Return to Transcripts main page
CNN NewsNight with Abby Phillip
Trump Picks Fox News Host To Be His Defense Secretary; Trump Picks Mike Huckabee For Ambassador To Israel; Wall Street Journal Reports, Trump Considers Executive Order To Purge Woke Generals; "Newsnight" Tackles Wokeism; Richest Man In The World Will Now Be In Charge Of Firing Federal Workers. Aired 10-11p ET
Aired November 12, 2024 - 22:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[22:00:08]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ABBY PHILLIP, CNN HOST (voice over): Tonight, the Fox in the Pentagon. Trump picks a morning show anchor to run America's military as he drafts a plan to weed woke out of military brass.
Plus, Trump picks a familiar face to be his man in Tel Aviv whose past comments complicate an already complicated Middle East jigsaw puzzle.
Also, the billionaire bros, Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, get Trump's trust to run a new government agency charged with laying off potentially millions of federal workers.
And, January 6th jailbreak, people convicted of insurrection-related crimes say the president-elect now needs to deliver on a pardon promise.
Live at the Table, Nikole Hannah-Jones, Scott Jennings, T.W. Arrighi, Cari Champion and Carl Bernstein.
Americans with different perspectives aren't talking to each other, but here, they do.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP (on camera): Good evening. I'm Abby Philip in New York.
Let's get right to what America is talking about, double take. Tonight, it's probably what most of you did at home over a seemingly out of left field choice to run the Pentagon. This is Pete Hegseth. He is a Fox personality. He's host of their weekend morning show. He is a combat veteran who did two tours in both Iraq and Afghanistan. He's interviewed Trump quite a lot, but he's also been something of a sounding board for the president in private on military matters. Sources say, he also looks the part, and that factored into Trump's decision to choose him. The pick was a surprise on Capitol Hill, where one senator literally said, wow. And inside the Pentagon where defense officials tell CNN that Hegseth was nowhere near the list of likely Trump picks to run the military. Also tonight, another big pick, Trump is dipping into the Fox ranks once again for the hardest ambassador posting in the world. Mike Huckabee is Trump's choice to run American diplomacy in Israel.
But let's start with Pete Hegseth because this is the thing that I think is kind of shaking parts of Washington, the Pentagon, a lot of people are surprised. Some people on Capitol Hill have no idea who he is, apparently.
But one of the key things about Pete Hegseth, in addition to the fact that he is pretty close to Trump one of the more notable things about him is that we know, based on reporting and what he's said publicly, that he pressured Trump to pardon Eddie Gallagher, who was accused of war crimes. He pressured Trump privately and publicly. This is the kind of thing that I think makes him a bit of a controversial pick.
T.W. ARRIGHI, VICE PRESIDENT, PUSH DIGITAL MEDIA: Yes. I think, like many people, I was surprised at the pick. I was rooting for my guy, Mike Pompeo. That didn't happen. Okay.
PHILLIP: I think that ship has sailed.
ARRIGHI: Yes, it did, unfortunately. But I do want to say a couple of things. I've talked to some senators on Capitol Hill this evening. I've talked to people who know Pete Hegseth well, and they all vouch for him universally. It is good to have civilian control of our military, and a lot of the things that, Pete Hegseth has been known for is outreach to veterans, outreach to our servicemen and women. He knows the community incredibly well. He is one of them. And he's an outspoken proponent of getting us ready for the upcoming war with China. I think that's massively important.
Look, there's no way to know exactly how he's going to play out in that role, but I have optimism.
PHILLIP: I mean, one of the other things -- look, I hear what you're saying and I think it's important, that part of it. Here's the other part, and this is what Pete Hegseth has said fairly recently, literally just a couple days ago about what he thinks should happen when it comes to the military.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PETE HEGSETH, FORMER FNC HOST: I'm straight up just saying we should not have women in combat roles. It hasn't made us more effective, hasn't made us more lethal, has made fighting more complicated.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARL BERNSTEIN, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: If we were to look --
PHILLIP: Pretty retro there.
BERNSTEIN: -- look at all of these appointments, including the White House staff in a larger way, and that is what Trump is doing is what he said, and that is to undo in an insidious way, really, the basic philosophies, tenets, legislative priorities, executive actions of the American liberal experiment in government that goes back to the new deal.
[22:05:21]
This is an attempt to end what we have been living with since before the Second World War, that it is an ambitious project as any president has ever proposed, it's deadly serious. And he means to enforce it not through democratic ideals and programs, but through purges, as we've seen today, through fiat, through fealty, not to the Constitution, but fealty to the maximum leader.
We are in a new place, but it is a deadly, serious place. And all of these appointments fit together in terms of undoing this legacy that goes back to Roosevelt. And a lot of the people involved in undoing it have said that over the years.
PHILLIP: The other part of it is that he has the ability to just appoint the people he wants to do these things, and that's literally what he is doing. I hear what you're saying, but it's also -- there's nothing secretive about what's happening here. He's just putting the people --
BERNSTEIN: No, not at all.
SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Does anyone have confidence in the current leadership of the Pentagon and the way the defense situation has been operating for the last several years? I mean, from the Afghanistan pullout, which was an extreme debacle for which no one was held accountable. We've had spy balloons flying over the United States. We built a $300 million pier as a public relations stunt, which wound up killing an American service member.
I'd say I've had just about enough of the so-called insiders running the Defense Department. I think we ought to give Pete Hegseth a chance, because he's got --
BERNSTEIN: (INAUDIBLE).
JENNINGS: All the criticism of him is that he's not the expected Washington pick. And I'm just saying to you that the American people just voted against the expected Washington pick. So, he's got 20 years in service, Afghanistan Iraq, two bronze stars, Princeton, Harvard, yes, he's on T.V., but so were the rest of us. And I think he ought to be given a chance.
PHILLIP: That list that you just gave us is really interesting because you highlighted a bunch of things that the civilian leadership of the country decided on. And the military, their job was just to execute. They actually --
JENNINGS: How did it go?
PHILLIP: I'm just saying, in terms of the decision-making, you're assigning decision-making responsibility to the military over things that civilians are responsible. JENNINGS: So, you make a good point. The civilian leadership made decisions and then the people they put in charge of the Pentagon carried it out, and it was all pretty much a disaster. So, now we have a new president who I think got elected in part because of some of those disasters and he's going to put in some of the non-insiders in charge of not just this agency, but a bunch of them.
Now, look, you know, they've got to perform. They've got to perform. I mean we got 53 U.S. senators and Republicans, and Pete Hegseth, he's an American hero. The man won two bronze stars for his service and he's been a champion for veterans. I mean, he's going to have to go up there just like everybody else and prove his knowledge of how to do this job. He's not immune from that, but we ought to give this man a chance, in my opinion.
PHILLIP: I want to talk a little bit about the Mike Huckabee of it all, because that's another big role that Trump announced today. One of the interesting things about Huckabee is that he is quite outspoken about his views on Israel and on the Palestinian people.
I just want to play a little bit about what he's said over the years.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
FMR. GOV. MIKE HUCKABEE (R-AR): Basically, there really is no such thing as -- and I have to be careful in saying this, because people will really get upset, there's really no such thing as a Palestinian. There's not.
My feeling personally, and I'm speaking only as a person, I think Israel would only be acting on the property it already owns. I think Israel has title deed to Judea and Samaria. There are certain words I refuse to use. There is no such thing as a West Bank. It's Judea and Samaria. There's no such thing as a settlement. They're communities, they're neighborhoods, they're cities. There's no such thing as an occupation.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: No question, I mean, that is going to be a very problematic and already pretty combustible situation in the Middle East.
NIKOLE HANNAH-JONES, STAFF WRITER, THE NEW YORK TIMES MAGAZINE: Yes. I imagine that Netanyahu is quite pleased with this pick. And I think that this pick kind of confirms many people's fear about what a Trump administration would bring for hopes of peace in that region and for hopes that there might be a ceasefire and those who were afraid that what we're seeing is part of a larger attempt to take the land that is already being disputed. So, I imagine, you know, there are certain people are very happy with that pick.
[22:10:01]
CARI CHAMPION, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: I think that, I think Carl, you kind of touched on this, when I think about just the day and we look at the appointments or those who allegedly might be up for appointments, I think that he is making good on all of his promises.
One thing about Donald Trump that I find very interesting and, Scott, you may disagree, which is fine I don't necessarily know if acumen is top of mind when picking these people. And what I mean by that is, I believe, and then, and I have a random story, but very true, I believe he more so cares about what people look like and sound like. Enter our man who is a Fox News host who is now secretary of defense. I don't understand that.
I don't hope -- one second.
JENNINGS: I think you're making a good point.
CHAMPION: And for him it's most important for it to be showman and it's also loyalty and it's what you need to say and you need to be on board. He's making good on all of his promises. I don't feel like anybody is saying what this is. I feel like we're in the twilight zone. I think this is bizarre.
BERNSTEIN: Which (INAUDIBLE) for his mustache?
JENNINGS: Which person doesn't have acumen?
CHAMPION: I don't believe that your Fox News host is going to be the person that you -- just as we read a moment ago, someone said, wow, this is the person?
JENNINGS: Does a military record not meaning anything to you? This is bronze stars.
CHAMPION: There are many people with military --
JENNINGS: Just has two Harvard degrees?
CHAMPION: Let me tell you, I've done a lot of things. You want to put me in a -- I've been in a couple of school fights. I can do something too, if you want that to be the case. If you're saying --
JENNINGS: You're saying he doesn't have acumen. I'm just saying he has a resume.
CHAMPION: I don't believe that anyone -- and if you also look at Donald Trump, I also don't think that he has acumen, but what we have here today is the president of the United States, that we have -- America gets what America deserves.
