Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

DOGE Showdown; Trump Meets With French President. Aired 1-1:30p ET

Aired February 24, 2025 - 13:00   ET

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

[13:00:52]

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: Refusing to comply. Federal agencies telling employees not to respond to Elon Musk's e-mail demanding to know what they did last week. Musk warning workers they will be fired if they don't. We will have more on this fierce showdown.

OMAR JIMENEZ, CNN HOST: Plus, happening now: President Trump and French President Macron are meeting in the Oval Office, and their sit- down comes really at a critical point for the West, as Trump's push for a quick end to the war in Ukraine leaves European allies scrambling to adapt.

And an unprecedented push. The Trump administration is reportedly launching a new effort to deport thousands of unaccompanied migrant children. Ahead, we're going to take a look at the new directive for immigration agents nationwide.

We're following these major developing stories and many more all coming in right here to CNN NEWS CENTRAL.

KEILAR: Defy the deadline.

Some of President Trump's own agency heads are telling federal workers to ignore Elon Musk's newest demand, the special government employee giving those employees until midnight tonight to e-mail what they did last week or face termination. But leaders at the Pentagon, the FBI, State Department, Homeland Security, and Department of Energy have instructed staff not to reply.

And we have now learned federal workers are suing over this threat to fire them.

CNN's Natasha Bertrand is live at the Pentagon.

Natasha, tell us what you're hearing about all of this at DOD.

NATASHA BERTRAND, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY AND POLITICS CORRESPONDENT: Well, this is really setting up a showdown between many federal agencies and Elon Musk and DOGE.

We're hearing that the FBI, the Pentagon, DHS, State Department, they're all advising their employees at this time to hit pause on responding to that e-mail that was sent out over the weekend from OPM asking them for five things that they did last week.

And that is because many of these agencies are saying, look, we are the ones who are going to determine who is employed or not at our agencies. We are the ones who are going to be making that decision, something that even FBI Director Kash Patel said in his e-mail to employees over the weekend.

The Defense Department sent out an e-mail to employees as well on Sunday saying that they should also pause on sending any response to this OPM directive.

In a statement, they said -- quote -- "The Department of Defense is responsible for reviewing the performance of its personnel and will conduct any review in accordance with its own procedures. When and if required, the department will coordinate responses to the e-mail you have received from OPM. For now, please pause any response to the OPM e-mail titled, 'What Did You Do Last Week?'"

Now, as I said, this e-mail came out yesterday to the force. As of this morning, a senior DOD official told me that they still had not received updated guidance, for example, on whether that pause still stands or whether DOD employees have gotten any additional information from OPM on exactly what they're looking for here, particularly when it comes to people who are working in sensitive positions that may be unable to respond to this e-mail with anything substantive about what they worked on because they work in things like intelligence or things in the legal sphere that cannot be put in writing.

And so it remains to be seen just what's going to happen here, but there's a lot of anger, I can tell you, here at the Department of Defense amongst not only the rank-and-file civilian employees here and military personnel, but also among the senior DOD officials who are having to figure out what exactly to tell their staff.

One senior official told me that he is trying to stop his employees from -- quote -- "stepping off the ledge" and simply quitting because they are so frustrated with all the back-and-forth that they are getting from OPM and Elon Musk and DOGE, who are not even their direct supervisors.

KEILAR: Yes, good point there.

Natasha Bertrand, live for us from the Pentagon, thank you.

Joining us now is M.T. Snyder. She works in the federal government as a field examiner with the National Labor Relations Board. She is speaking with us in her personal capacity, not on behalf of the NLRB. She's also an organizer with the Federal Unionists Network.

M.T., thanks for being with us.

And I just wonder here, first, just tell us about this e-mail and what it was like receiving it and what you all have talked about after getting it.

[13:05:07] M.T. SNYDER, FEDERAL WORKER: Sure.

I got this e-mail Saturday afternoon about 3:00 p.m., and I felt absolutely infuriated getting this e-mail with a demand within 48 hours to provide a response in what I did within the last week or face termination.

This is clearly an attempt from Elon Musk to harass and bully and intimidate the federal work force, which is part of his broader plan to gut the federal work force and privatize public sector services to ensure that corporations like his own can get more profit.

And that makes me really angry, my co-workers as well.

