Return to Transcripts main page
CNN's The Arena with Kasie Hunt
Musk Intensifies Attacks On Trump's Agenda: "Kill The Bill"; Former Biden Press Secretary Says She's Now An Independent; Trump Admin Threatens Columbia's Accreditation. Aired 4-5p ET
Aired June 04, 2025 - 16:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: You know, maybe he should come back soon.
Tell me you've never walked by a bodega and just walked in feeling hungry, maybe late at night, just raid it.
ERICA HILL, CNN HOST: Not in that way. No.
SANCHEZ: I mean, you pay for things to be number one. You just kind of, you know?
HILL: Yeah. I mean, that's the beauty of the all-night convenience store.
SANCHEZ: Some glizzies, you know? They've been sitting there a few days.
HILL: Yeah. Hot dog that's been on that rack for like three weeks. Extra beeline for that.
SANCHEZ; Extra flavor.
HILL: Yeah. Good stuff.
SANCHEZ: Thanks for joining us. Good to be with you, Erica.
HILL: Always a pleasure.
SANCHEZ: "THE ARENA WITH KASIE HUNT" starts right now.
(MUSIC)
KASIE HUNT, CNN HOST: It's Elon Musk versus Donald Trump and his Republican Party. Can the world's richest man halt the president's agenda?
Let's head into THE ARENA.
Elon Musk on a tear this afternoon, saying Republicans should kill the bill and start all over.
Plus, leaving the Democratic Party behind. President Biden's former press secretary now says she's an independent. And then fighting back. Former Trump homeland security official Miles Taylor will be here to talk about what it's like to be accused of treason by the White House.
(MUSIC)
HUNT: Hi, everyone. I'm Kasie Hunt. Welcome to THE ARENA.
It's wonderful to have you with us on this Wednesday.
Well, Elon Musk might have said he was leaving Washington behind, but it is now clear that he is so unhappy with Republicans' mega bill to advance the president's agenda. He is so unhappy that he wants to start over. Musk wrote this on his platform formerly known as Twitter this afternoon, quote: A new spending bill should be drafted that doesn't massively grow the deficit and increase the debt ceiling by $5 trillion, end quote. He followed that up with a much more straightforward message, quote, kill the bill.
This morning, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office announced that the house bill would add $2.4 trillion to the debt over the next ten years -- the deficit, excuse me. And that seems to be the source of Musk's frustration.
In just the last day, Musk has called the Trump agenda bill massive, outrageous, pork filled, disgusting and an abomination. And all of these tweets clearly blindsided the Republicans, who just spent months working on a bill that barely passed the House.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. MIKE JOHNSON (R-LA), SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: Elon had a great conversation about a half hour long talk on Monday this week. We had a great -- it was very friendly, very fruitful conversation together. And he and I talked about the midterm elections and he said, well, I'm going to help.
And then yesterday, you know, 24 hours later, he does a 180 and he comes out and opposed the bill. And it surprised me frankly. And I don't take it personal. I don't take it personal. You know, he's a -- policy differences are not personal. I think he's flat wrong.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: Totally flustered speaker of the House right there.
So, Republicans are surprised. You can see it really on his face to hear that Musk is not on board with this big, beautiful bill. They're probably not happy with his vow to fire anyone who votes for it in the next election. He does have an awful lot of money to put behind that particular threat.
But here's a big question. Do the Senate Republicans, who are now the ones that are going to have to move this bill forward, do they actually care what Elon Musk thinks? (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. JOHN KENNEDY (R-LA): Entitled to his opinion. He's frustrated. I think he believes in my judgment correctly, that we're quickly becoming debt slaves.
SEN. LISA MURKOWSKI (R-AK): He certainly has the right and ability to say what he will about it.
SEN. ERIC SCHMITT (R-MO): I think people listen to what he has to say, as they should. He's a really smart guy.
SEN. CYNTHIA LUMMIS (R-WY): I don't think it changed any views in the Republican Party, in the Senate.
SEN. TOMMY TUBERVILLE (R-AL): He looks at it a different way than we have to look at it, because, again, we're the ones who have to vote for it.
SEN. THOM TILLIS (R-NC): Like I said, I can't respond to platitudes. Thats all I saw in a tweet that I had summarized to me.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: Okay. So, Speaker Johnson weighed in, Senate Republicans giving their thoughts. So, we were all eager to see, right, weren't you, how Donald Trump might respond to Musk's tweets.
So, for most of today, the response from the president looked like this. Let's put it up. Here it is.
So, until this afternoon, the president hadn't said or posted anything about the man who called his big, beautiful bill a disgusting abomination. We'll show you in a second how that is pretty -- usually not how he operates.
But as we were getting ready for this show, President Trump did put something up. He posted a screen grab. So, he didn't say anything himself. Just posted a screengrab of the tweet that Musk sent last week when he left DOGE. And of course, in that tweet, Elon Musk says he's leaving and he thanks President Trump.
