Return to Transcripts main page
Laura Coates Live
Judge Scolds DOJ in Hearing Over Mistakenly Deported Man; Trump Issues New Funding Threat To Harvard; Palestinian Student Detained At U.S. Citizenship Interview; Biden Slams Trump White House In First Remarks Since Leaving Office; George Clooney Speaks Out On His Biden Op-Ed. Aired 11p-12a ET
Aired April 15, 2025 - 23:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[23:00:00]
MELINDA FRENCH GATES, PHILANTHROPIST, AUTHOR: She had enough information about what happened that she understood that I needed to move along.
ABBY PHILLIP, CNN ANCHOR AND SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Yeah.
FRENCH GATES: And it was sad for all of us.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: We will have more from our interview tomorrow night. But you can watch the whole interview online right now. Scan that QR code in the corner for more.
And thank you very much for watching "NewsNight." You can catch me any time on your favorite social media X, Instagram, and also TikTok. "Laura Coates Live" starts right now.
OMAR JIMENEZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: A federal judge calls out the Trump administration, saying they've done nothing to facilitate the return of a deported man to the United States. But the president says he has no plans to bring him back. So, what happens next?
And President Trump issues a new threat to Harvard University as he tries to bend it to his will. A Harvard professor says it is truly Orwellian, and he's my guest tonight.
Plus, George Clooney shares why he felt the need to urge Biden to drop out of the 2024 race. Tonight on "Laura Coates Live."
All right, welcome, everyone. I'm Omar Jimenez, in for Laura. It has already become a bitter legal fight over the man mistakenly reported to a notorious prison in El Salvador, and it looks like it's getting uglier.
The federal judge overseeing the case is now telling DOJ lawyers, cancel your vacations, clear your appointments, and get me the information I'm demanding.
Now, Judge Paula Xinis says the Trump administration has done nothing to show it's complying with an order to facilitate the release of Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia. Now, she wants two weeks now of intense discovery, which means the government will have to fork over what it has done to get him out of prison.
And as that hearing was going on, President Trump appeared in a new interview, again, trying to brush off responsibility.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: We won that case nine to nothing.
UNKNOWN (voice-over): Uh-hmm.
TRUMP: And basically, that's really a decision that will be made by the government of El Salvador.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JIMENEZ: And right now, this legal battle is being waged over a single word, facilitate. Trump is trying to argue he won a Supreme Court ruling that ordered him to facilitate Abrego Garcia's return. But his administration is going with a very narrow definition of it. They say they don't have to try to get him back, but they won't block him if he finds his own way here.
But Judge Xinis, who originally issued the order, isn't buying that. She says -- quote -- "It flies in the face of the plain meaning of the word."
And while all this plays out in the courtroom, Trump's team is working hard in the court of public opinion.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: There is never going to be a world in which this is an individual who's going to live a peaceful life in Maryland because he is a foreign terrorist and an MS- 13 gang member. Not only have we confirmed that, President Bukele yesterday in the Oval Office confirmed that as well.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JIMENEZ: And again, we have not seen evidence that he has been charged or, of course, convicted of terrorism. But President Trump's border czar is saying the same thing, essentially, as Karoline Leavitt, that he's vowing to deport Abrego Garcia again if he's returned to the United States.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TOM HOMAN, WHITE HOUSE BORDER CZAR: He's an MS-13 gang member based on our intelligence and El Salvador's intelligence. He will be detained, and he will be deported. What's the sense of bringing someone back to simply go and face deportation again?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JIMENEZ: But again, they say that. But the Trump administration so far has provided no evidence that Abrego Garcia is a current gang member or a terrorist. And again, as I mentioned, he has never been convicted or even charged with those allegations. His legal team says his deportation flies in the face of his due process rights.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RINA GANDHI, ATTORNEY FOR KILMAR ARMANDO ABREGO GARCIA: They decided they were the judge for him, and they removed him without him ever seeing a courtroom. If he were to return, which is what we are asking for, fine, put forward your evidence, file a motion, have a judge make decision, but they don't get that right.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JIMENEZ: Abrego Garcia's wife is also pleading for his return and accusing the Trump administration of using him as a political pawn.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JESSICA VASQUEZ, WIFE OF KILMAR ARMANDO ABREGO GARCIA: My heart aches for my husband, who should have been here leading our Easter prayers. Instead, I find myself pleading with the Trump administration and the Bukele administration to stop playing political games with the life of Kilmar.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JIMENEZ: Now, the ball is in the Justice Department's court. But while it decides the next play, Republican lawmakers are facing some tough questions from their own constituents.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNKNOWN: Are you going to bring that guy back from El Salvador?
UNKNOWN: Yeah.
UNKNOWN: Yeah.
