Return to Transcripts main page

Anderson Cooper 360 Degrees

FCC Chair on Kimmel Suspension: "I Don't Think this is the Last Shoe to Drop"; FCC Chair: "If Broadcasters Don't Like that Simple Solution They can Turn Their License into the FCC; Republicans Block Dem Rep. Khanna's Effort To Subpoena FCC Chair Carr Over Jimmy Kimmel; Kasparov: "I saw How Russia Killed Media Freedom"; TX Democrats Say Their Voices Silenced By Partisan Redistricting; Aired 8-9p ET

Aired September 18, 2025 - 20:00   ET

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

ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST: Breaking news, protests growing right now in support of Jimmy Kimmel, including one right outside his studio in Los Angeles. That is actually where he would normally be taping his show as I speak. The protests were a day are coming a day, and we're watching this live here in Los Angeles. After ABC suddenly pulled Kimmel Show because of his comments about Charlie Kirk's shooter.

Protesters carrying signs, including one that says, "ABC bent the knee." It comes as CNN learns that ABC hopes to bring Kimmel back, but there's no time table on how or when. Thanks for joining us. Anderson starts now.

[20:00:35]

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST, "ANDERSON COOPER: 360": Tonight on 360, new reporting on why ABC pulled the plug on Jimmy Kimmel as the President's top regulator says this is this is not the last shoe to drop.

Also, who is that regulator? FCC Chairman Brendan Carr. How he got the job and how he's turning the agency into an arm of the administration.

Plus, democracy activists and former chess world champion Garry Kasparov with a sobering warning. What he saw happen in Russia when Vladimir Putin began targeting dissenting voices in the media.

Good evening, thanks for joining us. We are learning for the first time tonight from inside ABC, what drove the decision to pull Jimmy Kimmel off the air. It caps a day in which it became amply clear that the Trump administration's campaign against broadcast shows and media outlets is not over, not by a long shot.

Getting ABC to suspend Kimmel's show yesterday was not the end of it. Both the President and his hand-picked FCC chairman made that plain.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WILL CAIN, FOX NEWS CHANNEL HOST, "THE WILL CAIN SHOW": What are what are you talking about when you say not the last shoe to drop?

BRENDAN CARR, FCC CHAIRMAN: Look, we're going to continue to hold these broadcasters accountable to the public interest and if broadcasters don't like that simple solution, they can turn their license into the FCC. There's other things that we can do with it that would serve the national interest. And frankly, other people would want to use this spectrum. But we're going to continue to make clear that we're holding broadcasters accountable to public interest.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: That is Brendan Carr on Fox late today, talking about this in terms of the public interest and the national interest. However, a short time earlier aboard Air Force One all the way back from the U.K., the President also weighed in and said nothing about either of those things nor anything about what precipitated jimmy Kimmel's suspension.

Kimmel's remarks Monday night, characterizing the reaction to Charlie Kirk's assassination by what he called the MAGA gang. Here's what the President said instead about Kimmel, and what seems to be his largely personal interest in all of this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP (R) PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: He had no talent, he's a whack job, but he had no talent and more importantly than talent, he had no -- because a lot of people have no talent, they get ratings. But he had no ratings. His ratings were worse than Colbert. I think. They got rid of Colbert, which is a good thing to do. And look, that's something that should be talked about for licensing, too.

When you have a network and you have evening shows and all they do is hit Trump, that's all they do. If you go back, I guess they haven't had a conservative vote in years or something, somebody said. But when you go back and you take a look, all they do is hit Trump. They're licensed, they're not allowed to do that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: And in case it's not clear from that what exactly he intends to do about those broadcast licenses, he also said this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REPORTER: Mr. President, are you going to ask Brendan Carr to weigh in on other late night hosts that you have said be off the air?

TRUMP: (INAUDIBLE) a late night host on network television, there is a licensing. I'll give you an example. I read someplace that the networks were 97 percent against me. I got 97 percent negative and yet I won it easily. I won all seven swing states, won everything, and if they're 97 percent against, they give me only bad publicity or press I mean, they're getting a license. I would think maybe their license should be taken away.

(END VIDEO CLIP) COOPER: As for Chairman Carr on CNN political commentator Scott Jennings radio show, he suggested he might look next at "The View" which is produced by ABC News, with an eye toward removing some of the exemptions it enjoys as a new show from certain FCC rules.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CARR: I would assume you could make the argument that "The View" is a bona fide news show, but I'm not so sure about that, and I think it's worthwhile to have the FCC look into whether "The View" and some of the programs that you have still qualify as bona fide news programs.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: That's Brendan Carr today and just to remind you of the cloud his remarks carry. Here he is yesterday, shortly before ABC pulled Jimmy Kimmel off the air.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CARR: We can do this the easy way or the way. These companies can find ways to change conduct to take action frankly, on Kimmel, or there's going to be additional work for the FCC ahead.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[20:05:01]

COOPER: And again, it raises questions about whether the public interest, the national interest, or even the Charlie Kirk tragedy is truly motivating any of this, or whether it's merely the justification for several reasons. There's what you heard the President say about networks and hosts targeting him. Nothing about the public interest and there's what he said online in July shortly after Stephen Colbert's cancellation but long before Kirk's assassination, I'm quoting now, "The word is and it's a strong word that word that Jimmy Kimmel is next to go and the untalented late night sweepstakes and surely thereafter Fallon will be gone. These are people with absolutely no talent and who were paid millions of dollars for, in all cases, destroying what used to be great television. It's really good to see them go, and I hope I played a major part in it."

