Return to Transcripts main page
Erin Burnett Outfront
Hours Away: Trump's 104 Percent Tariff Hits A Defiant China; China Lashes Out At VP Vance; DOGE Employees Speaks Out. Aired 7-8p ET
Aired April 08, 2025 - 19:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[19:00:25]
ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST: OUTFRONT next:
The breaking news, Trump goes to war with China, hitting them with 104 percent tariffs going into effect in just hours.
Beijing tonight not backing down at all. A longtime Wall Street analyst, who my guest tonight, says it's one of the scariest days he's seen in his decades long career.
Plus, J.D. Vance under fire tonight. The vice president insulting more than a billion people, calling them peasants. And that is now feeding through this.
And an OUTFRONT exclusive, a former DOGE employee breaking her silence, saying Musk and his team don't know about the government they're slashing. It's unclear who is really in charge, she says.
Let's go OUTFRONT.
(MUSIC)
BURNETT: And good evening. I'm Erin Burnett.
OUTFRONT tonight, the breaking news. A nearly 2,000-point drop as we are hours away from Trump's tariffs on China going to 104 percent. The Chinese embassy posting, quote, China will fight till the end.
Now, Trump acknowledges that the situation is, in his words, explosive.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: So that whole situation that, you know, there was -- it was somewhat explosive. Sometimes you have to mix it up a little bit.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: Mix it up a little bit. Just today, the Dow experienced nearly 2,000-point swing from high to low. Those are real people's retirements. It started off today up more than 1,400 points because investors had this optimism that maybe, you know, all this talk of negotiating meant that this China situation was a bluff and wasn't going to happen.
Now, China, Trump came out and said, and I quote him, China also wants to make a deal badly. It turns out there -- there was no deal in the offing. Not yet. It turned out that this is real life and these are massive tariffs. And the rally turned into a rout.
Dan Ives, a longtime tech stocks analyst who will join me in a moment, said today was one of the scariest days he's seen in three decades on Wall Street.
And while Trump claims at least 70 countries have called to make deals, a few really matter to the U.S. economy like China.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Countries like China, who have chosen to retaliate and try to double down on their mistreatment of American workers, are making a mistake. President Trump has a spine of steel, and he will not break.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: You know, it's interesting she looked down -- I mean, reading those words, they were prepared words, right? Spine of steel was not an off come -- off the cuff extemporaneous comment. Spine of steel was what they wanted out there.
And the response in China was an overwhelming patriotic rally. People flooding social media there with the same message, essentially a hashtag. The message in part says: Make no mistake, when challenged, we will never back down. Post after post after post, that phrase.
The fear and chaos on Wall Street and among investors and CEOs around the world causing a break actually on Trump's own team.
Elon Musk, turns out, does run companies and is an executive and doesn't like tariffs, now all in on a public fight with Trump -- Trump's top trade adviser, Peter Navarro, writing: Navarro is truly a moron. What he says here is demonstrably false. Navarro is dumber than a sack of bricks. And then he went even further, writing, I'd like to apologize to bricks for calling Navarro dumber than a sack of bricks. That was so unfair to bricks.
Musk also slamming Navarro for his comments about Tesla, writing: Navarro should ask the fake expert he invented, Ron Vara. That, of course, is a reference to what we pointed out last night. According to "The New York Times", Navarro invented an expert for his books where he bashed China. That expert he quoted often was named Ron Vara, using letters from his own last name.
Navarro quoted Vara saying, you've got to be nuts to eat Chinese food.
And if you're thinking, who would do such a thing to make up a person? I mean, in this case, using letters of his own last name, but just to make up a person to make a point. Well, you don't have to look further than this guy. (BEGIN AUDIO CLIP, WASHINGTON POST, MAY 17, 1984)
JONATHAN GREENBERG, REPORTER: What's your first name, by the way?
TRUMP: John.
GREENBERG: John?
TRUMP: John Barron.
(END AUDIO CLIP)
BURNETT: John Barron. Remember him?
Reporter Jonathan Greenberg -- he said, you know, John Barron was actually Trump. Trump would claim to be this guy, John Barron, to call the New York tabloids to talk about how much money he had to give them numbers that perhaps weren't true.
We all know Trump cares about his image and his media presentation. That is something that the biggest names in technology know full well as they, one by one, have shown up when Trump wants them to be there, donating millions of dollars to his inauguration, sitting just a few feet away from him at that ceremony. You can see them all there. We're circling them. Zuckerberg, Bezos, the Google CEO, Musk, Tim Cook.
Has that paid off? Did that pay off going to that inauguration? Well, if you look at it in one way, it has not as of yet. Look at the biggest losers of the trade war.
[19:05:00]
Since that photo at the inauguration, Amazon has lost $539 billion. That is half $1 trillion. Meta has lost $235 billion. Google, half a trillion. Apple, more than $1 trillion. More than $1 trillion. That is absolutely incredible. Tesla, half a -- half a trillion dollars.
These numbers are really impossible to comprehend for any of us.
Jeff Zeleny is OUTFRONT, live outside the White House.
