but what kind of an impact does a pause in intelligence sharing with Ukraine have?

REP. JIM HIMES, (D-CT) INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE: Yeah, John, it's going to have really very substantial impact, right, for a bunch of reasons. Number one, the actual weapons that are moving into Ukraine, a lot of them are fairly standard issue. The intelligence we provide by contrast is unique actually, and it can't be replaced. And it's nice to have offensive weaponry, but it's also really nice to have visibility into your opponent's offensive positions. It's nice to get warning of attacks coming your way. And again, that's just not something that can be replaced by anything that the Europeans or others have.

BERMAN: To what extent did you see this coming?

HIMES: Not at all. Not at all. In fact, I can't say I was entirely surprised. Obviously, we've seen the way that the president thinks about Ukraine and Russia, and then we saw the weapons pause, and so I'm not surprised by it. I am a little disappointed that many of us in the Oversight Committees learned about it about a millisecond before it happened.

BERMAN: Who does this help?

HIMES: Well, I mean the answer to that question is obvious, right? Many more Ukrainians will die because the Ukrainians will not have as much warning as they did previously of Russian attacks, and many fewer Russian military assets and people will be at risk. I mean, the president could have taken two approaches. He could have gone for the aggressor and said, Hey, if you don't come to the table, we are going to triple our efforts to assist the Ukrainians. But of course, President Trump took the other route, which was to say I'm going to force the victim to his knees. And this is part of that effort.

BERMAN: That's not how they say it. What they say is that this is leverage to try to influence Volodymyr Zelenskyy to negotiate a piece in Ukraine, which he has been unwilling to do. Does that make any sense to you?

HIMES: No, it doesn't make sense, right? Neither Putin nor Zelenskyy is desperate for peace right now. But both countries would want it, and both leaders would want it. And sure, look, I guess I could figure out that Trump believes that if you force Zelenskyy and the Ukrainians to their knees, you can affect a peace.

BERMAN: How long do you think Ukraine can hold out without the military aid, which has been paused, and also now intelligence?

HIMES: Well, look, the Europeans understand both the values at stake here, which is do we care about democracies or do we just do whatever totalitarian murderous regimes want us to do? So, a particularly aggressive Putin is much more of a problem for Europe than it is for us. So they will continue, of course, to do all that they can, all that they can doesn't hold a candle to all that we are able to do. So, the Ukrainians are fighting for their very existence. People fighting for their existence are not going to go quietly into that good night. So I think that the Ukrainians are going to continue to put up a heroic fight, and I'm just heartbroken that we're not going to be apparently part of that fight going forward.

BERMAN: Did you hear anything in the President's speech last night to you that indicated that maybe he was softening his position towards Zelenskyy from last week?

HIMES: Well, not necessarily last night, but of course, rumors today are that maybe, especially given the communication that Zelenskyy sent to the president yesterday, that maybe this minerals deal is back on, and I suppose this minerals deal is a door to a peace negotiation.

[20:40:00]

Do I believe that that peace negotiation is going to be peace at any cost? Yes, I do. And so -- and by the way, how do I feel about a minerals agreement? I don't remember FDR saying to Winston Churchill, we're going to help you out, but we want that North Sea Oil. We want your coal. Again, we've just become a very different country than we used to be.

BERMAN: What leverage, if any, do you have to impact negotiations? If President Trump, as you say, is intent on forging a peace deal that may be favorable to Russia, more favorable to Russia, what can you do to influence that?

HIMES: Well, from the minority in the House of Representatives, the sad answer to that question is not much, right? It used to be exactly a year ago that the Democrats were pretty much a hundred percent behind Ukraine. And I would tell you that my Republican friends were about 50/50 pro helping Ukraine and those opposed. Now, with Donald Trump as president, other than maybe Lisa Murkowski and a few others, there are just very few Republicans who are raising the alarm about this because they know the target that that will put on their backs with respect to Donald Trump.

BERMAN: Congressman Jim Himes, Ranking Member of the House Intelligence Committee, we appreciate you being with us tonight. Thank you.

HIMES: Thanks, John.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BERMAN: Next, the unintended effect President Trump's effort to freeze foreign aid could have on farming here in the United States. And later, the new role King Charles is taking on the world stage.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:46:00]

BERMAN: The supreme court rejected today the Trump Administration's effort to keep frozen billions of dollars in foreign aid that had already been approved by Congress. Today's ruling might only be a temporary setback for the Administration. The court did not give a timeline for when the money must be released, sending the issue back to the lower courts. Back in January, the president moved to freeze billions of dollars in foreign aid from the State Department and USAID, causing aid programs around the world to ground to a halt.

