Tonight on 362, the most powerful CEOs in America expressed their concerns about the president's terror policy as he promises to respond to new terror from Canada and the EU. Also, tonight, one day after Ukraine accepted the terms of a ceasefire of Vladimir Putin dressed as up in fatigues for cameras. What does that signal about their plans for the world of Ukraine? And later Elon Musk said they made a mistake firing experts on a voila but then fixed it.
But did they? Tonight, a doctor who survived a voila sounds the alarm. Good evening, strong comments tonight from two of the nation's most influential CEOs regarding the president's terror policy and warnings about what they could do to businesses and the economy in the short term. Jamie Dimant, a JP Morgan Chase, has changed his tune on tariffs and a newly released interview with Semaphore.
He said that, quote, uncertainty is not a good thing and the businesses could change what they do because the tariffs two months ago that he defends tariffs saying get over it. Also today, Larry Fink, head of the world's largest asset manager, BlackRock, said this to CNN. The collective impact in the short run is people are pausing, they're pulling back. Talking to CEOs, the threat to economy is weakening as we speak.
Well, Fink went on to say he remains, quote, very bullish on America. But all of these comments come as price hikes are on the way from Canada and now the EU, after President Trump's steel and aluminum tariffs went into effect today. Hours from now, Canada's reciprocal tariffs will hit imported US steel and aluminum plus computers and sporting equipment and anything made with cast iron. The EU's tariffs go into effect next month with many hitting products like peanut butter, bourbon and motorcycles produced in Republican states and districts.
When asked today whether he'd respond to the EU tariffs that Trump said, of course, I'm going to respond. The good news is that markets had a better day than most of the past two plus weeks. A favorable report on inflation came out today, which was lower than expected and that'll now serve as a baseline for how tariffs may affect the rate of price increases in the coming months. All the market indices are still down for the year in large part because of the tariffs as well as the inconsistency with which they've been announced, paused and then rolled out.
Not to mention the car values for automakers plus the brief flirtation with doubling the steel and aluminum tariffs on Canada. Trump dismissed that criticism today. On tariffs, there's been a lot of on and off some inconsistency. There's no inconsistency.
Let me just tell you the inconsistency. I have the right to adjust. I'm not like a black. They just won't be loyal.
I have, it's called flexibility. It's not called inconsistency. It's called flexibility. Well, what you will, businesses do not like a level of uncertainty because it makes planning for the future that much more difficult.
Today, the president insisted it'll all work out. Financially, it will be stronger than ever before. I think the markets are going to soar when they see what's happening. So far, that has been the case.
JP Morgan today said the chance of recession increased to 40% from 30%. President Trump has struggled on the question of whether there will be a recession. He whipped on it twice over the weekend. Yesterday he settled on the response.
I don't see it at all, but his aides are now sometimes peppering the responses with the possibility. Will these policies be worth it if they lead to a recession, even a short-term recession? These policies are the most important thing America has ever had. So it is worth it.
It is worth it. I don't think the only reason it could possibly be a recession is because of the Biden nonsense that we have to live with. That was Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnik last night saying that the recession would be worth it, but then it's not going to happen. But if it did, it would be President Biden's fault.
We saw another this afternoon also laying the groundwork to blame Biden if there was a recession. Here's the President's Senior Counsel for Trade Manufacturing Peter Navarro. Bidenomics was a combination of very over-aggressive Keynesian stimulus spending to goose the economy. It built in a recession possibly sometime down the road if that spending weren't controlled.
The concern many economists have with tariffs is they could lead to price hikes followed by a pullback and spending and then possibly recession. Something Trump told us last month we didn't need to worry about. As far as the hypothetical tariffs, would you also direct agencies to study the impact they would have on prices in the US? No, there's nothing to study.
There's nothing to study. It's going to go well. We begin with CNETG White House correspondent Kayle Collins, who anchors the source on the top of next hour. He's going to be speaking tonight with President Mark Wayne Mullen.
Is the White House still trying to avoid a recession or officials more focused on laying the blame on the Biden administration? Well, the President himself came out and said he doesn't think that there's going to be a recession. Of course, that was after about 48 hours of speculation after he declined to rule one out because of his aggressive policies that we've seen have so very clearly unsettled the market Anderson, to put it lightly. The White House felt a little bit better this morning by those good inflation numbers that came out, but the question was whether or not that was really just a brief reprieve.
