Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Trump Family Launches Stablecoin Amid Crypto Conflict Concerns; Trump Announces new Auto Tariffs in Trade War Escalation; Experts Warn New Car Prices Likely to Surge in Coming Weeks; Interview with Rep. Dan Meuser (R-PA): Pete Hegseth Shared Classified Intel and Trump's Tariffs. Aired 8-8:30a ET

Aired March 27, 2025 - 08:00   ET

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

[08:00:00]

TOM FOREMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): ...promises to aggressively help their industry.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We will ensure that the future of crypto and the future of Bitcoin will be made in America.

FOREMAN (voice-over): Jeff John Roberts covers crypto for Fortune.

JEFF JOHN ROBERTS, FINANCE AND CRYPTO EDITOR, FORTUNE: It's a chance for the industry to put its best foot forward and show some technology, you know, that can be useful, that can help people.

TRUMP: Bitcoin I just seems like a scam.

FOREMAN (voice-over): But Trump's position is a big flip flop. For a long time, he dismissed this electronic way to invest, collect and exchange virtual money as too risky, echoing concerns about criminal organizations using it to secretly move and launder money all around the world.

He posted: Unregulated crypto assets can facilitate unlawful behavior, including drug trade and other illegal activity.

But now, he's all in, with meme coins issued in his name and that of First Lady Melania Trump. With crypto investors as advisors, including Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and a crypto summit at the White House. Trump's administration has eased off investigating and regulating the business, and he's ordered the government to start a crypto stash similar to the nation's gold reserve.

Democratic lawmakers call it a naked attempt to line Trump's pockets.

Such a reserve, one wrote to the Treasury, provides no discernible benefit to the American people, but would significantly enrich the president and his donors.

Even some crypto fans are squirming at the potential for a conflict of interest that could be worth billions to the incumbent president.

ROBERTS: They're very happy Trump came in and they want sort of, you know, a fair playing field for crypto. But the optics of some of this just don't look very good.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: I want to inflict as much pain on Americans as possible. And that comment's from a U.S. ally. After the president launches new tariffs on cars and car parts, tariffs that could raise your prices by thousands, is the famed Trump Teflon wearing off one spin too far?

Signs of cracks this morning among traditional supporters as officials give conflicted, contorted information about how and why they shared sensitive attack plans on Signal.

And then a graduate student seized off the streets by federal agents. New questions about why she is in custody this morning.

Sara is out today. I'm John Berman with Kate Bolduan. This is CNN NEWS CENTRAL.

KATE BOLDUAN, CNN ANCHOR: How about this for a warning from one auto industry expert? The price of new cars in the U.S. will skyrocket in coming weeks and maybe even sooner than you think. After President Trump announced 25 percent tariffs are coming on all cars and car parts shipped to the U.S.

Quote, there's probably not a vehicle on the market today that wouldn't be affected in some form or fashion by tariffs.

Leaders of some of America's biggest trading partners, also known as some of America's closest allies, are pushing back hard overnight about this. Try on another warning for size from the premier of Ontario, Doug Ford.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PREMIER DOUG FORD, ONTARIO: That 65 billion of tariffs that we have on the table that we can launch towards the U.S., we have to run through every tariff and minimize the pain for Canadians, maximize the pain for Americans. And I feel terrible for the Americans, but it's one person, it's President Trump that's creating this chaos.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BOLDUAN: Joining us right now is Mark Zandi, the Chief Economist for Moody's Analytics. It's good to see you, Mark. Thank you for coming in.

25 percent tariffs coming for cars and basically all cars since it also applies to car parts. What is this going to mean? What's your analysis on what people need to be preparing for?

MARK ZANDI, CHIEF ECONOMIST, MOODY'S: Well, Kate, it means higher prices and it means fewer jobs. I mean, on the higher price side, you know, a lot of moving parts here, a lot of uncertainty. But I think if the tariffs are imposed as articulated and stay in place, by this time next year, the typical car price will be somewhere between $5,000 and $10,000 more.

So, you know, right now, the average car price is $50,000. So that means you're going to be paying $55,000 to $60,000 as a result of the tariffs.

And then I do expect that it's going to cost jobs. You'll see retaliation. You just heard the Canadians talk about this. Other countries will respond, no doubt.

And that means U.S. manufacturers are going to have trouble selling what they produce to those countries and it'll cost jobs. And you don't really need to go too far back to see this.

[08:05:00]

If you go back to President Trump's first term and look at what happened with manufacturing activity, jobs and prices, the tariffs resulted in the kind of damage that I'm talking about.

So in here, we're talking about much higher tariffs. So I'd buckle in. I think this means higher prices and fewer jobs.

