Return to Transcripts main page
Inside Politics
Raging Wildfires Engulf Homes In Greater Los Angeles; Political Blame Game Picks Up As California Wildfires Rage; Trump Cabinet Picks To Face Senate Hearings This Week; Democrats Shift Right on Immigration after Election Loss; GOP Hardliners Mount Potential Threat to Trump's Agenda; The Newest Senator at the "Candy Desk". Aired 8-9a ET
Aired January 12, 2025 - 08:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[08:00:37]
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
(MUSIC)
MANU RAJU, CNN HOST (voice-over): California in crisis. Wildfires engulf blocks of Los Angeles as Trump points fingers.
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT-ELECT OF THE UNITED STATES: The governor has not done a good job.
RAJU: And Newsom pushes back.
GOV. GAVIN NEWSOM (D), CALIFORNIA: This guy wanted to politicize it.
RAJU: The latest from the West Coast.
Plus, Senate spotlight. This week, Trump's cabinet picks face a moment of truth.
PETE HEGSETH, TRUMP'S DEFENSE SECRETARY NOMINEE: He said, keep going. Keep fighting, behind you all the way.
RAJU: Plus, my brand new reporting as Trump meets with House Republicans behind closed doors.
And a sweet tradition. The new senator behind the secret candy stash on the Senate floor.
INSIDE POLITICS, the best reporting from inside the corridors of power, starts now.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
RAJU (on camera): Good morning. Welcome to INSIDE POLITICS SUNDAY. I'm Manu Raju.
We begin with the most destructive fire in the history of L.A. County, affecting the lives of millions and still raging through parts of Los Angeles. The Palisades Fire, only a fraction of which is contained, destroyed thousands of structures in a matter of days, now moving closer to densely populated areas in the country's second most populous city.
The crisis has forced the outgoing president, Joe Biden, to cancel an official trip to Italy, where he was scheduled to meet the pope, and it will soon fall on the lap of the new president, Donald Trump, who takes office in just eight days.
But all week, Trump has been attacking the Democratic governor, Gavin Newsom, and overnight, lashing out on social media against, quote, incompetent politicians.
Meantime, the Democratic mayor of L.A. Karen Bass, facing her own storm over her handling of the crisis as the city's fire chief blames L.A. officials for cutting its budget by millions.
But the bigger question right now when will the fire finally get under control?
CNN's Julia Vargas Jones is in Los Angeles with how things are looking right now.
So, Julia, tell us the latest.
JULIA VARGAS JONES, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, Manu, we are here in the Mandeville Canyon area of Los Angeles, just to situate our viewers. We're looking to the west here. This is where the front of the Palisades Fire has been expanding. We were here yesterday. We watched this entire hill burn down, but firefighters were able to keep this neighborhood behind me safe. And we're still hearing even now that still in the middle of the night here in Los Angeles, were hearing those aerial operations that have been so critical to keep this fire from expanding even further.
They're dropping water. They're dropping fire retardant in these communities, in the canyons -- in Mandeville Canyon. This is not too far from the 405 freeway that cuts Los Angeles north to south. As you said, still, evacuation orders, 100,000 people under those evacuation orders, even though some of those areas have already been lifted.
There was a snafu, part of what you mentioned with the mayor and part of the issues with the response is that these evacuation orders were sent erroneously to so many people around Los Angeles County, and now authorities are saying, please still listen to them and make sure that you are heeding those warnings. Also, new, Manu, we have the ATF now leading the investigation over the Palisades Fire.
This team will be able to determine if the cause of the fire was arson, a downed power line, or anything else that might have caused this unprecedented destruction in Los Angeles -- Manu.
RAJU: Julia Vargas Jones, live on the ground in Los Angeles, thank you so much.
And let's bring in CNN's meteorologist, Derek Van Dam, to get a sense on how the conditions may affect the emergency response.
Derek, is there any relief in sight or are there signs that things may get worse?
DEREK VAN DAM, CANN WEATHER ANCHOR: Unfortunately, Manu, it's likely it'll get worse before it gets better. The critical fire conditions extended from today right through Wednesday. Two different Santa Ana wind events that are forecast, and I want to take you through the winds.
But just keep in mind the tinderbox conditions that we are contending with the start of the water year in California begins October 1st. Every year, we've only had three hundredths of an inch of rain so far since that date. We're running just about 4-1/2 inches below where we should be, and that comes off the heels of a very wet winter last year, so there's a lot of vegetation that dried out rapidly leading to this tinderbox conditions.
