Return to Transcripts main page

CNN This Morning

Trump Praises Musk's Email Request to Government Workers as Department Heads Balk; U.S. Declines to Condemn Russia for War on Ukraine. Aired 6-6:30a ET

Aired February 25, 2025 - 06:00   ET

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

KAYLA TAUSCHE, CNN ANCHOR: Its Tuesday, February 25, right now on CNN THIS MORNING.

[05:59:21]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: If you don't respond, we assume you're not around, and you're not getting paid anymore, too.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAUSCHE: Do I still have a job? Many federal workers waking up asking that question this morning as Elon Musk's deadline for federal workers passes overnight.

Plus, this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DAN BONGINO, INCOMING FBI DEPUTY DIRECTOR: The FBI has lost. It's broken. Irredeemably corrupt at this point.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAUSCHE: Two Republican firebrands heading up the FBI, Kash Patel and Dan Bongino, plan to shake things up at the bureau. What impact will it have, if any, on our national security?

Then later --

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: I do deals. My whole life is deals. That's all I know is deals.

SEN. MARK KELLY (D-AZ): This is like the art of the bad deal.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAUSCHE: President Trump touting his deal-making ability as the U.S. aligns with Russia and North Korea at the United Nations. Is America becoming even more distant from its allies?

And this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I thought there were supposed to be checks and balances somewhere.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAUSCHE: How are Trump voters feeling about his first month in office? We'll take you to a county that helped President Trump win the White House to ask them directly.

Six a.m. here on the East Coast. You are looking live at the Washington Monument, just down the street from our studios here.

Good morning, everyone. I'm Kayla Tausche, in for Kasie Hunt. It's wonderful to have you with us.

Elon Musk's midnight deadline for federal workers to detail everything they did last week, or risk losing their job, has come and gone. So, what now?

Federal agencies spent the day Monday, confounded by contradicting orders from administration officials about whether they should respond to Musk's weekend message.

One IRS employee telling CNN, "It's bedlam." One message sent to Health and Human Services employees told workers to, quote, "assume that what you write will be read by malign foreign actors."

Veterans Affairs workers say, quote, "No one knows who is in charge and who to listen to." That worker adding, "It's totally disruptive."

The confusion also playing out in federal court as a D.C. district judge grilled Justice Department lawyers about who is leading DOGE.

During a hearing over Treasury Department access, Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly asked, "Where is Mr. Musk in all of this?" asking, "Who is the administrator of DOGE?"

The DOJ lawyer didn't have an answer.

As the government tried to work out whether Musk's email was legal, President Trump cheered on the effort from the Oval Office.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: The last email that was sent, where he wanted to know what you did this week, you know why he wanted that, by the way? I thought it was great. What he's doing is saying, are you actually working? And then if you don't answer, like you're sort of semi-fired or you're fired, because a lot of people are not answering, because they don't even exist.

(END VIDEO CLIP) TAUSCHE: Eventually, the Office of Personnel Management informed agencies last night that responding to the email was voluntary, and a failure to respond would not, quote, "equate to resignation."

But Musk seems undaunted, saying last night workers will be given another chance, adding, "Failure to respond a second time will result in termination."

Joining me now to discuss: Leah Wright Rigueur, CNN political analyst and historian; Kendra Barkoff, former press secretary to Joe Biden; and Brad Todd, CNN political commentator and Republican strategist.

Kendra, first off, what's the harm in responding to this email with a few innocuous bullet points about what you did that doesn't betray client or customer information?

KENDRA BARKOFF, FORMER PRESS SECRETARY TO JOE BIDEN: The harm is the overall thing of what Elon Musk and Donald Trump are doing. This is not about exactly what they're asking for. This is about power. This is about control.

And this is about causing mass chaos within a government who is supposed to be doing certain things.

Veterans, you know, the Veterans Administration are supposed to be giving out what they deserve to -- to get to their veterans.