But, the effects are also being felt closer to home by farmers who relied on USAID to purchase their product and distribute it overseas. Our Shimon Prokupecz has more.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JOHN BOYD JR., FOUNDER, NATIONAL BLACK FARMERS ASSOCIATION: You asked me why I do it, why? We feed people, and that's a good feeling. What I produce here, I stand behind my crop. I don't produce anything on my farm that I wouldn't eat. Matter of fact, I'll show you, I'll chew some soybeans first. Man, it tastes good. I'm growing (ph) right here on my farm.

SHIMON PROKUPECZ, CNN SENIOR CRIME AND JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: What does it taste like?

BOYD: It tastes like McDonald's hamburger.

PROKUPECZ: No.

BOYD: Yeah, that's what's in them.

PROKUPECZ (voice-over): John Boy Jr. Is a fourth generation farmer. He grows wheat, corn, and soybeans here on this thousand acre farm in southern Virginia. He also founded the National Black Farmers Association, and he's no fan of President Donald Trump.

BOYD: The president cast a net of uncertainty. Every time he makes one of these wild announcements that he -- people are saying, yay, tariffs on China, terrorist on Mexico, terrorist on Canada. Our USAID, it is over, it is done. Every time he makes those type of drastic announcements, he affects America's farmers.

PROKUPECZ (voice-over): Within days of taking office, President Trump dismantled the USAID, a humanitarian program that's been a lifeline for the most vulnerable around the world, and a critical source of income for U.S. farmers, paying them hundreds of millions of dollars a year for their crops. He also froze some funding for farmers and rattled trade markets.

BOYD: We take it totally, totally for granted. And what we're doing in this country right now, we're gambling with all that. PROKUPECZ (voice-over): Gambling with farmers?

BOYD: Gambling with farmers' lives. They are gambling with my life, they are gambling with my livelihood, man.

PROKUPECZ (voice-over): Farmers like Boyd rely on loans to plant for the upcoming season with the hope that the harvest will pay it off and bring home some profit. In fact, about a million American farmers rely on the USDA for financial assistance every year. But just days before planning season starts, Boyd says he hasn't been able to get a loan yet and he says he's not the only one.

BOYD: They want to hear -- they want you to show him on paper how you're good for that operating loan and how you're going to pay it back. I can't pay it back with $8 beans and $6 beans and $3 corn.

PROKUPECZ (voice-over): The majority of grain exported from the United States is stored in grain elevators. In Kansas alone, one grain elevator can export millions of dollars of goods.

PROKUPECZ: This is in Pawnee County in Kansas. This is a grain elevator site. This is where farmers will bring their grain, stuff that they've harvested, like milo and wheat and soybean and corn. It is stored in these bins, these large concrete bins, and then sold to exporters, companies who are willing to buy that. And right now, it is very difficult to move some of this stuff.

KIM BARNES, CFO, PAWNEE COUNTY COOPERATIVE ASSOCIATION: They could come in and sell wheat for $5.58 cents. It was down $0.14 today.

PROKUPECZ (voice-over): Kim Barnes has been buying and selling each year's harvest for Kansas farmers for over 50 years.

BARNES: All these bins are full, and they're full of milo.

PROKUPECZ (voice-over): That's $5 million worth of grain, Barnes says. Grain that countries like Ethiopia and others depend on for food aid.

PROKUPECZ: And so, what's going on with the milo? Why do you have so much of that right now? What are you seeing in the market?

[20:50:00]

BARNES: Just -- we just don't have any market for it. There's nobody wanting to buy it.

PROKUPECZ (voice-over): Five months ago. Barnes says, USAID bought over 200 million metric tons of milo from American farmers. Today, with no market for that grain, he's desperate. One potential lifeline, a proposal in Washington for the USDA to continue USAID's food distribution program.

PROKUPECZ: You're optimistic that the USAID stuff will get moved into USDA and the program will get --

BARNES: And will go on.

PROKUPECZ (voice-over): But John Boyd doesn't share that optimism. He's not just worried about the future of farming, but for the future of his own farm.

