'This Week' Transcript 3-23-25: Trump Administration Border Czar Tom Homan and Sen. Bernie Sanders

A rush transcript of "This Week with George Stephanopoulos" airing on Sunday, March 23, 2025 on ABC News is below. This copy may not be in its final form, may be updated and may contain minor transcription errors. For previous show transcripts, visit the "This Week" transcript archive.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ANNOUNCER: THIS WEEK WITH GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS starts right now.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JONATHAN KARL, ABC "THIS WEEK" CO-ANCHOR: Constitutional showdown.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Well, they're bad people. We don't want them in our country. We can't let a judge say that he wants it.

KARL: President Trump escalates his battle with federal courts, even calling for impeachment after one judge tries to block his latest deportation plan.

KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: We have judges who are acting as partisan activists from the bench.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We're in a constitutional crisis.

KARL: This morning, White House border czar Tom Homan joins me live, a Sunday exclusive.

Plus, Chris Christie on the debate over presidential powers.

Rallying cry.

SEN. BERNIE SANDERS (I-VT): We're not going to allow Trump to destroy our great country.

KARL: As Democrats struggle to mobilize against Trump, Bernie Sanders draws massive crowds.

Out here in Denver, big crowds to see Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. They're calling it the Fighting Oligarchy Tour.

My conversation with the independent senator.

How much lasting damage, in your view, do you think Trump is doing?

SANDERS: We have the political will. It can be undone.

KARL: Another Sunday exclusive.

And what exactly is Elon Musk doing at the Pentagon? The roundtable on the week's most surprising developments.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ANNOUNCER: From ABC News it's THIS WEEK. Here now, Jonathan Karl.

KARL: Good morning. Welcome to THIS WEEK.

We were just with Bernie Sanders in Denver where we saw one of the biggest and most energized crowd of Democrats that we have seen in a long time. In fact, Sanders, who spoke to huge crowds when he ran for president in 2016 and 2020, says it was his biggest rally crowd ever. Is this a sign of life for the resistance to Trump, or is it an indication of just how frustrated rank-and-file Democrats are with their party's leadership that they are turning to an 83-year-old independent who says the Democratic Party is failing working Americans? We'll bring you our conversation with Senator Sanders shortly.

While Sanders was in Colorado railing against the influence of billionaires, the world's richest man, Elon Musk, was at the Pentagon. We'll get to that, too.

But we begin with the battle over President Trump's actions to secure the border and combat illegal immigration. The president has moved swiftly, just as he promised he would, to deport undocumented immigrants, especially alleged criminals and gang members. His approach has largely bypassed one branch of government, Congress, but is now running headfirst into the third branch, the courts. In a moment, we'll talk to President Trump's border czar, Tom Homan. That's a Sunday exclusive. But we start with ABC's Terry Moran on the battle in the courts.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

TERRY MORAN, ABC NEWS SENIOR NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice over): This week, the Trump administration showdown with the courts over immigration escalated sharply.

REPORTER: Mr. President, do you think you have the authority, the power, to round up people, deport them, and then you're under no obligation to a court to show the evidence against them?

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Well, that's what the law says, and that's what our country needs.

MORAN (voice over): A constitutional confrontation sparked by the deportation of hundreds of Venezuelan migrants to a notorious prison in El Salvador last weekend under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 despite U.S. District Judge James Boasberg’s order to turn the plane’s carrying them around. On Friday, another tense hearing between Judge Boasberg and Trump's Justice Department.

MORAN: In the hearing, Judge Boasberg grilled the Justice Department lawyer on what happened last weekend when those planes took off and landed in El Salvador despite the judge's verbal order in court from the bench that they be turned around immediately.

He also expressed sharp skepticism about the sweeping claim of presidential power at the heart of this case.

MORAN (voice over): The judge calling those claims “awfully frightening” and a “long way” from the intent of the law and the Constitution.

TRUMP: Hello, everybody.

MORAN (voice over): But late Friday, almost a week after those planes landed, Trump seemed to distance himself from the decision to send the planes to El Salvador.

REPORTER: He wants to know why the proclamation was signed in the dark, his words, and why people were rushed onto planes?

TRUMP: Because we want to get criminals out of our country, number one. And I don't know when it was signed, because I didn't sign it. Other people handled it.

MORAN (voice over): Trump's signature is clearly seen on the official proclamation dated March 14th. The White House now says Trump meant that he did not sign the 1798 law.

Friday's court hearing capped a week of back and forth as Judge Boasberg repeatedly sought an explanation from Trump's Justice Department for the incident. Boasberg called the government’s reasoning for proceeding with the deportations despite his order, “woefully insufficient.” One White House defense, the planes had already left U.S. airspace before the judge's written order was filed, and that, officials claim, means they were out of Judge Boasberg's jurisdiction.

TOM HOMAN, TRUMP ADMINISTRATION BORDER CZAR: We're already in international waters. We're outside the borders of the United States. I'm the border czar. Once you're outside the border, you know, it is what it is.

MORAN (voice over): But the judge seemed stunned by this claim since all deportees were still in U.S. custody and, therefore, still subject to U.S. court orders. The president insists he did not flout the judge's order.

TRUMP: I never did defy a court order.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And you wouldn't in the future?

TRUMP: No, I – you can't do that. However, we have bad judges. We have very bad judges.

MORAN (voice over): All week President Trump repeatedly made personal attacks on Judge Boasberg and called for his impeachment. That triggered a rare rebuke from Chief Justice John Roberts. “For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision,” Roberts declared, adding, “the normal appellate review purpose exists for that purpose.”