I think this might be the definition of a subtweet, but I also might be too old to be using that phrase correctly.
[16:05:08]
So we're going to check in with the panel on that in just a second.
But let's start with CNN's Manu Raju, who is live for us on Capitol Hill.
Manu, my big question here, do lawmakers care about what Elon Musk has to say here? Because obviously, there was a period where they did. I mean, this isn't the first time Musk has -- it wouldn't be the first time, I should say that Musk has scrambled what was going on legislatively. There was a period some months ago where Mike Johnson was taking all sorts of incoming, and they were going back and forth on text. But, obviously, Musk has been kind of shown the door, albeit graciously, but still shown the door by President Trump.
MANU RAJU, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yeah. Look, there's a lot of frustration among Republicans, particularly ones who supported this in the House. Remember at the time, the Elon Musk was not raising those concerns about the deficit? That didn't really come out until yesterday. The comment from Elon Musk, so very much surprising, blindsiding Republican members who told me that they are frustrated with Elon Musk's handling of this and really putting them in a difficult spot.
Now, the other question is, will it actually impact the vote counting in the Senate? And there's really not a clear indication that it really will. There have already been concerns that members had raised about a whole wide variety of issues.
On one side, how deep of cuts to seek on Medicaid in particular. That's something that some folks on the right flank of the Senate GOP wanted deeper cuts because they are aligned themselves with Musk's concerns about the impact on the federal deficit of the Congressional Budget Office today, estimating roughly $2.4 trillion impact on deficits over the next several over the next decade.
And then there are folks in the more moderate side of the Senate GOP and House GOP who are really worried about those cuts going too deep and want to pare back the phase out of some of these green energy tax credits that are being called for in this bill.
So those concerns still remain, regardless of what Elon Musk is saying here. And the vote counting is still the same too. John Thune, Senate majority leader, can only afford to lose three Republican votes on a bill that's expected to go along party lines, and they are moving furiously behind the scenes to try to lock down support, try to weigh members concerns from everyone, from the people like Ron Johnson and Rand Paul, the right flank of the conference, who say that they will oppose this bill, to more moderate members like Senator Lisa Murkowski, who are worried about the impacts on their states because of those budget cuts.
And just moments ago, members from the Senate Finance Committee, Republican members just left from the Capitol to the White House to meet with Donald Trump to try to cobble together, see if they can come to any sort of consensus with the president because they want this passed out of the Senate by the end of this month on the president's desk by July 4th. And to do that, major differences need to be resolved.
HUNT: Yeah, they sure do.
Manu, as we discussed yesterday, busy summer ahead for you. Thank you very much for that reporting.
And our panel joins us now. CNN contributor, "New York Times" journalist, podcast host Lulu Garcia-Navarro; staff writer for "The Atlantic," David Frum; CNN political commentator Xochitl Hinojosa; and CNN senior political commentator Scott Jennings.
Welcome to all of you. Thank you so much for being here.
Scott, you're back for another day of this. You know, one of the -- one of the reasons why it's been, you know, you have an interesting perspective on this is because you did recently talk to Elon Musk one on one. And you came on yesterday and said that you weren't surprised that Elon Musk was upset about this.
But the question is, what does the White House think about this? Because again, so let's put up how long it usually takes President Trump to criticize someone who criticizes him. Let's go to June 3rd, where Rand Paul appears on CNBC at 9:18 a.m. to criticize the bill and Trump on Truth Social at 9:18 a.m., trashes Rand Paul over it.
Go back to May 4th, 9:20 p.m., Karl Rove appears on Fox News with Trey Gowdy; 10:31 p.m. Donald Trump has tweeted criticizing Karl Rove for criticizing him.
So, Scott, I mean, you know, this is this is a muted response from Donald Trump. But this is a big, you know, threat to his agenda.
SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, first of all, they're friends. They get along. Elon Musk had a lot to do with President Trump winning last year, and has been a big part of the administration. I don't think there's any reason to go out and trash an ally like Elon Musk.
HUNT: He's not acting like an ally at the moment.
JENNINGS: Well, he has a difference of opinion about this one issue, and that's okay.
HUNT: In fairness, these people did, too. I mean, this is -- Rand Paul has the same difference of opinion actually on the deficit.
JENNINGS: But what the White House and the congressional leadership believe is that this opinion that Elon has formed and some others is based on faulty scoring from the CBO. They just have a different point of view about this.
And at the end of the day, this is the president's agenda. He ran on making the tax cuts permanent, welfare reform and border security.
[16:10:02]
That is the core of this bill. And I think all Republicans want to cut spending. All Republicans want to get the debt and deficit under control.
But this is how the president won the election. The national popular vote, the Electoral College, tax cuts, welfare reform, border security. This is the vehicle for that. And I don't think failure is an option.
