Return to Transcripts main page

State of the Union

Interview With Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD); Interview With Rep. Tom Emmer (R-MN); Interview With Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN). Aired 9-10a ET

Aired April 20, 2025 - 09:00   ET

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

[09:00:38]

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

DANA BASH, CNN HOST (voice-over): Deportation showdown. After his meeting with a mistakenly deported undocumented immigrant, a Democratic lawmaker is back with a message.

SEN. CHRIS VAN HOLLEN (D-MD): Put up in court or shut up.

BASH: But the White House isn't backing down.

PAM BONDI (R), U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL: He is not coming back to our country.

BASH: What happens now to Kilmar Abrego Garcia? I will speak with Senator Chris Van Hollen fresh off his trip to El Salvador.

Plus: Trump vs. the courts. As the Supreme Court blocks yet another Trump plan, some judges question if the White House is defying their orders.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: A judge wasn't elected to do that. I was elected to do that.

BASH: Is the country careening toward a constitutional crisis? I will ask top Senate Judiciary Committee member Amy Klobuchar, plus number three House Republican Tom Emmer.

And to the streets. Protesters gather in hundreds of cities across the country.

(CHANTING)

BASH: But as some key institutions take a stand, is the resistance fighting back or falling flat? Our political panel will weigh in.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BASH: Hello. I'm Dana Bash in Washington, where the state of our union is wishing you a happy Easter.

We begin this morning on the escalating war between the president and courts over immigration. After a rare post-midnight emergency ruling from the Supreme Court

blocking the Trump administration in no uncertain terms from using the Alien Enemies Act to deport alleged Venezuelan gang members, it comes amid blistering criticism from my first guest this morning, who just got back to the United States from El Salvador after meeting with Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the undocumented immigrant who the Trump administration admitted in a court filing was deported by mistake.

Senator Van Hollen at first was blocked from meeting with Abrego Garcia, but Salvadoran officials relented and brought him to the senator's hotel.

Here with me now is Maryland Senator Chris Van Hollen, fresh off his trip to El Salvador.

Thank you so much for being here, sir.

You said that you talked with Kilmar Abrego Garcia for more than half- an-hour. After you returned on Friday, you told reporters that he was detained in Maryland, moved to Texas, and then flown to El Salvador. What more did he tell you about his deportation? And since he's no longer in the CECOT supermax prison there, what did he tell you about where he is being held now?

VAN HOLLEN: Well, Dana, he told me that, when he was in Baltimore, he asked the authorities if he could make a phone call to let others know where he was and what had happened to him.

And he was denied that opportunity. So, very early on in this process, it was clear that nobody was telling him why he was being taken or where he was being taken. And that's the thing about this case, because the Trump administration has admitted in court, admitted in court that he was wrongfully abducted and taken to El Salvador, and yet they refuse to follow the court order, the U.S. Supreme Court order, to facilitate his return.

BASH: Now, President Trump says that some of Abrego Garcia's tattoos signify that he's a member of MS-13. In 2019, police alleged a confidential informant claimed that Abrego Garcia was an active MS-13 member.

His wife and his attorney deny that, of course. Can you say with absolute certainty that he is not, nor has he ever been a member of the MS-13 gang? And did you ask him point blank?

VAN HOLLEN: Well, Dana, what Donald Trump is trying to do here is change the subject.

The subject at hand is that he and his administration are defying a court order to give Abrego Garcia his due process rights. They are trying to litigate on social media what they should be doing in the courts. They need to put up or shut up in the courts.

Let me tell you -- and I decided to write this down so I could be absolutely accurate as to what federal district court Judge Xinis said about these allegations by the Trump administration -- quote -- "No evidence linking Abrego Garcia to MS-13 or any terrorist activity has been presented to the court."

[09:05:09]

That's where to litigate this. That's -- it's been litigated in many other places.

BASH: Yes.

VAN HOLLEN: So, I'm not going to get into the details because the whole purpose of our court system is for them to adjudicate these things, not for Donald Trump to go off on social media.