The people sent to the president in El Salvador were deported under the rarely used Alien Enemies Act, a law that gives the government the power in wartime to deport people with little to no due process, which has been invoked just three times in the nation's history. The White House alleges that the deportees are members of the Tren de Aragua gang, a group President Trump says is controlled by the Venezuelan government, a highly contested claim. Beyond that issue, attorneys for the ACLU say they didn't even have a chance to challenge whether the individuals who were deported did or did not have any affiliation with the gang in the first place.

LEE GELERNT, AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION ATTORNEY: At a minimum, there has to be due process for people to show that they're not even members of the gang.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

KARL: I'm joined now by the Trump administration's border czar, Tom Homan.

Mr. Homan, thank you very much for joining us.

I want to start with something you – you said last week that caused a big stir. You said, I quote, “I don't care what judges think.” Now, I know you have since said the administration will abide by court orders. We heard Donald Trump say the same thing. So, what – what do you mean when you say, “I don't care what judges think”?

TOM HOMAN, TRUMP ADMINISTRATION BORDER CZAR: I don't care what that judge thinks as far as this case. We're going to continue to arrest public safety threats and national security threats. We’re going to continue to deport them from the United States.

I understand this case is in litigation through the Alien Enemies Act and we'll abide by the court order as litigated. But my point was, despite what he thinks, we're going to keep targeting the worst of the worst, which we've been doing since day one, and deporting them from the United States through the various laws on the book. We're not making this up. The Alien Enemies Act was actually a federal law, it’s a statute, enacted by Congress and signed by a president. Now that's our litigation.

But put that aside, we still have Title Eight authority to remove illegal aliens from the United States and we’re going to continue to concentrate on those who are the biggest threat to our communities, the public safety threats.

KARL: But you’re going to abide by court orders as long as – you know, and go through your – your appeals process, but you are not going to defy those orders?

HOMAN: No.

KARL: OK, let – let me ask you about the flights at issue here. The flights to El Salvador.

You have said that everybody on those flights had ties to the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua or to MS-13. Can you give me some background – help me understand how these people ended up there? Are these people that were recently arrested?

HOMAN: Some were. Some weren't. Some have been in custody for – for a little bit. And some may – some – some on that plane were Title Eight removes, which means they were ordered removed by an immigration judge, and some – others were – were removed through the Alien Enemies Act. And I think all 240 on that flight were Venezuelan gang members, TDA, and I think we had 21 MS-13 members, and a couple, you know, specific MS-13 cases. But as far as the Venezuelans on that flight, every single one, according to the information given to me from the field, are – are members of the TDA. And TDA has been determined to be a terrorist organization. They are – they are now classified as terrorists. So that plane removed 240 terrorists from the United States.

KARL: So, how do you determine – or how do your people in the field determine that somebody is a gang member?

HOMAN: Look, there are various methods. Now, it’s not been – I've noticed in the media streak (ph), oh, a lot of them don't have criminal histories. Well, a lot of gang members don't have criminal histories. Just like a lot of terrorists in this world, they’re not in any terrorist database, right? We only know information what’s in databases based on – for instance, most terrorists we arrest that are identified by the U.S. government are later identified through a Title Three investigation or through an undercover operation. They'renot in any terror screening base (ph) with -- in screening database, we know that.

A lot of gang members, I started as cop in 1984. Many gang members don't have a criminal history. So, we have to count on social media. We have to count on surveillance techniques. We had to count on sworn statements from other gang members. We had to count on you know wiretaps and Title III, to everything involved with criminal investigations come into play.

So just because someone doesn't -- hasn't been arrested and charged with a crime yet doesn't mean they're a member of a gang.

KARL: But -- but how do you -- I mean, what we've heard from lawyers representing some of these people is that they deny that they're members of -- of this -- of this gang or either, you know, Tren de Aragua, or MS-13. Do they get a chance to prove that before you take them out of the country and put them into a notorious prison in a country that they're not even from? I mean, do they have any due process at all?

(CROSSTALK)

HOMAN: Look, due process --

KARL: Yeah.

HOMAN: -- where was Laken Riley’s due process? Where were all these young women that were killed and raped by members of TDA, where was their due process?

(CROSSTALK)

KARL: Well, the people that did actually prosecuted --

HOMAN: How about the young lady burned in that subway, where was her due process?

KARL: Well, sure (ph).

HOMAN: But the bottom line is, that plane was full of ter -- of people designated as terrorists, number one. Number two, every -- every Venezuelan migrant on that flight was a TDA member based on numerous criminal investigation, on intelligence reports, and a lot of work by ICE officers.

Matter of fact, two days after that flight took off, I even had a discussion with the acting director of ICE and we -- he reiterated that every person, every Venezuelan on that plane was a known member of the TDA.

So a lot of officers, a lot of criminal investigators, special agents who've done this for decades looked at the intelligence -- intelligence information, the criminal investigation information, all their various social media and surveillance and government records and public records, and they are confident that they're all members of the TDA.

And I’m not surprised that a member of the family saying they're not a member of the TDA, but they were given due process as according to the laws on the book. See, that's the difference between the Trump administration and Biden administration, we're actually using the laws on the books to enforce immigration law and secure the border at the highest levels ever been.

The Biden administration not only ignore the law -- ignore the law, they violated law like district -- district court and District 5 said that not only they violating law, they're actually ignoring the law altogether.

