Return to Transcripts main page

Inside Politics

Trump Ramps Up Unprecedented Use Of Presidential Power; Republicans Brace For Impact As Trump's Bill Moves Forward. Elon Musk Pulls Back from Politics and Trump White House; NJ & VA Governor Races Could become Bellwethers for Trump; Lawmakers Doze as Trump's Bill Advances in Dead of Night. Aired 8-9a ET

Aired May 25, 2025 - 08:00   ET

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

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

(MUSIC)

[08:00:35]

MANU RAJU, CNN HOST (voice-over): Strong-armed.

President Trump attacks his political enemies.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I went through more investigations than Alphonse Capone, and now I'm talking to you as president.

RAJU: And swipes at Apple, as he forces his agenda through Congress. Will the GOP face a reckoning?

REP. HAKEEM JEFFRIES (D-NY): The American people are paying attention, and they know when they are being hurt.

RAJU: Plus, X'ed out.

ELON MUSK, TECH BILLIONAIRE: I'm going to do a lot less in the future. I think I've done enough.

RAJU: Elon Musk's time in government winds down as he pulls back from politics. How have Musk's cuts reshaped America?

And out cold. More lawmakers caught napping while Trump's bill advanced in the dead of night.

REP. MIKE JOHNSON (R-LA), SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: He fell asleep in the back. No kidding, I'm going to strangle him.

INSIDE POLITICS, the best reporting from inside the corridors of power, starts now.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

RAJU (on camera): Good morning, and welcome to INSIDE POLITICS SUNDAY. I'm Manu Raju. This morning, President Trump's unprecedented use of government power

rages on as he works to bend Americas political, economic and cultural forces to his will. This week, his administration tried to ban international students from Harvard, a move swiftly halted by a federal judge. And then Trump resurrected warnings of massive tariffs 50 percent on the European Union and 25 percent on an American company, Apple, unless it moved iPhone production to the U.S. He expanded that threat to Samsung and others, too.

But beyond Trump's trade war, some prominent Democrats now in the crosshairs of his justice department. Just yesterday, speaking to West Point cadets, he donned a red MAGA hat and trashed previous investigations into him.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: I say I was investigated more than the great late Alphonse Capone. Alphonse Capone was a monster. He was a very hardened criminal. I went through more investigations than Alphonse Capone. And now I'm talking to you as president.

We've liberated our troops from divisive and demeaning political trainings. There will be no more critical race theory or transgender for everybody forced on to our brave men and women in uniform, the job of the U.S. armed forces is not to host drag shows to transform foreign cultures, but to spread democracy to everybody around the world.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: All right. Let's break this all down with my excellent panel this morning. "Axios'" Hans Nichols. Tia Mitchell of "The Atlanta Journal-Constitution", and Astead Herndon from "The New York Times".

Good morning, guys. Nice to see you guys.

Let's start off with Trump's comments yesterday because as he's trying to, of course, reshape Americas institutions, whether its economic, political, cultural, so much of this is driven by this anti-diversity push. And that was really the message that he delivered in large part to the cadets yesterday at West Point. Of course, today is also the fifth anniversary of George Floyd's murder, which is spawned a lot of these diversity efforts.

Regardless of what Trump some of what Trump said, there is not actually totally accurate. He took credit for ending drag shows at military bases that actually occurred under Biden, but nevertheless, facts aside, what do you make of him taking that message to West Point and how that's really driven so much of his early parts of his administration?

ASTEAD HERNDON, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Yeah, it's a focus we shouldn't be surprised at. It's a focus he made clear during the campaign trail, and also reflects a country that has really backslid, I would say, and some of those commitments over the last five years, I was thinking about kind of the then the now post-George Floyd summer, that 2025. And almost universally, whether it's corporate, political, even some places in media, you've seen folks make those commitments and really back off of them.

And I think it's somewhat reflects a reality that some people didn't want to admit was that a lot of those programs weren't really reaching folks on the ground. And then the ride in Donald Trump specifically has been able to kind of turn it into a slur. He's been gone, goes beyond just using DEI as a as the program, but really goes at the fact that anyone who might be a minority, a woman, a person of a LGBT person is inherently unqualified for their job. Thats how he talks about it. And that's how hes really had political success.

I saw the Defense Secretary Hegseth say the phrase he hates is "diversity is our strength".

