Return to Transcripts main page

The Lead with Jake Tapper

CNN, MS NOW And Politico Sue President Trump Over White House Ban; DoorDash Driver Shot By ICE Says He Still Has A Bullet In His Body; Trump's D.C. Arch Plan Sparks Alarm Over Proposed Military Complex; Trump Meets With Mamdani Ahead Of U.N. General Assembly; German Chancellor Calls Election Results A "Disaster". Aired 6-7p ET

Aired September 21, 2026 - 18:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:00:00]

PAMELA BROWN, CNN ANCHOR: Welcome to The Lead. I'm Pamela Brown in for Jake Tapper.

And this hour, President Trump is in New York ahead of a major global conference. But he's without much of the press coverage he usually gets. Media companies standing by, CNN, MS NOW, and Politico, as the three outlets sue the White House over Trump's media ban. Where that lawsuit stands tonight as both sides prepare for a court battle in the coming days.

Plus, top Democrats across the country are privately warning they don't have enough money in the bank ahead of the November midterms. Right now, Republicans have nearly $200 million more worth of ads reserved than Democrats. So how big of an impact could this huge money disparity have?

And President Trump is now providing a new justification for his proposed 25-storwe arch in Washington, DC. He says the structure, which would be in the middle of the traffic circle, will now be used to also house drones and snipers. So, how would this even work, and is it feasible?

The Lead tonight, CNN, MS NOW, and Politico are suing President Trump after he banned them from the White House for, quote, negative coverage for the first hearing, and this case is now set for Wednesday. And in a lengthy post on Truth Social, President Trump wrote, the administration already intends to appeal, writing, quote, fake news people and publications that only write negatively and who violate our national security by writing false and defamatory stories with unknown sources shouldn't be allowed access to the most important office anywhere in the world.

In the lawsuit filing, the outlets call the ban a direct assault on the First Amendment and a blatant violation of constitutional principles. Other major T.V. networks, ABC, CBS, Fox, and NBC, are standing with CNN after it was barred from its pool duties today, declining to replace CNN with a crew to cover the president's events in New York. So, let's go live now to CNN's Chief White House Correspondent and Anchor Kaitlan Collins. So, Kaitlan, we're learning more about what led up to Trump's announcement last week that surprised us.

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, Pam, he's been lashing out about the coverage. Obviously, that's not surprising. It is something that he has complained about for years, long before he was president. But he's been facing a string of setbacks lately when it comes to the Supreme Court, when it comes to the Federal Reserve raising interest rates, gas prices rising, the Iran war still underway, and certainly a big topic here at the United Nations General Assembly this week.

But it was the president being shown a graphic of negative coverage last week by Politico, we're told, by his close aide, Natalie Harp, someone who's often in the Oval Office, often with him on Air Force One, and is actually joining him and traveling with him on this trip to New York just now according to the reporters who are still traveling with him.

She showed him a graphic of negative coverage from Politico, and we are told that it so infuriated the president that he decided to loop these outlets together -- lump these outlets together, and ban them, as he announced on Friday, from covering him, which he himself, despite the vice president saying earlier today, this is not a ban on the free press. The president himself called it that last week when he was in the Oval Office taking questions about how exactly he envisioned this working.

Now, what we do know is this has kind of prompted a scramble in and of itself behind the scenes because this is the first time in modern history that the president has not had a major T.V. network traveling with him when he goes somewhere. Often, there is one representative, one team from CBS, CNN, NBC, ABC, or Fox, who is always with the president no matter where he goes, whether that's a war zone or down the street from the White House or here to New York.

But today, there is no T.V. camera traveling with President Trump as the networks are now acting in solidarity after the White House refused to admit CNN and let them carry out their assignment as the T.V. pool today.

BROWN: Kaitlan Collins, thank you so much. And don't miss Kaitlan's show, The Source with Kaitlan Collins. Her guests tonight include Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear at 9:00 Eastern on CNN. Don't miss it.

All right, I want to bring in Conor Fitzpatrick, chief supervising attorney from the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, and Frank Sesno, former CNN White House correspondent and Washington bureau chief.

Conor, to start with you, based on the legal filing from CNN, MS NOW, and Politico, how do you expect this case will unfold?