And, Jeff, all of this happening. Markets hoping for some sort of reprieve. And then a massive drop hours from Trump raising that tariff against China to more than 100 percent.
What are you hearing from the White House tonight?
JEFF ZELENY, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Well, Erin, I mean, the president is marching defiantly toward this midnight deadline for these tariffs to go into effect. You're right about that optimism. It was clear in the market and even in the minds of some Republicans on Capitol Hill, who we've been in touch with, some advisers here who have been watching the market.
But then that turned into realism that the president is not going to change his policies. You know, what they're trying to do is change the subject and say that he's -- he's open to a negotiations.
The president was at an event in the East Room just a couple hours ago, where he was signing some more executive orders, and we shouted out a question about the response to the market. He didn't answer. But the bottom line is they are trying to -- he is trying to say that Japan is coming to the U.S. to renegotiate, that other countries, South Korea is as well.
But one thing that has been so different in the last 24 to 36 hours is some top Republican donors, some big CEOs, big names like Ken Langone of Home Depot, who is a huge supporter of his speaking out against President Trump. I cannot recall that at all, certainly during his first three months in office.
But even on the presidential campaign, this is a different matter. But you don't really feel that sense of urgency here at the White House. The White House seems to think that they are doing just fine on this.
But looking at the market day by day, they're starting to be a lot more pressure. The president right now is heading to a fundraising dinner across town here in Washington, a black tie fundraising dinner. Republicans are trying to keep control of the House. Erin, that is a central question on their minds.
But politics aside, look around your households. The cost of goods is going to be more expensive, and many politicians here know it, whether the president admits it or not.
BURNETT: All right. Thank you very much. As we had said yesterday, laying out the math, you could have something that you could have bought that came from China. That was $10 a week ago. That would be $18.50 when these go into effect tomorrow. Obviously, just -- that's a back of the envelope. Just to give a sense of the scale here.
Jeff, thank you very much.
And OUTFRONT now, as I promised, veteran tech analyst Dan Ives, and Peter Tuchman, he's one of the most recognizable traders on Wall Street.
I did not know this. I've known you both for very many years, but I did not know that you have a show together.
PETER TUCHMAN, WALL STREET TRADER: We do.
BURNETT: It's "Ives and Einstein".
TUCHMAN: Incarnation.
BURNETT: Einstein. And Einstein, you know, my nickname for you. So I --
TUCHMAN: You named me that.
BURNETT: I named you that. I think it's accurate in all regards, but. But here we are. And, you know, look, we try to laugh. I think that most people watching people feel a deep sense of unease and uncertainty and fear. And I don't really know anybody who doesn't. Whatever your political persuasion may be, that's the feeling.
Dan, you know, this, this, this swing we saw today nearly 2,000 points. I mean, how would you describe it?
DAN IVES, GLOBAL HEAD OF TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH, WEDBUSH SECURITIES: I'd say it's probably the scariest or one of the top 2 or 3 scariest days that I've ever seen in the market in the last 25 years. Because when it comes to tech, you don't know -- you don't know the rules of the game. And ultimately, in my opinion, this is an economic Armageddon that's coming for the U.S. consumer and the economy.
And I talked to tech executives, talk to people around the world. And when it comes to U.S. tech, I mean, I think this is something that could send the U.S. tech industry back a decade. And I think recession is now starting to get baked into the market.
BURNETT: I mean. Peter, so you're there, you know, you see the market start off up right, which had been expected. You would have ups and downs and, you know, would not be seen as, okay, were fine with this. But nonetheless it was a breath. And then, all of a sudden, boom.
TUCHMAN: So, you know, it was almost a bit of arrogance in my opinion, because yesterday, look, we've had now the first time in history where you had two days back to back with 2,000 point swings. Yesterday was -- was very significant in a lot of ways. People were asking what is the -- what needs to be done for people to start buying the market again? Right?
You remember Jim Cramer said the other day, I don't see a reason why anybody would buy stocks now. But it turns out that if there was a little breath between what's happening now in the aggressive narrative about -- about tariffs and a little bit of leeway, right. Which is what Mr. Ackman said yesterday, then you saw the buyers come into the market with -- with abandon, right?
BURNETT: Right.
TUCHMAN: Trillions of dollars came in yesterday to buy the market once that came in --
BURNETT: Well, they thought, you know, Bill Ackman, the hedge fund manager who has Trump supporter has come out against this. Started out the feeling that maybe there'd be a pause, a 90-day pause. And that's when the money came in. Yeah.
TUCHMAN: Correct. And so that think about that. It wasn't that we had -- we were getting rid of tariffs. It wasn't that we had figured them out. It was just a pause, gave the green light to buyers to come in yesterday with so much abandon, the trillions of dollars came into the market in that period, a short period of time when that -- when that hit the tape.
[19:10:11] Today, we came in, we were up 1,300 points on the Dow, 200 plus points on the S&P. We had a little breath and then out of nowhere, it was almost like it was almost a tantrum in a way like nobody. And you know, and then I sort of started reading about the weekend where there was a full court press by Elon Musk at the president about maybe we should -- maybe we should revisit this thing.