BOLDUAN: Because that was what I was going to ask you next, because Donald Trump, the president, says that this is being done to protect American manufacturers, to save American workers. The UAW president, Shawn Fain, applauded the decision, saying it's a step in the direction to end the free trade disaster, is how he put it. What are the chances this does not negatively affect American consumers?

ZANDI: I just don't see it. I really don't. Just put yourself in the position of a CEO of a major global manufacturer, and you're looking at this, and you're thinking, should I build a vehicle factory in the United States?

And by the way, Kate, to build a factory takes years. You can't build it for next month, next quarter. This is something that takes two, three, four years. And then you're building it to last for years after that, maybe even decades.

And what's the tariff going to be tomorrow? What's the tariff going to be six months from now? What's the tariff going to be a year from now? What's the tariff going to be five years from now? Because all this is done under executive order. It's not in the legislation. This can be changed in a stroke of a pen.

So that CEO is going to say, I'm not going to invest. I'm just going to sit on my hand. So I just don't see it. I'm confused by it.

BOLDUAN: Help me be less confused about also now the following, if you like, add it all together. I mean, you said a couple of weeks ago, the risk of recession is uncomfortably high because of how markets were reacting to tariffs in part. We learned this week consumer confidence slid to its lowest level since January 2021.

Add it all up. What is the economic outlook looking like since the new administration came in? ZANDI: Well, highly uncertain. You know, Kate, I've been a professional economist for 35 years, and there's a few other times in that 35 years where the uncertainty is as thick as it is today. I mean, you know, maybe 9-11, the global financial crisis, the pandemic.

I mean, it's incredibly uncertain. And in that kind of world, people freeze at first, and then they start pulling back and cutting back. And you can see it in the surveys.

You mentioned the Consumer Sentiment Survey, the Conference Board Survey. That's a really good leading indicator of recession. Now, it's not screaming recession yet. I don't see red flares going off yet, but it's moving in the wrong direction.

And I do think if prices -- if we do see these kinds of tariffs go into place and prices do rise to the extent that seems likely, I think it's going to be a lot of pressure on consumer psychology, on business sentiment, on what the Federal Reserve Board decides to do or not do. And all those things mean recession risks are on the rise.

BOLDUAN: Mark, thank you so much for jumping on this morning. Appreciate it -- John.

BERMAN: All right, this morning, will somebody, anybody pay a price? Even some traditional Trump supporters like Dave Portnoy from Barstool are asking that at this point. Will we hear more from the president today as calls are growing for someone in the Trump administration to maybe lose their job or face any consequences over the messages that appear to give away critical details of U.S. military strike in Yemen before it happened. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth just arrived in the Philippines. He claims no classified information was shared on the group chat that even after the Atlantic published a new round of texts that included plans in detail for that attack. So far, the president is standing by Hegseth.

Let's get right to Katie Bo Lillis, who is in Washington. And Katie Bo, you've been hearing from people inside the Pentagon, defense officials who've seen these plans now, seen these texts and say these look like something that's classified.

KATIE BO LILLIS, CNN SENIOR REPORTER: John, that's exactly right. The Trump administration has, you know, for 24 hours now really been bending over backwards to say nothing classified in these texts, nothing classified in these texts. And it is true that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, as the classification authority for the Defense Department, has the power to downgrade, declassify and release some of this information.

But at this point, there's no indication that he did so. And he's been pressed on this point by reporters and has yet to answer it directly. And defense officials that we've spoken to say that not only have they seen no indication that he did so, but also there's no reason that he would have just two hours before the attack was launched, which is when these text messages were sent.

And the issue here really becomes semantic at a certain point. You know, whether or not the information was officially labeled classified, if it had been released prior to the beginning of the attack, if it had even at worst fallen into the hands of the Houthis, it would have allowed the Houthis not only -- as one member of the House Intelligence Committee said yesterday -- to duck and potentially avoid the the repercussions of this strike, avoid being hit.

[08:10:00]

But it also might have allowed them the opportunity to fire back potentially endangering American service members.

It's really important to remember here that the Houthis, this Iran- backed militant group in Yemen, do have access to anti-aircraft capabilities. They have access to weaponry that is literally designed to try to shoot at planes in the sky. Some of these -- some of the ordinance that was dropped on Houthi positions as part of this series of strikes came from American fighter jets.

And so what we have heard repeatedly from defense officials is that this information was facially classified, was on its face, the kind of information that is always classified prior to the beginning of an attack for this very reason, to protect American service members lives.

And so I think you will continue to see a lot of focus on precisely this point. Did Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth move to declassify the information before texting it on a Signal group? If he did, why?

BERMAN: Right, exactly. And I think the important sentence there is this is the kind of information that's always classified. Katie Bo Lillis, thank you for your reporting on this. Very appreciated -- Kate.