BERNSTEIN: Let's look at the three beneficiaries of this election as reflected in these appointments, in part, and that is, Putin, Netanyahu, and the third would really be --
PHILLIP: Xi Jinping and China?
BERNSTEIN: Pardon me?
PHILLIP: China? BERNSTEIN: Well, the Chinese. But the real thing is that these appointments are indicative of a new American position in the world that we no longer are. NATO is no longer the significant leader in the world. That we're looking at a situation in Ukraine, it has fallen to the disadvantage of Ukraine as a result of this election, and what Donald Trump has said about, what kind of settlement did he want?
(CROSSTALKS)
ARRIGHI: Can I defend Mike Huckabee for a second? Mike Huckabee has been to Israel a hundred-plus times. The man knows the issues better than just about anyone. He had ambassador's role in the previous Trump administration. He was governor of Arkansas. He is as legitimate as a person.
The person losing sleep tonight is the ayatollah. That's who should be losing sleep, with Rubio and him and Stefanik, those are our mission chefs (ph).
And, by the way, the war in Gaza, that happened under the Biden administration. We need a forced posture that deters aggression. We had it in the previous Trump administration with zero new wars. There's two new wars. We can say, could you criticize Trump all we want, but he's anti-hawk and he's the candidate of peace.
HANNAH-JONES: We can't actually believe that Mike Huckabee knows more about that region than almost anybody else. I mean, there there's no way.
ARRIGHI: He knows a great deal. And so (INAUDIBLE) ambassadorship --
HANNAH-JONES: But you said, he knows more than anyone else because he visited Israel 100 times. And then we just think about the language that's being used, this is not an occupied place, this isn't anybody --
BERNSTEIN: Judgea and Samaria.
HANNAH-JONES: Right. You know, I don't think you can actually --
JENNINGS: He supports Israel. I mean, this was a candidate who ran on a platform of, and has a record, by the way, of supporting Israel, and by the way has a record of brokering peace accords in the Middle East, let's not forget the Abraham Accords, but he's a pro-Israel candidate, he gets elected, and now he's putting a pro-Israel ambassador to go represent us to Israel. This should not be surprising to anyone.
PHILLIP: I guess the other part of this is that that the U.S. policy is that the settlements are illegal, that they are an inhibition to a lasting peace in the region. Mike Huckabee is on record saying there's no such thing as settlements.
BERNSTEIN: Well, we've said that we want to --
PHILLIP: (INAUDIBLE) do whatever they want. I mean, I guess the real question is, I mean, if the goal is it's fine, there are a lot of people -- most people who are in that ambassadorship are pro-Israel, but there's also a United States government posture that is about how do we get to an end to the conflict? And I'm having a hard time seeing Mike Huckabee getting there.
BERNSTEIN: Also a two-state solution has been the objective of our government. And Huckabee right there is saying there will never be a two-state solution.
JENNINGS: Well, a lot of Republicans don't believe in that.
BERNSTEIN: Exactly. And that is why I say, you know, one of the losers of this election is indeed the Palestinian people and their aspirations.
PHILLIP: And, by the way, the Palestinian people are real.
BERNSTEIN: Exactly. And it is possible to support Israel and the Jewish state, and at the same time find a way to advocate for the aspirations of the Palestinian people at once, as many Israelis have done throughout this conflict.
[22:15:11]
PHILLIP: All right, guys, everyone, hold on.
Coming up next, Trump announces that Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy are going to lead a new agency that is aimed at firing 75 percent, perhaps, of the federal workforce.
Plus, speaking of firings, we are also getting word that Trump is plotting a military purge of, quote, woke generals. We'll tell you what that's about, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PHILLIP: Tonight, MAGAfying the military. Generals are about to live through their own version of the movie, Office Space.
[22:20:03]
The Wall Street Journal reports on a Trump plan to review three and four star officers and basically see if they wear too many pieces of flair, if they are too woke for the president's liking. A draft order, quote, could fast-track the removal of generals and admirals found to be lacking in leadership qualities.
Weeding woke out of the military is something that Trump has talked about over and over again.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT-ELECT: There's not woke in the military. There's woke at the top. They want there to be woke. But these guys aren't meant for woke.
REPORTER: Are you going to fire those generals? The woke generals at the top? Because Pete's been talking about it.
TRUMP: Yes, I would get rid of them. Yes, I would fire them. You can't have woke military. You said it's so great. You know, you have -- you need people that want to win. They want to win wars. That's what their purpose is, to win wars, not to be woke.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: What (INAUDIBLE) is work military (INAUDIBLE)?
JENNINGS: Well, I think conservatives and Republicans have long believed that the military has taken on a lot of the worst properties of corporate America and gotten away from the core mission, which is fighting and winning wars and defending the United States. All of the H.R. properties that have divided this country for the last several years when it comes to promoting -- you know, these soldiers are not, you know, cultural guinea pigs. They're soldiers. They're there to fight and win wars and defend America, and that should be the point.
