Return to Transcripts main page
One World with Zain Asher
CNN International: U.S. & Ukraine Sign Minerals Deal After Months Of Talks; White House: Moving At "Full Speed" To "Operationalize" Ukraine Deal; Trump: We Signed Minerals Deal With Ukraine "To Be Protected". Aired 11a-12p ET
Aired May 01, 2025 - 11:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[11:00:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ZAIN ASHER, HOST, "ONE WORLD": The minerals deal, a decades-long partnership now cemented between the U.S. and Ukraine. One World starts
right now.
After months of heated negotiations, could this signal a thaw in the relationship between President Trump and President Zelenskyy? Plus, let
them buy fewer dolls, President Trump plays defense and casts blame amid new signs that the economy is feeling the impact of his trade war. And as
the U.S. and El Salvador are reportedly discussing the mistaken deportation of a migrant, we'll speak with a lawyer about immigrants' rights in the
U.S.
All right. Coming to you live from New York, I'm Zain Asher. My colleague, Bianna Golodryga, is off today. You are watching One World.
Ukraine's foreign minister is hailing its new minerals deal with the U.S. as an important milestone for the two countries. The agreement signed after
months of tense negotiations gives Washington access to Kyiv's rare earth minerals in exchange for the establishment of an investment fund for
Ukraine's reconstruction. Kyiv says it will retain full ownership and control of its resources, determining which minerals to extract and from
where. The U.S. Treasury Secretary says the deal signals to Russia that Washington is committed to a peace process centered on a free and
prosperous Ukraine over the long term.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SCOTT BESSENT, U.S. TREASURY SECRETARY: This moves both America and Ukraine in that direction. I think that this is win-win for both sides, and it's
very innovative. The easy thing to do would have been to give the Ukrainians more loans, pile on more debt, the tax the American people more,
and lose the support of the American people. Here that the Ukrainians can see a path to economic prosperity once this conflict ends and the U.S.,
U.S. businesses, U.S., best practices, U.S. capital, will be part of that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ASHER: CNN's Kylie Atwood joins us from the U.S. State Department to break it all down. But, let's begin with White House Reporter Alayna Treene.
So, Alayna, just in terms of security guarantees, it looks like security guarantees for Kyiv was not part of this deal, but to walk us through some
of the wins for the White House here.
ALAYNA TREENE, CNN WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Yeah, and we're still learning more about exactly what exactly is in here, as we're getting more and more
text of this. But, look, I mean, there have been so many twists and turns to this deal, Zain. I'd remind you that this deal was initially supposed to
be signed back in February when Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy visited the White House. Of course, that meeting ended up descending into a
shouting match, but this is a huge win after months of intense negotiations of both sides really trying to come to some sort of compromise.
Now, one key thing in this, just looking at the text of it compared to other preliminary deals, is that it doesn't seem as far reaching and
lopsided in favor of the U.S. Prior deals that we have looked at, draft proposals of this, had been giving more to the U.S. This, from what we've
seen, really looks more even-handed in this. Now, another key development as well about this new deal is that it stipulates that the future of
American military assistance to Ukraine will count as part of the U.S. investment fund that they are setting up here.
But, I think big picture is really that, on behalf of the Ukrainians, this is really a way to keep them engaged with the United States, to keep the
United States more so, I should say, engaged with Ukraine, and to continue their support for them, particularly as we know that many Ukrainians and
United States' European allies have been worried that President Donald Trump might be willing to give away too much in order to clinch a deal with
Russia.
Now, on behalf of the United States' side and the Trump Administration's side, this is really all about what they see as being a way to pay them
back, a way to try to get back some of the aid that they have given over the past several years, not just now and not just in the future, but also
some of the aid that was sent during the Biden administration. This is something that Stephen Miller, the Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy,
reiterated during a briefing this morning.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
STEPHEN MILLER, WHITE HOUSE DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF: We'll move it and operationalize it as fast as we possibly can. But, it's meant to pay back
the United States, is the key point, for the hundreds of billions of dollars that our taxpayers have spent subsidizing the war in Ukraine. So,
it is repayment to the United States.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
TREENE: So, as you heard there, he is calling it repayment to the United States. We've heard other top Trump administration officials try to package
this as a big win for the U.S. But, again, it's also a big win for the Ukrainians, who have really been looking to have Americans have a vested
interest in what is going on between this war.
[11:05:00]
Now, one other thing I also just want to point out is what we heard the President say that he told Zelenskyy over the weekend, when they had met on
the sidelines of Pope Francis' funeral, the President essentially said to him that it's a very good thing if he signed the deal, because Russia is
much bigger and stronger, and that just gives you a little bit more insight into how the President, Donald Trump, views all of this and how he is
viewing these relationships going forward.
ASHER: All right. Alayna Treene, stand by.