[08:05:03]

And that's really what they're trying to roll back on when they think about the military. But even that hasn't assumed belief there. The folks who are diverse are inherently unqualified, and that's really what they've been able to do.

TIA MICHELL, ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF: Yeah. And I think one of the things that Republicans and this isn't new -- this isn't even new under Trump. But one thing that conservatives have often tried to do when it comes to diversity, equity and inclusion is to look at the solutions that were put in place to address systemic and institutional racism or issues with discrimination on myriad issues. And there have been efforts to address that, for example, at West Point, to diversify the ranks of the U.S. Army, in part to help ensure the army is robust and has the best and the brightest.

But what we see some conservatives doing is then making those initiatives the problem. So, it's not that the army lacks diversity, is looking to ensure that it's strong for generations to come. But now those programs put in place are the problem and attacking the programs. And that's what you see in what Trump was saying in his speech. And again, a lot of times, how conservatives look at diversity, equity and inclusion programs.

And I think that is a -- then that allows them to ignore some of the core issues that these programs are trying to address. They don't even wrestle with those initial issues. They just focus on the outcome of the programs in place.

RAJU: And this is driving to his fight with Harvard as well. This was Trump. Trump last night actually posted on Truth Social, 12:51 a.m. and Sunday morning, posting on truth social about this battle. Of course, they tried to ban international students. They're still trying to ban international students from going to Harvard. A judge has stopped that. We'll see how that ultimately plays out in court.

But he went after them on social media. And then this is just the actions that they have taken. They've cut $450 million in federal grants from Harvard. They froze more than $2 billion in research funding. They're trying to ban those international students. They're threatening to sever its tax-exempt status, and they're using the DOJ to investigate diversity initiatives.

HANS NICHOLS, AXIOS POLITICAL REPORTER: Yeah, you have five bullet points up there on Trump administration actions against Harvard. You're going to need more, because when you talk to Trump officials and when you talk to just broadly Republicans in congress, they really want this fight. It's something they feel like they can win on.

And the challenge for Harvard and they're aware of this, and it's been reported, is that there's always another lever that the federal government can pull. If you are an institution of higher learning, you are dependent on the government for -- I mean, none of us a week ago were really thinking about the visa issue, right? And then it comes out. So especially in folks in higher education, they're trying to figure out how to navigate the Trump era. They have a very tricky road ahead of them because they're just so many other things the federal government can do.

And it's clear Donald Trump doesn't want to sue for peace. This is a fight he wants, and he always likes to pick his enemies and define himself in contrast to them. And this is just yet another example.

RAJU: But the reason why this is so significant is that if Harvard were to lose this case, they have massive repercussions for the entire higher education apparatus.

HERNDON: There is mass fear in the higher education system in academia right now because of this fight, partially because of what you're saying. They know the government knows they have these pressure points they can push with Harvard. And it really fits into his theme of retribution broadly. You laid it out at the top, whether its higher education, E.U. and tariffs, Apple, any of Trump's perceived enemies that find themselves in the crosshairs of the government right now can have their days turned and their institutions upended somewhat overnight.

But this is a total and complete effort by this White House, which Harvard is a proxy. And so, you know what Republicans have done successfully is really use these institutions like Harvard as a -- as a face of what they feel is an entrenched liberal ideology in particularly higher learning.

And so, I think -- we know you're right. They're going to lean into this fight because they want the trickle-down effect. They want the cultural effect. That's the reason they see this presidency is more than just policy. But tapping into culture itself.

RAJU: And it's culture, it's also political. And you look at some of the people who are being targeted by Trump's Justice Department and other investigations as part of the Trump administration. There's a common theme among all those different entities you see from ActBlue to Letitia James or people that Trump either doesn't like, or perhaps they're Democrats.

MITCHELL: Yeah. And I mean, again, it's an attack on free thought. It's an attack on free speech, and its attack on a people being allowed to challenge, whether it's the cultural ideology, the political ideology, the moral ideology of not just Donald Trump, but the Christian conservative movement, particularly white Christian conservatism.

And a lot of what we're seeing is their efforts to silence those who present, I guess, more diverse lines of thinking on the issues.

[08:10:07]

And we know higher and higher education is a place where you do hear from different types of people with different perspectives. A lot of the Democratic leaning organizations or places like Media Matters pushes back sometimes on misinformation and disinformation. And I think that's not what the Christian conservatives want right now. They want to control the message, control what people are receiving from these institutions.

