Return to Transcripts main page

CNN This Morning

Roben Farzad is Interviewed about Tariffs; Powell Accused of Mismanaging Federal Reserve; Trump to Visit Texas Flooding; Judge Blocks Birthright Citizenship Order; EPA Debunks Chemtrails. Aired 6:30-7a ET

Aired July 11, 2025 - 06:30   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[06:31:43]

AUDIE CORNISH, CNN ANCHOR: Good morning, everybody. I'm Audie Cornish. Thank you for joining me on CNN THIS MORNING.

It's now half past the hour. And here's what's happening right now.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do not panic. Do not run. Do not run.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CORNISH: A federal judge will rule in a lawsuit seeking to stop these immigration raids in Los Angeles. The lawsuit accuses the Trump administration and the Department of Homeland Security of conducting mass immigration sweeps without probable cause. The government claims DHS agents conduct stops based on intelligence.

Also happening today, President Trump and First Lady Melania are traveling to Texas. They'll tour the flood damage and visit the emergency operations center.

President Trump striking a deal also to defend Ukraine from the onslaught of Russian airstrikes. Under the plan, the U.S. will sell defense systems to NATO, which will then provide them to Ukraine. That's according to NBC News. Overnight, we learned at least ten people have died in Ukraine from this week's Russian bombardment.

And I want to turn back now to those tariffs, because soon you could be feeling it, say, even in your morning coffee runs. That's because of President Trump's latest threatened 50 percent tariff on Brazil. The countries were -- the -- the country is the world's largest coffee exporter. Trump says he'll impose the tariffs come August if Brazil doesn't end the trial of former president, and Trump ally, Jair Bolsonaro. He's accused of trying to stage a coup.

Now, last night, President Trump also threatened a 35 percent tariff on Canada, and he's reportedly considering a blanket tariff on other countries. Joining me now is business journalist and host of the "Full

Disclosure" podcast, Roben Farzad.

Roben, good morning.

ROBEN FARZAD, BUSINESS JOURNALIST AND HOST, "FULL DISCLOSURE": Hi, Audie.

CORNISH: So, we were in this moment where the economy, looking at some of the numbers, are actually pretty good. So, what's your sense of why the president would be doing this now? What's the perception in term -- from the markets?

FARZAD: It's just -- at this point, it's just the constantly spewing fire hydrant of news out of the White House. If you'll remember, a couple weeks ago, we were fixated on World War III and Iran. It could be with ICE. It could be with him versus universities. It's just constantly grabbing and hogging that attention.

And the problem with that is it's -- it's just so much being put out there that after a while the market learns to yawn. So, are you really going to slap Canada with a 35 percent tariff over kind of negligible fentanyl trade over the border? But you want to look big. Are you really going to hit Brazil? That enormous size of an economy that has an enormous breadbasket that we depend on back and forth for agricultural inputs, for minerals, because of a political element, because of the fact that they're trying a former president there for attempted insurrection? I mean, after a while, you see how much the market has gained, and we've hit records, and you pay lip service to it in the morning, but that -- they keep invoking tariff and chicken out.

CORNISH: I also want to talk about Brazil because he's using it as specifically as political leverage, right, which we know he very much believes that this economic policy is in a lot of ways.

[06:35:03]

Can you talk about sort of how -- how that's seen?

FARZAD: I always end up quoting the late, great Charlie Murphy on "The Chappelle Show," like, he's a habitual line stepper. You're not supposed to go here. In the era of general agreement of tariffs and trades and the WTO, you're not -- you know, you're supposed to keep this church and state. Like, my political allies, that I'm going to defend them, and I'm going to mortgage the entire economy of a nation and our entire trade balance with them at a time of a global trade war over this spat, it seems penny ante.

And, by the way, international courts could knock it down. But he's out there for the rhetorical victory. For the fact that, look, I got somebody to step down. It's -- it's -- it's mob like. Like, I look out for my friends. But after a while, you see that it loses its bite here in the United States. The dollar clearly, has had a terrible year. But markets have yawned about it. And if you keep doing this, people are going to think you have just so much more bark than bite. CORNISH: Roben Farzad, business journalist. He's also host of the

"Full Disclosure" podcast.

Thank you so much.

FARZAD: My pleasure. Audie.

So, the Trump administration is throwing the kitchen sink at Fed Chairman Jerome Powell. The president is now demanding Powell cut interest rates by, I think, about three percentage points, even raising the possibility of firing him, a move that would be unprecedented.

