Court Blocks Trump Tariffs
47:54 Share

Your gut affects everything, even your mood. So Oli created two brand new products to take care of your insides. Oli Big Ten Probiotic has 10 strains of probiotics, their most ever, to support a healthy gut microbiome, immune system, and stress response. And Oli Super Good Superfoods delivers 15 superfoods in tasty gummy form. Find them at Oli.com and exclusively at Walmart. Oli! These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.

Hi, this is Joe from Vanta. In today's digital world, compliance regulations are changing constantly, and earning customer trust has never mattered more. Vanta helps companies get compliant fast and stay secure with the most advanced AI, automation, and continuous monitoring out there. So whether you're a startup going for your first SOC 2 or ISO 27001, or a growing enterprise managing vendor RIST, Vanta makes it quick, easy, and scalable. And I'm not just saying that because I work here. Get started at Vanta.com.

It is Thursday, May 29th, and here's what's happening right now on CNN This Morning. President Trump's sweeping global tariffs blocked. A court says he overstepped his authority. How the Trump administration is responding. Plus... Harvard has to show us their lists.

It's graduation day at Harvard, but just down the road, the fate of international students will be in the hands of a federal judge. And when you hear crypto crime, you probably think about someone behind a keyboard, not someone with a wrench. Why wealthy people in crypto are an even bigger target. Also, buy now, pay later. More and more people seem to be using apps like Affirm and Klarna. Is this a sign of economic strain?

It's 6 a.m. here on the East Coast. Here is a live look at the White House. Good morning, everybody. I'm Adi Cornish. I want to thank you for waking up with me. And we're going to begin today with a conversation about the president's tariffs because they are on pause again, but not because of him. This time it's because of a court ruling.

So the U.S. Court of International Trade in Manhattan ruled that the president overstepped his authority when declaring an emergency economic power to slap tariffs on essentially the entire world. So the ruling even applies to the president's Liberation Day tariffs, which he unveiled with a ceremony and a chart at the White House just last month.

So we're going to be charging a discounted reciprocal tariff of 34%. I think, in other words, they charge us, we charge them. We're going to charge them 20%, so we're charging them essentially half. We're going to charge them 46% tariff. We're going to charge them 32%. Switzerland, 61% to 31%. Indonesia, Malaysia, Cambodia. Oh, look at Cambodia, 97%.

That was on April 2nd. The mood at the White House now, very different after this ruling. White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller posting, quote, the judicial coup is out of control. World markets, however, seem a little bit happier, even as the Trump administration plans to appeal. So joining me now to discuss CNN's Mark Stewart in Beijing. Hi there, Mark. Good morning. Hi, Audie. Great to see you.

So I think the thrust of this case essentially found that the court said your ideas of what the emergency is, whether it be the fentanyl crisis or your other concerns, they don't quite meet the bar and therefore your power to do to take these actions is limited. What does this mean for China? Does this affect that big swath of tariffs that that they were still dealing with from the U.S.?

Well, look, from the very start, China had said this was unfair and that it was going to appeal to the World Trade Organization. But now it's getting some validation, if you will, from this judge in the United States.

Here's one thing which I have observed by my time here in China. The Chinese government is really consistent in its messaging. When this whole trade dispute first unraveled, what, eight-plus weeks ago, it said that there were no winners in the trade war and that protectionism is harmful. Well, the response that we heard today from the Chinese government to this action by the court in New York was the exact same verbiage.

there are no winners in the trade or tariff dispute and that protectionism is harmful. So China, I mean, give it credit, is being very narrow focused as to how it views this. No indication as to what it will do next. I think that there is hope by both nations. We have the world's largest and second largest economy. I think there is hope that there would be some kind of

trade deal. This perhaps gives China a little bit more leverage because the United States is not holding these tariffs as a tool for punishment. Both nations have ways they can hurt each other. I mean, the United States can certainly do things. China holds all of these precious rare earth minerals, which are so valuable. So

The road ahead, at least from the Chinese perspective, China is not revealing its cards what it's going to do next. But I think it would be safe to say that at least on the surface, perhaps it feels some kind of validation already. Yeah, I mean, the tariffs aren't the only issue they are dealing with when it comes to U.S. policy. We have an announcement from the secretary of state, Marco Rubio, saying that the U.S. will begin revoking visas.

of students from China, including those with connections to the Chinese Communist Party or studying in critical fields. Can you talk about what's behind the thinking here? And again, like, is this something that China can or will react to?