UNKNOWN: Are you?
UNKNOWN: Yeah.
UNKNOWN: Yeah.
UNKNOWN: Yeah.
(APPLAUSE)
UNKNOWN: Why not?
SEN. CHARLES GRASSLEY (R-IA}: Well, because that's not -- that's not a power of Congress. UNKNOWN: The Supreme Court said to bring him back.
[23:04:58]
UNKNOWN: We would like to know what you, as the people, the Congress, who are supposed to reign in this dictator, what are you going to do about these people who have been sentenced to life imprisonment in a foreign country with no due process.
UNKNOWN: Right.
UNKNOWN: Our government cannot do anything.
(APPLAUSE)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JIMENEZ: And if these are the questions now, Republicans may soon find themselves facing more questions because President Trump is doubling down on his push to potentially send American criminals or homegrown criminals, as he's described them, to prisons in El Salvador.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNKNOWN: Could we use it for violent criminals, our own violent criminals?
TRUMP: I call them homegrown criminals.
UNKNOWN: Yes.
TRUMP: I mean, the homegrown --
UNKNOWN: The homegrowns could be --
TRUMP: The ones that grew up and something went wrong and they hit people over the head with a baseball bat. We have -- and push people into subways just before the train gets there like you see happening sometimes. We are looking into it, and we want to do it. I -- I would love to do that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JIMENEZ: All right, a lot to talk about here. I want to bring in law professor and a former judge in the Miami-Dade County Court, Jeff Swartz. Thanks for being here.
Look, I want to start with -- with -- the White House does continue to claim Abrego Garcia as a foreign terrorist without providing evidence of that charge, despite him, again, never having been charged or convicted of being a terrorist. But the Trump administration is also alleging he engaged in human trafficking.
I mean, is there anything a judge or the Supreme Court can do to -- to sort of force the administration to comply, at least in the eyes of Judge Xinis? JEFF SWARTZ, FORMER JUDGE, MIAMI-DADE COUNTY COURT: Yeah, there -- there are ways to make this happen, and I think she started that process today. That is for all intents and purposes, although Mr. Garcia does not want to be a symbol of resistance, what is happening here is that his lawyers are now being authorized to take discovery.
This is a civil matter. It's not a criminal matter. So, they can take depositions, they can demand production of documents, they can send interrogatories which are written questions for them to answer. They can do all of those things. And if they refuse to answer those questions, then the line will be drawn. That is that if she orders them to answer those questions and somebody doesn't, somebody is going to go to the jail until they do.
This -- this crisis that we've been waiting for is not the way I think that the Trump administration wants it to go. She wants to know who made this deal. How did this deal come apart -- come together? Who's in control of it with the American government? What are we paying for? Who are we paying? Are we paying the guy that runs the country or are we paying the country?
The bottom line is this prison is being run for the American government. She wants to know why it is that prisoners are being sentenced to go into incarceration instead of being deported and why, for some reason or another, the fed -- our government, who controls what's going on down there, refuses to take the action necessary.
Why didn't Donald Trump say publicly at a meeting to the president of El Salvador, would you put him on an airplane and send him back here, please? Hasn't done that. He can tell him to send him back. He just won't do anything.
JIMENEZ: And, you know, the federal judge in the case talked about it's going to be two weeks of -- of intense discovery here. I know you talked about sort of what that allows on -- on -- on what essentially the discovery and what it has done or has not done to free Abrego Garcia. But what does that actually look like?
SWARTZ: Okay. They -- what they will do is they will subpoena in witnesses that are provided and the government has to provide his witnesses to answer questions regarding how all this came about.
When they get those answers -- and some of them may be, who told you to do this? Who are you reporting to? Who told you to let the planes go? Who told you this? Who's really in charge? And they're going to work their way up the ladder.
I think if it were me, I wouldn't let them take these depositions in Washington. I would make these people show up in Maryland, in the courthouse. So, as she put it, if somebody is not answering questions, here's my phone number, you call me.
Now, you've got them in the courthouse. They take them before her. She says, are you going to answer the questions? And if their answer is no, then she has the marshals take them into custody and say, you can open up your jail cell, all you have to do is answer the questions. I think that she has reached that point.
JIMENEZ: Yeah, yeah. When she's telling people to cancel their vacation, that's going to be an intense two weeks ahead. That's not good in any context, especially not in a courtroom.
Jeff Swartz, really appreciate the time and perspective.
SWARTZ: My pleasure.
JIMENEZ: I want to keep the conversation going with CNN political commentator and Republican strategist Brad Todd, along with Democratic strategist Antjuan Seawright. Good to see you both.
