Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Sean 'Diddy' Combs Admonished in Court; Trump Sounds Off on Elon Musk. Aired 1-1:30p ET

Aired June 05, 2025 - 13:00   ET

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

[13:00:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:00:52]

JESSICA DEAN, CNN HOST: President Trump sounds off from the White House in his first meeting with Germany's new chancellor.

The president just moments ago defending his new travel ban, sharing a new alarming insight on his call with Putin. But it was his prized budget bill that got a lot of attention and his newfound battle with his once close ally billionaire Elon Musk that the president spent most of his time talking about.

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN HOST: Yes, that friendship seems to be pretty much over.

DEAN: Yes.

SCIUTTO: Trump in his first public comment since Musk told Republicans to kill Trump's massive budget bill now suggesting, well, admitting perhaps, their friendship could be over.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: You know, Elon's upset because we took the E.V. mandate. I know that disturbed him. He wanted, and, rightfully, he recommended somebody from -- that he I guess knew very well. I'm sure he respected him, but to run NASA.

And I didn't think it was appropriate. I had a great relationship. I don't know if we will anymore.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DEAN: All right, let's get right to CNN's Alayna Treene at the White House, Hadas Gold also standing by for us.

Alayna, first, to you. Tell us what Trump said beyond what we just heard.

ALAYNA TREENE, CNN REPORTER: I mean, these comments from President Donald Trump are pretty remarkable, particularly just having covered the very close relationship between Musk and Trump for months now, even before, of course, he took office.

Musk has long been someone who the president viewed as a very close personal friend, brought him to events with him. He had Oval Office walk-in privileges where he could just show up unannounced to talk with the president.

So, to hear how much this has deteriorated in just a matter of days is, again, very remarkable. I'd also note the last time we actually saw and heard from the president directly answering questions from reporters was last week, not even a full week ago, on Friday, when he was sending off Musk in this Oval Office kind of goodbye ceremony for him. And the two were praising each other.

So, it has changed very, very quickly. Now, very striking words, I think the most striking to me from what the president said was when he said -- quote -- "Look, Elon and I had a great relationship," had, I think, being a key word there. "I don't know if we will anymore."

The president said that he always liked Elon, but he was very surprised with the harsh language Musk has been using to attack the big spending bill that he is trying to muscle through Congress right now. He went on to say that he would prefer if Musk had criticized him personally, rather than this bill.

He also noted, he said, I'm -- quote -- "very disappointed" in Elon. He said he believed that Musk knew the inner workings of this bill better than almost anyone else, and that, from the president's point of view, he said he didn't believe that he had any problem with the bill until he had already left the Trump administration, but also had really understood the breadth of the electric vehicle mandates that are in this bill, essentially kind of revoking the credits that we have seen many electric vehicles like Tesla, of course.

Elon is personally benefiting from those credits. He believes that that is part of why this has happened. But another notable thing for me that I have really seen through all of this is, and particularly in watching that moment, is the somber tone that the president had.

You could see kind of, he looked visibly sad when talking about this fraying relationship with someone that he has viewed for so long now as a good friend of his. And so it's remarkable, again, to hear the president now describing it as he doesn't know what their relationship will be moving forward.

And I'm sure Hadas will get to some of this, but we are hearing now in real time from Musk as well. And one of the key things that I saw, and just moments ago, he posted that, without him -- he said -- quote -- "Without me, Trump would have lost the election, Dems would control the House and Republicans would be 51-49 in the Senate."

He went on to say: "Such ingratitude."

I mean, again, I have watched now this relationship between them, the influence that Musk has had over the president. It is amazing to see where this is now, Jim and Jessica.

[13:05:02]

SCIUTTO: Yes. Listen, I mean, there was a dollar figure to that relationship, $290 million that Musk donated to the campaign, and, by the way, to the presidential campaign, but also hugely influential in confirmation hearings, with threats to primary those who voted against the president's choices.

It's interesting reading another reply just now from Musk, Hadas, where he says: "False. This bill was never shown to me even once and was passed in the dead of the night."

So he's denying the president saying that he was in on this bill for some time.

HADAS GOLD, CNN MEDIA CORRESPONDENT: Yes, I feel like I am watching a couple breaking up in real time. You're sitting next to a couple at a restaurant. They're having a fight. They're breaking up right in front of you.