CONOR FITZPATRICK, CHIEF SUPERVISING ATTORNEY, FIRE: I think the best way to predict this is by looking at President Trump's social media post, where he is already promising to appeal a ruling he has not lost yet. The law on this point is very clear, and it's been clear for 50 years. The White House cannot throw members of the press out of the White House grounds because it doesn't like what they have to say. That's been the law under Republican presidents, Democratic presidents, and it's still the law today.

[18:05:02]

BROWN: Frank, we just heard from the president last hour talking about this alongside Mayor Zohran Mamdani of New York. Take a listen.

All right, we don't have that. But he basically just went on to rail against the press and continue what he has said many times, that he believes that it's fake news, so forth and so on. Do you think he was expecting more press conference of his events today?

FRANK SESNO, FORMER CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Oh, he expects press coverage wherever he goes, and he gets it for the most part. I don't think he was expecting this kind of solidarity from news organizations, and that's a very important thing, both that the news organizations did this and that the president and others around him see that he's going to get less coverage.

Sometimes he doesn't act like he cares at all because he's got his own Truth Social channel that and other ways that he can get to people in real time. But this is a president, a person who, in my opinion, has never met a camera or a microphone he doesn't like after all, and he wants that attention. He wants that coverage.

And it's extraordinary thing that in the solidarity of ABC, CBS, Fox News, NBC, that it's the Fox News bureau chief and T.V. pool chair who today wrote to the White House press pool and said they're -- you know, they're, they would not be covering events designated for pool coverage.

So, this is not a minor thing, and he has created this dust-up. How much he cares is really kind of depends on the moment, it seems. But it's actually a very big deal.

BROWN: Yes. And it was interesting. CNN was supposed to be pool today. That means we were supposed to travel with him, cover him. Obviously, that did not happen. And we held the press conference outside of Gracie Mansion, but it was the local New York outlet that we were getting the feed from, not CNN as it was supposed to be.

I wonder, Conor, what your view is of Trump's Truth Social post from earlier this afternoon where he referenced the judge in the case, Judge Timothy Kelly, who Trump appointed. It's the same judge who heard the case to restore CNN's Jim Acosta's credential during the first administration. So, I just wonder what you think about that, and how do you think that will play into the case?

FITZPATRICK: It might be the same judge, but it's the same law. The same law was binding back during the Jim Acosta case that this judge previously handled, and it's the same law that's in play today. You know, as a First Amendment litigator, sometimes we spend years of litigation and discovery, and even a jury trial, trying to prove that a government actor was acting against somebody because he or she didn't like their viewpoint.

But here, Donald Trump is on social media not only saying the quiet part out loud, but putting the quiet part in all caps. So, when it comes to the law here, it's not close. This is a violation of the First Amendment.

BROWN: Frank, earlier today, Vice President Vance made a comment about this ban that seemingly contradicts what the president had said. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

J.D. VANCE, U.S. VICE PRESIDENT: He's not banning media outlets. What he's doing is saying, we're not going to give you special access to the White House if you engage in what is effectively propaganda.

If you're going to engage in what is effectively far left propaganda, why would a Republican White House give you special access?

REPORTER: But, sir, you've talked a lot about free speech over the years. How is this not an attack on free speech?

VANCE: Well, they can still report on the Trump White House. They can still get the public reports. They can still, of course, talk to people in the administration and outside the administration. What the president has said is, we're not going to give you special access inside the White House.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: Now, the president said he was banning these press outlets. What do you make of that?

SESNO: Well, what I'm -- it's very sad, okay? It's very sad. What, you know, the president announced on Friday, for all intents and purposes, felt and sounded like a whim. Now, you've got J.D. Vance actually trying to defend it based on some kind of argument or logic. It just doesn't work. The president said, I don't want these people, when he made this announcement on Friday, in my office.

That's not his office. In fact, he made a reference to the people's house. That building, the White House, is maintained with taxpayer dollars from all parties and all stripes, just as it is covered by news organizations from all stripes. And it is wrong legally and wrong editorially, journalistically, and wrong morally to say that these organizations are going in there and doing propaganda. Would they have said the same thing, would J.D. Vance have said the same thing if Joe Biden had kicked Fox out, which was constantly harping on his administration during those years?

And this is the problem. This is what the former White House press secretary, Ari Fleischer, said the other day when he said, well, this is dangerous stuff because if now it's Republicans kicking out what they see as liberal media, tomorrow it can be Democrats kicking out conservative media.