Now, the White House is accusing Powell of breaking the law by failing to comply with government oversight regulations. They're accusing him of lying to Congress about renovations at the Fed's headquarters, which the administration claims are ostentatious.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JEROME POWELL, FEDERAL RESERVE CHAIRMAN: There's no VPI dining room. There's no new marble. We took down the old marble. We're putting it back up.

There are no new water features. There's no beehives and there's no -- and there's no roof terrace gardens. Other than that, you know, so, all of the -- all of the sort of inflammatory things that the media carried are either not in the current plan or just inaccurate.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CORNISH: OK, group chat is back.

And, Mike, the reason why I want to start with you --

MIKE DUBKE, FORMER COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR, TRUMP ADMINISTRATION: Yes.

CORNISH: Is because the president has spoken very harshly about Powell. We know he doesn't like him. Why bother with this part? Like, why not just fire him if that's what you really feel?

DUBKE: Well, a couple --

CORNISH: Why are we going through a thing now where there's allegations about gold sinks?

DUBKE: Well, a couple of things, because it's easier to have somebody resign than to fire them, first off. So, I think that's why you may have rhetoric coming out of the -- out of the White House or other places, on Capitol Hill about, I guess, beehives and rooftop terraces.

LULU GARCIA-NAVARRO, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Nothing wrong with beehives. I just want to say. The bees are in trouble.

DUBKE: But -- but that is a whole other conversation that we can have. But, I mean, I think that the president does have a point here. And -- and we can't forget that Powell is -- is going to be at the end of his term at the --

CORNISH: Yes.

DUBKE: In the -- in the beginning to the middle of next year.

But the president does have a point. Powell did not cut interest rates because he thought that the tariffs were going to lead to inflation. The tariffs have not led to inflation. And we've got the E.U. at 2.5 percent. We've got Japan -- or Canada at 2.75 percent. Weve got Japan at 0.5 percent. And we're at 4.5 percent. I mean the next -- Russia's at 20 percent. So we're -- Powell made a mistake. He has not owned up to that mistake. And I think you've got members on Capitol Hill and you've got the White House saying, we want this economy -- economy to move faster.

CORNISH: Yes.

DUBKE: We want interest rates to come down. We want credit card bills to come down.

CORNISH: Let -- hold on one second. Let me come back to something you just said.

DUBKE: You've got to move forward, Powell.

CORNISH: It's easier to make someone resign than to fire them.

DUBKE: Yes.

CORNISH: Powell was actually asked about this last November about the president's calls for him to step down. Here's how he responded then.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Some of the president-elect's advisers have suggested that you should resign. If he asked you to leave, would you go?

JEROME POWELL, FEDERAL RESERVE CHAIRMAN: No.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Can you follow up on his -- do you think that legally he -- you're not required to leave?

POWELL: No.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

NOEL KING, CO-HOST AND EDITORIAL DIRECTOR, "TODAY, EXPLAINED" PODCAST: He's not intimidated. I mean, Jerome Powell knows that he has two jobs, right? One of them is -- this is the Fed's dual mandate. One of them is price stability. So, no inflation, no deflation. Keep it -- keep it straight. And one of them is maximum employment. And employment numbers in the U.S. are really good right now. So, for all intents and purposes, Jerome Powell is doing a very good job.

If he resigns, if he is fired, that's a disaster. This is an independent economist who -- whose job, whose -- whose task is to make sure the American economy stays stable. If he's out because the president decides, oh, I don't like him, that's really bad news for the markets. And I think you're -- that's really bad news for the economy, and you will see it in the markets.

Also, if I can just add one thing. I don't think it's yet been proven that the tariffs are not going to cause inflation. They haven't yet.

DUBKE: How long are we going to wait?

GARCIA-NAVARRO: Can I --

KING: But we do know we got a lot of surplus bussed and shipped into the United States --

DUBKE: How long?

KING: Because everybody was concerned, oh, God, we're not going to get our iPhones. So, Apple's sending millions of iPhones. So, we haven't seen the inflation yet. We still might. And what I see Powell saying is, give it three or four months, you know.

[06:40:01]

CORNISH: Yes.