HERNDON: Also feels like it goes into a larger backlash against expertise, against research that feels like it flows out of the pandemic. I think some of it is about the -- maybe the DEI-ness of these liberal institutions, you know, and I would say, like, there's a fair argument that Harvard and those ivies may have lost the sauce a little bit, but I think there's another one that says that that's not what they're doing here. They're not trying to find a solution for that. Nor should that be.

The government's necessarily role, they are intentionally attacking them. And I think expertise, research and the kind of things that they have been teaching are all under attack.

RAJU: And it's the power of the government, not just on those issues, whether its cultural, political, higher education, economic, of course, which is Trump's been the theme through this first term, second term as well. The early parts of it, the tariffs going after an American company, Apple just on Friday, then saying you'll go after Samsung if those phone production is not done in the United States, suggesting 50 percent tariffs would increase for the E.U. if they these negotiations that are happening don't go lead to a successful resolution in his eyes.

But he's not backing off. Even though there are real concerns about the increase in prices. Just look at the number of companies that are increasing prices because of tariffs. These are the big retailers, Walmart all the way down to best buy to adidas and the like. And that's not even talking about small businesses too, which are going to be rising prices as well. But Trump doesn't seem to be -- too concerned about that.

NICHOLS: There's always a question of Trump is when does he give in, right? What's in Wall Street peak, they call it speak. They call it the Trump put when like the markets go that badly, Trump kind of comes back.

What's interesting about all the sort of brands that you had all up there is that we've probably used four of those today. Like some of them. I mean, I'm just looking at the Procter and Gamble. I didn't drive a Subaru here. Just to be clear.

And so -- but, you know, we all have our iPhones. I guess we're still allowed to have our iPhones out. Everyone has -- most people in this country have an iPhone, whether or not it's an iPhone or Samsung or smartphone that's going to be a direct corollary impact if he stays with this.

And I just like it's an open question I have if iPhones go to $3,000, like, is Donald Trump going to keep that 25 percent demand in there?

RAJU: Yeah.

NICHOLS: And that's just -- I throw it out to the table. Or maybe I should ask my phone.

(LAUGHTER)

NICHOLS: But it's just -- it's just an open question to me whether or not he ever cries uncle.

MITCHELL: And I think it's also the question is, what is he exactly want? What is he trying to get at? Because is he truly trying to move manufacturing to the U.S.? But if that's the case, why does he then look for a deal? And he says, oh, I brought these countries to the table.

So, are you trying to just get the countries to come pleading and begging, wanting to come up with some type of agreement that lowers the tariffs but still is higher than where they started? What exactly are we getting at?

And I think consumers are starting to realize that no matter what, it's still going to result in higher prices. But sometimes it comes across that what Donald Trump wants is just these countries to come begging. He doesn't necessarily have a business output or a true goal in mind for the country. He just wants the country to come begging.

RAJU: And we'll see how he adjusts as the midterms draw closer and prices increase if they in fact do. All right. Next, with Trump's big, beautiful bill facing a rough road ahead in the Senate, Republicans are grappling with the political fallout after Trump got the final holdouts in the House to bend to his demands.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: Mr. Roy, are you prepared to vote yes on this bill? Why are you not saying anything, sir?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:18:26]

RAJU: It was a tense week in the capital. All nighters, high stakes horse trading and arm twisting as GOP holdouts were ruled by a president determined to get his so-called big, beautiful bill through the House, and all by just one vote. It includes some of Trump's biggest campaign promises, including new tax cuts like on tips and tens of billions of dollars for border security.

But as they head home for the Memorial Day recess, some Republicans are facing backlash over cuts to social safety net programs like Medicaid and food stamps, all as Trump's bill faces a complicated path in the Senate, with fears that it could make the eye popping $36 trillion national debt even worse.

My panel is back.

The impact of this bill is so far reaching and so many different ways, whereas on taxes or it's on cuts or it's on all the federal spending in there, just on some of the impacts from the Congressional Budget Office, 13.7 million more people would be uninsured in 2034. The Kaiser Foundation looked into the numbers and dove a little deeper there. People would be without food stamp benefits to because of the new work requirements in particular that would take effect here, but also the transfer of wealth from the higher income to what seems to increase over the number of years lower income, lower household incomes, lowest 10 percent decreasing because of those cuts to those programs.