And I feel like that's what we're seeing right now play out both in the Oval Office and on X, Elon Musk for the first time really directing his ire at President Trump, as you said, refuting what this narrative we have been hearing from the White House and from President Trump, that it's about the electric vehicle mandates, that it's about the nomination for NASA.

He even -- he literally just says, whatever. Keep those cuts in. I don't care. What he says he cares about and what Elon Musk's friends and allies are telling me, they really do think that it's all about Elon's kind of big mission over the deficit and over the budget.

What's incredible to me is now to see what we saw those posts just now about how Elon Musk is sort of saying the quiet part out loud, saying, I helped you get elected, essentially saying, if it wasn't for me, you wouldn't be president. What ingratitude. You're not doing what I essentially want you to do. And I'm the one who helped get you into this position.

And then, on the other side, hearing President Trump level some of his sort of worst disses at his enemies, but now leveling them at his former first buddy. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: I will tell you, it's not -- he's not the first. People leave my administration, and they love us. And then at some point they miss it so badly. And some of them embrace it and some of them actually become hostile. I don't know what it is. It's sort of Trump derangement syndrome, I guess they call it.

But we have it with us too. They leave and they wake up in the morning and the glamour is gone, the whole world is different, and they become hostile. I don't know what it is.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GOLD: And so he's alluding there, essentially, that Elon Musk has what he calls Trump derangement syndrome.

Now, even before that Oval Office meeting where President Trump made those comments, Elon Musk was using President Trump's own past words against him, resurfacing very old tweets from 2012 and 2013, where then-private citizen Trump was talking about the need to balance the budget, was talking about the debt, saying things like wise words and where is this guy now?

And again, people who I know -- who I speak to who know Elon Musk, they're saying to me this isn't about the NASA nomination, this isn't about the E.V. mandates. One person who speaks to Trump -- or speaks to Elon Musk told me: "Elon is a big mission, not a small mission person, fully believes this is bad deal."

And I also think it's really important that he essentially, Elon Musk sees what this bill does, especially to the DOGE cuts, as like a slap in the face, because Elon Musk, he says this as well. He went through a lot, joining the administration, joining DOGE. We saw what happened to Tesla. We saw what happened to Elon Musk's personal brand.

He believes that he sacrificed a lot, that he suffered a lot, and now he sees this bill essentially eliminating what he believes DOGE has achieved and believes that it's essentially a slap in the face for all that he put into the Trump administration.

SCIUTTO: You know what's interesting about that is that Musk is the guy that Trump put in charge of cutting money from the budget, right, the whole DOGE thing.

What Republicans are trying to claim now is that the CBO is just flat- out wrong when they say it adds to the deficit, when, of course, the facts...

DEAN: That's what it has said, yes.

SCIUTTO: There's wide agreement. There's wide agreement to that.

So, for Republicans now, they have to believe that the person that Trump put in charge of cutting money from the budget is wrong or lying when he says that the bill will add to the deficit.

DEAN: Right, and there is this interesting, in addition to that, I think another layer to it.

And, Alayna, I know you have covered these two men as well and their relationship, is kind of this idea of money versus power. Elon has all the money in the world, and, to your point, poured so much of it into getting Trump elected, getting Republicans elected, and swaying people, Republicans in Congress to vote the way they wanted them to by threatening to primary an opponent.

But Trump is the president of the United States. And if you're a member of Congress, Alayna, coming back to what they're trying to get done on Capitol Hill, who are you listening to?

TREENE: No, absolutely. I mean, that is really the question here. And, look, I mean, right now, you're right. President Trump is the president. He is the one who is sitting in the Oval Office, calling a lot of these shots. They will need him. He is not only just the president. He is really kind of the kingmaker of Republican politics.

He really has been ever since he was in office his first term. And they need him and his power to help them, of course, accomplish what they actually want to do legislatively on Capitol Hill, but also, of course, for their elections and looking forward to the midterms.

[13:10:07]

Now, does Elon Musk's money play a big factor in this? Can he help? He has already said that he's thinking of trying to challenge and put money toward these -- the Republicans opponents who do support this bill.

