Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

White House: Trump "Perfecting" His Tariff Plan With Advisers; Europe To Trump: Ready For "Strong" Retaliation Against Tariffs; On Eve Of Tariff Announcement, Mystery Surrounds Trump Plan; Trump Admin Mistakenly Deports Maryland Man To Salvadoran Mega-Prison; GOP Reps Lash Out At "Rogue" Judges As Dems Blast Trump Overreach; Rep. Laurel Lee (R-FL) Discusses About Proxy Voting For New Parents; GOP Rebels Tank Johnson's Effort To Kill Push For Remote Voting For Lawmakers Who Are New Parents. Aired 3-3:30p ET

Aired April 01, 2025 - 15:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:00:40]

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: The countdown is on, just one more day until the long-promised new round of tariffs will finally be revealed by President Trump. What we know about this rollout.

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: Plus, the Trump administration admits it deported a Maryland man to a notorious prison in El Salvador by mistake. Today though, the White House is standing by that deportation.

KEILAR: And torpedo bat takeover. How this unusual design may be a game changer for the major leagues. And Neil deGrasse Tyson will take a crack at the physics behind the bats.

We're following these major developing stories and many more all coming in right here to CNN NEWS CENTRAL.

SANCHEZ: Happening right now, we are all, us, the media, consumers, the markets, we're all waiting to find out what is in this plan. It's a question that's fueling global anxiety as the world watches and waits for President Trump's sweeping tariffs.

This afternoon, we have little to no details on the scope or size of his tariff moves. But we did learn just a short time ago that what he announces roughly 24 hours from right now will take effect immediately.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: The President will be addressing the decades of unfair trade practices that have ripped our country off and American workers off. It has hollowed out our middle class. It has destroyed our heartland. And the President is focused on reshifting our global economy to ensure that America is once again the manufacturing superpower of the world.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: Right now, Europe and allies like Canada have vowed retaliation and, of course, all of this with American consumers hanging in the balance.

KEILAR: CNN Business and Politics Correspondent, Vanessa Yurkevich, is leading us off this hour. So, Vanessa, first, how are businesses preparing?

VANESSA YURKEVICH, CNN BUSINESS AND POLITICS CORRESPONDENT: Yes, we're expected to hear something unprecedented tomorrow. What kind of plan, tariff plan, does the President have?

We have a little bit of precedent. In his first term, President Trump slapped tariffs on about $380 billion worth of goods. That was in 2018. To date, we're at about $1 trillion. That's all the tariffs that have gone into effect in his second term up until now. But what is coming?

We don't know. It could be upwards of tariffs on $3.3 trillion worth of U.S. goods. That is the total amount of goods that comes into this country. Now, an analyst at Wells Fargo tells me that businesses are actively gaming out different scenarios because they don't know what's coming. One scenario, as you can see there, is Jeremy Jansen says that one scenario is that the supplier would absorb all of the costs, all of the costs of the tariffs.

Another scenario is that it would be split between the supplier and the business. And then the third scenario is that there would be a split between the supplier, the business, and ultimately the consumer, trying to take a share of that burden of whatever kind of tariff is coming.

Ultimately, though, businesses have no idea what to expect. And that is why, guys, they have to plan out different scenarios in order to figure out what to do when the news drops.

SANCHEZ: And, Vanessa, how are consumers at all preparing?

YURKEVICH: Well, consumers are actually spending ahead of these tariffs taking effect. Just look at what's happening with car searches on Kelley Blue Book and Auto Trader. Car searches between March 26th and today, up 30 percent. And people are actually searching for foreign cars more, two to four times more than U.S. cars, because we know that foreign cars and parts are going to be taxed under Trump's tariff plan that's going to be unveiling on April 3rd on the auto industry.

Also worth noting, guys, that Ford just released its earnings this morning, and they report that sales are up 10 percent in the first quarter and retail sales, direct-to-consumer retail sales, up 19 percent. That is a sign that consumers are spending, trying to get ahead of all of these tariffs.

KEILAR: All right. Vanessa, thank you so much. Let's talk about this now with Douglas Holtz-Eakin. He was the chief economist on President George W. Bush's Council of Economic Advisers. He's now president of The American Action Forum.

[15:05:06]

All right. So, Doug, we don't know exactly what's going to be announced tomorrow. So, I just wonder, what are you looking for here?

DOUGLAS HOLTZ-EAKIN, CHIEF ECONOMIST, WH COUNCIL OF ECONOMIC ADVISERS UNDER PRESIDENT G. W. BUSH: Well, I think there are really two important things to look for. The first is the magnitude of the tariffs that the President intends to levy. They're going to take place immediately. There are rumors of a 20 percent nearly universal tariff. That's something on the order of $500-, $600 billion of taxes that would begin immediately.