Politically, what does this mean for Republicans? Because we know the attacks are coming. They're already coming. Can they sustain it?

NICHOLS: They're going to go on offense, right?

[08:20:02]

I mean, in politics in general, the old cliche, if you're explaining, you're losing. So, the Republican plan is to sort of ding Democrats for voting for this, saying that they are for giving away health care to illegal immigrants.

RAJU: And tax increases. That would happen at the end of the year.

NICHOLS: So, the strange thing about this bill that you and I don't know, we won't come clean on whether or not we stayed up all night to cover it. But the interesting thing about this bill is that Republicans, Democrats agree on it. They agree that the 2026 election is going to be contested on the provisions contained in the 1,116 pages.

And that's, you know, other things can happen in this world, but that's going to be a really dynamic kind of argument going. The ad makers are already looking at it. They know how to write ads for or against it. And it's just, you know, 2026, the midterms are going to be trench warfare. It's going to be bit by bit, and we know what they're going to be fighting about.

So --

RAJU: Yeah. And the vulnerable Republicans in swing districts, they all voted for it. Whether it's the Kamala Harris districts or the three of them there. And there's also a whole host of others in more swing districts that Trump may have barely won, that they all fell in line. They got what they wanted to some extent, but to some extent they did not.

How is that going to play for them?

MITCHELL: I think one of the things that is also going to have to be grappled with is the cost shifting onto states. And I think the perception that Republicans have tried to shape about the bill is that this is going to require blue states to kind of pay more of their fair share, and that's how they're selling it.

But what we know is, particularly with the cost shifts on things like food stamps, is going to really hurt some of the red states in the south, where they have more people who are poor and who are taking advantage of this nutrition program. And I think that's something that could really hurt Republican lawmakers coming up in the midterms, when they see the potential impact on state budgets, or they see states making decisions to cut back on certain programs because they say all of a sudden, we don't have the money, we can't afford it.

So, there's going to be a lot of questions that Republicans haven't -- I mean, they're hearing it when they go back in their district. We know that. But they're going to be hearing it more and more as more and more of the details start coming out of the impact on states and local government.

RAJU: And one of the big things is how did the states will pay for some of the Medicaid coverage? And there's also, you know, there's the new work requirements that would take effect at the end of 2026. Some of those far right, hard right members pushed to get that language in there. The question to voters from this Marquette Law School poll about, are they willing to cut Medicaid spending to reduce the deficit? Majority of Republicans, independents and Democrats say no.

Now they there is support for work requirements. But if people start seeing their benefits impacted, that changes could change their perception. However, the other side point of it, it's going to take some time to implement this stuff so people may not notice it, but necessarily before the midterms.

HERNDON: Yeah. And I think we learned that particularly even back in the Biden in 2021 with the IRA. I mean, this -- I mean, Hans is right. Obviously, this is going to be where the midterms lives and dies. And I think from the election perspective, it's been a couple of things that have been noticeable about this fight in D.C. one, I can't believe he's gotten everybody to actually call it the "Big, Beautiful Bill". I'm shocked that is actually.

RAJU: The reconciliation bill doesn't sell as well.

HERNDON: But I think even more so, it shows the differences between his voter coalition and then the policy once they get there. Donald Trump did have a higher increase of lower income supporters and actually grew his base across racial on that front. But what they're doing here is kind of classic Republican politics, a direct wealth transfer, adding that, you know, the estimations from the CBO that would add trillions to the deficit, those are direct in conflict with the things he promised people.

And so, one of the things I think is going to find interesting is it's not just the impact of this bill. It's happening in tandem with the tariffs and in tandem with the prospect of inflation from that front. And so, I think it's a very likely or possible impact that folks feel these things directly. And so, as the details of the bill come out more and we're seeing companies raise their prices, that is a kind of perfect storm for a Democratic message or for them to push back against folks leading into the midterms.

The question I just feel, is I don't really see the White House responding to that. Right. Like, and so when do they change their own strategy is really the core question here.

RAJU: Well, it's been interesting seeing how Trump you know, we know how dominant he is over the Republican Party. But it was so evident this past week, particularly with some of those holdouts on the hard right of the House GOP who said that they were absolutely not going to get behind a bill that would increase the deficit. According to the CBO, this could be roughly $3.8 trillion over the next several years, adding to the federal deficit. But ultimately, these members fell in line.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. KEITH SELF (R-TX): This bill in its entirety, the way it was written, we would go from $36 trillion, now in debt to $56 trillion minimum in 10 years. We would own Obamacare, not repeal it. Own it.