But, again -- and this is me just thinking about how -- my conversations as well Republicans on Capitol Hill -- the person probably that matters more right now is the president. And he is really going to be the one that can really control their fates personally right now in this immediate term and how they're going to get any of their legislative accomplishments, what they want to bring home for their voters in their districts and whatnot, but also looking ahead to the election.

So it's going to be very, very interesting, Jim and Jessica, to see exactly you know what happens from here, because could there be some sort of reconciliation between these two? Maybe. I think it's too early to say.

But could we see a battle now on their hands when it comes to how they're going to approach, of course, not only this bill, which they're already battling over, but the politics of the future? I think that's going to be a key question and a very, very important one, because they are both such big figures and so important in Republican politics right now.

SCIUTTO: Alayna Treene at the White House, Hadas Gold, thanks so much to both of you.

Joining us now, Justin Wolfers. He's a professor of economics and public policy at the University of Michigan.

Justin, good to have you here.

Listen, politicians will make their claims, as they often do, about how much, for instance, this adds to the national debt. But the facts are there. The CBO has made its assessment. And the bond market, notably, the bond market doesn't lie on this.

How would the bond markets react to a bill -- let's say Republicans in the Senate take a little bit off the top, but still a bill that adds a couple trillion dollars to the debt. What would the consequences be?

JUSTIN WOLFERS, UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: Look, so the math of this is very simple. And let me break it down for the audience, which is, this is a budget that cuts spending by about $1 trillion, but cuts taxes by about $4 trillion.

So you just need to do the simple arithmetic and you can see that it adds $3 trillion to the national debt. That's not a secret. Everyone understands that. And that's behind much of the bond market nervousness we have seen over recent days and recent weeks. They're worried I think at one level about the fiscal situation.

Again, let me try and simplify this. The usual rule of thumb is, you try and sock away a little bit of extra money and hard times, so that you can come with a bit of a cash splash when the economy really needs it. If you thought this was a good time, then you think it's a good time to be stashing away cash. Right now, we're doing the opposite.

DEAN: I do also, Justin, want to talk about some other news that we -- we have got a lot of news today -- that we wanted to get to, which is the fact that President Trump did speak with China's President Xi on the phone.

Obviously, China and the U.S. have been trading under what I think you could call a temporary truce of sorts. How important was it to get these two leaders on the phone? And, obviously, the economy would like this to be settled. But what could this little -- how significant is this particular moment in getting towards some sort of resolution?

WOLFERS: At one level, it's very hard to tell.

The story of how we got here is, in some sense, the most interesting part of this. Trump initially put high tariffs on China -- quote -- "in an attempt to get the attention of President Xi." That didn't work. And so then things escalated all the way up to a 145 percent tariff.

And neither had called the other. When there was a meeting called in Geneva, the Chinese claimed that Trump called for it and Trump vehemently denied it. So, even if they're talking, they're not even saying who's calling who over what. And, really, it's the American people who paid an enormous price in order to get this phone meeting to happen.

Look, I'm glad the two guys talked. But as far as the early readouts go, it's that, the end of the call, they agreed that they should talk again. Look, I have had first dates that have gone better than that. But at least they are still talking. But what we really need -- one at some level understands the frustration on both sides.

President Xi is a very, very tough negotiator. But, on the same token, they met in Geneva. They talked, or their underlings did. And then President Trump all of a sudden kicks all Chinese students out of the United States or makes it hard for them to get visas. It's hard to see this as an ongoing, stable relationship.

SCIUTTO: Yes. Listen, of course, Xi Jinping sent his own daughter to the U.S. for college. Happened to be Harvard University that has its own issues with the Trump administration.

The two issues that seem to be so central for both sides, one, China's rare earth restrictions, because U.S. companies have been panicking about losing those rare earths so essential to magnets that go into high tech, high-tech products, as well as batteries, et cetera, and then from the Chinese side that China is really bristling at the high- tech restrictions that the U.S. has on its companies selling chips, et cetera.

Is that -- if you're going to sit down and talk again, are those the two areas where you see a quid pro quo from the two sides?

[13:15:08]

WOLFERS: Yes, and.

