Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Judge Halts Elon Musk's Access To Treasury Department Payment System; Shock At Frail Appearance Of Three Released Israeli Hostages; Rubio Previously Praised USAID, Now He's Overseeing It's Demise; Egg Prices Rise Due To Bird Flu, leaving Consumers, Restaurants Scrambling; Countdown To Superbowl LIX: Chiefs Vs Eagles. Aired 4-5p ET

Aired February 08, 2025 - 16:00   ET

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

[16:00:01]

WHITFIELD: All right. Thank you so much for joining me today. I'm Fredricka Whitfield. The NEWSROOM with Jessica Dean starts right now.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BETSY KLEIN, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE PRODUCER: -- empowered Elon Musk and the so-called DOGE, Department of Government Efficiency. So we have started to see DOGE deploy across departments of the federal government and start to look into some of those systems, including accessing sensitive information from that critical Treasury Department payment system.

Now, New York Attorney General Letitia James, as well as 18 other state attorneys general filed a suit saying that Musk's associates who were categorized as special government employees were unlawfully granted access to that system and that U.S. district judge ruled to temporarily restrict the DOGE team from accessing that Treasury Department system, citing the risk to sensitive and confidential information as well as vulnerability to hacking.

Now for his part, Trump appears to be pleased with the work that Elon Musk and his team is doing so far. Take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Mr. President, I wonder what you make of the criticism from Democrats that these staff reductions, the cuts that Elon Musk and DOGE are doing are unlawful power grab? Is there anything you've told Elon Musk he cannot touch?

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Well, we haven't discussed that much. I'll tell him to go here, go there. He does it. He's got a very capable group of people. Very, very, very, very capable. They know what they're doing. They'll ask questions and they'll see immediately as somebody gets tongue tied that they're either crooked or don't know what they're doing.

We have very smart people going in. So I've instructed him, go into education, go into military, go into other things. (END VIDEO CLIP)

KLEIN: Now, Trump and his team have much confidence in their ability to defend themselves against these lawsuits. And the next hearing on this matter, Jessica, is scheduled for Friday, February 14th.

JESSICA DEAN, CNN HOST: Betsy, I want to ask you about another legal case, another federal judge blocking this deadline which would have been today for federal workers to accept a buyout, so-called buyout for their jobs. What is the latest on that?

KLEIN: Well, it's just another move by President Trump and his team to transform the federal workforce and try to pare down federal spending. Now, a federal judge paused this deadline for federal employees to take a so-called buyout, extending that deadline to Monday. About a lot of legal uncertainty and questions about the legality of this program.

Now, prior to this week's deadline, a White House official told CNN that about 65,000 federal workers had opted in so far. Now, this program also came with a warning, and that is if enough people do not opt in, the federal government is going to have significant layoffs to its workforce -- Jessica.

DEAN: All right. So more to come on that. Betsy Klein in West Palm Beach for us. Thank you so much for that reporting.

And joining us now is the national president of the National Federation of Federal Employees, Randy Erwin. That union representing more than 100,000 government employees.

Randy, thank you so much for being here with us. This new news --

RANDY ERWIN, NATIONAL PRESIDENT, NATIONAL FEDERATION OF FEDERAL EMPLOYEES: Thanks for having me.

DEAN: Yes. How are you advising your union members right now?

ERWIN: We're telling them, don't take this deal. It's a bad deal. They're making -- this administration is trying to make it sound like they're offering a deal that's good. They make it sound like they're going to get time off until September 30th. In fact, these folks are going to have to work until September 30th. So it's no deal at all. They're also making it sound like if they don't accept this deal, then they're going to be ripped. They're going to be -- there might be a reduction in force and they'll be laid off.

[16:05:01]

But in reality, they have no protection from a reduction in force if they accept this deal. So it's a terrible deal for federal employees. We're saying don't accept it.

DEAN: And as Betsy noted, look, the president campaigned on this, on shrinking the federal government, cutting waste, cutting spending. It's something Americans -- he was very clear with Americans on. They voted for it. What do you say to that?