Right. Well, as soon as I heard that news, my first reaction is how is this going to impact these trade talks? It's yet another point of contention. And Beijing really isn't weighing in on that so much, only to say that this is harmful and that this is unfair and it's hurting students.

Yet at the same time, I don't think anyone here in Beijing is really surprised by this. I mean, let's think back to when Marco Rubio was in Congress. I mean, he established himself very early on as taking a very firm stance against China, you know, China hawk. And the government was critical of him when he was in Congress. So this is not that much of a surprise.

If we look at the numbers, about 275,000 Chinese students have come to the United States to study. I mean, there are some analysts who feel that this could actually help China in the sense that all of the smart minds that went to Harvard and other universities, well, maybe they'll choose to stay back in China and help develop things when it comes to technology or for medicine. So I think that's where China stands right now.

Not a surprise, though. I think that Marco Rubio was waiting to flex his muscle as Secretary of State. And this was the time and this was the opportunity. That's CNN's Mark Stewart. Thanks so much for speaking with us. You bet.

Coming up on CNN this morning, the first buddy goes back to his day job. Why Elon Musk is getting out of Doge. Plus, the big beautiful bill lives up to its name in that it's over a thousand pages long. But what are the key issues that could actually impact your daily life? And testimony about burnt out cars, freak offs and violence. But could Sean Combs take the stand? I don't know that I could keep him off the stand.

I think he is very eager to tell his story.

Craftsman days are here at Lowe's with big savings on the tools you need. Save $100 on the Craftsman V26 Tool Power Tool Combo Kit, now at $199. No matter what the project is, Craftsman's high-quality, high-performance products empower you to build on. Stop by your nearest Lowe's store and check out the full line of Craftsman tools today. Valid through 618 while supplies last. Selection varies by location.

You may get a little excited when you shop at Burlington. Burlington saves you up to 60% off other retailers' prices every day. Will it be the low prices or the great brands? Burlington. Deals. Brands. Wow. I told you so. Styles and selections vary by store.

Elon Musk going back to his day job as he leaves Washington and his role with Doge. In a post, Musk thanked the president for letting him reduce what he calls wasteful spending and said the Doge mission will only strengthen over time as it becomes a way of life throughout the government. He appears to be somewhat disillusioned with Washington and took a swipe at the president's agenda on the way out the door. I was like disappointed to see the massive spending vote, frankly.

which increases the budget deficit, not just decrease it, and it reminds the work that the Doge team is doing. I think a bill can be big or it can be beautiful, but I don't know if it can be both.

Joining me now in the group chat, Camila De Chalas, CNN White House reporter, Margaret Tulliv, senior contributor at Axios, and Jasmine Wright, politics reporter at Notice. Okay, good morning, everybody. Welcome to the chat. I have to admit, I feel a little bit surprised that this is happening, not with a bang, but with a whimper in terms of how it's...

playing out his goodbye. Did we see, and Camille I want to start with you, any cracks in this relationship that we should have paid closer attention to?

Definitely in the first few days in office, Trump kind of put out that he really wanted to do this cutting of waste cutting. And you saw with Doge just going into these federal agencies and making these cuts and doing it in a way that there was this little bit of turmoil and there was this backlash that Trump received. It was just saying, hey, are we doing this the correct way? You had some Republican lawmakers coming out. But did Trump receive it or did Elon? Like for a while I thought Elon was the heat shield. Yeah.

for the criticism of Doge. - I think he was. And I actually am not surprised by this kind of whimper that you see Elon going out of. In the last like 72 hours, you've seen him express regret. You've seen him express some kind of, you know, tension, upsetness with the way that DC works. He obviously slammed that one big beautiful bill. You just heard that thought right there. - Not just slammed it, but undermined its very premise. - Yeah, and undermined.

exactly what it does, which is what Trump wants it to do. But I think, frankly, if you look back at Elon's tenure, it was kind of always going to end this way. No, it didn't end up with this big. You haven't seen it end up with this big fight. When you talk to White House aides, they say that Trump still loves Elon. Trump was asked, kind of teed up in the Oval Office yesterday to discredit and slam Elon for his comments, and he didn't.