[08:05:05]
Now, I want you to see the change in the wind directions that will be not from the typical northeast Santa Ana winds, but this onshore component that could take some of the embers and bring them back into the areas that have already burned. Then going forward in time, Monday into Tuesday and Wednesday, that northeasterly Santa Ana wind will pick up and the potential for additional erratic and extreme fire behavior exists with the four large active fires that we are monitoring over the western portions of L.A. County.
Is there any rain in sight? Nothing. In the foreseeable future may be a glimmer of hope for a few drops of water to fall from the sky by next weekend. Fingers crossed -- Manu.
RAJU: Yeah. Fingers crossed indeed.
All right. Derek Van Dam, live from the CNN Weather Center, thanks so much.
And there is a lot to unpack with the great panel this morning. Joining me now is "Punchbowl News's" Anna Palmer, Carl Hulse of "The New York Times", Julie Davis, also with "The Times", and "Politico's" Alex Isenstadt.
And, Alex, is the author of a brand new book called "Revenge: The Inside Story of Trump's Return to Power". It goes on sale in March.
Congratulations, Alex.
ALEX ISENSTADT, AUTHOR, "REVENGE": Thank you.
RAJU: Very excited to read that.
Look, Trump is going to have to confront this crisis even, let's hope it's contained, of course, by the time he comes into power in eight days. But even so, this rebuilding process is going to take years. It's going to require lots of federal aid coming in. Yet, he's engaged in this personal feud. He's been attacking Gavin
Newsom all week.
You've been -- you've been -- you've been covering Trump. You know Trump. You wrote the book on Trump.
Will he be able to set aside this personal feud and give California -- give Los Angeles everything it needs to rebuild?
ISENSTADT: Well, you know, the interesting thing is his relationship with Gavin Newsom compared to a lot of other Democrats for a long time, wasn't actually all that bad. If you go back to the pandemic, if you go back two years before that, he actually attacked Newsom a lot less than he did relative to other Democratic governors. Part of the reason was, was because, Kimberly Guilfoyle was engaged to Donald Trump's son, Don Jr. And Kimberly Guilfoyle used to be married to Gavin Newsom. And so she helped to sort of officiate or manage that relationship a little bit.
But Kimberly Guilfoyle is now out of the picture, no longer with Don Jr. And so, there is been a real breakdown in terms of the relationship. And Trump is going into office finding someone to blame for these fires.
And that's what he does. He finds someone to blame. So, the problem isn't his. The problem is someone else's.
RAJU: And speaking of someone to blame -- I mean, look at the social media posts from Trump just in the past week, he's been all over social media attacking Gavin Newsom, sometimes calling him Newscum. That's what he said. Even in the wake, immediate wake of this crisis was unfolding. And then he has been attacking him publicly as well, including saying this on Thursday.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I think that Gavin is largely incompetent.
I think it's one of the great catastrophes in the history of our nation. This is not just in Los Angeles. I've never seen anything like that. Devastation.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
RAJU: But again, they're going to -- they're going to require his support. L.A. is going to need his support in order to rebuild. And you're hearing that from the president-elect.
JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS, NEW YORK TIMES CONGRESSIONAL EDITOR: Right. Well, I mean, we heard this when during his first term, right, when -- when -- even when it comes to storms and natural disasters and moments when the nation needs the president to sort of step up and just be the president of all of the people in all of the states, he finds it very difficult to do that.
He thinks of this job. He thinks of his power as his personally. And if he personally has a beef with someone or has a bad relationship with them, that's going to affect his approach to helping their state or helping, you know, do what needs to be done by the federal government.
So I guess we have to see what happens. I think, you know, the timing of this is particularly unfortunate because he will be in blame mode. And this was not me. I was not president when this happened.
But this is the scale of this disaster and the cost that that's going to be incurred here. It's so astronomical that he's going to have to do something and figure out some way to put some of this aside. And, and, you know, deal with it when he is actually in office, which is soon.
RAJU: Yeah.
CARL HULSE, NEW YORK TIMES CHIEF WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT: Well, I mean, I agree with Julie. You know, this is a Congress that's now talking about cutting spending, and we're going to reduce the deficit. Now, all of a sudden, you have this huge, unexpected expense.
So, I think for --
RAJU: Truly massive, massive expense.
HULSE: Yeah. And you know, how do you pay for it and how do you pay for it in the context of this big legislation that they're trying to push?
But it's also like at some point now, Trump, he's been on the outside, been able to really rip other people. Now he's coming in and at some point you have to deliver. You can't just stand back and say, boy, they really messed this up. So how is he going to manage that?