BASH: Right. Yes, you're right. They have not -- there hasn't been a court hearing for them to put forward evidence in the first place, which is your whole point.

But since you were the one person to have met with him and since this is a thing, you say, on social media, it's what we hear from Donald Trump and Republicans every day all day long, you didn't ask him?

VAN HOLLEN: I didn't ask him that because I know what his answer is. What he told me was he was sad and traumatized that he was being imprisoned because he has committed no crimes.

And that goes to the heart of this issue because he's been denied his due process rights. And Donald Trump is trying to change the subject. And when people start asking about -- asking that question, in my view, they're falling into the president's trap, because what the president wants to do is talk about that, as if we can't all fight gang violence, which I have been doing for much longer than Donald Trump, right?

His argument is you can't fight that and at the same time uphold people's constitutional rights. That's a very dangerous view. And if we deny the constitutional rights of this one man, it threatens the constitutional rights of everybody in America.

BASH: So, on that note, you have said your goal is to bring Abrego Garcia home. Home is the word that you used.

But he did enter the United States illegally. So if he were to come back to the U.S., went through the proper legal process, got a deportation notice through due process, would you be OK with that?

VAN HOLLEN: I'm for whatever gives him his due process rights. And it was his due process rights where an immigration judge back in 2019 said he should not be deported to El Salvador because that would actually put his life in risk from gang members like MS-13 or others.

And the Trump administration did not appeal that immigration judge order to keep in the United States. Because he's here legally now, he has a work permit, he's a sheet metal worker, he has a family, he has three kids, and so the reality is, I am fine so with whatever result happens, so long as he is given his due process rights under the Constitution.

And that is why we have a 9-0 opinion from the Supreme Court.

BASH: So, you -- you ...

VAN HOLLEN: That's why we had a strong opinion from the Fourth Circuit.

BASH: You would be OK if he were at the end of this ultimately deported?

VAN HOLLEN: I'm OK with whatever the rule of law dictates.

BASH: Yes. And...

VAN HOLLEN: But, right now, we have a lawless president. We have a lawless president. Now, let's be clear.

We have a lawless president who is ignoring the order of the Supreme Court of the United States to facilitate his return. That's what's going on right now.

BASH: Yes.

VAN HOLLEN: That is -- that is a risk to all of us.

BASH: Can I...

VAN HOLLEN: And so all of this other stuff...

BASH: Yes.

VAN HOLLEN: ... you can ask about it, but they need to put up or shut up in the courts of the United States.

BASH: Can I ask you about that the facilitate language that the Supreme Court used? Because the legal argument that the White House, the Trump administration is using is that the Supreme Court didn't say effectuate, and that that is a distinction with a difference, and that because it was 9-0 perhaps the Supreme Court used the word facilitate on purpose, and that is the kind of loophole that the administration got from the Supreme Court.

What's your response to that?

VAN HOLLEN: Facilitate does not mean you do nothing. And that is what Judge Xinis said when the case was returned to her. She wants to take depositions from the administration to find out what they're doing to facilitate his return.

That's why the Fourth Circuit just a few days ago had very strong language again underscoring the fact that the administration is violating Abrego Garcia constitutional rights.

So the administration needs to show it's trying. I asked the folks at the embassy in San Salvador, the American Embassy, whether they'd gotten any direction from the Trump administration to help facilitate his release. The answer was no. They are outright defying a court order the United States. And Donald Trump wants to change the subject to all these other things.

BASH: And I just want to ask you one last question just, frankly, about some raw politics of this.

And I'm asking you this because we have heard some of your fellow Democrats like Gavin Newsom say that it's a mistake to have this fight, when the economy really is the issue that Democrats should be focused on.

[09:10:06]

He said: "It's the distraction of the day, the art of distraction. And how is it so that we are looking like we're defending someone who's out of sight, out of mind in El Salvador?"

Do you see an argument that the focus on this, regardless of due process, which is totally understandable, but just on the politics, might not be winning for you?

VAN HOLLEN: I don't think it's ever wrong to fight for the constitutional rights of one person, because, if we give up on one person's rights, we threaten everybody's rights.