This is about causing chaos in the administration. And at the end of the day, who is responsible for this? You're already seeing some of the cabinet secretaries push back on this. There's just -- there's a sense of just undue chaos. And this is all about the power.

TAUSCHE: That OPM memo that CNN obtained, essentially sent to H.R. departments, saying this is voluntary. If you don't respond, you're not going to have to resign or be fired. You would expect, Brad, that that's going to be a major exhibit in a forthcoming lawsuit if, in fact, workers are fired as a result of this.

BRAD TODD, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, it will, but in the end, what they're trying to get to is -- is they're trying to force federal government employees to declare, do you agree that you work for the White House and the president of United States or not? Or do you think you're entitled to just do what you want?

There's been this arrogance in the federal bureaucracy for a long time. People think they're going to stay there forever. They don't take orders from the White House. They don't take orders from maybe even anyone.

And I think that they're trying to shine a light on that arrogance and force some sort of accountability so that the federal bureaucracy admits that it works for the elected leadership of the government.

TAUSCHE: Well, I think there's some pause about whether these workers believe they work for Elon Musk, whether they work for DOGE, who's calling the shots here. And to be sure, a judge did issue a 14-day temporary restraining order

on DOGE's ability to access some of these more sensitive systems.

But, Leah, you're a historian. Put this into context for us. Every administration has tried to cut costs in some manner. So, how does this differ, in your view?

LEAH WRIGHT RIGUEUR, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST AND HISTORIAN: So, every administration has not only tried to cut costs; they've also tried to cut the federal bureaucracy. And in fact, they've been pretty successful at doing it.

Bill Clinton is a great example of this. Over the course of his two terms in office, he cut close to half a million people from the federal budget and, you know, saved millions of dollars. And it was explicitly about efficiency and getting rid of waste and fraud.

[06:05:08]

However, he did it in a very specific manner. There was a task force that was led by Al Gore. It had 400 people on it. And so, they would identify very carefully, over the course of eight years, who are these people? What are they doing?

And then we have very human conversations to limit the kind of harm that we are doing, because these are real people with real lives that also have details, very sensitive and important information.

The goal is not to cause chaos, which actually helps inefficiency.

And so, one of the things that we should be looking at, and the way that we should be trying to understand DOGE, is that even as it is accounting for waste and bureaucracy and mismanagement and things like that, it is actually exacerbating those problems.

So, we should be evaluating that. And what are they doing and how are they actually helping fraud or not helping fraud?

TAUSCHE: Well, in this case, Elon Musk, as a special government employee, only has 130 days to affect his own agenda and get his goals accomplished. Perhaps one of the reasons why this has been moving so quickly.

That's led some lawmakers to urge him to use more compassion and, to the administration more broadly, to approach this in a more compassionate way, which President Trump himself addressed from the White House yesterday. Here's what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: Elon uses an expression, "caring." If we had people that cared, just cared a little bit when they did contracts, when they negotiated with outside vendors for -- on behalf of the United States. That's what I'm doing now. I'm negotiating for the people of the United States, and we're doing a great job of it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAUSCHE: So, the idea that more care should have been exercised when these contracts were being inked, or these workers were being hired, or these divisions were being set up. Kendra, your response to that?

BARKOFF: Yes. I mean, I would say Glenn Youngkin was out there yesterday, talking about the empathy that he has for the workers in his state.

There's probably, I think, around 100,000 federal workers in the state of Virginia. He's out there talking about, you know, this is really hard. People need to plan. People need to have lives. People have children. And it is -- it is something that Republicans should take -- should take into account.

You're also seeing this not just outside of the D.C. area. You're seeing it in town halls across the country, where Republicans are going out there and talking to their constituents, and they're hearing from their constituents that this is a problem. This chaos is causing a problem, not just in the D.C. area, but everywhere.