KEILAR: So, in your agency, are you replying? How are they advising you to handle this? Because there are some agencies or departments where they're saying, do not reply or we're going to reply on behalf of groups of people, so that you're not doing it individually. What guidance did you get?

SNYDER: At my agency, I am still waiting for guidance. We have not received any guidance yet. And I will not be replying unless I am directed to do so by my agency or by my supervisor.

KEILAR: Do you worry about getting fired because you haven't replied within 48 hours?

SNYDER: The -- Elon Musk has no -- this outside entity sending this e-mail has no legal authority over me. And even in the Office of Personnel Management's own description of this e-mail program, this mass federal e-mail program, all replies are voluntary.

So I think this is all a big threat to coerce federal employees. And what we need to be doing right now is speaking up against this and standing against this, so that we can get back to our work of serving the American public, so I can get back to actually doing my job.

KEILAR: Listen, I know some people looking at this are going to say, well, what's the matter with having to attest for the work that you have done? What's the matter with a proof of performance?

What do you say to those folks?

SNYDER: I am totally happy to talk about the work that I do upholding the National Labor Relations Act and ensuring that those who come to the board get justice and their rights are upheld.

But I will not do that in a way that violates the integrity or the privacy of my work, of the American people who are serving. We don't just serve the billionaires and the rich and the wealthy, right? We serve everyone. So that's why myself and other members of the Federal Unionists Network are speaking out.

We're sharing the stories of the services we provide to the American public. And we need the public to stand with us in this fight to ensure that our government continues to function and continues to provide these services that we all rely on. So I encourage everyone to join us by visiting go.savepublicservices.com to get on our e-mail list for updates.

KEILAR: M.T., thank you so much for being with us. We appreciate it.

SNYDER: Thank you.

KEILAR: M.T. Snyder.

And let's talk about whether this is all legal.

With us now is Elliot Williams, former deputy assistant attorney general for legislative affairs at the Department of Justice.

I mean, what a mess, a patchwork of responses from different agencies.

ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Yes.

KEILAR: Is it legal?

WILLIAMS: It's a mess.

And to your point, so let's look at the lawsuit that was filed today, questioning whether it's legal. What's interesting about the lawsuit is that they focus very heavily on process. They talk about the fact that the Office of Personnel Management, which is what M.T. was talking about a few moments ago, is the H.R. and life insurance office in the government.

It doesn't have the authority to be sending e-mails to people asking them to document what they work -- what they have done in the last couple of weeks. Only your boss has the authority to do that, so right there.

And this whole idea of setting the rules via e-mail, it just doesn't smell right. And I would think that a court will step in here. It's just -- it's crazy.

JIMENEZ: And you were nodding your head during that interview when she talked about, well, they don't have any legal authority over me by just sending -- this outside agency sending an e-mail.

WILLIAMS: Right.

JIMENEZ: Legally, when you're looking at this, that failure to respond will be taken as a resignation, either saying -- with department heads either saying do or do not respond in not necessarily a blanket fashion. It's patchwork by agency.

WILLIAMS: Right.

JIMENEZ: I mean, what legal concerns do you have on this front?

[13:10:00]

WILLIAMS: Oh, absolutely. Oh, absolutely. Again, these are employees that have a chain of

command, that have supervisors that set the standards for their employment. Congress dictated how each agency was going to work. The idea that this outside body can come in and ask you what you're doing, that's like me writing you an e-mail, Omar, and saying...

JIMENEZ: I would take it seriously if it came from you.

WILLIAMS: You would take it -- but you're not legally obligated to.

JIMENEZ: True. True. True.

KEILAR: I would not.

WILLIAMS: You would not. And you are not obligated to either, Brianna.

(CROSSTALK)

WILLIAMS: Look, I like both of you, but I'm not your boss. You have a chain of command. You have an H.R. department and all of the above. And this is set, quite frankly, for these employees in contract.

Some outside body, no matter how important it is, or no matter what their goals are, simply do not have the authority to do so. And I think that's the problem here. Even if the underlying goal is to make the government more efficient, you still got to follow some modicum of process in carrying that out.

KEILAR: If I got that e-mail from Elliot, I'd call your wife and ask if you were OK.

