Return to Transcripts main page

CNN NewsNight with Abby Phillip

Police Chase New Clues as CEO Killer Remains on the Run; Hegseth Defiant on Hill, Vows to Fight Like Hell. President-Elect Trump Goes To Army Navy Game With DeSantis; House Members Vote To Keep An Ethics Committee Report About Matt Gaetz's Alleged Sexual Predation Out Of Public View. Aired 10-11p ET

Aired December 05, 2024 - 22:00   ET

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

[22:00:00]

ABBY PHILLIP, CNN ANCHOR: Good evening. I'm Abby Phillip in New York.

Let's get right to what America is talking about, manhunt. Breaking news in the search for the killer with fake I.D.s, a bus trip from Atlanta, words scrawled on live rounds, and tonight we have some new details of new evidence in the hunt for the gunman who murdered the UnitedHealthcare CEO.

CNN is learning a lot in the last 24 hours about this suspect who is now the subject of a frenzied and far and wide search of this city. A source says that the gunman arrived in New York on a bus out of Atlanta. He was in the city for ten days before the shooting. He used a fake I.D. from New Jersey to check into a hostel here in Manhattan, where he paid in cash. He fled the scene on an ebike.

And as of this hour, no one is under arrest, but police are looking for this man. He's identified as a person of interest. The photos were gleaned from that very hostel, and the man in the picture only lowered his mask, we're told, because a hostile employee was flirting with him. That's according to a law enforcement official.

Let me bring in first CNN's Shimon Prokupecz, who is live outside of that hostile in New York City on the upper west side. Shimon, investigators found quite a lot of clues. I mean, this is a big break in an investigation like this. Can you paint the picture for us? What is it like there and what did they learn?

SHIMON PROKUPECZ, CNN SENIOR CRIME AND JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Well, during the day today, police were back out here. They started their investigation yesterday at the hostel. They learned several hours after the murder that a person of interest was at this hostel. And as you said, that individual arrived here on November 24th.

What's interesting is that he checks out, actually, from the hostel on the 29th. Then comes back on the 30th and checks in, and then obviously, a few days later, we get this horrific murder in Midtown.

So, you know, investigators have been out here looking for more video. We saw investigators out through this neighborhood looking for other video of the suspect. The thing is what's so important for them is they're trying to figure out his movement. And they've been doing a pretty good job of learning where he was in the days leading up to the murder.

The big question now is, obviously, where is he? Where did he go in the hours after the murder? The last piece of video that we know that we have seen and that we have obtained is of him on his bike at West 85th Street. It's believed that he was coming out of Central Park and going west on 85th Street. And after that, we do not know where he goes. And certainly, investigators have not told us, and perhaps there is other video out there, we just don't have it. And that is the big question. Where did he go?

Now, interestingly enough, Abby, also, when law enforcement sees him again on that bike on West 85th Street, he does not have the backpack that we see him wearing when the shooting occurs. And they believe that he dropped the backpack that he got rid of it inside Central Park. They have not been able to find them.

So, they've been gathering a lot of clues, certainly knowing where he stayed here behind me at this hostel has been an important clue. They've been able to talk to people inside of here. They've been looking for other video inside the hostel. So, they have a lot of information leading up to the day of the murder.

Now the big question is where is he and what happened in the hours and now days, two days, since this happened.

PHILLIP: Yes, we're looking right now at pictures of the inside of this hostel.

Shimon, can you tell us a little bit about what that hostel is like? What kind of living arrangement would he have had for those ten days?

PROKUPECZ: Yes. So, they are bunk beds. He was sharing a room with three, I believe, or four other individuals. He was on the fourth floor, according to people who were staying here, and they believe that's because they saw the police on the fourth floor.

We saw people coming here today from, you know, all different places, Ecuador, Spain, families from Turkey that were leaving the hostel today. You know, I've been here all day talking to some of the people. They're actually worried. They think they may be staying in an unsafe space, but, obviously, there's nothing for them to worry about.

[22:05:05]

And some of them were kind of shocked to learn this. They were like, oh my God, the man who murdered that guy may have been staying here. And when they learned of this, they were very concerned.

But, certainly, I don't think any of the folks here have felt unsafe. Some of them were kind of surprised to learn that this individual had stayed here. I think it's really one of the most fascinating things in all of this has been how law enforcement has been learning of this individual, what they've been learning about where he was, what he was doing. And a lot of it is being captured by video. And so far we've not been able to talk to anyone here that recognize him, saw him, spoke to him. But he was here for a long time and, you know, it's a pretty transient place. People come and go here, a lot of people, and it's a really busy hostel.