If the good news that came out of that could be undermined by the uncertainty that is in the market because of these tariffs and the policies here and what that looks like. The White House has been expressing confidence about this. They keep saying that there could be some pain, a detox period as some of his top advisors have referred to it as, but they say overall that they do believe this is the policy that he is moving ahead with. When you listen to President Trump today inside the Oval Office, he's really dismissive of the stock market in those numbers.
Instead, not saying that he's backing off his tariffs, he's instead talking Anderson about the ones he's going to be putting in place in just a few weeks from now, these reciprocal tariffs that he's been talking about. But really the back and forth has been the president putting in place these tariffs, then countries threatening retaliation and the president threatening to retaliate again against the EU for their retaliation inside the Oval Office today as he was sitting next to the Irish Prime Minister, a member of course of the EU. And so it is a remarkable moment to see how the president is kind of dismissing concerns from other world leaders inside the Oval Office from these major CEOs of these companies, some of whom he came base to base with earlier in Washington this week and kind of insisting that he is going to push along with this. And it's also turning on its head really, this kind of longstanding assurance that Wall Street seemed to think it had after Trump won the election as he was leading up to the election, that essentially it was going, they were going to be able to not control Trump, but know where he would go based on how the stock market was reacting to something.
And that is just not proving to be borne out anymore. Trump has not seen his bothered by it or nearly as controlled by it or paying attention to it as he did when I covered him in his first term, Anderson. Now, Kaitlin, thanks very much. We'll see you at the top of the hour.
For special now from the co-host of my favorite podcast, Pivots, Scott Galloway and Professor of Marketing at NYU and Cinek and contributor Cara Swisher. It is so nice to have you both here together. Nice to have you together. Thanks for your gather.
What do you stand on the recession on what the president is doing with tariffs? It's difficult to think of a more elegant way to raise prices and reduce productivity and prosperity than tariffs. I was a graduate student instructor at the Micro-Mac, Mac Reconomics in the 90s and we talked about tariffs and economics class the way I mentioned. I talked about leeches in medical school.
Like, can you believe they were stupid enough to do this at one point? They can be used to restore symmetry and unfair trade. They can be used to protect certain key industries for strategic reasons. But these blanket tariffs are nothing but a reduction in prosperity of Americans.
In addition, even worse than tariffs are the inconsistency. I think the entire world is reshaping around different supply chain and different partners they can rely on. They don't even know how to adjust for these tariffs because they're on and they're off again. The uncertainty is even more damaging I think than the tariffs.
He can call it flexibility once. It's chaos. It's like it's like red light, green light, red light. That game you play as a kid and it feels very juvenile the way they're doing it.
I'm mad at you. I'm doing this. It seems haphazard. I'm calling it a Trump session.
He's trying to shove it over to Biden. But really, it's his. He's owning it by saying I'll do what I want and I'll do so fine. It's a Trump session if it happens.
It's interesting to hear Jamie Diamond think there's a lot of CEOs who are not speaking publicly and obviously there's a lot of CEOs who are now bending the we've talked about this a little bit. That only seems to be rolling along. That seems to be rolling along the capitulation by a lot of CEOs. Well, the market doesn't lie.
The market is telling you the story and it doesn't care what Peter Navarro says about any of this. It is telling the story in a minute by minute basis. Correct. I mean, Scott, I talk about this a lot.
Okay. Peter Navarro is in prison. There's a domino of cowardice here that is increasing and more and more damaging. A domino of cowardice.
When you have the wealthiest people in the world controlling the most powerful companies in the world agree to be trotted out and paraded around and then texting my pivot co-host claiming how much they hate themselves. That emboldens the CEO of X to demand that advertisers advertise on her platform or she will weaponize her boss to block their merger. That enables somebody to get rid of or feel pressure to delete the opinion section of a newspaper. You are seeing individuals now intimidated and not speaking out and companies intimidated into having pro-Trump policies are put out fake press releases claiming there's going to be incremental $300 billion while in the back room they are trying to figure out their reducing spend, reducing production estimates because they don't know what this manic president is going to be up to next.
Is it true you get it? I do. I had someone saying I know you hate me but I hate myself more like for having to do this. And one of the things was interesting.
I was on the train coming up here from Washington where the business roundtable was talking about and I was listening. Of course they all talk loudly on the Amtrak as you know. And they were all saying they were all saying how the tariffs are ridiculous, how it's going to hurt business, how they're going to cut back and every CEO I talk to is talking about cutbacks. Now sometimes that's a good thing.