He defended the bill, said there's some things he didn't like about it, but he didn't attack Elon directly. And so I think that they've been kind of setting up this whimper for him to leave. Yeah. Well, Margaret, let me let you jump in because I want your eyebrow is doing a thing. People can't see it. You can't see it under the frames, but it's wiggling and under there. That's the beauty of these frames. You can't actually see what's going on.

- First of all, I don't think this means the relationship between the two of them is over. - No, all those doge workers are still there. - He and his folks had a huge impact

internally in what the federal government looks like. And still have access. And still have access to a ton of data. And he used this time to maneuver his many companies and investments and holdings into much stronger position, including the potential for federal contracts. And just because you're out of the Trump administration doesn't mean you're out of Trump universe. We've seen this with... Not if you're a donor of that scale. Or if you were influential. Look at Steve Bannon, for example. You remember some people who just...

landed on earth might not realize that Steve Bannon was hugely important to Trump's, you know, the beginning of Trump's first administration and now his huge influence on the outside. Yeah, Camila? I just, yeah. Margaret has a great point there. It's the term of access and who has the president's ear. And that is what we're going to see in the few coming months and even years while he's still in office. There's still a lot of things that Elon Musk has made it clear that he would still like to see the government do. And that is in terms of how this can actually carry out in these federal agencies that

play a very big role in everyday American lives. And that's what we're going to see is that there might be things that we're hearing behind the scenes that he wants to see Trump do, and he's going to have a very big influence. I think that's the term here, is access and influence to actually carry out some of the policies that he still wants to see implemented. Yeah, I'm going to be watching it too because Musk has also expressed some disappointment with politics in general, talking about like, well, maybe...

I'm not going to be doing that as much. He's got plenty of other things to spend his money on. I'm sure we're not going to hear the end of this group chat. Yeah, exactly. Stay with me. We've got a lot more to talk about ahead on CNN this morning. Eat now, pay later. You can now finance your takeout. What could go wrong? Plus graduation day at Harvard. And at the same time, the lawyers are in court battling out with the White House. Here's a live look at Boston this morning.

I have spent $32,196.23 on Affirm and Klarna since 2022. And the big question is, what did I purchase? All kinds of stuff. I think I've even gotten gift cards for random stuff. You can pretty much purchase anything you want almost on Affirm and Klarna. You can, but should you?

Buy now, pay later services are more popular than ever. I wanted to dig into this in this week's episode of my podcast, The Assignment, because this is all coming as household debt is increasing and credit card debt is falling.

In the meantime, you got past due student loans that are hitting credit reports for the first time in five years. So those delinquencies saw a big jump in the first quarter of this year. So that's why I actually got to talk with Klarna CEO Sebastian Semyakovsky to get his take on whether the demand for services like this is actually saying something about the state of this economy. I am mostly focusing on what's happening with the jobs, because in the end, it's the jobs that impact whether you can pay off or not, right?

And if you look at the jobs, I'm concerned that AI may start having an impact on the employment rates in the U.S. And the question is how. Yeah. And we should say you say this as a person who actually tried to do some restructuring where you used more AI rather than workers. We have also like despite like, you know, mixed writings about it. But the truth is we were 5,500 people about two years ago and we're 3,000 now. So we are growing.

you know, and we're a significantly bigger business. So we have been able to utilize AI to become fewer to do the same amount of or even more work, right?

And I think that that is becoming a reality. And it's different this time around, because maybe, like, as I remember, as a kid, when, you know, when things got worse in in the economy, it would usually hit blue collar workers, you would hear like, now they have, you know, they have let go of like, a lot of blue collar workers, right? Like, that was always the thing, people lost their jobs in the factories.

I think this time around, the risk is that, and I hear that now as I hear a lot of manufacturing companies announce, they're not touching their blue-collar workers. Or for the record, the bank. No one's coming to a bank teller anymore. So glad I found another line of work. All the factory workers are staying, but they are reducing the size of their headquarters, their offices, the knowledge workers. And so the white-collar jobs are at risk this time around.

The group chat is back. The reason why I wanted to bring this to you guys is because I have been digging way deep on AI. And one of the things people are talking about is where it disrupts the workforce is actually kind of entry level, low level. And it feels like the Venn diagram between I have student loans and a low level white collar job, and I have thousands of dollars in stacked loans on buy now, pay later services might soon become a circle.

And that you have people making their lives work with credit. With these tiny micro, they're not even loans. It's interesting because I think we've been thinking about this trend with Klarna and with Buy Now Pay Later.