And then he came out almost like a kid in the playground going, you know what? No, 105 percent tariffs on China. And the market literally broke from having a really solid morning. A lot of money being put to work. We were up 1,300 points.
I mean, it was -- it was a good solid morning where you really got a little bit of sense that maybe we're -- we're getting a little bit of a leeway and breath in the market and then and then and it completely broke.
BURNETT: What does it mean when you see and I understand you know, it can be up and down in terms of how he handles things. But what the way that he is taking on Peter Navarro, who has been credited as sort of the most aggressive pusher of perhaps even higher tariffs than, than Trump went with.
IVES: Look, no one understands tariffs better than these tech leaders when it comes to Musk, Nadella, Cook, you know, obviously, Jensen (ph) and others.
So, Musk, he's hearing it from the ground. Then, you know, he's not just talking from a beltway perspective. He's hearing it from Fremont Texas. What's happened in Europe, what's happened in Asia.
And when you look at what's happened with Navarro -- I mean, Musk sees it front and center. This is -- it's a category five storm coming not just for tech. Weve talked about for the U.S. consumer. And look, in my opinion, it's the first step toward Musk I believe, you know, leaving the government.
BURNETT: And you think actually when we put those up again those posts, you know when he -- Elon Musk posted Peter Navarro. Navarro is truly a moron.
You actually think -- I don't know whether anyone laughing, watching even laughs at this now or what a response might be, but you think that those posts were part of why we saw the markets.
TUCHMAN: Look, I'm not -- I don't like to call to call anybody names. It's just not -- not -- not the way I roll.
But it was amazing that he would really aggressively come at Navarro like that. Navarro being so up in the Trump world. But, you know, it started -- it -- you know what? It felt like there was a bit of a mutiny going on inside the Trump world, right? It happened over the weekend when apparently Elon Musk came at the president and said, we've got to back off for of the Congress.
Men decided to vote against tariffs. And it seemed like a lot of the people were falling off, standing really firm with Trump on this. And then for Elon Musk to really break with him to the point where he is aggressively -- I mean, those are some bold words to call somebody who is the guy who's really -- who's touting the tariff story with such abandon, to call him a moron that way.
BURNETT: And dumb as a bag of bricks. Right. Right.
I mean, so can I ask you, Dan, though, what does someone do right now? I mean, you could look at this and say, well, we are, what, 16 hours away from those coming into effect and maybe they don't happen and maybe there's a delay and -- and who the heck knows at this point?
IVES: Well, yeah. I mean, look, how we're navigating investors around the world. I mean, we haven't downgraded one stock because my view is that even if this lasts a few weeks and a month and it is going to be buckle the seatbelt and we've talked about it is going to be a brutal market.
On the other side of it, I believe that these tariffs in some form get negotiated. If they don't, then ultimately you start to go with a recession sealed U.S. tack. You could have numbers go down 25, 30 percent. But this -- this is in my -- this is -- we're now getting to something that could even dwarf anything that we've seen in terms of.com financial crisis, in terms of the worries and the concerns and not knowing the rules of the game.
TUCHMAN: Well, we saw that with the VIX -- the VIX back up today up to 58. That means that there's fear -- fear in the water for sure. We heard it with Richard Quest the other day when we were here with him.
BURNETT: Yeah.
TUCHMAN: He called it economic vandalism, right? Vandalism is when somebody walks down the street with a bat and smashes windows for absolutely no reason. That's self-inflicted situation. That was confirmed today when Mr. Trump came out and said, you know what? I'm going to--
IVES: It's coming from the U.S. consumer.
TUCHMAN: Exactly.
BURNETT: All right. Well, thank you both. I'm always glad to see you. Glad you're a part of this show and your own show. Of course, "Einstein and Ives", I'm so glad to have had a part in that. I don't know how it took me to -- to name you that.
TUCHMAN: Wonderful duo.
BURNETT: It's so obvious.
TUCHMAN: How we found each other.
BURNETT: You found each --
TUCHMAN: And we are the best dressed people on Wall Street. You know. BURNETT: I think so.
TUCHMAN: Clearly.
BURNETT: Because everyone should know these are essentially uniforms.
TUCHMAN: And these are uniforms, absolutely.
BURNETT: They are.
All right. I'm glad to have a laugh. Thank you. I'm -- not very many of them right now.
All right. Joining me now is Brent Neiman. He's an economist and former Treasury official in the Biden administration. His research was cited by the Trump White House, really to help them justify the reciprocal tariff rates.
So, they said, you know, look at this research. Look at this. This is where we get this crucial number that gets us to these stratospheric tariff rates.
So, Brent, I really appreciate your taking the time here. I just want to start off with you, because we've got the math and I've spent a lot of today. I've got my, you know, going through the math. Sorry. I'm just holding it up for people that I was -- we were going through.
So, you see these high tariff rates and Trump's sitting there on the screen and its scrolling by country after country after country. And you see your works used to justify them.
What did you think in that moment?