So, it needs to be seen as the open place it is. The White House should be, is, the beacon for coverage, accountability, and that's why this thing is so outrageous.

[18:10:03]

BROWN: And just for context, historically, we have seen presidents clash with the press, right? In 2009 --

SESNO: Repeatedly.

BROWN: Yes, repeatedly. And you did have the Obama administration trying to exclude Fox News from a round of interviews with the treasury official before backing down. The Biden administration tightened the credentialing process, which led to fewer journalists having White House badges. But, Conor, explain how this is different.

FITZPATRICK: This is very different in the modern era. So, we know that presidents have had antipathy towards the press going back a very long time. John Adams used the Sedition Act to try to -- and was effective in throwing some of his critics actually in jail. But the backlash to the Sedition Act from regular Americans led to John Adams' defeat in the 1800 election and the extinction of the Federalist Party.

So, over the last 250 years, the people of this country have proudly defended the right to free speech and a free press, regardless of whether we like what that particular newspaper or television channel has to say. And those principles have to hold true here. Because what's different today is that he's not only trying to ban reporters from particular areas or decide that he only wants to do interviews with particular outlets, he is trying to kick certain outlets outright out of the White House grounds, and that is unprecedented and that is unconstitutional.

BROWN: Right. And especially with the distinction that these are outlets that were already given a press badge to be at the White House, and now it is being revoked because he said for himself he doesn't like the coverage.

Conor Fitzpatrick and Frank Sesno, thank you so much. We'll see how this plays out in court.

Well, protests are erupting after ICE agents shot a man in Austin, Texas. His lawyer tonight saying the man came to the country legally, but the Trump administration disagrees and is trying to deport him. We're going to explain how all of this unfolded up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:15:00]

BROWN: In our National Lead, unanswered questions remain after ICE agent shot and wounded a DoorDash driver from Venezuela Sunday afternoon in Austin, Texas. Social media videos not only captured the moment the shots were fired, they also show the man in handcuffs with federal agents standing around him, even though he clearly has a bullet wound in his back. He was taken to a hospital, but a few hours later, moved to a detention center 100 miles away with the bullet still inside of him. He says it was because it was close to his spine.

He's identified as a 28-year-old Wilbur Garces Perez, who federal authorities say was in the country illegally. And he called into a news conference this afternoon, where his attorney and others translated for him.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: He's saying that he's in a lot of pain, that they did not take out the bullet because it was close to his spine. He was complaining that he was in a lot of pain, and he's like, are you going to take out the bullet wound? And the doctor said, hey, they're in a hurry to get you out of here. When he arrived at the detention center at 4:00 A.M., he also complained about the pain, and he had to sleep on the floor.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: With us now is Austin City Councilmember Vanessa Fuentes. Thank you for coming on. What are you learning about what happened here?

VANESSA FUENTES, AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL: Yes. I mean, absolutely horrified to learn that Wilbur still has a bullet lodged in his body. You know, to us, this is just another example of how ICE continues to operate in a violent and reckless regard for public safety. It is alarming to see that he was not given proper medical care either at the scene or in the hospital, and was within hours taken to a detention facility.

And so yet again, this is another violent example coming out of ICE, an agency that is operating without accountability and without oversight.

BROWN: Are you getting any more details about what exactly led ICE agents to shoot him?

FUENTES: That is what the questions that we still have and we're trying to seek answers for. And it's important that we have a local investigation so that we are able to gather the evidence and interview bystanders. You can see from the video accounts that have been shared online what happened, but we want to ensure that there's a thorough investigation, and we want it to also happen locally.

We cannot rely upon ICE to give us all the information that we need. They do not have a good history in that regard. So, it's important that we have a local investigation.

BROWN: Are you concerned that ICE that he will be deported and you won't have a key witness as part of the local investigation?

FUENTES: Absolutely. I mean, the way they, how quickly they moved, the fact that he didn't receive proper medical care and within hours was transported to a detention facility away from his family. And, again, without due process here, I mean, this is a violation of our constitutional rights, is absolutely concerning that he will be deported.

And so we really want to ensure that he is provided the right to be with his family as this investigation plays out.

