Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

America's Feelings about the FBI; Musk and Ramaswamy Cite on Supreme Court Rulings; Employers Encouraging Resignations; Merkel Reveals Impressions of Trump. Aired 8:30-9a ET

Aired December 03, 2024 - 08:30   ET

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

[08:30:00]

DONIE O'SULLIVAN, CNN SENIOR CORRESPONDENT: Undermined, John, just how big this movie is. I hear about it all the time. Two and a half years since it's release. It really is one of the core pieces of propaganda that undermines Americans faith in U.S. elections. Just even recently, somebody brought it up in conversation.

Have a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

O'SULLIVAN: Where will you go to get trusted results on election night?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Well, so, the mainstream media is one news source. Thats not the only news source.

O'SULLIVAN: Yes, yes, yes.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You glance through different social media forums for people to post things about results. I mean, that's kind of how a lot of the cheating that was done in 2020 was exposed, right, 2000 mules. It was very plainly - there was videos showing how it was done.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

O'SULLIVAN: So, people bring up this movie all the time. And in part, John, because it looks - it's a really slickly produced. It's kind of half "CSI" Mar-a-Lago, half, you know, these election detectives. But it is bogus. The movie has been repeatedly debunked for years. But really it has played such an important role in undermining trust in elections.

D'Souza's apology was posted on his website without much fanfare. But I don't think this is going to be the last we're hearing about the case of this man in Georgia and about this movie.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: Yes, I think you're probably right about that.

Donie O'Sullivan in West Palm Beach. Wear some sunscreen, Donie. Thank you very much for that report. All right, there is nothing sexier than federal regulation reform

except maybe fairly obscure rulings from the Supreme Court on federal regulation reform. Now that - that is hot. How the spicy rulings might shape the Trump administration.

And are you considering quitting your job? I'm not. But why some companies are intentionally trying to get people to resign.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:36:27]

KATE BOLDUAN, CNN ANCHOR: Donald Trump's pick to head up the FBI, Kash Patel, has long vowed to dismantle the organization that he could soon be leading. During a podcast in September is one example. Patel said he wanted to shut down the FBI's headquarters on day one and reopen it the next day as a museum to the deep state, is how he put it. In his book back in 2023 Patel said - called for a comprehensive housecleaning of the Justice Department.

His views - my point being, his views about the FBI, well known. But how about the views on that agency of the American public - from the American public?

CNN's Harry Enten has been working on that for us. He's here with us now.

How have - what - how do you gauge and how have the views of the American public evolved or changed or not over the - over the years?

HARRY ENTEN, CNN SENIOR DATA REPORTER: Yes. Look, I think Patel has real reason to believe that Americans would go along with changes that he might potentially make at the FBI. And there's a reason why Donald Trump feels like he can make this change. It's because if you look here, FBI is doing an excellent or good job. Look at this time trend line. You go back to 2014, right, it was 59 percent of Americans. Then 57 percent in 2019. Fifty percent in 2022. Look at where we are today. My goodness gracious. Just 41 percent of Americans think the FBI is doing an excellent or good job. That is by far the lowest number this century.

The bottom line is, during the Trump administration, obviously, there were the investigations into Donald Trump. You saw a little bit of drop then. And then post-January 6th, look at that drop, 50 percent, now 41 percent. My goodness gracious, Kate Bolduan.

BOLDUAN: I think one thing about this - and hard to gauge, right - is I'll call it a chicken or an egg kind of question, is - is it - is - is the view declining because there - is it from bottom up or top down? Is it because people are talking trash about the FBI more and more or because people - American's views are of distrust of the agency are, you know, are - are growing? Something we - it's hard - that - that is hard to know. But I throw that out there by asking then, how does it break down along party lines?

ENTEN: Yes, take a look at Republicans. Here we go. Look at this drop. If you thought that -

BOLDUAN: Oh, geez.

ENTEN: Yes, oh, geez. Oh, geez. That's a very good word, Kate Baldwin, if you look at -

BOLDUAN: It's two words.