LULU GARCIA-NAVARRO, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: That's a good spin. That's a good spin. But this is a problem, and the reason it's a problem is because Elon Musk, what was so beneficial to Trump and what has been so beneficial to the GOP is that Elon Musk has this huge bullhorn, right?
It's not only that he's the richest man in the world and gives a lot of money, but he has this megaphone and people like him. The people that follow Trump -- no, no. But the people who follow Trump.
(CROSSTALK)
GARCIA-NAVARRO: I mean, the people that follow Trump like -- I'm not saying writ large.
HUNT: Okay.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: I'm saying -- I'm saying that there are Elon Musk stands. And so, if he's coming out against this, that causes a problem with the constituencies in Congress, these are their voters who might take a second look at this and not like it. And that's where the problem lies.
XOCHITL HINOJOSA, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, and also, I mean, it's the other problem with this is that the midterm elections are. Coming up. And we've seen that Republicans are not favored to win when they control everything to win the midterm elections.
And Elon Musk is someone who can open his checkbook and write to these candidates. But instead, his message right now has been, well, anyone who voted for this bill, you know, they should be held accountable. Does that mean that these members of Congress is he saying that they should face primaries?
So, it sounds to me like the Republican Party is facing somewhat of a crisis very early on in an administration going into a midterm elections where their largest political donor is now saying that the people who walked the plank for Trump maybe shouldn't get the support from the Republican Party.
DAVID FRUM, FORMER SPEECHWRITER FOR PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: Elon Musk is a shrewd and ruthless operator who knows what he wants and knows how to get it. So, what did he get?
He's a big winner. He turned off SEC enforcement, Securities and Exchange Commission enforcement that was inconveniencing and threatening him.
He cut a third of the IRS enforcement, which is inconveniencing and threatening him. And he disabled a great, to a great extent, American soft power throughout the world because he's become very skeptical of American power.
And, of course, he has a major business interest in China. So, the Voice of America is gone. PEPFAR, the anti-AIDS in Africa. He's just -- he's done the damage that he set out to do. But he's not wrong about the math of this bill. For all of his bad actions in the past. He's not wrong. He can count
which many of the Republicans aren't able to do. He can count. And people hear these numbers 2.4 trillion. What does that mean?
The most important thing to keep in mind about this bill is if you've been watching politics for the past 15 years, you've been living through an era in which money was cheap and often free. Interest rates at 1, 2 percent, often zero.
HUNT: Anybody that's bought a house in this era understands that.
FRUM: Yeah, and interest rates are about to go up. Thats why President Trump is raging against Jerome Powell. Jerome Powell doesn't control interest rates. He only controls the rate at which banks lend to each other overnight. The market sets interest rates and the market is deciding, you know, the United States dollar, the United States bond, it's not so safe anymore.
And we want a premium for the risk. Every one of the rating agencies now has downgraded the United States from the safest level of debt, and we are on our way to much higher rates. And all those CBO estimates, by the way, assume nothing too catastrophic is going to happen with the 10 and 30-year bond, but something catastrophic may be happening, in which case all those estimates go out the window.
And the United States is in the debt crisis that Paul Ryan and other Republicans predicted in 2010, 2012.
HUNT: Yeah. I mean, I have to say, I probably know a little bit too much about the CBO having covered Congress for so many, so many years. This number, Scott, it's so high that when I read that, I was like, wait, did we get this wrong? Or are they saying it adds 2.4 trillion to the debt because adding 2.4 trillion to the deficit seems so outrageous compared to what we have seen in the past.
And, you know, the White House, I understand their -- the beef they're picking with the CBO, they're assuming that our economy is going to grow at a faster rate than the CBO is assuming.
JENNINGS: Yeah, which is what -- which is what happened when we passed the tax cuts in 2017.
HUNT: But what happened to GDP growth in the last quarter and why?
JENNINGS: Well, look --
HUNT: It was negative.
FRUM: It crashed because of tariffs. You do something as dumb as tariffs. You're going to have a depression.
JENNINGS: The economic trajectory of this country is good. And it will be better when this bill is passed. When we have certainty on the tax cuts being permanent, that is the view of the White House. That is what happened when they passed the tax cuts in 2017. The CBO wildly missed its projections on economic growth in 2017. So, look --
HUNT: But we didn't have tariffs across the board.
(CROSSTALK)
FRUM: We're not going to have tax cuts. We're having tax -- tariffs or taxes. We're having tax reallocation. We are raising taxes on everyone who buys goods and services -- buys goods. And we're cutting taxes on everyone who lives on capital.
And it's not a tax cut when you raise another tax called a tariff, but still a tax. And the Trump administration is counting on revenues from those tariffs, now may be illegal to offset some of the impact of their other math.
The math on all of this is so jerry-rigged and impossible. And that is the thing that Elon Musk, who can count and can add and can do higher mathematics, is calling nonsense.