BROWN: A Department of Homeland Security statement on X describes Garces Perez as, quote, an illegal alien from Venezuela who illegally entered our country under the Biden administration and had a final order of removal. How do you respond?

FUENTES: Well, regardless of anyone's immigration status, no one should be shot in the back. I think we can all agree upon that. And based on the information that Wilbur's attorney is providing to the media and to our community, he is here legally. But it shouldn't matter, you know? There is a proper way to do public safety, and ICE is not making our communities any safer.

BROWN: And the shooting sparked a demonstration last night. What else are you hearing from members of Austin's Latino community?

FUENTES: I mean, certainly, there is a level of fear knowing that ICE is operating within our city and just knowing their track record for a violation on human rights and their ability to detain individuals.

[18:20:03]

I mean, they are detaining people that have no criminal record. So, there is a lot of fear in our Latino community.

And so having this happen, a tragic shooting like this happen in Austin, is one that sadly, you know, we knew that at some point it would happen, but one that it was important for us to prepare for. Earlier this year in March, I joined my colleagues in a five-point action plan on how to protect our community, as well as how to respond when horrific shootings like this occur to ensure that there's accountability. And so right now, our community wants answers, and we want to ensure that there's accountability as well.

BROWN: All right. Austin City Council Member Vanessa Fuentes, thank you.

Well, an agreement announced today clears the way for a Hollywood mega merger. What we're learning about the deal to allow Paramount to acquire Warner Brothers Discovery, the parent company of CNN.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:25:00]

BROWN: A major development today in the Money Lead. The state's attorneys general suing to block Paramount's merger with Warner Brothers Discovery, CNN's parent company, announcing they've reached a settlement clearing the way for the two entertainment powerhouses to combine. California Attorney General Rob Bonta led the lawsuit, and he spoke this afternoon.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ROB BONTA, CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY GENERAL: This settlement is not a vote of support for this merger. It is not a blessing of the broader merger.

But as I've said before and I'll say again, I'm always willing to come to the table for honest, good faith negotiations.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: CNN's Chief Media Analyst Brian Stelter is here. So, what are the terms of the deal, Brian?

BRIAN STELTER, CNN CHIEF MEDIA ANALYST: Yes, Pam. The concessions are relatively modest. Bonta did not secure many of the structural remedies that he said he wanted. Instead, he is touting what are known as behavioral remedies with legal language describing how Paramount will behave in the next five years.

The settlement terms require a combined Paramount/Warner to release 30 films theatrically per year, something that CEO David Ellison has said he wants to do anyway. That number will rise to 32 after two years. The deal also requires Paramount to maintain its theatrical release windows, to keep Paramount's Hollywood and Warner's Burbank Studios open and not move out of California, to invest an additional $1.5 billion in domestic film production, and importantly, on the news side of the business, to establish a, quote, editorial independence board for CNN and CBS News.

Now, there's a lot of details still to be figured out about that editorial board, but Paramount will choose five journalists to sit on it, and they'll have the ability to resolve disputes and set standards. How that will work and whether it'll be effective very much remains to be seen, but some of the state attorneys general were pushing to have this board because they want to ensure that CNN's newsroom has editorial independence from the parent company.

As one of the people involved in the negotiations said to me, Pam, quote, this board's going to exist, so let's try to make sure it actually has teeth.

BROWN: So, what does this mean for the timeline of this merger?

STELTER: This is the final hurdle that Paramount had to clear. Paramount wanted, of course, this merger to close to take effect a couple of months ago. So, now there's going to be about a week or so of final preparations. I expect this deal to take effect either September 30th, October 1st, that kind of timeline, because it's the end of the third quarter, the start of the fourth quarter. It's a convenient time for the accountants in the room. And Paramount will be able to make more comments and explain in more detail how it intends to run the combined companies.

Wall Street is expecting major layoffs and other cost-cutting moves in order to help pay down the debt associated with this deal. Also notably, three Middle Eastern royal families and sovereign wealth funds are financing a big chunk of this deal, Qatar, the UAE, and Saudi Arabia. That's causing many Democratic lawmakers and other media watchdog groups to denounce today's settlement.

But the bottom line, Pam, is that Paramount is moving forward. It will be able to take control of CNN, HBO, Warner, and all the rest in the next two weeks or so, and the final details are now being worked out.

BROWN: All right. Brian Stelter bringing us the latest, thanks so much.