Let me bring in Kylie Atwood. So, Kylie, how much, Alayna was sort of touching on this there, just how much of a win is this for Ukrainians?
Because obviously they didn't get the security guarantees that they would have wanted. But, this version, this signed deal, is actually quite a bit
more favorable than some of the previous versions that we've been reporting on. Just walk us through how much of a win this is for Ukraine.
KYLIE ATWOOD, CNN U.S. SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Yeah. I think it's fair to cast this as a major win for the Ukrainians, both because of the terms that
we are learning about, as we learn about the documents that were signed yesterday at the White House, but also because of the relationship with the
United States that this agreement shores up.
So, first, when it comes to the terms, obviously, we have heard from the White House time and time again that the Ukrainians need to pay back the
United States for the support in this war, but this deal doesn't actually reimburse the U.S. for that support that they have provided over the last
few years. It's actually going to provide financial support to the U.S. and Ukraine going forward. And as we understand it, that's going to be a 50:50
split between the two. So, for the Ukrainians, that is obviously good news.
When it comes to shoring up the relationship with the United States, we have seen an incredibly rocky relationship between President Trump and
President Zelenskyy, as Alayna pointed out, over the last few months. And what this does is gives President Trump something that he can point to as a
victory that he was able to pull off with the Ukrainians. And of course, that is critical when he is thinking about the peace process between Russia
and Ukraine, because some have said that he has appeared to favor Russia in those talks that the U.S. has been engaging with, both on the Russian side
and the Ukrainian side. But, coming to this agreement with Ukraine, might put that relationship in a better place.
Just listen to what President Trump said yesterday about concerns that in the past the Ukrainians weren't paying the U.S. for any of the support that
the United States was giving them in this war.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VOICE OF DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: We got nothing, and I felt very bullish being the head of the -- a country where Europe
gets their money back, and it's a much smaller amount, and we get nothing. So, I went to them and said, look, we got to get rare earth. They have
great rare earth, meaning certain minerals, materials. They have things that a lot of places don't have. It's a big asset that they have. And we
made a deal today where we get much more in theory than the $350 billion, but I wanted to be protected.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ATWOOD: So, as we understand it, the United States is going to get preferential treatment to the extraction of minerals that are going to come
out of Ukraine as a part of this deal. We don't know exactly when that's going to happen, which minerals exactly they expect to get, but that is
critical here. The other critical part, which is a win for the Ukrainians, is that this soil is still going to be considered Ukrainian soil. The
United States isn't going to own it in any way, shape, or form. One thing that a senior administration official also made clear in a call with
reporters today is saying that this agreement is integral to the peace process --
ASHER: Kylie, unfortunately, I do have to cut you off. Kylie, I have to cut you off because we do have breaking news from the White House. I want to go
to my colleagues in Washington, D.C. for it.
JEFF ZELENY, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: -- inside the West Wing ever since that Signal chat conversation broke out, and for those who
don't remember, this is -- it was Mike Waltz who effectively started this, a communication, with a variety of officials on that weekend of the
military strikes in Yemen. And we're told that he has never recovered inside the West Wing, but it's also something more than that.
Mike Waltz, his foreign policy views are not in complete alignment with the views of the MAGA movement, if you will. He has s been much more of a hawk.
He has been much more supportive of Ukraine funding, etcetera. So, he wasn't always a perfect fit. And so, some people have had him in their
sights. Laura Loomer, of course, who is one of the President's outside advisors, some would argue, a conspiracy theorist as well, she has been
after him, and others have as well. So, this is an indication of how he has lost his standing in the White House because of the Signalgate, but not
necessarily entirely leading up to that.
But, this is a major shift in the White House. The President, we're told, our Kaitlan Collins is reporting, as well as the rest of our White House
team that this is something that will be happening likely soon, perhaps today, in the coming days, and other advisors as well.
[11:10:00]
So, we're told one potential replacement is Steve Witkoff. He, of course, is a top advisor to the President. He has emerged as a major envoy. He has
met with Vladimir Putin, I think, four times or so. We shall see. But, he is one of the names that is being discussed. But inside the West Wing,
Wolf, as you all know, covering many White Houses, the National Security Advisor, his office is just steps away from the Oval Office. So, he is a
central advisor to this President, but clearly, the President has lost faith in him, and so not necessarily surprising.
But, one indication earlier this week, one more thing here, he was riding a Marine One as the President was traveling to Michigan on Tuesday, and he
did not board Air Force One. He walked away from Air Force One and did not go on with the President's. That was viewed as sort of odd at the time, but
now it seems that he will be taking his lead, one of the first high-profile departures of this administration.