[23:10:00]
All right, to continue the conversation with the judge, Brad, I want to start with you because, look, the White House says even if Abrego Garcia is brought back, that deportation is always going to be the -- the end result, which they would be able to do. The immigration judge previously ruled that -- that they could be deported, but just not necessarily to El Salvador.
When you follow the White House's intentions of deporting him here, wouldn't him going through deportation that way represent the way the legal system, I guess, is supposed to work on issues like this? I wonder how you see it.
BRAD TODD, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: Well, we also need to be clear. President Trump said in the Oval Office the other day that he -- if the court rules and orders him to do something, he'll follow the court's orders.
The Supreme court has basically remanded this case back down to the district court to figure out what the word effectuate means. It's not a word I use much. It's not a word most people use much. And so, the Supreme Court is going to make the district court judge talk about exactly what does that mean and how they have to pull this off of pulling him back.
I think immigration is Donald Trump's gold standard. The American public elected him because they trust him to enforce the laws at the border and our immigration laws, and they didn't think those laws were being enforced by Joe Biden. So, I think he should follow it to the T, and I think he should follow the court's orders to the T.
The man is deportable. A judge has already said he's deportable. He can be deported anywhere in the world except El Salvador, according to that immigration judge. So, the administration needs to either win that argument with a different judge or they need to send him to a third country.
This does happen. What happens with a couple dozen people a year who have this withholding of removal? They find another third country to send them to. And it might just be right now that President Trump has some leverage with a lot of other countries. He might find some more to take him. ANTJUAN SEAWRIGHT, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Here's the challenge of what you just said and what's happening in real time. The president has a pattern, practice, and a history of saying to hell with the rule of law, I'm going to do what I want because I want to send a political message up to my -- to my supporters and to those who campaign for me and with me and voted for me on this issue of immigration.
The problem with that is Donald Trump is setting a dangerous precedent as we move forward for future administrations. His posture and his -- I think his will was very make -- very much so made clear today when he simply said that he's going to not do everything he can to bring this gentleman back to the United States as a judge order. He's simply ignoring the Supreme Court.
We've seen Donald Trump flex his political muscle before when it comes to foreign countries. We've seen him do whatever is necessary to accomplish what he wants to do. In this case, because immigration was a right-wing red meat, tone down racial issue for him and his base in this election, he's clearly saying to hell with everything else, I'm going to do what I want to do to prove a point.
TODD: But large majority of the country trust Donald Trump on immigration. They think --
SEAWRIGHT: It doesn't make him right.
TODD: They think --
SEAWRIGHT: It doesn't make him right in this case. Now, what I think the electorate said was that immigration is a top of mind issue, and we want to give Donald Trump an opportunity to implement the things that he's saying. It doesn't mean in this case that you can illegally deport someone and not follow the Supreme Court orders of bringing him back. I think that's where we are, in the gray area, in a dangerous territory.
JIMENEZ: And so, Brad, just on that point, you know -- look, President Trump is no secret. He wanted to work with -- with many of these Latin American countries: El Salvador, Panama, Costa Rica. We've already seen some of these countries receive migrants that have been deported from the United States.
In the Oval Office meeting, we clearly saw him punt the ball to El Salvador's president. El Salvador's president saying, woah, woah, we're not going to be able to do this. And, in the meantime, you've got someone in a prison here.
Does the administration not have the ability, despite what we've heard, put out the posturing that has been put out publicly, does -- if Trump picked up the phone and called the president in El Salvador and said, bring him home, would that not happen?
TODD: You think that they have a relationship that he has a certain amount of leverage. But --
JIMENEZ: Yeah. TODD: -- we're going to figure out exactly where the court believes that line is. That's what's important. What does the court -- the Supreme Court of the United States, which has instructed this district court judge that they have to grant the executive branch with a lot of leeway in exercising foreign affairs, that's a part we're leaving out of this order. They have -- he's -- the Supreme Court, by nine to nothing, told this district judge she has to grant the executive a lot of leeway.
We're going to find out exactly what that -- she means by effectuate. It'll go back to the Supreme Court, and then the Supreme Court will have to decide.
Now, keep in mind, John Sauer, Donald Trump's solicitor general, he was at the Supreme Court first. He got there before the plaintiffs did because he saw they were sodding administrative delay, seeking administrative delay on it.
So, they're working through the court system on this. I think you're trying to -- you're hearing a lot of them do a lot of -- trying to demonstrate how strong and tough they are on this because they want to send a signal to other people. If you're someone who has a withholding of removal from one country but you're here illegally, maybe you ought to find another place to go.
[23:15:05]
I think that they're trying to send a signal that they're pretty strong.
SEAWRIGHT: You say send the signal. I say they're bojangling (ph) around and trying to bojangle (ph) the American people. Here's the reality: This young man was deported all because based on no real evidence, tattoos, maybe some sort of informant of so forth.