We are using the laws on the books to -- to enforce our borders, crime -- immigration laws and the internal (ph) enforcement -- enforcement.

If you -- if you look at the -- border numbers are down 96 percent. We already got 40,000 criminals removed by ICE in the interior which -- which more was done in weeks than by administration did in a year.

We're using laws on the books. We're not making this up. Everything we've done is based on a statute that was enacted by Congress and signed by a president.

The president, quickly, by proclamation invoked the authorities he has under Alien Enemies Act, which he's allowed to do.

KARL: But -- but let me let me ask you. One specific example and then there are -- there are many, but one specific example is somebody that was on that -- on one of those flights. His name is Jerce Reyes Barrios. He is a professional -- was a professional soccer player in Venezuela.

And his lawyer says that he was caught up in this because he had a tattoo that he said was chosen because it is a tattoo that that is similar to the logo of his famous favorite soccer team, Real Madrid. It says he's got no criminal record whatsoever and has never been a gang member.

Now how -- now that person is now apparently in that prison in El Salvador with no ability now to contact his lawyer, no rights as far as they can tell, no rights at all to defend himself or prove his innocence. I mean, what -- what happens to somebody like that?

HOMAN: Well, look, they can make those claims and, of course, we have information that says the complete opposite, a member -- member of TDA, affiliate with TDA, which again --

KARL: Will you release that information?

HOMAN: -- is a terrorist organization.

KARL: Will you release the information?

HOMAN: Look, that's going to be -- that -- look that would be litigated in the courts with this with this judge. I’m not going to get into every specific case because, you know, there's 260 cases. We got to count on the men and women who do this every day for a living, who -- who -- who designated these people as a members of TDA, through, like I said, various law enforcement methods. This will be litigated.

But as of right now, I’ve been assured by the highest levels in ICE that every one of these members -- every one of these Venezuelans are members of TDA.

There's going to be more litigation on this case, I’m sure. But what we did -- what was done by the Trump administration was it was exactly in accordance with federal law, again, enacted by Congress and signed by a president.

We're not making this up. We're enforcing laws around the books.

KARL: All right, let me turn to the situation at the border itself. You have now more than 10,000 U.S. troops deployed to support your mission at the border and two Navy destroyers that have been deployed to patrol the waters around the border as well. How long do you expect you are going to need that level of force, military force, at the border, because, as you just mentioned, the numbers are way down? I mean they are dramatically down.

HOMAN: They are down. We’re – you know, illegal entry is down 96 percent. What's most impressive is known got-aways. Known got-aways under Joe Biden, you know, were, on average, 1,800 people a day crossed the border, weren't apprehended, weren’t processed, weren't vetted. We don't know who they are or where they came from. That's a huge national security issue. Known got-a-ways are down to, you know, double digits now.

But, you know, we're not going to be satisfied until that know got-a-way is down to zero. We’re going to secure the border and make sure no public safety threats or national security threats cross the border and get away.

So, look, you know, like – like we knew what would happen as we secure the southern border, the land border, some of these groups are going to take to maritime, they’re going to take to the water. So, we’re – you know, we’ve got the Coast Guard, we’ve got CBP maritime patrol, and we’re going to have the Navy out there looking at the maritime.

And, again, it's just not about illegal immigration. It's about people who come to this country to do us harm. These public safety threats, national security threats. You look under the Biden administration, right, over 400 people on terrorist watch lists that were arrested trying to sneak into the country, but we’ve got 2.2 million got-aways under Joe Biden, 2.2 million people paid more to get away. They could have paid less money, just get to the border, turn themselves over to a border patrol agent, get released in 24 hours, get a free airline ticket to the city of their choice, get a free hotel room, get three meals a day, get free medical care and get work authorization in 90 days. So, why did more than 2 million people pay more to get away? They didn't want to be vetted. They didn’t want to be fingerprinted.

We’re going to secure the border, both the land border and the maritime border to make sure these public safety threats and national security threats won't get into the country.

So, we’ll use these assets as long as we can until we get to the point where we – we have total operational control of the border and national security threats have a new avenue into this country.

KARL: All right, Tom Homan, the Trump administration’s border czar, thank you for joining us this morning. We'll talk to you again soon.

Up next, Chris Christie on the battle over presidential powers. Was that a stern rebuke of President Trump that we heard from Chief Justice John Roberts this week? And Bernie Sanders says he's done running for president, but why is he now drawing the biggest crowds he's ever seen?

We're back in just two minutes.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KARL: To help us break down the showdown between Donald Trump and the courts, I’m joined now by former New Jersey governor, and former federal prosecutor, Chris Christie.

So, let me start with something I asked Homan. I asked, are you saying – you say you don't care what judges think, but you're going to abide by their orders? Trump has said the same thing, he's not going to defy a judicial order. Do you believe him?

CHRIS CHRISTIE (R), FORMER NEW JERSEY GOVERNOR: I do. And the reason I do, Jon, is I've known him for 23 years. he has used the courts to his advantage in every aspect of his life, going all the way back to his business career. Even in the early parts of his political career you remember Trump University, that controversy in 2016, and he had a real confrontation with that judge, but then ultimately backed off, apologized to the judge and settled the case.

Donald Trump knows that, in general, in his life courts have been his friend not his foe and --

KARL: He's been very good at using them. I mean --

CHRISTIE: Very good. Very effective.