I'll just point out that we're trying to avoid a sunset of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act to avoid an increase in taxes of about $425 billion, because a lot of people think that would kick the economy into recession. So, if it's worth avoiding $425 billion, it's probably worth thinking hard about $500- to $600 billion in tariffs, so that's the first thing to look for.

And the second is, are there any exceptions? It's been described as almost universal, but we don't really know. And so, is he tilting the playing field toward favored industries, favored countries? What is the structure of the tariff? And those are the two things I'm looking for the most.

KEILAR: Okay. So, whatever they are ...

HOLTZ-EAKIN: Yes.

KEILAR: ... can they accomplish what Trump is saying he wants to accomplish here, which is moving that manufacturing base, reviving it in the U.S., bringing it back and eliminating the trade deficit?

HOLTZ-EAKIN: No, I think that's probably not going to happen. Certainly, the trade deficit is the result of a lot of interaction with financial flows and where people are trying to park their dollars in international capital markets and not merely the prices of goods and services. So, I think it's unlikely to make any real significant dent in the overall trade deficit.

There may be some impact on some manufacturing. That will depend on the scale and the structure of those tariffs. But in the big picture, in 1950, 30 percent of the American workforce worked in manufacturing, and now it's eight. That steady decline in employment was not matched by a steady decline in manufacturing output. Instead, manufacturing output held steady as a share of the economy, dropped a little bit. That's because manufacturing has become much more productive. There have been technological advances, and those advances are the reason that there are few people working that, not international trade. And over that period, you can't find a steady erosion because of international trade.

So, flipping a switch on tariffs is not going to bring back either the 1950s or a balance of trade. And I think we're just going to see a lot of domestic economic damage instead.

KEILAR: Doug, proponents of this tariff plan will point to Trump's 2018 tariffs. This is very different, right? We have to be clear about that. But also, as you're looking ...

HOLTZ-EAKIN: Yes, oh, be very clear.

KEILAR: ... yes, it's very different. The economic indicators and the climate is different. And consumers have such a say here. They account for more than, you know, two thirds with their spending of the economy. So, what are the possible kind of wild cards as you're looking for how they're interpreting this and behaving?

HOLTZ-EAKIN: So, I think that the reason it's different than 2018 is worth emphasizing. Number one, those were largely tariffs on China. And there were lots of alternatives for China to get its goods to the United States, trade diversion and lots of substitutes for a lot of Chinese products. So, the impact on the economy was much less significant and we didn't see much inflation as a result.

The impact of, say, tariffs on Canada and Mexico, a unified economic North America, it's going to rip that economy apart and be much, much more dramatic, much bigger impact on prices, much bigger impact on output and employment in both - on all three economies.

So, I don't think you should do this in comparison to 2018. It's also true that the rest of the world has been waiting for this. They saw him as president once. They listened to him on the campaign trail. And they are ready to retaliate. And they're going to retaliate with, you know, in Europe, we already know, whiskey, and jeans, and Harleys, and the American farmers going to be in the crosshairs around the globe.

So, there's going to be damage inflicted on the United States that has nothing to do with these tariffs, has a lot to do with the retaliation.

KEILAR: Yes, we are bracing.

Doug Holtz-Eakin, thank you so much for being with us.

HOLTZ-EAKIN: Thank you.

SANCHEZ: Let's discuss the political fallout now with Marc Short. He was Vice President Mike Pence's chief of staff during the first Trump administration. Marc, great to see you, as always.

MARC SHORT, FORMER CHIEF OF STAFF TO VP MIKE PENCE: Thank you.

SANCHEZ: You were in the room when a lot of these decisions were made. Before we get to the policy, I saw you nodding to a lot of what Douglas was saying. I wonder what it's like when Trump is hosting these conversations and how he finally comes about making a decision that could weigh on the lives of so many consumers.

SHORT: Well, I think that important point that Brianna and Douglas were talking about is I think there's still a lot of people who think this is like the first administration. They look at it and say, well, look, he did assess tariffs on China. He did assess tariffs on steel and aluminum.

The scope of what's anticipated to be announced tomorrow is dramatically different. On his first day with the executive order, he announced 22 investigations that would allow him to have extraordinary power under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, which is something that no president's ever used before to assess tariffs.

[15:10:07]

And so you're basically allowing the congressional branch to see this authority to the executive branch to have an enormous amount of tariffs. I think your question, Boris, as far as the discussion inside the room, I think it's what the President's always believed. The President would often say that we in America are suckers, that we have the greatest marketplace in the world, and we should be charging people for access to that marketplace, almost like it's a real estate deal.