GARCIA-NAVARRO: The other thing I will say is the idea that you are trying to shake down the chairman of the Fed and tell him to reduce interest rates by three points. When we know that this -- you know, the -- when they raise them, it takes months and months and months, if not years. And to lower them, they are -- they calibrate this so, so carefully.

DUBKE: Right.

GARCIA-NAVARRO: To just like, in one fell swoop, say, like, you know, we're going to just shave half of this off is -- is -- is clearly politically motivated.

DUBKE: Yes, absolutely.

GARCIA-NAVARRO: Clearly.

DUBKE: Absolutely. And they can make the points about higher interest rates. I mean, look, I'm going to blame the Fed that my credit card rates are that much higher on the payments that I'm making. And they say three percent because no one expects the three percent but a half point cut would be appropriate.

GARCIA-NAVARRO: I'm not going to blame the Fed. I'm going to -- I mean, I'm going to look at what the administration in charge is doing and their political actions and their policies.

DUBKE: Right.

GARCIA-NAVARRO: And that affects the economy. DUBKE: But again, I come back to this. He expected inflation to rise

in May and June. It hasn't. We're now in July. At some point he should cut those rates. And I don't think, politically, it is bad for Republicans in the -- in Congress, or in the White House, to pressure the Fed. I know that's the big thing that everyone --

KING: Inflation would be very bad for them. And that is what Powell -- what Powell is trying to avoid, right?

DUBKE: Inflation would be very bad. But we haven't had it.

CORNISH: Yes. Well --

DUBKE: Right now -- and the rest of our -- the economies that are equivalent to ours, the other central banks have been cutting throughout the year.

CORNISH: Well, we'll know they're serious if we start to see random names somehow floating in the press and you see that "sources say." That's when we'll know if people are getting serious.

GARCIA-NAVARRO: And he only has to wait until May, right?

DUBKE: Right. Right.

CORNISH: Yes. Yes.

GARCIA-NAVARRO: I mean this is the thing. I mean, I just don't understand it. He only has to wait till May.

CORNISH: Kind of dirtying him up on the way out the door.

GARCIA-NAVARRO: Yes.

CORNISH: All right, you guys stay with me. There's a lot more to talk about coming up on CNN THIS MORNING.

There's a federal judge blocking President Trump from ending birthright citizenship. But didn't the Supreme Court just rule that judges can't do that? OK, we're going to lawyer up, figure it out.

Plus, how the EPA is trying to debunk conspiracy theories about the Texas floods.

And more from the group chat after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[06:46:25]

CORNISH: So, in just a few hours, the president is heading to central Texas to see the damage firsthand from those devastating floods. He's also expected to meet with victims' families and first responders. And this trip is happening as we're hearing more from dispatches, from local 911 responders during the early morning disaster just one week ago. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Respond to 2029 Highway 39, at 2029 Highway 39. It's going to be for a water rescue. House caller's house flooded.

We're getting multiple calls off of 39. People are stating their houses are flooding. We're trying to advise them to get to higher area.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CORNISH: CNN correspondent Julia Vargas Jones joins us live from Kerrville, Texas.

Julia, good morning.

Can you start telling us where you are and what's been happening?

JULIA VARGAS JONES, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Audie.

We're actually just off of Route 39 that's mentioned in that call. We are by the river. Here behind me, you can't see, you know, it would have been impossible for me to be standing here one week ago. This is right by a local restaurant that was heavily affected. You know, we've spoken to folks here who lost not only a source of income, they also lost one of their employees, a father who worked right here in Kerrville in this restaurant.

You know, this is part of what President Trump will see when he gets here with the first lady later on today. It's not just about meeting with those first responders and trying to push back on the criticism of this response. You know, we are hearing that it took about 72 hours for authorizations to come through, and FEMA -- on FEMA's side to get the ball rolling on the response here. That's what he will be pushing back.

But he will also be meeting with families of those people who were affected, not just here in Kerrville, but all throughout central Texas. You know, 121 people dead, 160 still missing. And we're seeing those crews this morning here, Audie, still patrolling. We saw a firefighter truck earlier with some folks with flashlights walking down and up this river. They have so much more to go. There's so much more debris to sift through as they're looking for those 160 people still missing.

The main question is, will President Trump's visit here help soothe this community that needs that soothing so badly right now?

CORNISH: CNN correspondent Julia Vargas Jones in Kerrville. Stay with us for her reporting today.

Julia, thank you.