So there's that, as for Chairman Carr's public interest justification for leaning on broadcasters. Not so long ago, he was flatly against it. Just ask 2019 Brendan Carr, "should the government censor speech it doesn't like he asked online" and his answer "of course, not." The FCC does not have a roving mandate to police speech in the name of the public interest, which sounds a lot like what he's doing now, though in fact regarding Kimmel, he didn't actually have to do anything.

A large station group which needs the FCC's approval for a merger were the ones to announce they were going to stop broadcasting Kimmel's show. Carr then went on a right wing podcast and said his we can do this the easy way or the hard way lines.

And as for the President's view on free speech, here is what he said on the subject on day one of his second term.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: I will also sign an executive order to immediately stop all government censorship and bring back free speech to America. Never again will the immense power of the state be weaponized to persecute political opponents.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: Never again, today, former President Obama weighed in on social media, quoting now, "After years of complaining about cancel culture, the current administration has taken it to a new and dangerous level by routinely threatening regulatory action against media companies unless they muzzle or fire reporters and commentators it doesn't like."

Also speaking out, former CBS "Late Night" host David Letterman.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DAVID LETTERMAN, FORMER HOST, "THE LATE SHOW WITH DAVID LETTERMAN": Well, this is a misery. In the world of somebody who is an authoritarian, maybe a dictatorship, sooner or later everyone is going to be touched. But this is me for 30 years, I did this for a living. So, I see this happen.

You know, this happen, you know, I just -- I feel bad about this because we all see where this is going, correct? It's managed media and it's no good, it's silly, it's ridiculous and you can't go around firing somebody because you're fearful or trying to suck up to an authoritarian criminal administration in the Oval Office. That's just not how this works.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: He also talked about his 30 some years of making fun of Presidents from Jimmy Carter to Barack Obama.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LETTERMAN: The point is, beating up on these people, rightly or wrongly, accurately or perhaps inaccurately, in the name of comedy, not once were we squeezed by anyone from any governmental agency, let alone the dreaded FCC.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Republican, Democrat, never --

LETTERMAN: Well, I will say we probably went easy on Barack Obama, because I kind of like the guy.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: Well, tonight, with protests on both coasts outside ABC's parent company, Disney, Jimmy Kimmel has still not yet spoken publicly about any of this. The network is airing reruns of "Celebrity Family Feud" in his time slot.

And as we said at the top, we are getting new details from inside ABC about what drove their decision to pull the show. CNN's Elizabeth Wagmeister has been doing some reporting on that joins us now. So, what more are you learning about what went on at ABC and Disney?

ELIZABETH WAGMEISTER, CNN ENTERTAINMENT CORRESPONDENT: Hey, Anderson, so I hear that this was on ABC and Disney's radar all week. Really, ever since Jimmy Kimmel's monologue on Monday night. And then he doubled down on his show again on Tuesday night. But this really escalated, of course, after FCC Chair Brendan Carr went on that podcast and made very severe threats to Disney and ABC. And that is exactly how Disney execs perceived it, as a very serious threat that would not just impact Jimmy Kimmel Live, but that that could impact the entire organization.

And I hear from sources that they felt like they had no choice but to indefinitely preempt Kimmel's show. Now, I hear that the decision ultimately was made by made by Bob Iger and Dana Walden, who has a great relationship with Jimmy Kimmel.

What I am hearing from all of my sources is that ABC loves Kimmel. They are very hopeful that they can figure out a path forward in how to bring this back. But what I have been told is that told is that the temperature has to be brought down.

I hear that Jimmy Kimmel was planning to come on his show last night on Wednesday, and that his monologue was very hot. That is the word that a source used, that is when execs made the call and they said, we want to figure out a path forward, but we can't air the show tonight. Because again, it is a very serious threat that your show is going to be going to be pulled by different station groups.

[20:10:17]

Now, Anderson, I also been also been speaking to people all across the industry and I spoke to a veteran T.V. news producer who does not work for ABC, has never worked for ABC and here's what they told me. They said that there is no more terrifying circumstance for a broadcast entity than the threat of an FCC fine or worse, that the agency could move to revoke the station's broadcast licenses.