BRENT NEIMAN, DEPUTY UNDERSECRETARY OF TREASURY FOR INTERNATIONAL FINANCE: Yeah. Thanks, Erin, for having me on the show. You know, I was -- I mean, on Wednesday of last week, I was in a University of Chicago macroeconomics seminar. And, you know, my phone, my phone started blowing up with those pictures of -- of the president in the Rose Garden with that, that screen with really big numbers and, you know, many more countries listed than I thought.
And so, you know, with apologies to the speaker, I couldn't really focus. And then the next day I woke up and there was a bunch of emails from journalists in my inbox, and a former colleague had had posted that they released the methodology explaining what they had done to calculate these tariffs, and they had cited, you know, not many papers. And one of them was a paper I wrote together with Alberto Carvalho, Gita Gopinath and Jenny Tang.
And -- you know, so I started digging in and looking at how my -- my work could have possibly informed this policy, which I really think is a is a terrible policy. So, I -- I ended up writing an op-ed on it, and I think it's been well-received so far.
BURNETT: All right. So, so you're -- you're shocked because you couldn't understand how your work could be used in this way. I just want to ask you, though, because there's how your work was used incorrectly. And then there's what the premise of what they've done, the premise of what they have done basically is, as you've described it, do unto others as they do unto you, right? That they, you know, the way they define reciprocal, the actual, the premise that they have approached this with.
Do you support that just on its base, forgetting the math that they use, do you support their logic?
NEIMAN: Well, they -- they billed it as a reciprocal tariff. So, you know, what I was expecting is that they would look at what other countries charge as tariffs to the United States. And if there are two, three, four percentage points higher, we might try to bridge that gap with a reciprocal tariff of our own.
And maybe they would look also at non-tariff barriers, et cetera. But they did. They did nothing of the sort. The main issue with these tariffs is that they define them such that they would eliminate bilateral trade deficits between the United States and every trade partner that we have in the world, one by one, where we run deficits.
And once you make that, the goal of the policy, you know it's over. You're done. Whatever formula you come up with and whatever numbers you plug into that formula, you're not going to get a good trade policy. You're instead going to going to come up with something that can do, do real harm to -- to Americans. And I think to the whole world.
BURNETT: Right. And that's the basic just to say to people that there might be a country I know, you know, as you and I were talking earlier about examples say, Sri Lanka, where Americans buy a lot of clothes, but Sri Lanka does not buy a lot of gas turbines, for example, right? That that's not a trade imbalance that would need to be corrected, right? But they're approaching it as if it is.
NEIMAN: Right. I mean, I certainly expected, frankly, that, you know, China would be on the list, you know, maybe even Europe. But I was surprised to see, like you said, Sri Lanka, Jordan is on the list, Zambia is on the list. And the reason is just because, you know, we happen to buy a lot of textiles and jewelry and coffee from those countries, and they don't buy that much, you know, high tech equipment or, you know, gas turbines, like you said.
And so, yeah, I think it's a mistake in philosophy to even try to calculate reciprocal tariffs the way that -- the way that they did. And then from then on, frankly, the more I looked into it, there was what I would characterize as a cascade of -- of mistakes, making these tariffs even broader and even bigger.
BURNETT: So let's talk about that cascade, because it comes down to the equation. They put this equation out that that looks like it could have come from Einstein. And you know, this, this complicated equation. We'll throw it up.
I mean, you know, this is the sort of stuff you want to see in econometrics or something like that, but it's a very fancy looking equation. It essentially boils down to you're going to take the difference between the exports and imports of a country. Right. And you're going to calculate your tariffs based off of that.
Thats the essential thing. And then just your bottom line on this, this, this this formula, is it good or no?
NEIMAN: Yeah. So, the formula is definitely not good. You know that was the point I was making is even -- even the derivation of the formula, no matter what they do with it, I think it is not good trade policy. But they went further.
You know, you do still have to plug some numbers into it.
BURNETT: So, let's do that okay. Because I said hold on while you're talking here. I said I had my sheet. So, I put it on a whiteboard as you and I discussed, I might try to do just to try to make sense of it. Okay?
So, this is where we are, all right? We took Japan because Trump's been talking a lot about Japan, Brent. You went through Japan.
So, he got a 46 percent tariff that day when he stood up there, 46 percent came up.
[19:20:04]
So, I've got the numbers here, the difference between the exports and imports, I filled in all the numbers. There's one number here, though -- I'm going to put in red. That is 0.25. That's your number. That's the number.
Well, that's the number they say is your number, right? And when you take that number, that's the magic number I put it in red and you plug it into their equation. You get 46 percent.
NEIMAN: Well, close, but -- but not quite. The number that we would put that I would put based on my research in for that value is 0.95.
BURNETT: Okay.
NEIMAN: And that differs from the one that they used like you said which was 0.25. You know, the difference is almost a factor of four. So --
BURNETT: You know, 0.95.
NEIMAN: Mathematically --
BURNETT: Then what happens to this - to the 46?