And the reality, of course, as you know, is that it's the American that pays the tariff. It's the American importer that pays it. It's the American consumer who assumes the price increases as well.

SANCHEZ: So to the policy, there seems to be this sort of philosophical split within the conservative side of trade, the view of trade, which is that free trade is good for consumers, right? The reason that you can go to Walmart at 4 in the morning and buy a huge TV for very little money is because it's manufactured in a bunch of different places, and it isn't usually tariffed when it comes into the United States.

Conversely, the argument from a lot of Trump folks is that our supply chains are not as sophisticated or as independent as they need to be to compete with China moving into the future. Where do you land in that argument? How important is it to domesticate those supply chains and bring manufacturing into the country?

SHORT: It's hugely important to bring manufacturing back, particularly we saw, for instance, during COVID, the importance of having pharmaceuticals produced inside the United States. But I think the way to do that, Boris, is actually the first administration policies.

I think when he advanced a deregulatory approach and reduced corporate taxes, you saw a lot of jobs that have fled America to come back into the United States. The tariff strategy is the wrong strategy. It's going to kill jobs, it's going to hurt the economy and it's going to be one of his own self-inflicted wound.

And I think that the reality is there's another component beyond economics. It's a national security component. When you're trading with neighbors, you're less likely to have conflict. When you set up barriers to trade, you're more likely to have conflict.

Just this week, you saw an announcement of Japan and Korea partnering with China against the United States on this effort. We worked so hard for so long to isolate China. What these policies are doing is you're pushing people who were allies back into China's corner.

SANCHEZ: I wonder where that instinct from Trump comes from, and specifically because you mentioned Japan and Korea. He's said a number of things before about troops being stationed there, about National Security that the U.S. offers to our allies in the Pacific. But I wonder about Canada specifically. Why this desire to make it the 51st state and to punish them economically if they don't join the union?

SHORT: I think, Boris, it is a trade issue for him. I think he does believe that Canada has had unfair trade practices benefited from them. I think that American consumers are at an advantage if the consumer doesn't have to pay as high of a cost because you're having trade. And so I think it's just a very different worldview here. And again, he views it almost like a real estate map in the sense that there should be a fee assessed to people for getting access to America's markets. But of course, having access to America's markets benefits American consumers.

SANCHEZ: I have to ask, because I'm sure you're still friendly with a lot of folks that might be serving in the administration now. Have you gotten any indication of what might be coming to now if potentially there's an off-ramp the way that we've seen it happen before with this second term and his threat of tariffs?

SHORT: Well, I think it is important to keep in mind that he has intentionally assembled a group of economic advisors who support this policy.

SANCHEZ: Right.

SHORT: There's far less division about what the economic policy should be now. But I think, again, I don't think there's been a full appreciation of the scope of the latitude the President's going to have after tomorrow when these investigations come back. It's required in the law that there has to be these investigations. It's now been roughly 90 days. He'll have - he basically - I don't think it'll be any surprise, the Department of Commerce comes back and says, yes, across the globe there's unfair trade practices or there's currency manipulation.

And so, yes, the President - we are ceding this authority to the President to exert tariffs, which I think he could use in an unpredictable way. In some cases, it could be broad from the start. In other cases, he might hold it in his back pocket for negotiation purposes.

SANCHEZ: We'll see how it goes tomorrow in the Rose Garden. Marc Short, always great to get your perspective.

SHORT: Thanks, Boris. Thanks for having me.

SANCHEZ: Thanks for being with us. Of course.

Still plenty more news to come. A man in Maryland deported to a notorious mega prison in El Salvador, but now the Trump administration confirms they made a, quote, administrative error in his case. Plus, Republicans on Capitol Hill holding hearings on the power of federal judges after President Trump calls to impeach those who rule against his policies.

KEILAR: And a high-profile murder case is headed for retrial in Massachusetts. Jury selection underway in the new case against Karen Read, the woman accused of killing her police officer boyfriend.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:19:00]

KEILAR: The Trump administration says a clerical error was to blame for a Maryland father being among those deported to a notorious prison in El Salvador despite having legal protected status.

SANCHEZ: Even so, federal lawyers say Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia cannot be brought back to the United States. CNN's Priscilla Alvarez is here with the details.

Priscilla, what are you hearing?

PRISCILLA ALVAREZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, since the deportation flights to El Salvador last month, Trump administration officials have expressed a great deal of confidence about the vetting that they had done and the way that this had unfolded. But in a declaration yesterday evening, a senior Immigration and Customs Enforcement official conceding that there had been an error in one person in particular being sent to El Salvador. And that is who you mentioned, Kilmar Abrego Garcia.

