Return to Transcripts main page

Inside Politics

Trump Push To Fire Govt. Ethics Chief Heads To Supreme Court; Trump: "He Who Saves His Country Does Not Violate Any Law"; Source: DOGE Team To Gain Access To IRS Tax System "Imminently"; Zelenskyy: Ukraine Won't Accept Peace Deal Made "Behind Our Backs"; Tomorrow: U.S., Russia Hold Peace Talks In Saudi Arabia; Arizona Biden-To-Trump Voters On Trump's First Weeks In Office. Aired 12-12:30p ET

Aired February 17, 2025 - 12:00   ET

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

[12:00:00]

DANA BASH, CNN HOST: Today on Inside Politics, see you in court. The Trump administration wants the Supreme Court to weigh in on the president's efforts to expand executive power in unprecedented ways, as he takes new steps to dismantle key parts of the government he now runs.

Plus, pulse of the people. What do voters who flipped from Biden in 2020 to Trump in 2024, think of the president's first weeks in office. We've got a fascinating focus group. And I am going nowhere. New York City Mayor Eric Adams is refusing to resign. His legal problems may be on ICE, but fellow Democrats are starting to coalesce against him.

I'm Dana Bash. Let's go behind the headlines at Inside Politics.

First up, President Trump is facing dozens of legal challenges to his blitz of executive orders. Courts are stepping in to pause Trump's actions in many of the biggest cases, and now the administration filed its first appeal to the Supreme Court.

The president wants the highest court in the land to allow him to fire the head of the government ethics agency whose five-year term is not yet up. Trump's lawyers call a lower court's refusal to let the president do that, quote, an unprecedented assault on the separation of powers.

CNN's Katelyn Polantz is following this case. Katelyn, what more is the president's and his lawyer saying?

KATELYN POLANTZ, CNN CRIME AND JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Well, Dana, they are arguing that this case is about the power of the presidency. This case, it is the first time that we have a case about things that Trump is trying to implement in his second term of the presidency, getting to the Supreme Court. It's an emergency case.

And in this one, it's about, can the president fire whomever he wants in the executive branch? And does he have full control over investigations that may be taking place in the executive branch? Two, really key questions about the president's power and the expansion of it with Trump in that position. Now, the Justice Department, in their filing on Sunday did talk about this case, about the firing of Hampton Dellinger, who was serving as the special counsel over federal workers. So the person who would field whistle blower complaints from people across the government about their bosses, basically, and look into them.

The Justice Department is saying to the Supreme Court, hey, we should be able to fire this guy. even if Congress says, he should have some independents. In their filing, they write, this is from the acting solicitor general of the United States

Right now, a single district judge is forcing the president to continue allowing a principal officer, that's Hampton Dellinger, to exercise executive power when the president believes that officer should be removed. That sort of harm to the executive branch, to the separation of powers and to our democratic system is transparently irreparable.

So, they're really framing this up as a big fight, one of many to come over executive powers. They want to say, even if Congress was trying to give some independence to this, we want to tell them to pound sand, because we think that everything within the executive branch under the Trump administration should be dealt with by just the president and the executive branch. Stay out of it, Congress, and stay out of it, courts, as well.

BASH: Pound sand. That's, I'm sure, a very technical legal term. Thank you so much. Katelyn, really appreciate that. I'm joined here by some really terrific reporters, NPR's Ayesha Rascoe, CNN's Isaac Dovere and Dave Weigel of Semafor. Hello. Happy Presidents' Day. It's very thematic with what we're talking about today.

And on that, I just -- I think this is one of the moments that certainly I have been waiting for, and I'm sure all of you as well, because what the president and his team are hoping is that what they're doing -- they were like, bring on the lawsuits.

And what they're doing will cause at least one or all of these issues to head to the Supreme Court. And the president knows very well what the Supreme Court's makeup is. So, he's hoping that at the end of the day, the Supreme Court rules with him, and what he's doing does become precedent, official precedent.

[12:05:00]

AYESHA RASCOE, NPR HOST, "WEEKEND EDITION SUNDAY" AND "UP FIRST": Well, I mean, absolutely, that is what the hope is. I will say that for people who are concerned, and I'm not saying that people shouldn't have concerns, the fact that the administration is going through the courts is a sign that they are trying to play ball, right? They're not just ignoring them. They're doing the appeals.

Now, in this case, they are appealing a temporary restraining order. So basically, just like a pause.

BASH: Right. RASCOE: And so, in this -- this will be a test to see is, can they move as fast as they want to? Generally, these would be upheld a restrain because it's not saying you can't do it at all. It's just saying, wait until the courts figure out what's going on. And so, it will be a test of, like, how much power this administration is going to have to move as quickly, at lightning speed as they try to do.