And I think a lot of voters, both Republican and Democrat, are tired of elected politicians -- of elected officials and politicians who just put their finger to the wind. And I would say that anyone who's not prepared to stand up and fight for the Constitution doesn't deserve to lead.

BASH: Senator Chris Van Hollen, thank you so much for being here, and happy Easter, sir.

VAN HOLLEN: Thank you. You too.

BASH: And, as President Trump pushes the constitutional limits, how are Republicans responding?

The number three House Republican, Tom Emmer, is with me live next.

Plus: Thousands took to the streets on Saturday. My next guest -- my guest later, I should say, Senator Amy Klobuchar, will be here. And, also, the panel will weigh in on that ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:15:40]

BASH: Welcome back to STATE OF THE UNION.

President Trump's clash with the courts has grown even more pointed after an extraordinary rebuke from one appeals court and another federal judge inched towards holding the Trump administration, at least officials there, in criminal contempt.

Here with me now is Minnesota Congressman and the number three Republican in the House Majority Whip Tom Emmer.

Thank you so much for being here. Happy Easter to you. Thanks for coming in on this holiday.

I want to start with what the core issue is here. And that is the fact that the administration detained and deported Kilmar Abrego Garcia without any due process, violated a judge's deportation protection order, refused to provide evidence in court to back up its allegations.

Does that concern you?

REP. TOM EMMER (R-MN): Actually, if you look at this, it's very interesting when people talk about the fact that this illegal alien, who is not a resident of the U.S., he is a citizen of El Salvador, actually did have due process in an asylum hearing, where his request for asylum was rejected.

The Trump administration, as part of the promise that they made during the campaign, President Trump made it very clear, I'm going to get rid of the gang members, the murderers, the rapists, the terrorists. And this is part of that process in keeping that campaign promise. And I think they're doing a good job at it.

BASH: There's no evidence that was provided because there was no hearing in which to do so that he is either a murderer or a criminal or a gang member.

Isn't that something that should be provided to a judge, even an immigration judge, before somebody who has been in this country illegally, no question, but has been in this country and has appeared before judges before should be afforded?

EMMER: Actually, I think he was afforded that due process.

In this case, an illegal alien was transported back to El Salvador. The administration initially thought it was a mistake, subsequently says it was not a mistake. The courts, interestingly, have suggested that we need to understand what facilitate means in the order.

So they have deferred back to the lower court, Dana...

BASH: But...

EMMER: ... to tell them -- to tell the administration, facilitate means this.

And what's going on in El Salvador now is, you have a citizen of El Salvador that is within the country of El Salvador. It really isn't the U.S.' ability to go in and remove someone.

BASH: Well...

EMMER: It'll be up to the president of El Salvador.

BASH: Can I just go back? Because you said a couple of times that he did get a court hearing. Are you talking about the 2019 hearing that he had?

EMMER: I'm talking about when he requested asylum and it was rejected.

BASH: OK.

EMMER: I'm talking about that hearing, which I'm not going to get into the transcript. Nobody seems to want to talk about the MS-13 issues that are in that transcript.

Again, his request for asylum, he had due process. It was rejected.

BASH: OK. Well, a couple of things. First of all, if you talk about the process, the one thing that the judge did do is say that he had a protection order and that he should not be deported to El Salvador. And yet he was.

EMMER: Yes.

BASH: Specifically, they said not to El Salvador because they were concerned about his safety.

EMMER: I figure that the court process will continue, Dana.

But I find it very interesting that your network and others like the senator from Maryland are doubling down on an illegal alien, when they won't talk about all the Americans who have been harmed by illegal aliens. And you have heard the story over and over about Rachel Morin...

BASH: Yes.

EMMER: ... the senator's own constituent, who he doesn't even give words of comfort to her family, but he will fly down to El Salvador to deal with an illegal alien who is a resident and a citizen of El Salvador.

[09:20:01]

BASH: But, Mr. Emmer, I hear what you're saying. and I think that both things can be true.