And regarding this order, which I don't think we've actually seen, the issue is he's the commander-in-chief. We have a civilian led military. The generals at the top of the military do need to have the capacity to execute our defense policy and his vision for how we defend this nation. And if they can't do that, then that's a problem. And they should not be trying to substitute their own judgment.
So, there is some, I think, utility in the commander-in-chief reviewing the people at the top of the military and saying, can we work together? I don't think there's anything wrong with that.
PHILLIP: I didn't really hear an answer to my question.
CHAMPION: Yes.
HANNAH-JONES: Well, let me just say, for one, that the military has long been woke. For instance, the military was the first institution in the United States to integrate. It was one of the first places to have integrated housing, to enforce integrated schools on the base, to actually enforce the fair housing law when people were trying to rent to soldiers and saying, if someone were found violating that law, that the military could not allow any soldiers.
So, the idea that there's something wrong with being woke, when in fact what that means is a military that's trying to reflect a multiracial country that has a lot of different types of people who have to come together and learn how to work together in the national defense, actually racial polarization is bad for military strength. And it's been used against this country many times by our adversaries, including in recent elections.
So, I think this idea that we can purge woke from the military is actually ahistoric. And I also think it's dangerous because. While he's saying he's going to purge woke, what he really wants is to purge any generals who might actually stop him from using the military against the American people and in ways that the military is not supposed to be used. BERNSTEIN: Such as he threatened with General Milley, that he didn't like what General Milley said. And he decided he would like to see General Milley court-martialed because of what he advocates and what he said about President Trump.
First of all, the military, we've seen time and again, is the most admired institution in the United States. And not only is it admired, it's the things that we really criticize, for instance, the Iraq War, it's not the product of the military, it's the product of the president of the United States, Vietnam, disaster, that was not the product of G.I.s or generals. It was the product of the president of the United States.
So, the whole idea of the military being corrupted by these generals, and, in fact, the kind of education, military and historic and diplomacy and warfare that these generals get is probably the most unique education system in our culture.
CHAMPION: But I don't understand what you mean by woke. You're talking about racial integration, and I think that makes sense, but is that what you define woke as? I'm curious.
BERNSTEIN: I was referring to the criticism of general ability.
JENNINGS: I think what President Trump and what a lot of Republicans are fearful of is that the core mission of the military to fight wars and to defend the country sometimes takes a back seat to trying to overlay social and cultural programming into the military that is commonly found at universities, commonly found in corporate America.
PHILLIP: Where's the evidence though?
JENNINGS: And maybe it's fine for that. But that's what he resists in the federal bureaucracy, specifically in the military.
(CROSSTALKS)
CHAMPION: Is there some truth that he just wants to control it for himself so he can use it as he pleases? I mean, we're using that term as woke for his self.
[22:25:00]
What are the woke policies that are used?
BERNSTEIN: That's the question.
CHAMPION: Are you referring to DEI?
JENNINGS: Yes, I would say he would specifically name DEI.
HANNAH-JONES: And how does that harm --
CHAMPION: How is that harmful?
HANNAH-JONES: -- the military prowess? Name something specific? JENNINGS: I think he would probably say -- I mean I don't speak for him, but I think he would probably say that any policy that doesn't prioritize getting the military into a position to fight wars and defend America, anything else that's ancillary to that --
CHAMPION: What does it mean I have to deal do with that --
JENNINGS: -- but may be detrimental to that should be set aside. That's what he believes.
HANNAH-JONES: So, you have no actual specifics on this?
PHILLIP: T.W., I know you want to get in.
ARRIGHI: I just want to get more of a core issue. And I feel kind of foolish, bring up history, sitting next to the esteemed Carl Bernstein, but I think you would agree that it's not unusual for a president to have deep distrust on his military apparatus --
BERNSTEIN: Well, MacArthur and Truman.
ARRIGHI: Absolutely. And the article, The Wall Street Journal's article, cites George Marshall's plan where he was plucking out senior officers to replace with junior officers. There is a precedent for the commander-in-chief, and through his ancillaries, to push for a clear of house.
Now, a lot of presidents talk about it. He's the only one who's going to act on it.
BERNSTEIN: The president has the authority to begin with.
ARRIGHI: Right.
BERNSTEIN: This is a fake to begin with. This is a show. This is about show trials.
PHILLIP: Let me just speak to the elephant in the room.
ARRIGHI: No, I would not go that far.
BERNSTEIN: This is about a show trial.
PHILLIP: Let me just add one thing here. I think that whatever he's dancing around is, when Trump and his allies say, we're going to go after woke in the military, usually, woke is a code name for diversity. Diversity is a code for people of color. There are already not that many people of color in the three and four star general ranks.
So, if that is the mandate, to go after people who care about diversity, what do you think is going to be the end result of that?
JENNINGS: I don't think that's true.
