Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Chicago Mayor Signs Order Aimed At Resisting Trump's Plan To Send National Guard; Appeals Court Finds Many Trump Tariffs To Be Illegal; Yemen Houthi Rebels Vow Revenge For Killing Of Prime Minister; Two Court Rulings Set Back Key Trump Priorities; Chicago Mayor Plans Response If Trump Sends In National Guard; Nevada Recovering After Security Incident Closed Offices; Cheap Goods From Overseas About To Face Expensive Tariffs. Aired 6-7p ET

Aired August 30, 2025 - 18:00   ET

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

JESSICA DEAN, CNN HOST: You're in the CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Jessica Dean here in New York.

And new tonight, Chicago is preparing to fight back, as multiple sources say the Trump administration is preparing a major immigration enforcement operation there that could come within days.

Chicago's mayor, Brandon Johnson, signing an Executive Order providing guidance to local police and agencies if federal agents are sent into Chicago.

Now, President Trump has already sent federal troops into two democratically-led cities, Los Angeles and Washington, D.C., for what he describes as a crackdown on crime. He has suggested that Chicago is next.

CNN correspondent Julia Benbrook is joining us now.

Julia, walk us through what the Chicago Mayor is doing and also what the administration is likely planning.

JULIA BENBROOK, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Jessica, President Donald Trump has really taken aim at Chicago, implying that it would be next when it comes to his anti-crime agenda as well as his immigration crackdown, and according to multiple sources familiar with the planning, the Trump administration is preparing for a major immigration enforcement operation that could come as soon as next week.

The city's mayor, Brandon Johnson is pushing back.

He has in recent days accused Trump of "stoking fear" and he signed an Executive Order earlier this afternoon laying out his initial plans for the city to try and resist a potential crackdown. Now, here is what he said to reporters as he explained his reasoning before he signed that order.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MAYOR BRANDON JOHNSON (D), CHICAGO: We will not have our police officers who are working hard every single day to drive down crime, deputized to do traffic stops and checkpoints for the President. We do not want to see tanks in our streets. We do not want to see families ripped apart. We do not want grandmothers thrown into the back of unmarked vans.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BENBROOK: So here were some of the key takeaways in that order. It says that the police will not collaborate with federal agents on immigration enforcement. It urges federal officers to avoid wearing face masks and to identify themselves to members of the public with names and badge numbers. It also directs city departments to resist any efforts that violate the rights of Chicago citizens.

Now we reached out to The White House for a response to this order, and a spokesperson said this in part: "If these Democrats focused on fixing crime in their own cities, instead of doing publicity stunts to criticize the President, their communities would be much safer."

As Trump has taken aim at Chicago specifically, both when it comes to crime and immigration, both Johnson and Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker have repeatedly pointed out that the lack of communication with their local teams, the people on the ground, is a major concern.

DEAN: All right, Julia, another story that we are also keeping an eye on tonight, a federal judge ruling against the administration's effort to speed up deporting migrants who are already inside the country. So what do we know about the order and what impact that might have on efforts to enforce immigration laws by the administration?

BENBROOK: This is a setback for the Trump administration's sweeping immigration policy. A federal judge blocked a Trump administration effort that aims to speed up the deportations of migrants detained in the interior of the United States, slamming it as a violation of due process.

The judge made the point that unlike migrants detained at or near the border who have previously been subject to expedited removal, the people the administration are now targeting have long since entered the country, and that push to accelerate these deportations was put into effect in the early days of Trump's second term -- Jessica.

DEAN: Julia Benbrook in Washington, thank you so much for that.

Another legal setback for the Trump administration as a federal appeals court ruled Trump has overstepped his presidential authority when he implemented several of his tariffs.

Let's bring in CNN senior White House reporter, Betsy Klein from The White House.

Betsy, tariff and trade, a key cornerstone to the Trump administration. How significant is this ruling?

[18:05:04] BETSY KLEIN, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE REPORTER AND WRITER: Well, it is very significant, Jessica, and I think the common thread between this pair of rulings that Jessica, excuse me, that Julia just laid out on deportations, as well as this ruling on tariffs, is a president challenging the bounds of his executive power.

And we saw early in the Trump administration, as the President imposed these tariffs, really seeking to transform the global economic order and reshape alliances through trade. Now, what was at question in this particular case was whether the President unlawfully used emergency powers when he imposed those tariffs.