JENNINGS: If they don't pass this bill and the tax cuts are not made permanent, that'll be the biggest tax increase in American history, period.
[16:15:04]
Failure is not an option here for the Republicans.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: But this is the problem -- Trump was the one who wanted this big, beautiful bill. He wanted to stuff everything all together and pass it, 1,000 pages. And that is what many members of Congress are saying is part of the problem.
Normally, it is not passed like this. People are able to negotiate over discrete items. He's shoved this all through and it's become a big mess.
(CROSSTALK)
HUNT: That has become in fairness --
JENNINGS: Anybody want to bet 20 bucks on whether he gets his agenda or not?
HUNT: -- the way anything --
(CROSSTALK)
FRUM: The Republicans are clapping seals. Of course, they're going to pass it.
HUNT: Yeah. Look, I would be very surprised if this bill ultimately fails. Scott, to your point, I would also say that this has become the way Congress does business. A president basically gets one shot at the very beginning of their term here. It's not just Donald Trump who's doing it this way. And by the way, Mike Johnson can't pass more than one bill, right? He needs all that stuff together to get it through.
JENNINGS: This is the president's agenda.
HUNT: Period. The end.
JENNINGS: You got to do it.
HUNT: All right. Coming up next here in THE ARENA, President Trump says he had a good conversation with Vladimir Putin today. Does that bring us any closer to peace in Ukraine?
Plus, former Trump homeland security official Miles Taylor will be here. I'm going to ask him about his fight to clear his name. After President Trump accused him of treason.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: He wrote a book "Anonymous", said all sorts of lies and bad things, and I think it's -- I think it's like a traitor, like -- it's like spying.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:20:50]
HUNT: All right. Welcome back.
We are learning new details from the 75-minute phone call held today between President Trump and Vladimir Putin.
President Trump describing the conversation as, quote, good, but not as one that will lead to immediate peace between Russia and Ukraine. It comes after a daring and damaging Ukrainian drone attack on Russian air force positions over the weekend. Trump, writing in his post this, quote, President Putin did say and very strongly that he will have to respond to the recent attack on the airfields.
Joining me now is Democratic Congressman Jason Crow of Colorado. He sits on the House Armed Services Committee and is a former army ranger.
Congressman, always wonderful to see you. Thank you so much for being here.
One thing that we saw from the president, one of the more recent times that we saw Russia retaliate against Ukraine, he wrote in all caps: Vladimir, stop. In this case, this call seems to suggest that Vladimir Putin wanted to tell the president what he was going to do.
What is your reaction to the way the president was characterizing this? Does it signal to you that he may be okay with it? What does it tell you about the president's posture toward the Russian president?
REP. JASON CROW (D-CO): Well, Donald Trump has not ended this war on day one like he promised to do. In fact, he's done nothing to actually put pressure on Vladimir Putin.
And I think we need to be really clear in all of this back and forth and this talk about retaliation. There is an aggressor in this war. And that is Vladimir Putin and Russia. And there's a victim of this war. And that is Ukraine.
Ukraine didn't start this. Russia started it. It's Russia that invaded. It's Russia who has kidnaped tens of thousands of Ukrainian children and sent them into reeducation camps. Its Russia that continuously. Bombs and missile attacks civilian infrastructure and kills Ukrainian civilians.
Meanwhile, Donald Trump has done nothing to increase pressure. He hasn't done additional sanctions. He hasn't seized frozen Russian assets. He's backed off of support. In fact, Secretary Hegseth just today skipped the meeting of our allies to talk about support for Ukraine.
So, of course, that sends a message to Vladimir Putin that we're not serious about actually ending this war.
HUNT: Yeah. Let me follow up with you on that, actually. I mean, this is the first time in over three years that secretary of defense won't attend the key meeting of these Ukrainian allies.
Do you think that this is deliberate? And what message does it send?
CROW: Of course, it's deliberate. This is a single -- one of the single largest national security issues facing the United States right now. And that is peace and prosperity in Europe, of which the United States has a really big interest in ensuring that that continues. And yet, we can't even show up for a meeting.
I suppose Pete Hegseth is too busy in his makeup room. I suppose he's too busy renaming ships in what has become an out of control cancel culture war that this administration is running. I suppose he's too busy lifting weights in his weight room in the Pentagon to actually show up for a really important meeting.
It's a travesty. America deserves better. Our service members deserve better. And our allies deserve better.
HUNT: Sir, let me also ask you about Elon Musk. We started the show talking about what he's had to say about the agenda that is facing you all in the Congress, threatening, apparently, to possibly primary Republicans who had voted to pass this.
My question to you is whether you agree with Elon Musk's basic argument here. He says that this bill spends too much money. Is he right?