BNPL, there's even an acronym for it. That's how big it's become. I think we've been thinking about it in terms of the way the current economy feels. What impact are Trump's tariffs going to have? And what's the kind of post-COVID blowback, the weird economic situation? But what he's talking about is actually next wave. It's the thing that hasn't come yet and the thing that's starting to happen, but hasn't really hit us yet. My colleagues at Axios, Jim Van Ey, Mike Allen, have just been also writing about this this week, the

massive hit to entry level white collar jobs and how whether it could impact the 2028 race. There is an obvious danger to this, which is that this would be like putting everything on your credit card if you had no ability to pay it back. But that's what they say. I mean, the CLARNA CEO was like, look, it's just another credit card option. Do you think it is? Do you have any? It's higher interest. CLARNA, Affirm, anything. Okay, let me tell you, I have done CLARNA and I'm just going to say, don't do it. Don't do it.

Sorry, mister. - Yeah. - Well, even he was like doing it for essentials is not a great idea. - It's just, I mean, who would have thought

I would have thought that people buying Chipotle on Klarna would not be able to pay back their loans. Nothing wrong with Chipotle, but... Yeah, pay back their loans. I mean, particularly with the interest rates. I mean, just a personal story. My brother's about to graduate from college and he's a coder. And my dad, my 70-year-old dad, has been talking my ear off the last two weeks about how he's nervous that my brother won't be able to get an entry-level job because they're replacing code entry-level AIs with AI.

And so I think it's a real thing that's not just we're talking about on this panel. People in the real world are talking about this issue, but it's also antithesis to what Donald Trump is trying to project, right, with these tariffs. He's talking about reimagining or reconfiguring the way that American manufacturing works. But is that necessarily the type of changes that the American public

wants right now or needs. Even as we look at good economic numbers, one of the things I learned in reporting the story was about phantom debt, that BNPL services, they are not licensed banks. Usually, and as a result, they're not reporting everything. They just got some regulatory relief, too. From what regulator? I think they were doged. So I don't know who's going to be enforcing that regulation. Camille, I don't know if this is something you've used, you know about, but kind of how are you thinking about how this situation

in terms of our economy? I think a lot of when we're talking about the economy and what's going to impact Americans, credit's one, but Jasmine just mentioned a really great point of just saying, is this what's coming of them paying their debt

Also, he's talking about manufacturing jobs and entry level jobs are going to be heavily impacted. But it's also looking at the people that are graduating, like you mentioned. Are they going to go in and actually get a job where they can pay off their debt? And a lot of this, when he's talking about initiatives for education and preparing the next generation to use AI, it's really putting them in a position that there is going to be sustainable and that is succinct. This is in California.

AI is just one of those archetypes that is changing and the evolution of it is changing by the day. And we're still learning the actual impact of it and how to use it in our systems. And so this is something where, too, if we're talking about making jobs, like Trump has talked a lot about we're creating more jobs, we're trying to boost this economy.

talking about a lot of the job loss that could potentially come in the next few years and potentially impact the next generation. People are more aware of it. That is something to look at and how to really prepare them for the next future. Okay. You guys, thank you for talking with me about this because it's the kind of thing where you do an interview and then you go around to everyone like, oh my God, did you know about Buy Now Pay Later? There's new episodes of The Assignment every Thursday. If you want to listen to this one, it's out right now.

And still ahead on CNN This Morning, the latest in the trial of Sean Diddy Combs. What a celebrity stylist said about the rap mogul's relationship with Cassie Ventura. Plus, the House passed the president's tax and spending bill. What's actually in it? One congressman learned about part of it after the vote. We're going to have more from the group chat. She's made up her mind.

Boring money moves make kinda lame songs, but they sound pretty sweet to your wallet. BNC Bank. Brilliantly boring since 1865.

This episode is brought to you by LifeLock. Not everyone is careful with your personal information, which might explain why there's a victim of identity theft every five seconds in the U.S. Fortunately, there's LifeLock. LifeLock monitors hundreds of millions of data points a second for threats to your identity. If your identity is stolen, a U.S.-based restoration specialist will fix it, guaranteed, or your money back. Save up to 40% your first year by visiting LifeLock.com slash podcast. Terms apply.

Good morning everybody, I'm Audie Cornish and thank you for joining me on CNN This Morning. It is 33 minutes past the hour and here's what's happening right now. Stock futures predict strong gains at the opening bell after a federal court blocked most of the president's tariffs. So now the tariffs on China, Mexico, Canada and the 10% universal levy are all on pause. But the Trump administration says it is appealing the decision.