WOLF BLITZER, HOST, THE SITUATION ROOM WITH WOLF BLITZER AND PAMELA BROWN: We didn't hear much from him at the Trump cabinet meeting yesterday. He was
sitting there with other members of the cabinet, but he was pretty, pretty quiet then, and he was responsible for accidentally bringing in Jeffrey
Goldberg, the editor of The Atlantic magazine, into that Signal chat where all that sensitive, very highly sensitive information was being discussed
about war plans involving the Houthis in Yemen.
ZELENY: He was. He is the one that convened the chat, if you will. And even though the Defense Secretary, Pete Hegseth is the one who apparently
dropped some highly sensitive, if not classified information into the chat, it was Mike Waltz who convened this. And for the President, that was
perhaps the original sin (ph).
BLITZER: Yeah. I'm sure it was. I stand by for a second. I want to bring in CNN's -- CNN Anchor and Chief White House Correspondent Kaitlan Collins.
You're doing a lot of reporting on this. Kaitlan, tell our viewers what else you're learning.
VOICE OF KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yeah. Well, we are hearing from sources that Mike Waltz is going to depart
the administration. He has been the National Security Advisor only for just over 100 days. Of course, as we all know, as the President just marked that
moment in office.
And the reason this stands out, Wolf, is to just give you some back story here, obviously, Jeff is right. Mile Waltz's job has been on shaky ground
ever since Signalgate happened and he inadvertently added a reporter to a group chat where they talked about sensitive military strikes, but also
this week in particular, has been a real focus for Mike Waltz's job and the standing of his position inside the West Wing.
I was told that it was communicated to Mike Waltz earlier this week that his time as the National Security Advisor under President Trump had come to
an end. He has been fighting that and attempting to stay all week. Just yesterday, he was inside the cabinet meeting with President Trump. When he
went around the table, they stopped at Mike Waltz, as he gave an update from the National Security Council. He was on Fox News this morning as
well, and was even inside the West Wing this morning. But, we are told that he is expected to depart.
He was not being ousted immediately. He was given some time, essentially before he was going to be ousted. As Jeff noted there, they do not have a
replacement yet.
But, it really speaks to just what has happened with Mike Waltz ever since that story first broke. He had been on shaky ground, and it never really
recovered his standing inside, not just the view of the President, but also other top aides inside the West Wing who did not feel that he was the right
fit for that job.
And so, now the question is, who they will replace him with? Who will take over? Because it's a sensitive time, as they are working to negotiate a
ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine, a permanent one, not just one that's a few days, and also navigating many other foreign policy issues that are
on the horizon right now, Wolf. And so, it is a real question of who is going to replace him, and I should note that his deputy is also expected to
depart. So, essentially, the top leadership of the National Security Council will be leaving.
Wolf, I would also be remiss if I did not mention the meeting that happened at the White House a few weeks ago with Laura Loomer, who is a far-right
activist, who came and had a one-on-one audience with President Trump. Mike Waltz was actually partially in the room for some of that meeting. She
attacked many of the staffers on the National Security Council and told President Trump they were not serving him well and they were not carrying
out his agenda. That also played a huge role in how the President himself was viewing the National Security Council. And so, now a major shake-up
underway at the National Security Council, and also Wolf, the first one of Trump's second term. This is his first major departure since he took
office.
BLITZER: All right. Kaitlan Collins there reporting for us. Excellent reporting, as usual. Kaitlan, of course, you're going to have a lot more on
all of these stories coming up later tonight, 09:00 p.m. Eastern on your program "The Source". We will all be watching, as we do every night.
Kaitlan, thanks very much. Pamela.
PAMELA BROWN, HOST, THE SITUATION ROOM WITH WOLF BLITZER AND PAMELA BROWN: There is a big question, obviously, on what the impact could be here on
Ukraine. We know that the minerals deal was just signed between the U.S. and Ukraine.
Nick Paton Walsh, I want to bring you in on this. What's your take?
NICK PATON WALSH, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Yeah. I mean, look, obviously what's key to successful negotiations is consistency
of people at the table, and certainly in the key meetings between the United States and Russia that took place in Saudi Arabia. Waltz was there
at the table.
[11:15:00]
He was known in the past, prior to taking that NSA job, to have been more of an advocate of Ukraine's positions, more critical of Russia, much more
traditional in his Republican outlook. And so, certainly, I think this will leave many in Moscow wondering who his replacement will be, and whether
that indeed, that replacement, may be more sympathetic to their point of view. Many of the senior officials we've seen around Trump in the past have
indeed been that.
So, the Russians perhaps, well, I think we'll look at this as a change in personnel, and it may well delay any potential outcome here. We've seen
Moscow itself changing venues, formats, agendas at times, to prolong their diplomatic relationship and the potential for an outcome with Washington,
and now the Trump administration changing a key figure. It shows a lack of consistency, potentially in what they're thinking, and that's something I
think that may be exploited, indeed, by Vladimir Putin at this exceptionally key time where the U.S. and Ukraine, after indeed a meeting
that Waltz was part of, offered a 30-day unconditional ceasefire to Moscow. It's not been accepted for nearly 50 days now.