TAUSCHE: You mentioned what Governor Youngkin said. I just want to play that before we get our panel's response. Here's the governor yesterday.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GOV. GLENN YOUNGKIN (R-VA): We need to press forward and drive efficiencies in our federal government. And as a result of driving those efficiencies, I do expect that some Virginians will lose their jobs. And that's why it's so important that we provide alternative -- alternative opportunities for them.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAUSCHE: "Alternative opportunities for them," Brad. Virginia has a very robust economy. There are a lot of companies headquartered there.

What is the down-ballot effect in states that might not have such a robust economy, that might not have so many large blue-chip employers there to catch some of these --?

(CROSSTALK)

TODD: Well, we've seen this kind of disruption with -- due to government policy before. You know, I come from a place that was manufacturing-based, and NAFTA and PNTR just devastated it. A lot of those people lost their jobs. People I know.

They had to move to different areas. They had to move to a different place where there were more opportunities, maybe more booming metropolitan area.

So there -- there -- but luckily, the government workers in Washington, D.C., are probably not going to have to relocate. Washington is a booming economy, and there's always work for people who are educated and -- and have skills. And that's the kind of people that that might lose their jobs in the federal government.

TAUSCHE: Do you expect an exodus out of Washington? What have we seen in the past?

RIGUEUR: Well, I think one of the things that we have to understand about Washington is the cost of living in Washington. And what have we seen in the past is that, by and large, when administrations change, we do see people move out of those spaces.

So, we're starting to see a trickle down in terms of real estate, in terms of what's going on the market. That also may be natural, given that it's starting to be spring. I'm being aspirational here.

But we're also seeing a transition between administrations.

What I would be very careful about, though, is that there is a difference in how we are seeing the kind of explosion or transition, because it's not simply political appointees that we're seeing leave right now.

We're seeing, en masse, these kind of larger, much larger layoffs that affect career and civil employees who normally have not been part of these large mass layoffs that have happened so intimately and so fast.

That is absolutely going to have an effect on the economy. Both the economy within Washington, D.C., but larger economies that are dependent upon or have been integrated into the conversation around the federal government.

The government -- the federal government plays an important role in the economy, and it's one that I think we've really overlooked in this larger conversation.

TAUSCHE: And there's a lot of institutional knowledge walking out of the building, as well, with that, too.

This conversation will continue. But coming up on CNN THIS MORNING, two MAGA loyalists who peddle in conspiracy theories, now leading the FBI. How former FBI agents are reacting and what they say this means for the country.

[06:10:11]

Plus, the House might vote on one big, beautiful budget bill today. But do the Republicans have the votes? Democratic representative Nikki Budzinski is here to discuss.

And a growing rift on full display as President Trump meets with his French counterpart in the White House while refusing to call Vladimir Putin a dictator.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You called Zelenskyy a dictator. Would you use the same words regarding Putin?

TRUMP: I don't use those words lightly.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[06:15:18]

TAUSCHE: The nation's premier law enforcement agency is now being led by two staunch political allies of President Donald Trump.

FBI director Kash Patel, now joined by Secret Service agent turned right-wing podcast host Dan Bongino, who Trump has chosen to serve as deputy director. Both are Trump loyalists who have publicly criticized the agency they're now in charge of and entertained conspiracy theories, raising questions about what this new era of the FBI will look like under a second Trump term.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KASH PATEL, FBI DIRECTOR: I'd shut down the FBI Hoover Building on day one and reopening it the next day as a museum of the deep state.

BONGINO: The FBI has lost. It's broken, irredeemably corrupt at this point. But what the FBI did to Donald Trump, that wasn't law enforcement. It was tyranny.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAUSCHE: Let's bring my panel back in. Leah, this is quite a departure from the days of J. Edgar Hoover himself.

RIGUEUR: Very much a departure. And in fact, the -- the conversation and the concern with J. Edgar Hoover, while he was in -- while he was head of the -- the White House -- the head of the FBI was, in fact, that he was too independent, that he was too powerful, that Nixon, in particular, President Richard Nixon, had very real concerns about J. Edgar Hoover's loyalty amongst his FBI workers; the way that he cultivated an environment where essentially, he amassed so much power that he could challenge, effectively challenge the president and have his own agenda.