And the question here now is how this fits into the larger question of the Trump administration following the rule of law and abiding by the rule of law and also following the way that the courts say that things should go.

Let me just read what the appeals court ruling said in this particular case. It said that -- and this is somebody appointed by Ronald Reagan. I just want to add that.

"It's difficult in some cases to get to the very heart of the matter, but, in this case, it is not hard at all. The government is asserting a right to stash away residents of this country in foreign prisons without the semblance of due process that is the foundation of our constitutional order. This should be shocking not only to judges, but to the intuitive sense of liberty that Americans far removed from the courthouses still hold dear."

What's your response to that?

EMMER: Yes, and it's been referred to the lower court to interpret what facilitate means.

Dana, you make it -- you want to make it about a much bigger thing. This is isolated incidents like the order that was issued after midnight this morning saying that they're going to delay some deportations so that the lower court process can continue. These will happen on a case-by-case basis.

And, again, the administration is absolutely following the law. I see nothing that they have done that's illegal. Certainly, judges may disagree here and there, but the Supreme Court has been pretty good about supporting what this administration is doing legally.

BASH: And so, just on the Supreme Court, the idea that the Supreme Court said that the administration should facilitate the return of Abrego Garcia, and we have not seen any evidence that the administration has done that, you don't see any defiance of the Supreme Court there?

EMMER: Not at all.

I see a citizen of El Salvador who is now in El Salvador. The United States can't go in and extract people from countries. This is going to be up to the president of El Salvador, not up to the Trump administration. I think you made my point, in that the court has said it's to facilitate.

And what does that mean? So they have sent it back down to the lower court for some more interpretation on the term facilitate. What does that mean exactly, Dana?

BASH: Well, we don't know. That's the point that, according to...

EMMER: Right.

BASH: I mean, you heard Senator Van Hollen say that he believes that it is -- it means that they need to try to make it happen through channels with the leader of El Salvador.

I want to ask you about another idea that President Trump is floating. He's done so repeatedly. And that's the idea of deporting U.S. citizens convicted of violent crimes to El Salvador. You're not only a lawmaker. You are an attorney.

Do you think the federal government has any legal authority to do that with American citizens?

EMMER: I think, right now, what he's doing is absolutely legal, which is removing those that do not have legal status in this country that have proven to be the worst of the worst. This is what he promised Americans he would do.

BASH: But what about U.S. citizens?

EMMER: And you talk about me listening to the senator. The senator literally doesn't do anything for his constituent who is murdered mercilessly by an illegal alien let in under the Biden administration's open border policy.

BASH: Congressman, my question was...

EMMER: But, boy, when an illegal alien gets deported to his country of origin, he flies right down to represent him.

BASH: Congressman, my question is about U.S. citizens.

EMMER: It seems to me that these Democrats are representing the illegal aliens against the very constituents, the U.S. citizens, that they're supposed to be protecting.

BASH: What about the idea that the White House says that it is looking into whether or not U.S. citizens who are convicted of violent crimes can be imprisoned in El Salvador?

EMMER: Well, again, what they're focused on and what you and I are focusing on is what's actually happening, which is deporting terrorist cartel members, rapists, murderers.

The worst of the worst is exactly what Donald Trump promised during the campaign. And that's why 77 million people, Dana, elected him to follow through on this promise, and that's what they're doing.

BASH: OK. I just want to give you one more chance to say whether or not you're OK with U.S. citizens, the idea of it. I know it's not happening, but he has actively said more than once that they are looking into it. Would you be OK with that?

EMMER: Yes, again, I -- the issue that we're dealing with is we have got a president who wants to protect U.S. citizens from violence, from crime, having their children solicited, murdered, et cetera, versus Democrats who seem to want to protect illegal aliens in this country for whatever reason.

[09:25:14]

BASH: Tom Emmer, thank you so much for being here this morning. We are out of time. I appreciate you coming on.

Again, I hope you have a nice Easter with your family.

EMMER: Happy Easter to you, Dana.

BASH: Thank you.

And she previously told me America wasn't yet in a constitutional crisis. What does she think now? Senator Amy Klobuchar is ahead.