NEIMAN: Right. So, you know, if you change a number in the denominator, the bottom part of the fraction by a factor of four, you're going to reduce the equation, the left hand side, the tariff by a factor of four. So specifically, you know, when Trump held up that sign and it had a 46 for Japan, you know, you know, if you instead used 0.95, which is what I think my research motivates, you know, you'd get a number like 12 percent much, much lower than 46 percent.
And it doesn't even have to be that extreme. If you picked a number like three, you'd still go down to 15 percent. You know, much, much lower.
BURNETT: Yeah.
NEIMAN: And the other thing I did want to just mention, because, you know, you said they got that 25 from you. To be clear, I don't know where they got that 0.25 and what --
(CROSSTALK)
BURNETT: When I say they got it from you, I should have been more accurate there. Yeah.
NEIMAN: Well, not -- not quite. I mean, it's, you know, this is an unbelievably consequential policy. I mean, I listened to the guests in your interview just now. You know, markets are moving tremendously. I mean, this is a really, really consequential policy for the world, for the country, for everyone.
And yet the whole methodology explaining how they did this is, you know, a couple pages long and I can't answer that question. I have colleagues saying, what does that 0.25 number? You know, for instance, I don't even know.
BURNETT: Well, yeah. But I mean, you know, you talk about literally you could have things like war and peace depending on it. I mean, you go from 46 to 12 and do Trump's math and take half. Youd be looking at 6 percent instead of 24.
I mean, it is just absolutely stunning to think about that. And I think so important that you say all of that, a lot of it could come down to this one number, your number. Thats just who knows where the heck it came from. I mean, it's stunning.
Brent, I really appreciate your time and thank you very much.
NEIMAN: Thanks for having me, Erin.
BURNETT: All right. And next, it's not just Trump at economic war with China. J.D. Vance is now in the crosshairs there as well after he said this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
J.D. VANCE, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: To make it a little bit more crystal clear, we borrow money from Chinese peasants to buy the things those Chinese peasants manufacture.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: Plus, the breaking news, "The Associated Press", with a major victory over Trump tonight. A Trump appointed judge just ruling that the president's action against the "AP" is unconstitutional, awaiting a response from the president.
And we have new details about what the Secret Service told local officials about a potential military parade for Trump's birthday.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[19:27:31]
BURNETT: Breaking news, it's 7:27 a.m. in China. An all eyes now are how President Xi and China will respond to the 104 percent tariffs on Chinese imports that set to take effect in hours.
Beijing says Trump is making a mistake upon a mistake, but tonight, it is not just Trump who is a target of China. Vice President J.D. Vance is caught in a firestorm of his own making, calling the Chinese peasants, and many of them are not pleased by the pejorative term.
Will Ripley is OUTFRONT in Taipei.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
VANCE: Well, good morning, everybody.
WILL RIPLEY, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The American hillbilly versus China's so-called peasants. It all started with this.
VANCE: And to make it a little bit more crystal clear, we borrow money from Chinese peasants to buy the things those Chinese peasants manufacture from Chinese peasants.
RIPLEY: Vance's Chinese peasants comment reaching Beijing within hours. The government's response, was swift and scathing.
LI JIAN, CHINESE FOREIGN MINISTRY SPOKESPERSON (through translator): It's both astonishing and lamentable to hear this vice president make such ignorant and disrespectful remarks.
RIPLEY: On China's tightly controlled Internet, government censors are allowing Vance's interview to go viral, amplifying the outrage, igniting anger and sarcasm.
Have you said thank you for the money we lent you? A reference to China being the second largest foreign holder of U.S. government debt, and that infamous Oval Office exchange with Ukraine's president.
VANCE: You should be thanking the president.
RIPLEY: One hashtag about the Chinese peasants remark shot to the top of China's Twitter like platform Weibo, with millions of views and counting. Many comments boasting of China's modern achievements.
Look, this is their true face. Arrogant and rude as always. We may be peasants, but we have the world's best high-speed rail, the most powerful logistics and leading A.I. and drone technologies. Aren't such peasants quite impressive? Former "Global Times" editor Hu Xijin posted on Weibo: This true
peasant who came out of rural America seems to lack perspective. Many people are urging him to visit China and see reality with his own eyes.
Many in China are interpreting Vance's comments as describing all Chinese people, some even referencing Vance's memoir and movie.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: How many times have you seen this?
RIPLEY: As one social media post put it, the author of "Hillbilly Elegy" is calling Chinese peasants, really?
(END VIDEOTAPE)
[19:30:07]
BURNETT: I mean, Will, it is incredible when you see, in moments like this just, you know, sort of the overflowing patriotism that we're -- we're seeing here. Why do you think Beijing is allowing these comments to go viral? I mean, they could easily censor them if they wanted to.
RIPLEY: Yeah. I mean, you know, Erin, we get censored all the time on this program. But if you look at the live signal from Beijing right now, we are on the air. They're letting this go out across the country.
And I think the reason why they're even amplifying and encouraging people to talk about this is because China knows it's on the verge of a very serious situation with this trade war, like the Chinese embassy just a few minutes ago, put out this statement. You know, trade and tariff wars have no winners. Protectionism leads nowhere. We Chinese are not troublemakers, but we will not flinch when trouble comes our way.
