Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

New Analysis Finds GOP Bill Would Add $2.5 Trillion to National Debt by 2034; Musk Calls on Congress to Scrap Trump's Big Beautiful Bill; Judge Grants Bond for Massachusetts Teen in ICE Custody; Trump Administration Returns Migrant Hastily Deported to Mexico Back to the U.S.; Judge Warns Combs Could Be Excluded From Court Room. Aired 2- 2:30p ET

Aired June 05, 2025 - 14:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:01:00]

JESSICA DEAN, CNN CO-ANCHOR OF "CNN NEWS CENTRAL": Happening now. It is getting a lot uglier. We're talking about the beef between President Trump and Elon Musk over the president's budget bill. Musk now suggesting the president would've never have become president if it wasn't for him. This after Trump suggested Musk may have a case of "Trump Derangement Syndrome".

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, (R) PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Elon and I had a great relationship. I don't know what well anymore. I was surprised. 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.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DEAN: I do want to go to the White House now where Kristen Holmes is standing by. Kristen, there was always a lot of talk of when this might turn sour and now, we are seeing this play out in real time.

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, and Jessica, I think that a lot of Donald Trump's administration officials and advisors thought that they were in the clear of this actually turning sour and at least turning sour so publicly because Musk is now out of the government. They had their going away party last Friday. They said nice things about each other, Trump and Musk, and then Musk went on his way, kind of a sigh of relief for many in the administration who were a little tired of having Elon Musk around.

But obviously, this was not over. What we saw two days ago was Elon Musk starting to attack Donald Trump's legacy bill, the spending bill that's currently with the Senate. And Donald Trump, I'm told behind the scenes was annoyed. He was also confused. He was wondering why Elon was doing it. He speculated it had to do with the cutting of the electric vehicle mandate, which we heard him do just now in the Oval Office as well, saying this must be related to his business and with Tesla.

But this was the first time, sitting there in the Oval Office with the German Chancellor, that he actually addressed this in public. And here's part of what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: I am very disappointed because Elon knew the inner workings of this bill better than almost anybody sitting here, better than you people. He knew everything about it. He had no problem with it. All of a sudden, he had a problem and he only developed the problem when he found out that we're going to have to cut the EV mandate because that's billions and billions of dollars.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HOLMES: In real time, then you have Elon Musk on X, company which he is the CEO, responding and this is what he said. He said false, this bill was never shown to me even once and was passed in the dead of night, so fast that almost no one in Congress could have read it. He also said, without me, Trump would've lost the election. Dems would control the House and the Republicans would be 51 to 49 in the Senate. And the other one we don't have for you there, he said in gratitude. This is getting deeply personal. It does feel like we're watching a breakup in real time in public between these two figures.

And as you mentioned, Jessica, this had long been speculated that the two of them could not end amicably given the fact that they have big egos, the fact that they're such big personalities. But again, Musk is now out of the government. He left that government special advisory position that he was in, and now, it appears that he is taking on Trump. The two men have not spoken since Trump's -- since Musk started lambasting the bill.

DEAN: All right. The very latest from Kristen there at the White House. Thank you so much. And I do want to bring in Lauren Fox now on Capitol Hill. And Lauren, look, when they were going through confirmation hearings, there was a lot of pressure from Musk on some of these members to make sure they voted the way that he wanted them to vote, that he might primary them. There's a lot of money potentially wrapped up, all while the president's trying to get this bill passed. So, what are you hearing as this continues to develop?

LAUREN FOX, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, Republican Senators were just exiting their daily lunches on Capitol Hill, and I was asking several of them, reading part of this tweet from Elon Musk in which he essentially argued that he was the reason why Donald Trump had the House and the Senate.

[14:05:00]

And so many of the Republican Senators that I was talking to wanted to make clear they did not want to be in the middle of this tussle. They didn't want to be in the middle of this fight. Markwayne Mullin, who's very close to the president, said he learned a long time ago when he was a fighter not to get involved in other people's fights. He said the focus needs to be on getting this bill across the finish line, getting Trump's agenda through the United States Senate and that is where Republican Senator's mind should be right now. But obviously, it is difficult to separate Elon Musk's views of that bill and the workings of trying to get a deal together at the exact same time, because Elon Musk is really seizing on one of the vulnerabilities for House and Senate conservatives, which is that this bill didn't do enough to cut federal spending.

Now, that is part of the reason that there is continual negotiations over what changes need to be made to the House bill if it's going to pass in the United States Senate. But this is really complicated, because I was talking to Senator Thom Tillis, he's up for reelection in the state of North Carolina and he was making the point to me just a few minutes ago that Senators are going to have to think about, who has more influence? Is it Donald Trump? Is it Elon Musk?