Clearly, from what "The New York Times" have said and others that I've read and the research says, he has no real ties to gangs here. And so --
TODD: It's his alleged. That's his allegation.
SEAWRIGHT: Well, well, I think due process will allow him to make his case, and then there are processes in place --
TODD: Yeah.
SEAWRIGHT: -- in this country to figure that out. But the other thing is Donald Trump, on other cases and other examples, has a pattern and practice of history of ignoring rule of law. And I think the Congress, Republican's control, has a responsibility and obligation to reign him in when he oversteps his boundaries and when he abuses power from the executive office.
JIMENEZ: And we are potentially seeing another threshold with this as we've seen the president sort of float what happens with homegrown criminals and could they meet sort of the same fate. That's a whole another set.
SEAWRIGHT: It's illegal.
JIMENEZ: That's a whole -- yeah.
SEAWRIGHT: It is illegal.
JIMENEZ: Well, as of now, it is, yes. But --
SEAWRIGHT: Even the senator from Louisiana said today on Fox News --
JIMENEZ: Yeah.
SEAWRIGHT: -- it's illegal.
JIMENEZ: Yeah. Well, look, we'll bring you back when -- when -- if that happens.
SEAWRIGHT: Omar, can I just say one thing?
JIMENEZ: Yeah.
SEAWRIGHT: Thankfully, the Democrats are headed down to -- to the border tomorrow or to El Salvador tomorrow to try to deal with this issue in real time. That's opposite for what we see --
TODD: You know what, though? How come these same Democrats, how come Chris Van Hollen was not going to the border to try to get Joe Biden to crack down on illegal immigrants in the first place?
SEAWRIGHT: Well, he did.
TODD: How come he's not happy?
SEAWRIGHT: In a bipartisan way, he was trying to pass legislation to deal with the immigration that we've had in this country for generations.
TODD: Joe Biden let 10 million people coming in. Chris Van Hollen said not a peep (ph).
SEAWRIGHT: Well, Chris Van Hollen and others are working in a bipartisan manner to pass legislation to get it done. It was Donald Trump who cut the legislation and did not let it pass.
JIMENEZ: And, you know, we will see if they actually make it down to El Salvador and what they'll be able to or maybe not see. Thank you both for being here, Brad Todd, Antjuan Seawright. Appreciate it.
All right, coming up, America's oldest college doing something. Multiple law firms, businesses, and other top universities in this country haven't really standing up to President Trump. But is Harvard ready to take on the full might of the Trump administration? A Harvard professor speaks out next.
And ahead, he was at an immigration services center near completing his requirements for U.S. citizenship only to be arrested and detained. We're going to have that story for you coming up.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:20:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. ELISE STEFANIK (R-NY): These schools get billions of dollars of U.S. tax payer funds. They are not entitled to those funds if they are not protecting civil rights of Jewish students on campus. So, yes, it is time to defund Harvard.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JIMENEZ: That's New York Congresswoman Elise Stefanik, one of Harvard's leading critics and a Harvard alum, echoing President Trump's call to strip the oldest university in the country of its tax- exempt status.
Now, Trump writing on his Truth Social platform today that Harvard -- quote -- "keeps pushing political, ideological, and terrorist- inspired/ supporting sickness."
Now, his new threat comes after he announced a freeze of about $2 billion in federal funds to Harvard. Trump claims university is a hotbed of antisemitism after the October 7th attacks on Israel by Hamas. And White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt is adding another demand today.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LEAVITT: He also wants to see Harvard apologize. And Harvard should apologize for the egregious antisemitism that took place on their college campus against Jewish-American students.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JIMENEZ: Now, the university acknowledges some reforms are needed, but it refuses to capitulate to Trump's demands over control for classes, admission reforms, and auditing the viewpoint diversity of students and faculty.
Joining me now is Steven Pinker, psychology professor at Harvard University. He's also co-president of the Council on Academic Freedom at Harvard. Thank you for being here. You heard what Karoline Leavitt said, that the university should apologize for antisemitism.
Since 2023, ex-president Claudine Gay has resigned, there's a task force to address antisemitism, and current president, Alan Garber, has spoken openly about it. Do you believe the university has made significant progress on that front?
STEVEN PINKER, PROFESSOR OF PSYCHOLOGY, HARVARD UNIVERSITY: It has made significant progress. The thing to realize is that Harvard University has tens of thousands of students and faculty, and the president does not have totalitarian control over everything that every one of them says.
Sometimes, some of them will say things that are highly offensive. They -- sometimes, they will demonstrate, which is okay. Sometimes, they will invade lecture halls or classrooms or university buildings, which is not okay.