Sometimes it's good to clean up things and clean up costs and everything else. If you do it in a smart way but this is so haphazard nobody knows what's going to happen. And again I look to the markets. The markets are telling you they don't like this.
Americans are telling you don't like this. The price of eggs is telling you it doesn't like it. I mean there's a number of people have been making arguments lately that well look you know these these multi-billionaire CEOs they don't care about making more money that they're doing either for the country or to be part of the conversation. When people say that they don't think people who are billionaires care about making more money do you buy that?
No I don't Scott you first. I think one of the most upsetting features about this administration in general, Cadence in America is that you're the market senior freedom there's a function of how much money you have. The wealthy are protected by the law but not bound by it and the bottom 99% are bound by the law but not protected by it. Anyone at this table if things get really ugly can peace out to you by any woman in our life has.
I'm not sure I would have smelled about it. No we'll go on his plate. But anyone in my life has access to Mesophastero. I can say what I want because if someone comes from me I can lawyer up.
The wealthiest man just put the president in office in America. Democracy in the Constitution are meant to protect the lower 90 or especially the lower 50 and instead democracy and rights have become strictly correlated to how much money you have. So there is a really unfortunate conspiracy between the wealthiest and the most powerful in our nation who have decided not to speak up because at the end of the day they're going to make more money with these tax cuts at $800 billion to the deficit. So everything else we're talking about is a misdirect from this conspiracy of the wealthiest most powerful people in our nation deciding to ignore this blatant craven denial of democracy and Constitution because they're about to get richer.
You think it's really because they're going to make more money? Yes because AI is what's at stake here. This president can't affect that. The next couple of years is going to be critical for AI and so it's going to figure out the winners and losers and the government is going to be critical to this.
You know Mark Cuban said this out loud. He's like the reason they're doing it carrot is because they want to be first in line for whoever gets the AI because it's a winner take all game. And so it's going to matter that the government data is going to matter having access to it. How much building you're going to do.
How much investment the government is going to do. So they want to be up close and personal whether it's space or AI or the future tech. Well I just wrote an article about Johnny from junior being part of this I guess fund that invested in that they're getting access to Elon Musk's AI company to invest in that. I mean is Musk positioning himself for his AI company?
I don't know. Did you see the car sale on the White House on the other side? The stock did go up. He probably made the amount of money he then put into a pack for president Trump.
Well that's the mega hammer at the time. So that's not reported on this program. Musk has voiced to give $100 million in Trump's political operation. Which he got today from the stock going up seven or eight percent.
Now that's not going to stay up. The problems at Tesla are real problems of people not wanting to buy the cars. They don't like Musk. They haven't had innovative cars in a while.
And because there's competitors it's a natural decline in market share for them. But it's being pushed along by the fact that they haven't come up. He's going to give to the political operation which is different than the money he's been giving to or his organizations having given. Yes, he's given control by him.
Right. This is much more direct. He feels like a gift to me. Well do you feel the times have reported on that meeting where it seems like Musk was kind of not dressed down but certainly was told it's the department heads.
It's the cabinet secretaries who have the hiring of the fire. If you say so he knows how to behave like a beta. I don't think he is a beta. He's in an alpha position here.
Even if Trump doesn't know it. He's manipulating the situation with his money. And when he needs to look like he's beneath him or acquiesce he'll do it. You think he is playing Trump very well?
I think you said this. Karen, the kind of resonated. Kara said that you think Trump is scared of Musk. I mean I'm sure there's some people who've shown him the map and said you're president because of this guy and he could unprecedented you.
He's the most powerful man in the world. When a small number of counties and a small number of states decide the election and you have a third of a billion dollars go into those counties weaponized by a platform that a lot of people are on. You could argue that not only a rights correlated to wealth but who gets to be president who is the wealthiest person in the world right now. That was Speaker by the way.
It was just said at some forum that you have to consider what Musk is going to tweet on. That's correct. I mean look I'm not a fan of Steve Bannon's by any stretch of imagination but he has clocked him absolutely perfectly and I think he understands the threat to the actual movement which I think he is indeed believes in even though it's mistaken. We're going to take a quick break.
You guys stick around please. Please. A lot more. I also want to talk to you about Democrats and how they are dealing with this party leaders that responses to what's happening thus far plus Vladimir Putin visiting the front lines of the war he started in a chemical uniform as the world waits to hear of Russia will accept his ceasefire.