ERWIN: I say there's a process for that. You know, we live by the Constitution in this country, and he is one not -- the president, Article Two of the Constitution, he's got to faithfully execute the laws of this country and he is not doing that. It is Congress that controls the purse strings. And, you know, for right now, for federal workers existing under the current authorization by Congress, you know, they're paid for.

But with this resignation, they're making offers for a period that hasn't even been funded yet. That is a violation of the Anti- Deficiency Act. And you can't -- you can't make obligations that Congress hasn't funded. And so they can't possibly make good on some of the promises that they're making to these federal employees, which is why we're telling them that they're going to get stiffed.

DEAN: And you've also said you're concerned that Americans don't understand maybe what a dramatic reshaping of the government like this might actually mean in practicality. Explain that a little bit.

ERWIN: I mean, this is going to be terrible for the American people, the kind of things, I mean, they have said, this DOGE has said their goal is to cut 75 percent of the federal workforce. These folks, first of all, 87 percent are spread all throughout the country. They're not in Washington. They're doing critical things for the American people. Keeping our military ready, caring for our veterans, maintaining our homeland security, clean air, clean water, safe air travel.

All of these things are critical to the American people. They're spreading lies about these people saying they're lazy. They're not coming to work. All of those things are false, but they're spreading those lies anyway to meet their ends. In the end, what they really want is they want another big tax cut for billionaires that we can't afford in this country, and they're going after working people to get it.

DEAN: And I just want to make sure I heard you right. 87 percent of these workers are outside of D.C. They're in blue and red states across the country.

ERWIN: (INAUDIBLE) percent. These are your neighbors. The federal workers are doing great work right in every single congressional district in the country.

DEAN: Wow. And Musk and his team are treating this like a private company. I mean, I think most people are familiar with him buying X, going in, doing something very similar there. And it's an idea that, you know, a lot of Americans say, yes, like get a business person in there and take care of business. But is it possible to use that same approach with the government?

ERWIN: Absolutely not. You know, what they did with Twitter, you know, you want to lay off everybody, that's your business. You want to ruin your company, that's your business. But it is serious business the work that the federal government does, keeping us safe. I mean, look at them just kind of laying off people at the Department of Justice, laying people -- DEI. It's been several different places now. And we got serious work to do, and people don't realize that planes can be falling out of the sky. Communities are going to be burning. And we haven't even talked about just the loss of institutional knowledge.

If they force all the best people out, the people who've been around the longest and really have some special know-how that the American people paid for and benefit from, if they force all those people out, the quality of our government service is just going to fall dramatically. And, you know, I'm worried for the American people. People need to be calling Congress and telling them to pump the brakes on this administration for what they're trying to do to the federal workforce.

DEAN: And it really sounds like, I think I'm understanding you right, that, look, you're concerned with the process, with how this is being done and how abruptly this is happening. You mentioned that Congress has not approved a buyout plan. So there are questions if it's even funded.

ERWIN: True.

DEAN: And -- so do you acknowledge that maybe, yes, you could be looking at where you could cut back, where you could streamline, where you could reduce wasteful spending, but you're concerned with the way this is being done.

ERWIN: You know, any organization could become more efficient. So I'm not going to say that government can't get more efficient. Of course it could. But there's a way that you have to do that and you can't come in there and just start breaking things and think that that's going to be a good plan, because the work that they do in the federal government is serious, and it puts people in danger when they do that.

DEAN: Is there anything that Musk or somebody from the Trump administration, the president, could do that could make this more appealing for your members or make this a better situation?

[16:10:02]

ERWIN: Yes. Well, one, they need to take their time. They need to go through Congress and do things properly. If you're going to, you know, have some reduction in force that is necessary, it should be well thought out. You could just see how they're backtracking on the number of -- the folks in different areas that can actually accept this resignation because they're realizing what a disaster it would be if people actually accepted it.

So it is important that you take your time. Right now they are just pedal to the metal and putting sticks in the spokes of our government and people. We just can't allow that to happen. So Congress needs to do its job, be an effective check on the executive. That's the fundamental thing that Congress has to do. And so far they haven't done that at all. And they need to have a backbone and do it.