So, right now we're learning more about a new, nationwide block on President Trump's executive order to end birthright citizenship. You might be wondering, didn't the Supreme Court actually like rule on this a few weeks ago? They did. That same ruling, however, opens the door for plaintiffs to challenge the order through class action lawsuits. That's what happened yesterday when a federal judge issued an injunction putting the president's order on hold, at least for now.

So, we're going to lawyer up, get some answers on this from CNN's legal analyst Elliot Williams.

Welcome back, Elliot,

ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Good morning.

CORNISH: I think in the flurry of all the Supreme Court conversation, it sort of got lost what they did.

WILLIAMS: Yes.

CORNISH: So, how is it that a federal judge, in this moment, can step in and block this particular rule?

WILLIAMS: And to be clear, the Supreme Court willed this into existence. This is almost what they asked for deliberately.

Back when they ruled on the matter, they had said that a judge can't issue a single, nationwide injunction. When one person sues another person, applying the facts or the ruling in that case to the whole country.

[06:50:04]

They did say, and they were quite explicit, instead of doing that, why don't you all come back as a class action? You can do them as a bunch of class actions around the country, or, quite frankly, certify one massive class of everybody who might have a lawsuit here. And then, you know, we'll reassess that.

This is sort of what happened here. These plaintiffs filed a class. Now it's a big class of virtually every immigrant baby born in the United States after February 10th or so.

CORNISH: Yes.

WILLIAMS: And now they're the class. And the court will assess whether that makes sense.

CORNISH: It's a little bit different from kind of finding the perfect case --

WILLIAMS: Yes.

CORNISH: The perfect plaintiff, the perfect victim in one state --

WILLIAMS: Yes.

CORNISH: Hoping that that will kick it off.

WILLIAMS: Absolutely. And the thing is, because -- it's not every kid. It's every child to a parent who's not, you know, lawfully in the United States.

CORNISH: Yes.

WILLIAMS: But there's so many of them that, in effect, it is a nationwide injunction. If every child that fits into that class is part of -- is, you know, is part of that class, and the court says now the ruling applies to all of you, at least temporarily, that has the effect of applying to the whole country. And that's why people are a little bit up in arms about it.

But look, they asked for it. Roberts, Kavanaugh, a number of conservative justices said, we welcome the class action option. And here we are.

CORNISH: OK, there's something else I want to talk to you about.

WILLIAMS: Yes.

CORNISH: It's kind of a coda to a story from last summer. It -- we're approaching the one year anniversary of the first -- the first failed Trump assassination plot.

WILLIAMS: Yes.

CORNISH: And, you know, as you know, there was another near miss at that golf resort in West Palm Beach in September. So, the man charged in that case wants to represent himself in court. Help me out. I don't know how often we see something like that.

WILLIAMS: Yes.

CORNISH: And kind of what the circumstances are.

WILLIAMS: It's incredibly common. But my -- my advice to the defendants of the world, don't represent yourself in court. A great way to think about it is, I -- if I were to slip and fall right now and pop my shoulder out, could look on the internet as to how to pop it back in and successfully do so. That does not mean I should do it. I should go see an orthopedist, a trained person, who can handle it. And, quite frankly --

CORNISH: I think of people doing this though when they want to message throughout a case.

WILLIAMS: No.

CORNISH: When they want to talk and make sure it's out in the -- the public space.

WILLIAMS: No. People think they can represent themselves in court. They think they can. And also, because of all of the stuff that goes into court, they take it personally that their lawyer is not acting up for them in the way that they want them to. So, they go ahead. It's often people, you know, without much education or without much experience, they go and try to represent themselves in court. Law is hard. Like I said, to use the medical example, it's -- CORNISH: Yes. And this isn't just any case.

WILLIAMS: This isn't just any case. And it is -- now the judge, he has a right to do so. And the judge warned him and said, this is often a very, very bad idea. It's your right under the Constitution, but I'm telling you, this isn't a great idea.

You know, to everybody who's -- who might say, well, this guy tried to kill the president, let him burn. If you want him to go to jail, the way to get him to go to jail is to make sure that he has quality representation, because the kinds of mistakes he will make in court are the kinds of things that will get a case thrown out.

So, it's good for everybody if people just -- even -- even these reprehensible defendants get good counsel and follow the advice of the court, don't represent yourself.

CORNISH: Yes. OK.

Stay with us for a little bit, Elliot.

WILLIAMS: Yes.