ANNA PALMER, PUNCHBOWL NEWS CEO & CO-FOUNDER: Well, and he helped try to get the Olympics to California. This isn't just a short term to your point, Carl, you know, a month long fight.
He relishes this fight now with Gavin Newsom, who clearly was very critical of Trump on the 2024 campaign trail. But at some point it has to shift because this is going to be about how America presents on the world stage.
[08:10:03]
RAJU: In the meantime, Gavin Newsom is taking this opportunity to fire back at Trump. He put out a letter on Friday urging Trump to come visit California. He said in this letter to Trump. And then he has gone on a media tour of sorts, making clear his concern that Trump potentially could withhold aid and also pushing back on some of the attacks that he has faced from the president-elect.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
INTERVIEWER: --assistance when he becomes president. NEWSOM: Of course, he's pretty straightforward about that. He's tried to do it in the past. The rhetoric is very, very familiar, and it's increasingly acute. And obviously, we all have reason to be concerned about it. It's delusional and it's a consistent mantra from Trump going back years.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
RAJU: And he was on the liberal podcast "Pod Save America". He the delusional comment was about some of the claims that Trump has been making about the water supply in California and the like, but that's the kind of stuff that Trump is going to. We'll see. And it could stick with Trump.
ISENSTADT: Yeah, it could get worse before it gets better, the war of words between the two of them. But to Carl's point, this is just going to be one of the challenges that Trump faces when he gets into office. You know, the honeymoon period that he's had during the transition, it could end relatively soon.
Once you're in, once you're in office and you're faced with these challenges and you're dealing with them day to day to day and other things pop up, Trump's going to be under the microscope pretty soon. He's getting inaugurated in just eight days. We'll see how long the honeymoon lasts after that.
RAJU: And meanwhile, Newsom is dealing with this on multiple fronts. Elon Musk has been bashing him repeatedly on X, and then Newsom responded to Elon Musk just yesterday, saying, stop encouraging looting by lying and telling people it's decriminalized.
It's not. It's illegal, as it always has been. Bad actors will be arrested and prosecuted. He was responding to a post where Musk reposted someone who said Newsom in California, Democrats literally decriminalized looting, barring police from arresting looters.
But this is a multiple. It's a front that Newsom is going to have to fight on multiple fronts.
DAVIS: Right. It's not just the president. It's one of the most powerful and wealthy supporters of the president, who has been inserting himself into various areas here, and, you know, has a big following and has a big platform and really has the ability to gin up the right and Trump supporters and spread things that may or may not be completely true or true at all. And that's a big problem if you're Gavin Newsom and you're dealing with this crisis, because there is going to be a pretty long tail here.
It's not just about money. It's also about kind of getting people to pull together after this disaster. And, you know, Elon Musk is throwing some more fuel on this.
RAJU: Yeah. And look, as we know, crises, people remember how politicians respond to crises. George W. Bush during Katrina. We'll see how people remember how Gavin Newsom responds now. So there's a lot that well see how that.
HULSE: But there used to be this tradition of pulling together --
RAJU: Yeah.
HULSE: -- in these moments. And this is pulling apart. And its really -- it's so counterproductive in this situation.
RAJU: Yeah.
PALMER: And so many other Republican lawmakers are going to look to Trump to see how he deals with this in terms of how they should be positioning themselves vis-a-vis government funding vis-a-vis so many other things. How can they work with Democrats on this when you have the leader of their party just going after Newsom and Democrats in California over and over again?
RAJU: That's such a good point. They could potentially use this as leverage if they don't agree with or if they listen to what Trump decides to do, we'll see what he decides to do if he changes or if he continues this fight with Newsom.
All right. Coming up, Trump's nominees get ready to take the stand this week in a showdown with senators who will get confirmed on day one.
And later, why some of Trump's biggest loyalists could put his agenda at risk. A new reporting coming up.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[08:18:10]
RAJU: Donald Trump wasted no time making his cabinet picks within days after he won last November. But which of those picks will be confirmed by the time he takes office in just eight days. This week, a huge test, at least a dozen nominees will be grilled by Senate committees during their confirmation hearings. The nominees' goal, make sure they do not lose the support of more than three Republicans to ensure they can get confirmed by at least a party line vote.
And many Senate Republicans are putting aside some of their reservations over some of the nominees, as Senator John Cornyn suggested to me late last week.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RAJU: Do you have any concerns with any Trump nominees right now? Hegseth over his past allegations or Gabbard or meeting with Bashar al-Assad? Do they raise any red flags for you?