So, everybody across the industry, not just in ABC, is very concerned of what comes next and what they are going to do. Hollywood is really still shocked, and they are horrified that Jimmy Kimmel is not on the air. Final point, Anderson, I have reached out to Kimmel's team, I have not heard back and I hear that there are really no plans as to how to move forward quite yet.

COOPER: Elizabeth Wagmeister, thanks very much.

Joining me now for more on this, CNN senior political commentator, former republican congressman Adam Kinzinger, journalist and cofounder of "Lift Our Voices" Gretchen Carlson, writer at large for "The New York Times" Jim Rutenberg, former Republican Governor of Minnesota Tim Pawlenty and Harvard law professor Rebecca Tushnet. Jim, I want to start with you. Carr's argument today that basically has been that well, look, the government did not look, the government did not exert any pressure here. This was two major affiliate groups preempted show. They were upset, they were entitled to do so and that's what led ABC to pull this. Does that ring true to you?

JIM RUTENBERG, WRITER AT LARGE FOR "THE NEW YORK TIMES": I think that the progression of events has always been murky, but two things are happening in tandem. And this we know, these are the facts, Chairman Carr is talking about removing or maintaining station licenses under the public interest standard. These are terms that we haven't heard in the context of political coverage, political commentary since the Nixon years. So, and he's been talking about this quite for some time, for weeks, if not months. At the same time, he's been saying these station groups should pressure their networks, which need their stations to, in his view, be good public service broadcasters and stop being biased against President Trump, in his view.

These two things are happening in tandem when Kimmel is suspended. We'll see if he comes if he comes back. So that alone is extraordinary. Again, we just haven't seen it and it's an intermingling of government power with editorial content that is, you have to go back a generation or two to see.

COOPER: And, Gretchen also, I mean, one of the affiliate groups, Nexstar Media Group they want to buy this other company, TEGNA for $6.2 billion. They would need FCC approval. The other one, Sinclair, is also interested in expanding, interested in expanding, interested in acquiring other stations or and they would also need FCC approval for that.

GRETCHEN CARLSON, AMERICAN BROADCASTER AND JOURNALIST: Yes, whoever would have thunk that getting FCC approval upend the entire legacy of free speech in America -- the fabric of America, no doubt. It's why we fought for our own independence 250 years ago. But that being said, look, these companies, they are desperate to get these approvals. And so, we saw this happen with Paramount and the deal with taking over CBS, the same thing.

They wanted that deal to go through. So, that's why the "60 Minutes" deal came to fruition and that's why they decided that they won't do edited interviews anymore on the Sunday morning news show.

I mean, these types of things are all acquiescing in the effort for the bottom line and business, and one has to ask, ABC had the option to push back on this and to sue, and most legal scholars say they probably would have had a good case because of the coercion that Brendan Carr gave to them just three hours before they pulled the plug on Kimmel. But instead they acquiesced.

So, you know, this is a question in my mind about big business versus free speech and private companies wanting to continue to pad their bottom line instead of fighting for free speech.

COOPER: Congressman Kinzinger, I mean, the other actor in this is the President of the United States, who has made it clear he is willing to pull levers of influence and, you know, punishment, which have -- I mean, other than Nixon, have not been thought of, and I'm not even sure Nixon thought of some of this.

ADAM KINZINGER, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yes, I mean, look, the President's interest is the President, that's it, his personal interest. Look at this TikTok deal that's going to be announced. His friends end up having an ownership stake in it. Intel, the government is now involved in buying. You look at crypto deals of this President and everything else. He's clearly concerned about this, not because of the Charlie Kirk murder. He is concerned about this, as he said, clearly when he was asked, because they're really, really mean to him and he can't take meanies, or he wants to take away their license.

And I think an important thing to note, Anderson, is the government is not in the business of granting broadcast license to monitor content. They're in the business because they have to control how many stations are on what spectrum. And so, it's about controlling the airwaves in terms of making sure that I'm not broadcasting on the same channel as ABC, it's not because the President can get really, really hurt and pull it.

COOPER: Governor Pawlenty, in your mind, is there a justification for the President or his point man at the FCC to even explore revoking broadcast licenses of outlets because of how they cover him?

TIMOTHY PAWLENTY (R), FORMER MINNESOTA GOVERNOR: Well, just to step back and to build on the congressman's point, you know, the public airwaves are given to networks to serve a public interest, a public necessity, and a public benefit. And so, if you apply that standard to Kimmel's show, I think any fair person would have to look at that show and say over the months and years, it is a decidedly partisan show. So seriously, presenting partisan information on the airwaves without balance in the case of these particular comments, arguably inaccurate comments, not comedic comments and analysis, is that in the public interest benefit or necessity and the legal scholars may say no, but if ABC believes they have their right, then litigate it.

And by the way, the way, the FCC hasn't even acted. One member of the FCC got on a podcast and spouted off, so there hasn't even been an official government action relative to ABC. And one last thing. Kimmel also ticked off the customers of his employer, namely those affiliates. And as an employee, you don't get to around and tick off an employer's customers without employers without some consequence.