PHILLIP: I just think we should contemplate what is the end result of Trump going after three and four star generals, there are not that many of them, not that many of them that are people of color, anyone who prioritizes diversity in the military is going to be on the chopping block?
JENNINGS: I think we're all on our jump to conclusions. Matt's here, if you want to talk about Office Space.
I think we haven't seen the order. We don't know what's going to come of this. What we do know is that Donald Trump has said he would like to have generals at the top of the military who see eye-to-eye with him about our national defense policy and the posture of our armed forces. That's what we know.
PHILLIP: We just played the clip where he talked about --
JENNINGS: And to jump ahead of that --
PHILLIP: We just played the clip, Scott, where he talked about woke a thousand times. You cannot take that out of the equation. That is a big part of the mandate.
JENNINGS: I'm not taking it out of the equation.
PHILLIP: And so the question is, what is the concrete consequence of it for a military that is already struggling with adequately promoting people who are already within their ranks, right, and are not making it up to those high ranks?
JENNINGS: My assumption is that the consequence will be that the generals who want to execute on the commander-in-chief's vision and the people who just can't see eye to eye with the concept of a civilian military won't. That's my view.
PHILLIP: So, in the United States military, if you are not waving a Donald Trump flag --
CHAMPION: Correct. I mean, this is --
PHILLIP: If you read The Wall Street Journal article, there are people quoted in there who talk about this.
BERNSTEIN: Well, the chief staff of the Air Force has cited that this is aimed partly at him and to make an example of him. Now, I don't know that's the case but he is someone who --
PHILLIP: C.Q. Brown, he's a black man.
BERNSTEIN: Who indeed has spoken about his experience as a black aviator. And, apparently, this has pissed off the president, former president of the United States. The former president has remarked on it.
PHILLIP: We wanted to talk about this is because, I mean, obviously in the postmortems of this election, Nikole, there's a lot of conversation even among Democrats about whether the message, the anti- woke message worked and was the main vehicle actually to bring Trump back to the White House, convincing not -- I mean, I think he did about as well with white voters this time as he did the last time, but convincing actually more voters of color, particularly Hispanic men and women to vote for it.
HANNAH-JONES: Yes, I mean, it's been interesting to see all the postmortems. First argument was this was a vote on economic anxiety. Now, it's changed to this being a vote, anti-woke vote, which we can't even define what that means. When I hear anti-woke, I hear anti-black. And we should also be very clear, as I tweeted about, or posted about earlier this week is that Latino is not a racial group. Latino is a broad category that includes people across the racial spectrum from many different countries. And they -- some of them also self-identify as white. In fact, the majority of Latino self-identify as white. So, it shouldn't be shocking that some of them also are enamored by that message and vote on that message.
But my thing is when we are talking about what is actually woke or anti-woke, the same people who are making that argument are saying the Democrats lost on identity politics.
[22:30:04]
Well, the anti-woke argument is identity politics. It is white identity politics, and that is what Trump was selling, and that's what a lot of people are buying. And we should just be honest about that.
CHAMPION: And I don't think it's -- I think we should be honest. I don't think that's out of line for her to say. And Scott, I saw you shake your head. It's not -- it's not odd for her to say anti-woke sounds like anti-black. It does sound as if it is about a group of people that you do not want in your party, at your top, with your workforce.
JENNINGS: Did you see the election results?
CHAMPION: I did see the reelection results.
JENNINGS: We just put -- we just put the biggest multi-racial coalition together in the history of the Republican Party.
CHAMPION: Let me ask you a question. When you say anti-woke, when you say woke, do you think about a certain class of people, a certain group of people outside of yourself? I'm just asking you that question.
It sounds like that to me because I am a black woman and I'm speaking from my experience. So, I'm asking you from your experience. When you hear anti-woke or woke, does that identify a group of people? That's all I'm asking you, because I'm asking you to help me understand so I know what you're saying.
JENNINGS: I mean, I tend to think about hyper-liberal people who have a fundamental disregard for, you know, the underpinnings about founding of our country and who want to fundamentally change our society in ways that are not in line with a vast majority of American citizens. That's what I tend to think about. CHAMPION: Such as? Such as what?
BERNSTEIN: And what is the vast majority of American citizens?
JENNINGS: I would say the vast majority of American citizens in this case want the military to do one thing. Fight and win wars and defend this nation. And I would suspect what they want the commander-in-chief to do is find generals and find leadership for the Pentagon that also agrees with that. They don't believe soldiers are cultural guinea pigs. This is not a place for sociology experiments. It's a place for fighting and winning wars.
PHILLIP: I guess, Scott, you keep saying that but you -- again, I'm not hearing specifics, especially on the military, but it's not just the military. It's education. This is another big bucket for Trump. They're going to go after "woke in education" --
CHAMPION: Yes.
PHILLIP: -- which again, it's largely about diversity, but it's also to be clear about LGBTQ --
UNKNOWN: Sure.
PHILLIP: -- particularly trans people --
UNKNOWN: Sure.