Well, President Trump now says his proposed 250-foot arch will contain military drones and be used by snipers. So, when did these plans change, and how would this even work? That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:30:00]

BROWN: A striking and controversial new proposal from President Trump is raising fresh alarms in Washington, not just because of its size, but because of what he now says it will be used for. Trump says his proposed 250-storey arch near Arlington, Virginia, could double as a military site and be equipped with drones, ammunition, and rooftop snipers. That intensifies concerns about militarizing one of America's most symbolic spaces.

CNN's Tom Foreman has more.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

TOM FOREMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice over): Amid raging controversy over the president's proposed arch, and relentless claims from the White House that construction will proceed as planned, a surprise change. At the strong request of the United States military, Trump wrote on social media, I have agreed to convert the project to a top- grade military complex Triumphal Arch, to house, store, and have the rapid ability to use large numbers of drones, plus snipers.

The about-face comes amid fierce outcry from preservationists and veterans groups who clearly saw Trump as an arch villain, and claimed his original plan would detract from nearby Arlington Cemetery. Some of them now say the new plan should start the approval process all over again.

REBECCA MILLER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, D.C. PRESERVATION LEAGUE: We've been going through this process now for about six months, where it's been reviewed by the Commission of Fine Arts, it's been reviewed before the National Capital Planning Commission, and now this is an entirely different complex.

FOREMAN: It's not lost on those critics that Trump has made this maneuver before. When he tore down the historic East Wing of the White House, he stated his goal clearly.

DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: We're replacing it with one of the most beautiful ballrooms that you've ever seen.

FOREMAN: But after being demolished himself in the press, polls, and courts, he repainted that pet project, too, as being as much about defense as dancing.

TRUMP: This will be the greatest military complex/ballroom anywhere in the world. There won't be anything like it.

FOREMAN: This is more than just a battle of architecture and landscaping. Safety advocates who'd already raised alarms over such a massive monument crowding flights into Reagan Airport now must grapple with the idea of drones and gunmen in the mix, even as the president keeps going as he has all along, full throttle.

TRUMP: What I do best in life is build. I build buildings really well.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

FOREMAN (on camera): The president's move raises another question, too.

[18:35:02]

Only a couple of miles from the Pentagon, with a river nearby where security patrols go by all the time, with military flights going over all the time, in one of the most highly protected cities in the world. Does it even make sense to talk about putting security measures on top of an arch in the middle of a traffic circle swarming with tourists, Pam? So --

BROWN: Fair question.

FOREMAN: It's a fair question.

BROWN: Fair question.

FOREMAN: There are a lot of fair questions in this one.

BROWN: We also want to -- yes, note that it was 250 feet high.

FOREMAN: Sure.

BROWN: Not storeys. All right, Tom Foreman, thank you so much, as always.

CNN Chief Law Enforcement and Intelligence Analyst John Miller joins us now. So, what do you make of this new explanation from the president about what the arch would be used for, John?

JOHN MILLER, CNN CHIEF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND INTELLIGENCE ANALYST: Pamela A. Brown, this raises a boatload of questions. So, let's take it at face value. It is this arch of triumph, but it is also a military location where there'll be snipers on the high ground where they have got a three hundred and sixty degree view. But the president also said snipers on the plaza level. The question is, under posse comitatus, this is the legal rule that bars the military from engaging in law enforcement action against Americans on U.S. soil, who are these snipers shooting at? The ones on the top? The ones on the ground? And what are these drones being launched at? Are they armed drones, or are they just for observation?

These are questions we haven't really heard the answer to, and Washington, D.C., has the Washington, D.C. Metro Police SWAT team. The Secret Service has a highly competent SWAT team with a big sniper component just around the corner at the White House. The FBI has a SWAT team, as do most other federal agencies in Washington.

So, there's a question being begged here, what is the need for this Trojan horse? And it's not much of a Trojan horse in that the cat's out of the bag. Anybody who would target Washington, who is a foreign adversary, would know what it was, what was in it, and where to hit.

BROWN: And you pointed out all the law enforcement assets in the area. Trump also didn't mention in his post you have the Army's Fort Myer about a mile away from the proposed arch site, and the Pentagon is about two miles away. They seemingly would have a lot of military and security capability if needed.