COOPER: Do you think the fact that these that these two affiliates need FCC approval for to change laws so they can have mergers would have had any influence on this at all?

PAWLENTY: Absolutely, I think that's absolutely correct, Anderson, but that's their right to get upset about that and be interested in that merger. It's also their right to complain to ABC. But again, this is a business, the Kimmel show is a business, and you don't get to tick off your customers without some consequence from the employer.

COOPER: Our panel, including a First Amendment scholar, is going to stick around. We'll have more from them. Next, we'll have more on the man who's doing the threatening cheered on by the President, FCC Chairman Brendan Carr, and later Democratic Congressman Ro Khanna on his argument for compelling Carr to testify before the House Oversight Committee.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. RO KHANNA (D-CA): Mr. Chairman, this administration has initiated the largest assault on the First Amendment and free speech in modern history.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COOPER: Some of tonight's breaking news that the administration is not through pressuring broadcasters in the wake of Jimmy Kimmel's suspension comes courtesy of the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission. It's a position that normally does not draw much attention, but these are perhaps not normal times. More from CNN's Brian Stelter.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

CARR: When you look at the conduct that has taken place by Jimmy Kimmel, it appears to be some of the sickest conduct possible.

BRIAN STELTER, CNN CHIEF MEDIA CORRESPONDENT (voice over): Those words from FCC Chairman Brendan Carr touched off the firestorm around Jimmy Kimmel, ultimately leading to Kimmel's suspension and earning Carr praise from the President.

TRUMP: I think Brendan Carr is outstanding. He's a patriot. He loves our country, and he's a tough guy.

STELTER (voice over): And condemnation from Democratic leaders.

SEN. ELIZABETH WARREN (D-MA): When the head of the FCC is talking openly about taking away the broadcast license, then that is the government trying to exercise censorship.

STELTER (voice over): Carr welcomes the attention because it's a key part of strategy. A lawyer by training, who joined the FCC as a staffer, he became a commissioner during Trump's first term in office, which means he knows the limits of the FCC's power. The agency only regulates broadcast stations, not cable or streaming, and it has not revoked a license in decades but Carr knows what Trump wants.

TRUMP: The license is based on honesty. I think they have to take their license away.

STELTER (voice over): And Carr has followed the President's lead, announcing probes of media companies Trump doesn't like while also making regular appearances on Fox and Newsmax and, yes, even sharing memes to amuse the MAGA base. CARR: Broadcasters are different than any other form of than any other form of communication. Breaking with decades of precedent, Carr has turned the independent FCC into a political arm of the President and the GOP. The lone Democrat on the commission, Anna Gomez, says the agency has been weaponized.

ANNA GOMEZ, AMERICAN ATTORNEY: Free expression is non-negotiable.

STELTER (voice over): The chairman has been accused of using his media megaphone to pressure companies, something known as jawboning. As the website "The Free Press" wrote today, that's when state actors use threats to inappropriately compel private action.

CARR: Look, I can tell you Jimmy Kimmel is no Johnny Carson.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

STELTER (on camera): And that was a clip from one of Carr's many interviews today as he took a victory lap of sorts, thanking the local station owners that pulled Kimmel's show and put even more pressure on ABC. What Carr largely ignored is the fact that those station owners, like Nexstar, need him to approve their big money deals -- Anderson.

COOPER: Brian Stelter. Brian, thanks. Back now with our panel. Congressman Adam Kinzinger, Gretchen Carlson, Jim Rutenberg, Governor Tim Pawlenty and Harvard Law School First Amendment expert professor Rebecca Tushnet.

Professor, let me start with you. To the argument that, we'll look, this -- the FCC didn't actually do anything here, which the governor made before the break, that this was an ABC decision to do this.

REBECCA TUSHNET, HARVARD LAW SCHOOL FIRST AMENDMENT EXPERT: Yes, so the Supreme Court has for decades said that threats by the government can unconstitutionally suppress free speech. Your rights are violated, not when you are at last arrested, but also when they say, if you keep annoying us, we'll arrest you. So stop annoying us and the same is true with threats to pull the license.

[20:25:25]

And it's very clear that's what they are saying. That's what people are hearing. Carr and Trump are not hiding anything about their intentions.

COOPER: Governor, what do you make of that that argument?

PAWLENTY: I think it's a fair argument. It's called jawboning, as was referenced during the presentation that you just made. But at the same time, you know, this is not the only time the government has acted to suppress speech.

In the Biden administration, you had them pulling back, arguably false COVID information, pulling back 2020 information that Trump was presenting or the right was presenting and keep in mind the comments by Kimmel in this instance are arguably inaccurate or misleading. So, an interesting legal question would be if he makes not comedic, but seriously makes inaccurate or misleading comments, is that in the public interest?