KARL: But there's an interesting interview that John Yu, who is a conservative legal scholar who takes a very, you know, kind of, some would say, extreme view on executive power, very consistent with what Trump has been saying, he's warning, I'm going to read a quote from John Yu, "I worry there might be some people in the administration who would actually like to defy judicial order, which I think would be a terrible mistake."

So Trump, you say, is going to abide by these orders but does he have people around him that --

CHRISTIE: Sure.

KARL: -- would like to see this kind of constitutional crisis?

CHRISTIE: Look, I think what you see, Jon, is a flip from the first term to the second term. In the first term I think the person who was most pushing to try to expand their power and push the courts was Donald Trump himself, and then you had folks inside, like John Kelly, like Reince Priebus, like Don McGahn, and others who were saying, go slowly here, Mr. President. We don't want to do this.

This is, I think, the exact opposite. I think you have folks like Stephen Miller and Russ Vought, both of whom I know from the first term who were pushing him to be more aggressive. They now are the people on the inside, and I think Trump may, in fact, be the person who says, I'm not sure that I want to do all of that.

KARL: So Trump -- so Donald Trump is the moderating influence in the second term?

CHRISTIE: That's the difference between the first term and the second term, that on this issue Trump will be the moderating influence. He'll still use it rhetorically, as we saw this week with the judge, Judge Boasberg, but he's not going to -- I will be shocked to see him defy a court order. I think he'll use the appellate process, and he thinks he's going to win most of the time if he gets to the United States Supreme Court.

KARL: And what we've seen is the Trump -- is Trump turn up the rhetoric, of course, as you implied there. He's saying judges should be impeached if they don't, effectively, rule the way he wants them to rule. This talk of impeachment drew what seemed like a direct rebuke from John Roberts. Let me read you the statement that the chief justice put out.

"For more than two centuries it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreements concerning a judicial decision. The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose."

That is extraordinarily rare, isn't it, to see a judge, a chief justice, John Roberts --

CHRISTIE: Yes. It's extraordinarily rare.

KARL: -- directly respond to a president.

CHRISTIE: Right. Now the smart thing that Roberts did that a lot of people forget is he didn't mention Donald Trump's name in that statement. Now we all know it's a direct rebuke of what Trump said, but Roberts is smart enough not to put his name into it. He's trying to make it a much more generic type statement. But it's a generic statement that goes right to the heart of what Donald Trump posted on social media urging impeachment.

This is another way where Trump tries to bully, you know, calling for impeachment. He's trying to intimidate without taking the step of saying to Republicans in the House who seem willing to do anything Trump asks, he's not asking them to go ahead and start impeachment proceedings. He gets up to the edge of the water and hopes that what he does is like what he did to the Paul Weiss firm with his executive order, intimidate them to the point where they cave.

KARL: This is a firm that --

CHRISTIE: And that's what he's hoping what judges will do.

KARL: That represented Democrats and Trump tried to basically put them out of business.

CHRISTIE: Correct.

KARL: And they have agreed to spend $40 million, do $40 million worth of pro-bono work on issues consistent with the Trump agenda.

CHRISTIE: And not only that but basically give in in a way that, to me, I'm sure is really upsetting to a number of the people who work there and to the broader legal community.

KARL: So on this, there's a, just over the weekend, we've seen a memo go from the White House to the attorney general and also to the secretary of Homeland Security threatening action against lawyers who sue the Trump administration. I want to read you a line from this. This was, again, a memorandum from the White House to Pam Bondi, the attorney general.

"I hereby direct the attorney general to seek sanctions against attorneys and law firms who engage in frivolous, unreasonable and vexatious litigation against the United States."

Vexatious is not a word I've heard Trump use a lot. But, I mean, this is a message. You come after us, we're going to come after you.

CHRISTIE: Look, it is -- it is the M.O. of this first quarter of the Trump administration which is -- we are going to try to use the power of the presidency in every way we can, and in this instance, to intimidate people from availing themselves of the rights they have as American citizens to access the court system if they think the government's done something wrong.

Everything that Donald -- any suit that's filed against Trump's administration, Donald Trump will -- will by definition believe is frivolous and vexatious, okay?

So that -- what he's saying to them is punish anybody who sues us. Again if people stand up and say I don't care, I don't think that this is going to be a huge problem. But if they continue to act like Paul Weiss did and caved and be intimidated -- well, then, we're going to have a much different legal system in this country.

KARL: And -- and just quickly before we go, do you think he can count on the Supreme Court?

CHRISTIE: I think that John Roberts agrees with him on a majority of the executive power issues. But if what he does is continue to make statements like impeach judges I disagree with, he's going to tick off, the Supreme Court so much that they may not give him everything he wants.

And so, even though they may agree philosophically, they -- Roberts -- what care -- Robert cares about the most, Jon, what John Roberts cares about the most is the independence and reputation of the court. And if they -- he looks like Trump's making him look like he's in his pocket, they may go the other way.

So Trump, tactically, should keep quiet on the judges keep quiet. Don't make justice -- Chief Justice Roberts come after you.

KARL: Okay. We’ll see about that.

Governor Christie, thank you very much.

CHRISTIE: Thank you, Jon.

KARL: Up next, we're on the road with Senator Bernie Sanders for his fighting oligarchy tour. He wants to stop the Trump administration but says Democratic leaders are part of the problem. So what's the solution?

The conversation when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ (D-NY): I want you to look at every level of office around you and support Democrats who actually fight, because those are the ones that can win against Republicans.