Plus: A Republican senator pulls back the curtain on Trump 2.0.

My panel will break it all down later.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BASH: Welcome back to STATE OF THE UNION.

Protesters took to the streets in cities across the country yesterday to oppose many of the Trump administration's policies. But what, if anything, can Democrats do to stand in his way?

[09:30:04]

Here with me now is Democratic Senator Amy Klobuchar.

Thank you so much for being here, Senator.

SEN. AMY KLOBUCHAR (D-MN): Thanks, Dana.

BASH: We have a lot to get to, but I do want to start with the courts, specifically the Supreme Court order to -- quote -- "facilitate" the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, who, according to the Trump administration's own court filing, was mistakenly deported to an El Salvador prison.

The Trump administration has made clear it has no intention of doing that. And Hakeem Jeffries told me this past week that the Supreme Court needs to aggressively enforce its orders. Is that what you think? And, if so, what does that look like?

KLOBUCHAR: Of course.

We are a nation of laws, not of kings. We have three equal branches of government. And what you see right now is the courts doing their job. This is not just the district court. There is an appeals court in an opinion that was unanimous written by a very conservative judge who had been appointed by Ronald Reagan.

They made clear, when you have something you did wrong, which the government did here -- they admit it. They shouldn't have deported him. It was a mistake. Then you make it right. So you have members of the Senate, Chris Van Hollen, out there meeting with Mr. Abrego Garcia.

You have got courts now intervening. And what can they do to make it right? Well, if the administration won't do it themselves, a court does have the power to refer it to the Justice Department, mentioned by Judge Boasberg here.

But, also, if the Justice Department won't do anything, a court can actually appoint a prosecutor on their own, an outside prosecutor, because they have the power to hold people in contempt. And that may be the people that did the deporting. It may be the secretary who's responsible for this.

But they have the right to do this. And, of course, in past administrations, they followed the law.

BASH: So...

KLOBUCHAR: And, in other areas, the Trump administration is following the law.

BASH: So, I just want to -- I just want to...

KLOBUCHAR: But it is -- go ahead.

BASH: Forgive me.

I just want to make sure I'm understanding what you're saying correctly, which is that you believe that the federal courts, maybe a district court -- I'm not sure -- you can tell me if the Supreme Court could even do this -- should hold key administration officials in contempt if they continue to defy the Supreme Court, which I'm guessing you see...

KLOBUCHAR: Yes. Yes.

BASH: Yes, they should?

KLOBUCHAR: That's the way our law works. They -- yes.

And my point is, they have picked out this case and this man because it's about a subject that they want to keep in the news. So it's even more cynical than just flaunting the law. They're doing it because they want to distract people from the fact that our economy is in a tailspin thanks to them, their tariffs, the fact that you have got businesses that are looking at closing down or not investing, that costs are up, chaos is up, corruption is up, and the market is down.

So, for the most cynical reasons, this is the case they have picked to not obey the law. Maybe one -- they will. All of a sudden, they will just send him back. Or maybe they will be held in contempt.

BASH: Yes.

KLOBUCHAR: But I think it's really important for people to realize they're following the law in other cases. They have just decided not to follow the law with this guy.

BASH: You told me on this show two months ago that we are not in a constitutional crisis. That's what you said back then. Do you still believe that? Where are we now?

KLOBUCHAR: I said back then, and I will say now, we're getting closer and closer to a constitutional crisis.

Why do I think that we're not full-blown in one? Because the judges are standing up and doing their job, because you're starting to see a little inkling of some Republicans. All we need is four in the House, four in the Senate to stand up on things like tariffs.

When you start seeing them actually vote to get rid of the Canadian tariffs, a bill that Senator Kaine and I and Senator Warner put forward, you start to see, is there a glimmer of hope that they're going to stand up for this nation as well?

And what you most see are our constituents standing up. And it is not just the loudest people in the room. I just came back from a 19-county rural tour, and I saw farmers show up and small business owners show up, and they would come to the microphone. They wouldn't be as loud. They weren't holding up signs that say "This isn't normal," as much as that is necessary.