It's increasingly a tension point between Washington and Moscow, and I think now with this rare earth minerals deal here, there is an impetus to
see some kind of progress, but I think potentially the train on that track somewhat delayed or derailed even by the departure of one of the key
figures in all of these negotiations and discussions. Remember, Waltz himself, one of the first people to discuss quite how rare earth minerals
deal might indeed work, he is now out of the picture. And the big question, who steps in and how do they feel about the Moscow-Washington relationship,
Pam?
BLITZER: Yeah. Good points. Thanks very much, Nick Paton Walsh.
I want to bring in our Chief National Security Correspondent Alex Marquardt. He is here with us in The Situation Room right now. So, what are
you seeing? What are you hearing about the impact that this departure from the National Security Council will mean on U.S. foreign policy?
ALEX MARQUARDT, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Well, I think just picking up from where -- what Nick was talking about, Ukraine is
obviously front and center right now, and if indeed the replacement for Mike Waltz will be someone coming a bit more from the MAGA space, who is a
bit more aligned to Trump, rather than the more traditionalist, then certainly that is probably going to frighten the Ukrainians a fair bit and
play into the Russian hands, if you will.
I agree with Nick that Waltz has been a key player at many of these top level meetings with both Ukrainians and the Russian sides. But, we have
seen an evolution over the past few weeks in that he has receded a little bit in terms of his involvement, while others like Marco Rubio, Steve
Witkoff, have really taken the lead, Keith Kellogg, the Ukraine envoy.
And so, Kellogg -- Waltz has not been as involved on that portfolio. You look at the other major portfolios. He has been -- Waltz has been a
proponent of these strikes against the Houthis, and that has not gone very well. They have trumpeted what they have been doing against the Houthis,
but frankly, they have not been able to take out the top level leadership that they've been going after. The Houthi strikes still continue against
American and other vessels with ballistic and cruise missiles and drones. Just this week, we saw a fighter jet fall off of an aircraft carrier.
(TECHNICAL DIFFICULTY).
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ASHER: All right. This breaking news just into CNN. Sources are telling us that U.S. National Security Advisor Mike Waltz will step down from his
position in the coming days. Mike Waltz is going to be stepping down from his position in the coming days. Sources are saying that he has been on
shaky ground and lost most of his influence after he mistakenly added a reporter to a group chat on Signal about military strikes targeting Houthi
rebels in Yemen. His deputy, Alex Wong, is also expected to leave his position.
CNN's National Security Analyst Juliette Kayyem joins us now, as does Kim Dozier as well.
Kim, let me start with you. I think what's interesting about this is that President Trump isn't normally someone to get rid of somebody who is a part
of his team based on outside pressure. He normally does stick by members of his team despite controversy, and actually immediately after Signalgate,
what he said about Mike Waltz is he is a good man. He made a mistake. He is a good man. Just walk us through your reaction to this latest development.
KIMBERLY DOZIER, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: I think this shows that the side of MAGA world represented by people like Laura Loomer have won. Mike
Waltz was Deputy National Security Advisor to Vice President Dick Cheney, and probably describes himself to the right of Cheney. I have known Mike
for years, as have many in the national security community in D.C., and he is a serious scholar of international issues. He has s got time on the
ground in places like Iraq and Afghanistan as U.S. Army Green Beret. So, he really has had skin in the game. And for a lot of traditional Republicans,
they felt safer about this second Trump administration, knowing that he was in the White House and had Trump's ear.
In a sense, Waltz had tried out for this job in Trump's first administration, when Waltz was a congressman, and on a regular basis was on
the phone. President Trump would seek him out for advice. And to hear Afghan officials tell it, they believe that Mike Waltz single handedly kept
Trump at that time from pulling out of Afghanistan, and many in the national security community here had hoped that he would serve the same
kind of role this time around to help temper Trump's more mercurial way of doing business. So, this is a loss.
ASHER: Juliette, let me bring you in, because there is two factors at play here. The first is that Mike Waltz was actually the person who introduced
Jeffrey Goldberg into the conversation in the first place, obviously, The Atlantic editor, and that was a huge mistake for members of the Trump
administration, but it was actually Pete Hegseth shared a lot of the really sort of sensitive information when it came to the military strikes in Yemen
targeting Houthi rebels. I mean, obviously, Jeffrey Goldberg talked about being in a grocery store parking lot, and seeing all of this information
come up on his phone. Just explain to us why Pete Hegseth, at least for now, is safe in this administration.
JULIETTE KAYYEM, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: So, part of it is that the people that Trump likes around him are amplifiers of MAGA and
Trumpism and whatever else. So, in that sense, Hegseth is playing the role correctly, so all of his machismo, all of his pushback, all of his sort of
-- now better way to explain sort of this toxic masculinity. This confirms and conforms why Trump picked him.