I mean, they're preparing people for a fight. And so, this just adds ammo to their argument, their anti-American argument.
BURNETT: Yeah. And it's, of course, horrible to watch all this, you know, and then it devolves into country versus country. We watch this happen.
Will Ripley, thank you very much.
And next, the breaking news. Trump dealt a major blow tonight from a judge that he appointed. This is that crucial "Associated Press" situation, remember, related to the Gulf of Mexico and the Gulf of America and White House access. You'll see what just happened.
Plus, an OUTFRONT exclusive, a former member of DOGE speaking out and warning that Elon Musk's agency is putting America at risk, they say.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MERICI VINTON, FORMER SENIOR USDS EMPLOYEE: I want Americans to try to understand it and to believe it, and to understand that what -- that it is a wrecking ball and that it's not a scalpel.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[19:36:27]
BURNETT: Breaking news a major defeat for President Trump in court tonight. A federal judge ruling it is unconstitutional for the White House to eliminate the "Associated Press's" access to the Oval Office and other Trump events. This is a very significant ruling. It comes from a judge who happened to be appointed by Trump.
It all came because the "AP" continues to say Gulf of Mexico in its coverage, despite the fact that Trump has renamed the body of water the Gulf of America.
U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden, who, as I mentioned, is a Trump appointee, saying the court finds in part, quote, the "AP's" exclusion has been contrary to the First Amendment and enjoins the government from continuing down that unlawful path.
The Constitution forbids viewpoint discrimination even in a non-public forum like the Oval Office.
Ryan Goodman, OUTFRONT legal analyst, is here tonight.
Ryan, this -- this ruling literally just happened. You know, what's your reaction when you see this? And I hate that we're in a world where I have to mention who appointed a judge. But I think in this case, given that Trump has threatened to impeach judges who go against him, it is important to note that this is a judge who happened to be appointed by him taking this -- this course.
RYAN GOODMAN, JUST SECURITY CO-EDITOR-IN-CHIEF: Absolutely. And the judge is being very careful and I would say very fair. In fact, on first impression, the judge ruled against the "Associated Press" for a temporary restraining order and said, look, I just need to hear the evidence from both sides. We need to have hearings and let me look at the facts.
And then, lo and behold, this opinion is written with deeply into the facts that came out in the hearing. And he says, this is just absolutely clear it's retaliation, and it's absolutely clear in the First Amendment that you cannot retaliate against a member of the press based just on their viewpoint alone.
BURNETT: So, the White House has a week to appeal, and that the judge didn't immediately restore "AP's" access. They said, all right, you've got a week here for the White House to appeal. Obviously, this could go up to the Supreme Court.
I mean, what -- what happens here? This is not done.
GOODMAN: It's not done. But I think this is such a strong opinion by the judge, especially because the judge is the fact finder. And when he goes through all the facts and he in fact says, look, the government didn't even put on a rebuttal witness. When the "AP" put on their witness, which was subject, who was subject to cross- examination. So, it's a very solid opinion by the judge. It will go up on appeal.
He's also being very careful by saying you have a week to appeal the case. Giving them time. I'm not binding you immediately. I'm not being unfair to you.
BURNETT: And so, you know, I read the quote there of what the judge said about the "AP", which was very clear and as you point out, but it wasn't just the ap that stands out to you, that the judge actually had strong criticism for the Trump administration more broadly.
What stood out to you there?
GOODMAN: He does. At the very end, he saves a paragraph for the second to final page, and he says essentially that the government's lawyers were making bogus arguments to him. So, he says one final note is in order. The government repeatedly characterizes the "AP's" request as a demand for, quote, unquote, extra special access.
But that is not what the "AP" is asking for. It is not what the court orders all the ap wants, and all it gets is a level playing field and framing this issue. Otherwise, the government fails to fully engage with the forum analysis and retaliation case law rather than grappling with the implications of the doctrine, the government tries to sidestep them.
And then he says, this might be your favored litigation tactics, but it's not actually what's happening in this case. So maybe they're playing to the public, but it's not a good legal argument. And he calls them out for it, essentially.
BURNETT: Well, really a very significant ruling. And one I think a lot of people have been aware of, given the whole controversy over Gulf of Mexico, Gulf of America.
All right. Ryan Goodman, thank you very much.
GOODMAN: Yeah.
BURNETT: And tonight, an OUTFRONT exclusive, a former DOGE employee speaking out about what Elon Musk is doing. She worked in the government for four years, is left just weeks ago. She says Musk and his DOGE team don't know how federal agencies work and have not cared to learn.
[19:40:01]
She also says that no one actually knows who's really in charge of what DOGE is doing. And tonight, she's speaking out to Sunlen Serfaty, who is OUTFRONT.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
MERICI VINTON, FORMER SENIOR USDS EMPLOYEE: I didn't get the sense that DOGE really understood the rules or wanted to play by the rules.
SUNLEN SERFATY, CNN WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): With the stroke of a pen --
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is an order creating and implementing the Department of Governmental Efficiency known as DOGE.