Given the fact that he's such a huge campaign donor, Thom Tillis said for him personally, it was the voters back home in North Carolina. But, are those voters influenced by Elon Musk? I think that's a huge question that Senators may have to be weighing in upcoming days if this tussle isn't figured out.

DEAN: Yeah, for sure. All right, Lauren Fox there on Capitol Hill. Thanks so much. Jim?

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN CO-ANCHOR OF "CNN NEWS CENTRAL": Let's talk about this now with CNN in Chief Media analyst, Brian Stelter. And Brian, I mean, I think it's fair to say this is not just a cooling of the relationship. This is a clean and very public break. But setting aside the personal, the political impact of this, because there are a lot of reasons Trump won this election, but $290 million was a big contribution and the young particularly male voters that Musk brought along, it seems a lot of these elections made a difference. What are the political consequences for Trump here from a break, but also for Republicans more broadly?

BRIAN STELTER, CNN CHIEF MEDIA ANALYST: Right. In fact, both men may end up damaged here as well as the GOP brand. Musk sounds like a customer who paid hundreds of millions of dollars for a product. Now, he hates the product and he is demanding a refund. He sounds like a guy sitting at the table asking the waiter to go back and remake the meal. I mean, he sounds like someone who thinks he paid for something and is now fed up with the product. And that is remarkable about the state of money and politics. It's remarkable about the break with Trump because just six days ago, Musk sat in the Oval Office and played along with Trump when Trump said, oh, Musk, he's not really leaving. He'll be back. DOGE is continuing. Remember that charade? What a sham that turned out to be.

SCIUTTO: Yeah.

STELTER: Back then, the big story in the headlines was about whether Musk was on drugs and his drug use according to The New York Times. Well, now here we are, a complete break and I think you got to wonder if there's ever any healing that can happen. And to your point, Jim, the damage to Trump could be legitimate because some people are going to choose. This is a pick your fighter, choose your fighter sort of moment to use a video game analogy. And some of those voters who did support Trump last year, they were really Musk stans at heart. They're going to side with Musk over Trump, quite possibly.

Listen. There are Republicans other than Trump, who I have to imagine miss or at least worry, fear the prospect of not having Trump's dollars to back them in the midterms, which were an explicit part of the Trump's strategy, right? I mean, during confirmation hearings, you know that they said outright, if you vote against Trump's picks, we will primary you. How about just on the business side, because we noted Tesla stock is dropping now.

STELTER: Yes.

SCIUTTO: It seems like investors see a consequence from the breaking of this relationship.

STELTER: Definitely. Tesla was already having a poor day in the stock market. But right around the minute that Trump started speaking, saying he was disappointed in Musk, right around that lunchtime presser, the stock started to plummet. So, we've seen about a 5 percent drop from that point where Trump spoke and broke with Musk publicly. That's worth tens of billions of dollars for Tesla that's been suddenly erased. Now, it could very well just pop right back up tomorrow.

The Tesla stock is very volatile, but there are clearly some day traders out there who heard Trump criticize Musk and said, Tesla's in trouble now. Tesla is going to have a hard time, at least in the short term, because a lot of the conversation for months now has been about how Tesla and how Musk's other companies are going to benefit from having this first buddy relationship. Well, the converse could also be true now.

SCIUTTO: Brian Stelter, thanks so much. Jessica?

DEAN: The feud with Musk aside, Trump's domestic policy bill still faces some key holdouts in the Senate. Concern has been building among some Senators after projections that the plan would raise the country's deficit, leave millions of Americans uninsured, and lower revenue.

[14:10:00]

Now today, the treasury secretary responded saying the bill would not lead to a deficit but actually a surplus. Here's what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SCOTT BESSENT, (R) UNITED STATES TREASURY SECRETARY: What we've seen is, we keep hearing from the CBO that there's going to be a large deficit from the bill, which we disagree with. But using the CBO scoring, they came out and scored the tariff revenue. We think it'll be the minimum of $2.8 trillion over the 10-year window, which actually puts the bill in surplus if you include the tariff revenue, which they won't do. (END VIDEO CLIP)

DEAN: With us now, the President and Co-Founder of The Budget Lab at Yale, Natasha Sarin. Natasha, thanks so much for joining us. I want to just stay on what Secretary Bessent said there. What do you make of his explanation? Is that mathematically correct?