A federal appeals court ruling late Friday that these tariffs did overstep that power. This court says that the power to impose taxes, including tariffs, lies solely with the congressional branch of the Legislative Branch of government. It is very important to note that these tariffs are still in effect. This court said that it will not go into effect until October, giving the Trump administration some time to potentially appeal this ruling.

But certainly, as you mentioned, a cornerstone of the President's economic policy now facing a major setback -- Jessica.

DEAN: All right, Betsy Klein with the latest at The White House. Thank you so much for that reporting.

And we are joined now by defense attorney and former federal prosecutor, Shan Wu.

Shan, good to see you on this Saturday. We appreciate you being here.

All right, let's start first with this ruling on tariffs. The Appeals Court saying Trump went too far. Explain why this matters, and if -- what kind of impact this ruling can ultimately have?

SHAN WU, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: Well, from a common sense standpoint, Jessica, it is pretty easy to understand the ruling because tariffs are simply not in the statute that he tried to impose them under. The words are missing from it.

So it seems like a pretty easy open and shut case, but the court is being cautious in saying this doesn't go into effect until the administration gets a chance to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The practical effect of this, once they do go into effect is enormous because a lot of this money has already been collected in the way of taxes, and there is a huge logistical nightmare as to how you would actually attempt to refund that money if it has already been spent.

So from a procedural standpoint, that's just an enormous can of worms that really courts, administrations haven't faced before, but it is so critical. I was glad to hear that the court used that language about the taxes, because so often, there is this idea that tariffs are not taxes, but the court correctly points out they are, and that power does not really rest with the President, it rests with Congress.

And this is now likely headed for the Supreme Court. How do you see that playing out?

WU: Well, the Supreme Court tends to be rather friendly to expansion of presidential power, but I think also when the law is extremely black and white, they don't have much trouble following that. So I think the central question whether tariffs are authorized under the statute, pretty easy answer, it is not there. I think, they are going to say Congress would need to act to add that to it. I mean, the President may have some power to impose tariffs, but not under this particular provision, not under this law.

DEAN: I also want to talk about this ruling on deportations. The judge in that case, taking issue with the idea, the administration believed none of the migrants should get due process. This has been an issue repeatedly for this administration. They've tried to make the argument that I said, that migrants don't enjoy that provision. Why is this important? And do you think that's true?

WU: I definitely do not think it is true. I mean, the bedrock of all process in the United States is due process, having some kind of process.

And the Trump administration, in this effort to impose these really broad, sweeping crackdowns on immigration, the only way you can have that effect be felt really quickly is obviously to do away with delays. Don't let them have hearings, don't let them have access to lawyers.

So over and over again, I think, and this case is a great example of it, the courts are saying, no, I mean, you can have policy changes. The administration is allowed to do that, immigration policy, very much subject to the executive's ideas, but you cannot just strip away the normal process. People need to have a right to be heard, to determine -- you know, if you're saying they are not here properly, you've got to show that to a court, maybe immigration court, maybe a federal district court, but there has to be some process.

And repeatedly, this attempt to sort of shortcut that in order to get these things implemented, and that is what lawyers in courts are saying, no, you've got to do it by the process.

DEAN: I also want to talk about the Trump administration's firing of the Fed Governor Lisa Cook, and at the heart of it, and this whole thing is that they say they are firing her for cause, and it seems like that a lot of this is going to hinge on what is for cause? Is this cause? How does this work?

[18:10:08]

Help -- walk people through why that's going to be important.

WU: So this is a situation which actually goes back to a conservative wish to let the President make all of these decisions, not giving any deference to the independence of agencies.

So the Supreme Court has really undercut independent agency existence in the Wilcox case, but in that case, they had a big carve out, which was the Federal Reserve. So now we are smack into this carve out area that says for the Federal Reserve, the President is not given that kind of deference, and he would have to do it for cause.

Here is the problem, there is no definition of for cause in the enabling act for the Federal Reserve, there is no case law on this particular point, it hasn't been tried before. No president has ever tried to fire a governor on the Federal Reserve.

So the judge has to look at this as a case of first impression and again, lay down some standards against the due process question. There has to be some process. It can't just be that the President just says, I find cause, it has got to go through some sort of standard. That's the question.