RAJU: Mr. Self, are you ready to vote for this bill?

SELF: No comment.

REP. ERIC BURLISON (R-MO): I've made it very clear that I'm not going to grow the deficit.

RAJU: You had told me before that your red line is the deficit, and it looks like this will still increase the deficit.

[08:25:07]

How could you get behind it.

BURLISON: In the early years, it does it. It gets better. It's been a long fight.

There's a moment where you just kind of take a collective pause and say, we've accomplished a lot.

REP. CHIP ROY (R-TX): I have expressed my concern. You end up with significant deficits in those first years. And my experience in this town is that when you're banking on savings in the back half, they don't materialize. RAJU: You feeling better?

ROY: Yeah.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: And Chip Roy went from no to ant to yeah. Voting yes. Ultimately for this bill, there were some things that they liked, a lot of things that they demanded. They did not get in the bill, but ultimately the calculation from the White House was cut a deal with the moderates and get the hardliners to fall in line. And the strategy was successful.

NICHOLS: Everyone's holding hands and they're jumping. And sort of to Astead's point, if the economy turns south, if our iPhones double in price, Republicans will pay for this in 2026. If the economy stays strong and there aren't huge price increases. And let's take our market prognostication hats off, they're in a much better position.

But, you know, I take your point on, you know, the work requirements don't come in until 2026. And there are all these details. It's just going to come down. The midterm elections will come down what the environment is going to be like.

And if the environment is negative towards Republicans, if consumers are feeling very hurt and crimped, then they're going to have a bad night in November if they can ride it through and remember a lot of the tax cuts they get in 2025. So, they made certain that the tax cuts were going to be for this year, so retroactive. And a lot of the pain is out in the further years to Chip Roy's point.

RAJU: And the other point is that getting it through the Senate is going to be very difficult. I mean, I talked to Lisa Murkowski and Ron Johnson, two wings of the Senate GOP. They have one side. Lisa Murkowski thinks the Medicaid stuff goes too far. Ron Johnson says the deficit needs to be cut. His quote to me was, somebody's got to be the dad that says, I know you all want to go to Disneyworld, but we can't afford it. I guess I'm going to be that guy.

MITCHELL: I mean, to your point, though, you just showed us clips of a lot of house members who had a similar stance, and by the time it was time for them to vote, they were like, okay, I'll go with it.

So we'll see if Ron Johnson continues to dig in or during calls with Trump or the White House or with Republican leaders. They find a way to change his mind.

I think the Murkowskis of the world are a little bit more problematic because, again, we've been talking about the impact of the Medicaid cuts or the work requirements, and we know that politically you can sell, hey, if you're able bodied and you can work, why don't you work to get these benefits? I think a lot of people say that makes sense.

But when you see the actual reality is work requirements usually serve as a barrier to people getting the coverage they desire, whether its food stamps or Medicaid. And that's going to be the outcome. Then we'll see how that impacts again, governments.

RAJU: I would agree with that. And a lot of Medicaid beneficiaries in Alaska as well. Three votes. That's all that they can lose in the Senate. We'll see if they're able to do that.

All right. Coming up, the impact of Elon Musk, a fixture from the campaign trail to Trump's White House, is stepping back from Washington.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:32:44]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ELON MUSK, CEO, TESLA: You know, they say I wear a lot of hats.

And that's true. That's true. Even my hat has a hat.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MANU RAJU, CNN HOST: Elon Musk, the world's richest man, appears to be hanging up at least one of those hats, shifting away from his role, upending the federal government as a special government employee. And he and DOGE have fallen short of their vow to slash $2 trillion in spending.

But their actions have led to at least 121,000 federal workers laid off or targeted for layoffs, and cuts in aid to some of the world's poorest people, not to mention a flurry of legal challenges and furious political blowback.

Our panel is back.

So the question is, how much of -- is this -- how does the administration, how do Republicans view Elon Musk not taking this big role anymore? This is how the American public views it, according to the "Washington Post/ABC News poll. approve of Elon Musk's work just 4 percent of Democrats, 32 percent of Independents, not good numbers. Better with Republicans.

But that's -- he's turned into perhaps one of the most polarizing figures outside of Donald Trump.