BOLDUAN: Still ahead for us this hour, a Tufts University student arrested in broad daylight by federal agents. What DHS is now saying about why they say her visa was to be terminated.

And hidden heart shaped notes found in socks meant for accused CEO killer Luigi Mangione.

And breaking news overnight, an academic paper written by the man accused of killing four Idaho college students. That paper details a case involving a different fatal stabbing. How prosecutors plan to use that now in their case against him.

[08:15:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BERMAN: All right, this morning, something a little bit different than we've seen. Some folks in the conservative media sphere are very critical of President Trump and the administration over his and its response to sharing these sensitive attack plans on the Signal group chat.

Listen to this. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TOMI LAHREN, CONSERVATIVE POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Now, I think that the American people would be more satisfied with what I believe is maybe a kernel of the truth, like, hey, we accidentally added this person in, and we shouldn't have done it, and it was reckless and careless.

DAVE PORTNOY, PRESIDENT, BARSTOOL SPORTS: You can't downplay it. You have to sit up there and be like, holy (BLEEP), this is a (BLEEP) of epic proportions. Michael Waltz, it seems like you're the guy who added him to the group chat. You have to lose your job.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: That was Tomi Lahren and Dave Portnoy right there.

With us now, Republican Congressman Dan Meuser of Pennsylvania. Congressman, thanks so much for being with us.

I don't know if you heard Dave Portnoy's whole complaint there, but it was about accountability. What do you make of what he said?

REP. DAN MEUSER (R-PA): Well, I think we've got accountability occurring because Mike Waltz came out and stated that the National Security Advisor, that he takes responsibility. By the way, those were words that were never uttered during the course of four years with the Biden administration. So there is accountability.

It was, quite frankly, John, a mistake, but a pretty minor one. What were the consequences of this mistake? Now, again, we don't want to go back and do comparisons, but there's a big difference between politics and principles.

OK, there's nothing principled about the comments that are being made. Because when Secretary Austin went MIA, did any of these folks say, hey, what in the world is going on? Somebody should be looking into this.

When 13 soldiers were killed in Afghanistan, when Bagram was evacuated and Biden said, oh, my generals never told me to keep 2,500 people there. Yet Secretary Austin and General Milley said, oh, yes, we did tell the president to do that. Did anyone ever call that out? I don't think so.

A mistake was made. We're fixing it. There were no consequences. And by the way, John, real quick, why were we bombing the Houthis? Maybe it was because the Biden administration did nothing for four years with 174 attacks on American and ally ships.

So this is this is pretty ridiculous, to be honest with you.

BERMAN: You brought up former Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin. And your first reference to him was about his prostate surgery, which was information about it was withheld. He went and testified before Congress about that. He had to face questions from you all about that. And he apologized. And, you know, that was a screw up. And he did admit it was a screw up. So, well, he said he should have done it differently. I mean, he absolutely did listen.

MEUSER: But so what I'm saying is disappears for four days.

BERMAN: Sure. So what I'm saying is you're the one who brought up that standard. So then are you supportive of Pete Hegseth coming before Congress soon answering questions about this?

MEUSER: Of course he will. We're transparent. We're open. I mean, Pete Hegseth, first of all, he had very little to do with this. Look, it was a Signal. It is an encrypted, usable government tool.

BERMAN: Pete Hegseth is the one who posted the time the bombs were going to fall. He had a little bit to do with it.

MEUSER: Well, he was sharing information that he believed was a very closed group that he felt needed to know that information. And that was stated. He had no idea some rogue reporter was somehow placed on there.

But you know what? They're getting to the bottom of that. They got their best and the brightest, as you probably know, looking into how he got on there.

BERMAN: Do you think there should be an independent investigation?

MEUSER: You'll find out.

BERMAN: The Senate Armed Services chair, Roger Wicker, says he would like to see --

[08:20:00]

MEUSER: An independent investigation.

BERMAN: -- an independent investigation. That's what Senator Wicker is asking for.

MEUSER: Afghanistan.

BERMAN: The Senate Armed Services chair Roger Wicker for.

(CROSSTALK)

BERMAN: I'm just asking you if -- I don't think he's calling for a special counsel, I think he's calling for an inspector general investigation. Would you like to see an inspector general investigation?

MEUSER: John, I don't want to argue with you. I'd rather just present the truth and the facts and look at this thing in a fair way. When we've had, again Afghanistan, when we had the president say, oh, if Putin goes into the Ukraine, it'll just be a minor skirmish, I mean, that was a green light to Putin. When we had so many different mistakes made over the years and none of these folks said a word, and now all of a sudden you've got people on your network, Chris Hayes, saying this is the worst intelligence breach in the history of our country.