Today is graduation day at Harvard. At the same time, a few miles away, a judge will be hearing arguments and considering evidence in the fight between the school and the Trump administration over the future of international students there. Also, the State Department currently reviewing all Harvard-affiliated visa holders.

and China firing back this morning at the Trump administration's plan to revoke the visas for hundreds of thousands of Chinese students specifically. Within the past hour, China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs claimed this was a "politically motivated and discriminatory move."

And a celebrity stylist who worked with Sean Diddy Combs for about a decade will be back on the stand in the Music Mogul's trial this morning. Deontay Nash testified about several incidents in which he claims to have seen Combs assault former girlfriend Cassie Ventura, and he explained one moment to the jurors about when Diddy came to his home looking for her.

saying quote, "Puff came in and he was like, 'Where the F is she?' He started looking all around my house in the closets. He went in the oven. I don't know why he looked in the oven. And he asked me where she was." Right here with me to discuss all that, former federal prosecutor, Elise Adamson. Elise, I'm sorry I have you on the Diddy Docket, but every day there's something looking in the oven. So here we go.

The stylist, why is this figure in the employer's orbit significant?

Well, Adi, there's a lot of significance to this stylist. And honestly, when I saw him on the witness list, I didn't appreciate the significance until after this testimony. So first of all, again, he's offering some insight into how this Combs enterprise operated, which is key to that RICO charge. We've talked about this before. It can't just be Combs operating on his own. He needs to be operating with people.

furthering this corrupt enterprise. And the stylist is there behind closed doors, sometimes silently, while people are still doing business, right? People are still doing business and also the business of the sex trafficking, which is kind of at the heart of this case. And I also wanted to say significant to the sex trafficking charge was a lot of his testimony. He talked about black

mail. He talked about seeing Cassie be bloody. And most significantly, he talked about Cassie telling him she didn't want to participate in those freak-offs. So his testimony was exceptionally helpful for two charges, the RICO and the sex trafficking. Wait, say that last part again. So is he one of the first people to come up on the stand and say specifically she did not want to be a part of this? Yeah, that's right. And so Cassie herself, when she testified, she made clear that she did not want to participate in these freak-offs.

But subsequently, some of the witnesses said it seemed like she was cooperative or she was enjoying herself. Nash's testimony corroborated what Cassie had said, that at some point, she just didn't want to do it anymore. Some of the testimony was heartbreaking, that she wanted to go to a party. She was still young, like a young kid. And Diddy said, no, he wanted her at a hotel to

to participate in this freak-off, and he asked, "Well, why are you doing it if something to the extent of why are you doing it if you don't want to do it?" She said, "Because he wants me to." Almost like she has no choice. That is completely in contradiction to the defense's opening, painting her as some strong woman making her own decisions. She seemed like a scared young person who was under the control of a very powerful man. Okay, the defense team at one point asked the judge to declare a mistrial.

Is this a Hail Mary? Is this just a thing you do? Help me understand a legal mindset. - Yeah, very dramatic moment in court, of course, when the defense jumps up and asks for a mistrial. It's actually very common though. A lot of times the defense is trying to preserve an appellate issue. They also wanna shoot their shot. Maybe a judge will buy their legal argument. It was all based on some fingerprint cards. We had an LAPD fire,

investigator testifying and they were talking about the investigation in that Molotov cocktail bombing and they were talking about how the fingerprint cards where they were testing for prints mysteriously had been destroyed. And the defense was saying, well, the line of questioning can leave a misimpression with the jury that Combs was the one that destroyed it. They said it was so prejudicial you've got to throw out the whole case. And the judge, what the judge is going to do is just instruct the jury to

not listen to that testimony, strike that testimony as irrelevant. And that is the proper cure. - But you also signal to jurors, we're worried about this. We're worried that you heard it. - Sometimes that's the thinking. It's so key that you said that because when deciding whether to make these objections,

you do draw attention to testimony when a judge then gives a limiting instruction and says, okay, you may have heard that they testified X. You need to disregard that. Do not use it in your deliberations. It's irrelevant. I mean, you're- Yeah, trying to unring the bell. Unring the bell. One more thing. We have heard in the past his lawyer talking about the idea that Diddy would want to testify. It's one thing to say that,

ahead of your trial. It's another thing to sit through the trial, see how it's going, and make that call. What are gonna be the signals to you that that might actually happen? I honestly don't know. And I'm saying this because he's in so much legal peril that putting him on the stand

in my opinion, would be probably a bad tactical decision because the government has so much information that they can go and cross him on. If he doesn't come out as credible— You're saying cross-examine, like there's a lot of questions that have been raised. Correct. So if he were to go on the stand, would he be doing— is painting the picture that this was all voluntary, he's just into kink, it's consensual. So he would get to tell his side of the story, which would be very helpful.