DEAN: So far, it's really just been the legal system that we've seen doing anything here. All right. Randy Erwin, thank you so much. We appreciate it.

ERWIN: Thank you for your time.

DEAN: Still ahead, celebrations after three additional Israeli hostages are freed. But their appearance is also causing alarm today. We're going to have more on their conditions and Israel's response. Plus, both Trump and Israel's prime minister says the U.S. troops will not be needed in a proposed American takeover of Gaza. Still, the plan facing severe international backlash. How this could destabilize the entire region. We're going to talk more about that.

You're in the CNN NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:15:58]

DEAN: Israel is celebrating the release of three more hostages who've been held captive by Hamas for 491 days. But the mood became somber as people saw the frail condition of those captives.

CNN's Jeremy Diamond joins us from Tel Aviv with more on this.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JEREMY DIAMOND, CNN JERUSALEM CORRESPONDENT: Well, we are in Hostages Square where earlier today we witnessed very emotional scenes as hundreds of Israelis gathered here to watch as those three Israeli hostages were released from Hamas captivity after 491 days. But it was really a roller coaster of emotions. Initially, yes, there was the wave of relief as those three hostages emerged in live pictures for the first time after more than 15 months.

But then there was also some pained looks on the faces of many here, as they realized the state in which those three Israeli hostages were emerging. All three of them looking quite frail and emaciated after their time in captivity. It was particularly striking to see the image of Eli Sharabi, a 52-year-old who was taken hostage from Kibbutz Be'eri on October 7th. The difference between how he looked before he was taken hostage and how he looks now really striking. Clearly, he has lost a lot of weight.

And really these images are driving the Israeli public to focus on the remaining hostages in Gaza. And these images driving a public debate here in Israel over the fate of this ceasefire agreement, with many saying that it is a reason to push to extend this agreement and to ensure that all of the remaining hostages in Gaza come home now.

Earlier this week, it's important to note that the Israeli defense minister, the former Israeli defense minister, Yoav Gallant, noted that the agreement that is bringing these hostages home now is identical to the one that Hamas agreed to in July. And his point being that all that has happened since then are wasted months during which many of these hostages have faced dire conditions. But in addition to that sense of urgency, we did see the emotional

reunions between these three newly freed hostages and their families, many of them meeting initially at the Re'im military base in southern Israel, and then others also meeting with them at hospitals in central Israel.

In addition to that, we've seen as 183 Palestinian prisoners have been released from Israeli prisons in exchange for those three hostages. They include 18 who were serving life sentences. Several of those will be deported to third party countries. 111 of them were detained in Gaza over the course of this war since October 7th.

We know, of course, that some of those who have been detained in Gaza were rounded up as part of Israeli military operations in the Gaza Strip. Many of them held without charge or without trial. And now indeed being released as part of this agreement.

And on the Palestinian side as well, both in Gaza as well as in the West Bank, we have seen images of people reuniting with family members and also, of course, several individuals who were taken to hospitals after their time in Israeli prisons.

Jeremy Diamond, CNN, Tel Aviv.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

DEAN: All right, Jeremy, thank you very much.

Joining us now is former State Department Middle East negotiator Aaron David Miller. He's also a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

Aaron, thanks so much for being here with us. I want to pick up where Jeremy left off there. Israel condemning the appearances of these three Israeli hostages following their release today. And then later, the Palestinian Prisoners Media Office raising concerns over the appearance of some of the released prisoners. What is your reaction to all of that?

AARON DAVID MILLER, FORMER STATE DEPARTMENT MIDDLE EAST NEGOTIATOR: You know, I think it underscores the human tragedy of how innocents suffer as a consequence of conflict and war. As far as these three that were released, I mean, you see the obvious signs of physical torture and psychological torture. The fact that they're paraded before or in the company of masked Hamas gunmen who are -- who basically forced them to give speeches praising their captors just adds to the trauma, it seems to me.

[16:20:07]

And again, I think it reflects the reality that getting these hostages out is critically important. Governing is about choosing, and the current Israeli government, I think, has made some choices which don't prioritize the release of hostages.