SEN. BERNIE SANDERS, (I-VT): I would not be telling you the truth if I didn't tell you that within the Democratic Party, there are billionaires who have undue influence. Democrats have turned their backs on the working class of this country.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KARL: That was Senator Bernie Sanders Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez drawing more than 30,000 supporters in Denver on Friday. I was there and spoke with Senator Sanders after the rally about whether the Democratic Party can do anything to slow President Trump's agenda.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

CROWD: Bernie, Bernie.

KARL (voice-over): Bernie is back.

SANDERS: Hey, Mr. Trump, people fought and died to create a democratic society. You're not going to take it away from us.

KARL (voice-over): 83-year-old Independent Senator Bernie Sanders is drawing crowds even bigger than he did as a presidential candidate.

SAM GAO, RALLY ATTENDEE: Feeling the Bern (ph)?

KARL: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

(LAUGH)

KARL (voice-over): For the past month, Sanders has taken the fight against President Donald Trump on the road. He's billing it the "Fighting Oligarchy" tour.

SANDERS: We will not allow America to become an oligarchy.

KARL (voice-over): In Denver, the anti-Trump sentiment was strong.

EILEEN MCCARRON, RALLY ATTENDEE: Oh, I think it's a disaster. And he -- he talks about he has a mandate -- he never had a mandate.

KARL (voice-over): But so was the frustration with Democrats.

KARL: How's the Democratic Party doing challenging this?

PATRICK LARZIK, RALLY ATTENDEE: They got to be a little tougher.

SUSAN BAKER, RALLY ATTENDEE: Quit being a bunch of doormats.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It feels like we're left stranded when everything feels like it is crumbling.

KARL (voice-over): Tour's western swing, Sanders was joined by New York Congresswoman AlexandriaOcasio-Cortez.

OCASIO-CORTEZ: He has handed the keys of the federal government to Elon Musk.

(CROWD CHEERING)

OCASIO-CORTEZ: And is selling off our country for parts to the richest people on the planet.

KARL (voice-over): More than 30,000 showed up for their joint appearance in Denver.

SANDERS: Look, as you know, when you run for president, you do a lot of rallies.

KARL: Yeah.

SANDERS: And we have done a lot of big rallies. 32,000 people here is by far the largest rally I have ever done, and nobody's running for office. That tells you something.

KARL: So, what are you trying to accomplish with this tour?

SANDERS: I'm trying to make it clear to the people throughout the world and throughout our own country, that the American people are not going to sit idly by and allow Trump establish an oligarchic form of government, where Musk and other billionaires are running our government. And we're not going to sit back and allow him to form an authoritarian form of society, undermining the Constitution, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, and undoing what the -- you know, what the founding fathers of this country did in the 1790s, separation of powers, making sure that no one person had an extraordinary amount of power, and that is precisely what Trump is trying to do. He wants it all. Doesn't want Congress, he doesn't want the media, he doesn't want the judiciary. He wants all of the power; we cannot allow him to have that.

KARL: Well, I hear you telling people out there, fight back. What do you mean, though? How do these people -- how do they fight back?

SANDERS: Well, that's the question. We're working on it right now. But I think simply, first of all, coming here and showing the world that Americans are not going to sit back and take what Trump is doing is a good step forward. But obviously, what we need to do is what neither political party is capable of doing right now, and that is develop a strong grassroots movement prepared to run candidates, prepared to stand up and question candidates, demand responsibility from their elected officials to stand with working families and not just the 1 percent.

KARL: I've been covering you for a long, long time. I've heard you railing against millionaires and billionaires for a long time.

SANDERS: Hey, guess what?

KARL: Is it different?

SANDERS: Turns out a few other people are catching on to that, right?

KARL: Yeah.

SANDERS: I have been talking for many years about this country moving toward an oligarchy. And I think anybody who is not dumb, deaf or blind, is seeing precisely what is happening. Trump's inaugural, right behind him, three wealthiest guys in America. You know, Lincoln talked about a government of the people, by the people, for the people. Remember? Well, we got a government of the billionaire class, by the billionaire class, and for the billionaire class. That's what we have.

KARL: So we're about 60 days into the Trump era, the second Trump era. How would you grade the Democratic Party's response?

SANDERS: Well, I would take us back even two years before that, before Trump was elected, in saying that it saddens me that when the Democrats had control of the Senate, they did virtually nothing for working people. I have to say that. I'm a member of the Democratic Caucus as an Independent, so I'm not going to lie to you and tell you otherwise.

KARL: Yeah.

SANDERS: And since then, do I think the Democrats have been effective in rallying the American people, in stopping Trump's movement toward oligarchy and authoritarianism? No, I don't.

KARL: Is there anything that you think Trump has done right?

SANDERS: Yeah. I mean, I think cracking down on fentanyl, making sure our borders are stronger. Look, nobody thinks illegal immigration is appropriate, and I happen to think we need comprehensive immigration reform, but I don't think it's appropriate for people to be coming across the border illegally. So, we've got to work now on comprehensive immigration reform. The idea that Trump has, I don't know what his latest numbers are.

He wants to deport 20 million people who are in this country who are undocumented. Well, you do that, you destroy the entire country. Because, I got news for you, Trump's billionaire friends are not going to pick the crops in California that feed us. They're not going to work in meat packing houses. That's what undocumented people are doing.

So, we need a variety of programs, guest worker programs, but mostly comprehensive immigration reform.

KARL: But you know illegal immigration, it exploded under Biden. And it had been high for times under Trump as well. But it exploded under Biden. And nothing was really done until his last year in office when he was –

SANDERS: Yes, should have done much better. No argument.