[11:25:00]
He likes that voice. He likes that image. Substance does not matter. So -- and mistakes don't matter. So, picking up on what Kim said, I think
Signalgate is going to be like the thing that the White House wants you to look at. Right? In other words, Mike Waltz did this and the President
realizes what a mistake it was. That's the responsible explanation, right? Well, if that were true, it should have happened three weeks ago or four
weeks ago when Signalgate happened.
The real reason why is, as Kim was describing, is for a long time, most of us have known that not only was he inconsistent with this sort of paranoid
pro-Russia national security policy coming out of the White House, but he had been receding well before Signalgate. There were special envoys that
were meeting with all the necessary people. We barely saw Mike Waltz in the room and some of these big international efforts. And I think that this was
coming for a long time. I don't think Mike Waltz is probably surprised today.
ASHER: So, Kim, just in terms of what Juliette is saying, and you're reiterating, there were other factors at play here in terms of getting rid
of Mike Waltz. But, when you think about Pete Hegseth, just to go back to the Defense Secretary here, I mean, he had another Signalgate chat in which
he shared really sensitive information with both his wife, his brother, I'm just trying to think who else was on it, his attorney as well. Does that
completely go unpunished here? Give us your take on that.
DOZIER: Well, I think if you're Pete Hegseth today, you are a little bit worried. You're concerned, and you are minding your Ps and Qs to make sure
that you are not the next head to role. That said, Hegseth, including members of his family, goes along with Trump style of doing business. The
last Trump administration, he had many members of his family in the White House with him, serving as part of the administration, and Hegseth has also
managed to stay on Trump's good side in terms of -- he has been taking a pasting in the media. So, Trump has a certain amount of sympathy for him.
They're attacking Pete because he is doing what I want him to do, and therefore that somewhat protects him.
But, some of the names that are being floated to replace Mike Waltz have me concerned, because one of them is possibly Steve Witkoff, the current envoy
to the Middle East and to Russia, because Witkoff doesn't have the background, just like Hegseth doesn't have a deep background in the
politics of these nations overseas, the history, and doesn't seem to want to call on all the various experts resident in the State Department and the
Pentagon to teach them about these backgrounds. Waltz would have been using all that national security power to inform the President and possibly
irritate him by pointing out inconvenient facts, like the fact that Russia is the aggressor in Ukraine. Russia has made peace agreement in the past,
not honored them, and now that's removed.
ASHER: I mean, it's interesting, just to ask you about the possibility of just Kim -- of Steve Witkoff ending up as a replacement here. I mean, it's
an interesting role that he has played during this administration, because a lot of people have noticed that obviously, technically, Marco Rubio is
Secretary of State, but Steve Witkoff has a lot of power when it comes to foreign relations, be it with Russia, be with Israel, arguably the two most
important sort of pieces of real estate when it comes to global affairs for the United States.
The idea that someone like Steve Witkoff could possibly, I mean, obviously certain names are being floated around now, we don't know for sure, the
idea that Steve Witkoff could possibly be National Security Advisor, just talk to us about his relationship with Donald Trump.
DOZIER: Well, what you're seeing is, again, the New York and Mar-a-Lago mafia taking precedence in the Oval Office, especially if he ultimately
ascends to this National Security Advisor role. Trump trusts the people that speak the same way he does and have the same level of interest in
things like foreign affairs and geopolitics. This was never on Trump's radar previously, unless it was about business.
I've spoken to former Trump administration officials who tried to get Trump interested in what was going on in the Middle East, in the geopolitics of
it, and it wasn't till they struck on the idea of presenting it to him in terms of, here is how much U.S. business happens in those areas. Here is
how much U.S. businessmen are making out of these different Gulf countries. And therefore, why we have to protect the trade routes, etc.
[11:30:00]
And all of a sudden, Trump got it. So, what you have in Steve Witkoff is someone else who sees, for instance, Witkoff's visit to Gaza, he was really
struck, as a property developer, with the level of destruction he was seeing and thinking in terms of how long it would take to build it, etc.,
as opposed to a seasoned diplomat or a former soldier who has seen things like that before and knows that, yeah, this might take a long time to
build, but the Palestinian people are really attached to this territory, and if you bring up the notion of moving them out to rebuild, that's going
to be gas to flames. Witkoff doesn't have that flexibility,
ASHER: Right. And final question to Juliette, just in terms of -- I mean, obviously you guys have both touched on the fact that there are other
factors that play in terms of getting rid of Mike Waltz. But, obviously the Signalgate would have been or is rather a perfect excuse to get rid of him.
Just in terms of the timing of all of this -- I mean, Signalgate happened, what was it, end of March, why not get rid of him --
KAYYEM: Yes.