BOYD: I have four children and I know that my kids have watched me scuffle throughout my career, and they're not going to want to do this if this administration continues to make it more difficult than it already is.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BERMAN: And Shimon Prokupecz is with U.S. Now, Shimon, first of all, it's just amazing how quickly these people are feeling the impact of these decisions which are just a few weeks old. This was about USAID, but we did hear talk about tariffs there as well.

PROKUPECZ (on camera): Yeah, they're already thinking about that. They're hearing Trump talk about tariffs. They know what that's like. They went through this already the first time around, the first administration and what happened there was the government had to come in and bail them out. But now, they're worried it's going to be much worse because you have the USAID stuff, that money is not coming in. But also significantly, is there were grants, a lot of farmers bought into the previous administration -- they had grants for conservancy, water, irrigation, all kinds of systems really for the environment that they all bought into.

They went ahead and spent their own money to do this. And now they say, OK, government pay us back and Trump has frozen all of those funds. It's just really sad what's going on. For these farmers, this is their life and it's taking a toll on them mentally, and that's a big problem right now.

BERMAN: It all happening so quickly.

PROKUPECZ (on camera): Yeah.

BERMAN: Shimon Prokupecz, great to see you out there. Great report.

Next on 360, King Charles, his new diplomatic blitz involving Ukraine, Canada, and President Trump.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:56:49]

BERMAN: So in these complicated times, there is an unexpected figure emerging in global diplomacy, Britain's King Charles. CNN's Max Foster is in London.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

MAX FOSTER, CNN ROYAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Britain's King Charles thrust to the forefront of international diplomacy three times in the past week, stepping in on delicate maneuvers between the U.S. and its allies. Despite the traditionally apolitical role of the monarch, the U.K. hopes to leverage one of its greatest assets when it comes to President Trump. His fascination with the monarchy, the King's invitation for a rare second state visit was delivered to the president by the British Prime Minister Keir Starmer last week, ahead of some tough discussions with the White House on Ukraine.

KEIR STARMER, BRITISH PRIME MINISTER: This is really special. This has never happened before. This is unprecedented.

DONALD TRUMP, (R) PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: He's a beautiful man, a wonderful man.

FOSTER (voice-over): Just days later, the king invited Ukrainian President Zelenskyy to his country residence in a show of solidarity and an indication of the king's fragile yet influential role at this tense moment.

HUGO VICKERS, ROYAL BIOGRAPHER AND AUTHOR OF "THE CROWN DISSECTED": He is dying to do good and to be a conciliator and to help things along. And he's in a very good position to do it. I think the meeting last Sunday, I would say passed off extremely well.

FOSTER (voice-over): Charles has long appeared to side with Ukraine over the war, recently calling Russia's invasion as an indescribable aggression and unprovoked attack.

CHARLES III, KING OF THE UNITED KINGDOM: Well, we've all been worried of actually thinking about your country for so long.

FOSTER (voice-over): But now, having to play a delicate dance with Trump as the U.K. and Europe tried to keep him on side. The king also found himself confronted by another U.S. dispute when he hosted Canada's Prime Minister Justin Trudeau this week, as Trump slapped tariffs on Canada and declared it should become the 51st state of America, the king as Canada's ceremonial head of state, again caught between two allies.

The late Queen Elizabeth, Charles' mother, was one of the few global figures Trump seemed to show real deference to in his last term as president. So this new era of the relationship between Charles and Trump will be a real test for the Monarch.

VICKERS: He has met many, many world leaders. He's got a lot to offer just as the Queen did.

FOSTER (voice-over): Their first official meeting five years ago was rumored to have not been an instant success.

NIGEL FARAGE, BRITISH POLITICIAN AND BROADCASTER: You had a meeting with Charles and it was --

TRUMP: I did.

FARAGE: It was reported by one of your former press secretaries that you were somewhat bored by the meeting.

TRUMP: That I was?

FARAGE: Yeah.

TRUMP: No, I wasn't bored. I like Charles. I thought he was great. You know, he's an environmentalist. He talked about the environment most of the meeting, which was fine.

FOSTER (voice-over): No date set as yet for Trump's second state visit to the U.K. But when it does happen, we can expect the whole royal family to come out in full force to meet the president.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

FOSTER (on camera): In the 14 years I've been reporting regularly on the British royal family, John, I've never seen them roll out the red carpet like they are for Donald Trump this time. King Charles even offering to fly up to Scotland whilst the president is playing golf there, so they can discuss how they can both get the most out --