SEN. JOHN CORNYN (R-TX): You mean what I choose the same people. It's really not my decision. He's entitled to his team because that's the team that will help him follow through on the promises that he made on the campaign trail.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
RAJU: All right. My panel is back.
We learned that over the weekend, actually, on Friday, the leaders of the Senate Armed Services Committee were briefed about Pete Hegseth's FBI report. This is a typical part of the confirmation process. But of course, those accusations from Hegseth's past have become front and center in this nomination fight. He's denied a lot of these allegations, including sexual assault allegations from October 2017 about how he managed the veterans' nonprofit groups that he led, alleged alcohol abuse. He's denied all of that.
But that will be part of the process. Carl, what are the chances that Hegseth gets confirmed at this point?
HULSE: I think his chances are better than they were when his when his name was first rolled out and these things came out. Of course, Joni Ernst had raised objections, but she seems to have backed off of that.
[08:20:00]
So -- but this is what the Democrats want to use the hearing for, is that they want to highlight these -- these instances and try and pick off a few Republicans and cause trouble for Hegseth. He's obviously the marquee hearing, but it's going to be a real blizzard of hearings. I don't know that people are quite prepared for how many they're going to be, but I don't know if you want to answer the question of who's going to get confirmed on day one, but I don't think many.
RAJU: Yeah.
HULSE: Maybe Marco Rubio.
RAJU: Yeah.
HULSE: Unless something horrible surfaces. I don't think that's going to happen.
RAJU: Maybe Elise Stefanik, maybe, I don't know.
HULSE: Maybe. But there's some real process issues here. You know, these aren't official nominees. I don't want to get way in the weeds, although you probably would. But the -- you know, they're not officially nominated until the presidents in. You got a lot of paperwork issues to deal with.
So without Democrats going along, you won't get too many. And plus, they remember they only got one for Joe Biden.
RAJU: And he mentioned Joni Ernst. This is going to be a key moment. She sits on the Senate Armed Services Committee. She has been she had some concerns. They had multiple conversations. She's, of course, someone who has actually worked to address the issue of sexual assault in the military, herself a sexual assault survivor.
But as Carl suggested, she is sort of changed her tune a bit over Hegseth. And she's also facing reelection in two years.
PALMER: Yeah, I mean, I think when you look at Joni Ernst, she is somebody who I think all of us were trying to get to right away, after some of these allegations came forward, especially regarding sexual assaults and allegations around that.
But she is really -- she's been down to Mar-a-Lago. She's talked to him a couple of times. I mean, it seems as though a lot of her questions have really been answered, at least so far from the kind of posturing that we've been able to see.
To me, the interesting thing is, really, is how Republicans are trying to posit the Democrats arguments on this, saying, you know, they're just trying to do what they did to Brett Kavanaugh, to Pete Hegseth. And so that is kind of a way for them to tamp that down and say, hey, actually, these are just allegations. Anybody can say anything.
There's not anything serious here, clearly going to be a big focal point for Democrats. But the bigger point, I think the question is going to be -- he's never run anything like the military, like the federal. When you think about just the overall complex and the mission of this job, I think that's -- will be interesting to see if that resonates at all with Republicans.
RAJU: Yeah, no question about that. And meantime, while Hegseth has dominated the headlines, Pam Bondi, the attorney general nominee, has really flown under the radar. Yet she could be very controversial as well, at least according to Democrats.
I'm hearing that there are going to be some focus from Democrats about some of the things that she has said in the past, as Trump was trying to overturn the election back in 2020. Just a flashback on something she said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PAM BONDI (R), TRUMP'S PICK FOR ATTORNEY GENERAL: We are not going anywhere until they declare that we won Pennsylvania.
The good residents who are all supporting us in Pennsylvania, their votes don't count by these fake ballots that are coming in late. And back to the observation, they're not letting us watch the process.
STEVE DOOCY, FOX NEWS ANCHOR: Pam, did you just say fake ballots?
BONDI: There could be. That's the problem.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
RAJU: And that was from November 5th, 2020.
So when she gets confronted by this, she's going to also have to show some loyalty to Trump. Does she distance herself from those past comments? How do you think she -- she deals with that, given that Trump is watching? ISENSTADT: Yeah, well, we'll see. I mean, Republicans have gotten
pretty good at how to answer the January 6th question at this point. They faced four years of these questions. She's going to come in. She's going to be prepared.