NATASHA SARIN, PRESIDENT AND CO-FOUNDER, THE YALE BUDGET LAB: So, I think it's not mathematically correct and it's not mathematically correct for the following reason. If you look at what the Congressional Budget Office has said, the deficit impact of this legislation is going to be, it scores it at about $2.4 trillion over the decade. But importantly, in this legislation are a lot of gimmicks. There's a lot of expiring tax provisions, and if you do what we've done with my colleagues at the Yale Budget Lab and do a true permanent cost of this bill, it is going to be closer to $4 trillion over the course of the next decade.

And that means that it is not actually possible, at least at the tariff rates that the administration has currently laid out. And they're arguing in favor of trying to negotiate even lower tariff rates in the future. It's not possible to get a deficit impact of this bill that is not in the trillions of dollars over the course of the next 10 years.

DEAN: OK.

SARIN: And I think an important thing to understand for your viewers is like why does that matter?

DEAN: Yes.

SARIN: It matters because that's going to mean higher interest rates for government borrowing, but it's going to mean tens of thousands of dollars more in the rates that they are going to pay on their 30-year mortgage and in the rates they're going to pay to buy a car because car loans are going to be more expensive.

DEAN: So that's what's interesting because I think sometimes people think this can kind of be something that doesn't impact them personally. It is the nation's deficit. They can care about that. But in terms of their actual financial picture at home, that maybe it won't touch them. But what you're saying, these are very -- these are very personal things that do matter to a family's bottom line.

SARIN: These are very personal things, and they matter in two ways, right? So on the one hand, you have effective tariff rates right now that are at something like 20 percent. They were at like two-and-a- half percent at the beginning of the year. What that means is it means thousands of dollars in higher costs, higher prices that American consumers are going to pay each year. And you have this massive deficit increase coming from the House passed version of the reconciliation package, which is going to mean higher interest rates on all of their borrowing.

They're buying houses, they're buying cars, and they're buying anything really, or trying to start a business and take out a loan from a bank. And I think the American people have a totally reasonable right to ask themselves, like, to what end, what exactly are we trying to accomplish with this legislation? Because remember, massive deficit increases and also, kicking tens of millions of Americans off of their health insurance. So, I think there are real reasons to be skeptical about the bill as it stands, and I hope the Senate will take steps as they will in the reconciliation process to try to make this a better piece of legislation.

DEAN: There's another component to this which is the tax relief, which a lot of Republicans will talk about. This is big tax relief, they say, for middle-class Americans. The criticism is that it's tax relief for some of the richest Americans. But, either way you slice it, it is an extension and kind of carrying on of the tax cuts that they put into law back in the last Trump term. So effectively, if you're a family or a working person who's paying taxes, does this actually change things or does it just let you keep that current tax rate? It's not going to go back up.

SARIN: Well, it changes things in a way that makes things worse if you're at the bottom of the distribution, in that, if you're someone who is on Medicaid or who gets food stamps that have been cut by the House passed reconciliation bill, your after-tax and transfer income, if you're in the bottom 40 percent of the distribution, is actually going to be lower as a result of this House passed reconciliation bill than it is today. And you're in a situation where disproportionately this tax relief is going to the very, very top. So, the top 0.1 percent is going to see a lower tax bill of about $400,000 relative to what they would see if these tax cuts expired and we didn't do the new no tax on tips, no tax on overtime, that's part of the reconciliation package.

DEAN: All right. Natasha, thanks so much for being here with us. We appreciate it.

SARIN: Thanks so much for having me.

[14:15:00]

DEAN: Still to come, the Massachusetts high school student who has been detained by ICE since last Saturday has just been granted bond, plus new details on what President Trump called a very good phone call with the Chinese President Xi Jinping. Could trade tensions be softening? And with the rise of A.I., what does the future look like for an American worker? That and much more coming up on "CNN News Central."

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:20:00]

DEAN: This just in as an immigration judge has just granted bond to a Massachusetts high school student who was arrested on his way to a volleyball practice this weekend. That arrest sparking outrage from community members who have been demanding immigration officials return that teenager to his family. The bond for Marcelo Gomes da Silva was set moments ago at $2,000. CNN's Polo Sandoval has been following this story closely. He joins us now with more. Big development here, Polo, what are the attorneys in this case saying?

POLO SANDOVAL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: This was certainly a high-stakes initial hearing, Jessica, for this high school student as he appeared before judge for the very first time. And really just to underscore what you mentioned, this is certainly a significant and a major victory for him, as a judge is going to allow him to continue to address his pending immigration proceedings outside of detention by granting him that $2,000 bond that you just mentioned. His attorney telling me that they are expecting to post that bond shortly, so hopefully, before the end of today, he will rejoin his family after nearly five days in detention.