The university probably has not cracked down as firmly as they should have in the past, but they certainly have changed the policy. For example, the encampment in Harvard yard may have gone on too long, but it was -- it was driven out. Students who have invaded classrooms have been punished. So, steps have been taken, yes.
JIMENEZ: And, you know -- look, professor, what -- what is your response to -- to Trump's demand for an apology and an -- and an end to tax-exempt status?
PINKER: Well, it's not good what the apology would be for because the president of Harvard can't apologize for a statement made by some student groups. He has acknowledged that the university was too slow in shutting down the illegal encampments.
[23:25:00]
And if it took an apology to restore the funding for -- for cancer research and battery storage research and heart disease research, then fine, they can give the apology.
But I think to take in to account is that the federal funding is not like harbors on welfare. The funding that we're talking about is a scientist writes a grant proposal to study, say, aging or heart disease or Alzheimer's or Parkinson's. The grant is evaluated competitively.
If it is good enough, then Harvard gives the scientist research to do the funding. If the funding is withdrawn, the research just doesn't get done. Harvard is a conduit and a host. It's not a support of Harvard, it's support of research that has to take place somewhere.
JIMENEZ: And that's, of course, some of the research that -- that could be affected with this freeze. And, you know, the student newspaper there is reporting that a researcher -- Harvard Crimson is reporting that a researcher working on ALS says he received an order to stop work immediately.
Can you just expand a little on what the country does stand to lose if this funding freeze stays in place? Because it's not just limited to -- to Harvard.
PINKER: That's right. I mean, the -- in the United States, research takes place at our universities. They're the envy of the world because universities attract the best talent from everywhere in the world. They hire on the basis of talent and accomplishment. Compared to many European universities, we have very little cronyism in universities. It really is a meritocracy. And there's vicious competition for these federal grants.
The research on energy, on technology, on electronics, on the internet, on health, on child development is done in universities. The government itself, we don't entrust to do all of that research.
JIMENEZ: Yeah.
PINKER: So, what the American people has to lose is all of those researches done at universities.
JIMENEZ: And, you know, the last thing I want to ask is, you know, one of the criticisms that the Trump administration and even some Republicans have made towards places like Harvard, but also Columbia and other Ivy League schools, is about sort of censoring and -- and political climates on campus.
Even Harvard's president shared concerns about students self- censoring. There was a survey from Harvard Crimson last year that found 55% of students identified as progressive, 13% identified as conservative.
I bring all that up to say, what is the political climate on campus? Do you think there is room for -- for improvement?
PINKER: Oh, there is. That's why I cofounded the Council on Academic Freedom at Harvard --
JIMENEZ: Yeah.
PINKER: -- to push back on the de-platforming on the cancel culture. It's not clear how defunding cancer research is going to help that, but we certainly are working very hard within Harvard. Both agitation by the council that -- that I co-lead, new initiatives at Harvard to encourage diversity of viewpoints, to encourage constructive disagreement and debate, I -- cracking down on disruption of speakers and intimidation of students, which does not count as free speech.
JIMENEZ: Yeah.
PINKER: So yes, there are efforts. There is a problem, but it is completely unclear why defunding agent research is the solution to that problem.
JIMENEZ: Professor Steven Pinker, really appreciate the time and perspective. Thanks for being here.
PINKER: Thanks for having me.
JIMENEZ: All right, one moment, a Palestinian student is standing outside an immigration office. The next, he's taken into handcuffs here. The Trump administration cracking down on yet another Columbia student. But this time, it's one who wasn't a part of the encampments. This avowed antisemitism multiple times publicly and was close to citizenship. We're going to talk to one of his friends next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) [23:30:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
JIMENEZ: Welcome back. In an instant, the life of a Columbia University student, who helped lead pro-Palestinian protests on campus, dramatically changed. New video shows the moment Mohsen Madawi was escorted out of a Vermont immigration office in handcuffs, and he was set to have an interview that day to get closer to becoming a U.S. citizen. But now, he is being detained, unable to go home. Now, Madawi's attorney believes he was targeted for his involvement in campus protests.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MOHSEN MADAWI, STUDENT, COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY: We come here, and we stand tall to raise our voices.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JIMENEZ: Now, while he did help found groups that organized protests, he did not participate in the on-campus encampments that we saw last spring and has no criminal record. The U.S. State Department declined to comment to CNN on why exactly Madawi was taken into custody. But here's what Madawi had to say about the growing tensions and conflict on Columbia's campus two months after the October 7th attack.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MADAWI: To be antisemitic is unjust. Is unjust. And the fight for the freedom of Palestine and the fight against antisemitism go hand in hand because injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JIMENEZ: Joining me now is a friend of Mohsen Madawi, Mikey Baratz. He immigrated to this country from Israel when he was 12 and graduated from Columbia in December. Really appreciate you being here. You know, I -- I don't know Mohsen personally. Can you just tell me about him and how you know him as a friend?