There's not a whole lot of evidence at this point that she's at risk of bleeding off too much Republican support. Not as much trouble as Pete Hegseth is in. But, you know, she's -- she's going to come in. She's going to be prepared.
And Republicans have gotten pretty good at how to navigate that needle of how to answer when you're asked about January 6th and what you said back then and how your position now aligns with that.
RAJU: And she's likely moment she stands very likely to get confirmed, in large part because Matt Gaetz, the guy who was nominated before her, pulled back. And Republicans don't see her nearly as bad as Matt Gaetz.
DAVIS: Right. I mean, I think what were seeing with Pam Bondi and what we will see with her hearing is a much more conventional sort of old school confirmation hearing where the Democrats are going to be against her because they are substantively have differences with her on policy. Feel like what she said about the 2020 election was, you know, wrong and irresponsible.
But this is sort of a substantive difference they have in terms of her disclosure. In terms of her qualifications for the job, there doesn't seem to be as much question on the Republican side. And that's why I think you're going to see a smoother road for her.
RAJU: Yeah.
DAVIS: I think with Hegseth, part of the issue notwithstanding the allegations, is just that there's been a lot of pushback to getting just the basic information that committees usually get before these hearings, and that's going to be an issue.
RAJU: I do want to just quickly talk about RFK, Jr. He's not facing a hearing this week, but he will very soon. He's been making the rounds on Capitol Hill. And the big question has been about his vaccine skepticism, his past comments falsely linking vaccine childhood autism to vaccines.
[08:25:05]
And he's made some comments that suggested perhaps he's trying to clean those comments up.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RAJU: Senator Cassidy, do you plan to support RFK Jr.?
SEN. BILL CASSIDY (R-LA): I haven't made a decision yet.
RAJU: Do you have any concerns about RFK Jr.'s views on vaccines? SEN. JOHN FETTERMAN (D-PA): Well, of course. But what I will say is
that he is -- he expressed that he is pro-vaccine. You know, that's that -- you know, I'm not violating his trust. I mean, I think he's been front and center. Now he claims that he is pro-vaccine.
RAJU: Do you buy that?
FETTERMAN: Well, it's like I'm saying what he said.
CORNYN: He told me he is not anti-vaccine. He's pro-vaccine safety, which strikes me as a rational position.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
RAJU: He's cleaning up his remarks. Senator Cassidy, who's the chairman of one of the key committees overseeing this nomination process, will not say if he's supporting him yet.
HULSE: Yeah. I mean, nominees tend to change their tune when hearing time comes. He's obviously doing that.
I think the interesting thing about him is he might get some Democratic support. There are Democrats who like the things that RFK Jr. says against big ag, against pharma. So I think he's -- his could be really interesting in terms of what's the coalition.
RAJU: Yeah. No question. That will be interesting to see. We'll see when that hearing happens.
All right. Next, are Democrats shifting right on immigration? Well, wait until you hear what some in their party say after the first big vote of the new Congress.
Plus, my panel is back to react to this new comment from President Biden.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I would have beaten Trump, could have beaten Trump.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[08:31:04]
RAJU: Republicans last year tried to advance a bill named after Laken Riley, the Georgia nursing student murdered by an undocumented immigrant last year. But it was ignored in the Democratic-led Senate.
Now Republicans are in charge, and the bill could become law. Why? In no small part because more Democrats now are embracing the bill, a sign of a shift in the party over a key issue.
The bill would require though the detention of undocumented migrants who are charged with crimes like theft or burglary. But Democratic critics call the measure unconstitutional and warn it could lead to indefinite detention of migrants.
Yet supporters like Democratic Senator Jon Ossoff, who is up for reelection in Georgia this cycle, told me the bill should become law.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. JON OSSOFF (D-GA): I think that this murder shook the state of Georgia, shook the whole country. And I think we have a prospect here at working together across the aisle.
RAJU: How big of an issue you think this will be in your race, in your reelection race? Immigration.
OSSOFF: Look, I think that the whole country recognizes that we've had a crisis at our southern border. My obligation is not to consider the politics, but to consider my state's interests and the national interest and that's what I'll keep doing.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
RAJU: All right.
My panel is back. Just a look at the votes in the Laken Riley Act in the House this past week. In 2024, 37 Democrats voted for it. That is up 48 Democrats this year. That happened the first vote of the new Congress.
And then the Democrats who voted to advance the bill, who are up for reelection in 2026, in the Senate -- all of them pretty much did vote -- many of them did, at least especially the ones who could be in tough races.
Julie, you've written the book on immigration. What do you make of the way the Democrats are handling this issue in the wake of the elections?