TIA MITCHELL, WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF, ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION: Right. And the fact that he didn't technically work for the federal government. I think a lot of Republicans felt it was a good time for him to step away because he was so polarizing.

He was so present, so visible, and became like a proxy for the Trump administration, even though he was never officially part of the administration.

And so I think the polling shows why he's gone, especially the numbers with Independents. Two-thirds of Independents did not have a favorable view of him. RAJU: He -- you know, Independents and Democrats buy Teslas, too.

Perhaps that's one big reason why his Tesla recorded in the first quarter of the year, its revenue fell 9 percent. So perhaps this has to do with Elon's bottom line, too.

ASTEAD HERNDON, NATIONAL POLITICS REPORTER, NEW YORK TIMES, I think it for sure does. I mean, I would actually describe the Elon Musk co- presidency as one more surprising aspects of the first six months of this administration.

Lot of what Donald Trump has done, he promised. I don't think anyone expected to see this kind of buddy-cop act to happen. And even when we were out checking in with voters recently, that was the thing they were slightly uncomfortable with.

[08:34:49]

HERNDON: It doesn't surprise me that that backlash has come. Particularly look at that Wisconsin race where he drove Democrats out.

But the legacy is still there, right? What he did in terms of elevating DOGE's goals using waste, fraud and abuse as a kind of pretext for these legal challenges, these reshaping federal government, the Trump administration is going to take that forward --

RAJU: Yes.

HERNDON: -- even as Elon Musk goes away. I'm thinking about yesterday.

RAJU: And regardless of whether the law allows it, which is what he did. He pushed the boundaries of what the law allows.

HERNDON: Firing 100 NSC officials yesterday like that's the -- that's going to be what they do even going forward, even as Elon Musk steps away.

RAJU: Yes. And the political impact though will be interesting because he said last week in terms of political spending, I'm going to do a lot less in the future. And of course, he spent $290 million in the 2024 election to help Trump get elected, and at least -- and Republicans, too.

And he did spend $20 million in that Wisconsin Supreme Court election. But they did lose that by 10 percent.

HANS NICHOLS, POLITICAL REPORTER, AXIOS: One, Elon can always go back and reverse himself and decide to spend. Two, he could potentially be giving an in-kind donation to Democrats because he is going to appear in a lot of attack ads from the Democratic party against Republicans.

I would just say one note on Elon Musk. One, he's not going to go away, right? He will come back. He might no longer be a special government employee, but he always can sort of reenter the conversation.

The buddy act, the friendship didn't blow up between Trump and Elon. RAJU: A lot of people thought it would.

NICHOLS: In the beginning of this, we thought it would, and they stayed strong and true. Now we -- you know, we always find out things after the fact, but it seems as though they're both firing on the same cylinder.

And that's interesting going into the election and whether or not Elon decides to reverse himself and start spending again.

RAJU: Yes. Especially if he starts seeing things that Democrats are threatening going after him. If there's a House Democratic majority, I can expect to see Elon Musk being called to testify or being -- that becoming a big fight. We'll see what ultimately happens.

But how Trump has dealt with Elon Musk was also just fascinating to see. And people would say push the bounds of any ethical lines between business and government.

There was the Tesla -- hawking of the Teslas on the -- in the White House, where the president actually bought a Tesla for his granddaughter, Kai. That was back in March.

And there are a whole host of other issues in which it appears that Elon's businesses were tied, or at least had some connection to some of his work here in the government, including this this past week. He was in this -- he was in the Oval Office with the South African president this week. And he was pushing for Starlink's approval, according to "The New York Times".

MITCHELL: Yes, I think that was one of the things I was thinking about when you looked at the money he spent to help Donald Trump get elected. Elected? I think initially Elon Musk felt that that was money well spent.

It was an investment because you look at, again, a lot of his businesses rely on either, you know, government programs, we're talking about Tesla with the incentives for electric vehicles. We're talking about the space program with SpaceX and the government contracts. He gets through that.

And then again with Starlink and government contracts internationally to create Internet access. So in a lot of ways, I think Elon Musk felt that helping Trump get elected was good for him and good for his businesses.

I think again, though, when the public perception start to go a little bit sour, that seemed to complicate that calculus.

RAJU: I mean, Trump took no real action to limit the, you know, he said he was going to police Elon Musk to make sure there was no conflict. I didn't see a whole lot of policing of Elon Musk.