BERMAN: He's not on my network, first of all. But let me ask you this, Congressman, because you've been doing -- I was reading in the Pennsylvania Papers -- I enjoy perusing the Commonwealth journalism -- you did a town hall, not in your district, by the way. You did a town hall outside your district, because I think you're considering running for governor there. But I am curious, and this is an open-ended question, what are you hearing from people on tariffs, and is it universal?

Because the president announced these car tariffs on cars and car parts really could raise prices by thousands of dollars on cars. Are you hearing concerns among voters?

MEUSER: Well, yes, I did that one outside my district. I have a saying in my office, ATP, all things Pennsylvania, and I always have. You know, within my district, we venture out on occasion. I've done many town halls, farmer town halls, small business town halls, veteran town halls, you name it, and that one happened to be in the Philadelphia area because they invited me to come in.

Yes, tariffs are a concern. Look, there's a lot of things that are a concern. Inflation is a concern, interest rates are a concern, manufacturing is a concern, trade is a concern. The border, thankfully, is no longer a concern. Crime is a concern in Pennsylvania.

So what we're doing is, regarding the tariffs, taxes are a concern.

Here we have the Democrats refusing to continue the President Trump's Tax Cut and Jobs Act, and yet are screaming and yelling that, oh my God, don't tax, i.e. tariff, foreign manufacturers, but it's OK to tax those evil American corporations. That doesn't make any sense.

So what the President's trying to do, what we're trying to do is create parity, create reciprocity, create a fair playing field for the world, and in the end, yes, that's going to benefit the United States' domestic production because the world is going to be much more of a customer when we break down the tariffs that they have on us.

That's the goal, breaking down those tariffs on us. The President would like them to be 0 percent, but they're going to be reciprocal at some point. There are concerns.

Look, we've had a really bad, you may not agree, four years. We've got economic trouble, we've got national security trouble, we've got energy trouble, we had border trouble. These things are going to be corrected.

We've got a government that's spending $2 trillion more a year than we have, OK? So we've got to get some reductions. We need growth, and that's what the President, his plan is, and that's what he's trying to lead.

BERMAN: Well, we will see whether tariffs lead to growth. I think some economists would say they're a bit contradictory, but we may see that implemented shortly. Congressman Dan Meuser, thank you for being with us this morning. Appreciate your time, sir.

All right, a graduate student seized off the streets by federal agents. New questions this morning about why she is in custody.

And tensions flaring during a House intelligence hearing as a Democratic lawmaker questions Trump administration officials about the defense secretary's drinking habits.

[08:25:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BOLDUAN: So this morning there are bipartisan calls for accountability over the Signal chat national security breach. President Trump right now though says the defense secretary still has his support. And the president is now clearly hoping to move away from answering questions about the scandal. Now trying to call the fallout, quote, a witch hunt.

CNN's Harry Enten is looking into, I guess we should say, the early numbers around all of this. Some of the president's -- hi Harry, good morning.

HARRY ENTEN, CNN SENIOR DATA REPORTER: Hi, good morning.

BOLDUAN: Some of the president's bigger allies, bigger defenders, say that no one cares about this scandal. No one cares about this story, if you will. What are the early numbers around this?

ENTEN: Yes, sometimes I get a little surprised when I look at some of the data. And of course it's very early on in this. But we can look at Google searches and I think it gives you an idea that there's a lot of interest in this story.

Google searches this week versus last week for these topics. For The Atlantic, how many people are searching for The Atlantic? Up 900 percent. That is the highest on record since Google searches began. They started tracking them back in 2004.

How about for Signal, of course, the app on which this all occurred? Up over 1,000 percent. Again, the highest on record. It has gone up through the roof on these two particular topics.

Whether or not people ultimately end up caring and it changes their minds about the administration, that's one thing. But the interest at this particular point is absolutely there. People are interested in this story.

BOLDUAN: Right, beyond the interest, their take on it, you don't read that into Google search. But there is interest, absolutely. ENTEN: Absolutely.

BOLDUAN: Trump's cabinet, obviously many of them are on this group chat. Many of them are facing a lot of scrutiny and questions right now. Trump's cabinet to this point before this was already on somewhat, I don't know, we call it thin ice with the American people.

ENTEN: Absolutely. I mean, here we go. All right, disappointed with the administration appointments of these different presidents. You might notice only one of these presidents, only one of these terms that were a majority disappointed.

Look at this. In 2025, 52 percent were already disappointed with Donald Trump's picks for his administration. That is the first time you get a majority.

Back in 2017, it was only 44 percent for Donald Trump. Before that, you see 16 percent, 17 percent, 14 percent. Joe Biden's picks were not, in fact, pulled, but less than 40 percent disapproved in separate people.

[08:30:00]