However, the government would then get to go and bring in all these documents, ask him all these questions, and if he comes off as unlikable or not a truth teller, that could potentially really sink him. And the defense is doing the best job they possibly can. A lot of times when they put a defendant on the stand, it's either because the

the client insists upon it, or it is a Hail Mary. They didn't get out from cross or through their case what they needed to. And so they have to put the defendant on the stand so they can go and piece together this story.

I should say, we don't know that's going to happen, but I think now we know the scenarios where it could. It would be, if it did, I would be heading up to New York to watch it. I'll tell you that right now. And we would have you on. So thank you, Elise Adamson, former federal prosecutor. And of course, if you want to know more details, get the download at the end of each day. Check out the CNN podcast hosted by Laura Coates. It's called Trial by Jury. New episodes out almost every day.

OK, I want to move on to domestic politics because that legislation, the tax and spending bill that the president wants, well, he's got it for now. But what's inside it? How could it impact you? Some voters in Nebraska confronted their congressman, Republican Mike Flood, and he admitted that he voted in favor of the bill without reading a provision that would make it harder for judges to hold parties in contempt for defying court orders.

I do believe that the federal district courts, when issuing an injunction, it should have legal effect. This provision was unknown to me when I voted for the bill.

Okay, among other top concerns for voters, nearly $700 billion in cuts to Medicaid, $267 billion slashed from the food stamp program, those numbers according to analysis from the Congressional Budget Office done before some of the last minute changes to the bill. So bringing in CNN senior writer, Tammy Lubbe, and I know it is massive. I actually downloaded the PDF and tried to do some scanning, took a minute.

- A lot of pages. - There's a lot of pages and I noticed a lot of fees. Like there's a lot of little costs tucked in there. What did you notice? - Well, what I really was looking at were the safety net changes.

And there are a lot of provisions that are a lot of concern. There are certainly a lot of provisions of a lot of concern to a lot of people. The fees you mentioned would be levied on immigrants applying for asylum, applying for work authorization. But there would also be a lot of changes that would be made to people who rely on the nation's safety net program. As you mentioned, nearly a trillion dollars of cuts. This would be historic, experts tell me.

And it could result, just the Medicaid changes alone could result in nearly 8 million people losing their health insurance coverage over the next 10 years. And that figure is actually expected to grow based on some last minute changes in the bill.

the bill would introduce work requirements into Medicaid for the first time in its 60-year history. And it would also reduce a lot of federal support to states, and states really rely on that money to provide the benefits to people. Now, the Republicans say that they are looking to protect the most vulnerable and that these changes are designed to get able-bodied adults who should work, in their view, should work, you

you know, into the job market and off of federal assistance. But experts tell me that the changes would actually affect a lot of those very vulnerable people, including people with disabilities, children, senior citizens, parents.

And yeah, and it's not only people, actually. One of the things that you saw several Republican senators come out against, you know, you've heard concerns from Maine Senator Susan Collins and Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski. They immediately looked at what some of the Medicaid changes might mean for hospitals, particularly rural hospitals.

Tammy, I want to ask you something else because there was actually, we played a little clip from a town hall and in Nebraska, I think in that same conversation, you had this voter basically explaining why he felt the need just to go to it.

Congress is doing a pretty fundamentally terrible thing for our country, both like fiscally and I would argue morally. So I think it's important for me to come out here and let them know that, you know, we see through it.

I wanted to bring this to you because we've talked so much about Medicaid, and I think maybe for a lot of people, they feel like that is not related to their lives. But I hear a young person looking at the cost of this, looking at getting a sense of what's in it and being unhappy. Will it affect people kind of in that middle class? And do you think people are starting to understand that?