And I think one of the things that it speaks to is, one, the power of the FBI and the ability of the FBI to do these kind of far-reaching things that go beyond simply being the federal police force or something like that, but in fact, that they have the ability to do things like surveillance; monitor; internal investigations.

But then the other part of this, too -- and that's really different and really quite, I would say, really quite alarming -- is that you've now installed two people that have very much said that their loyalty is to the president of the United States.

What does that mean for the existing -- the 38,000 members of the FBI or the -- the FBI agents who very -- like, who actually don't know what they're supposed to be doing now?

How does that inspire leadership, or how does that inspire confidence in the body that exists?

The one last thing that I'll say here, too, is that by bringing in two people who are not or who have not had an intersection or interaction with the FBI or experience with the FBI, we have to think about what does that mean for organizing a bureaucracy, right?

TAUSCHE: Yes.

RIGUEUR: It is a large organization. How do you manage that? What does that actually look like in practice?

TAUSCHE: He has prior government service, as we were talking about during the commercial break. Kendra, he was part of the Secret Service detail for presidents George W. Bush, President Barack Obama.

But how different is serving in a detail from running 55 field offices and being in possession of some of the most sensitive information and the minutia about all of the investigations that the bureau has ongoing?

BARKOFF: It's -- it's very different. And there are some real problems that he's going to face on day one, when he comes in there.

People are going to ask him really tough questions about tough investigations, about tough decisions that need to get made, and he's going to have to make decisions in real time that could have an effect on people's lives.

This is -- this is an organization that deals with counterterrorism, that deals with, you know, the -- the most sensitive law enforcement issues in our country. And it's a -- it's a real problem.

This is Trump's 20th former or current -- former FOX News, you know, anchor or person. And I -- and I think that what Trump is creating is a sense of a reality show, as opposed to real life, that people's lives are, in effect.

TAUSCHE: Brad, Republicans are focusing on -- on his resume and on his prior service.

But one of the things that's creating some agita within the bureau, as we've learned through reports, is that Kash Patel told the FBI Agents Association that he would respect the tradition of putting a career officer in the deputy director rank, as has been done for decades.

So why do you think he made this move?

TODD: Well, I think the president made it, but I think Kash Patel has the hardest job in this administration. Trust in the FBI is at an all- time low, and you have half the country that would just -- would almost disband it. And we can't disband the FBI. We need a strong FBI that can work on law enforcement functions.

But in order -- the trust is so low, and the trust by the president is so low that you have to rebuild it almost from the ground up.

But you have to do so with most of the same people in the agents' jobs.

I think it's a real task, and I think you have to -- first thing he has to do is he has to build an agency that the president will trust. And then he has to build one the American public can trust.

TAUSCHE: He has pledged to purge the agents who played any role in the search of Mar-a-Lago for classified documents. He's pledged to evaluate the list of any FBI agents who had a role in any of the January 6th investigations.

[06:20:11]

Do you expect the -- the FBI to shrink in a material way?

TODD: I don't think it will shrink. I think that there are plenty of talented law enforcement people around the country who can step into some of those roles.

The FBI was politicized. It's not just about what they did at Mar-a- Lago. It's also the fact that they -- they decided that people who -- who were strict Catholics and went to Latin mass might be at risk of being a terrorist. It said parents that go to school boards might be a domestic terrorism threat.

The FBI has a problem culturally that must be rebuilt from the ground up.

And so, there will be people there who can stay, who are -- who are just career law enforcement people who wanted no part of politicizing the administration under Joe Biden. They can stay. But there will be some people who have to go.

TAUSCHE: And many of those agents are public servants with specialized knowledge who contribute to nonpartisan work. We should -- we should also mention.

TODD: All right. Fair point.

TAUSCHE: But it's an important point. To be continued.