Public pressure will grow, Jessica, I suspect as a consequence of these pictures and the stories that the hostages will tell, but the reality is I think the current Israeli government, prime minister, much more focused right now on trying to undermine and destroy what remains of Hamas. And that brings us to the issue of the second phase of the negotiations, which are rapidly upon us, I think, within the next three weeks.

DEAN: And that's what I wanted to ask you about next, because now comes phase two and getting to that point. How confident are you that can move forward?

MILLER: Not very. The second phase requires Hamas to release -- the Israelis estimate there will be, assuming phase one is successfully implemented, there are 59 hostages, IDF soldiers, half of whom are Israelis, 35, are no longer alive. So second phase compels Hamas to release all of them, compels the Israelis and Hamas to end the war and Israel's withdrawal from Gaza.

I see no way right now that Hamas is going to agree to release all of those hostages, the remaining ones that are alive, and the bodies of those who aren't, unless they receive ironclad guarantees that that's the end of the war and the Israelis will withdraw from Gaza. I don't see anybody providing those guarantees. So as the Israelis are concerned again I think the prime minister wants, quote, "total victory," unquote, over Hamas, which means expelling them from Gaza, expelling the senior leadership from Gaza.

And I think Hamas is not going to agree to that. So we really face, I think, a choice within several weeks, either phase one will continue with dribbling out additional hostages in exchange for Palestinian prisoners or a very real chance that the conflict will resume.

DEAN: And of course, there is the Trump of it all and the new administration and the role that they might play. Trump said Friday there's, quote, "no rush" to implement his plan to take over Gaza. You've called that idea not just impractical, but dangerous. What did you mean by that, the idea is dangerous, even if it doesn't come to be?

MILLER: Well, I mean, I mean, think about it. In one presser, the president essentially tethered the United States to what some people would regard as the forced transfer of Palestinians, even the voluntary transfer of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians to Egypt and Jordan, two longstanding American partners who look at the absorption of Palestinians not just as the end of the Israeli- Palestinian conflict, but as an existential threat to Jordan and Egypt.

He's validated the fantasies of the right-wing and I think he sent a pretty strong message to both Putin and Xi that if you want a territory, just give a presser, demand it without justification. And I think by and large it's an unimplementable proposal, and I think it's raised serious questions about the competency and judgment of this administration. And that's not something, frankly, in its complex a conflict. And with the challenges that face U.S. interests in the Middle East, that's not a signal you want to send. DEAN: And so then knowing all of that, it brings us back to kind of

where we started, which is what kind of impact might that have as they try to move forward with these negotiations for phase two and even a potential phase three?

MILLER: I mean, it may have an impact on the negotiations in phase two because I think the administration tends to favor what the prime minister wants to do, which, I mean, it's understandable. Hamas is a terrorist organization by statute and law. It's classified as an FTO by the U.S. government. Foreign terrorist organization. It's abused and willfully killed Americans and hostages. But expelling the senior leadership, I suspect, is not going to work.

And if the administration embraces that point, I think the prospects of a phase two implementation is not going to occur. The king of Jordan is do, Jessica, I think on February 11th, and I'm sure the king is worried that the $1.5 billion, $1.6 billion of U.S. assistance to the Al Hussein kingdom is somehow now going to be leveraged by the president in an effort to compel and force the king to absorb large numbers of Palestinians. So all around, I think we're in for a very rocky road in the weeks ahead.

[16:25:06]

DEAN: All right, Aaron, David Miller, thanks for your time. We appreciate it.

MILLER: Thank you, Jessica.

DEAN: Still ahead, a federal judge temporarily blocking President Trump from putting thousands of USAID workers on leave. We're going to speak with one global development adviser about that decision, as one critic is calling the move one of the worst and costliest foreign policy blunders in American history.

You're in the CNN NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DEAN: Multiple USAID staffers telling CNN they're relieved after a federal judge temporarily blocked President Trump's plan to put more than 2,000 workers on leave from their jobs. These are people who are on the front lines fighting famine and disease around the world, trying to stop Ebola and HIV from spreading, some risking their lives to rebuild communities in war-torn countries.