So the yes is, I think both of those are extremely important issues. The and part of this is, what we have seen with the rare earth minerals is a surgical way of applying and using your leverage. This was not an across-the-board tariff. This was not an action that particularly hurt the Chinese economy at all. But it really has enormous implications for the United States.

And that's why it is so important that Trump actually makes some progress on this. I'd like to see a little more surgical precision from the American side as well. And then the other part of the end is, what does it mean to really strike a deal? Yes, they met in Geneva and came to an understanding and there was a new 90-day pause in hand, but then continuing with other aggressive actions, for instance, not using Chinese-made A.I. chips, what's going on with Chinese students and so on.

All of these things need to be folded in to be part of a stable and ongoing relationship. And, so far, our president hasn't shown himself to be willing to be a stable partner really to anyone.

DEAN: I also want to ask about this other piece of economic data that we got, the U.S. trade deficit shrinking by a massive 55 percent in April. That's the largest decline since 1992, obviously, Trump and his team very focused on trade deficits.

What does this mean practically? What are people to make of that statistic?

WOLFERS: Look, it's a great talking point, but there's a lot less to it than meets the eye.

So let me just explain what actually happened, because if you see a graph of this, it's completely clear. But if you read a newspaper article, it's not. Basically, people understood that Trump was going to impose tariffs. And so ever since Election Day, people have been bringing stuff in from abroad and so have companies before the tariffs hit.

The word you sometimes hear for this is front-running. What that meant is, American imports rose dramatically between Election Day and say a month ago. Then the tariffs actually hit. So now people have got storerooms that are absolutely full of foreign -- foreign-sourced stuff. They don't need to buy more stuff. And the only thing that's happened now is, imports have fallen back

down to normal. So what's actually kind of surprising is, right now, imports are around about normal, exports are around about normal, and the trade balance is around about normal. It's just there's been a whole lot of other stuff that had caused disruption over the prior three months.

DEAN: Yes. No, you were right. When we showed that graphic, it does kind of draw -- really hammer home that point.

SCIUTTO: Justin Wolfers, thanks so much.

WOLFERS: A great pleasure.

SCIUTTO: Well, as President Trump and Elon Musk publicly battle over the so-called big, beautiful bill and now other issues, behind the scenes, Republicans are frustrated.

DEAN: And now they're scrambling to find a way to move forward with that legislation. We're going to go live to Capitol Hill. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:22:22]

SCIUTTO: There is breaking news just now in the trial, ongoing, of Sean "Diddy" Combs our Laura Coates has been covering.

She's outside the court.

Tell us about the theatrics inside the court.

LAURA COATES, CNN CHIEF LEGAL ANALYST: There was a major moment just now inside the Diddy trial while the jury had left the room. The judge had a conference with the actual attorneys, at which point the judge said: I was so clear this morning to Mr. Agnifilo, who is the lead counsel. I was so clear this morning there were not to be any reactions to this jury. There were not to be any theatrics. Was I or was I not clear?

Mr. Agnifilo said that they were clear about it. He then admonished Sean "Diddy" Combs, the defendant in this RICO trafficking and prostitution case, that he had been nodding at the jury. He had been looking straight at the jurors.

The judge in no uncertain terms said that that was not the correct behavior and that he threatened to preclude Sean "Diddy" Combs from being inside of the courtroom for possibly the duration of his own trial if he continued to look at the jurors and nod and react in any way to testimony that was coming in.

This was a really big moment, of course, for the judge to make this statement. He is on trial, of course, fighting for his life, could spend the rest of his life in prison if he is convicted of all five charges. The judge said he expects this not to happen again, that the defendant in his case would look at the jurors, would nod or in any way react.

And you can imagine if you are the jury in this case hearing testimony come in where the defense was scoring some significant points through a witness by the name of Bryana, who they tried to chip away from her credibility line by line, even suggesting she did not know the date of the alleged dangling off of the balcony incident or that she was somehow in cahoots with Cassie Ventura to concoct some narrative and to promote Bryana's own civil lawsuit.

So you have the impression for the jury that he's not able to react in some way, how would that possibly hamstring the defense? This just happened, Sean "Diddy" Combs threatened with not being able to be present for his trial if he reacts or nods and looks at the jury, who is waiting to decide his own fate.