Now here, it would have been somewhat easier for the Trump administration if they just waited, because if there are allegations of some kind of wrongdoing, let those go forward somewhat. DOJ actually started an investigation.

Right now, there is nothing except them saying, oh, there is a criminal referral. There is a concern about it. There is no proof of any improper behavior on the governor's part there. Not only that, if you go way back in history to Humphrey's executor, which was the case that established this independence of agencies and how you need a for cause requirement that really only talked about malfeasance during the term of duty. This allegedly happened before Lisa Cook even began serving as the governor. So some question whether that would even matter or not.

Obviously, if she is charged and convicted of a crime, I think you're going to have a strong case, but we are so far away from that, and that may never happen at all.

DEAN: Yes, we still would have to wait for that.

All right, Shan Wu, always good to see you. Thank you so much.

WU: Sure thing.

DEAN: Outrage growing as Israel halts aid into Gaza and calls for residents there to evacuate the enclave's largest city, and some families of Israeli hostages now threatening Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu with legal actions if their loved ones don't come home alive.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

EINAV ZANGAUKER, MOTHER OF ISRAELI HOSTAGE, MATAN ZANGAUKER (through translator): I will personally make. sure you are charged with premeditated murder.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:17:15] DEAN: Yemen's Houthi rebels are vowing to take revenge for the deaths of their Prime Minister and other political leaders in Israeli airstrikes earlier this week. The Houthis, confirming Ahmed al-Rahawi was killed in a strike Thursday, which left others wounded.

CNN's Oren Liebermann reports now from Jerusalem.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

OREN LIEBERMANN, CNN JERUSALEM BUREAU CHIEF AND CORRESPONDENT: It took the Houthis several days to acknowledge the results of an Israeli airstrike on the capital of Sanaa, but they now say the strike, which we had reported targeted senior Houthi leadership killed their Prime Minister Ahmed al-Rahawi, as well as other ministers though they don't detail who else was killed in the strike. They say it was a group of their leaders that were meeting in Sanaa, and that was where the Israelis struck.

It is another example of the Israeli military using its intelligence to target the senior leadership of Iranian proxies in the region. We saw it when Israel targeted and assassinated Hamas political leader, Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran, as well as when they killed Hezbollah leader, Hassan Nasrallah in Beirut, and strikes that have targeted Hamas leaders in Gaza.

Now we see that same M.O. being used by the Israelis to go after Houthi leaders, after a number of ballistic missiles have been fired at Israel, as the Houthis say they are standing in solidarity with the Palestinian people in Gaza.

We saw Israel's Defense Minister warn in December that they would start targeting Houthi leadership, and now, after the Israelis struck power plants, military bases, civilian infrastructure that they say was used by the Houthis, we see a shift in what Israel is targeting here as they go after the leaders of the Iran-backed rebel group.

Meanwhile, in Gaza, a source familiar with Israel's planning says Israel intends to halt airdrops into Gaza City, meaning that Palestinians up to a million of them in and around Gaza's largest city, will be forced out of the city if they are looking for desperately needed aid, and that is part of Israel's bigger plan as it prepares for the takeover and occupation of Gaza City.

The plan is to force the evacuation and then to move in with the military, but we already see the military operating on the ground in the neighborhoods around Gaza City, neighborhoods like Jabalya and Zaytoun, and then we have seen strikes closing in on Gaza City itself.

On Saturday, according to local health officials, there was an Israeli strike that killed 11 Palestinians in Western Gaza City, and then in the al-Rimal neighborhood of Gaza City itself, a strike there killed six Palestinians according to the Gaza Civil Defense.

Israel said about the latter strike that they targeted a key Hamas terrorist without providing any more details about who they were targeting or whether they believe the target was killed in the strike. Meanwhile, Saturday night in Israel means there were more protests on the streets, this time, protesters holding a massive sign that that called on President Donald Trump to "make history" and force Israel and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to accept the deal on the table, get to a deal to end the war and bring home the remaining hostages.

Oren Liebermann, CNN in Jerusalem.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

[18:20:12]

DEAN: Oren, thank you, and as he just mentioned, those protesters in Israel's Hostage Square pleading with President Trump to end the war in Gaza and bring the hostages home.

Again, as Oren noted, thousands packed the Square ahead of tomorrow's scheduled Security Cabinet meeting, in which ministers are expected to push ahead with plans for the IDF to take over Gaza City.