MILLER: Well, they would, and they also, as military facilities, would have the standoff that, as Tom Foreman pointed out, you wouldn't get in the middle of a traffic circle in a tourist location where this military facility would be basically just sitting out there.

But I think we're missing the real dodge here, which is one of the struggles, and Tom pointed this out in his piece, he hinted at this, with building the ballroom was, it was challenged in court again and again. And when it got to the Supreme Court, where they prevailed was the president's power for national security needs and the fact that there was a military installation under the ballroom, and the ballroom was a cover for that, and it was needed for national security.

Right now, nobody's ever really told us how the arch was being paid for. First, it was going to be money left over from the ballroom. Then it might be money from the National Endowment. Then now it's a military project, which means it can be defeating challenges in court by saying it's for national security, and it could be paid for out of the Pentagon budget, and that's probably closer to what's really going on.

BROWN: So, you see this just as a way to justify it as he has his other projects?

MILLER: To beat legal challenges and to develop a funding stream.

BROWN: And just like when you look at what Trump says he wants, he mentioned drones as one of the things that the arch would supposedly hold. And this comes at a time when threats from drones are on the rise and local law enforcement are on high alert and struggling on how to combat that. I mean, if this actually happened, how do you see it playing out? MILLER: Well, just this weekend, the Police Executive Research Forum, or PERF, the leading think tank for law enforcement, issued a scathing report saying based on the fact that 700 drones were seized by law enforcement during the FIFA games, hundreds more during the Super Bowl, the UFC fight on the White House lawn was targeted by terrorists who wanted to fly explosive drones on and cause a stampede, where then snipers would shoot at people, gunmen at the gates. They're saying it's not a question of if, it's a question of when. They see how drones are being used in Iran, how drones are being used in Russia and Ukraine, and that domestic terrorists are onto this.

[18:40:04]

So, law enforcement has been barred for years from being able to monitor, to take down, or to interfere with drones because the FAA and the FCC have said they can't do it. There's a new law that says the FBI can train them, authorize them, and certify them. And what PERF is urging is for law enforcement agencies big and small to go get the training and be ready.

BROWN: All right. John Miller, thanks so much, really important to get your analysis on this.

Meantime, Democrats are sounding the alarm about a major cash disadvantage ahead of the midterms. How much of an advantage could this give Republicans? Our political panel weighs in next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BROWN: In our Politics Lead, they're on opposite sides of the political spectrum, but today, as you see right here, President Trump and New York City Mayor Zohram Mamdani came together for a meeting at the mayor's mansion. Top of the agenda was the housing crisis in the city.

And as for those critics who don't condone the mayor hosting the president, here's what Mamdani has to say.

[18:45:01]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MAYOR ZOHRAN MAMDANI (D-NEW YORK CITY, NY): I have said time and again that I will work with anyone, no matter what party they belong to, no matter how much we may disagree on other topics.

Whoever has the power and the will to lift that weight off New Yorkers' backs at a time where hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers are asking the questions of how they can afford this city. I appreciate the conversation that the president and I have had on the subject of how we can make it easier to afford life in this great city that we call our home.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: All right. My panel joins us now to talk more about this. So really interesting seeing the dynamic between these two men. I

mean, they couldn't be more opposite with their politics, right? You have a self-proclaimed Democratic socialist and Republican President Donald Trump meeting multiple times in one year.

Chuck, what do you make of that?

CHUCK ROCHA, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Look, I'm all about Democrats and Republicans getting along. Even my arch nemesis here, Ashley Davis. We get along.

BROWN: I can tell you they're not.

ROCHA: We don't like each other.

BROWN: They're very friendly in the commercial.

ROCHA: Let me tell you, when you think about politics, blue or red don't matter when you're trying to get elected or help people. And I think Mamdani is doing the right thing here.

And nobody dis -- how can I say this? Nobody disagrees more with Donald Trump than me. But I like to see this happening because what Mamdani said is actually true. Folks in New York and in Texas and in California feel like there's a weight on them. And folks are trying to get out of $6 diesel hamburger prices. They're trying to figure out where ends meet. They might have met right there at the mayor's mansion.

BROWN: What's in it for Trump to have this meeting?