CROW: Well, Elon Musk is all over the board. Apparently, he's struggling with drug issues. He, you know, changes his mind daily. It's hard to even keep up with what he's -- what he's saying because he's just all over the board, if you actually watch one of his interviews. And he's somebody who's done unbelievable damage to American credibility and American interests. You know, some assessments by cutting off U.S. aid, by cutting off PEPFAR, which is our program to actually reduce AIDS and HIV in Africa. There are estimates that his efforts, the thing he -- the things he's done in the last couple of months are killing upwards of 100 children an hour in Africa, which, of course, is destabilizing the entire continent and making America less safe.
[16:25:04]
So, you know, no, this is a man who has no idea what he's doing half the time. But hey, listen, Donald Trump and the Republicans have made their bed and they're sleeping with it. Now, this is what happens when you pull somebody in and put them in charge of important stuff. It all kind of blows up.
HUNT: The House Speaker Mike Johnson, seemed to suggest that part of what's going on here is that Elon Musk's own interests, his own financial interests related to electric vehicles, are being threatened by this bill. And that's why this is happening.
Do you think that's true? And what was your reaction to that? That seemed to be something Republicans didn't want to say out loud before. The idea that Musk might have conflicts of interest.
CROW: Well, of course, it's -- of course that's true, right? You put somebody in charge of government reform and efficiency and actually had somebody sit in on the interview for the secretary of the Air Force, which Elon Musk did, who actually is one of the largest defense contractors in our nation and whose defense contracts actually flow through the Air Force, right?
So, if that's not a conflict of interest, if that's not blatant corruption, I don't know what is. Right? This is insane. Americans deserve better. Taxpayers deserve better.
Listen, there's real, actual need for government reform. Government needs to work better. It needs to be more efficient. Taxpayers deserve better. We deserve faster and better services.
But DOGE is actually going to cost us more because we've fired all of these -- most -- some of our most professional employees in the government that we're now going to have to rehire and replace. And oh, by the way, weve actually shut down government services that are fee generating, like the National Park Service, which actually creates revenue and actually more than pays for itself.
So, the terrible travesty of all of this is the DOGE might end up costing us more than it's saving at the end of the day.
HUNT: I want to ask you about your own party as well while you're here. We learned earlier today that Karine Jean-Pierre, who of course, most recently was President Biden's press secretary, said that she's going to be leaving the Democratic Party. She is promoting a book. She says, quote, we need to be clear eyed and questioning rather than -- rather than blindly loyal and obedient as we may have been in the past.
Do you share any of that sentiment with her? Do you have any regrets about how it all went down with President Biden in the summer?
CROW: Well, I'm not going to say whether I share any individual's perspective because I'm not in Ms. Jean-Pierre's mind. I don't know why she's making her decision, but I can say is that I'm a pretty independent member of Congress.
What I can say is, I was one of those lone voices that stood up last summer and raised the alarm bell and encourage President Biden to step down.
What I can say is, time and time again, I have stepped up, and when it was necessary for the country and to fulfill my oath and my duty, when it was necessary for Colorado and my constituents, I always -- I always look out for them first, in the Constitution first, instead of my own party. And I have a long track record of doing that.
But I'm also a proud Democrat, and I'm a proud Democrat because I was raised working class. I've been working since I was 15, minimum wage jobs, fast food. I worked in construction to help pay my way through college, and what I want is a level playing field.
I want a fair shake for Americans. I don't want government to solve all my problems for me. And it's the Democratic Party that historically has always looked out for the working person in America that wants fairness, that wants to make sure that people get a fair shake. And I will never step down from that fight. And it's the Democratic Party that's standing up to defend those folks once again.
HUNT: All right. Congressman Jason Crow, always grateful to see you, sir. Thank you very much for being here.
CROW: Thank you.
HUNT: All right. Coming up next here, this just in. The Trump administration is threatening to revoke Columbia University's accreditation. The latest details on that ahead.
Plus, more on why Joe Biden's former spokesperson says she's done with the Democratic Party.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:33:25]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KARINE JEAN-PIERRE, FORMER WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Our perspective is that it's not about age. It's about the president's experience. That's what we believe.
I would put the president's stamina, presidents wisdom, ability to get this done on behalf of the American people against anyone -- anyone on any day of the week. We understand the concerns. We get it. The president did not have a
great night, as you all know.
The things that he's been able to do and get done is -- is actually in line with the majority of Americans. And I think that's important to note. And again, I will say, with age comes wisdom and experience.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: So, it hasn't even been six months since Karine Jean-Pierre was standing behind that podium in the White House briefing room, speaking on behalf of and defending President Biden. Now she's announced that she's become a registered independent.
This new political affiliation revealed with the cover of her forthcoming book, which is titled "Independent: A Look Inside a Broken White House Outside the Party Lines". So, it comes, of course, as Democrats continue to take stock of their loss in the 2024 election and grapple with the future of the party.
Our panel is back.