KARL: So, realistically, Republicans control the House. They control the White House. They control the Senate. So what, realistically, can be done?

SANDERS: Well, for major pieces of legislation, you still need 60 votes in the Senate. And let's be clear, and we – we have picked many of the spots that I've gone to in Wisconsin, in Iowa, in Michigan, have – we – we chose them carefully.

KAR: Yes.

SANDERS: And those are because they have Republican congressmen who won by small margins. Right now I don't know what the number is. I think if two or three Republicans out of 200 and whatever it is, 18 or whatever they got, choose not to support giving tax breaks to billionaires and cutting Medicaid and education, we can defeat this big supplemental bill, “the beautiful bill” that Trump wants to see passed.

So, right now, what we're trying to do is put pressure on those Congressional districts, demand that Republican congresspeople sit down and talk to their constituents and explain why they think it's a good idea to give a trillion dollars in tax breaks to the 1 percent and cut veterans programs, cut Medicaid, cut Social Security, cut education.

KARL: You said that the passage of this bill, the continuing resolution, was a, “absolute failure of Democratic leadership.” Who are you talking about?

SANDERS: Well, Schumer is the leader of the party, and it should not have happened, period. No question about it.

But, you know, when we talk about Democratic leadership, we're talking about the Democratic Party in general, you know. So I – look, there's been nobody more critical of Chuck Schumer than I have been. And not just on this thing. But the bottom line is not just Chuck Schumer. It's not just Chuck Schumer. It is – you've got a Democratic Party in general that is dominated by billionaires, just as the Republican Party is, that is – operates under the leadership of a bunch of inside the beltway consultants, very well paid, who are way out of touch with the 32,000 people who are here today.

KARL (voice over): Ocasio-Cortez’s criticism of Schumer has been harsher, fueling speculation she’ll challenge him in the Democratic primary when he is up for re-election in three years. For his part, Sanders doesn’t want to talk about whether or not Schumer should remain the Democratic leader in the Senate. And he got irritated when I asked him about the possibility of AOC running, abruptly getting up to end the interview.

KARL: OK, you're out there with the AOC today.

SANDERS: Yes.

KARL: Do you see her as a future of the progressive –

SANDERS: We have one of the untold stories –

KARL: Yes.

SANDERS: Of what's going on in current American politics, is that in the House of Representatives, you have dozens and dozens of strong, smart, disciplined, hard-working young people in the Progressive Caucus.

And, you know, way back when, when I first came to the Congress in the House, I helped form the Progressive Caucus. We had five people in it at that time. Now they have close to 100. So, you got a whole lot of good people. Alexandria is extraordinary. I am so impressed by her work in Congress and her – just, she inspires young people all over the country.

KARL: Would you like to see her join you in the Senate?

SANDERS: I – right now we have, as I said, just a whole lot of people in the Congress. OK, Jonathan, thanks.

KARL: Wait, I got one more – I got one more. This is an important –

SANDERS: No, I asked you –

KARL: OK.

SANDERS: No, you want to do nonsense. Do nonsense.

KARL: No.

SANDERS: I don't want to talk about inside the beltway stuff. I got 32,000 people –

KARL: I was just asking you about AOC because she was out there with you.

SANDERS: Well, you know, fine, but I don't want to talk about this – what was the last question?

KARL: I was just going to ask you one more question about you. I mean, that’s all. I was – it was literally your last –

SANDERS: All right, what – what is your question?

KARL: Well, I mean, it's easier if you're sitting.

I mean, I want to ask you about your future. This is the biggest crowd. You said – you ran for president twice. This is the biggest crowd you've ever seen. Are we going to see you run again? What's your, what's your future?

SANDERS: No, right now I'm very proud that the people of the state of Vermont sent me back to the Senate with 63 percent of the vote.

KARL: Yes.

SANDERS: Right now I’m Vermont’s senator. That's what I do. And I'm very happy to do it. I am 83 years of age. So – and I'm tired.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

KARL: All right, our thanks to Senator Sanders for taking the time to talk to us and for letting us get that last question in.

Coming up, what was Elon Musk doing at the Pentagon this week?

We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. LISA MURKOWSKI (R-AK): I’m going to take -- take the criticism that comes, and it may be -- it may be that Elon Musk has decided he's going to take the next billion dollars that he makes off of Starlink and put it directly against Lisa Murkowski.

Everybody just, like, zip-lipped, not saying a word, because they're afraid they're going to be taken down, going to be primaried. We cannot be cowed into -- into not speaking up.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KARL: Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski this week on Elon Musk's grip on the Republican Party.

The roundtable is here at that talk about that and what exactly Musk was doing at the Pentagon this week.

We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KARL: Let's bring in the Roundtable. Former DNC Chair, Donna Brazile; Former Trump Justice Department Spokesperson and Dispatch Senior Editor, Sarah Isgur; ABC News Contributing Political Correspondent and Politico Capitol Bureau Chief, Rachael Bade; and NPR White House Correspondent, Asma Khalid.

So let me start with you, if you don't mind, Donna. What was going on with Bernie Sanders? I mean that the -- the crowd, I haven't seen Democrats get a crowd like that for a long time.

DONNA BRAZILE, FORMER DNC CHAIR & ABC NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: Yeah.

KARL: Is that where the energy in the party is right now? On the progressive left or what? I mean, what -- what was going on?