And, you know, for people here, it's kind of interesting to kind of experience this while being in New York City, visiting in such a sensational, really, just crazy situation that happened here.

PHILLIP: It's a pretty wild tourist experience for the people at that hostel.

Shimon Prokupecz, thank you very much for that reporting.

Let me bring in our panel here in the studio. We have CNN Senior National Security Analyst Juliette Kayyem, former NYPD Detective Tom Verni, also with us, CNN Chief Law Enforcement and Intelligence Analyst John Miller.

John, let me start where we left off Shimon left off, which is all the clues that we've gotten today, I think, seem to indicate basically the same thing. This was a man who, it seemed, went to some great lengths to conceal his comings and goings. This is New York, so the video was there, but he took a bus, he paid in cash, he stayed at a very transient place. What do you make of it all?

JOHN MILLER, CNN CHIEF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND INTELLIGENCE ANALYST: He was a man on a mission. He came here for that specific mission. And he was determined to get -- to execute it, to get away with it and to not be detected.

And how do we know that? Because we understand at the moment he's conducting this homicide that he's going to have his mask and his hood up and, you know, all of that, even before that when he's going to buy a bottle of water. But as they've developed this video canvas, you know, spreading out the days leading up to this and much, much more time than we first thought, you know, now we know he's here ten days on the ground, not a couple of days. He never takes that mask off. He never puts that hood down because they've been searching. They've been searching for that one moment where he gets out of a taxi or he sits in McDonald's and, you know, he takes the hood back and you see the whole head. What does the hair look like? What does the face look like connected to that? He doesn't do that.

Now, they're still looking. They may find that. But right now, that conversation at the hotel clerk where she said, let me see your face, pull the mask down, is the best clue they have.

PHILLIP: Yes. I mean, it is, and it's a good clue, because you do see a face.

MILLER: If you know him, you'll know him.

PHILLIP: You would definitely recognize that person if you knew him.

The ten days, Tom, talk to me about that. That's a long time. To be here before an event where someone is in that split second moment walking down the sidewalk to go into a hotel. It's a small window of opportunity that he eventually got, but he spent ten days in the city beforehand.

TOM VERNI, FORMER NYPD DETECTIVE: Yes. Well, it seems by all accounts that he definitely did his research. He knew where this gentleman was going to be walking, at what time would be the best opportune time to approach him, you know, to approach his target, so to speak.

And, you know, by the way, my condolences to his family. This is awful at this time of the year to be going through something like this. It's just even twice as bad.

You know, the good part is, I guess, for the general population here, there were people concerned about going to the Hilton Hotel. You know, nobody really has to worry about that. You know, the Hilton is fine, the surrounding area is fine. This is clearly a targeted attack. He did his homework, he found out where the CEO was going to be, and when. He planned out the sort of scoped out the area where he could approach him.

PHILLIP: Do you think he could have done that without help? For example, do you think he could have known where a high level CEO like this would have been at any given moment without knowing more than just where he was attending a conference on a particular day?

VERNI: I mean, look, there's a possibility. Could he have had an accomplice involved in this? It's possible. Could he have done all this research and homework by himself? That's entirely possible as well.

The problem with, and I think this may be a sort of a lesson, I guess, for CEOs of large corporations, particularly corporations that might be controversial, in that maybe it's not such a good idea to advertise where their people might be all the time.

For CEOs or people who might be under certain threats, they may consider getting executive protection. You know, it's maybe worth to put that into the budget, especially if they are a controversial person in a controversial agency or company.

[22:10:00]

It's just something to consider. We live in a crazy world.

PHILLIP: And he had it, but just not at that particular time, correct me if I'm wrong, John. But, Juliette, the motive, he was talking about controversy. There were those words written on the casings. How much do you think police right now, investigators, know about the motive? And what do you think that all of these clues are leading to?

JULIETTE KAYYEM, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: I'm going to be honest. I know we're supposed to have the answer as analysts. This case gets creepier as time goes on. Like, normally, you know, when I first heard about it, it says a targeted killing, maybe it's a former employee, someone who was denied health insurance. But it's just how tactical, purposeful, professional, in some ways, the killing was. And then he sort of vanishes into thin air. Like New York Police Department's very, very good, and, you know, they may be close, but it's now 48 hours.

So, you know, you could put the motive into three buckets relatively easy, and one is something quite personal that we're not looking at yet, something that just has to do with him and nothing to do with the company. The second is you would normally think about maybe a former employee, someone who had a personal hatred towards him having to do with work. And then the third is someone who was denied health insurance or some sort of claim.