DEAN: And, Laura, as someone who has been in a number of courtrooms seen a number of cases, how rare is it for something like this to happen, for a judge to say, listen, you keep doing this, you're not going to be sitting here for your own trial?

COATES: I have seen it, of course, with theatrical and particularly disruptive defendants who are told to calm down or not to be theatrical in the way they are presenting the jury to sway them.

[13:25:00]

I have also heard it if the judge believes that somehow the conduct of defendant might possibly influence or intimidate the jurors in this case, direct eye contact or otherwise.

But to have this particular reaction in this high-profile of the case, when a defense is well-versed in the appellate process and knows full well that anything that the judge orders their defendant and client not to do, if a conviction results, could very well go up on appeal.

And, of course, you have got the commonsense notion. Imagine, if you will, the hypothetical, if you were accused of a horrendous crime and the jurors will naturally as human beings looked to the defendant for some human reaction of any kind. If one is not provided, there could be some adverse inference drawn for that jurors.

And so, if you are a defendant, it is a human instinct to react. The judge, however, have a very tight leash on this trial, including the attorneys and beyond. This was a moment that I have not seen where Sean "Diddy" Combs, who is normally stoic, looking ahead, has been threatened.

If he reacts and looks at the jury and nods along with the testimony in an effort to try to persuade them on his own thoughts, he could possibly not be present for his own criminal federal trial.

SCIUTTO: In your experience, Laura, does -- and that's a prospect, we don't know what's going to happen -- but does not having the defendant present, is that a disadvantage typically for the defense?

COATES: It could very well be, of course, because the jurors are going to be left to try to understand why he is not present.

The judge could give a curative instruction, which the judge said today, you don't want to hear the instruction I would give that jury, which led the people in the audience who were remaining -- we were all getting ready to leave out. There was a break that was sustained for about a 30 minute period.

I lingered behind waiting to hear their different arguments that might be raised, and, to my stunning surprise, hearing the judge give this admonishment and saying -- quote -- "Let me make my own record here."

If the defendant is not present in his case, particularly in a case of this magnitude, the jury could be left to think of what they might conclude and infer. And no defense counsel, no defense counsel wants their client's absence to be interpreted independently by a jury of his peers.

DEAN: And, Laura, again, just for anyone joining us, we are following this breaking news that just happened in the courtroom, where the judge admonished Sean "Diddy" Combs and saying that he could excluded from the courtroom if he continued to make faces at the jury.

I do want to ask you to look ahead to the rest of the day. Obviously, you will be keeping a close eye on what Combs is doing in there if he puts himself in that position to be essentially kicked out of the courtroom. But we're going to hear this testimony from an accuser using the pseudonym Jane.

What are we expecting from that testimony?

COATES: Well, the jury is waiting to hear information regarding the claims that the prosecution must carry its burden of proof to conclude.

Remember, there are five felony charges that could result in a lifetime conviction for Sean "Diddy" Combs. And every single witness will be important in establishing the prosecution's burden of proof. RICO cases are notoriously difficult to prove, because it requires the jurors to connect dots independently and alongside of a prosecution team that is trying to ensure that they will connect the dots through a closing argument at the end of a trial.

We were told initially this could be up to an eight-to-10-week trial. So imagine putting the pin in the status quo for the jurors. We expect to hear further testimony in today and the days beyond where the prosecution is going to try to enhance the credibility of prior witnesses, prior stated victims, and the allegations they have said, and this afternoon will continue to be no different.

However, now we have got this added discussion where the defendant in this case, Sean "Diddy" Combs, is going to have to, as my parents used to say when I was acting up, fix my face to make sure that I'm not displaying anything that would be problematic. But this is a defendant. I was a kid. This is a defendant in a conviction possible.

He's presumed innocent, of course, but a case that could, if convicted, lead to the rest of his life behind bars.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

COATES: And people in the audience were thinking to themselves, and, for that, he has to have a straight face? How can that be?

DEAN: The stakes are very high.

Laura Coates, outside the courtroom there in New York, thank you so much for that breaking news update. We really appreciate it.

Again, we're going to continue to follow this, the judge warning Sean "Diddy" Combs he could be removed from the courtroom if he continues to make faces and look at the jury there.

We're going to keep following this. Take a quick break. We will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)