BRAZILE: First of all, Bernie Sanders is filling a void, a major void left after, of course, the defeat of Kamala Harris last year by Donald Trump. This void has to be filled because there's so much anger, anger not just in red districts, but also in blue districts. The American people, by and large, many of them are fed up. They're fed up with the distractions that -- that's happening in Washington, D.C., the policies of the Trump administration, and they want somebody to speak to that anger. Bernie Sanders is not speaking to the left or to the right. He's trying to make the case that this is a -- a real fight between the very top --

KARL: He's not speaking to the -- he is not speaking to the left?

BRAZILE: No, this is about the top versus the bottom. You got to listen to Bernie Sanders.

KARL: Right.

BRAZILE: I've been listening to Bernie Sanders for 40 years.

KARL: Yeah.

(LAUGH)

BRAZILE: And -- and the one thing you -- you should know about Senator Sanders is that he is a man of true convictions. You could disagree with him on policies, but he understands what he is doing. He wants to really waken up that soul inside the Democratic Party, and perhaps Independents that says, we're going to fight back. We're not going to take it anymore. And that's -- that's who he is. And also, I have to say this, be careful what you wish for because there will be a lot of Democrats that will face a primary challenge from our revolution come next year.

KARL: Well, that's an interesting prediction.

RACHAEL BADE, ABC NEWS CONTRIBUTING POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT & POLITICO CAPITOL BUREAU CHIEF AND SENIOR WASHINGTON COLUMNIST: I mean, look, like if I -- I think Donna is absolutely right, this is the beginning of the starting gun to a bunch of primaries that are going to happen, we're talking about in the green room. But the problem for Democrats right now is if they're primaried by a bunch of Bernie Sanders, AOC-type Democrats, they're going to have a real hard problem flipping the House.

I mean, look, they only have to win a couple of seats. And while these folks really sort of gin up the base, they get people really excited, Democrats really excited, when it comes to independent voters, a lot of those types think Democrats are out of touch. They -- they don't like what they see -- see as sort of Democrats moving further left. So like that's not necessarily a win.

And the other thing about your interview -- I have to say, Jon -- I mean, look, it is one thing to sort of energize the base. It's another thing to go directly after your party leadership. And obviously, he dodged that question. Tried to get up to leave.

KARL: Yes. Why? Help me translate. Why was he so irritated at even the mention of AOC running for Senate?

(LAUGH)

BADE: Well, it's obviously a sensitive subject because he is on Chuck Schumer's leadership team. And so, you know, if he goes out there, endorses a primary challenge to Schumer, I mean that would be a total bloodbath. But look, the bloodbath is already happening. I mean, people are calling for Schumer to step aside. The problem is Schumer did what leaders do, you take bullets for your party if you think it's in the best interest and there was real questions about what would've happened in a shutdown. How could Democrats -- how could Democrats have even won that?

BRAZILE: But you know, I want to say one thing.

(CROSSTALK)

ASMA KHALID, NPR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT & ABC NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: I do think -- I think those things are all really valid, right? And they're sort of looking at over the horizon. But in this particular moment in time, I mean, we saw polling over the last week that showed the Democratic Party's popularity is at an all-time low. And I would argue that a contributing factor there is the fact that the Democratic Party's own base is deeply dissatisfied with how it is handling this moment.

I mean, this is fundamentally different than what we saw from the Democrats in terms of how they're able to respond, how they're able to effectively put up opposition to Trump than what we saw during his first term. There is no singular unified message. And I think the Democratic base voters want that and you see that. You see that in the polling. They are not happy with the current Democratic Party.

KARL: Sarah.

SARAH ISGUR, ABC NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: The problem with the Republican Party in 2013, I hope you all enjoyed the break, but the Republican Party had Mitch McConnell, and Chuck Schumer is no Mitch McConnell. So while the Republican Party also did not have a leader, the Democratic Party is even more in the wilderness, I would argue. And remember in that post-2012 autopsy from the Republican National Committee, it was all about moderating, providing common sense solutions, something you hear from the Democrats right now as well.

But who actually wins the next presidential nomination? Who actually wins the White House? It's Donald Trump. It's not Marco Rubio. So I think the Democrats may be looking at their future when they see Bernie Sanders.

KARL: That was also a path to winning back the White House.

ISGUR: That's right. And that's who defines parties. We live in such a time of weak parties, increased party polarization, which is an irony, but the parties themselves are incredibly weak. They don't pick their own standard-bearers and that's how Donald Trump was able to take over the Republican Party. You could see something very similar happening for Democrats because the definition of the parties now is whoever wins the White House.

KARL: And you know -- Donna, go ahead.

BRAZILE: She's absolutely right, because what we saw in 2016 was two populist movements, on the right was Donald Trump and on the left was Bernie Sanders. We forget that Bernie Sanders ran in 2016 and 2020. And while he did not become the Democratic nominee, Bernie has a lot of followers devoted not just to his agenda but they are interested in changing the status quo.

And to your point, there's nothing wrong with universal healthcare. There's nothing wrong with raising the minimum wage. There's nothing wrong with fighting for working class people. That's what Bernie represents. Now I'm speaking on behalf of Bernie today. Tomorrow I'll speak on behalf of somebody else. But here's the point, he's a fighter, and the American people, regardless of their -- they want someone to fight. That's why Donald Trump is in the White House.

(CROSSTALK)

KHALID: I think they don't know what they're fighting.

ISGUR: And I think that's why Democrats are frustrated right now. They don't see that fight.

BRAZILE: We don't have a playbook.

BADE: We get the frustration but, like, what does the fight look like? I mean, you even asked Bernie in your interview, what do you want to do? And he said, well, we're still coming up with an answer to that. That's what he said.