They're the ones that -- saying, I voted for Donald Trump, but I'm not happy with how this is happening. My 401(k) is down. I can't figure out Social Security. No one's answering the phone.

That's the chaos you're seeing. And I believe, as long as these courts hold and the constituents hold and the Congress starts standing up, our democracy will hold. But Donald Trump is trying to pull us down into the sewer of a crisis. There is no doubt about it. He likes shock and awe. He likes when things are a mess. And we all must stand up against it.

[09:35:07]

BASH: Well, let me -- you talked about tariffs. I want to ask you about the tariffs in particular, and ask you to respond to the White House's argument, which is that the people need to be patient, including the people you talk to in your tour in Minnesota, give President Trump room to maneuver to negotiate deals that bring good manufacturing jobs back to states like yours.

Do you think that is a viable goal in 2025?

KLOBUCHAR: Trade negotiation is a viable thing to do. It's the right thing to do.

BASH: But what about manufacturing back in the U.S.?

KLOBUCHAR: But that's not how he's doing it, Dana.

It's not -- you could have some more manufacturing. It's not how he's doing it. He's doing it in a revenge agenda to go after countries he doesn't like or people he doesn't like. Then, what we have just seen is Tim Cook can make a call to the White House and get an exemption for Apple. Fine. I don't quarrel with it.

But guess what? The woman who I met last night in Owatonna, Minnesota, who runs Busy Baby, a small online company that's doing well with baby products, she's going to be the one that's going to have to close down. The billionaires like Elon Musk can absorb this. Regular small businesses and farmers who have just tight margins and need a market for their soybeans out of Southern Minnesota, they are not going to be able to absorb this. And they know that.

That is why they are starting to show up and speak out. And what you do is, you negotiate things. Like, Canada and Mexico should be negotiated within the trade agreement that Donald Trump himself put together. That's the USMCA. And so these across-the-board tariffs have been a disaster for the economy. And what I really hate the most is seeing our seniors show up and say,

I'm going to retire in four months or I just retired two years ago. My 401(k) is a mess. Or I don't know what's going to happen to my kids now. It looks like the job he thought he was going to get he's not going to get. And now I have to take him in.

It's an unbelievable story going on across the country. People are afraid. And I'm glad people are showing up loud, but I'm also glad they're starting to show up quiet, because they are Republicans and they are independents who are starting to see this is not what they voted for.

BASH: The Federal Reserve chair, Jerome Powell, warned that tariffs could drive inflation up. President Trump then lashed out at him, saying his -- quote -- "termination" cannot come fast enough and that -- quote -- "I want him out, he will be out of there real fast."

Are you worried that President Trump will find a way to fire Jay Powell? And what happens if he does?

KLOBUCHAR: For someone to say they're not worried about what Donald Trump may do on any day, that would be a lie.

However, the law is very clear on the chair of the Federal Reserve. It says that he can only be fired for cause. That has been defined as things like malfeasance or criminality. You're not going to find that with Jerome Powell. So he stays in office as chair of the Fed until a year from now, until next May of 2026.

He gets to then stay on the board until 2028. There's a reason we have an independent Fed, and it has served us well through many crises, through downturns, through depressions, through the pandemic. They are able to respond and stabilize things.

And what Jerome Powell is doing right now is warning that these tariffs are having a huge destabilizing effect on our economy and hurting everyday people, and that's going to affect decisions that the Fed make. That's his job, and he's doing it.

And the president is looking for a scapegoat to distract from the fact that it's his actions, his administration's actions, his tariffs that has caused what was a stabilized economy that was dealing with inflation, but has made it worse, as we have seen, groceries go up. The predictions on his tariff, $4,000 a family for all costs, $200 a family a year just for the groceries alone.

And I just bought eggs, of course, with this, our Easter weekend. And I can tell you, we are still seeing high egg prices out there.

BASH: Yes, that is true.

And I want to wish you and your family a happy Easter.

KLOBUCHAR: Thanks, Dana.