Xochitl, let me start with you because, of course, you know, for people who don't understand these kinds of worlds, I mean, you've spoken on behalf of Democrats. You kind of everyone often knows each other in this town. You understand what it's like, or at least a little bit of what its like to do a job like the one that Karine had.
I have to say, I am very surprised by this. Do you have any insight or understanding into why she's doing it, what her problem is, and if it's not what President Biden, I mean, she's saying that the White House was broken.
[16:35:08]
HINOJOSA: That's right. It's unclear why she's becoming an independent. She doesn't really state that. She I think was she also says is that, you know, she was upset at the Democratic Party for abandoning President Biden when 75 percent of the American people felt like he was not and he wasn't going to win against Donald Trump. And people believe that he should have not been the Democratic nominee.
What bothers me about this, and I was making some phone calls before this to a number of former Biden administration officials and people in the White House where they were saying, this is just all an attempt to sell books. And that is what the general consensus is right now in the Democratic Party.
I think it is really difficult also to hear from her and all of those clips that you just played, where she's clearly defending the president and was going out and talking about how the Hur report and what the Justice Department was doing was gratuitous and defending the presidents age up until the very end, when most of the Democratic Party was not for President Biden staying in the race. And so, I think that, you know, her job as press secretary to defend the president.
But it's not necessarily to defend herself and to lift herself up. And it seems like that's what she's doing here.
HUNT: David?
FRUM: Can I answer this question a little personally? I mean, I know what it's like to lose a party. I knocked on doors for Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush in 1980. I worked for George W. Bush. I voted for McCain and Romney.
I believe in free trade, and I saw my party turn against that. I believe in defending alliances, I saw my party turn against that. I believe that the president should not take massive bribes from foreign governments, and I saw my party turn against that. I believe in the rule of law and honoring elections, and my party turned against that.
And there comes a point where you say, you know what? If that's where you guys are, I'm just not one of you anymore. And so those are important moments. They need some powerful reasons.
I think I've just given some of mine. I'd like to hear better than people are mean to me or. I didn't like this administrative or managerial detail. These things need to come from deeper places in the spirit, like the revulsion that those of us who honor democracy about what has happened to our former Republican Party in these days.
HUNT: Well, and I will also say, David, I appreciate your kind of bringing the personal aspects of yourself to this, but you were also not speaking on behalf of, you know, the last Republican president and then turning around and saying you don't support him.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: I mean, that's what I was about to say. This is the first really senior figure in the Biden administration that is coming out and really you know, is going to be speaking out in a book about what went on behind the scenes. And so, I think it is important to hear her out. I don't know what her motivations are.
You know, obviously, if you're selling a book, there is some speculation about that. But at the end of the day, I think its going to be enormously damaging for the Democratic Party that this has happened already, a party that is very heavily damaged.
JENNINGS: I have a different view. I'd like to congratulate Democrats for ridding ourselves of this untalented mediocrity. I mean, this is the most self-aggrandizing liar that has ever held this job. The White House press secretary is a sacred position, and she stood up there for years and lied through her teeth to the American people.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: My friend, and she's not the first.
JENNINGS: She -- she is. She is the literal worst White House press secretary in my lifetime. And what she did in the last year, year and a half of the Biden administration, cheap fakes, the entire cover up around the president's mental faculties. She was in the center of it.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: So you think she's doing this to launder herself?
(CROSSTALK) JENNINGS: So congratulations for getting rid of this. But Democrats deserve everything they're getting here for putting her in that job in the first place.
HINOJOSA: So I will say for the most part, and, you know, this is that when you serve in the White House, it is an honor to serve in the White House. And there have been some press secretaries who have not told the truth, and especially in Trump's last term and in this term as well.
And I think that we need to look at this position and the people that are in these positions, the media has a right to question them and whether or not they're telling the truth. And I think that over time, you have seen some hard questions come to the White House press secretaries. I think she was getting some hard ones as well.
I think what bothers me about this is the fact that she seems like she was in the White House for her own personal gain, and not to service the American people.
JENNINGS: Agree with you.
HINOJOSA: And I -- and I -- and part of that is Alex Thompson has some reporting that she had had a publicist working for her pro bono to lift up her profile.
When you're in government service, you're not getting paid a lot. You're not supposed to worry about your own personal profile. You fight tooth and nail every single day to defend your boss, to tell the truth, and to make sure that you are doing everything to communicate with the American people. And that's --
GARCIA-NAVARRO: It's not that I'm not here for the character assassination, I don't know her, but what I will say is that its bigger than that for the Democratic Party. She was a senior person and there was very credible questions about what the president was doing behind the scenes and in what condition he was, and she was out there selling that.
[16:40:02]
FRUM: I think the amazing ability -- I once had a dog that loved to chase squirrels, but when he met a deer, he looked away because deer were just too big to see.
And I think confronting what is going on in Washington now, the massive -- the billion dollar self-enrichment, the post-Soviet scale of corruption, the post-colonial African scale of corruption that is going on right now, that's too big to see.