MIKEY BARATZ, FRIEND OF COLUMBIA ACTIVIST MOHSEN MADAWI WHO WAS DETAINED BY ICE: Yeah. Oh, man. He's -- he's not like anyone else I've ever met.
[23:35:01]
Mohsen and I met six months ago. He reached out to me. He was looking for Israelis on campus who were studying international affairs and security policy, who were interested in the conflict and interested in creating dialogue. And that's really who he is. He is the most empathetic person I've ever met.
You know, I think nowadays, empathy is this buzzword that people just throw around, and he really lives it. He really cares about other people. He really was interested in the Israeli experience and the Jewish experience and wants to know what it's like and wants to understand it.
And this is a person who -- you know, I don't know how many people know his backstory, but he has every reason to hate Israelis. He saw his best friend die in his arms when he was 10 years old, killed by an Israeli soldier. And he could hate us. He could wish me ill. And instead, he came to me, wanting to build a connection.
JIMENEZ: And, you know, as I'm sure you're aware, you know, some groups are -- are now calling for his deportation based on some protests he participated in and groups he helped found on campus. I should note, Mohsen did not participate again as far as we know in the encampment-led protests we saw at Columbia last spring.
BARATZ: Yeah.
JIMENEZ: He hasn't been arrested for any crimes.
BARATZ: That is correct.
JIMENEZ: But when you saw his protesting activities, did you think he was a threat either as a friend or -- or even as a Jewish student?
BARATZ: No. I mean, so to be clear, I didn't know Mohsen at the beginning of the protest movement. But -- and, you know, I've heard people had their own different experiences, but that doesn't align with the person I know at all.
He -- I never felt endangered. I never felt unsafe. I felt uncomfortable at times. I felt uneasy. I heard things, not necessarily from him ever, but just throughout the protest movement. I heard things I didn't like. I heard things that were really painful for me. But I also was able to talk to people.
And, you know, I think the ability to hear things that are uncomfortable or painful or just make us feel bad is important, and that's the foundation of our democracy today. And Mohsen embodied that.
JIMENEZ: You know, I don't know if you got a chance to see his -- his most recent interview with CBS. But the day before his detainment --
BARATZ: Of course.
JIMENEZ: -- you know, it seemed that he was fearful that something like this could happen ahead of this immigration meeting, essentially saying that on one hand, he'd been waiting for this for more than a year, and the other feeling is like, wait a minute, is this a honey trap? Did he ever talk to you about fearing deportation or -- or even if this immigration appointment could be a trap?
BARATZ: So, I didn't know about the immigration appointment --
JIMENEZ: Yeah.
BARATZ: -- at the time. I will say I wouldn't use the word fear about Mohsen. JIMENEZ: Hmmm.
BARATZ: Mohsen has many things. We spoke on the phone a few weeks ago. He knew the risk he was under. He was trying to take precautions. But Mohsen was not afraid. He has dealt with much, much worse things than this. He has survived much harder things. He will persevere through this. I have no doubt.
JIMENEZ: And, you know, it clearly also was on his mind, you know, leading into this. So, as you point out, maybe not afraid, but at least top of -- top of mind for -- for what might happen.
I want to talk just a little bit about -- about Columbia and the climate. You know, I -- I covered the -- the encampment-led protests on campus last spring and -- and was sort of in that climate that I don't have to tell you. Temperatures were very high at the time, as -- as they are still in many respects.
BARATZ: Of course.
JIMENEZ: But Columbia is now facing pressure from the federal government to amend curriculum and policies in -- in large part based on how that time period was handled. Do you think they should resist? And just based on your experience, do you think Colombia needs to change based on what you saw?
BARATZ: You know -- listen, I -- I will not deny that there were instances of antisemitism in the protest movement. I will not deny that Columbia could have handled things differently at times. I would have preferred it had. But I don't buy that the current administration is furthering this policy as a response to antisemitism.
You know, let's -- let's be abundantly clear. You know, I'm someone who has worked for organizations that deal with security in the Jewish community in the States. And the vast majority of antisemitic violence is coming from white supremacists, neo-Nazis.
[23:39:58]
I don't see any efforts under this administration to address that -- the real risk. And, of course, antisemitism is rising on the left. It's rising in general in America. But I think there is a deep remove between what people like Elise Stefanik or Donald Trump claim is their goals and their desires and what they're actually doing.
JIMENEZ: And, you know, obviously, Columbia not the only one under the microscope right now. A lot of high-level universities including, obviously, Harvard, as well. Mikey Baratz, really appreciate you being here.
BARATZ: Of course.