[16:30:12]

The administration also freezing funding 90 days for aid projects. That's money that's already been allocated by Congress.

Now, the White House argues that dismantling the agency will save taxpayer money and fight fraud. USAID funding was about $40 billion in the last year, less than 1 percent of the budget for this country.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio this week -- saying he's now the acting director of USAID, confirming the State Department's de facto takeover of the agency.

But over the years, and, of course, before joining the current administration, Rubio has consistently defended American foreign aid.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MARCO RUBIO, SECRETARY OF STATE: We don't have to give foreign aid. We do so because it furthers our national interest. That's why we give foreign aid. Now, obviously, there's a component to foreign aid that's humanitarian in scope, and that's important, too.

I promise you, it's going to be a lot harder to recruit someone to anti-Americanism, anti-American terrorism if the United States of America was the reason why they're even alive today.

Anybody who tells you that we can slash foreign aid and that will bring us to balance is lying to you. Foreign aid is less than 1 percent of our budget. It's just not true.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DEAN: CNN's "KFILE" also uncovered a letter that Rubio sent to the Biden administration in 2022, asking for more foreign aid to counter China's rising influence. And now Rubio, though, echoing some of the attacks he once dismissed.

Joining us now is John Oldfield. He's the CEO of Accelerate Global, a firm advising NGOs and government contractors.

John, thank you so much for being here with us today.

I first want to get your reaction to this judge's order and -- and what it may mean for the people you're talking to.

JOHN OLDFIELD, CEO, ACCELERATE GLOBAL: Yes. Jessica. Thank you. It's great to be with you again.

I -- we support Judge Nichol's letter and the temporary restraining order associated with that. It gives a small group of USAID employees a few more days. So I applaud that. We applaud that.

What it doesn't do is make any real effort at stopping this unconstitutional, illegal, abrupt dismantling of an entire statutorily required federal agency.

So I suggest that if the legal system doesn't push further, doesn't build on Judge Nichol's temporary restraining order, you know, USAID is going to disappear as early as next Friday as we know it.

We will continue to lose lives and livelihoods. We will continue to lose ground to the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative. I mean, look at Russian propaganda this morning. They're crazy excited about the dismantling of USAID.

We will lose the moral high ground. We will lose our status as influencers to the Russians and violent extremist organizations. We will lose access to critical minerals in important countries of national security interest to the United States, like the Democratic Republic of Congo.

If USAID goes away, as it may, well, in a week we lose those trusted relationships that we spent decades building up with our partners.

DEAN: Yes. I mean, in the clips we played, you know, now, Secretary of State-then Senator Rubio laying out all of that really is as to why it -- why he thought it was important at the time.

I think your approach to all of this is what I think we're hearing and starting to hear again and again. It's not that you can't look for waste. It's not that you can't reform an agency. It's about how it's being done.

OLDFIELD: Well, I think that's exactly right, Jessica. There -- the time for foreign assistance reform is always -- the place for foreign assistance reform is everywhere.

Now, what most people know about USAID is it's work in water, in health, in preventing infectious diseases, in democracy and governance, in conflict prevention across the globe.

Now what Secretary of State Rubio understands, and what Senator Moran understands, from Kansas, is the direct positive impact and benefit that the U.S. Agency for International Development has on the United States.

Who's watching? Well, I'll tell you who's watching. Kansas farmers are watching, those folks that are producing soybeans, corn, wheat, the logistics providers, the shipping companies, the loading companies that are moving American commodities overseas, farm commodities, pharmaceuticals, other goods and services.

Those folks are waiting. Not only are they waiting for that $2 billion piece of business that directly impacts the United States. They're waiting to be paid half a billion of expenses that they've already incurred.

So the U.S. Agency for International Development has an extraordinarily positive impact overseas building these trusted relationships. But we have to acknowledge the access to critical minerals for our cell phones, for our medical devices, for our weapons systems that these trusted bilateral relationships with our trading partners help to ensure.