COOPER: I just want to play the comment that he made. On the show, which seems to be the comment that's gotten a lot of attention.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JIMMY KIMMEL, "JIMMY KIMMEL LIVE" HOST: We hit some new lows over the weekend with the MAGA gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them, and doing everything they can to score political points from it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: Congressman Kinzinger, is that offensive to you? Is it --

KINZINGER: No, I mean, I think people have a right to say what they're saying. Look, here's the thing on some of this, what you're seeing, this is where I think the Republicans if I'm advising them, need to be careful. I haven't seen anybody that is not necessarily a faceless bot on X that has not condemned the killing of Charlie Kirk. And we should honor his service, we should honor his life. But it's different than to turn around and to keep fundraising on it and do this stuff, and then say, you don't have a right to either be critical of him or you don't critical of him or you don't have a right to say you disagreed with him. Otherwise, you know, you can't do that. That's not, you know, in coordination with the First Amendment.

COOPER: We should also point out what Jimmy Kimmel actually said about the killing of Charlie Kirk. I think we have a, I don't know if it was at X statement that he made or that he put out. I think we have to put on the screen -- we're going to get it up.

Gretchen, I mean, does -- where do you think this goes from here?

CARLSON: Well, look, I don't think it was necessarily a really smart decision for Jimmy Kimmel to come out and say what he did Monday night. I mean, everyone knew that everyone was on high alert based on the killing of Charlie Kirk. So, I just want to make sure that I say that I don't think it was the smartest thing to do. I don't think it's a reason to shut down the show, however, and I would argue right now that this could possibly happen if Democrats ever get back in power, like Republican outlets should be thinking that they also might not be on the air much longer either.

And is that the kind of country that we want to live in where every four years, if we continue to have elections, we're just going to bounce back and forth between different entities. I mean, this is this is crazy talk and crazy world.

COOPER: Professor, if Jimmy Kimmel, I mean, does he have a case to sue, if so, I mean, would it be ABC?

TUSHNET: He absolutely does have a case, and he would have to sue the government and say that ABC and the stations were acting because of government pressure. There are various procedural barriers to that, so you know, it would take a while, but, you know, on the facts, the facts really speak for themselves. There's internal reporting, about decision making at ABC that says they felt pressure. You know, it's a perfectly valid claim.

COOPER: Everyone stay with us. Sorry. Go ahead.

TUSHNET: Yes, so it's -- the public interest is a standard that is about, you know, the general behavior of an outlet. I think it is a little rich to talk about whether one person's statements were in the public interest when we all know that Fox News defamed a whole bunch of people, and Dominion, and, you know, is still plodding along after having to pay the largest judgment I've ever heard of in a defamation heard of in a defamation case.

And you know what? I don't think they should lose their license for it either but what's really corrosive to democracy is when only one side gets its own outlets and the others have to worry.

COOPER: Everyone stay with me. Up next, well talk to Congressman Ro Khanna on efforts to subpoena Brendan Carr.

[20:30:05]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COOPER: I want to quickly read you a post from Jimmy Kimmel on September 10th, the day of Charlie Kirk's assassination. "Instead of the angry finger pointing," he wrote, "can we just for one day agree for one day that it's horrible and monstrous to shoot another human? On behalf of my family, we send love to the Kirks and to all the children's parents -- to all the childrens, parents and innocents who fell victim to senseless gun violence."

That was a post he sent -- an Instagram post from the day of Charlie Kirk's assassination.

In the wake of Kimmel's suspension, Democrats on the House Oversight Committee moved today to try and subpoena FCC Chair Brendan Carr to appear before the panel. That motion was tabled with Republican Committee Chair James Comer, saying, a subpoena is not necessary because he believes Carr will appear on his own.

Congressman Ro Khanna joins us now.

[20:35:00]

So, Congressman, assuming Carr does appear, and he certainly seems to want to appear places right now, if he appears voluntarily, what specific questions do you want to ask him?

REP. RO KHANNA (D), OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM COMMITTEE: Why he pressured ABC to cancel Jimmy Kimmel, whether he has any correspondence with Nexstar that has a merger approval before him, and whether he --

COOPER: Nexstar, by the way, has denied, I think, any correspondence.

KHANNA: Well, we need to ask Carr whether there has been any communication, either publicly or privately, with them or Disney. But the more -- most important point here is, Anderson, that, you know, for an administration that lectured the country about canceled culture, they have now canceled Jimmy Kimmel, canceled Stephen Colbert, threatened to cancel Jonathan Karl, who holds this week, canceled a Washington Post columnist, Karen Attiah.

And I think if we don't, as a Congress, hold people like Brendan Carr accountable and say that this is not acceptable to go pressuring private companies and journalists, you're going to see the administration do more and more of it. So this is about Congress saying, no, you can't go threaten the media or private corporations.