HERNDON: No, I mean, there was championing to the point that you mentioned. But, you know, even if we take the kind of folks who are standing with Trump at the inauguration, whether it be Bezos or Zuckerberg, and there was a moment when Trump was kind of reveling in that attention.

I think tariffs have really shifted that and some of the public sentiment has really shifted that.

Now Elon has stuck by him because he has a personal investment in Donald Trump. But, you know, I think it's reflective of a growing kind of sourness on this administration that you're seeing him exit at this time.

RAJU: Yes. We'll see. We'll see. You're right. He probably will still be involved in some way. We'll see if he decides to step back in in the weeks and months ahead.

All right. Still ahead. Reality check. What two key states in our upcoming off-year elections will tell us about how voters feel about Trump. More next.

[08:39:01]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

RAJU: Political junkies hungry for election season don't have to wait until next year's midterms. There are several important elections this year, including two in the blue states of Virginia and New Jersey that could give us our first taste on how voters are feeling about President Trump and his agenda.

In New Jersey, there's a crowded field running in next month's Democratic primary, including House members Mikie Sherrill and Josh Gottheimer, along with local leaders. On the Republican side, Trump has endorsed New Jersey assemblyman Jack Ciattarelli.

And in Virginia, Democrat Abigail Spanberger, a former congresswoman, is facing off against Republican Lieutenant Governor Winsome Earle- Sears.

My panel is back to break it all down. So how much do we really, look, the media oftentimes. Overinterpret these things, but still, it's something. What are you looking for when we start to assess these two races?

NICHOLS: Well, I'm looking for Republican concern in Virginia, which you're already starting to hear about. They don't love their candidate. There isn't a whole lot of enthusiasm there. There's less optimism there.

And the New Jersey side, the Democratic primary is really interesting because you have two big name lawmakers with a lot of money.

[08:44:48]

NICHOLS: Josh Gottheimer, Mikie Sherrill -- two impressive lawmakers who have had pretty storied careers up to this point and are pretty good with donors, so they'll have a lot of money to go at it.

In general, the vibe, and it's still pretty early, Republicans feel a little bit more optimistic about New Jersey, which they haven't won the governor's mansion there since Chris Christie, than they do about Virginia.

But again, it's Memorial Day.

RAJU: Yes.

NICHOLS: We have a long ways to go, but they do tell us something.

RAJU: They do tell us something. Look at New Jersey, just the New Jersey presidential election results from 2016. Clinton won by 14 points. Biden won in 2020 by 16 points. Harris only won New Jersey by six points. That was a big warning sign.

I asked Cory booker who's, of course, the senator from New Jersey, about that trend and if he's concerned about what it means for this year's races.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: Is there something specifically Democrats did wrong last year that you have to correct now?

SEN. CORY BOOKER (D-NJ): Look, I think one of the things -- mistakes that Democrats make is talking about what's best for their party and not what's best for people.

RAJU: How do you see the gubernatorial primary shaking out?

BOOKER: I do not know, my friend. It is the most competitive primary I can remember. New Jersey's had Republicans win in the past. And so, it should always be a concern.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MITCHELL: Yes, I think on one hand, we know that Republicans can win statewide in New Jersey. So I think that is what makes Democrats a little bit cautious. But I think the trend lately has been especially post-Trump in these statewide races, like the Wisconsin Supreme Court race, for example, Democrats have liked how they've done in these swing states, for example.

So I think a lot will be the primary. Who comes out of the primary, particularly on the Republican side.

Yes, it's interesting, the Republican side primary, they're fighting over loyalty to Trump.

HERNDON: Yes.

RAJU: Just like we've seen in so many other races.

HERNDON: I think that's where these races have value, is in kind of seeing that internal messaging. But Tia makes a good point where Democrats have grown has been in those super voters who come out to these type of races, particularly on the statewide level. So it'd be interesting to see if the federal workforce in VA becomes a

constituency base for them, things like that.

But we know there's been some Republican infighting too. Donald Trump has really papered that over with infrequent voters in those national elections.

But also, we give a shout out to the New York mayor's primary, too, because I think that's going to be very interesting. Not just Cuomo and Eric Adams, but you also have Zohran Mamdani making a big push and kind of consolidating a liberal kind of progressive lane.

But really, I think it's because Democrats have regressed so much in those cities. I find it very interesting to see the language of governance they're going to try to pitch to people, to really get them reinvest in the party that has lost a lot of votes in those urban areas.