CORNISH: And next, we're actually going to be talking about, I don't know, it's a little bit of a weird story, but chemtrails. Conspiracy theorists believe they're real, claiming the federal government is spraying harmful chemicals into the sky to control the weather. Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene believes in it, posting this just hours after the water levels in Texas began rising last week, saying, "I am introducing a bill that prohibits the injection, release or dispersion of chemicals or substances into the atmosphere for the express purpose of altering weather."

That prompted new EPA boss Lee Zeldin to kind of gently debunk the conspiracy.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LEE ELDIN, ADMINISTRATOR, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY: For years people who ask questions in good faith were dismissed, even vilified by the media and their own government. That era is over. Instead of simply dismissing these questions and concerns as baseless conspiracies, we're meeting them head on.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CORNISH: The EPA website makes it clearer, saying chemtrails are, quote, "a term some people use to inaccurately claim contrails from air traffic are actually an intentional release of dangerous chemicals."

OK, bringing you guys back for two reasons. One, there is such thing as cloud seeding, or there are several programs around the country, Utah, Colorado, where states are toying with this.

But I'm interested in how the federal government tries to deal with conspiracy. And it felt like he was taking -- you're nodding.

KING: Yes.

CORNISH: It felt like he was taking a different approach than during the pandemic when everyone was just sort of like, you got to get rid of that.

KING: Do your own research. Go down the rabbit hole.

CORNISH: Don't listen to those. Don't listen to that. Don't listen to that.

KING: Let's put it up on the EPA website.

So, I am susceptible to conspiracy theories. Some of you know this. I was on the website this morning, and I will tell you, I don't think they make it clear enough.

GARCIA-NAVARRO: Don't point at me. (INAUDIBLE).

[06:55:00]

KING: I -- there needs to be like in big, block red letters, this is a conspiracy theory. Don't have (INAUDIBLE).

CORNISH: With that, you heard what he said. He said something particular. He said --

DUBKE: No, I thought -- yes.

CORNISH: Some people have been dismissed. I understand you will feel dismissed. And I'm here to meet you halfway.

DUBKE: Right.

GARCIA-NAVARRO: But the reason he has to do that, why?

KING: To subtle.

GARCIA-NAVARRO: Because so many on the right have embraced these conspiracy theories. We're seeing this also in a lot of the problems that the administration is facing in -- in other conspiracy theories that are gaining traction. And so, you know, that is their demographic. And they're trying to say, it is not crazy. However, this is the truth. I don't know that they're going to be very successful.

DUBKE: I -- I am sorry, are we dismissing a level-headed response to a conspiracy theory that should be the response?

GARCIA-NAVARRO: No, I'm saying it's a good response.

DUBKE: Yes. And we should be happy that -- that Zeldin and the EPA are addressing it this way. I mean, I -- I actually think, if we had a little bit more of this level of honesty and -- and meeting people halfway, to use your language, during Covid, I think a lot of these conspiracy theories about vaccines and all of this could have been put to bed. But instead, we stiff armed people. I mean this is -- this is a breath of fresh air to me.

CORNISH: Yes, and because --

GARCIA-NAVARRO: Do you think it's going to work, though? Do you think it's going to work?

CORNISH: Well, hold on, there --

DUBKE: I hope so. But it's -- it's worth trying.

CORNISH: Because the consequences are very real.

I want to play something for you. The CEO of Rainmaker Technologies, as I mentioned cloud seeding, he's the leader of a cloud seeding company. And he's talking about the effect on his life as people start to kind of gin up these theories.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

AUGUSTUS DORICK, CEO AND FOUNDER, RAINMAKER TECHOLOGY CORPORATION: I am praying for my family constantly. I'm praying for myself. There have been threats leveled against us, most of which I think are incredible, but I'm grateful to be on here tonight just to set the record straight and clarify what cloud seeding can do so that people stop accusing Rainmaker and my family of having contributed to the floods.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WILLIAMS: You know, it's interesting. More than anything else, if the administration would just simply have a consistent response to some of these things, I think that would -- would put to bed some of the conspiracy theories.

I think what Lulu was getting at was this hubbub over the Jeffrey Epstein files. And, yes, it's rooted in conspiracy theories, but part of the problem is that the attorney general was sort of flip flopped on how she has talked about it.