ASHER: -- right then and there? Why wait the extra month, Juliette?
KAYYEM: Yeah. I think it is -- I think the White House and others will present it as a Signalgate response. The timing makes no sense. So, where
the timing does make sense is a considerable power play with the Witkoff, Rubio and even I would argue, sort of Stephen Miller's side in terms of who
owns what. And as Kim was describing, it's not just that Witkoff would sort of comes out of nowhere, but he is now the point person on Ukraine, on the
Middle East and on like various other things, which should be the National Security Advisor. So, in many ways, Trump is already very, very comfortable
with what Witkoff is doing and his sort of management of the national security staff.
I want to say there has been lots of news reports out of the national security staff, people who are, what we call career, they are not sort of
undermining is, that very natural for a national security agency to pull on the expertise of career officials from the other national security
agencies. There has been essentially a blood bath in terms of the expertise that is at the National Security Council. So, we cannot rely that there is
a sort of historical support and historical legacy to help the White House. The White House wants to be on its own in its transactional aspects of what
is happening in terms of the U.S. role in the world.
And I think this was -- this will mark a significant change in I think Donald Trump's sort of comfort level in this space, in terms of having his
guy at the helm. Mike Waltz was appealing to someone like me, not on the same side as Donald Trump, and that's for a reason, because he was a
subject matter expert. He had spent time in the field. He understood America's role in the world and its need to embrace its responsibilities.
Even if people disagree with where he was on those things, he did not represent a sort of break the world attitude that you're going to see even
more prevalent in the weeks and months to come.
ASHER: All right. Juliette Kayyem, Kim Dozier, thank you both for coming up so quickly on this breaking news story. We appreciate it. Thanks.
We'll be right back with more after this short break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[11:35:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ASHER: All right. Welcome back to One World. I'm Zain Asher in New York.
The largest U.S. automaker, General Motors, has put into dollars just how big a bite tariffs will take out of its bottom line. CNN -- CEO, rather,
Mary Barra told shareholders, tariffs that imported cars and parts will cost GM between $4 billion to $5 billion this year. She tells CNN, GM is
working to offset those expected costs.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MARY BARRA, CEO, GENERAL MOTORS: We already have a very U.S.-centered supply base. Over 80 percent of the parts that go into our vehicles are
already USMCA compliant, and the lion's share of that is U.S. So, there is many steps that we can take to offset the $4 billion to $5 billion, but we
wanted to be transparent and share. That's the impact right now.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ASHER: And here is the impact on the U.S. economy as a whole. GDP actually shrank three tenths of one percent in the last quarter. It's worth showing,
since 2022, although that's partly because there was a surge in imports. A lot of people trying to get ahead of the tariffs. We'll get to the impact
on employment tomorrow 08:30 in the morning local time, when monthly jobs report comes out.
The President, meantime, says that trade deals are in the works with South Korea, Japan and India. He adds that Americans do not need most of the
things China exports anyway.
Let's bring in Justin Wolfers, my good friend, who is a Professor of Economics and Public Policy at the University of Michigan. Justin, it's so
good to see you. Look, I always look up and I see you somewhere on CNN at least five times a week. But, just in terms of the hard data that we're
getting about the impact of these tariffs, I mean, obviously I was just mentioning that, yes, we got first quarter GDP just yesterday. A couple of
weeks ago, we had retail sales. But, a lot of these numbers have been skewed because of front-loading, the fact that people are trying to
outsmart the tariffs and sort of get ahead of them. But, tomorrow's jobs report is really going to be the first piece of concrete, hard data about
the kind of impact that Liberation Day is having on the U.S. economy just in terms of hiring. How important is it?
JUSTIN WOLFERS, PROFESSOR OF ECONOMIC AND PUBLIC SAFETY, UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: Yeah. So, this is where owning a calendar turns out to be the
most important economic tool you can have right now. So, Liberation Day, the big tariff announcement was April 2nd. We were just talking about the
decline in GDP in the first quarter. That lasted through to the end of March. So, the economy shrank prior to the imposition of tariffs. And to be
clear, Liberation Day led to a level of tariffs that were both higher and more incoherent than anyone had understood or expected before that.
Tomorrow is the first of the so-called hard data. What are we doing? What are we making? What are we buying from post-Liberation Day? But, actually,
there is a very interesting and important thing. When the jobs report asks whether you have a job, they're asking for a specific week. Technically, we
call that the reference week. It turns out that's the week of April 6th through the 12th.
[11:40:00]
So, really, this is, did you start firing people within a couple of days of Liberation Day? So, this isn't really giving it enough time to kick in. So,
it will be, I'd say, slightly tariff afflicted, but it's not really a good reading on how businesses are responding to the economic chaos that was
unleashed on that day.