You recall, it was this past Saturday when Marcelo and several other classmates were headed to a volleyball practice. That's when they encountered ICE agents. They detained him even though authorities there, federal authorities had been looking for his father after they had received reports from local officials that his father was not only in the country illegally, but also had been driving recklessly. So that brings us to this point right now and what we just saw play out only moments ago in court, while supporters gathering outside.

I want you to hear a little bit of what one of his attorneys, Robin Nice, had to say when asked what her message is to Immigration and Customs Enforcement who detained her client.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ROBIN NICE, ATTORNEY FOR MARCELO GOMES DA SILVA: If there is a lesson is, don't come after members of our community. Target the bad guys if there is bad guys, or also let the criminal justice system do its work. Immigration court is not meant to be a criminal justice system. It's not set up for that. So, if you want to make our community safer, show me. This is not that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANDOVAL: You'll recognize Attorney Nice there. She was on "CNN News Central" just yesterday, about 24 hours ago, and she really sort of underscored her argument, which is that it's not that they take issue with the validity of the order for removal of this young man, but they took issue with the detention of an 18-year-old high school student who by many accounts has no criminal record and has multiple community ties.

So, they were asking the judge today that he be allowed to remain in that community since he doesn't plan to go anywhere, so he can then address his outstanding immigration issue, which is that expired visa. He does have plans to file for asylum and his attorney believes that he should have proper grounds to at least issue that or at least submit that application, Jessica.

DEAN: Polo Sandoval with the latest, thank you so much for that. Jim? SCIUTTO: Now, to what is believed to be a first in President Trump's immigration crackdown, the return of a deportee back to the U.S. A judge ruled the Guatemalan had been wrongfully sent to Mexico. Court records show OCG, that is the migrant's pseudonym, landed back in the United States yesterday. His legal team tells CNN the man is now in ICE custody. CNN Correspondent Priscilla Alvarez has been tracking the story. So Priscilla, what exactly was the mistake here? And I suppose, part of the story, right, is how did the administration cop to it?

PRISCILLA ALVAREZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, there has been an ongoing case about sending migrants to countries with which they have no ties. So, this particular case dates back to earlier this year when an immigration judge that said that he couldn't be sent to his native country, that being Guatemala, but he granted what's known as withholding of removal which means he's still deportable just not to his home country. So what the administration did is sent him to Mexico. The catch, however, was that he was also facing dangers in Mexico and then Mexican authorities deported him to Guatemala. So, he ended up exactly where the immigration judge had said he shouldn't end up.

So, this one went before a federal judge who ordered the administration to return the man, the administration making moves to facilitate that. And as you just mentioned, he landed in the United States yesterday. He is now in Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody. I've been talking to his legal team who says -- it's still unclear what happens next because, again, with withholding of removal, he still can be deported somewhere else. So, there's still questions here as to how long he'll be in custody and whether the administration moves to send him somewhere else.

SCIUTTO: Right.

ALVAREZ: If they do that, however, they would have to undergo a process, notify the council and see if there are any grounds by which he would state fear in that other country.

SCIUTTO: Understood. OK. So I mean, some of the due process that's become so central --

ALVAREZ: Right.

SCIUTTO: -- to a lot of these disputes, he's given a chance to challenge. Another federal judge ruled against the Trump administration deporting migrants under the Alien Enemies Act to El Salvador, specifically. What did the judge rule here?

[14:25:00]

ALVAREZ: Yeah, this is actually a very big deal for the families and the attorneys of those Venezuelan migrants who were sent to El Salvador's mega prison in March. The reason it's such a big deal is because it's the first time that there is any semblance of relief for these migrants who have essentially been in this black hole because the U.S. says they don't have custody. El Salvador says they're in their custody now. So, what the judge is essentially saying here is that they have to be able to contest their removal underneath this sweeping wartime authority.

And he was quite blunt in his language. I'll read part of the order. It said, "Perhaps the president lawfully invoked the Alien Enemies Act. Perhaps moreover, defendants are correct that plaintiffs are gang members, but" And this is the critical point. "There is simply no way to know for sure as the CECOT plaintiffs never had any opportunity to challenge the government say so."

Remember, this happened so quickly in mid-March.

SCIUTTO: Yeah.

ALVAREZ: The administration said that they had criminal records. Then, stories came out that there actually weren't -- wasn't there in some of the cases. So, this is going to open up another phase in this storyline about those sent to that prison.

SCIUTTO: And it does seem that even the Supreme Court is open to some kind of due process guarantee as well. But of course, so many cases moving to the courts now. Priscilla Alvarez, thanks so much. And coming up, just a stunning moment in the Sean "Diddy" Combs criminal trial. The judge has warned the music mogul's legal team Combs could be removed from the courtroom entirely. What led to that threat, coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)