ENTEN: It's two words. The g's was what I was going for. Geez, Louise. That's - there's - there's two words right there.

Among Republicans, is the FBI doing an excellent or good job? This is where you really see the drop off. You go back to 2014 - I'm going to come to your side of the screen - it was 62 percent. 2019, look at that, 46 percent. 2022, 29 percent. Now we're tied for the lowest point at this century among Republicans at 26 percent. That is a drop of more than half since 2014. So again, you saw some of that drop during the Trump administration. You know, obviously, he replaced James Comey. And then you see it really after January 6th, 29 percent. And now 26 percent. That is a tremendous, tremendous drop off among Republicans.

BOLDUAN: So, let's remember that number and then let's talk about Democrats.

ENTEN: Yes, remember this number and remember this trend line, this downward trend line. Among Democrats, it's just not the same story at all, all right? Among Democrats it was 54 percent in 2014. Then you saw that number shoot up to 66 percent in 2019. Then look at this, 79 percent in 2022. We have seen some drop off since then to 67 percent. But that is still significantly higher than it was in 2014 at 54 percent.

The bottom line is this, if Republicans have become much less trusting of the FBI, Democrats have become more trusting, though the number who trust it now, who think it's doing an excellent or good job, is lower than it was two years ago. And that is why we have the lowest percentage this century of Americans overall who believe the FBI is doing an excellent or good job.

[08:40:07]

BOLDUAN: And you can assume that especially amongst Republicans and people who voted for Donald Trump this cycle that that trend could carry across many - just distrust in institutions in general seems to be growing. And that was a large part of this election. So -

ENTEN: That was - that was a very large part of this election. It's a very large part of why I think Donald Trump believes that he can go ahead and make big changes to the government and the American public, and especially Republicans, will go right along with him.

BOLDUAN: Great to see you, Harry. Thank you.

ENTEN: Nice to see you.

BOLDUAN: John.

BERMAN: All right, this morning, Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, tapped to lead what Trump is calling the Department of Government Efficiency, they're planning to use two recent Supreme Court rulings to try to slash federal regulations.

With us now, CNN's senior legal analyst, former assistant U.S. attorney in the Southern District of New York, and our Metuchen bureau chief, Elie Honig.

Counselor, thank you for being with us.

These two Supreme Court cases on regulations, pretty big deals over the last few years. One of them had to do with what some people think was one of the biggest cases the court's made in the last 20 years. The Chevron Deference. What does that mean?

ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: All right, John, we know you've always wanted to go to law school, so, here we go.

One of the first things they used to teach in law school back when I went was this thing called Chevron Deference, and that goes back to a 1984 Supreme Court decision which said essentially that the courts have to defer to agencies, whether it's the EPA, or the FDA, or the CDC. Generally speaking, it was hard for courts to strike down those regulations.

However, this past summer, in 2024, while everyone was paying attention to the presidential immunity case, a few days within that we got a different decision that reversed Chevron Deference. And what that case involved was a regulation passed by the National Marine Fisheries Service that said that when herring fishermen go out on their boats and fish for herring, they have to have a monitor, a human being on their boats making sure they're complying with regulations. And those herring fishermen have to pay the monitor. So, this was costing fishermen hundreds of dollars per day, thousands of dollars per week. The Supreme Court struck down that regulation and said, the courts no longer have to defer to the agencies that made it much easier for the courts to strike down federal regulations.

BERMAN: And then the other case has to do with major questions - the Major Questions Doctrine. What does that mean?

HONIG: So, this was another decision that was overruled because it came out in 2022, and all the focus then was on Dobbs, which reversed Roe versus Wade. But this decision involving the EPA involved a law that Congress passed, a very narrow law, that regulated coal emissions by coal plants. Carbon emissions. And what the EPA did was they took a very narrow statute and they issued a very broad regulation that would have cost the industry hundreds of billions of dollars. And the Supreme Court, as the name suggests, major question, said, if there is a major question of financial import or of political import, there has to be a specific, broad law from Congress. And so, you can't do what the EPA did there.