EDWARD-ISAAC DOVERE, CNN SENIOR REPORTER: And like, we're a month in today to the Trump presidency. Yes, they are going through the courts. They are also saying very clearly, including what the president posted himself over the weekend, that if they don't get what they want, that they probably will go and do it anyway. And so, I think that that's the thing to remember here.

We are so early out in this presidency, and they have tested already the boundaries of so many things, and at that same time, as Donald Trump has done in a number of different ways. He said, if I don't get my way, I'll try to do it your way. And if I don't get my way, then I'll just do it my way anyway. And so, we will see if the courts rule against them, if the courts rule for them, and then what does Donald Trump do? They are telegraphing a pretty clear thing.

RASCOE: Well, let's constitutional crisis, right?

DOVERE: Right, exactly.

BASH: Yeah. And so, let's look at what you're referring to, channeling Napoleon over the weekend. Here's what the president put on his social media. He who saves his country does not violate any law. Before I want -- I want you to weigh in, Dave. But before we do that, I want you to listen to what Reince Priebus, who this time in the first Trump administration, was Donald Trump's chief of staff. How he reacted to that.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REINCE PRIEBUS, FORMER WHITE HOUSE CHIEF OF STAFF: It's catnip for the media. It's entertainment for Trump. The president enjoys, taking a grenade out on a Saturday afternoon, throwing it on the floor and watching everybody react.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DOVERE: Yeah. And that's a refrain I've heard from Democrats too. You asked them about various Trump actions, and they all have a different list of actions we shouldn't care about. Don't get distracted by Gulf of America. Don't get distracted by this tweet. Don't get distracted by this post.

There's little -- there's a little agreement on what we should be worried about, which is what we've just been discussing because the Democrats have been watching this. The Democrats who are litigating this, know that there is a generational effort going on here to undo both post-Watergate reforms, like the impoundment act and to undo New Deal reforms, which are 90-year-old precedents. No one -- almost no one in the country lived when these -- when these precedents were put into place by different makeups of the courts, but which are the right cases to get to them and to change forever how the president operates forever, for decades. It doesn't -- materially it doesn't -- it doesn't matter.

And that is the -- that is the focus here, which of these -- which are the best cases, which are the ones they want to get up to the court level because they're -- this summer, pretty soon, there are going to be tests of these precedents that everybody litigating is used to.

You saw this -- beginning of this in Biden's administration, the first president to operate under the 633 (Ph) majority, said goodbye to affirmative action. Said goodbye to Chevron deference. And the goal here, you're talking to conservative attorneys. They're just working on a different clock that we're going to achieve decades of stuff through these lawsuits.

BASH: Yeah. It is definitely the long game leading into this, and the hope is that it's going to do some monumental change. You're absolutely right. And I also think that all these things can be true. Reince could be right that, you know, this is catnip, as he said, that the president likes people to run with it. And maybe it's the red shiny object, or whatever it is that we call it. It also could be that we need to pay attention because it is his approach.

DOVERE: I mean, the previous comment just reminds me of that famous, infamous quote that was in the Washington Post in December of 2020, after Trump lost and he was doubting the election that and someone said, oh, he's just getting through it. What harm could it do?

This is -- he like -- he's quoting a movie about Napoleon. Yeah, it could be silliness, but he's also acting in these ways, making it clear that this is what's going on. J. D. Vance, not this past weekend, but the weekend previous that said something about ignoring things that that judges may rule against, that the president has to have the power. So, it's not -- it's not just in a bubble.

BASH: OK. So, on that note, I asked Amy Klobuchar, who is a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, about all of this, but specifically about the idea that they are just blowing through what judges are saying. Judges are saying stop freezing funding, and in many cases, they're doing it anyway. Watch our exchange.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BASH: Are we in the constitutional crisis?

[12:10:00]

SEN. AMY KLOBUCHAR (D-MN): We're not quite there yet, because ultimately, when the final court order is made, the Trump administration is going to have to decide. And this isn't just at the top. These are lower-level people as well. Are they going to face contempt charges? In the past, in the last administration, they did follow the court orders, and you do have voices in the United States Senate, like Senator Thune, the leader, or people like Chuck Grassley, even Josh Hawley, saying that you have to follow the rule of law.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RASCOE: Well, this is -- this is the whole issue, right? You know, I talked to a former clerk Clarence Thomas for Weekend Edition, and what he said was, look, you know, these orders that come from courts is kind of like stuff from the pope. You know, they don't have, like, an army to enforce this, right? And so really, what we have been depending on for years is that White Houses will just do what they are supposed to do. But we don't have a way to really make them, like they don't have an army to make them do it.