COOPER: Carr said today that Jimmy Kimmel was the victim of free markets, that affiliate owners didn't like what he said, and ultimately ABC pulled the show entirely.

KHANNA: That would be a fair explanation if Carr hadn't gone out there and pressured and demanded that ABC pull Kirk and make those comments as the chair of the FCC. And so if he had said nothing and then Disney had come to that conclusion, that would be perfectly appropriate.

But what you have here is Carr calling for Kimmel's ouster. You have Trump threatening Jonathan Karl. You have Trump today threatening to pull networks he disagreed with. You have Vance telling people to report those social media posts they don't like, to report those Americans to their employers.

This is just something we've never seen, and we have got to stand up and say this is not our country. I saw one of your previous guests who said if a Democratic president comes in, they may do it to conservatives. I hope not. I would be out there screaming that they shouldn't do it.

We don't need a retaliation. We need constitutionalism, and my hope is whoever the next Democratic president is, the first thing they say is they're going to uphold the Constitution, not engage in tit-for-tat retaliation.

COOPER: How disappointed are you in companies like ABC, Disney?

KHANNA: Look, I don't think they should have taken the action they did with Kimmel. Partly, we need grace in this country. I'm glad that Kimmel condemned the assassination. But think about where conversation has descended, Anderson.

Instead of just condemning the killing and reflecting on how we can all be better, and I include mysel. I'm sure I've had posts that I could have framed better. We're arguing whether the left or the right is more guilty for extremism. I mean, what have we come to?

So, look, I disagree with Disney, but I understand how private companies are feeling when you have the administration threatening you. I mean, it's not easy being a CEO -- COOPER: Yes.

KHANNA: -- or a university president.

COOPER: Congressman Khanna, thanks very much.

Back with the panel --

KHANNA: Thank you.

COOPER: -- here. I mean, it is remarkable the extent to which this administration has made clear, and very vocally, they are willing to threaten anybody.

ADAM KINZINGER, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yes, and they've said that. The President has now said that he's going to cancel the rest of the late-night hosts. He doesn't hide it. The only people that try to kind of put lipstick on it and pretend like it's based on anything are the people that have to go out there on TV and defend him.

He's very clear. He doesn't like it when people attack him. He's not going to let them attack him. And he's going to use the power of the presidency to do it. And it's chilling.

And I think every Republican needs to think through, as we've hit now two times, what happens when a Democrat becomes president? Because a Democrat will eventually become president again. And we don't want to be in this.

GRETCHEN CARLSON, CO-FOUNDER, LIFT OUR VOICES: So big picture for me, I have two points. The first is that, unfortunately, I don't think most Americans are paying close attention to this right now. I mean, when you think about, you know, busy people, they're thinking about their kids' soccer game and getting off to their party and planning dinner --

COOPER: When they're watching repeats of Celebrity Family Feud every night.

CARLSON: And they are watching -- I mean, I'm just trying to be --

COOPER: Not -- there's any long (ph) Celebrity Family Feud, by the way.

CARLSON: -- realistic that I think people are -- and they may be hearing, oh, Kimmel got fired for his ratings, right? I mean, they're not really -- they're kind of getting in bits and pieces, and they're not completely paying attention to what this might mean for free speech down the road.

The second thing I'd like to say, big picture, is that Republicans could stop this right now. Republicans could come together and say, what they're saying privately. They could come and actually say it publicly, right, Adam?

KINZINGER: Yes,

CARLSON: And say what they actually believe and stop this. But you know why they won't? Because they want to be reelected more than they want to potentially save this country.

And if you have been brought up with conviction in your life, you should do the opposite.

KINZINGER: Hey, man.

COOPER: Jim, where do you see this going?

JIM RUTENBERG, WRITER AT LARGE, THE NEW YORK TIMES: I'd say -- well, based on the comments, the new fresh comments that you're reporting tonight, it would be extraordinary to go through more of this. And that's what the chairman is saying. That's what the President is saying. And we're going to -- if it becomes show after show after show, based on this new use of the public interest standard in our lifetimes, that's going to be a really brand new chapter for us.

[20:40:22]

COOPER: I mean, the idea that the President of the United States becomes the TV programmer for the United States is kind of --

KINZINGER: Can I -- you know, the one thing that nobody caught, I think, too much is when Trump basically told Jonathan Karl. This whole thing, you know, started this week, we were talking about hate speech and whether hate speech was a thing.

You remember when President Trump told Jonathan Karl, you know, you write unfair things about me, I'll come after you for hate speech. That's what the President's thinking. And that's the chilling part.

COOPER: My thanks to everybody.

Just ahead, a warning from Russian pro-democracy leader, Garry Kasparov, on how easy it is for a country to lose its free press. Something he saw happen in Vladimir Putin's Russia. He's here next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:45:10]

COOPER: A stark warning tonight from Russian pro-democracy leader, Garry Kasparov, in the wake of moves by the Trump administration to crack down on what it calls hate speech. In an article published by TheNextMove.org, Kasparov writes about the beginnings of a free press in Russia after the fall of the Soviet Union.