Clerge's award joins us also from Ukraine. I'm CNN tech reporter Claire Duffy. This week on the podcast in terms of service. Tell me if you've ever felt this way while sitting at your desk at work.
Eyes burning back and shoulders curled up like a boiled shrimp and feeling cranky. That is how journalist and podcast host Manush Zomerodi describes the experience of working at a desk in front of a laptop all day in her new book. Today on average information worker most of us are information workers. 90% of our time is spent.
It's wild. It increases the possibility of diabetes, obesity, all sorts of chronic health issues. Listen to CNN's terms of service wherever you get your podcasts. I mean I cried is that like for Congress to pass continuing resolution basically a stop gap spending bill to keep the government running otherwise it won't just be terrors that could cause market supply.
Democratic votes are needed in the Senate to assist the Republican majority. Senator Minority Leader Chuck Schumer says the Democrats have the votes to block a bill passed by the Republican control house. But late tonight some Democrats suggested a possibility for compromise that they can get a vote on their package. Back with the scare swisher and Scott Galloway.
What do you make of how Democrats are? Exactly. We talked about this on pivot the other day. Just the whole from the state of the union on.
It feels like we were not pleased with that. I don't think they were pleased and they will say that's something they'll tell you off the record. I just interviewed Senator Warren and I tried to get her to at least say come on and she wouldn't do it. She's like everyone expresses themselves their own way.
It just seems. Everyone expresses it. But it's not coordinated. It's not clear.
And they still haven't figured out how to have a response to Trump in a consistent situation. Kim Skorville has talked about just playing possum and laying dead for a while. Others are being. I think you want to channel Mitch McConnell.
I think you want to go upstream with Doug and threaten to shut the government down. That's what they would do. Threaten to raise the debt limits. That's the way we default on our next election.
I would be the party of not everything around right now. And also we need to transition from being the party of indigness to the party of ideas and not waive your cane at the president during the congressional address but talk about raising them away to $25 an hour bringing down Medicare eligibility two years until we have nationalized healthcare, figuring out national service, building 7 million houses in 10 years, leaving the indigness and the outrage behind because that's just a misdirecting to kind of lightens up the sensors of the right and become the party of ideas. I mean, as a client I just interviewed today for the book they just had called Abundance. It's the idea is thinking abundance, thinking about how this building house is, thinking about where we're going for and what about the future.
And that's what the Democrats have to project is what's our idea is not what we're against, which is Trump, but what do we for and what can we do, how can we make instead of the cruelty of doge, what is government good for and what results can people get from government how do you make that case. It's got to you still think a lot of what's going on with doge and muskin is a kind of a misdirect a diversionary tactic because you've said in the past it's sort of diversionary tactic from the explosion of the debt that's going to take place with spending bill. Well, look at the numbers. The Wall Street Journal reports a so far doge has saved a whopping $2.6 million.
We get six acts of saving some doge by cutting off all subsidies to Tesla. I think blaming a helicopter crash on DEI or the Gulf of cheaper eggs, all of this is a misdirect or male versus female semantics. And the fact that the greatest tax increase in history is about to be levied on future generations by a gigantic increase in the deficit to fund a tax cut. So look over here.
Maybe we'll get rid of some inspectors for the 11 investigations of must companies or the 32 investigations across 11 different agencies. But I generally think this is primarily an attempt to get us to look over here such that they can lower taxes on the 1% and massively explode the deficit. They talked about Biden economics and stimulus, Peter Navarro such BS about unneeded stimulus. From George Washington to George Bush deficits were $7 trillion.
Donald Trump had $7 trillion during his four years as presidents. This is nothing but most of the stuff and the Democrats fall for it is a giant misdirect from what is about to be an explosion or deficit to give the wealthiest Americans a big tax cut on a credit card of young Americans. They do want to holler at government and this is their chance. That's why they're doing it so quickly and with such lightning split.
I do use a word blitzkrieg but that's exactly what works with these people. So I mean this is what they want to do. They want to get rid of it, holler it out so it doesn't come back. And I think it's up to the Democrats to take the opportunity and say what can we do to build and give services to the American people.
Here they're talking about how bad government is. Maybe the Democrats should start to argue how good it can be. And by doing things like housing like Scott talked about high speed rail, better food, better pharmaceutical prices, things like that. And there are billionaires working on this market.
Cuban is one of them for example with drug prices down, egg prices down. How do you have cleaner water and things like that? How long do you think the doge cutting or whatever it is that's going on in this sort of unregulated way is going to go on? It could go on for a while.