Coming up on CNN THIS MORNING, afraid to open emails. Federal workers facing another threat from Elon Musk. Democratic Congresswoman Nikki Budzinski joins us live.

Plus, President Trump refusing to call Vladimir Putin a dictator as America aligns with Russia at the U.N.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[06:25:41]

TAUSCHE: The Trump administration siding with Russia against a U.N. General Assembly resolution condemning the Kremlin's war on Ukraine. America, now at odds with its longtime European allies as casualties mount on the third anniversary of Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine. The U.S. also pushing through its own U.N. resolution, making no

mention of Russian aggression or acknowledging Ukrainian territory.

Russian President Vladimir Putin now saying he could see working with American companies in the future.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

VLADIMIR PUTIN, RUSSIAN PRESIDENT (through translator): We would be ready to offer cooperation to our American partners, as well. When I say partners, I mean not only administrative and governmental structures, but also companies, if they showed interest in working together.

I want to stress that we certainly have much more of such resources than Ukraine. Russia is one of the leading countries when it comes to rare metal reserves.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAUSCHE: CNN's Nick Paton Walsh joins us live from Kyiv.

Nick, how is Ukraine reacting to this news after three years of steadfast U.S. military and financial support?

NICK PATON WALSH, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Look, I think there has been, obviously, shock and disappointment over the past week, but it's been a remarkable seesaw and whiplash, frankly.

Yesterday morning, European leaders were here to express their physical solidarity with President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. And there was a feeling that it was Europe trying to suggest it could go it alone, potentially without the Trump administration.

But then we had this remarkable intervention by France's Emmanuel Macron, who appears to have, for much of the time, speaking, it seemed, for Donald Trump, but appeared to have brought the United States back into the European security agenda, suggesting that they would be there in solidarity, if the French and the British put peacekeeping troops on the ground.

Not suggesting that the U.S. might have a material role there, but would return as a deterrent.

And that, I think, along with the suggestion from President Donald Trump sitting alongside Macron, that indeed, Zelenskyy would come and visit him in the coming week or two to potentially sign a rare earth minerals deal, which has become really the key plank of future U.S.- Ukraine aid.

There's been another stretch of optimism here, but above it all, I think there is this lingering fear and suspicion that the Trump administration's agenda is increasingly closer to Moscow than, of course, it was when the Biden administration were the main key military and financial backer for Ukraine here. A lot of disappointment about the revisionism that we've been hearing.

That initially sparked President Zelenskyy's comment that began the spat between him and Trump over a week ago now, where he said that Trump was living in a disinformation circle. Sorry, that was Wednesday when that comment was made. That then sparked Trump to call him a dictator.

But it was that notion that Ukraine started the war that somehow -- that began Zelenskyy's comments and, of course, is really at the heart of this U.S. resolution, refusing to say Russia began this.

And that's, I think, for many people, a concern, because that revisionism plays into Russia's narrative. There are some advocates of the Trump administration who suggest, if you want to make a deal with people, you can't spend the whole time being antagonistic towards them.

And others who say, we tried a reset with Russian relations at the beginning of the Obama administration. It didn't work. They only really understand strength.

So, many differing opinions about what will work and what may work. Certainly, the war has got increasingly complex and difficult for Ukraine. Will fresh thinking change that? We simply don't know.

What we do know is that Trump himself has, it seems, after the visit from Macron, not entirely flipped. We don't know what practically has changed, but that rare earth minerals deal seems a lot closer now.

The idea that he'd meet Zelenskyy. Well, that was frankly unthinkable potentially 48 hours ago. The men's relationship seemed in freefall.

So, we are seeing things change radically, but that does mean they can also change back again, not so much in Ukraine's favor. And that resolution really sticking in the minds of so many who have observed this horrific Russian assault on Ukraine. Over 12,000 dead civilians over the past three years.

It's just odd to see the main backer of Ukraine refuse to suggest Russia was the aggressor and, indeed, join Russia in a U.N. General Assembly vote. Remarkable.

TAUSCHE: It is remarkable.