So, again, this is one of two big decisions that the Supreme Court has recently issued that makes it much easier to strike down regulations.

BERMAN: So, Ramaswamy and Musk, they want to use these cases to try to save money and cut. There are those who look at these, Elie, and say, what these cases really do is provide a structure for things going forward for what the administrations can do when they try to impose new regulations going forward. They may not apply as easily to regulations that have been in place for years. What do you say about that?

HONIG: I think that's right. But what these cases will do is make it much easier for an outsider, for someone outside of government, like our herring fishermen, like the coal plants that we talked about, to come in and say, a-ha, here's a regulation. And by the way, there are tens of thousands of regulations on the books. This has really expanded since the 1980s for some private outside interests to come in and say, this regulation is putting a burden on us, a financial burden, some sort of other administrative burden, and therefore you, courts, should strike it down. And under these two new rulings on that, both Vivek Ramaswamy and Elon Musk have promised to utilize, it makes it much easier for the courts to come in and say, no good, that regulation is off the books.

BERMAN: I promise nothing is more exciting than talking about government regulations. I know I need a cold shower.

Elie Honig, thank you very much.

Kate.

BOLDUAN: I'm going to quickly jump ahead now.

Are your employers - is your employer trying to get you back in the office - back to work in the office full-time? It may not be because they miss you. I know I'm - I'm not speaking to you and you and you, it's the other person. Your employer loves you out there, I'm just going to say.

In a "Wall Street Journal" op-ed, Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy wrote this, "requiring federal employees to come to the office five days a week would result in a wave of voluntary terminations that we welcome."

[08:45:01]

Vanessa Yurkevich is looking into this.

What is going on here?

VANESSA YURKEVICH, CNN CORRESPONDENT: This is a little reverse psychology.

BOLDUAN: I know, I'm trying to reverse and understand it.

YURKEVICH: Trying to get - companies are trying to get people to quit for various reasons. A couple reasons are that, one, maybe companies have over hired and they need to let some people go, but they don't want to fire you. They don't want to lay you off. So, instead, they're trying to get you to quit. And, ultimately, if they do fire or lay you off, they have to pay you benefits. They have to pay you severance.

BOLDUAN: And that's the why. Why don't they want to fire you, Vanessa?

YURKEVICH: Because they don't want to pay the money that's involved in firing or laying off. So, getting you to quit voluntarily is a clean cut for them.

Some of the ways that companies are doing this are, they're doing return to office. People are comfortable at home. Maybe they don't want to go back into the office. So, they'll quit voluntarily. Also, reducing your workload. For some employees, that may be nice. But for others who are overachievers, they want to work and they want to be working on key projects.

BOLDUAN: Yes.

YURKEVICH: Some companies might say, oh, I'm sorry, you can't work on this big project. Someone might quit because of that. Or, if you get a poor performance review, or you don't get any raises, then someone might say, hey, I'm not really interested in working at this company if there's no path forward, upward mobility for me.

BOLDUAN: So, people might not like these tactics, especially if you're, you know, one of these employees that this is being targeted toward, but is this all above board?

YURKEVICH: It is. It is, because employers can fire you for reason or no reason. Employees can leave for reason or no reason. So, if they're trying to figure out ways to get you to quit, that's completely legal, except if you feel like you are being discriminated against for age, gender, race, national origin. Those are reasons that you can go to your employer, HR, or seek legal counsel to essentially say, I'm being pushed out for those reasons.

But is this good company practice? Absolutely not.

BOLDUAN: I was going to say.

YURKEVICH: This can backfire.

BOLDUAN: This isn't how you - this isn't how I would advertise if I was running an organization.

YURKEVICH: No.

BOLDUAN: Come on in. And if I don't like it, I'm going to make it super uncomfortable to make you want to leave.

YURKEVICH: And it can backfire because essentially you're pushing people out. But then what happens when you want to rehire? I spoke to Laura Mazzullo. She's an owner of a staffing company. She said, "getting someone to quit is not a good employer branding strategy! Word gets out fast and people will not want to work there going forward." So, the reverse - BOLDUAN: I think she likely didn't think she'd ever have to - ever have to say.