HIRSCHFELD-DAVIS: Well, it's really kind of a remarkable shift. I mean, not only did most of the Senate Democrats who are up for reelection next time vote for it, but almost all of the Democrats voted to advance it.
And we'll see what happens next week when this comes up again and they have another procedural vote and then a vote on final passage, whether it actually does get that many Democrats voting for it in the end.
But I think the recognition is that, you know, we saw in the -- in the 2024 election that message of cracking down and being much more punitive toward undocumented people who are here really resonated with voters. People were successful in their campaigns, including the President-Elect Donald Trump.
And so Democrats are having to grapple right now with what that means for them. And they understand that being against a bill that is, in the end, about punishing people who are here illegally for crimes that they are accused of committing, is a very popular and politically resonant thing.
Now, there are still major concerns among Democrats and certainly advocacy groups about this legislation. It doesn't say that you get detained and deported if you're convicted of a crime like that. It says if you're accused or charged of a crime like that. So there are a lot of due process concerns here.
Not to mention the fact that this would potentially cost the government tens of billions of dollars. It's not clear that ICE even has the detention beds to do this. But those are practical considerations that politically like, just are not top of mind right now for Democrats --
RAJU: Yes.
HIRSCHFELD-DAVIS: -- who understand that, you know, it sounds very rational that you would want to detain and deport people who commit crimes, who are already here illegally.
RAJU: Yes, and that's the hard thing. If you're a Democrat up for reelection, you have to explain if you vote against it and some of them say, look, this is too politically toxic for me to vote against.
ISENSTADT: Yes. And they're going to have to pick their battles, right? Like, they can't -- they can't fight with Trump on everything after they just got their clocks cleaned in this last election.
Immigration is probably not politically for them at least the best battle to battle to pick right now, just because it was an issue that was so central to their defeat in November.
[08:34:48]
RAJU: And as Senator John Fetterman suggested to me just last week, I asked him about the shift in this issue, and he's also meeting with Donald Trump -- the first Senate Democrat to meet with Donald Trump in Mar-a-Lago he plans in the days ahead.
Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RAJU: Do you think the politics on this issue, immigration, have shifted?
SEN. JOHN FETTERMAN (D-PA): well, I hope for our party, I hope it has shifted.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What do you plan on talking about with the president-elect?
FETTERMAN: Well yes, I'm asking to be named the pope of Greenland.
RAJU: Well, do you have -- do you have a specific ask?
FETTERMAN: No, I'm just having -- I mean, like, this is going to be the president, and I am not just the senator for Democrats in Pennsylvania. I'm the senator for everyone in Pennsylvania. And my state picked Donald Trump as president.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
RAJU: I mean, there are senators like Fetterman who have a totally different approach with Trump than Democrats did back in 2017 when he came into office.
PALMER: Yes, we've been reporting a lot on this this past week. We even quoted Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the kind of the leader for a lot of the left on these issues. And she said, listen, we can't just be reflexively anti-Republican.
I mean, the fact that she's even saying that is just, I think, really instructive of where Democrats are, not just Democrats on the front line, not just Democrats who are worried about their reelection, but are saying we have to take an entirely new kind of strategy when it comes to where we can work together and where we can't.
RAJU: Meantime, the president himself, as he was on his way out the door in just a matter of days, he had a press conference on Friday talking about what was happening in California. And he was asked about his decision to drop out of the race and what that -- whether he could have actually beaten Trump.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I think. I would have beaten Trump, could have beaten Trump. And I think that Kamala could have beaten Trump. And the party was worried about whether or not I was going to be able to move.
I thought it was even though I thought I could win again. I thought it was better to unify the party. I didn't want to be one who caused a party that wasn't unified to lose an election. And that's why I stepped aside.
But I was confident she could win.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
RAJU: His decision to drop out still grates at him.
HULSE: I mean, I've never talked to a single politician in my career who left a race, either retired or decided to leave, who didn't say they could have won -- universal.
But I do think that Democrats on Capitol Hill are glad that Joe Biden did drop out, because they think they would have taken it a much worse beating if he had been on the ticket and potentially lost the swing states.
They managed to win Wisconsin, Michigan, Arizona, Nevada. I think I mean, and then kept it close in the House. I think that all due respect to President Biden, I think that they
look at that and go, all right, well, we were going to take a real beating with him.
RAJU: Yes, no question about it. And as our as our colleague Harry Enten tweeted, he said based on the polling data, I categorize Biden's statement that he could have beaten Trump as flat out bonkers. So that's -- that's a scientific term from Harry Enten.