BASH: And thank you so much for being here on this holiday weekend. KLOBUCHAR: Thank you.

BASH: As Trump's retribution rages, one Republican senator makes a candid confession.

Our political panel is here to weigh in next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:44:00]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

QUESTION: What do you have to say to people who are afraid?

SEN. LISA MURKOWSKI (R-AK): We are all afraid, OK? I'm oftentimes very anxious myself about using my voice, because retaliation is real.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BASH: Welcome back to STATE OF THE UNION.

That was a very candid admission from veteran Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska.

My panel is here now. Thank you all for being here, especially on Easter morning.

MICHAEL DUBKE, FORMER TRUMP WHITE HOUSE COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR: Happy Easter.

(CROSSTALK)

BASH: Happy Easter to you.

Mike Dubke, I want to start with you since you were a White House communications director in Trump 1.0...

DUBKE: Yes.

BASH: ... about that, because Lisa Murkowski is no shrinking violet. She was not going to come back to the U.S. Senate, but she waged an improbable successful race in order to get back as an independent.

DUBKE: Right.

BASH: And she's been around a long time. To hear her say that, it is striking.

[09:45:03]

DUBKE: Well, I may also be a bit of a unicorn in that I also worked with Lisa Murkowski.

BASH: Oh, I knew that.

DUBKE: So, I am maybe one of the only people in America to work with both Donald Trump and Lisa Murkowski.

BASH: Yes. OK. Well, I'm glad I asked you first.

(LAUGHTER)

DUBKE: Listen, they're both fighters.

And I'm not at all surprised to hear Senator Murkowski use language like that. She is very -- especially -- she was in Anchorage. She's very up front with her constituents. She's going to continue to fight for Alaska.

BASH: But you're not surprised that she's afraid to use her voice because of retribution?

DUBKE: I will say this. She is not afraid to use her voice.

In fact, I have seen interaction with her and President Trump. He respects fighters. He respects Lisa Murkowski. So I think she may be talking about other members of the Senate, but she definitely is a fighter. And she is probably worried less about retribution.

And I think what she meant by that is less about retribution for herself and more about the state of Alaska. You have got to think about how you approach. She has praised President Trump when needed, and she has also held him accountable when needed.

ASHLEY ALLISON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I mean, she said what she said. She said that they're all afraid. And that means she is too.

And I believe her. I think people are. I have seen people's positions change on issues. I have seen -- I mean, look at Marco Rubio. He wanted to be secretary of state. Almost every belief he has had about foreign policy is different now.

Now, people can change their mind, but these are some aggressive swings. And we see big institutions that are capitulating to Donald Trump. Look, the power of the White House, the bully pulpit, the federal government is a massive hammer that can be placed on somebody's life, that can interrupt -- and it's the lawsuits. It's the attacks on social media.

So I don't think we should ignore the fact that even Donald Trump said he will -- on the campaign trail he will do retribution.

BASH: And it's -- and let's be clear. It's well beyond these law lawmakers and Republicans.

(CROSSTALK)

ALLISON: Yes.

BASH: I mean, from law firms to...

ALLISON: Universities.

BASH: ... universities, the Associated Press. It goes on and on.

LANCE TROVER, FORMER BURGUM PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN SPOKESPERSON: Yes, but I would argue I mean, the norms are what people wanted to bust up.

I mean, Donald Trump won not once but twice because he's a norm- buster. And I think the voters are giving him a lot of leeway. Harry Enten talked this week about, what, in a CNN poll, maybe 1 to 2 percent of vote Trump voters would change their vote. There's a Harvard/Harris poll out saying 61, 62 percent of people think the Democrats should let Trump kind of see what he can do.

So I think, when it comes to busting norms, remember, faith in our institutions hovers around 20 percent, I think, for the federal government, when it comes to universities, maybe 30 percent. So I think with voters they're out there saying, yes, let's give him the benefit of the doubt and see what he can do, because the incremental change has not been working.

And so I think, for a lot of people, they want a hammer, and not a scalp.

ADRIENNE ELROD, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Faith in our institutions has eroded because of Donald Trump.