PHILLIP: -- in the context of schools. So, it's not going to end there. It's not just about the generals.
ARRIGHI: Sure. Well, first of all, I don't know if you could find one very, you'd find very, very few people in this country who don't celebrate the achievements of the military of people of color.
UNKNOWN: Of course.
ARRIGHI: Toby Gilmore and the revolution -- we've had obviously Lloyd Austin's our defense secretary currently. We've had Colin Powell.
HANNAH-JONES: Who was accused of being a DEI hire.
PHILLIP: Exactly. I mean --
ARRIGHI: Those weren't my words.
PHILLIP: Republicans --
ARRIGHI: My point is -- my point is --
PHILLIP: --have, non-stop, criticized Lloyd Austin and Secretary of the Army, both of whom are black men in the highest levels of the military and a lot of the arguments is that they're woke, which, to Cari's point, it sounds like it's code for --
CHAMPION: It sounds very much about a group of people that it's code. It sounds like dog whistle politics. It sounds like you're talking about a group of black people. The DEI hire that you just talked about, four-star general, DEI hire. We've heard that over and over again. Trump said that he wants to give it to the Department of Education because they don't want to teach that stuff that slaves built America.
PHILLIP: We also talked in the last block -- Pete Hegseth wants women out of combat roles in the military.
CHAMPION: Very, very archaic and not inclusive.
ARRIGHI: If you can serve in combat, you do it effectively, and you're a war fighter, I want you in the military. If you accomplish the mission set laid before you, that's the simple goal of the president. By the way, the only quote in that article about somebody who is a source to the document said Trump thinks the DOD is way too big -- I'm paraphrasing.
Trump wants to get rid of underperforming three and four-star generals or force them to retire. That was all it said in the quotation that they put in there. So, I want to see what comes out of his mouth before I make any judgment.
CHAMPION: I just don't think it's fair that you aren't being honest about what anti-woke means or woke means. And I think all of us at this table are very smart. We're all very educated. And we do know that woke often refers to a marginalized people.
BERNSTEIN: Often, but not always.
PHILLIP: All right, we're going to leave it here on this conversation. Everyone, stick around, though. Coming up next, the richest man in the world will now be in charge of firing federal workers herewith Trump just gave Elon Musk the keys to. A special guest is going to join us to discuss that next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:38:31]
PHILLIP: DOGE -- and it's not just a coin, it's a whole new proposed government agency. It stands for the Department of Government Efficiency. It promises to revolutionize the federal workforce. It plans to do that by cutting and cutting deeply from everywhere across the government. So, who does Donald Trump want to run it? Well, Vivek Ramaswamy and Elon Musk.
Joining the conversation is CNN contributor Kara Swisher, host of the podcasts "On" and "Pivot". Kara. Are you surprised to hear this?
KARA SWISHER, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: No. It's an interesting stunt. Calling it DOGE is cute. That's of course the coin that Elon likes. You know, it reminds me a little bit of something called the Private Sector Survey on Cost Control. I don't know if you remember this.
In 1982, Ronald Reagan instituted something that later got called the Grace Commission. And it was, the phrase he used then was "drain the swamp" and "Be bold and work like tireless bloodhounds, don't leave any stone unturned in your search for to root out efficiency."
So, this isn't a new idea to bring in private sector people to do this, and I think it's a good thing to look through the government and figure things out. But a lot of this is done in a stunt-like fashion. I find it interesting that a Department of Government Efficiency would have two heads. That's not very efficient, but fine. That's fine.
You can think of names for it, like the Department of Grandstanding Edgelords, you know, stuff like that. It's fine. It's fine. I don't know if it has any power. I think it's a good idea to always look at government spending. But this is a lot of a stunt. They're going to put everything online.
PHILLIP: But Kara --
SWISHER: They're going to show us stupid things the government pays for, I guess.
PHILLIP: I have to say, I mean, Elon Musk has already been deeply ingrained in this transition planning.
SWISHER: He has.
PHILLIP: But he is also a huge, huge government contractor himself.
SWISHER: That's correct.
PHILLIP: He has business.
SWISHER: He could start with him. He could start with him.
PHILLIP: He's got business before the government.
SWISHER: He does.
PHILLIP: And so, look, I know that ethics is sort of out of style these days, but I do have to wonder what are the consequences of having someone who has so much financially at stake in where the government spends his money in a role like this?
SWISHER: Yes, there's a list a mile long in this way. He, I think has about $15 billion in federal contracts. And in fact, the government went a long way to saving Tesla when it was in trouble by giving it a loan. He's very beholden to the government. And you know, he was thrilled when he won some of those government contracts.
I remember talking to him when he beat out Lockheed and some others. And I think he was right. We need to bring an innovation into the government. We have to figure out how to cut costs. But sometimes the government's not for, not like a private company. You can't come in and just fire everyone and carry a sink into your -- into your thing and let this sink in and not pay vendors and things like that. There's some very serious things the government does. And so, it's fine to make a stunt and call out all the, you know, the
$600 toilets and all that stuff and I'm fine with that. But it feels so stunty rather than actually a serious commission looking at what's happening. And you know, these guys need a lot of attention so they'll -- whatever.