[16:35:00]

And you touch on something, too, that I think doesn't always get talked about, which is that this doesn't -- this isn't just about shrinking a federal agency in Washington, D.C., in the swamp, per se.

There are farmers in Kansas that are sending their -- their wheat or whatever they're growing overseas. There are farmers and -- and business owners across this country that do participate in this in a way. OLDFIELD: Well, that's right. I mean, and I wouldn't limit it to farm

commodities --

DEAN: Right.

OLDFIELD: -- and medical devices and critical minerals. Listen, I mean, USAID isn't -- isn't just going around the world giving presents to people. USAID is making investments on behalf of the U.S. taxpayer as stewarded by the U.S. Congress.

If -- if we want to lessen illegal immigration to this country, USAID does that by investing in economic development in Central American companies. And frankly, giving those folks a place to live, prosperous, safe, healthy lives instead of trying this dangerous crossing into our borders, right?

If you want to prevent -- I know you guys are covering Ebola a lot these days. If you want to prevent Ebola from breaking out of East Africa and hopping on a plane, an eight hour plane ride back to Washington, D.C.

If you want to prevent that, USAID does that by working with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, another agency very much under threat right now, to prevent that Ebola outbreak or other infectious diseases that emanate from developing countries, from getting on that plane and sickening and killing millions of Americans.

So, on the conflict side of things, USAID stabilization efforts work to prevent small conflicts from getting much bigger.

You know, our secretary of defense yesterday morning at the Pentagon, at the town hall meeting, said his job is to deter conflict. And when you don't have water and you're an Iraqi farmer or a Syrian farmer, you can't feed your family because you can't farm.

You become desperate. And desperate people do desperate things, including turning to violent extremist organizations. So if Secretary Hegseth actually wants to deter conflict, he needs to encourage Congress to fully appropriate funds for State Department and USAID.

DEAN: And you rushed against this. But just the idea that it -- that without with the U.S. backing out of the world stage like this, that it does open the door for Russia, for China.

One former administrator of USAID, writing in an op-ed that "Moscow and Beijing are cheering this attack on the agency. Quote, "They understand what those seeking to dismantle the agency are desperate to hide from the American people. USAID has become America's superpower in a world defined by threats that cross borders and amid growing strategic competition."

It gets back at this idea of soft power and what that -- what sort of benefit that might have, both for people abroad, but -- but really for America.

OLDFIELD: Well, that's right. And I certainly support that statement from Administrator Power.

But it's important to recognize that five previous USAID administrators essentially say the same thing. They might have policy disagreements. That's fine. But we cannot unilaterally, unconstitutionally, illegally dismantle an entire agency.

"Soft power" is exactly the right word. You know, the world is watching us. And China is watching very carefully. Russia is watching very carefully. Al-Shabab and ISIS are watching very carefully.

U.S. farmers that you talk about, that are watching very carefully, as are their elected representatives in the Kansas and the Iowa and the North Carolina delegations.

We -- the more this process unfolds, the more USAID continues to be dismantled, the more time we lose, the more trust we lose with our bilateral partners across Africa, across Asia, across Latin America.

If you talk about building a barn, it takes years. You've got the architects and the engineers to build the barn, and it takes five seconds for an arsonist with a match to burn the thing down.

Now that farm needs a foundation. USAID is built on a foundation of trust. And I have two big concerns. We're losing that foundation right now by completely dismantling the agency.

And then, secondly, in a larger concern is that USAID is the trial balloon. USAID is the -- the tip of the iceberg here. And I would ask 100 members of the Senate and the 53 Republican Senators, in particular, what comes next.

You know, is it the FBI? Is it the CIA? Is it the Department of Justice? Is it -- is it the Small Business Administration? Is it the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that's going to allow Ebola to come into this country or make that more likely?

I'm very concerned about USAID. I'm concerned about the rule of law. I'm concerned about any number of other federal agencies that might get the ax as well.

[16:40:02]

DEAN: Yes. All right. Well, John Oldfield, thank you for your time. We really appreciate it.