BASH: Yeah. I wonder. Also, we've been talking about these sort of really important philosophical and governance questions. But then there's the really big issue of how these cuts that are going on, on a daily basis are affecting people's lives, specifically, and including people who voted for Donald Trump largely.

Let's just look at some of the local headlines and in red states. Alabama, here's how much NIH cuts could cost UA, Tuscaloosa, the Missouri independent, nearly 30,000 federal workers in Kansas City brace for layoffs.

Alaska Beacon, federal firings hit U.S. force service in Alaska with at least 30 jobs cut on Thursday. Also say that it's not just about where we are in Washington. Federal workers live all across the country, and the people who have federal contracts live all across the country, including in states that voted Trump.

DOVERE: Look, there's going to be a lag here of what happens with these cuts and when people feel it, and then a big question of if they feel it or if they like what they feel because they see -- obviously the people lose their jobs, won't like it. But if there is a continuing approval for cutting the government here, but when services get cut, then people tend to complain. When jobs get cut, people tend to complain.

Some of this reminds me of a week before the election. I was in Michigan, traveling around with Bill Clinton, and he was talking about the cuts that he made to the government at the beginning of his presidency. He said, listen, we needed to do it to balance the budget. And I used to sit up at night and think about all those cuts and all those people who lost, and then we paid the price in the midterm.

Those kinds of cuts were intense. These cuts are more intense and are happening. You can see with a much broader approach, including our CNN reporting from last week that there were people -- 300 people, who were part of an agency that oversees nuclear security that were fired, and then on Friday morning, they were invited to where the firings were rescinded. And our reporting showed that the people who did the firing did not realize they were in charge of the safety of our nuclear stockpile, which I would say, when you talk about nuclear weapons, the word oops. You don't want anyone --

(CROSSTALK)

BASH: Definitely not. Standby one second, because I do want to get to Alayna Treene, who is reporting on Elon Musk and DOGE staffers who are seeking access to highly sensitive IRS data. We're talking about the private data on individual Americans tax returns and banking information. Alayna, what are you learning?

ALAYNA TREENE, CNN REPORTER: Yeah. It's -- yeah, Dana, it's not just their tax returns and banking information, but also their social security numbers, their private personal data. All of that included in some of this very highly sensitive IRS data that we know exists within that agency data system.

So now, what we're learning and what I'm told, is that one DOGE employee, he's a software engineer named Gavin Kliger. He is currently working temporarily at the IRS, and in the process of trying to gain access to that data system. I'm told, per one source familiar with the matter, that he's expected to get access to that imminently.

Now, I also went to the White House about this. I just want to quickly read for you what a White House spokesperson, Harrison Fields, told me, they said, quote, DOGE will continue to shine a light on the fraud they uncover. As the American people deserve to know what their government has been spending their hard-earned tax dollars on.

So of course, they are really emphasizing that this is what Elon Musk's Doge is all about, trying to get into these systems all across Washington and into the federal government to root out what they argue as waste, fraud and abuse.

But I also want to tell you, Dana, that we know that the IRS is also considering a memorandum of understanding, which would essentially give these different employees, particularly this one employing Gavin Kliger, more of this access to what is called the Integrated Data Retrieval System, or IDRS, that enables access to IRS accounts, allows access and adjustment to transaction data and automatically generates notices, collection documents and other outputs.

[12:15:00]

But look, we are hearing already concerns on. Including from Capitol Hill, a letter just went out from senators Warren and Wyden to the acting commissioner of the IRS, noting that there are some privacy concerns that they're worried about. So, this won't be that last. We hear of this. I think a lot of criticism already kind of coming around what this actually means and whether DOGE has the authority to do this. Dana?

BASH: Yeah. And those are Democrats asking for that. Again, if we can play the game, what if a Democrat in the White House was doing this? Republicans in Congress would be going absolutely bonkers, see if that happens now. Thank you so much. Appreciate it, Alayna.

Up next, U.S. and Russian officials are ready to discuss ending the war in Ukraine, without Europe or Ukraine at the table.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:20:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BASH: Secretary of State, Marco Rubio is now in Saudi Arabia, meeting with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman at the Royal Palace, ahead of talks with Russia aimed at ending the war in Ukraine. And in Paris, key European leaders who were not invited to the negotiations in Saudi Arabia are holding an emergency summit to discuss their own strategy.