The person who killed him wants us to think it's that third. But they're pretty smart. I mean, what they've done so far is they've sort of, they bypassed all surveillance. They've gotten there -- you know, we can't really tell who this person is. And so I'm uncertain even if what's on the bullet case scenes is we take for at face value.

PHILLIP: Yes. I mean, John you gave us that reporting this morning. I mean, I'm curious about when you were talking to your sources about all of these tidbits, right? And there's the bullet casings, but then there's also the question of the professionalism, or maybe not, of this person. Do you have a sense of where law enforcement is on that? Do they think that this guy was a hired hand?

MILLER: If he was a hired hand, he was on a very tight budget. And that doesn't really kind of match with the professional hitman who's, you know, carrying out a hit against a billion dollar executive for, you know, a $100,000.

This appears with The writing on the shell casings, you know, to put delay and depose, which is, you know, kind of the three Ds of the deny, delay, depose, critics of the insurance industry say this is what companies do to get out of paying, you know, settlements and so on. They are looking at this with an open mind right now, which is, A, we don't know the motive, but, B, we know that the shooter is trying to suggest a motive by leaving clues behind that suggest it.

PHILLIP: Yes. What do you think, Tom?

VERNI: Yes. I mean, we were talking about this earlier with Jake, in that there were some of the things that this shooter did, that this assassin did. If this guy was like, quote/unquote, professional trained assassin, right, he would be a ghost. You'd hardly see him approach. You would see him vanish into thin air, even in a place like Manhattan.

And the thing about Manhattan, as everyone here knows, you know, living here and working here, is that it's, there are just so many people and so many places to duck and hide. He could have got off at 85th Street and gotten into the nearest subway and that's it, been gone. He could have went down to the bus station, maybe hopped the bus back to Atlanta.

So, you know, a trained assassin or professional assassin, so to speak, is just going to appear, do his bit or her bit, and then disappear without leaving anything behind, certainly not a cell phone, not a bottle. And the weapon itself, you know, he chose to use some sort of a silencer on the gun but yet chose to shoot this person in clear view of almost a handful of people. So it's just, there's some sloppiness there.

So, he had a motive and clearly he had a motive, and he had the means. Whether he's a professional or not, I don't know.

PHILLIP: A lot of times when law enforcement are looking at crimes, murders in particular, they start at home. And in this case, we've learned just a little bit more about what was going on in his family life. This CEO, his wife, he and his wife, Paulette, were separated, living in separate houses. But we also know that there was an investigation related to insider trading. These are all just, again, clues. They don't tell us anything, you know, definitive. But what do they -- you know, how are you deciphering all of this?

KAYYEM: So, they're all relevant. They're all data points in an investigation. You're going to look at all these different pieces for the motive. Because the motive is going to get you closer to who this is, right? If you all of a sudden determine there might be one -- a particular motive, you're going to look one way.

Look, the company has said that he had gotten threats, that they generally get threats. What we don't know on the outside is how common is that. This is a consumer-facing industry that says no a lot.

[22:15:01]

There are a lot of angry people. And I think all of those pieces are relevant. They're going to come out. Some of them may lead nowhere. And we have to be very careful about what we think about him or the marriage.

The one thing that makes me nervous the further this goes on and the vanishing into thin air is, you know, this is a cold blooded assassination, and people hate their healthcare companies, and he's becoming a little bit of a folk hero online. We were all talking about the comments that we're getting to it, like, you know, we, these people are horrible and whatever. Like, no, right? I mean, there's an issue about your health insurance that you may not like and someone was killed in cold blood on a New York street. And we have to be able to separate those as a civilized society.

PHILLIP: I mean, that has been incredibly disturbing to see as a result of this.

But all of you, thank you very much for being here and providing that insight.

Coming up next, just moments away, don't miss a special edition of Laura Coates Live, Manhunt, The Search for the CEO Killer, 11:00 P.M. Eastern Time, right here on CNN.

But first, quitting time, not on his mind. Pete Hegseth says that he is not headed home, but he's going to fend off these accusations about alleged misconduct.

And it's mutual, a new CNN report traces the bromance between Kash Patel and QAnon.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[22:20:00]

PHILLIP: Tonight, Pete Hegseth won't back down. Everything that he is doing right now is Tom Petty-coded. He's blaming the media for dragging him down. He says his nomination to lead the Pentagon won't be turned around. And he doesn't want to give senators an easy way out, by quitting before a confirmation hearing.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PETE HEGSETH, TRUMP DEFENSE SECRETARY NOMINEE: I'm not going to back down from them one bit. I will answer all of these senators' questions. But this will not be a process tried in the media. I don't answer to anyone in this group, none of you, not to that camera at all. I answer to President Trump. I answer to the 50 -- the 100 senators who are part of this process and those in the committee. And I answer to my Lord and Savior and my wife and my family.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIP: My panel is here with me, CNN Political Commentator Scott Jennings, former Congressman Mondaire Jones, former Trump White House Comms Director Anthony Scaramucci, CNN Political Commentator Maria Cardona, and GOP Strategist John Brabender.