(LAUGHTER)

(CROSSTALK)

KEILAR: Let's just be clear. I would be like, oh, I'm getting some hints here.

WILLIAMS: Yes.

KEILAR: OK. This is a question I have, which is, if agencies are saying after their employees get this e-mail, guys, actually do not respond, we will respond on your behalf as a group...

WILLIAMS: Yes.

KEILAR: ... are they doing that because they are seeing a legal problem?

WILLIAMS: Yes.

KEILAR: So they're actually trying to intervene?

WILLIAMS: So let me take off my legal analyst hat and put on my just concerned citizen hat and just watcher of the news. What's truly fascinating here is a lot of the ones that pushed back were national security or public safety-facing agencies that are dealing with classified information that could never put that kind of information in an e-mail.

So maybe there's some elements of that, look, we can't put defense information in e-mails because that's what I worked on all week. Some of it might just be not everybody's in agreement across the federal government about how this ought to be working. And I think there's just some pushback happening from within the house.

And I think that's what you're seeing.

JIMENEZ: And to your point there, I mean, based on -- not to say that all agencies don't do important work, but there are varying degrees, national security-wise, safety-wise, public safety-wise.

I mean, how dangerous is it that now you have at least people questioning, well, what should I do? Bosses are saying, well, you should do this or wait for guidance.

WILLIAMS: Yes.

JIMENEZ: I mean, yes, what is the range of danger we should be assessing here?

WILLIAMS: If only there were an umbrella set of processes and laws and rules that govern employment. We have that already. And the problem is that this acts far outside of that.

The rules as they exist -- and again, and I say this, Omar. Even if we agree that the government ought to be shrunk or more efficient, there are still rules that govern how it works. I worked with them for 15 years. People have been working with them for centuries at this point.

And, yes, it's absolutely risky when you start clicking an e-mail that might have someone putting a national security secret in an e-mail if that's what they worked on. It's dangerous for the country, but also a violation of employee contracts that we just simply can't have in a functioning government.

KEILAR: Yes, and there is stuff -- it says don't reply with classified information.

WILLIAMS: Yes.

KEILAR: There's a lot that's sensitive that isn't classified.

WILLIAMS: Right, or just, yes, important information, even if it's not the launch codes.

KEILAR: That's right.

What a wealth of knowledge that a foreign adversary might want to tap into.

JIMENEZ: Because we all know e-mail is so secure. WILLIAMS: So secure.

(CROSSTALK)'

JIMENEZ: Elliot Williams, really appreciate you being here. Thanks for the time.

All right, still to come: The French president is at the White House meeting with President Trump right now, as Europe fights for a place at the table in the Russia-Ukraine peace talks.

KEILAR: Plus, some new details on the health of Pope Francis. What the Vatican is saying after blood tests showed mild signs of kidney failure.

And then later: a DOGE tax refund. We will talk to the investor who pitched the plan to give Americans 20 percent of any savings identified by the Department of Government Efficiency.

We'll have that and much more coming up on CNN NEWS CENTRAL.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:16:38]

JIMENEZ: President Trump is meeting with French President Emmanuel Macron. Let's listen in.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: President Macron is a very special man in my book.

We were together. We did it together. And I think a lot of progress has been made. We have had some very good talks with Russia. We have had some very good talks with others. And we're trying to get the war ended with Russia and Ukraine. And I think we have come a long way in a short period of weeks.

And the president has been very helpful also. And we're also talking about trade, various trade deals that we will be doing with France. And we will be discussing a little bit further. Then we will have a press conference later on. You can ask some questions. We will be having a press conference in a little while.

We're going to have lunch with the entire French staff. And we look forward to it. And, again, the relationship has been very special with France and very special with this gentleman on my right. And we look forward to keeping that going for a long period of time. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

EMMANUEL MACRON, FRENCH PRESIDENT: Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you. Thank you. I want to thank Mr. President for his hospitality. We had a good

discussion this morning for the G7 here and for the third year of this war in Ukraine. And I think our common objective clearly is to build peace and a solid and longstanding peace.

And this is what we will discuss, obviously, because I have great respect for the bravery and the resistance of Ukrainian people. And we do share the objective of peace, but we are very aware of the necessity to have guarantees and a solid peace in order to stabilize the situation.