ASHLEY DAVIS, FORMER HOMELAND SECURITY OFFICIAL: I think he cares about New York. And I think he has from the beginning. I mean, every -- the first time they met, everyone thought that they were going to have this big blow up and they didn't because they care about the city and what my -- I was surprised when the president decided to go there.

It may be for security reasons, that he actually went to the mansion, but I mean, that shows him being very humble to go to his place. Well, the mayor's point.

BROWN: It was interesting. I had Lulu on earlier who noted that he was being a bit differential -- deferential to Mamdani. It's interesting to see. How much do you think. I mean, I know you said he cares about New York, but also it seems like he genuinely likes Mamdani.

DAVIS: Well, I think personal attacks, I don't -- I don't think he loves his ideas.

BROWN: No, he doesn't. I mean, necessarily his politics, but I think he likes -- he's a winner.

DAVIS: He respects that it was a winner and it was a populist message. And how he did it with social media. I mean, that was one of the things that he concentrated on the most when he ran is that he had a groundswell of people that voted for him with barely any money. And that's exactly -- I mean, especially the first time in 2016 when the president won. He had barely any money and won it because of the groundswell.

BROWN: So I want to just zoom out a little bit more beyond this and talk about the midterms and what's going on ahead of it. Two dozen Democratic sources tell CNN that the party is increasingly worried that it doesn't have the cash to compete over the next six weeks. The head of Democrats largest super PAC said unless more resources come in in support for house Democrats, we will ultimately leave seats on the table.

Chuck, how did Democrats find themselves this far behind?

ROCHA: I work -- in full disclosure, I work for that super PAC. I'm working in over 30 of those races, and I can't con --

DAVIS: He works with everybody..

ROCHA: Thank you very much.

BROWN: You can confirm.

ROCHA: When you're good, you get hired, right? Let me just say that. But I'll also say --

BROWN: So humble.

ROCHA: So humble.

Let me also say that we are getting outspent. The question on the table is this is that right now, Republicans know that they're under water, but they're fixing to spend a bunch of money. Elon Musk, the president, the Republican leadership PACs and their party committees may spend $300 million, maybe 400 million. The question is, is it too late?

We don't know that yet. And I don't even know that. And I'm running these races. But what I do know is that unless things change, we're going to be largely outspent. But what we don't know is all that money going to matter.

BROWN: Go ahead.

DAVIS: Two things. I think it's a little bit of Chicken Little.

ROCHA: Come on now.

DAVIS: Oh, it's totally chicken little. They want to raise more money. And obviously they're saying, listen, we have this really great chance to have a wave and so give more money. And number two, we have $1 billion.

ROCHA: We have consultants starving on our side that need to be paid.

DAVIS: We have not $300 million. We have $1 billion to spend. But I don't know if it's going to matter.

At the end of the day, if you have the anger on the Democrat side, that's going to go out and vote, you're still going to go out and vote.

ROCHA: Let me make one more point, is that the candidates who have money, like Talarico, his dollar goes further than a super PAC. And let me explain.

The Supreme Court had a ruling just a few months ago that said that candidates pay the lowest market rate. Wen a super PAC comes in, they have to pay the highest TV rate. So when you see all this money coming in, it doesn't spend the same as a campaign dollar. So, it's a little apples and oranges.

BROWN: So how are Republicans looking to seize this advantage here on the money front?

DAVIS: Well, I don't think that money is going to be an issue. I mean, there was all this talk on is PACs not going to have enough money. There's going to be enough money. I think, that we should spend our money on get out the vote, because that's the only way that we can over come some of our headwinds that we're facing right now.

But at the end of the day, we're not going to need money. And I don't believe that the Democrat major donors won't come to the table if they really feel that there's going to be races they need to invest in.

[18:50:04]

BROWN: All right. I want to talk about this op ed today that Congressman Lawler actually texted to me for a reason. This is from Congressman Jared Golden penning this op-ed that you rarely see in Washington. This Democrat is calling on New York to reelect Republican Congressman Mike Lawler. The two lawmakers collaborated across the aisle on multiple occasions. Golden praised Lawler's willingness to work with the other party, and wrote in part, "He would rather pass a bill with the other party than score a point against it."

So, Chuck, with this battle for Congress as tight as it is, what does it say to you that a Democrat is calling on a district to reelect the Republican running?