There are facts and truth in all sorts of stories, whether it's chemtrails or Jeffrey Epstein. And if you just say, this is not true and we're not going to give this air, or maybe this actually is true and here's the information to demonstrate that it is, you go with it. But I think they've had this ham fisted response to a lot of these conspiracy theories because of some of the voices in the base that really do believe it.

CORNISH: OK, so I want to turn away from that, and we're at the end of the week. What are your group chats talking about right now? Like, give me something. Give -- give me give me some more news.

Lulu.

GARCIA-NAVARRO: Well, for me, it's the -- the Birkin bag. Original Birkin bag. The O.G. Birkin bag selling for $10 million. That's including all the taxes and fees and whatever. Which is extraordinary. As someone who cannot afford a Birkin bag, would never be able to afford a Birkin bag, cannot walk into an Hermes store and be given a Birkin bag, I still think it's sort of impressive that this iconic bag sold for so much. It is something that is covetable by women all over the world. And, you know, the origin story of this is an incredible story of just how the sketch was done on the back of a vomit bag on an airplane.

CORNISH: Yes. With Jane Birkin.

DUBKE: Well, this -- this one has sticker residue on it, though. The original one. I mean, that's -- that's some serious love that that's --

CORNISH: Yes, but it's like getting a vintage car.

DUBKE: Yes.

GARCIA-NAVARRO: Vintage, yes.

CORNISH: It's a vintage car. You don't believe me.

DUBKE: You know what, I'm sorry. I -- what I really can't get beyond is I've got this image of Elliot doing Mel Gibson in "Lethal Weapon," throwing a shoulder back into its socket.

CORNISH: Yes.

WILLIAMS: Yes.

DUBKE: I really can't get beyond that.

CORNISH: You -- welcome to the group chat.

(CROSS TALK)

WILLIAMS: Do I make you laugh? Like a clown? Is that what this is?

CORNISH: Welcome to the group chat.

OK, this is when it gets dicey.

DUBKE: That's exactly what's happening.

CORNISH: Mike, what are you -- what's going on in your world?

DUBKE: Well, before I was going to talk about rescission packages coming next week after all these. Now all I'm thinking about from our previous conversation is, I made CNN comfortable for Republicans like Scott Jennings to go on air without a tie. That's what I've noticed this week. Scott is without a tie. I think all of your viewers --

CORNISH: Yes.

DUBKE: When Scott is on, notice, he has no tie now.

CORNISH: Keep an eye on it. DUBKE: I'm claiming --

GARCIA-NAVARRO: This is a fashion panel. I love it.

DUBKE: I am claiming -- I am totally claiming credit for this.

CORNISH: Yes. I like hearing about code switching.

WILLIAMS: I just spilled oatmeal on my tie this morning. That's why I'm not wearing --

CORNISH: (INAUDIBLE). No one believes you.

WILLIAMS: I'm going to be keeping an eye on the articles over the backlash to the "Superman" movie for a big reason. You know, I really feel that perhaps more than any other art form, reactions to superhero movies are a window into society.

CORNISH: Where we are in the moment. Yes.

WILLIAMS: Where we are. And the clearest ones, "Spider-man," at the height of the nuclear era in the 1960s, was bitten by a radioactive spider. In our lifetime, it became a genetically modified spider. The film was a window into what Americans are afraid about. So, all this stuff about welcomeness or national security or immigration that's sort of --

CORNISH: Yes, James Gunn has, yes, talked about it.

WILLIAMS: Clouding and I'm just curious to see, where does this all go? And do people keep talking about it in a few days.

CORNISH: And, Noel, last minute to you.

KING: I'm going to keep doing my research on chemtrails. That -- I'm joking. I'm joking.

Elon Musk's third party. How serious is he?

[07:00:01]

CORNISH: The American party. The America Party.

KING: Yes. It's an interesting moment.

WILLIAMS: America.

CORNISH: Yes.

KING: And he seems, over the last couple of hours, to have forgotten about it. He's focused more on Grok. But I kind of want to know how far he's going to take it. Truthfully.

WILLIAMS: I couldn't -- I couldn't hear much because it was the sound of the black helicopter flying overhead that you were clouding (ph). She just -- CORNISH: I don't know what this Friday setup is with this group chat.

You guys, thank you so much for being with us. We covered a lot of ground.

I want to thank you for being with us. I'm Audie Cornish. You're going to get the headlines next because "CNN NEWS CENTRAL" starts right now.