Yeah, I mean, it certainly will. Even the Medicaid changes could affect people in the middle class because if hospitals, for instance, are struggling, guess who's going to end up paying the difference? It's going to be people with job-based insurance like you and me and many other millions and millions of other Americans. So the ripple effect could be quite wide. But, you know, you also see some tax changes. That's one of the things that the Republicans are really focusing on, that it would provide tax benefits to the middle class.

But as the Democrats are saying, it would be generally a big giveaway to billionaires, you know, and at the cost, at the expense of lower income Americans and

uh penn wharton budget model crunched some of the numbers and it did find that lower income households would actually lose money overall they would see their after-tax money go down after you consider the tax changes and the cuts to the safety net and other programs including student loans there would be a lot of changes to the student loan program they're looking to downsize the um

involvement of the federal government in student loans which would obviously affect many many Americans so with all of those changes middle-class families according to Penn Wharton would come out slightly ahead you know a little over $800 per year but when you look at wealthiest Americans they would see $12,000 in a $12,000 raise from the package

Tammy, thank you so much for digging into it with us. Appreciate your time. Sure. Thank you. After the break on CNN this morning, a man allegedly kidnapped and tortured all for his Bitcoin password. What's behind the rise in violent crypto crime? Plus, the Trump administration's new target, Chinese students. Can the Trump administration revoke their visas to be tortured for 17 days?

in terms of a chainsaw cutting your leg, in terms of putting your feet in water and electrocuting them, in terms of making the person ingest narcotics. Horrible crime. That's what police say happened to an Italian crypto trader who was allegedly kidnapped and held in an apartment for weeks. A new video obtained by CNN shows the moment the victim was able to escape on Friday. Two men are now in custody accused of using torture to try to get the man to give them his Bitcoin password.

And this is just the latest in a string of crimes known as wrench attacks in the crypto industry. Joining me now to discuss is Yael Osofsky, fellow at the Bitcoin Policy Institute. Good morning. Thanks for being with us.

thank you so much for having me so this is a weird week to be talking about this because there was just this big crypto kind of event and you had the administration weighing in and the backdrop are these attacks here's the cover of the new york post been around the blockchain talking about this instance the thing i don't understand is crypto is supposed to be about anonymity so what's going on

Yeah, there's a couple of factors. I mean, first off, Bitcoin is over $100,000. That means that people who've been talking about it for many years, who've been flaunting their wealth, they're now in the crosshairs. And while we think that Bitcoin is anonymous, it's actually pseudo-anonymous. And most people are required to

their bitcoins or acquire them from regulated exchanges where they're supposed to share their personal information their id their address and oftentimes you do have hacks and leaks of that information sometimes it's innocuous and other times it actually is criminal actors who are seeking that information in order to find out who those people are what kind of wealth they have

And of course, if you have that lax security, if people are very public, then of course they're going to become what they call a victim of a $5 wrench attack where people try to use brute force to get their passwords, their seed phrases, or whatever access to their digital assets that they can't.

Right. So this isn't like people are trying to hack you in some way, although we should say the database you were talking about, I think it's called Know Your Customer, there have been data leaks, right? And so the information of folks who have been in this world is out there.

oh absolutely and you know the united states government requires any exchange or brokerage that wants to sell bitcoin or do anything with digital assets according to the bank secrecy act to collect all of that information and to have the information of every transaction to have your id and these are stored in databases which are not often very secure

And malicious actors or people who are bribed, who might be in customer service, has happened recently with a few crypto exchanges. Once that information is out there, then that means that it's being sold on the dark web and you could actually be a target. Specifically, if you have been flaunting your wealth, you've been talking about cryptocurrency for a long time, you're in the public eye, or if people assume that you have a lot of Bitcoin and the other crypto offspring as well.

There's like this tier of people that you're talking about, right, who are vulnerable to attack. And then there's a tier of people above that who are, frankly, trying to gain access to the White House in a variety of ways. And we actually I think the U.S. has a crypto czar, if I'm correct. So much of what the White House and the administration is doing in this space is connected to businesses they're involved in.

How is this moment affecting the potential for security regulation for your industry?

i think what's really interesting about the moment is that you do have many different crypto companies or you have crypto tokens that are perhaps launched by firms and then you really have the originator of it which is bitcoin and bitcoin is decentralized there is no company there is no firm and there you don't have control by a certain company or shareholders and really bitcoin has been the majority of the crypto ecosystem for a very long time and we should say you are a fellow

at the Bitcoin Policy Institute. This is what I mean. I kind of feel like sometimes I can't have a conversation about cryptocurrency because everybody has a stake in it.