And I'm here as a friend because, through centuries, we have been friends. And we are personal friends, as you mentioned, because we work very well together. And I think the U.S. and France always stand on the same side, the right side, I would say, of history.

And this is exactly what it's at stake today. And this is a very important moment for Europe as well. And I'm here as well after discussions with all my colleagues to say that Europe is willing to step up, to be a stronger partner, to do more in defense and security for its continent, and as well to be a reliable partner and to be engaged in trade, economy, investment in a lot of topics.

So I'm very excited by the discussion we will have and obviously we will follow up. And I want to thank you again, Mr. President, for your presence on Notre Dame de Paris. It meant a lot for French people. And I want to thank you for that.

TRUMP: That's the cathedral. And they have done a fantastic job. The president's done a great job in bringing it back. It was a terrible thing like, what, five years ago, that...

MACRON: Yes.

TRUMP: Watching that burn was a very, very horrible sight. And you have done a fantastic job in bringing it back. So I congratulate you. Thank you for being here.

Thank you very much.

MACRON: Thank you very much.

TRUMP: Anybody want to ask a question or two? Or is that a foolish question?

(CROSSTALK)

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE) Ukrainians on the critical mineral deal?

TRUMP: It looks like we're getting very close. The deal is being worked on. We're, I think, getting very close to getting an agreement, where we get our money back over a period of time.

[13:20:02]

But it also gives us something where I think it's very beneficial to their economy, to their -- to them as a country. But we're in for $350 billion. How we got there, I don't know, but that's a lot of money, a lot of money invested.

And we had nothing to show for it. And it was the Biden administration's fault. The Europeans are in for about $100 billion, and they do it as the form -- in the form of a loan. And the Europeans have been great on this issue. They understood it wasn't fair, and we were able to work something out.

But with the Ukrainians, I think I can say that we're very close. Scott is around here someplace. And I think we can say that we're very -- hi, Scott. I think we're very close. Do you have something to say about that, Scott?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We are very close, the one-yard line.

(CROSSTALK)

TRUMP: What?

QUESTION: Would a mineral include a security guarantee for Ukraine?

TRUMP: Well, it'll be -- Europe is going to make sure that nothing happens. I don't think it's going to be much of a problem. I think, once we settle, there's going to be no more war in Ukraine, and you're not going to have it. It's not going to be a very big problem. That's going to be the least of it.

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE) reporting that the U.S. has agreed to shut down a military base in Greece that's a logistical hub for (OFF-MIKE)

TRUMP: That it shut -- that who shut down?

QUESTION: That the U.S. has agreed to shut it down, at the request of Turkey and Russia. Is that at all true?

TRUMP: Marco, do you have anything to say about that?

(CROSSTALK)

TRUMP: Is it a no? Do you say...

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's a no, sir.

TRUMP: It's not a correct story.

QUESTION: Mr. President, how do you react to people in Europe who say that you are abandoning Ukraine and that you're going to sacrifice the security of Ukraine by making a deal with Putin?

TRUMP: No, we're helping Ukraine like nobody's ever helped Ukraine before.

And I can say this. If I didn't become president, Ukraine would right now still be at a level where there would be no even thinking about a peace. And it was -- it's a sad thing that this happened. This would have never happened, this war, if I were president, zero chance.

And it has happened. So, my function is to get you out of the war, get them out of the war, let them live. It's a bloody war. It's a horrible war. Thousands of people are being killed a week. And I would say Russia, maybe 700,000 people, I think Ukraine probably a similar number.

And that's not talking about the towns and the cities that have been blown up. That's talking about soldiers. This has been a horrible, bloody mess. And we're going to get it solved. We got to get it solved. And we're not talking about America's soldiers, soldiers from this country. We're talking about Russia and Ukraine.

But on a humanitarian basis, we have to get this very, very bloody, savage problem solved. And I will say this also. It could lead to World War III if it's not solved. There will be a point at which it's not going to stop at those two countries. Already, there's such involvement from other countries.

And it could really lead to a very big war, World War III. And we're not going to let that happen either.

QUESTION: Will you support the idea to send European troops in Ukraine to back the...

(CROSSTALK)

TRUMP: The European troops may go into Ukraine as peacemakers, so when the agreement is done, they can watch that everything's followed properly. I don't think that's going to be a problem.