Especially if there's a government shutdown, they could do that. They could selectively decide what to keep open and whatnot. And so they'll do it as long as they can do it and probably until the midterms I would guess. Unless there's some blow up between Musk and Trump.
But I don't know, Trump didn't add for him on the White House law and everyone keeps predicting this. I don't necessarily see it. He needs Musk to be able to have a cudgel to all those to primary those people or make them scared or make them nervous to bring them in line. There has to be some sort of fear.
But you can't hold people for fear for too long. One of the things I've been obsessed with this week is the attack by President Trump on law firms in Washington. And I know I'm not worried about these individual lawyers. I'm sure they're very wealthy and they're going to do just fine.
But it is unprecedented. To have a president in the United States go after attorneys in our system. Everybody has a right to be represented by including him. He needs a lot of work.
And he's benefited from lawyers who have security clearances who could help him defend cases. He's taken away security clearances from attorneys who work for Democrats or people who may be challenged him based on on firings. It's sending a very strong message to attorneys do not take cases of anybody going against the Trump administration. We will destroy your business.
Same thing with judges. Same thing with the media. He's attacking the Pulitzer Prizes, forgiving one to the New York Times over the Russia case. It's just very typical.
I mean, it's not you talk about this a lot. It's what you go for to try to quiet people. Well, when you remove the security detail for a general who ordered the strike on the head of Iranian security forces, you're putting that person. That's repackaged violence.
He's saying to people that I believe that bankrupt you, levy tariffs against your company, or potentially put you in harm's way if you don't sign up. I hate to use the word, but it's a perfect definition of fashionism. I however believe we differ on this, I think, doge is probably going to die quite death in the next 30 days. Yes, predicted this.
Because if in fact they have elevated the decision to the cabinet members and taken the power away, they quote unquote said that Musk is now an advisor and the cabinet members, secretaries have to make final decision. They're not interested in cutting people. They have hard jobs. They're not interested in this posturing.
In addition, I think the real reason that it's going to be like an actor, it's not going to die, it just kind of fades away, is he's losing too much money. It's jumped the lab. It's not only impacting Tesla stock, which has shed a third of its value in the last 30 days. It's now impacting his growth vehicle and the major source of his wealth moving forward and that is SpaceX.
There are now nations saying we can't count on you. The nation of Poland is reconsidering their contract for battlefield technology with SpaceX. They said we just can't count on you. SpaceX are struggling.
Starling. Excuse me. Also, Alberta, they're talking about or provinces of Canada are talking about shutting off their contracts. So when SpaceX goes from being the most valuable private company traded on the secondary markets to a company that's reduced in value, I think he's going to decide to kind of fade to black here.
Oh, Carol, I want to ask you, your big part of this new documentary that's seen in original film has called Twitter Breaking the Bird. When you look at Twitter in the early days, what are the big differences between kind of the startup it was and what it is now? It was a sloppy mess and now it's a toxic mess. I don't know.
It was never a very good business. Let's be clear. Twitter always kind of bumped along and never met the potential that everyone felt it had. It was always sort of the sad stepchild to Facebook and Facebook grew like crazy because he's a very aggressive CEO and Twitter always was in a kind of corporate mess all the time and it never got the advertising business right.
It managed not to buy Instagram. It was right there to buy it and it didn't. It had a lot of sort of turns down dead ends all the time. And it was run sloppily but kind of in an interesting shaggy way, very emotional company, I would call it.
And I think Mark Zuckerberg called it a clown car that drove into a gold mine, right? But they never made it a gold mine. And Musk is using it as an instrumented influence and that's what he's absolutely using it for. This is not a business by any stretch of the man.
No matter how many people you advertise, you can't make that a really great business. And especially it's become a bad product now. I think it's a bad product now. It's a mess.
So to me, I boil everything down to product and it has not innovated at all. It never really did for a while and it continues to get worse and worse as an experience. Thank you so much. It's a pleasure to see you guys.
I'm very excited to share with you. Yes, I know. We're very excited to share with you. And here we are together.
And others in the new scene in the original series, Twitter, Breaking the Bird, is Sunday at 10 p.m. Eastern. Up next, as I just mentioned, some breaking news and extraordinary story. We've been following closely this week, the president by executive order going after law firms who represented Democrats and others who run afoul of the administration today.
One of those firms fought back in court and a judge said the department justices' defense of transactions sent to chill down her spine. Also, the world is waiting for an answer from President Putin on the ceasefire proposal. Of course, the award joins us from Q. This breaking news and story brought you last night, the unprecedented attack by President Trump on two law firms in Washington, D.C.