ROCHA: Folks at home need to know that this is one of the few districts that's 5050. It's a Republican district that Kamala Harris won. You should also know, looking at the latest Kalshi, because there's not very good polling. Lawler only has a 40 percent chance of winning. That means he has an uphill battle.

I can't still ask myself why this happened, but I can tell everybody at home, this congressman who did this ain't coming back to Congress. He's giving up his seat. It's an open seat. But his seat was just like the Lawler seat. He won a seat that the Republican had won, which was Donald Trump.

I think this is all about whatever he does after the elections are over, and finding some nonpartisan think tank thing to be on both sides of the aisle, because I found it very ironic.

DAVIS: He doesn't have any ties anymore that makes him vote. I mean, he's done a lot of controversial things over the last couple of months with voting.

ROCHA: Or the Maine guy.

DAVIS: No.

BROWN: With Jared Golden?

DAVIS: Yeah. He's been voting with Republicans on a couple of rules to move things forward. But this is where the elections going right now, where it's hand-to-hand combat in these districts. I don't know if Golden writing an op-ed or endorsing Lawler is going to matter in his district at all.

But I do think that Lawler does represent his constituents very well. I mean, he obviously sides with the president, but he also makes some very big stances when he needs to.

BROWN: All right. Thank you both. Great to have you on.

DAVIS: Thank you.

BROWN: A police officer was shot outside of a synagogue ahead of the holiest days of the year for Jews. The latest on that investigation, up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:56:35]

BROWN: In our world, lead, a police officer is recovering after being shot near a synagogue in Ontario, Canada, last night while people gathered for Yom Kippur, the holiest day on the Jewish calendar. When asked if this was a terrorist attack, one official said, quote, common sense would say that probably was the case.

And Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said the attack was an example of why the government was working hard to bring in new laws combating hate.

Authorities have identified the suspect as 29-year-old Sean Ward. He is seriously injured in the hospital. The synagogue is now riddled with bullet holes. You see right here, the synagogue's president credits the injured police constable, Jeff Smith, with saving the lives of everyone inside.

And in our world lead, a disaster unprecedented, a heavy blow. Those words used by Germany's own chancellor after his party was embarrassed in another regional election yesterday.

Here's CNN's Fred Pleitgen.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) FREDERIK PLEITGEN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice- over): It's become almost a sad routine these days for German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, his opponents cheering after beating Merz's party in a state election. In this case, the right-wing Alternative for Germany, whose leader tells me flat-out Merz needs to resign.

"He is strongly damaged," she says. "I believe the CDU cannot continue with Friedrich Merz with a weak chancellor."

PLETGEN: While Friedrich Merz is trying hard to dispel any notion that he might have to resign, there's no doubt that the German chancellor is on the ropes and currently fighting for his very political survival.

PLEITGEN (voice-over): "Nobody has asked any questions about personal consequences or launched a debate about personnel neither last night nor this morning," Merz said after meeting with his party's leadership.

But Merz's conservative Christian Democratic Union has now lost three state elections in a row, the winners in each case parties on the political fringes.

After getting beat by a landslide two weeks ago by the right wing AFD in Saxony-Anhalt, this weekend in the northeastern state Mecklenburg- West Pomerania, the CDU didn't even get enough votes to make it into local parliament. The winners again, the far right AFD, which calls for mass deportation of undocumented immigrants and an end to all military aid for Ukraine.

Meanwhile, in the German capital Berlin, Merz's party lost to the far- left Die Linke, which wants to expropriate large real estate companies and faces allegations of anti-Semitism in its ranks, allegations the party's leadership strongly denies.

"We have been witnessing for several months growing radical and openly expressed anti-Semitism that is even welcomed with applause."

Merz has vowed to fight on and continue what he calls his reform agenda. But Germany's economy remains sluggish, his popularity ratings are in freefall, and even he acknowledges he's become a liability for those in his party fighting for reelection.

"I know that national politics played a major role both in the state election two weeks ago in Saxony-Anhalt and in yesterday's election, as did my own role."

And Merz claims he still believes he can fix his government's issues and bring Germany back on track, but the chancellor might be running out of time.

Fred Pleitgen, CNN, Berlin.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BROWN: Our thanks to Fred. I'll see you tomorrow morning at 10:00 in "THE SITUATION ROOM WITH WOLF BLITZER".

"ERIN BURNETT OUTFRONT" starts now.