JIMENEZ: Thanks for the time.
BARATZ: Any time. Thanks for having me. JIMENEZ: Just ahead, the on again, off again tariffs taking their toll. Harry Enten has been running the numbers, and he's going to tell you who's being hurt.
Plus, President Biden speaking out for the first time since leaving office, but so is George Clooney. He's talking about that op-ed he wrote calling on Biden to drop out of the race.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE CLOONEY, ACTOR AND FILMMAKER: When I saw people on my side of the street not telling the truth, I thought that was time to --
JAKE TAPPER, CNN CHIEF WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT: Are people still mad at you for that?
CLOONEY: Some people. Sure. It's okay.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:45:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
JIMENEZ: Welcome back, everyone. Now, look, the impact of President Trump's trade war still isn't fully clear. But in one sector, the caution lights are already blinking.
The travel industry, just today, China ordered all of its airlines to stop taking deliveries from U.S. plane manufacturing giant Boeing because of the trade war with Trump. Now that sent Boeing shares tumbling before rebounding. But is it another warning sign or at least another warning sign? What we're looking at is United Airlines. It says it will cut some domestic flights as demand softens.
I want to bring in CNN senior data reporter Harry Enten, who has been digging into the tourism numbers. All right, Harry, United, Boeing, they're just giving a glimpse, I guess, of the impact on tourism. So, can you just put it in perspective? Are tourists staying away from the United States?
HARRY ENTEN, CNN SENIOR DATA REPORTER: A one-word answer for you, yes. Yes, they're staying away from the United States, Omar.
JIMENEZ: Right to the point.
ENTEN: I like -- get right to the point. That's what we do at this time of night. What are we talking about here? How about air travelers in March? Why don't we compare it to international air traveling?
Get this: Down 4.5 million versus a year ago at this point. If you want to put it in percentage terms, it's down nearly 10%, a nearly 10% drop. My goodness gracious. Now, of course, the question is, where are these travelers not coming in from? Who are the travelers who are boycotting the United States of America? Well, why don't we talk about it here? Canada, down 7%. How about Europe? Down 14%. How about Mexico? Down 17%.
I don't know, Omar, but it seems to me that some of these countries, specifically the first and the last one, might have reasons to really be upset with the United States. I think Europe -- of course, the continent of Europe has reasons to be upset with the United States as well.
JIMENEZ: Yeah. What did that have to do with --
ENTEN: Yeah.
JIMENEZ: -- them being some of our biggest importers?
ENTEN: Interesting.
JIMENEZ: We will never know. Harry, obviously, foreign tourists do though bring in big dollars for American businesses. I mean, how much does the U.S. economy actually stand to lose if tourists like some of those actually do stay away in a meaningful way?
ENTEN: Yeah, this was a big surprise to me. We are talking a hefty chunk of change, Omar. What are we talking about here? The boycotts of the United States. Some folks are boycotting American products. Some folks are traveling less the United States. We're talking it could cost the United States of America, get this, up to $90 billion. That is with a B, billion dollars. We're talking 0.3% of gross domestic product. That is a hefty chunk of change that we're talking about here.
But, you know, this isn't shouldn't be so much of a surprise because if you go to the internets and you look at your Google searches, guess what is at the highest level since 2007 worldwide? How about boycott America? More worldwide searches for boycott America in this particular year since Donald Trump became president than any year since 2007.
At this particular point, the rest of the world is quite perturbed at our dear great country, the United States of America. They don't think it's so great at this point, Omar.
JIMENEZ: And clearly, a lot of money on the line.
ENTEN: Yeah. A lot, a lot of money. You know, I --
JIMENEZ: You get right to the point. As we say, Harry Enten, always appreciates you. Thanks for bringing us that.
ENTEN: Thanks, my friend.
JIMENEZ: Coming up, the former president makes his first speech since leaving office, speaking out against Donald Trump. But is he the right messenger for the job? And George Clooney sits down for an exclusive interview with CNN's Jake Tapper, telling all about the aftermath of his now infamous op-ed. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:50:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
JIMENEZ: Stick to a quiet retirement. That's what some former aides and close allies to Joe Biden are telling CNN they want the former president to do after the Democrats' crushing defeat last November, a loss many in the party are blaming on Biden's decision to drop out late in the campaign.
Well, tonight, he's not heeding that advice. The former president back in the spotlight giving his first major speech since leaving office on protecting Social Security. And while he didn't directly mention Trump's name, it's pretty clear who this speech was aimed at.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOE BIDEN, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Fewer than 100 days, this administration has made so much damage and so much destruction. It's kind of breathtaking it could happen that soon. Well, they're following that old line from tech startups. The quote is move fast, break things. They're certainly breaking things. They're shooting first and aiming later.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JIMENEZ: Joining me now is Chris Whipple, the author of the new book, "Uncharted: How Trump Beat Biden, Harris, and the Odds in the Wildest Campaign in History."