One of those firms, Perkins Cooey, brought suit against the Trump administration yesterday because of an executive order the president signed targeting them. The suspended security clearances for Perkins Cooey attorneys as well as their access to federal buildings, all because they represent clients the president doesn't like. It also cited their diversity efforts inside the firm. The firm called it a quote, direct and imminent threat to their ability to represent clients, to their ability to stay in business.
Today, a judge agreed and then some quoting from the bench ruling Judge Beryl Howell called Trump's order a quote, punishment for a singled out entity being disloyal. She went on to say, when quote, the queen of hearts yells off with their heads for her subjects that it cannot be the reality we are living under. Who comes next when bringing Jeffrey Tubin from the federal prosecutor in the office of the politics of presidential mercy. What is your reaction to the judges ruling?
Anderson, I've heard a lot of court rulings, but I have never heard a judge declare something unconstitutional in so many different ways. She said this was a violation of the First Amendment free speech rights. She said it was a violation of the right to counsel. She said it was a violation of due process.
She said it was a bill of a tinder, which means it was specifically targeted against one entity, this law firm. It was just a complete destruction of this executive order for now. But Judge Beryl Howell, very respected judge, she's an Obama appointee. In this case, it's going to move through the appellate process.
It may have a different face. Will this wind up in the Supreme Court? I think it really may because there was such a clear conflict between the Trump Justice Department lawyer who was arguing, who was basically saying, you know, we don't have to give a reason why we exclude this. We are explaining the president.
He was saying that the president has the right to go after any company or any individual that he feels is a threat. And you don't have and the president doesn't have to give a reason. It can be a good reason. It can be a bad reason.
And Judge Howell made a very interesting argument. She said, you mean you could go after Williams and Connolly, which was the law firm representing Perkins Cooey, you could go after them for representing Perkins Cooey. And the Justice Department lawyer sort of danced around but basically said, yes, this is entirely in the discretion of the president. And this conflict about the scope of presidential power is what all of these conflicts are really about.
The Elon Musk cases where, you know, can the presidents designate Elon Musk go in and fire all these people, all of these are about the scope of presidential power. And that's what the Supreme Court is going to have to resolve. Yeah. I mean, what Judge has mentioned that the lawyers, the government's lawyers, the argument from the Justice Department, she said it's going to chill down her spine.
Essentially these law firms are saying that this is going to destroy their business because part of the idea of this clearly is to intimidate companies from hiring these firms, not related even to anything the company might have with the Trump administration. And it came out in court that Perkins Cooey has already lost clients. I mean, this executive order is less than a week old, but they have lost clients. And you can understand the client's position.
It's like, how are you going to represent me if you can't even go in to visit the securities exchange? Right. It's a major company is going to hire this firm and then the president is going to attack that company for just because they hiring this firm. Right.
And that's why Judge Howell, who was really very outspoken and thoughtful about this, said, you know, this is a threat to all of the legal profession in America, notably though, and this is consistent with what's going on in the whole country. Very few law firms and very few sort of prominent lawyers have spoken out against this publicly. And Williams and Connolly deserves a lot of credit because they weren't afraid to take all of that. Well, so if, I mean, I got pushed back from Republicans, you know, who saw the pro the stuff we've been doing that this on the set, well, look, this is, you know, this is payback.
This is fair play. Look, they went after Trump. This is not, this is a law firm that is representing people. It's as if, you know, a Democratic administration would take away the law licenses or go after the firm that represented President Trump in all the legal cases he's been facing.
Correct. And that's not what the, I mean, you can, are you, the Trump lawyers had security clear says they weren't taking their security, they weren't taking away. They weren't taking away. And this idea that you can go after lawyers is very new and at least according to this judge, very scary.
If you've been appreciated, as you know, Ukraine is under pressure from the Trump administration, agreed to a 30-day ceasefire. Deal President Trump said today is up to Russia now. President Putin so far as he had to say a brush will agree to a ceasefire. He did send the world a message today, travel to Russia's cursed region, Donning a military uniform, he's an chief international correspondent, of course, awards and key.
Clarissa, what can you tell us about Putin's visit to Kursk? Well, it was one of the rare times Anderson where we see President Putin wearing military fatigues in course for the first time since August when Ukraine flares took that territory. He was in conversation with the head of Russian forces who was basically saying that through this counter-offensive, the Russians have now been able to take 86% of the territory that the Ukrainians had been holding. President Putin said that any prisoners of war should be treated as terrorists and he said that he was hopeful that combat operations would soon draw to an end.