But Carl, you make a good point. I mean, the losses in the House and the Senate could have been much deeper.
HULSE: Yes.
RAJU: We'll see. You know, we'll see if -- how people remember Biden's decision.
All right. Up next, Donald Trump holding private Mar-a-Lago meetings with House Republicans this weekend. What hardliners are telling me about their demands.
Plus a secret candy stash on the Senate floor gets a brand-new owner.
[08:38:23]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
0840
RAJU: President-Elect Donald Trump has been huddling with different factions of the House GOP at Mar-a-Lago this weekend, including some of his biggest loyalists, members of the hard right House Freedom Caucus. While the meeting they had was described as friendly, a brand- new reporting this morning with my colleague Sarah Ferris shows why those very same Trump loyalists are also the biggest wild cards behind his agenda and could put it at risk.
At the heart of the matter, Trump's demand to increase the national debt limit as part of his sweeping bill. But some of the hardliners have never supported an increase in the national borrowing limit, and they tell us that they will want hundreds of billions, if not trillions, in spending cuts if Trump goes that route. And if they get their way, that risk causing a revolt among more moderate GOP members.
Even so, some on the hard right are so far uncertain to go along with Trumps demands.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RAJU: How do you feel about that -- raising the debt limit as part of this big bill?
REP. ELI CRANE (R-AZ): I got no comment.
RAJU: Could you stomach doing that as part of this big agenda bill?
We'll see.
REP. ANDY BIGGS (R-AZ): I've never voted for a debt ceiling increase before, and I would like to make sure that we're paying for that.
REP. WESLEY HUNT (R-TX): I'm obviously very hawkish when it comes to the debt limit.
REP. CHIP ROY (R-TX): I fully support clearing the decks on the debt ceiling. I fully support trying to make sure that we get a either one or two bills to get it done. But I'm not going to back off of my belief that we need to drive deficits down.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
RAJU: All right. My panel is back.
This is going to be incredibly complicated to say the least, because when they put -- they may be all in agreement on the idea of doing a big bill.
When you get into the specifics, these guys are dead set against doing -- raising the debt limit unless they get their way or just maybe no altogether.
Trump is going to have to make some decisions on how to proceed.
[08:44:49]
PALMER: Yes, I think it's really complicated territory that they're about to get into. You have the debt limit. The fact that they're choosing to put it onto this big reconciliation package instead of this March funding bill, that is a strategic decision that could blow up in their face.
I think, second of all, up until April and even beyond, they're only having a one-seat majority. So Democrats aren't going to bail out Republicans when it comes to raising the debt limit, when it comes to government funding, when it comes to this reconciliation package.
How Trump is able to navigate some of these hard right liners and get them to vote for it is going to be very, very tricky.
RAJU: They can only afford to lose one vote in the House. And just to remind our viewers about what is in this proposed bill that has not been drafted yet, they're still meeting about everything from immigration restrictions to new energy projects. They have massive complex tax overhaul, raising the national debt limit, and those deep spending cuts.
Carl, you've covered a lot of these single party-rule efforts, but have you ever seen anything so complex like this?
HULSE: It's too close. The margin is too close. That's why we were all asking that night. Mike Johnson, why do you want this job? It's impossible.
And you can't lose anybody. Theres going to be something in there for everyone to hate. These guys haven't shown a lot of unity.
Debt limit -- you're going to have to put a number on that. You're going to have to say were going to increase the debt limit by $5 trillion.
And that's -- and Mike Johnson's already been trying to lay the groundwork for that, saying, oh, that's really just theoretical. We're really just going to cut. Yes, but that's not a theoretical vote.
RAJU: Yes.
HULSE: And I just think they are in for it -- to use a technical term.
(CROSSTALKING)
RAJU: Yes. Right.
And they say they're not going to touch Medicare, which is a huge obviously --
PALMER: Social Security.
RAJU: -- or Social Security. And they're going to have to find cuts elsewhere.
We're told that House Budget Chairman Jodey Arrington is talking about -- he's got some list of about $5 trillion in spending cuts. But look, if they go that route, those cuts have programs that are defended by Republican members, and that's -- therein lies another problem. They will revolt if those cuts are pushed forward.
HIRSCHFELD-DAVIS: Right. I mean, what we saw this start to play out in December, right, when they tried to put a debt ceiling increase on the floor and dozens of Republicans refused to vote for it. So you have that problem.