ASHER: So, when we get the May jobs report, is what you're saying, we will probably get a better impact. OK. So, just in terms of the Fed, because the
Fed is obviously meeting next week, May 6th and 7th. That's the FOMC meeting. I mean, obviously we don't expect any huge changes when it comes
to monetary policy just yet. It's still way too early, but they are going to be looking at this jobs report. I mean, they're going to be looking at
all the data as a whole, but they are going to be looking at this jobs report that we get out tomorrow. Right?
WOLFERS: They're absolutely going to be looking at it. Look, Jay Powell has been very clear. He said that it's unclear what the effects of this policy
will be, and that his view is, they're better off waiting to find out what happens and responding to what actually happens, rather than taking a great
guess or a leap of faith. And it's still too early to know what tariff- mageddon (ph) has unleashed upon all of us. Jay Powell, in many respects, is like most American CEOs, which is, if you've got the choice of making a
decision for a CEO, it might be opening a new factory for Jay Powell. It might be adjusting interest rates. It's probably better to wait and see
where everything falls before making that choice. So, they're very much in wait and see mode.
ASHER: And speaking of tariff-mageddon, I want to play you some sound from the President about the thought of Christmas that we could expect with
these tariffs in place. Let's roll it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: Somebody said, oh, the shelves are going to be open. Well, maybe the children will have two dolls instead of 30 dolls, and maybe the two dolls
will cost a couple of bucks more than they would normally. But, we're not talking about something that we have to go out of our way.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ASHER: Obviously, he has been criticized quite heavily for those comments, because it is extremely flippant. I mean, a lot of people in this country
live virtually below the poverty line. And so, the idea of not being able to afford Christmas presents or anything else is a difficult pill to
swallow. But, just in terms of what the next six months, I mean, obviously I don't even know how to ask this question, because I don't think anyone
has any idea, because the tariff numbers haven't even settled yet, but just in terms of if the 145 percent tariff on China stays in place, and you
already have a lot of CEOs from Walmart to Target talking about not just rising prices, but empty store shelves as well, because you can't do
business with China at those sorts of tariff levels, what does the next six months look like in this country from that perspective?
WOLFERS: Yeah. So, it's a wonderful economic lesson, and it's a lesson in how interconnected our lives are with people around the world. In some
sense, here is the homework assignment for the viewers, which is, as you go about your life over next week, as you pick up your t-shirt, look where
it's from. When you pick up your Chrome book, look where it's from. As you go through the store, look what -- where the various goods you're buying
come from. As you buy your kids a new pair of shoes, look where they're from. And you'll discover over and over, the U.S. has three big trading
partners, Canada, Mexico and China. And a lot of the goods that we rely on come from China, and they've just been made prohibitively expensive.
Zain, I come from a household where two dolls for Christmas would have been a lot of dolls. And so, for a lot of families, it's utterly glib. One of
the great things that global trade has given us, actually, is that working and middle class families can afford toys in a way that they never could
before. I can guess, if you ask your grandmother how many toys she had growing up, it was one or two. And my guess is, most of your viewers have a
whole lot more for their kids, but that's actually the fruits of international trade, and that's what Trump is coming after right now.
ASHER: And final question, just in terms of some positive news on the horizon, we had the Commerce Secretary say earlier in the week that there
were some trade deals in the works that he couldn't really clarify which country, but that the deal actually to be ratified by the country's
parliament and the Prime Minister. I mean, a lot of people are speculating that perhaps it could be India, but obviously, nobody is sure just yet. The
thing about what Trump has to do at this point is that it really is about not just any trade deal, but trade deal with some of America's most
strategic partners. You touched on China, obviously. That's going to take a while. You touched, obviously, Mexico and Canada. But, really, outside of
those three, it's all about South Korea, Japan, the EU, India, obviously, hugely important. Talk us -- talk to us about that, Justin.
WOLFERS: Look, this whole thing has a whole lot of, I got a girlfriend, but she is in Canada energy about it, doesn't it?
[11:45:00]
Somehow, he is striking all these deals, but no one has been seen going into or coming out of the White House. It typically takes two years to
strike a trade deal, and we're going to get 192 done within 90 days. Look, the U.S., our lives are integrated with all of these other countries. Their
lives are integrated with ours. They're not just trading partners. Many of them are allies as well.
You can probably hear this accent, I come from Australia. We've been one of America's greatest strategic allies. We help militarily. We help with
intelligence. We've done everything the United States has ever asked us to do. And frankly, my mates down under are confused that all of a sudden we
are getting a 10 percent tariff despite the fact we buy more from America than they buy from us, and despite the fact, in fact, we have had a free
trade agreement with the United States for 20 years.
So, it's not just the effect on Americans. Think about what this does for our standing in the world and our ability to form useful, lasting trade
deals going forward. They're not worth the paper they're written on if the bloke who signs and rips them up the moment he starts to feel bad about
himself.