This of course has been a key issue for President Putin. This offensive really took them by surprise and it's just possible Anderson that maybe taking back Kurs would give President Putin enough of a win that he would be willing to concede or agree to this proposition of this 30-day complete ceasefire. But of course, as of yet, we don't really know what exactly the Russians are thinking. We should be learning more as U.S.
officials begin their visit in Moscow with the Kremlin tomorrow Anderson. Yeah, I mean, it's an interesting idea that this would give them sort of a whether it's a fig leaf or just kind of a justification for having a ceasefire. They may push for more land though, obviously. Yes, I mean, previously Putin has been pretty firm that he's not interested in a ceasefire before negotiations, that he views negotiations as being the first step, that he wants to have the full territory that Russia has already claimed as its own, which is not just territory that it's already taken, but other territory that it still claims.
That clearly is not going to happen, certainly not going to happen before any kind of a 30-day ceasefire. Would there be other things, other concessions that he would be hoping to extract, extract some analysts and Russia have suggested that perhaps he would demand that the U.S. and the EU stop supplying any weaponry to Ukraine, at least during that 30-day pause, because in the Russians' mind, that could be an opportunity for Ukraine's army to re-constitute, to regroup, and then to launch another attack. But again, from the Ukrainians' perspective, the agreement has to be the same for everyone, which is no pre-negotiations or preconditions, rather, no red lines.
We start with a full ceasefire, and then during that 30-day period is when everybody gets to the negotiating table and tries to hash out the details that could result in a longer-lasting peace. What's the response you've heard in Kyiv among Ukrainians about the agreement by Ukraine to have a ceasefire, Russia agrees? It's interesting, Anderson, because I would say for the most part, people seem pretty relaxed in the sense that they are somewhat resigned to the fact that this is inevitable, that at some point this war has to end, that enough blood has been shed, enough treasure has been spent. They are adamant that there need to be security guarantees to ensure that Ukraine never finds itself in this position again, and they're also very skeptical of Russia's true intentions, even if President Putin turns around tomorrow or in the coming days and agrees to this ceasefire.
There are very few people on the ground here in Ukraine who believe that Russia would actually go ahead and honor that. Yeah, it's a pleasure to work. Thanks so much. We're coming up with Fireings at Many of America's health agencies.
I'll talk to one front-line doctor with a Stark warning, he says the diseases are coming. Also, more breaking news, phase one of a mission to finally bring back those two American astronauts from the International Space Station with Scrub Tonight, what it means for the ride home coming up. Frontline doctors fighting the growing measles outbreaks say it is much harder when each of us, Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.
says things like this on Fox News. There are adverse events from the vaccine that cause deaths every year, it causes all the illnesses that measles itself cause encephalitis, and blindness, et cetera. And so people ought to be able to make that choice for themselves. And what we need to do is give them the best information and courage that the vaccine does stop the spread of the disease.
Well, it's true the vaccine helped stop the spread of measles. A lot of what R.K. Jr. said there was at very least misleading.
The adverse effects of the measles vaccine are extremely small compared to actually contracting disease. And while the measles can call encephalitis and blindness, they're incredibly rare from the vaccine itself. Between statements like that and the firings that are in ancient health agencies, a lot of medical experts are standing the alarm. Dr.
Craig Spencer has fought infectious disease outbreaks around the world and is himself a survivor of Ebola. He has a piece in this month's Atlantic magazine titled The Diseases Are Coming, Elon Musk's slash and burn government tear will have lasting effects on global health. He joins me now. Dr.
Spencer, I want to ask you about a number of things which you've ridden. But what do you make for all the message that Secretary Kennedy is now sending? Well, Anderson, the last time I joined you just over a month ago was a day of his Senate confirmation hearing. And I told you at that time that I came into that meeting as a skeptic and left even more concerned.
And what I've heard over the past few days is exactly why. What we've heard is the head of health leadership in this country, bungling basic facts at best, and sharing outright lies at worst. We heard today how he confused, I think, the mumps vaccine for the measles vaccine when he said that measles vaccine declines, the effectiveness over time. That's not true.
The mumps vaccine. So we got that wrong. He also said that measles infections might not be all that bad. Well, it turns out measles infections are really bad.