But that in his rise to power, Vladimir Putin stamped it out, quote, "Very quickly, the Russian government set about squeezing the country's fledgling free press. They did so in a pincer movement that attacked individual journalists, presenters, and the program -- and programs from one side and the owners of media enterprises from the other." Garry Kasparov is here tonight. I mean, the article is chilling, and certainly, you know, the pushback from supporters of the president will say, look, it's outrageous to compare what Vladimir Putin did to what is going on here right now. What do you say to that?

GARRY KASPAROV, RUSSIAN PRO-DEMOCRACY LEADER: I was 25 years ago, and I have to say that Trump administration is doing a great job to make me feel whole. It all starts slow. It was not just instant, you know, just liquidation of free press. So it's just step by step.

Dictatorship, it doesn't arrive, you know, with tanks on the streets. It happens rarely.

COOPER: Things that seem maybe reasonable or could be argued away.

KASPAROV: It's a death by a thousand cuts, you know, just one by one. And, by the way, the first Putin attack was against the very popular puppet show.

COOPER: A puppet show. That was the first.

KASPAROV: The puppet show. Yes. So --

COOPER: And people probably said, oh, it's just a puppet show.

KASPAROV: Yes. And, by the way, they use the same arguments. The moment they hear public interest, I mean, that's always accompanies, you know, the attack on free press. Every would-be authoritarian talks about public interest.

Then the next step is business. Vladimir Putin also used the coercion and attacks on businesses and forcing them just to quit the shows, sell businesses. So it's always the same music.

COOPER: And so people were saying, well, look, it's the businesses that sold the show.

KASPAROV: That's what Putin told Bush 43. That's what Western leaders bought. So as -- again, he did it step by step. It took about three years for him just to liquidate what's -- what was a free press in Russia in the 90s.

COOPER: You write in the piece, you say, "Many of the Russian government's targets were never actually arrested or charged with any specific offense. Many more were never targeted at all. A few high- profile people got shaken down and everyone else got the message."

KASPAROV: Yes. But, again, everything, you know, happens slowly. So this is -- when I was arrested back in 2007, so a couple of times, so it was all five or 10 days in jail. Now you go for a tweet, you go for 10 years in jail. So it doesn't happen instantly.

So, but it's all about the trend. It's a one-way street. And again, it's very important that it's the first time, never thought it would happen in America. The government official threatened, threatened the public broadcaster to, you know, with the confiscation of their license.

And I think the whole idea of debating what Jimmy Kimmel said, I think is wrong because it's a First Amendment. And there were several cases in this country. I mean, one is what's been mentioned, it's last year where this is the Supreme Court decided in favor of NRA that was threatened by New York authorities. So that's -- it's a case of coercion.

And back in 1988 was a very famous case. You remember the people versus Larry Flynt? So that's the 1988. The Supreme Court, you know, it's a Hustler magazine versus Jerry Falwell, who was probably by far more significant for Christian movement in America back then than Charlie Kirk now.

And he was parroted, I mean, by Hustler. And eventually 8-0. Well, it's in favor of First Amendment, emotional distress. The Supreme Court decided was not a factor.

COOPER: You say Russia has no democratic immune system to fight the virus America does. What -- are you confident at all that there'll be pushback?

KASPAROV: I'm confident that, you know, there will be a pushback, but I think it's, you know, people have to wake up to understand it's existential threat. Because America has 250 years of history of, you know, just probably even more, you know, if you look, you know, at just -- at the years before -- colonial years when still rule of law was respected, people somehow believe that constitution can be -- can protect itself.

Absolutely not. It's not ironclad. Constitution offers a foundation for your fight, but it doesn't win on its own. And, by the way, Trump is kind of a genius, you know, to normalize things that were absolutely abnormal.

In the conversation here a few minutes ago, you talked about, you know, Watergate with other guests. I mean, come on, this is Watergate today, if it happens, nobody will even notice it. It just is -- because President lie -- I mean, come on, president lied.

So Trump normalized many things that many believed, you know, just would be impossible in America. And he keeps moving in this direction. And that's why threatening Republicans, oh, one day Democrats will take over. They're not planning to leave power.

Just listen to what Kash Patel did on the hearings. When you have FBI director insulting sitting senators, it means he's not working for Constitution, not working for American people. He's -- he working for one man.

[20:50:03]

And again, this loyalty to fealty to just one person, over Constitution, that tells me that elections in 2026, I mean, still will be free, but may not be fair.

COOPER: Gary Kasparov, I appreciate you being with us. Thank you.

John King goes All Over The Map to Texas where Republican legislatures are gerrymandering their way to more seats in the House. We'll have that when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COOPER: Former Biden Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg went to Indiana today to speak out against President Trump's plan to create more Republican House districts before the midterms. Could be the next red state to redraw its maps.