The protesters then unfurled that massive banner calling on President Trump to make history by ending the war and securing the release of all remaining hostages.

The mother of one Israeli hostage held in Gaza spoke at another protest earlier today and vowed to ensure Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will be charged.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ZANGAUKER (through translator): Netanyahu, if my son, Matan comes back in a body. bag, not only will he and I pay the price, I will personally make sure you are charged with premeditated murder.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DEAN: There are still 48 hostages being held in Gaza, 20 of them are believed to be alive. Meanwhile, a source telling CNN, Israel is set to stop all airdrops over Gaza City ahead of its major military offensive there. It will also reduce the entry of relief trucks. Israel's government has vowed to take complete control of Gaza City ahead of the second anniversary of the October 7th attacks.

The Red Cross has warned Israel's plan for mass evacuations is impossible.

Earlier today, an Israeli airstrike in Gaza City killed at least 11 Palestinians, including six children, that is according to local health officials there.

And joining us now is Dana Stroul, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for the Middle East and Research Director at the Washington Institute for Middle East Policy.

Dana, thank you for being with us. We really appreciate it. Let's start first with this military offensive. Members of the Israeli government have said that they believe going into Gaza City in this way is the only way they can effectively end this war and achieve their goals.

Do you think that's right?

DANA STROUL, FORMER DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR THE MIDDLE EAST: Well, they look at the fact pattern that, in their view, military pressure works, and you could make that case from a lot of Israel's experience over the last two years, since October 7th, military pressure worked against Hezbollah, which got to the ceasefire in Lebanon.

Military pressure worked in Syria, where Bashar al-Assad fled Damascus, military pressure did succeed in rolling back Iran's nuclear program, and Hamas is so degraded in Gaza that it is no longer capable of another October 7th-like operation. The challenge now is we can't get Hamas to agree to abandon its governance stranglehold over Gaza, release all the hostages and demilitarize, and for the Israeli government, their view is more military pressure is the only way to get Hamas to agree to those demands.

DEAN: And we've noted ahead of this, Israel has halted airdrops, and the Red Cross is deeply concerned. They say these mass evacuations are impossible.

So as we watch this unfold, help us understand the impact this next step could have on the humanitarian crisis we've seen there.

STROUL: So first of all, for the Israeli decision makers inside the government, they've heard the calls from the U.N. before that these mass evacuations of civilians from areas where they want to do operations are impossible. and again, for Prime Minister Netanyahu, they believe that every time they have managed to evacuate civilians before these military operations.

The challenge right now in Gaza City is we are talking about a million people where there already are reports of famine and starvation. People are exhausted and they may be unable to evacuate after nearly two years of war, and these operations are going forward.

So halting the humanitarian aid is, in their view, the way to get people to move south. The problem is people probably just can't do it as fast as Israel wants, and we are going to likely see more civilian casualties in the coming days.

DEAN: And then we look ahead. The U.S. announcing it is going to deny and revoke visas for the Palestinian Authority, President Mahmoud Abbas and other officials ahead of the U.N. General Assembly, which is next month and it comes -- when that Assembly happens, there are multiple countries expected to recognize a Palestinian State.

So I want to separate this out into two questions. First, the impact of countries, including, by the way, France and the U.K., strong allies of the U.S. and Israel who have said that they will potentially recognize a Palestinian State. What is the impact of that on the negotiations that are going on and what we are seeing unfold in Gaza?

STROUL: Well, first of all, Israel is increasingly isolated on the international stage, particularly by longtime partners in Europe. By recognizing Palestine at the U.N., it further isolates Israel.

[18:25:05]

The reality on the ground, of course, is that there is no Palestinian State. The Palestinian Authority is not seen by many Palestinians, either in Gaza or the West Bank as a credible legitimate government at this time. So while the international isolation, I think is very serious and there is a coming showdown at the U.N. general assembly in September, the practical effect on the ground would have been pretty minimal.

On the other hand, it certainly emboldens Hamas to dig in. What Hamas senses is that it doesn't have to compromise. It doesn't have to demilitarize, release all the hostages, and release its governance stranglehold in Gaza because it senses that it is on the up and Israel is on the down.

DEAN: And so you note that there is probably a showdown that's coming as we look ahead to the U.N. General Assembly. What might that look like? What are those dynamics like?