There are concerns that President Trump is making too many concessions to Vladimir Putin and pushing forward without their input or Ukraine's. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy says this is simply not acceptable.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PRES. VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY, UKRAINE: So, I will never accept any decisions between the United States and Russia about Ukraine, never and our people, never.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BASH: Alex Marquardt is already in Riyadh. Alex, what are you hearing from your sources about what to expect there?

ALEX MARQUARDT, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Well, this meeting between the U.S. and the Russians is expected to get underway tomorrow. Dana, it is going to be an extraordinary moment. We haven't seen a meeting like this between the two sides since this war in Russia -- in Ukraine, rather began.

There has been contact between intelligence officials, but nothing like this. So, this is going to be a really remarkable moment. Critics are saying that the Trump administration has brought Russia in from the cold in one fell swoop, that phone call with Vladimir Putin these meetings tomorrow. The Trump defense, the administration defense, is that in order to get to a peace deal, you have to speak to your adversaries.

The Russians and the Americans are looking at this slightly differently. The Russians are talking about a broader spectrum of talks, talking about the entire relationship. They want to get past what they call this abnormal period that we've seen for the past three years, and talk about the entire complex of issues, while the American Secretary Rubio has said that they want to focus more on Ukraine.

Now, what we're going to be seeing actually tomorrow at the table are the Russian side, led by Sergey Lavrov, the foreign minister, and Yuri Ushakov, who is a top aide to Vladimir Putin, who used to be an ambassador to the United States, on the American side, Secretary Rubio, as you mentioned, but he'll also be joined by the National Security Adviser, Mike Waltz and the Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff, who's getting more and more involved in these Ukraine talks, because he's getting closer to the Saudi's.

The Saudi's, for their part, they're not just hosting. They're going to have a role in this as well. They are -- they are mediating. So, we can expect to see a senior -- a senior team from the Saudi's as well. But the administration is saying these are very preliminary talks. This is why the Ukrainians are not here. They have to get the ball rolling with the Russians.

Eventually they'll get to a point where the Ukrainians, they hope, will also be at the table. So, this is just the beginning. Secretary Rubio saying that it's going to take weeks to figure out whether these talks are going anywhere, whether the Russians are serious. Dana?

BASH: Alex, thank you so much. Appreciate it. You're going to have a very busy couple of days ahead of you. Up next here, they voted for Joe Biden in 2020 and Donald Trump in 2024, four weeks into the second Trump presidency. What do those voters think of how things are going so far. We'll tell you after a break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:25:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BASH: How many voters who swung the election for President Trump feeling about his first few weeks in office. Our friends at engages, talked to some Arizona voters who switched from voting for Joe Biden in 2020 to Trump in 2024, and so far, they mostly like what they see.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

STEPANIE T., ARIZONA BIDEN-TO-TRUMP VOTER: I just think he's trying to get America back on track as quickly as possible, given the state that it was left in from the previous administration.

CARSON L; ARIZONA BIDEN-TO-TRUMP VOTER: It feels more merit and transparency that I'm getting from the administration so far.

BRI S. ARIZONA BIDEN-TO-TRUMP VOTER: I approve of a lot of the stuff that he doing with the border and everything.

JONAS G. ARIZONA BIDEN-TO-TRUMP VOTER: Other countries I've noticed that were to be taken seriously.

DONNITA F. ARIZONA BIDEN-TO-TRUMP VOTER: But in most part, I feel like he's on the right track by keeping transgenders out of women's sports. That's number one.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BASH: All 11 Biden, Trump voters say, they approve of Donald Trump's first weeks in office. My panel is back now. What do you -- what do you make of that, Dave Weigel? I know that you, I mean, you spent a lot of time before the election talking to voters who were perhaps on the cusp of this yes.

WEIGEL: Yes. And voting before the election, you could tell things that outraged every Democrat weren't necessarily outraging most voters. This is also the normal timeframe for a presidential honeymoon.

If we were having this conversation four years ago, I was talking to Republicans who were worried that Joe Biden wasn't very visible. He was older. But what was the thing that was going to make him unpopular? Because he seemed to be at a baseline, and they found it, which was Afghanistan.

But the confidence that these voters have and these people -- these were people that the campaign -- the Harris campaign could tell were not get able by October. This is what a lot of these plays are being run on. If you polling on what -- how many -- how much of people think foreign aid is a part of the federal budget? Overstates it, usually by factor of 30.

And the fights they've taken with the highest profile, this is when I talk about what Democrats are trying to focus on, what they think the media might catch on to, what voters might catch on to. They are worried about the foreign aid component.

If it looks like they are complaining about money going elsewhere, or they're getting into the gender and sport stuff, it looks like Democrats are too concerned with one of those issues.

[12:30:00]