OLDFIELD: It's my pleasure. Thank you, Jessica.

DEAN: Still ahead, you've probably seen it at the grocery store. Egg prices that seem to go up and up and up. What's behind that spike in prices? Well talk about it. That's next.

You're in the CNN NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DEAN: As bird flu spreads, New York Governor Kathy Hochul taking an extraordinary step in shutting down live poultry markets in some counties in New York.

This comes as the price of eggs skyrockets. Some experts think the price could go up 20 percent this year.

CNN's Nick Watt got a firsthand look at what one ranch in California is doing as prices keep rising.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

(CROSSTALK)

FRANK HILLIKER, OWNER, HILLIKER FARMS: And you can have two.

NICK WATT, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Frank Hilliker is rationing his eggs. The line forms around 7:00 a.m.

WATT (on camera): How many eggs do you eat?

EMILIE SOUTHWARD, SHOPPER AT HILLIKER FARMS: Myself, probably, three -- three a day.

WATT: What?

SOUTHWARD: Yes.

WATT: That's a lot, no?

[16:45:01]

SOUTHWARD: That's a normal amount.

HILLIKER: Two dozen?

WATT (voice-over): The average American eats about 284 eggs a year. Well, they used to.

(on camera): You're consciously dialing back on the eggs.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Oh, for sure, yes.

WATT: Because of the price?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Right.

WATT(voice-over): President Donald Trump claims the high price of eggs helped him win the White House.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: They were double and triple the price over a short period of time. And I won an election based on that.

(SHOUTING)

WATT: He made wild promises.

TRUMP: We're going to bring prices way down, and we're going to get it done fast.

WATT: Then he got egged in the first White House briefing.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Egg prices have skyrocketed since President Trump took office.

WATT: Democratic lawmakers urged him in a letter to crack down on corporate profiteering.

HILLIKER: They put price controls on things, but now, all of a sudden, we're Cuba or Venezuela. You know, who wants to be like that?

(CROSSTALK)

WATT: Waffle House just introduced a temporary 50 cent egg surcharge. And Roberto's tacos -- around the corner from Franks Farm -- is charging customers an extra buck 50 for all eggy dishes.

WATT (on camera): Who are they blaming?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, they take it out on me.

WATT: Smells rather noticeable.

HILLIKER: What smell?

WATT: Do you eat a lot of them?

HILLIKER: No.

WATT: They're too expensive.

HILLIKER: It's gone from $2 to $3 a dozen to $9 a dozen.

WATT: That's massive.

HILLIKER: It is. It's crazy.

(CLUCKING)

WATT (voice-over): And predicted by the USDA to climb even higher.

HILLIKER: Current egg shortages because of the bird flu?

WATT: It is, fully?

HILLIKER: Because of the bird flu.

(CLUCKING)

WATT (voice-over): The only way to stop the spread is to cull millions of infected birds, so slashing egg supply.

HILLIKER: These astronomical prices are all due on supply and demand. Economics 101. There's nothing Biden could have done to stop the bird flu. Look, there's nothing President Trump could have done to stop the bird flu. It's neither of their faults.

WATT (on camera): You literally have all your eggs in one basket?

HILLIKER: Yes, I do. You got to be careful with that.

WATT: There are so many other bad egg wordplays that we could use, but --

HILLIKER: Exactly.

WATT (voice-over): Nick Watt, CNN, Lakeside, California.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

DEAN: Still ahead, Superbowl LIX kicking off in New Orleans in just about 24 hours. Will the Chiefs pull off an historic three-peat? And who are people rooting for down there?

You're in the CNN NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:52:15]

DEAN: In a little more than 24 hours, Superbowl LIX will kick off in New Orleans, as the Kansas City Chiefs go head to head against the Philadelphia Eagles.

If the Chiefs win, they would be the first team to win three straight Superbowls. If the birds take it, though, it would be their second Superbowl victory.

President Trump, we know, will be in New Orleans for the game, the first time a sitting president has gone to the big game.

CNN sports analyst, Christine Brennan, is joining us now with more.

Christine, always good to see you.