PHILLIP: Look, Kara stay with me. I'm going to bring it into the table for a second here --
SWISHER: Sure.
PHILLIP: - because I think some people might think that we are exaggerating what the expectation is. But here is Vivek Ramaswamy in the GOP primary. I mean this is when he was a candidate running against Trump. But this is his idea of where the federal government should be headed in terms of the workforce.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VIVEK RAMASWAMY (R) FORMER PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: First, it will be a plan that reduces the size of the federal employee headcount by over 75 percent -- if I'm the next president by the end of my first term, 50 percent of which is implementable by the end of year one.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Okay, so let's talk about the 50 percent. I mean, let's take a look at the top five agencies as a percentage of the workforce. This is more than half of the government. Veterans Affairs, the Navy, the Army, Homeland Security, the Air Force. This is --
SWISHER: The military. It's the military.
PHILLIP: Yes, the military.
SWISHER: Yes, indeed.
PHILLIP: Yes, he military.
SWISHER: A lot of money goes to the military.
PHILLIP: I just, I mean, Scott, I wonder, I mean, you're, look, everybody has slogans and maybe some of this is gimmicky, but to your point, I'm going to take Trump seriously. Half -- 75 percent of the workforce is going to mean that everything gets slashed, including all of those agencies.
JENNINGS: Is that what the press release said today when they announced this, that they were going to adopt Vivek Ramaswamy's campaign talking points? Look --
UNKNOWN: They did not.
JENNINGS: So -- so I think that --I think they're here to look into things, as I understand it. And ultimately Donald Trump will look at whatever they come up with and make decisions. Obviously, I don't think there's any interest on the part of the president to cut the military by 50 or 75 percent. He's never said anything like that.
But if you want to look around the government, I don't think there's a single American who would say, yes, but there is some stuff we could find if we really thought about it in terms of people, headcount, waste, fraud, abuse. Do we have duplicative bureaucracies out there that confuse people? I mean, there's all manner of efficiencies that could be achieved if someone were given the opportunity to look into it.
So, I have no expectation that they're going to come in slash the military, in fact, have some expectation they might do just the opposite. But I do have some expectations the rest of federal bureaucracy, absolutely, should be looked at it may be on the chopping block. And I don't think there's going to be too many Republicans are going to be --
SWISHER: Although, although, Scott, what if the government -- what if the military is inefficient? I mean, honestly --
JENNINGS: That might be.
SWISHER: The problem here is --
JENNINGS: There might be issues in the bureaucracy. I agree with you.
SWISHER: One of the things that wasn't in this which was interesting is Elon was saying they were in cut to trillion dollars, I think that's what he said and none of that was in here. There were -- it's a lot of non-specifics.
JENNINGS: Yes.
SWISHER: And again, I'm all for commissions that look at these things but it's a little different when you're talking about government version yet a company of which your emperor of that you can do whatever you want. And that's -- it's a very different situation and I think these are serious issues and they should be seriously considered. But naming after like a digital coin is silliness to me.
JENNINGS: But your problem is with Elon and Vivek being put in charge of it, I assume and -- SWISHER: No, not at all. No, listen, I'd like a large commission.
JENNINGS: And we can be condescending about it all we want, but they won --
SWISHER: No, no.
JENNINGS: -- and now they get to be part of it.
SWISHER: Scott, that's inaccurate.
JENNINGS: -- and that's what we're going to do.
BERNSTEIN: There's another fundamental question, and that is, is this about seriously cutting waste, et cetera. UNKNOWN: Correct.
BERNSTEIN: -- or is there an ideological purpose in this that is part of a purge of various departments that Donald Trump thinks either shouldn't exist or that they exist in a nefarious manner that is meant to fight the policies that he wants implemented.
[22:45:13]
And I don't think we have a clue about that, but knowing Trump, that this is a very attractive way to go.
PHILLIP: There have been, for many years, efforts by Republicans, it's not new, to just get rid of entire parts of the government.
BERNSTEIN: Department of Education.
PHILLIP: Department of Education, Health and Human Services.
BERNSTEIN: Is this -- is this part of that?
PHILLIP: Things of that nature, housing and urban development, these are departments a lot of Republicans from a long time have not felt should exist.
ARRIGHI: Yes, correct. None of this is new and I think we finally have a president with a mandate and a demeanor that's willing to actually break glass to get it done. And before we quickly dismiss Vivek-- and I agree it feels a little gimmicky, Kara, and you know a lot about Elon, as well, so I'm not putting that by you.
But I do trust these two to give us some pretty good advice. A successful private equity guy, a man who's built some of the most amazing companies on Earth, putting rockets in space and catching them.
UNKNOWN: I just have to say -- they had to be brought out by the government.