YURKEVICH: I think she put a couple more exclamation points. She said, yes, it will have a long tail of bad consequences. So, not good business, but companies are doing it.

And listen, some people are quitting because they just don't want to be in that environment. But others, you know, they'll stick it out until they absolutely have to leave. People want to collect a paycheck at the end of the day. They do.

BOLDUAN: Confirmed. Confirmed.

YURKEVICH: Confirmed by everyone.

BOLDUAN: Well, very interesting. Good to see you, Vanessa.

YURKEVICH: Good to see you.

BOLDUAN: Thank you so much.

John.

BERMAN: You wonder why they're turning the temperature down in the studio a little bit every day. Maybe they're trying -

BOLDUAN: I - I - we finally have figured this out.

BERMAN: That's what (INAUDIBLE)

BOLDUAN: Has anyone out there ever seen how cold I am? You can physically see it on me when my lips turn blue and my fingers - I can no longer feel my fingers. Now I know why, John. Now we know why.

BERMAN: The strategy behind it.

All right, today is Giving Tuesday. And CNN Heroes is sharing a powerful way that your generosity can go twice as far. Starting today, dollar for dollar matching is in effect when you donate to the top five CNN Heroes.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANDERSON COOOPER, CNN ANCHOR: I'm Anderson Cooper.

Each of this year's top five CNN Heroes proves that one person really can make a difference. And again this year we're making it easy for you to support their great work.

Just go to cnnheroes.com and click donate to make a direct contribution to that hero's fundraiser on GoFundMe. You'll receive an email confirming your donation, which is tax deductible in the United States.

No matter the amount, you can make a big difference in helping our heroes continue their life changing work.

And right now, through January 5th, your donations will be matched by the Elevate Prize Foundation dollar for dollar, up to a total of $50,000 for each of this year's honorees.

CNN is proud to offer you this simple way to support each cause and celebrate all these everyday people changing the world. You can donate from your laptop, your tablet, or your phone. Just go to cnnheroes.com. Your donation in any amount will help them help others.

Thank you.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: And be the first to find out who will be the next CNN Hero of the Year when Anderson Cooper and Laura Coates make the big announcement. "CNN Heroes: An All-Star Tribute" airs this Sunday at 8:00 p.m. Eastern and Pacific.

All right, quote, "a fascination with the sheer power." How one former world leader describes Donald Trump as U.S. allies and enemies prepare for him to take office.

And are you feeling drained after spending hours scrolling aimlessly on TikTok? There is a name for that, and it is now the 2024 Oxford word of the year.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:54:18]

BERMAN: All right, new this morning, in a dramatic rescue, bystanders jumped into the Pacific to save someone who drove off a cliff. This happened in Santa Cruz, California. The car had hit another one before going into the water. The driver was floating when the bystanders got down. The person was taken to the hospital.

A Delaware judge has again blocked Elon Musk's Tesla pay package. It was approved by shareholders in June, but some had sued over it. The package includes more than $300 million in stock - no, I think more than 300 million stock options now worth about $100 billion.

So, are you familiar with the term "brain rot"? It is the word or words of the year. That's according to "Oxford University Press."

[08:55:01]

Apparently, it's the feeling you get after mindlessly scrolling on your phone for too long. They say the use of brain rot rose 230 percent this year. Now, the phrase was supposedly first used by Henry David Thoreau, a native of Concord, Massachusetts, back in the 1800s. That predates TikTok, Kate, but apparently he was a heavy user of MySpace.

BOLDUAN: Wait, he - you - you always - stop it. Wait, do you - that part wasn't a joke, that it came from Thoreau? BERMAN: No, Henry David Thoreau apparently used the term "brain rot"

to talk about how people were dumbing down their analysis of all things. It's been noted in all the writeups of the "Oxford University Press," they've cited Henry David Thoreau, a native of Concord, Massachusetts, not far from where I grew up.