In Missouri, the legislature just adopted a new one. But Texas is the biggest prize with the possible five-seat Republican pickup. Here's John King All Over The Map.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

MANNY RIZO, TEXAS VOTER: There's got to be some sort of a change.

[20:55:00]

JOHN KING, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: (voice-over): Manny Rizo is a Democrat in Texas, on the losing side, again.

RIZO: Intentional gerrymandering in order to control the vote. And are we really represented by the proper representative? I think it's just a way so they can keep control and power and continue on with the next two years as to what they're doing now.

KING (voice-over): Rizo maintains private jets. His office, a hangar at this private airport in Pflugerville, about 15 miles south of Austin. Business is good.

RIZO: This airplane came in for some big inspections. We found a lot of issues, but that's what we do. That's what they pay us to do is to find issues on the ground rather than they find them in the air.

KING (voice-over): Most clients are long-time customers. Of late, a few tough conversations about the bill when critical parts come from Mexico or Canada.

RIZO: Tariffs. It costs more money to stay in business. It costs more money to buy parts.

KING: To buy parts.

RIZO: To buy parts.

KING (voice-over): The local congressman for this airport is a Democrat, like Rizo. He listens if Rizo has concerns about how Washington impacts his business. He listens, too, on the issue that is now Rizo's passion, gun violence.

His nine-year-old niece, Jackie (ph), was among the students killed in Uvalde. RIZO: That's where it's really important, you know, to us and our family. You know, we -- our values, our morals. And --

KING (voice-over): Sadness every time he thinks of his niece. Anger every time he thinks about a new Texas map that moves Pflugerville and other Austin suburbs.

RIZO: Especially during a change in the midterms. You know, I don't agree with that.

KING: This is Kyle, Texas, about 20 miles down Interstate 35 south of Austin. As of today, this is the 35th congressional district, one of two solidly blue seats in the Austin area. But when Texans vote in next year's midterm elections, the map will be dramatically different.

The 35th moved south, east of San Antonio, to Republican country. The 37th made more compact right there in Austin. The result? Two Democratic districts become one. And tens of thousands of Texans, now represented by Democrats in Congress, dispersed into more rural and Republican districts.

KING (voice-over): Gretchen Pruett is one of those Democrats. And this winery just outside of Kyle is one of her favorite places. Pruett moved to Texas 30 years ago. Likes her wine red and her politics blue.

GRETCHEN PRUETT, TEXAS VOTER: I wanted to live near Austin. And I was looking for a place that would be a community that I would feel at home in.

KING (voice-over): The new map puts Pruett in a district represented by a Republican. That isn't her only objection.

PRUETT: It's also a district that is heavily farming and industrial. And that is not the same kind of industry and ecosystem that we're in here in Austin suburbs.

KING (voice-over): Pruett was a library director who first became politically active fighting Texas Republicans trying to ban books. Now she's embracing a new cause. Trying to elect a Democrat in a district drawn to heavily favor a Republican.

PRUETT: It has activated me and my family. So we will be helping to register voters. We will be helping to get out the vote. When I was in public service in the government, I could not speak out. But I'm now retired and unmuzzled. And so I have a voice and I'm going to use it.

KING (voice-over): Pruett has studied the new lines and she knows the math. But she promises to fight on if a Republican wins next year.

PRUETT: I just believe that conversation and compromise and seeing all sides of the issue and then making a decision is the best possible form of government. And we're silencing those voices. We're marginalizing them and my voice is marginalized as well.

KING: And that's what you think they're doing? They're just dispersing Democrats in a way that silences them? PRUETT: I do believe that, yes. The maps bear it out.

KING (voice-over): Trump's lead role in the remapping makes it sting Democrats like Pruett even more. It is a bold power play. And Texas, by far, the biggest player. But it might still not be enough to keep the House in Republican hands.

(END VIDEO TAPE)

KING (on-camera): And Anderson, you're looking here, these are the House districts in Texas. What Democrats complain about, they say this is disproportionate. Trump won 56 percent in Texas just last year. If the Republicans pick up these five seats here, that would give them 79 percent of the House seats just in Texas.

And as you note at the top, President Trump is not done. He says, number one, in Texas, too bad. We have the power, we have the votes, we're going to do it. That's what Governor Abbott says as well.

Missouri just passed its plan. Indiana, by the end of the year, early next year, may go for one or two more Republican seats wiping out Democrats. South Carolina is a possibility. Florida is a possibility. Utah is a possibility.

Remember, California voters decide in November whether they'll approve a new Democratic map. That would take five seats away, essentially offset Texas. So, as I note there, midterm averages, you lose about 20 seats. So this, the Republican power play, may not be enough. But the President is determined, Anderson, to try.

COOPER: John King, thanks very much.

The news continues. The Source with Kaitlan Collins starts now. See you tomorrow.