And a lot of the European countries, I think -- I don't want to speak for France, but I know that the president has talked about doing that also. I think that will be a very good day when we can go in as peacekeepers, as opposed to what's going on right now with everybody being killed. So...

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)

TRUMP: Well, we're going to have a backing of some kind. And, obviously, the European countries are going to be involved. And I don't think you're going to need much backing.

I think that's not going to be a problem. Once an agreement is signed, Russia is going to get back to its business, and Ukraine and Europe are going to get back to their business. I don't think it's going to be a problem.

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)

TRUMP: What?

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)

TRUMP: I will be meeting with President Zelenskyy. In fact, he may come in this week or next week to sign the agreement, and which would be nice. I'd love to meet him. We would meet at the Oval Office. So the agreement is being worked on now.

They're very close to a final deal. It'll be a deal with rare earths and various other things. And he would like to come, and I understand it, here to sign it, and that would be great with me. I think they then have to get it approved by their council or whoever might approve it, but I'm sure that will happen.

(CROSSTALK)

[13:25:01]

TRUMP: At some point, I will be meeting President Putin also, yes.

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)

TRUMP: Yes. I don't know when we speak. We're trying to get this thing worked out. But, yes, at some point, I'll be meeting with President Putin too.

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)

MACRON: I can say a few words in French?

TRUMP: Yes, please.

MACRON (through translator): President Trump has already spoken about this -- this just a moment ago. This is exactly what we want to do. We want to build peace with Ukraine.

As President Trump mentioned, there are already one million dead and wounded in Ukraine since the war began. We had a cease-fire in the past that was not respected. This was under the Minsk Agreements I and II. President Trump, as he said, will be meeting with President Zelenskyy to sign a deal on rare earths.

And we are pleased to see this very strong American involvement. Europe, of course, also stands ready to support Ukraine in various ways, supporting its military. And we don't want to preempt any sort of discussions that are currently under way, but we do share the same objective of building this lasting peace.

TRUMP: I just want to tell you a little story. So we were at the Eiffel Tower having dinner with your wonderful wife and with my wonderful wife.

And we came out and he started speaking the French deal. And we didn't have an interpreter, and he was going on and on and on. And I was just nodding, yes, yes, yes. And he really sold me out, because I got back the next day and I read the papers. I said, that's not what we said.

(LAUGHTER)

TRUMP: He's a smart customer. I will tell you that. That wasn't exactly what we agreed to.

(CROSSTALK) QUESTION: Mr. President, you called Zelenskyy a dictator. Would you should use the same words for Vladimir Putin?

TRUMP: I don't use those words lightly. I think that we're going to see how it all works out. Let's see what happens. I think we have a chance of a really good settlement between various countries.

And you're talking about Europe and you're talking about Ukraine as part of that whole situation. The other side has a lot of support also. So let's see how it all works out. It might work out. Look, you can never make up lives. The one thing you can't -- you can make up the money, but you can't make up the lives. A lot of lives lost, I think probably a lot more lives than people are talking about.

It's been a rough war. But I think we're closely getting it solved. Go ahead.

QUESTION: Do you think that DOGE could benefit from more streamlined communications? There was that e-mail telling employees to give five things that they have done last week. Agency heads told people to ignore it.

(CROSSTALK)

TRUMP: You're talking about the last e-mail that was sent where he wanted to know what you did this week?

You know why he wanted that, by the way? I thought it was great, because we have people that don't show up to work and nobody even knows if they work for the government. So by asking the question, tell us what you did this week, what he's doing is saying, are you actually working?

And then, if you don't answer, like you're sort of semi-fired or you're fired, because a lot of people are not answering because they don't even exist. They're trying to find -- that's how badly various parts of our government were run by -- and especially by this last group.

So what they're doing is, they're trying to find out who's working for the government. Are we paying other people that aren't working? And where's all this -- where's the money going?

We have found hundreds of billions of dollars of fraud so far. And we have just started. We're actually going to Fort Knox to see if the gold is there, because maybe somebody stole the gold, tons of gold. So I think it was actually -- there was a lot of genius in sending it.

We're trying to find out if people are working. And so we're sending a letter to people, please tell us what you did last week. If people don't respond, it's very possible that there is no such person.