BRAZILE: He did.

KARL: And the first time the answer was beating them.

BADE: It's one thing to take grassroots movement, energize Democrats and then use that in the midterms. Unify your party. Use of (INAUDIBLE), flip the House. Flip the Senate. It's different to energize and then direct it at your own party and then you start a civil war, which is what's happening.

ISGUR: And actually have Congress do the work. I mean, one of the ironies is seeing AOC out there, an incredibly good fundraiser, an incredibly good spokesperson on behalf of the progressive movement, but a congresswoman? She's in the lowest 20 for actual accomplishments out of 435, mind you, in the bottom 20 for accomplishments as a legislator.

KARL: Not 20 percent. You're saying 20?

ISGUR: Twenty human beings. She's renaming some post offices. So if Congress is just going to be a platform to raise small dollar donors and go on cable news, I don't know what we're doing with that first branch of government.

KARL: So --

ISGUR: And when you ask a senator what they can do and he's like, well, I don't know, basically we have to win back the White House, this is the first branch of government. Make Congress great again first.

KARL: But let me get to this, end oligarchy or fight oligarchy tour, and it's timed almost exactly to Elon Musk arriving at the Pentagon.

BRAZILE: Yes.

KARL: I mean, what's your sense, Rachael? I mean, this was quite a sight, it was preceded by a "New York Times" story that said he was going to get the secret war plans for Iran -- for China. I'm sorry, for China. What was going on there?

BADE: Yes. I mean, clearly, he was supposed to get some sort of briefing and then once Donald Trump, President Trump saw the headlines, they scrapped that. And I think there's a few takeaways I have from this whole exchange. Number one is the sensitivity the president himself is showing to some of these headlines. I mean, he not only stopped this briefing from happening, they called it fake news, they attacked the reporting, even though it was matched by a number of places. And the president said in the Oval Office that Elon has business in China and he would be susceptible perhaps to that if he got a briefing like this. So the president was actually putting limits on Elon Musk on that.

The other thing I would say is it also underscores a real miscommunication between what's going on at the Pentagon, what the White House is comfortable with, and what Elon Musk is trying to get access to.

KARL: By the way, it was attacked from the Pentagon and from the White House as being fake news that this was going to happen and Elon Musk denounced the leak. So if something is leaked, is it made up or --

KHALID: I mean, I don't know. That's an excellent question, what the perception is Elon Musk has. But one of the things, look, I will say as a journalist that is deeply concerning is the message about prosecuting the leakers. I would say this is broadly the vision we have been hearing from the administration is to sort of intimidate people they perceive as foes and then try to elicit concessions from this.

We are seeing this, I would argue, from law firms. We are seeing this strategy being used at universities. It is an across the board strategy to intimidate, try to get concessions. Then use those concessions publicly to further tout them and try to, you know -- you talked with law firms, but we're seeing this across the board as a strategy and I think it is deeply concerning.

KARL: I mean, Sarah, you had over the weekend, as I was talking to go Governor Christie about this, a memorandum to the attorney general saying to prosecute or to seek sanctions against attorneys and law firms who do frivolous lawsuits.

ISGUR: So what's basically happened is, since the beginning of the administration, they've put out three memos to punish three different law firms that they feel have worked against their interest, including just Trump's interest as a private citizen before he became president this time. Paul, Weiss, the last law firm to get that, the executive order said they were --

KARL: We have (ph) a huge law firm, right?

ISGUR: Huge, national --

KARL: This is a big, well-established --

ISGUR: International law firm.

KARL: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

ISGUR: Lawyers were not allowed into federal buildings. Federal contractors couldn't work with them anymore. Anyone who worked at that law firm would not be allowed to take a job in government. And Paul, Weiss then settled that with the administration for basically no actual concessions, except a great press release for President Trump. Then they put out this memo that says, and by the way, if any other law firm sues us or does anything we don't like against our political interest, we may put out an EO like that against your law firm.

ISGUR: So why does this matter? Bring -- bring it home, why does it matter?

ISGUR: This is the most under-covered story of the administration. Everyone's following immigration and I get it, but immigration actually legally is pretty complicated and the president has a lot of power. This is a retribution story. It is the first time that we have seen the president actually use his power to go after a perceived political foe with all the powers of the federal government behind him, and then use that to threaten everyone else who might consider going behind him.

We have not seen a united front from the law firms to say what they're going to do about this, but the result will be that future potential targets of the administration or issues the administration wants to pursue may have trouble getting the counsel (ph) of their choice.

BRAZILE: And where is the American Bar Association and all of this? I mean, if the law firms have put their profits --

(CROSSTALK)

ISGUR: The ABA at this point has been so left wing, anything they do at this point is pretty useless.

(CROSSTALK)

KARL: By the way -- they are also stripping. He is --

BRAZILE: So you need some third party.

KARL: He's also stripping security clearances from just about everybody, including --

BRAZILE: Oh, this is just the week of retaliation, Jon.

KARL: -- including -- including people that don't have security clearances. I mean, the Biden family, as far as I understand it, does not have security clearances. I mean, because --

BRAZILE: This is the week of retaliation. This was the week of retribution. This was the week that Donald Trump decided that he was going to take out all his pain (inaudible).

KARL: All right, we have to take a break. We will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KARL: All right, our thanks to the Roundtable. Thank you all for watching. Thank you for sharing part of your Sunday with us. Check out "World News Tonight." Have a great day.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)