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Okay, that's a big one.
SERFATY: Merici Vinton became a part of DOGE.
VINTON: W went in kind of excited to understand who wed be working with, and it became very clear there was two separate teams.
SERFATY: Vinton, a four-year employee with the U.S. Digital Service, witnessed how the little known government agency, which under prior administrations was aimed at using tech for efficiency, was renamed DOGE by President Trump in one of his first acts in office.
MUSK: This is the chainsaw for bureaucracy.
SERFATY: Taken over by Elon Musk in his quest to slash the federal government.
VINTON: So, we very much felt just like a convenient container for DOGE. They could have access to the White House through our office space. You could have access to email accounts, things like admin and the ability to hire people.
SERFATY: Vinton sat down with CNN for her first network TV interview, detailing for the first time what she calls a highly secretive operation she watched over the course of the two months. She was technically a DOGE employee as it infiltrated various agencies.
VINTON: DOGE is just constantly changing their tactics to achieve their objectives. So sometimes that is hiring people directly into an agency and having that individual report into the secretary. In other places, it is having people that have multiple badges and can go around and kind of connect a bunch of different agencies and what they're trying to achieve.
SERFATY: Vinton says the waves of new staff with ties to Musk and his companies have limited knowledge of how federal agencies work, and what she calls a careless disregard for wanting to learn. As one of the architects of Direct File, a platform for filing taxes online, she said she came to government to use her technology expertise to make life easier for Americans.
VINTON: What I see DOGE is doing is they're actually breaking a lot of that down. They're actually breaking those things apart.
SERFATY: That left her feeling rudderless with no clear sense of the mission, or who was actually in charge, as she never saw Musk or even heard from him.
Who is really in charge of DOGE?
VINTON: Just like everyone else, I don't actually know.
SERFATY: S is DOGE an agency?
VINTON: DOGE seems to be more of an idea than an a belief system, than an agency itself.
SERFATY: A belief system that, Vinton warns there may be no coming back from.
VINTON: I want Americans to try to understand that it is a wrecking ball, and that it's not a scalpel, and it is going to dramatically decrease government's capacity to deliver services and benefits in the next few years.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SERFATY (on camera): And a lot of these questions about Musk and DOGE's authority that she talks about here is being questioned in court and is the subject of ongoing litigation. Vinton left voluntarily in mid-March because her second two-year term was coming to an end. And Erin, we, of course, reached out to DOGE for their response to what she told us, but we did not receive a response from them.
BURNETT: All right. Well, Sunlen, thank you very much.
And next, more questions tonight about the price tag for that potential military parade on Trump's birthday.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHARLAMAGNE THA GOD, RADIO HOST: Isn't that wasteful spending? Where DOGE at when you need 'em?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: Plus, an exclusive interview with a world leader who claims he can get something Trump to do something in his trade war that no one else, no one else in the world has been able to do.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[19:48:04]
BURNETT: New details and OUTFRONT about that military parade the Trump reportedly wants in Washington, D.C., a parade that could take place on June 14th, which is Flag Day and Trump's 79th birthday.
The chair of the county board in Arlington, Virginia, where this potential parade would begin at the Pentagon, spoke to OUTFRONT. He says that he discussed the possibility of a military parade with the Secret Service just last week. The mayor of Washington, D.C., also confirming the administration discussed a possible parade with her.
And this comes after the White House official today told CNN no parades have been scheduled.
Well, those calls have been made. Radio host Charlamagne tha God calling out the president.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHARLAMAGNE THA GOD: Isn't that wasteful spending? Where DOGE at when you need 'em? DOGE can -- well, I guess he does have his presidential immunity. So, the DOGE can intervene in a situation like this?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: Well, and as Harry Enten will tell you, it's not the only way Republicans are hoping to honor the president.
Joining me now, Harry Enten to tell us something we don't know.
Now, Harry. It's unclear if the parade is going to come together in time for Trump's birthday on June 14th. But as the mayor of Arlington and Washington, D.C., confirmed, calls have been made from Secret Service inquiring.
But his supporters do not want to stop there. A parade on his birthday is not -- is not enough.
Can you go through some of the bills that Republicans have been putting forward? I think many people may not be aware of this.
HARRY ENTEN, CNN CHIEF DATA ANALYST: I would love to. How about -- would you like to see Trump's face on the $500 bill? That's one proposed piece of legislation. How about carving him out on Mount Rushmore? That's another one. Or, you know, were talking about his birthday. How about making his birthday a national holiday?
BURNETT: I thought we had Presidents Day.
ENTEN: Apparently, that's not enough. We have to have a specific day for Donald John Trump, at least according to one member of the U.S. House of Representatives.
BURNETT: All right, so they're moving. I mean, you know, those I would assume are not necessarily realistic at this point, but who knows?
ENTEN: Who knows? Who knows, Erin?
BURNETT: And the highest compliment of all of from Republicans in Congress, there is one Republican filing legislation to make President Trump eligible for a third term.
[19:50:04]
So that has been filed. What are the odds of such a thing happening as -- as you could look in your -- as you look at polls and markets?