ASHER: Yeah. It's not just Australia that's scratching its head. A lot of countries are in the same position. But, Justin, you're so funny. I have a
girlfriend, but she is in Canada. I just love that line.
WOLFERS: I don't have a girlfriend in Canada. You called me out, mate.
ASHER: You're a married man. So, I don't know.
WOLFERS: And he doesn't have a trade deal. Actually, he does. He has a free trade agreement with Korea. He has a free trade agreement with Australia.
He has a free trade agreement with 18 other countries, and he already had them. He has got a resign them.
ASHER: Right. Maybe we'll go back to -- maybe we end up where we started after all of this is over.
WOLFERS: Right. Yeah.
ASHER: Justin, so good to see you. Thank you so much. Thank you for making me laugh. I needed that. Thanks.
We'll be right back after this break with much more.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ASHER: All right. I want to turn now to our breaking news this hour, the first major shake-up in the Trump Administration. Sources tell CNN that
National Security Advisor Mike Waltz is expected to step down in the coming days. They add Waltz has been on shaky ground and lost most of his
influence after he added a reporter to a group chat on Signal about military strikes in Yemen. His deputy, Alex Wong, is also expected to leave
his post as well.
We're joined by Alayna Treene at the White House with more. So, Alayna, I think a lot of people are surprised by this, because right after Signalgate
happened, Donald Trump indicated quite strongly that he was going to stick by Mike Waltz no matter what, essentially saying he is a good man.
[11:50:00]
He made a mistake. He learned his lesson. What changed in the past month, Alayna?
TREENE: Well, I'd argue you're right, Zain, and I think outwardly, people may be surprised, but people have been talking, like myself, with top White
House and Trump administration officials over recent weeks, ever since that scandal really happened regarding that Signal chain, it was clear that
Waltz was never on great standing and he never fully recovered from that moment.
I would also note that top officials and those who are closest to the President, who the President listens to, who influence him, they have long
been frustrated by Waltz, some saying unimpressed by him, even before the Signal scandal really unfolded. I mean, a lot of people had thought that
perhaps he was not right for this job. And then, all of that really days long, more than a week long, scandal unfolded relating to him, adding a
reporter, especially, I would note a reporter that the President didn't like to a Signal chain where they discussed very highly sensitive
information.
But, as you put it as well, yes, they -- he has been on shaky ground for a long time, but so have many other people underneath Michael Waltz. I'd
remind you, I think I'd be remiss not to note that Laura Loomer, a far- right activist, came to the White House to meet with the President in the Oval Office a few weeks ago, and she gave him a list of people she deemed
disloyal, many of them being in the National Security Office underneath Mike Waltz, including Deputy National Security Advisor Alex Wong, who, as
you noted, is also expected to be ousted and leave the White House in the coming days, if not sooner. And Waltz, after that, was forced to fire many
of his officials as well. So, again, this had been brewing for some time.
I think a key question, of course, is, who would replace him? And we are told, from our conversations with sources familiar with the talks, that
that has been one of the reasons that the President has not moved to do this sewer, that they have been looking, one, for a replacement for Waltz,
but also to find some sort of soft landing for him. Another reason, I'm told that the President had waited so long to do this, despite this
frustration brewing really for months now, is because it was very clear, and he had told this privately to many of the people that he is close with,
that he did not want to fire one of his top aides, one of his essentially cabinet level members, this early on into his White House. He wanted it to
be longer.
When I chatted with my sources today about this, they said it wasn't that surprising that the time has come now, because the President has reached
his 100-day mark, and the writing has been on the wall with Waltz for a long time now. Zain.
ASHER: All right. Alayna Treene, thank you so much.
We'll be right back with more after this short break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[11:55:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ASHER: And finally, this hour, New York City's Metropolitan Museum of Art will have A-list celebrities attending the Met Gala this Monday, the night
of exhibition viewing, dinner and drinks. This is clearly not the right video, if you can change it. OK. I'm going to start that story again. You
were actually watching, and we've changed it again. OK. Let's try this again. This is live television, guys. So, I'm trying here.
Going back to the Met Gala, the night of exhibition viewing, dinner and drinks will first highlight all of the guests on one of the biggest red
carpet events of the year. This year is all about exuberant suiting and black style in the Met Gala's theme "Tailored for You." It's connected to
the Costume Institute's landmark new exhibition, "Super Fine Tailoring Black Style". Super Fine celebrates black Dandyism from the 18th century
and the impact it has on fashion today. The celebs attending and their stylists are encouraged to interpret it all on the red carpet, and that
exhibition opens to the public on May 10th. All right. I did try in terms of rolling with those punches there, live television. What can you say?
All right. Stay with CNN. I'll have much more on One World after this short break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
END