STROUL: Well It is going to be the United States and Israel largely against the rest of the world. When you have U.S. allies and longtime supporters of Israel like the U.K. and France and Canada all coming together to recognize Palestine, it is going to further limit Israel's ability to rally support for its real security threats and the fact that it faced a real significant atrocious terrorist attack on October 7th.

The challenge right now is, while Israel has said Hamas can have no future governance role in Gaza, it has not articulated what kind of Palestinian governance role would be acceptable for Israel and Israel's security concerns, and most of the rest of the world thinks that's the Palestinian Authority.

So by denying these leaders the opportunity to come to the U.N., I think the United States thinks it is preventing or mitigating the effects of the showdown, but actually, it is likely to have the reverse effect and just make them worse.

DEAN: All right, and that's just in a few weeks here in New York.

Dana Stroul, thanks for being here. We really appreciate it.

STROUL: Thanks for having me.

DEAN: Still to come, a political fight unfolding in Chicago, how Democrats there plan to push back against the Trump administration as the President ramps up his immigration and law enforcement crackdowns in one of America's biggest cities.

You're in the CNN NEWSROOM. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:31:35]

DEAN: In just the past day, two separate legal rulings are challenging some of President Trump's top priorities, a federal appeals court saying Trump overstepped his constitutional authority with the way he enacted many of his historic tariffs, and a federal judge saying the Trump administration is denying some migrants their constitutional rights in its effort to speed up deportation. Let's bring in Chicago Sun-Times Special Correspondent, Lynn Sweet.

Lynn, thank you so much for being here with us on this Saturday afternoon and evening. Let's kind of zoom out for a moment and give us some of the broader context here about why these rulings are significant for the Trump administration.

LYNN SWEET, SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT, CHICAGO SUN-TIMES: Well, they're significant, especially on the tariff front, because it's a blow to the main legal strategy that Trump has been using to justify his unilateral wielding of these tariffs as both a political and economic tool. The so-called emergency powers that Trump claimed were in play, the court said, weren't really the emergency powers that the law intended.

And as our listeners know, this will go to the Supreme Court. That's why the appellate panel based in Washington stayed their order until October. So, we don't know exactly if it's going to stick, and the same with the immigration ruling. It's not a matter of finality, but it does strike a blow for now to some of the initiatives that Trump is trying to force through the power of his pen.

DEAN: And as you've covered the Trump administration, and we've all covered them and watched this unfold, the overarching theme here is that they are trying to see how, you know, what the limit is of executive power here: What can they do? How much can they expand it? What are you hearing in your reporting about how the administration is thinking about that more broadly?

SWEET: Well, we all could see that at every - almost in every place that the federal government has something going on, that the Trump administration is challenging it from banning or dumping Democratic appointees to boards and commissions, where they had appointments for a certain number of years. And of course, all these are challenged in court.

The idea here is, I guess, throw everything up in the air, kind of sweat out all these legal challenges and see what sticks. And in the meantime, you get your way.

DEAN: Yes.

SWEET: Because most of the judges all say and all know that it's going to be the Supreme Court that will make the final decision. So far, the Supreme Court has overwhelmingly been compliant and bending to the Trump legal theories for justifying many of his actions. So, we don't have the sense of what will stick yet. But we do know that some of the institutions, especially at the Center for Disease Control are - if they're being deconstructed and the work they're done halting, it is hard to put it back together again, especially in some of these agencies where time does make a difference and their work is needed on a day-to-day basis.

DEAN: Yes. And look, as you know, Trump has had a lot of success as well in the legal arena with all of this, in addition to these rulings that have been, you know, against him as well.

[18:35:03]

We have also seen the President, yes, touting his power, including deploying the National Guard into some cities. You're in this unique position where you have a lot of insight into what's going on in Washington, but also Chicago, which is likely the next place we're going to see a lot of this. How might that situation look compared to what we've seen, say, in Washington, D.C.?

SWEET: It will look very different. This is a city on guard. In fact, that's kind of how we're labeling the extensive coverage that we're giving this at the Sun-Times and at our partner WBEZ. If you wonder why you need local papers, this story is one, because we are granular on the ground situation. Every - this is - everyone knows this is a Democratic town, Democratic governor, Governor Pritzker, Mayor Brandon Johnson.