He is a Salvadoran national. The court documents lay out a little more of his history, including, for example, that he crossed into the U.S. around 2011, and he had a brush with law enforcement in 2019. It was then that he was with a group of men at a Maryland Home Depot, and the police had approached them, and the police claimed that he had ties to MS-13.

[15:20:06]

In their case, they had mentioned that he had certain attire, as well as they also cited a confidential informant who had said that he had ties to this gang. Now, his attorney has said from the get-go that he has no ties to MS-13, and all of this was discussed in his immigration proceedings in 2019.

Ultimately, and this is why this is important, an immigration judge gave him or granted him withholding from removal. That is to say it's a complicated legal immigration term. He is still removable, but he cannot be sent to El Salvador for fear of persecution. The court documents say that he was fleeing gang violence in El Salvador years ago.

Now, what has come up since then is that last month, he was arrested by ICE. He was detained, and then he ended up on one of these flights. We're getting a glimpse into how these flights actually unfolded through these court documents, and particularly this court declaration.

Essentially, there was a flight manifest, there was a long running list, and some people were taking off of that list for various reasons that ICE does not go into. His name was moving its way up on the list until ultimately he ended up on the flight manifest and on the flight where he was sent to this notorious mega prison in El Salvador.

Now, I'll read you part of the statement here where Robert Cerna says, quote, "Through administrative error, Abrego Garcia was removed from the United States to El Salvador. This was an oversight, and the removal was carried out in good faith based on the existence of a final order of removal and Abrego Garcia's purported membership in MS- 13."

So, while the administration is saying they mistakenly deported him, they are maintaining that he has ties to MS-13, despite the attorneys saying that that is not the case. And we saw it even earlier with the White House Press Secretary leaning in on this exact message. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LEAVITT: It was an administrative error. The administration maintains the position that this individual who was deported to El Salvador and will not be returning to our country was a member of the brutal and vicious MS-13 gang. That is fact number one.

Fact number two, we also have credible intelligence proving that this individual was involved in human trafficking.

And fact number three, this individual was a member, actually a leader, of the brutal MS-13 gang, which this president has designated as a foreign terrorist organization.

Fact number four is that foreign terrorists do not have legal protections in the United States of America anymore.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ALVAREZ: So, she mentioned there a human trafficking claim. That has not come up in the court documents that I have reviewed. We have asked the White House and the Department of Homeland Security for additional details on those intelligence assessments that they are citing. They have not provided them at this point.

But certainly what this does show again is that these flights, as they unfolded, did include at least one person, in this case a Salvadoran national who shouldn't have been on the flight, again, because this withholding from removal would have kept him from being deported to this country.

SANCHEZ: Priscilla Alvarez, let us know if the administration finally responds.

Just ahead, debate on Capitol Hill over who is overstepping their power, President Trump or judges blocking some of his policies. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:27:54]

KEILAR: House Republicans are holding off on a push to impeach judges for the moment by instead holding hearings aimed at highlighting what they call judicial overreach and introducing legislation to limit the reach of those rulings. Republican lawmakers claim so-called activist judges are overstepping their authority by blocking parts of Trump's - President Trump's agenda.

Democrats argue it's the President who is overreaching.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. DARRELL ISSA (R-CA): These rogue judge rulings are a new resistance to the Trump administration and the only time in which judges in robes in this number have felt it necessary to participate in the political process rather than participate in the Article III powers.

REP. HANK JOHNSON (D-GA): Our Republican colleagues want us to believe that simply because the courts are exercising their Article 3 power, it is a sign of rot in our judicial system, that it is somehow our courts and judges, not the President, who have gone rogue and are overreaching.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: We're joined now by Florida Republican Congresswoman Laurel Lee. She's on the House Judiciary Committee, and she took part in today's hearing on judicial power.

Congresswoman, thanks for being with us.

REP. LAUREL LEE (R-FL): Great to see you.

KEILAR: And I do have to ask you and this - I just want to be clear, we're here to talk about the hearing, but I have to ask you because we learned just a short time ago that the Speaker is sending the House home, so I want to talk to you about that first. Your Republican colleague, Anna Paulina Luna, enlisted help from Democrats and some Republicans, several Republicans, to try to get a vote on allowing proxy voting for new moms and dads. She prevailed over Speaker Johnson, who you voted with.

Many Republicans have used proxy voting many times, including in cases so that they could travel to CPAC. Why die on this hill, new parents?

LEE: Well, I think it's important to understand the procedural background of what happened today. So, of course, I think there is really a unified concern about making sure that Congress is a place that new parents can serve and mothers can serve.

[15:30:03] But there's a difference when we start talking about proxy voting.