Pete Hegseth is now in God knows how many days of this. And he probably at this point does not really have much of a choice, but here is the person who -- I don't know -- she might be one of the most important people to this process. Listen to Joni Ernst.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It doesn't sound on your answer that you've gotten to a yes. If I'm wrong about that, correct me. And if that is the case, it sounds to me as if the hearing will be critical for his nomination. Am I right about that?

SEN. JONI ERNST (R-IA): I think you are right. I think for a number of our senators, they want to make sure that any allegations have been cleared, and that's why we have to have a very thorough vetting process.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIP: She is not, Scaramucci, buying this idea that it's all made up, that it's all anonymous sources. She said specifically, we want to make sure the allegations are cleared. I mean, are they waiting, first of all, biding some time to see what else comes out, or just waiting for, you know Trump to decide it ain't happening? ANTHONY SCARAMUCCI, FORMER TRUMP WHITE HOUSE COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR: Well, I don't think the senators have done the two step on them that they did with Matt Gaetz. And so --

PHILLIP: At least not yet.

SCARAMUCCI: -- that two-step is they get him in the room and they quietly tell him, look, you're going to embarrass the president-elect, and you're going to embarrass yourself, and there'll be an unnecessary show trial, and we're not voting for you, so you should drop out and spare the president the embarrassment of this.

And so she's more or less saying that with her body language on T.V., but they just haven't done that yet. And, listen, he's a tough guy, he's a resilient guy, and he's forcing them to do more than they had to do with Matt Gaetz.

PHILLIP: Can they really wait it out, John?

JOHN BRABENDER, GOP STRATEGIST AND MEDIA CONSULTANT: Well, look, first of all, you said he won't back down, which I want a defense secretary that doesn't easily back down. So, let's sort of start there.

But here's the thing. This is completely different than Matt Gaetz. Number one, you know, there's been two allegations against him. One is that he had a drinking problem when he came home years ago from serving his country. Boy, I hope we're not going to say any vet that comes home and serves this country and has some problems when they get home can no longer serve in the government, that'd be ridiculous.

Second of all, as his own attorney said on this channel, they're doing the FBI background. They're making all the documentation public. And I think what Joni Ernst has said is I'm not saying, no. I'm just saying, I want to see this information for myself. I think that's great that she is going to do that. And I think what this is really saying is the process is working. This has to go through the Senate. It needs approval. The process is underway. Let's see what happens.

MARIA CARDONA, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I think what really is hurting him and the whole process is the drip, drip, drip of information.

And I have got to think that the, Scott, you all will know better, that the Trump team cannot be happy about this. That's why you have FBI background checks before you even nominate somebody. But this drip, drip of information -- and it's not just the sexual allegations, it's actually that there are more than one. It's not just the drinking. It's just that it's more than one allegation on the drinking. It's the mismanagement of the organizations that he supposedly was connected with.

And I think Senator Ernst is critical for various reasons, not just because they can't really lose a whole lot of senators, but she is the one who has the reputation, working along with Senator Gillibrand, that focuses on issues of sexual accountability in the military. [22:25:12]

So, this issue, I think, for her is going to be critical, and I have got to think it would be so hard for her to vote for somebody who has those kinds of allegations in the background. And not just that, the way that he talks about women in the military, she is a veteran. She served in combat.

BRABENDER: Let me ask you this.

CARDONA: He apparently is against women in combat. That is not going to serve him well.

BRABENDER: If she ultimately comes out and votes yes, does that make you comfortable then with him as the choice?

CARDONA: I think that it would make me -- I mean, I would still question it, because here's the other thing.

BRABENDER: Well, you just said, you know, you're sort of conflicting with yourself.

CARDONA: No. I'm not conflicting with myself. I'm talking about a conflict that I'm sure Senator Ernst is going through right now.

But here's my question. Is there such a dearth of talent and expertise and experience in Trump's MAGA world, in the Republican world that they have to nominate somebody like Pete Hegseth with those kinds of allegations in their background?

FMR. REP. MONDAIRE JONES (D-NY): Well, it is a horrible beginning for the administration. I mean, to have nominee after nominee experience just a deluge of negative press. And, by the way, the allegation is not just that he had an alcohol problem when he returned from combat, it's that the alcoholism persists to the point where he's had to now resign from two different organizations that he's led, in addition to the voluminous allegations of sexual misconduct. And so it's much deeper and more egregious than what you mentioned.