I think it's less about a stake and it is a lot about just the ideology of the various tokens and projects. For many people in the Bitcoin community, they consider this a neutral money. They considered it as for the future of finance. Many of the other tokens are sort of created by companies. They don't have the same limits and rules. Obviously, there is always sniping between various tokens and projects. But so far, I think the White House has been fairly open to all of Bitcoin's

kinds of tokens and projects and definitely the crypto industry in general, which is a very good sign. It's been very helpful. There's still a lot of stuff on the books that does restrict individuals abilities, because I think that's more important. It's not about the companies or how much money is pumped out. It just has us as users of these crypto protocols. How can we benefit? How can we continue to use them and make sure that we can actually get that innovation that's supposed to be promised to us?

Well, Yael Ozovsky, fellow at the Bitcoin Policy Institute, thank you for your time. Thank you so much. All right. Today, lawyers for the White House and Harvard University will face off as the Trump administration continues to target the school. It's trying to revoke Harvard student visa program. Now, President Trump says he wants to limit the number of international students there. I think they should have a cap of maybe around 15 percent, not 31 percent. We have people want to go to Harvard and other schools. They can't get in.

because we have foreign students there, but I want to make sure that the foreign students are people that can love our country. Those comments, "As many Harvard students prepare to graduate today," group chat is back. Didn't hear a conversation there about anti-Semitism, and it feels like the conversation around who should be at Harvard has some other connotation here that I don't fully understand.

Yeah, I mean, I think that he's making that point, basically, that Harvard politically needs to get in line with his own agenda or face the consequences. There are people who could get in, but there are foreign students there. And also, like, let's cap it at 15%, not 31%, clearly trying to take away Harvard's ability to admit who they want and from where they want, I think, most interestingly. But I

When you look at this, I think it's really a test case for institutions that go against Trump. Either you go, either Trump tells you to do something and you submit and you capitulate, or you go against them and he kind of rains down repeated terror on you trying to destroy your business. This is a quote that he said, but he basically said the Harvard

now is getting its ass kicked when it comes to what they're facing from the Trump administration. And I doubt that this is the end. We've already heard them say it's going to go over to the University of California schools, colleges on the basis of anti-Semitism. Let's see what else they kind of drift into.

But I think it's becoming a larger conversation than anti-Semitism. Obviously, that's what they're pinning it on, but now it's become a conversation about foreign nationals. It's become a conversation about from where can these people come and what ideology can maybe-- - It's like an immigration adjacent conversation. - Yes. - And tariffs, leverage, and all the other political things. - Throw it in there.

There are actually a lot of protections built into the law for institutions to operate, and there are limits to the levers the federal government can exert politically, but it takes a long time for these things to move through the courts, and that's the game. Right, right. And we just found out with the tariff court, there can be limitations to that. Okay, 90 seconds, lightning round. What are you keeping eye on? Camila, I want to start with you.

Just as you mentioned, the standoff that's happening between Harvard and Trump has real implications. The fact that he is cutting federal funding for this university that funds a lot of research. I've talked to a educational policy expert and they say that you might not feel the impact of these cuts right away, but you're going to feel it in years to come. Right. Later on when there's like a clinical trial or something's gone sideways or whatever. Margaret.

I'm watching Cory Booker. You will recall that 25 hour speech that broke Strom Thurmond's previous record. Is there another one of those coming? God, probably, but there is a book announced yesterday. That book will be out in November.

some criticism even from the left towards Booker as he's trying to cash in instead of, you know, fighting the fight. But that's not what I'm watching. I am watching signs about whether this is just a 2026 re-election book or whether this is... You're just doing the is he running. See,

Jasmine. I'm looking out for pardons. Yesterday we saw Donald Trump going on a pardon spree. Who knows what comes next? Notice broke that he was pardoning Larry Hoover, obviously the infamous former Chicago gang member. Our traffic soared through the roof. And so people are really interested in how Trump is using his pardon power and who that's going to fall under. So who knows if there's not more. Guys, group chat. Thank you. Amazing having you here today. Thank you for waking up with us. I'm Adi Cornish and CNN News Central starts right now.

Take a journey with your favorite stars to their favorite places in the new CNN original series, My Happy Place. Join Alan Cumming, Taraji P. Henson, Simu Liu, and more. A new episode of My Happy Place premieres Sunday at 10 on CNN.