Chris, look, former presidents usually stay out of the limelight after leaving office, at least a little bit longer than this. Why do you think Biden is choosing to speak out months into Trump's presidency, and why specifically on the issue of Social Security?
[23:55:02]
CHRIS WHIPPLE, AUTHOR: Well, I think, you know, there's no problem with Biden choosing to appear at this point, but I just think this was a botched appearance by Joe. He's tone-deaf and counterproductive, and showed a stunning lack of self-awareness.
I mean, this is the first appearance by -- since the election, and millions of Americans are angry about his role in -- in getting Donald Trump elected with his 11th-hour exit from the race.
I mean, he has been taking a pounding now for months with disclosures from my book, "Uncharted," and -- and other reporting that shows the role he and his aides played in concealing his mental acuity or lack thereof. It's -- it's a real scandal and it's something I think -- you know, Joe Biden never addressed the elephant in the room, and I don't know how he can have any credibility to speaking about Social Security or anything else until he owns them.
JIMENEZ: And, you know, one of -- one of the big moments, of course, in the campaign trail or I guess before Biden dropped out is George Clooney in the op-ed that he published essentially urging that step. And -- and he's speaking out really for the first time since he published a New York Times op-ed calling on Biden to exit the race last summer, at least speaking to CNN. Here's what he told our Jake Tapper when asked if he thought that decision was brave.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CLOONEY: Well, I don't know if it was brave. It was -- it was a civic duty because I found that people on my side of the street -- you know, I'm a Democrat. I was a Democrat in Kentucky, so I get it. When I saw people on my side of the street not telling the truth, I thought that was time to --
TAPPER: Are people still mad at you for that?
CLOONEY: Some people. Sure.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JIMENEZ: He described it as a civic duty. And, you know, in your book, you write about what sort of went on behind the scenes when that op-ed came out. How did Biden see it?
WHIPPLE: Well, you know, the interesting thing here is that I told the story in -- in the book about how Clooney is absolutely ballistic when "Morning Joe" did a segment suggesting that he had either been put up to writing the op-ed or at least got a green light from Barack Obama to do it. And shortly thereafter, after that segment appeared, I described how he called somebody at "Morning Joe," who shall remain nameless, and went on an F-bomb-laden tirade.
So, it's one thing for Clooney to say that he has no problem being criticized, but readers can judge for themselves whether, you know, just how thin-skinned he was about that.
JIMENEZ: And, you know, sort of moving from the last election, obviously, as you mentioned, there -- there are some folks who were upset at the timing of Biden dropping out.
But looking ahead, Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, for example, continues to draw massive crowds on her -- on her tour with Bernie Sanders. We're looking at some video of an event she held in really red Idaho yesterday. And tonight, we're learning she raised $9.6 million in the first quarter of this year, more than double her previous record.
Her brand of politics does seem to be resonating. I wonder, as we sort of see Joe Biden appear, is she the messenger Democrats are looking for right now? I mean, what -- what is her place in the future of the Democratic Party?
WHIPPLE: Well, look, she's got a clear message, so does Bernie Sanders. It resonates. And I think that her appeal right now speaks to this hunger, this desperation for a new -- for new leadership in the Democratic Party. And you can thank Joe Biden for that. I think it's going to be a kind of litmus test for any -- anyone who wants to lead the Democratic Party forward.
They're going to have to first, you know, own up to the fact that this was a really scandalous chapter in the history of the Democratic Party. I'm talking now about Joe Biden and his inner circle and their failure to be candid about the president's condition and -- and their failure to get out of the race until the 11th hour.
I think the Democratic Party has to deal with that, and any future leader will have to really separate herself from him or herself from the Biden legacy.
JIMENEZ: Chris Whipple, really appreciate you being here. Thank you.
WHIPPLE: Good to be with you.
JIMENEZ: All right, before we go tonight, today is Jackie Robinson Day. And baseball fans across the country are honoring the legend who broke the color barrier in Major League Baseball 78 years ago when he made his debut on the Brooklyn Dodgers on April 15, 1947. Players are wearing his number tonight, the iconic 42.
[23:59:58]
It still hangs high in baseball parks across the country on this historic day. You can't erase that legacy. I'll leave you tonight with Jackie in his own words during his final public appearance at the 1972 World Series.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JACKIE ROBINSON, BASEBALL PLAYER: I'm extremely proud and pleased to be here this afternoon, but must admit I'm going to be tremendously more pleased and more proud when I look at that third base coaching line one day and see a Black face managing in baseball. Thank you very much.
(APPLAUSE)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