ENTEN: Yeah, we can -- we can, you know, I can look into the crystal ball. No, we can look at the prediction markets and look, historically speaking, after FDR and Harry S. Truman, who I believe was the last one eligible to run for a third term, it should be zero, right? But it ain't trading at zero when it comes to Donald Trump. And in fact, the odds of him potentially winning the GOP nomination in 2028, they're going up.
Look at this on November 10th, it was 3 percent. Look at where it is now. It's 9 percent. You might say 9 percent isn't that high, but it should be zero. This is a 1 in 10 chance that some folks are putting on it.
And that to me is ridiculously high, given, of course, that the Constitution bars him from running for a third term.
BURNETT: So, you know, when it comes to dollars and cents and how people see him right now, I guess I could be talking about tariffs dollar and cents. I'm talking about things that he sells, right? His "make Greenland great again" merchandise is you know, things that he is selling. That -- what sells?
ENTEN: Yeah. I mean this I think is the interesting thing, right? Because why would we say that Donald Trump could potentially run for and win a third or fourth GOP nomination, actually, and it would be because he has such a fan base that he can sell basically anything to.
What are we talking about here? We're talking about earbuds on his website, right? Look at this. Earbuds in case for $35.
How about a mini speaker for $32? Or how about a pickleball? Pickleball set that for $118? Yeah, yeah, that's where we're at.
BURNETT: You rend -- you render me speechless, Harry.
ENTEN: I tried.
BURNETT: Can you tell me something I don't know?
ENTEN: I'll tell you something I -- that you don't know and that I didn't know either. Which is apparently we can be like the Muppets a little bit.
My dear friend Stephen Binder, who is actually the executive producer of "NCIS", actually took what we were doing last week and turned us into Muppets. You can see me there, you there, interviewing me. I think we look gosh darn handsome and beautiful, don't you?
BURNETT: I do, and I think I actually was wearing a green dress.
ENTEN: He does very well.
BURNETT: It's got attention to detail.
ENTEN: He's good.
BURNETT: Oh, there we are. Wow. That's talent. I guess that's why he's a superstar.
ENTEN: I guess why.
BURNETT: All right. Thank you.
And next, an exclusive interview with a world leader who claims he's the only one with the power to get Trump to do something that everyone wants when it comes to the trade war.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[19:56:50]
BURNETT: Tonight, exclusive interview with the leader who thinks he can get Trump to do something that no one else has been able to do so far. Drop his tariffs.
Mike Valerio is OUTFRONT.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
MIKE VALERIO, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): As China's Xi Jinping strikes back against steep U.S. tariffs, vowing to fight them eye for an eye.
How are you? It's so good to meet you.
South Korea's leader says in an exclusive interview with CNN. He is looking for a deal.
Acting President Han, what is your message to President Trump?
HAN DUCK-SOO, SOUTH KOREAN ACTING PRESIDENT: First of all, we will cooperate with the United States and President Trump to make sure that we can find some of the solutions. You know, to arrive at the win-win situations.
VALERIO: Han Duck-soo, South Korea's head of state, says cooperation and negotiation, not confrontation, will be South Korea's playbook. A strategy he says driven by deep ties to the U.S. forged during the Korean war.
Today, nearly 30,000 U.S. troops are still stationed in South Korea. And he's betting friends with this much history. Can talk this through.
You do anticipate that this 25 percent tariff level will not stay. Thats your anticipation.
HAN: Depending on the negotiations.
VALERIO: Twenty-five percent, though, that's pretty steep for friends for generations.
HAN: Well, it's a pity because we are evaluated in that way. But I think that that kind of different assessment can always happen in this kind of situation. VALERIO: South Korea's auto industry is a success story, in part
because of tariffs. Seoul National University economics professor E. Kyung (ph), writing: South Korea's high tariffs on imported cars, protected Hyundai, helping it to grow into a global powerhouse exporter.
In this tariff trade war, economists fear parts and products from South Korea could skyrocket in price, harming jobs and assembly lines on both sides of the Pacific.
Han remains optimistic, speaking with U.S. President Donald Trump for the first time in a phone call Tuesday morning. President Trump echoing the enthusiasm for now, posting on Truth Social, the two leaders had a, quote, great call and, quote, we have the confines and probability of a great deal for both countries, Trump wrote.
HAN: I think if we really try to work very hard and you know, exchange our informations on interpreting and assessing in the right way, in this case with the United States, I think the situations can -- can be improved.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
VALERIO (on camera): So, Erin, this is the test here. If a country like South Korea comes to the table, putting its faith in the value of its longstanding alliance with the United States, how much farther can its tariff come down? Can its tariff come down at all?
That is the question that Han Duck-soo is facing. And, Erin, for what its worth, he has served as ambassador to the United States before the Trump years and also before the Trump years. He was instrumental in getting the free trade agreement with the U.S. and South Korea over the finish line. So we'll be watching from here in Seoul -- Erin.
BURNETT: Yeah, and it's such an important interview.
Mike, thank you very much from Seoul.
And thanks so much to all of you.
"AC360" starts now.