So today, the mayor signed an executive order. It's called the Protecting Chicago Initiative. And mainly, it tells Trump to stand down. President Trump is not going to stand down. He's going to do what he wants to do. He will get court challenges in Chicago and just worry about it later.

There has been reporting that's been confirmed that the - you know, in the story the Sun-Times broke that the Great Lakes' naval base in Lake County, Illinois, which, by the way, people may not know, is one of the largest training bases in the nation, and it's just up - just north of Chicago, is likely to be the staging area for military, either active duty or National Guard.

So, the city has a policy of not wanting to collaborate and, in a sense, make the Chicago Police deputies of federal law enforcement. The Governor and the Mayor have long said that they cooperate with legal initiatives by immigration authorities. That is not an issue. What no one really knows is where are these troops going to be deployed, into high-crime areas and, by the way, how would they know it, since there's been no communication yet between the Chicago Police Department, the Mayor and the Governor?

Now, this is really just kind of a cover for a massive immigration raid play. We don't know that yet. But it's talking about the things that have happened in Los Angeles, where you have masked law enforcement officials, no one wearing body cameras, no one wearing badges. This executive order that Johnson signed is banning it. But it is going to be very, very tough to enforce. But this is a city that's pretty unified against it. And unlike Mayor

Bowser in Washington, who's in a very different legal situation and was much more circumspect in her reaction to the deployment of troops, I would look more to Karen Bass, the Mayor of Los Angeles, who has been consulting with Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson on how to deal with sending troops to the streets of the city, and Los Angeles had Marines and National Guard.

DEAN: Yes. All right. Well, as a product of local news, we are grateful to all those local newspapers out there that keep everyone educated and aware of what's going on, and grateful to you, Lynn Sweet, for being here. Thank you so much.

SWEET: And thank you so much.

DEAN: Still to come, new details on the latest cyber-attack to hit a state's government websites and offices. What hackers targeted and why it's becoming more common? We're going to talk to a national security expert on the other side of this break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:43:10]

DEAN: The state of Nevada is recovering after a cyber-attack shut down government offices, websites, and phone lines earlier this week. Departments went offline to contain the threat before gradually restoring services. As far as what's currently operational, emergency services, including 911, state payroll, unemployment assistance, health programs, and limited DMV online services are available. Governor Joe Lombardo says the incident was first detected early Sunday and warned residents that scammers may try to capitalize on what happened.

Glenn Gerstell is joining us now. He's a senior advisor at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and a former general counsel at the NSC.

Glenn, thank you so much for being here with us.

This attack was initially detected about a week ago. Everything's not quite back up and running just yet. Is it usual for recovery to take this long?

GLENN GERSTELL, FORMER GENERAL COUNSEL, NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY: This is a cyber incident of extraordinary scale, probably the most severe to hit a state that we have thus far. Not necessarily in terms of the number of people because Nevada has only about 3 billion people, but in terms of the scope of the state government services, everything, as you said, from the gaming control board that oversees the Las Vegas Strip to public health to the state police.

As to what exactly happened, we're not quite sure whether the ransom attack affected all of those services or the state government, as apparently is the case, decided once it learned of the cyber intrusion a week ago to preemptively turn off some of the state government computer services to make sure that the infection didn't spread, the ransomware didn't spread to other systems. It sounds like that was the reason that this extent of the damage and disruption is so significant. A prudent step, but nonetheless, one that's going to take a lot of time.

In this case, it seems to affected almost every vital, not all, but almost every vital service of the government.

[18:45:07]

And one by one, they're going to have to check each computer network, make sure there's no ransomware, malware in there or other computer viruses and then turn them back on. But that's a lengthy process.

DEAN: Yes. Who might have done this and why would someone do this?

GERSTELL: Well, the why is easy, that's to get some money. They're obviously looking - the criminals behind this are looking for a payment of ransom. That's presumably why they may have exfiltrated, taken out some data, perhaps about Nevadans' personal information, to hold that as blackmail to the state to say pay us or else we'll release this.

It's most likely a group of cyber criminals, probably not another country, probably - even though Russia, China, North Korea, Iran are interested in meddling in - maliciously in our cyber infrastructure. This is probably just cyber criminals. And the reason it's so easy is that it's now possible to go on the dark web quite easily and buy a ransomware kit that master cyber criminals are selling. There they simply sell it either directly for cryptocurrency or simply ask for a cut of the ransom that you collect.