First, I just want to know what you're watching for tomorrow. A lot of dynamics.

CHRISTINE BRENNAN, CNN SPORTS ANALYST: Well, absolutely. Certainly, on the field of play. You know, can the Eagles pull it off? The Philadelphia Eagles were very close two years ago.

These same two teams played, as you know, just two years ago, Jessica. And I think the Eagles are a better team now than they were two years ago. Veteran team the great running back, Saquon Barkley, who can literally take over a game.

And Jalen Hurts, if he doesn't make mistakes. He's obviously a great runner, great passer. I think the Eagles could possibly do this.

In fact, I will say that I think they will, except for the fact that you should never, ever go against the Kansas City Chiefs -- (LAUGHTER)

BRENNAN: -- because Patrick Mahomes always finds a way to win.

And a great stat. If the game is close, and often these games are close, the -- the Chiefs now have won 17 consecutive one-score games, meaning every time it's been close at the end, 17 straight games, they've won that game.

Which certainly portends great things for them tomorrow. But I'll still say somehow the Eagles will pull it off.

DEAN: Yes. And it does seem like people, some people are rooting against the Chiefs. What's that about?

BRENNAN: You know, I think we love -- we love winners and we love big personalities in sports. Until we don't. And we get a little sick and tired of them. Right?

And as you mentioned, you know, of course, if -- if the Chiefs do this, it would be three in a row. And no team has ever won three Superbowls in a row.

I've covered a lot of Superbowls. I didn't even know that stat. You know, I kind of thought, well, maybe the Steelers did. No. 49ers. No. You know, it's just kind of amazing that's never happened.

So once you had a team winning and winning -- and of course, they were there before as well. So you know the idea that this team has been around the Superbowl. Mahomes, pretty much his entire career. And he's not even 30 years old yet. I think there's a sense that, hey, the rest of the nation might like to see something else.

So having said that, I don't know that it's a, quote, unquote, "hatred" of the Chiefs, the way that teams have hated, while either their rivals are really despised, their rivals.

But I do think there's a sense that could we move on? Could we have another team win this thing? And the Eagles did win, but it's been several years. And 2018 is when they last won the Superbowl.

So at least it would be a little bit fresher to have that headline, the Eagles winning, than the Chiefs doing it all over again.

DEAN: Yes. And we know President Trump is planning to go to this game, which you know, anywhere a president goes, it does become inherently political. It's happening as the NFL removed the words "End racism" from the end zones.

[16:55:06]

How do you feel like the NFL is walking this tightrope between its players, who care deeply about, let's say, DEI, care deeply about social issues that they want to stand up for and the president, who is at odds with a lot of where these players are? BRENNAN: All you have to do is look at the two quarterbacks, both

black men. That is such a rarity. Back 30, 40 years ago, black men, you know, we saw very, very few black quarterbacks. And it was a terrible stain on the game.

And that has changed. So you've got both Mahomes and Hurts playing. Obviously, black men playing, starting quarterback. So there's an amazing statement right there, as -- as it should be.

Also Roger Goodell, the commissioner of the NFL, earlier this week, he actually was asked about this. And he said that the NFL is not pushing back at all away from DEI. He said it wasn't a trend. They didn't do it for that reason.

And he said the NFL is stronger and better because of its diversity and inclusion. And -- and they're hiring. And there have been times when I've been working on a story, Jessica, where I will literally talk to one woman after another after another in the NFL office.

They have -- they have really, I believe, certainly they understand the power of women. They want women to be fans. It's close to 50 over 50. That's why they love having Taylor Swift around, because she brings women to the game and girls to the game.

And I think that Roger Goodell, I believe what he's saying, because I have witnessed it as a reporter in terms of the idea of getting so many more women involved in the NFL league office and in teams, and obviously, that goes without saying. it's a majority black league.

So there certainly are things there that the NFL is doing, and we can see it with our own eyes.

DEAN: Yes. Well, tomorrow will be fun. We're looking forward to it.

Christine Brennan, as always, it is great to see you. Thanks so much.

BRENNAN: Thank you, Jessica.

DEAN: We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)