If you solve that problem by putting all these spending cuts in advance on the bill, then you know, you have Republicans who are in states where even if you don't touch Medicare or Social Security, let's say it's all Medicaid, there are Republicans who represent districts where there's huge amounts of people on Medicaid.
So if you're going to change the rules for Medicaid, tighten up work requirements, restrict access to those kinds of services, those members are going to have a problem with that. Nutritional aid, same thing.
You know, you have huge numbers of districts represented by Republicans, or at least important districts represented by Republicans. There may not be that many of them, but those are votes you need. And when you have a one-vote margin, that becomes very problematic.
So, you know, I think there's a -- there's a sense Mike Johnson certainly seems to be operating from this theory that if you load everything all into one bill, the pressure will be so great for Republicans to vote for it that they absolutely won't be able to say no.
I think all of us who have covered these negotiations for years have seen it play out the other way, where a bill like that just collapses under its own weight.
RAJU: Yes. It's a great point. And this is exactly what Steve Womack, who is a veteran member from Arkansas, Republican member, said to us. He said, the more things that we pile onto a reconciliation package, the bigger the invitation for opposition. And I am concerned about that.
But that's the real fear for Trump --
ISENSTADT: Yes.
RAJU: -- right? Like, that's why Trump is saying I can do one bill or two bills. It doesn't really matter. But if they do one big, beautiful bill as he wants, it could collapse under its own weight.
ISENSTADT: Yes. It seems like one of the major questions here is to what extent does Trump get involved in terms of calling these members, putting pressure on them, having his political operation put pressure on them.
But what is going to be the thing that pressures these House Republicans to get in line? And it's unclear what that really is. It might be Trump coming in and doing some of that hard work himself.
RAJU: Yes. But then when we saw Trump try to pressure these members back in December, that didn't quite work. 38 Republican members voted against him when he tried to keep the government open to including raising the national debt limit.
And so, you know --
(CROSSTALKING)
HULSE: Well, they still have to do their spending package, too.
RAJU: Yes.
HULSE: They haven't even gotten the budget funding bill.
(CROSSTALKING)
RAJU: Yes, yes. Add that to the list.
Oh, boy. A lot to see.
All right. A lot to unpack. And what could be the most popular position in the United States Senate? Well, that's actually filling the candy desk. Don't go away.
[08:49:08]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) RAJU: There are 100 desks on the Senate floor, but one of them is not filled with papers or bills, but instead candy. Every new Congress, one desk and its occupant provide the world's greatest deliberative body with a secret stash of sugar.
It all started in 1965, when California GOP Senator George Murphy, recovering from vocal cord surgery, kept hard candy at his desk. That quickly became a bipartisan hit, and the tradition continued.
One desk stocked with treats, often from the occupant's home state and located on the GOP side of the aisle closest to the busiest entrance to the chamber.
60 years later, the now infamous candy desk has a brand-new owner, Oklahoma Senator Markwayne Mullin, a former mixed martial arts fighter who took the reins from Indiana Senator Todd Young.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RAJU: What's it like having the candy desk of the Senate?
SEN. MARKWAYNE MULLIN (R-OK): I love it.
RAJU: Yes.
MULLIN: Yes. And I'm not even eating candy right now.
RAJU: But you're probably the most popular guy in the Senate right now.
[08:54:47]
MULLIN: I was beforehand.
No, no, listen. Todd's -- Todd's a good friend, but Indiana isn't exactly known for candy, and he only wanted to have candy from Indiana there.
And Oklahoma is not known for candy, either, so I don't discriminate. I buy it from every place. And we have -- we have -- we have good candy --
RAJU: So how does a mixed -- a mixed martial arts fighter become the candy man?
MULLIN: Because I have a sweet tooth. Yes, 100 percent. Yes. I work out so I can eat what I want.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
RAJU: More than 19 senators have carried on this sweet tradition over the years and occupied the candy desk. And that includes the late Senator John McCain.
That's it for INSIDE POLITICS SUNDAY. You can follow me on X @mkraju, follow the show @INSIDEPOLITICS and follow me on Instagram @manu_raju. If you ever miss an episode, catch up wherever you get your podcasts.
Just search for INSIDE POLITICS.
Up next year, "STATE OF THE UNION WITH JAKE TAPPER AND DANA BASH". Jake has an exclusive interview with Republican Senator Katie Britt.
Plus, an exit interview with national security adviser Jake Sullivan, FEMA administrator Deanne Criswell on the fires in Los Angeles.
Thanks again for sharing your Sunday morning with us. We'll see you next time.
[08:55:52]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