And when you use artificial intelligence to go search for your victims and figure out how to get into them, this becomes a very, very easy and powerful tool in the hands of lots of criminals. So, it's very accessible. And the state governments and local governments often don't have the defenses necessary to stand up to it.

DEAN: Yes, and quickly we have to go, but it sounds like based on your last point there, are these governments up to the challenge? Are they prepared for this sort of thing?

GERSTELL: Look, state and local governments simply don't have the budgets and the cyber expertise that big banks, insurance companies, health insurance companies, et cetera, have who spend 10s of millions of dollars on cybersecurity. Most state governments and local governments aren't in a position to do that.

So, their defenses are lower. And yet at the same time, they're more vulnerable because of the data they have about the average citizen, property records, mental health records, school records for your kids. So, local governments are a really big, juicy target for cyber criminals.

DEAN: All right. Glenn Gerstell, thank you so much. Great expertise and context there. We really appreciate it. And we'll be right back.

GERSTELL: Thank you.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:52:07]

DEAN: Americans who love to shop online for cheap goods from overseas could have some major sticker shock soon. For years, the United States government let any packages under $800 enter the country tariff-free. But that exemption is now gone. CNN's Anna Cooban has more.

(BEGIN VIDEO TAPE)

ANNA COOBAN, CNN BUSINESS & ECONOMICS REPORTER: De minimis, it's a term you may be hearing a lot today. It's Latin for something lacking in significance or importance. Some people may not quite agree with that. You see, President Donald Trump has scrapped the so-called de minimis exemption, a rule that has allowed products worth $800 or less to enter the United States from all around the world without, crucially, paying an import tax.

That exemption has allowed low-cost goods like clothes, makeup, home decor, really anything that you can think of, to flow into the U.S. relatively easily and help to fuel a booming global e-commerce industry like these brands here.

And as you can see here, over the last decade, this number has grown significantly. And that is partly why Trump is ending this de minimis exemption. It's to help discourage Americans from buying overseas and incentivize homegrown manufacturing. U.S. Customs and Border Protection estimated that over 1.36 billion shipments entered the U.S. during the last financial year under this de minimis exemption, and that more than four million were processed every single day.

Sellers will face different tariffs depending on which country they are in. They'll face an $80 tariff if - per item for - if they're in a country with an overall tariff rate of 16 percent, below 16 percent, and an up to $160 tariff per item if they're in a country with an overall tariff rate of between 16 percent and 25 percent. And then, a brutal $200 per item tariff if they're in a country with an overall tariff rate above 25 percent.

Right now, for example, Brazil and India have a 50 percent tariff placed on most of their goods flowing into the United States. Sellers may decide to pass those extra costs onto U.S. consumers, and that means that those late-night impulse purchases will come with an even bigger dose of morning regret, or they may simply not arrive at all.

Postal services around the world, including in Japan and Australia and across Europe, have temporarily suspended shipments to the United States. That's because some say they are simply unsure of how to navigate the new system. How do they make sure the tariffs are paid, what paperwork is needed and it's not yet clear when these services will be back up and running. For now, Americans wanting to indulge in some retail therapy will

simply have few options.

Anna Cooban, CNN, London.

(END VIDEO TAPE)

DEAN: Anna, thank you.

President Trump's tariff policies have really been decades in the making. In his latest documentary special, Fareed Zakaria looks back at America's history with tariffs, and here's a preview.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

FAREED ZAKARIA, CNN HOST, "FAREED ZAKARIA GPS": As President Trump has been hurling America's economy into turmoil with his Big, Beautiful tariffs, you may have asked yourself a question: When did he first fall in love with tariffs?

[18:55:06]

Well, Trump's obsession with protectionism is a tale that goes back decades.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: They are beating the hell out of this country.

They have taken tremendous advantage of the United States, folks.

They are systematically ripping off this country.

ALL: USA. USA.

ZAKARIA: You'd be forgiven for thinking that was an anti-China tirade from Donald Trump on the 2024 campaign trail, or maybe the 2016 campaign trail - not quite. These are the words of a much younger Trump in the 1980s, then laser-focused on Japan.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DEAN: Be sure to tune in. "Big, Beautiful Tariffs, A Fareed Zakaria Special" airs Monday at 8 P.M. Eastern right here on CNN. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)