BOLDUAN: To say it again, just because the two greats from - from Mass.

BERMAN: The hub of brain rot.

BOLDUAN: Thoreau and John Berman.

Brain rot, wow, that's - it's been a long road of brain rot since Thoreau, for sure.

John, thank you.

Let's get to this. Secretary of State Tony Blinken in Brussels this morning for his final meetings with NATO foreign ministers. Ukraine in focus. And understandably so. The Biden administration has just announced a new $725 million aid package for - to continue to help Ukraine's fight against Russia's invasion.

At the very same time, world leaders are clearly gearing up for the incoming Trump presidency and what it will mean for their relationship with the United States. French President Emmanuel Macron making his move today, trying to position himself as a Trump favorite ally with the invite to attend the grand reopening of Notre Dame Cathedral this weekend. And so much more.

Joining us right now is CNN chief international anchor Christiane Amanpour, who just wrapped an interview with another world leader who knows Donald Trump very well, former chancellor - former German Chancellor Angela Merkel.

CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: Thats right, Kate. And no time for brain rot or dumbing down now, let me tell you.

BOLDUAN: No, please. No, please.

AMANPOUR: Everybody has to really, you know, be in gear to deal with - with this because what - what she has said about Ukraine, for instance, is that, you know, even if Trump wants to make a, you know, some kind of deal with Putin or whatever, it has to come with strong guarantees for Ukraine. You can't just believe Putin, as Angela Merkel with her experience said, he told me a brazen lie. That was her - you know, that was her term about what he did in Crimea, what he did in Ukraine.

So, I asked her about Trump and about her experience with him. And particularly what she noticed to be his fascination with dictators and authoritarians. So, I put this rather long winded question to her, and here is the answer.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) AMANPOUR: I remember very distinctly when Donald Trump was first elected you did one of - you were the only one to actually welcome his election conditionally. In other words, based on the respect and the adherence to mutual values, democracy, freedom, diversity, rule of law, human rights, et cetera.

And I just, you know, wonder whether you thought he did act in that way, and especially because you said, "he was clearly fascinated by the Russian president. In the years that followed, I received the distinct impression that he was captivated by politicians with autocratic and dictatorial traits."

How did that manifest itself to you?

ANGELA MERKEL, FORMER GERMAN CHANCELLOR (through translator): Well, in the way that he spoke about Putin, the way that he spoke about the North Korean president, obviously apart from critical remarks he made, there was always a kind of fascination at the sheer power of what these people could do. So, my impression always was that he dreamt of actually overriding maybe all those parliamentary bodies that he felt were, in a way, an encumbrance upon him, and that he wanted to decide matters on his own and in a democracy. Well, you cannot reconcile that with democratic values.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AMANPOUR: Really interesting.

BOLDUAN: Yes.

AMANPOUR: And she knows firsthand and she also talked about the trade tariffs and what might happen to the global economy, not just the U.S. economy, if all those tariffs are actually implemented. And she reminded everybody that, you know, in the first Trump term it was China, but then all of a sudden the EU was hit with steel tariffs and others. And she said, look, it's going to hurt America and the world as well. So, let's see how that comes into focus.

But yes, the world leaders, just like, you know, you saw Prime Minister Trudeau go down to Mar-a-Lago, President Macron has invited Trump to see the opening of the Notre Dame, and they're all trying to get the measure of the man.

BOLDUAN: The perspective from Angela Merkel in this next president - during Donald Trump's next term will be very interesting. I hope she doesn't shy away from - from the spotlight.

But on that, there's - it's not just what world leaders looking at in terms of Donald Trump. It's also who will he have around him helping him to - to put forth and to put in place his foreign policy?

AMANPOUR: Yes.

BOLDUAN: Like his defense secretary, Pete Hegseth.

AMANPOUR: Yes. BOLDUAN: He's - you well know, our viewers well know, he's facing a growing list of - of allegations and accusations.

[09:00:01]

What are you hearing from leaders and others about the - that pick and others?