And so, these petty disputes, they're like the squirrels my dog used to chase. But we're looking away from the deer because that's too much.
HUNT: All right. We want to turn to this story now because we do have some breaking news just coming in to CNN. The Education Department is now threatening Columbia University's
accreditation over concerns about antisemitism on campus.
CNN's Polo Sandoval joins us now with the latest on that.
Polo, what do we know?
POLO SANDOVAL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Hey, Kasie, that announcement just into CNN here. What the U.S. Department of Education is essentially doing is officially notifying Columbia University that it here has violated anti-discrimination laws, alleging that the university falls below the standards of accreditation by deliberately acting indifferent towards harassment of Jewish students on campus.
Of course, for well over a year now, Columbia university has been center stage for the debate about student protests relating to the Middle East. So, this violation means that the university now falling below standards of accreditation in the eyes of the Department of Education. You recall, Kasie, that the administration has previously issued an executive order taking direct aim at the college accreditation process, zeroing in on institutions of higher learning. So, it's going to be interesting to see here is how Columbia University responds.
According to the announcement from the Department of Education today, Kasie, that if a university fails to come into compliance within a specific period, then an accreditor must take actions against that institution. So again, things still certainly open ended here as we wait to hear from Columbia University. This -- make no mistake -- is certainly an escalation in Trump targeting Columbia University.
HUNT: All right. Polo Sandoval for us. Thanks very much for that report.
Coming up next here, the president signed an executive order directing an investigation against him. Now, he's calling for a probe of his own. Former Trump administration official, Miles Taylor, is live in THE ARENA, coming up next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:46:39]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I said, who the hell is Miles Taylor? I think what he did, he wrote a book "Anonymous", said all sorts of lies, bad things. And I think it's -- I think he's like a traitor. Like, it's like spying.
And I think it's a very important case. And I think he's guilty of treason, if you want to know the truth. But we'll find out. And I assume we're recommending this to the Department of Justice.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, sir.
(END VIDEO CLIP) HUNT: So, on the campaign trail, Donald Trump vowed retribution and revenge for those people that he considered to have wronged him, law firms, news organizations, universities, political opponents, senior government officials have all come under pressure from the president since he was reelected. One of those targeted most directly is Miles Taylor, the former chief of staff at the Department of Homeland Security.
You may remember him as Anonymous. He wrote that New York times op-ed in 2018. He's now filed a formal complaint to the inspector general of the DHS and the DOJ.
And Miles Taylor joins us now.
Miles, thanks so much for being here.
MILES TAYLOR, FORMER CHIEF OF STAFF TO HOMELAND SECURITY SECRETARY KIRSTJEN NIELSEN: Thanks for having me.
HUNT: It's nice to see you.
So, I want to start with what you're asking for here, because obviously, we saw the president there announcing that he was targeting you. He's also targeting another official that you served at the same time with, Christopher Krebs. What are you asking for here? And explain what the fallout has been since the president came after you directly.
TAYLOR: Well, one thing is evident to us that this is purely about revenge. I mean, the president's first reaction when I criticized him from -- within his administration was to say in all capital letters, treason question mark.
So to him, speaking out against him was a crime punishable by death, because that's what treason is punishable by in the United States. And we think it's wrong for the president of the United States, the president from any political party at any point in time to be able to sign an investigative order into a citizen because of First Amendment protected speech, no matter how much they like or dislike that speech.
And so, we want the inspector general of the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Defense to look into whether there are officials carrying out the president's order, which a lot of legal scholars say is unlawful, unconstitutional. Are they going forward with trying to exact retribution because of First Amendment protected speech?
Now to your second question, Kasie, we wouldn't be out here talking about this, me and my wife and my family, if the effects weren't devastating. I don't want to be here. I want it to be gone from anything related to politics and public life after the experience with Donald Trump. We've gone and started to build a family. But after April 9th, this order was totally destructive to our lives.
I'm the single income earner in my household. I had to leave my work and my wife, who stayed home with our daughter with our baby, had to go back to work because we have to buy diapers. We have to buy formula, we have to pay the mortgage.
That's what happens when you get added to the presidents blacklist. But it goes further than that. I mean, he may think its a joke to say treason, which is punishable by death, but his supporters don't. His supporters who say I should be killed by firing squad, that sent graphic death threats to my wife, that doxed our family, they take it seriously. And the implications of that blacklist are real.
And so, we decided to fight back. And that's a hard decision, too, because you don't want to have to sit at desks like this and talk about this and invite the White House to punch back, but we don't want this to happen to other people because it's just wrong.
HUNT: Can you talk a little bit about how -- you know, one of the sort of emerging narratives here, as people have people, institutions, groups have tried to decide how to deal with the Trump administration is sort of a mixed way of doing it.