TROVER: Oh, come on. Adrienne, come on.

ELROD: Because he has literally tried to convince the American people that our institutions are broken, when they're not. I mean, they are broken to an extent right now because of Donald Trump, but he is the one who is...

TROVER: How do you get to a 20 percent approval rating for the federal government? It's not because of Donald Trump.

ELROD: No, because of Donald -- it is because of Donald Trump.

(CROSSTALK)

DUBKE: Used car salesmen have a higher level of approval.

ELROD: I'm not saying that Democrats don't have issues too.

But Donald Trump is the reason why, he -- and the MAGA institution is the reason why people have lost so much faith in our institutions. And, to your point, that is why I think he thinks he can go out there and not allow Abrego Garcia to have due process, defy court orders.

He is the one who is perpetuating this, and he is the reason why people are losing faith.

ALLISON: I also think that -- I agree with you.

Donald Trump did win and the American public probably are -- is more tolerant to some of his aggressive policies. I don't like his policies, but that's what happens when you win an election. So you do DOGE. You start to hopefully deport people through a due process in an actual constitutional manner.

I get it, right? You do tariffs. That's what happens when you win an election. But retribution is not the same thing as a policy. Retribution is not...

ELROD: Right.

ALLISON: And so that is the difference of when people are afraid to express their free speech because they -- they're afraid the federal government will come. That, I don't think is what anybody, any American should really want.

TROVER: I don't think they view it as retribution.

ALLISON: She just said it, Murkowski.

TROVER: I know a lot of Americans don't -- yes, what I would say to the senator is, politics ain't beanbag. This is 2025.

Welcome -- and, by the way, I never heard anybody complaining when Nancy Pelosi ruled the House with an iron fist, and members would secretly go to...

ELROD: But she wasn't breaking the law. She wasn't defying court orders. She was following process.

ALLISON: Can we all agree retribution is not the way the federal -- the national -- the president of the United States should be acting?

(CROSSTALK)

DUBKE: I will just say one thing.

The ultimate retribution that we saw in the last year was Joe Biden on the Democratic Party by deciding that he was going to run for reelection. That was ultimate retribution.

ELROD: How is that retribution?

DUBKE: Because that's -- well... .

ELROD: That is called democracy. That is running for reelection as president.

(CROSSTALK)

DUBKE: There's one panel member that gets that joke, but yes.

[09:50:00]

ALLISON: It's actually changing the definition of a word, which is what often happens when we spread mis- and dis-information.

Retribution is when you don't like what somebody says, and so you use the power that you have through a democratic process or an authoritative process, and you go after people with the hope that you intimidate them to stand up against you. That is what she said.

DUBKE: She said retaliate.

ALLISON: We should all agree, retaliation, retribution -- Donald Trump said, retribution, my fault.

(CROSSTALK)

BASH: Final word, Adrienne.

ELROD: No, I mean, look, the bottom line is this.

I think Lisa Murkowski, I know that you work for her, so I don't want to sit here and put words in her mouth, but she did say what she said. She made it very clear. I think a lot of people are worried. I think a lot of people are nervous.

And I think, as long as the courts continue to hold up, which they are, to an extent, then people will feel like, Lisa Murkowski will feel like they can continue to come out and say that we are nervous and we are worried, and that will allow more people to come to -- to coalesce and push back against Trump's divisive rhetoric and actions right now.

BASH: Happy Easter, everybody.

(LAUGHTER)

DUBKE: Did we leave you some Easter eggs?

BASH: Yes. Well, I have some. I will give it to you in the break.

We will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:55:43]

BASH: A bit of good news this Easter.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

POPE FRANCIS, LEADER OF CATHOLIC CHURCH: (SPEAKING IN FOREIGN LANGUAGE)

(CHEERING)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BASH: That is Pope Francis blessing worshipers in St. Peter's Square this morning. It's his most high-profile appearance since his life- threatening fight with pneumonia earlier this year.

We want to wish all of you a very happy Easter as well.

Fareed Zakaria pick it up next.