HANNAH-JONES: I mean, I just think there's a fundamental difference between running a company and running government, right? Companies exist to make profit. Government exists to serve people and to work in a common good. So, I think putting two businessmen who have relied on government subsidies over what ultimately is going to be a purge of thousands and hundreds of thousands of middle-class jobs.
PHILLIP: All around the country.
HANNAH-JONES: Middle-class jobs that are disproportionately held by black Americans, by the way, because working for the federal government is a way that they can mitigate discrimination. There's studies on this, right? That this is going to have a real economic impact. So sure, is there fat? Yes. I imagine there's fat in any company, including the companies that both of these men run.
UNKNOWN: Yes. Sure. HANNAH-JONES: But the idea that two people who seem to know very little about the fundamental way the government works, that there's everything cannot be cut away when you're actually trying to make people's lives better, and the economic harms of such a policy seem to me to be quite disastrous.
ARRIGHI: I think that's reasonable, but I do not trust anyone in the current federal government to understand anything about efficiency or waste.
UNKNOWN: Anyone? Come on.
ARRIGHI: Very few. Very few.
UNKNOWN: Anyone.
ARRIGHI: I mean, I think it's good to get a fresh set of eyes.
SWISHER: Stop. Stop. Stop.
ARRIGHI: Two trillion dollars is ambitious. Biggest cuts is coolage.
PHILLIP: Last word --
SWISHER: It's fine to do it in this way but it feels like the apprentice here. It's like one of these trips, like go out and start a hot dog stand.
ARRIGHI: You might know the branding, but the mission's good, right?
SWISHER: So, always, these ideas are great, but I would have a much more wide ranging group of people. It feels stunty on something that's quite serious and that's my issue with it. It's not the people. I'd like to have lots of people do this.
PHILLLIP: We will see if it's just rhetoric or if it comes to fruition. But I just want to note, Vivek Ramaswamy tweeted tonight, "We can't reform the bureaucracy. The right answer, shut it down." So, we'll see what he makes of that.
UNKNOWN: That's my case.
PHILLIP: Kara Swisher --
SWISHER: That's called, look at me.
PHILLIP: Thank you for joining us, Kara.
SWISHER: Look at me, look at me. Also look at me.
PHILLIP: Thank you, Kara. Coming up next for us, the panel will give us their nightcaps, including a trip to outer space or maybe inner space.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:52:51]
PHILLIP: We are back and it's time for the "NewsNight" cap. You each have 30 seconds to say your piece. Carl, you're up.
BERNSTEIN: Historians are going to need to look at how the Supreme Court helped decide this election by not making the January 6th case go forward and depriving American voters of Donald Trump on trial for what happened January 6th. The results might have been different. Certainly, the dynamics would have been different if we had a chance to see that trial.
PHILLIP: Interesting. Cari?
CHAMPION: Okay. So, if the government becomes the law breaker, it breeds contempt for the law. Here is my quick thought. If we continue to live in a world in which we don't actually have government abiding by the law, its citizens will do the same.
I think Make America Great Again is going to be something that we have never seen before in terms of this generation in this lifetime. Civil disobedience and America will get, as I said earlier, what it deserves and what it has asked for.
PHILLIP: Nikole?
HANNAH-JONES: Well, people whose ancestors were enslaved for 250 years aren't old a thing. One hundred and ten-year-old Viola Fletcher, definitely not old restitution for surviving the Tulsa race massacre.
But, white people who've been subjected to diversity, equity, and inclusion, in any nation that believes in justice and righteousness, they must be compensated for that injustice of having to sit through a DEI training. So, it turns out the Republicans actually do believe in reparations, as long as the people receive them are white.
PHILLIP: T.W.
ARRIGHI: Well, I want to first say happy birthday to a picture I didn't even know existed up until about a week ago. Nineteen sixty-six -- today, November 12th, Buzz Aldrin took a selfie from space. We can all disagree on political things, but we all can kind of agree, space is cool.
One of the good things I'm excited about is that Donald Trump has a fascination of space. With the influence of Elon Musk, I hope we're entering a new era of space exploration for the United States.
PHILLIP: All right.
JENNINGS: If Marco Rubio does, in fact, become Secretary of State, we're going to need a new senator from the state of Florida, and we need someone with Rubio's national security credentials.
[22:55:02]
Now, there's one Floridian who can do it. He stood up to the Russians and the Iranians in the 1980s when he defeated the Iron Sheik and Nikolai Volkov, two of America's most lethal foes. He is a real American. He fights for the rights of every man. He knows that courage is the thing that keeps us free.
Ladies and gentlemen, I announce Ron DeSantis --get on it --Hulk Hogan for U.S. Senate. And what you going to do, Chuck Schumer, when Hulkamania runs wild on you, brother?
PHILLIP: All right, we got to leave it there. Everyone, thank you very much. Thank you for watching "NewsNight". "Laura Coates Live" starts right after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