They can wipe your immune system immediately and for years after. There's a reason that we vaccinate. I've seen measles cases. I've seen what it can do.
We need to prevent this. And I'm so concerned that he's speaking out of both sides of his mouth saying we need vitamin A and we need cod liver oil, but also maybe vaccines, but vaccines might be bad. I would like more health leadership at this time in this country during this outbreak. Again, an outbreak of measles that is already larger, more cases in this year than we had all last year.
Instead, what we're getting leadership, that sounds like a 3 a.m. infomercial on the magic of cod liver oil. Elon Musk, I just want to play what he said at cabinet meeting last month about cuts to Ebola prevention. We will make mistakes.
We won't be perfect. But when we make mistakes, we'll fix it very quickly. So for example, with USAID, one of the things we accidentally cancelled very briefly was Ebola prevention. I think we all went Ebola prevention.
So we restored the Ebola prevention immediately. And there was no interruption. So was everything restored and there's no interruption? No, he was saying there's a lie.
It's an outright lie. Let me tell you why. With all the chaos in Washington, it's probably not something that people focus on, disease detection abroad. So this is the thing that I focus on all the time.
My friends are working for CDC and for USAID and for WHO around the world. Those programs have almost all been cut. Right now, CDC has been muzzled and we have not sent our experts to outbreaks like the Ebola outbreak in Uganda that is actively happening and normally would have been tackled with the assistance of CDC. USAID experts who do disease surveillance and border screening at airports like they would normally be doing at the airport in Uganda are not doing that.
We have the World Health Organization that is trying to step up and do that for us. But we're actively taking away their money and the Trump administration has moved to withdraw. At this moment, what this means for Americans is that we do not have our normal eyes and ears on what's happening with diseases around the world at a time when the number of outbreaks is increasing, the risk is going to be increasing here, and I've been saying this over and over again, we are going to regret this. I promise we are going to regret this.
Because in this day and age, a zoonotic virus, something like Ebola, is only a plane flight away. That's absolutely true. But think about what's happening. We have an undermining of our disease detection systems abroad, an undermining of science and well-settled science and vaccines and things here at home.
Losing one of those would be bad. Losing them both at the same time means that if there is an outbreak that we don't pick up on, overseas that comes here to this country, normally our CDC, our HHS, we would have the people capable of doing it. We don't really have them anymore. We have again an infomercial about cod liver oil.
We have undermined our ability to detect, threats abroad and our ability to respond to them here in this country and the result is unfortunately going to be disastrous. I don't know if it's going to be next week. This means I'll break next month, next year, but I promise we will regret this. There's a lot more to talk about, Dr.
Craig Spencer. I would love to have you back. I also encourage people to read your article in the Atlantic. It's out now.
Still ahead, we have more breaking news space. X scrubbing is launched at the International Space Station today than mission goal to get the two astronauts home after an unexpected month's long stay. Look at what happens now. Two NASA astronauts aboard the International Space Station since last June will have to wait a little longer to find out when they're going to be coming home.
You're looking at new video of astronauts exiting a rocket following an aborted SpaceX launch that would have allowed Commander Sonny Williams and Captain Butch Wilmore to return to Earth. NASA scrubbed tonight's launch due to a hydraulics issue with the launch pad's ground system. The two NASA astronauts were supposed to spend only about a week on the station. President Trump and Elon Musk have said that the astronauts were stranded in space for political reasons, something that the Commander Williams and Captain Wilmore denied when I spoke to them last month.
There's some who suggested here, President Trump, that you were virtually abandoned by the last administration. Again, I know you've been asked this question before, but do you feel you've been abandoned? We don't feel abandoned. We don't feel stuff.
We don't feel stranded. I understand why others may think that. We've come prepared. We come committed.
That is what your human spaceflight program is. SpaceX says it has another window to launch the mission on Thursday night. CNN's original series, Twitter, Breaking the Bird, this Sunday at 10 p.m. Eastern.
That's the first time that's going to air. We watched it, Car Swisher, as we said, I was a guest earlier on is prominently featured in that. That's it for us. The news continues.
The news team starts now. I'm Daniel Day Kim. I'm going to South Korea to figure out how this small nation conquered the world with its culture. Join me and meet the artists and creators behind the phenomenon.
K, everything. Now streaming on the CNN app. Influential journalist Cara Swisher is taking a hard look at the longevity industry. There's so much bad information, then the really good information gets drowned.
The new CNN original series, Cara Swisher wants to live forever. Now streaming on the CNN app.