RAJU: The Cuomo thing actually could be pretty interesting, too. I mean --

NICHOLS: We've figured out, like Astead's reporting trip, he's going to sell a trip. He's going to New York, and then he's going to come down through New Jersey, and you can take yourself all over Richmond.

I mean, I think they're all going to be pretty fascinating. I think especially what we learn in the primaries. But yes --

(CROSSTALKING)

RAJU: I mean because -- I mean, Cuomo specifically, he's one of the people who appears to be targeted by the Trump Justice Department, just as the Trump team helped Eric Adams as he was facing federal charges.

NICHOLS: He was rejected widely and roundly by his own party. And now he's made a comeback, right? I mean, the Cuomo story alone, I mean, maybe it's not an (INAUDIBLE) profile. It's like a full-on profile of how Cuomo did it.

(CROSSTALKING)

HERNDON: I can get on the subway for that one. I mean, the 180 from political leaders in New York City has been jarring.

RAJU: Yes.

HERNDON: And so that is just a falling in line that has something to do with, I think, a cultural change that has happened from four and five years ago to right now.

Some folks want a strong man, and that's how he's pitching himself in a very interesting fashion I find.

RAJU: Interesting. And look, the question too is how involved will Trump be? Will he get involved in this Virginia governor's race? There's concern over the Republican candidate there, the lieutenant governor Winsome Earle-Sears.

A political headline, Virginia Republicans worry about their gubernatorial candidate who invokes slavery when criticizing DEI.

Do you think Trump will get involved there?

MITCHELL: I think he might have to. I mean, what else do they have? It looks like Republicans are starting to see that, or starting to feel that it's not going to be as competitive down there in Virginia. So they're going to have to come up with something.

RAJU: It'll be interesting to see how he deals with those bluish states and getting involved in the general election.

All right. Coming up, sleeping on the job, some marathon all-nighters in Congress, well, that actually lulled some members to sleep.

[08:49:01]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

RAJU: This week's battle over Trump's mega bill were marked by a flurry of late-night meetings and all-nighters at the Capitol, which proved, shall we say, challenging for some members of Congress.

After almost 22 hours straight of debate and negotiations Wednesday into Thursday morning, one of the GOPs key players in the talks, Andrew Garbarino, who represents a New York swing district, actually ended up missing the 6:54 a.m. vote because apparently he had fallen asleep.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. MIKE JOHNSON (R-LA), SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: Andrew Garbarino did not make it in time. He fell asleep in the back. No kidding. I know. I'm going to just strangle him, but.

And then --

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: And the bill ended up passing by just a single vote. Now, in a statement, Garbarino's office said, quote, "This is one of the many reasons why governing should happen in the light of day and not in the dead of night."

Now, the congressman who said he would have -- would have voted yes. He later was praised by Johnson in a post on X, perhaps a cleanup effort that came better late than never.

And he was just the latest lawmaker caught nodding off. You can see Congressman Ralph Norman struggling to keep his eyes open during a 1:00 a.m. committee meeting on Wednesday.

[08:54:47] RAJU: And days before Democrat Debbie Dingell and Republican Blake Moore, both out during marathon committee sessions over Trump's massive bill.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. BLAKE MOORE (R-UT): My wife saw that clip. And it was just like, of all the things that are out there, she's just like, I see this -- I see this every Sunday at church. This is no big deal.

But, you know, it is tax policy at 5:00 a.m., I -- it's pretty easy to doze off too.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: Now that it's a recess weekend, Congress may they live nappily (ph) ever after.

That's it for INSIDE POLITICS SUNDAY. You can follow me on X @mkraju. Follow the show @INSIDE POLITICS. Follow me on Instagram @manu_raju.

If you ever miss an episode, just catch up wherever you get your podcasts and search for inside politics.

Up next "STATE OF THE UNION WITH JAKE TAPPER AND DANA BASH". Jake's guests include Speaker Mike Johnson and Senators Michael Bennet and Ron Johnson.

And before we go, a word of thanks and remembrance ahead of Memorial Day tomorrow. Here's a look at U.S. service members placing over 260,000 flags at the final resting places for so many service members at Arlington National Cemetery, a decades' long tradition. A moment to honor and recognize those who have made the ultimate sacrifice for the United States.

Thanks again for sharing your Sunday morning with us. We'll see you next time.

[08:55:58]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)