[16:50:13]
Some people and institutions, Harvard University, for example, has taken the president head on. You seem to be taking the president head on.
Others have been more reluctant, have tried to stay under the radar as the way to deal with it. Critics of that approach will often say that, you know, that contributes to enabling someone that they may view in a very critical, autocratic way. How have people around you responded to the threats that you have faced here, and do you feel like you're getting the support that you need? Or are people afraid?
TAYLOR: Both, people are afraid. But, you know, look, I'll start with the silver lining is after this happened, the first conversation I had with my wife at the kitchen table right after we saw this on our phones was she looked at me and she said, are we going to lose our house? And I said, I don't know, because we cannot possibly afford the legal bills that we would expect this to cost, and going to war with an administration that's hell-bent on taking you down.
We are lucky that an organization called Whistleblower Aid stepped forward. They launched a legal defense fund called endpresidentialrevenge.org. If it wasn't for that, we wouldn't have lawyers we could pay for. We wouldn't be able to do this.
But I'm also not convinced that the fifth person on the list and the 25th person, if this happens to 100 people, are going to have the resources that have been made available to us. And that's what's really alarming here.
And I think when people are silent, when these things happen, it enables it. You saw that with the law firms, the firms that decided to cut deals with the White House made it harder for people like me and Chris Krebs who are in this situation, to go find law firms that will represent us. If this had happened seven years ago, there'd be a zillion law firms in dc willing to stand up and take on that case. But that was one of the initial things, is we had to spend days,
weeks, even thinking through who's actually going to do this now? Again, we were lucky to have a great legal team step forward, but that's the chilling effect that happens when people capitulate and try to cut a deal with a bully.
HUNT: So let me ask you a little bit about the strategy here, because you are going to the IGs, right? We know that the Trump administration has also taken on inspectors general across the administration as well. Why not go to court?
TAYLOR: Well, look to us, this is a first step because in normal times and I recognize this is not a normal time, but in normal times this is the built in guardrail that congress put inside the federal government to keep a watch over departments and agencies, not just to make sure that they're doing their jobs right and to prevent waste, fraud and abuse, but to make sure they're not violating the constitutional rights of private citizens.
And so, we think that's a good first step, is to go see if those IGs are actually still that guardrail, and they'll carry this out. I don't know the answer to that question. I hope and expect they'll do their jobs, but it's a test case for us to see if those IGs will still be able to perform those functions within the Trump administration. If they don't, we're prepared to take other legal actions come what may.
HUNT: Do you regret any of this? Any of this that was kicked off by -- I mean, just to remind people, the headline of the op-ed was I am part of the resistance inside the Trump administration. And you wrote at the time, many of the senior officials in his own administration, this was Trump's first, are working diligently from within to frustrate parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations. I would know I am one of them.
Are you glad you did this?
TAYLOR: I do not regret speaking out, but what I will say is I've come to believe pretty firmly that the biggest threat to free speech in this country is not Donald Trump or the Trump administration. It is anonymity itself. It is the inclination of people to hide behind obscurity and not share their opinions and the truth openly.
And I wish I had unmasked myself sooner, because what I saw within my party, in the Republican Party, was every party leader that I knew, knew who Donald Trump was, didn't approve of Donald Trump, thought he was unfit for office, but most didn't say anything. Thats how we got into this position we are in.
And I think now that we have a second Trump administration that's carrying out a pretty widespread effort of revenge across institutions, the only way that's going to be stopped, whether it's by Republicans or Democrats or Americans writ large, is if people take off their figurative masks, if they don't act anonymously, if they act in their own names. And I think that's really important to share.
HUNT: All right. Miles Taylor, very grateful to have you on the show, sir. I'm sure we'll be following how this all unfolds.
TAYLOR: Thanks, Kasie.
HUNT: Thank you.
All right. Coming up next here. Something totally different. The cast of "Back to the Future" needs our help. We'll explain.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(VIDEO CLIP PLAYS)
[16:59:29]
HUNT: This piece of Hollywood history, that actual guitar is missing and the film's cast needs our help finding it. I'm sorry. What?
I had no idea that this was the case. So that -- that's a cherry red Gibson. And of course, that's Marty McFly playing it at the "Back to the Future" school dance scene. Yeah, it's been missing, MIA, for 40 years now.
Now the cast is reuniting. They're asking fans and collectors to please help.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Ask your friends, ask your relatives, ask your bandmates.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If you know where it is, if you -- if you know who has it, call us, text us.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Go to lossofthefuture.com or call this 800 number below. We need your help.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We'll make a hero out of you.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We will all be so grateful.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We need that guitar.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: So, Phil Mattingly is standing by for "THE LEAD".
And, Phil, I don't know if I'm going to make people angry by, when I first met you, I didn't know your name. And I put you in as Marty McFly in my contact list, just because there's, you know, a little resemblance between the two of you. Are you hiding the Gibson guitar?