BRABENDER: But voluminous, I'm not sure, is the appropriate word.

SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: What's the standard? You said voluminous. What -- would you say I have a plethora of pinatas? I mean, look, I think --

(CROSSTALKS)

PHILLIP: Hold on just for one second, just for one second. Both of you hold on one second. There was some news that was made in the last hour when his attorney, as you mentioned, John, was on with Kaitlan, and he was talking about the woman who had the complaint, and it was investigated, there was a police report about their interaction, he did sign some confidentiality agreement. And here's what Parlatore is saying about the status of that agreement. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) TIM PARLATORE, ATTORNEY FOR PETE HEGSETH: If he is not confirmed as the Secretary of Defense, we may still bring a civil extortion claim against her.

If the false claims of somebody that was part of an extortion that was then put out in violation of a settlement agreement ultimately causes him to lose his future employment opportunities, then, yes, that is something that is worth bringing a lawsuit against her and her friend, and potentially even the attorney for, yes.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIP: He's threatening to bring a defamation suit, but also saying that she's free to talk. He says that the confidentiality agreement is not in effect anymore. So, should we hear from her? And if we should, then, I mean, why is he threatening her with a lawsuit if she speaks out?

JENNINGS: Well, because my imagination is that they believe she has made false allegations. And, by the way, he was investigated for this. The police looked at this. He's never faced any charges, whatsoever, over this. It's not uncommon for people to enter into these kind of agreements. But if she wants to come and testify, I don't think anybody should have a problem with it because I assume Pete Hegseth, who's going to be under oath, is going to have a much different story into a lot of Republicans right now.

Some of this is starting to feel a little bit like the Kavanaugh confirmation hearing, where you have a lot of anonymous, a lot of innuendo, a lot of people using words, like voluminous, and people, you know, sort of piling on here without really any substantive, on- the-record stuff to back it up.

So, what I would recommend is that he continue to fight for his own reputation, that we get to a hearing, and we put everybody under oath, and then we see where the chips fall. He's got two fights. One is reputational. One is also, can you do the job? And so he's fighting a two-front battle in the Senate, and that's a real thing, and he needs to cross those lines.

PHILLIP: A hearing of all the allegations against him.

SCARAMUCCI: That's very bad for the president.

PHILLIP: Yes.

SCARAMUCCI: What's Scott's saying might be good for Pete Hegseth but it's very bad for the president. If you were in the room with the --

JENNINGS: Why? It's his guy.

SCARAMUCCI: He's very frustrated by this. He has to be. I mean, I know the guy. The mother went after the guy and they had the mother in like a hostage crisis on Fox News backing out of what he said about her own son. And trust me, the thing that blew him up with Donald Trump is what the mother said about him. Because I know Trump, and I know exactly how he thinks about this stuff. And so he's upset, he doesn't want to be the guy to pull the string on him. But right now, Pete Hegseth said, I'm done, Donald Trump would be relieved by that. He's got another person waiting in the wings that's qualified.

PHILLIP: It is now a good time --

SCARAMUCCI: And this would be very bad for the president to be putting this guy in a show trial like that.

PHILLIP: Yes, the --

SCARAMUCCI: Very bad for him.

PHILLIP: Speaking of waiting in the wings, President Trump's going to go to the Army-Navy game and he's also going to be there with Ron DeSantis, who's reportedly --

[22:30:00]

JENNINGS: It's fine to have a plan B.

PHILLIP: -- one of the other people who's being considered here.

JENNINGS: I just think, you know, the president wants this guy. He was a nontraditional pick because Donald Trump's a nontraditional president. He's not going to pick the regular Washington establishment types. And when you -- and when you --

ANTHONY SCARAMUCCI, FORMER TRUMP WH COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR: Don't hurt the president by doing that to him, though.

JENNINGS: The president made the choice. Hegseth didn't show up today and declare that he was going to be Secretary of Defense. This was Trump's choice.

SCARAMUCCI: I don't think all of that stuff was declared to Donald Trump.

MARIA CARDONA, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Did they know about all this?

JENNINGS: No, but I'll tell you what Donald Trump does know about. People piling on with garbage after garbage after garbage and never feeling like you get the chance to repair your own reputation. He does know a lot about that.

JOHN BRABENDER, GOP STRATEGIST AND MEDIA CONSULTANT: Yes, and he's not going to blink. He's not going to just blink because a bunch of Democrat senators are trying to make a public relations campaign out of it.

PHILLIP: It would be -- it would be -- everyone, stick around. Hold on. We got to go. Stop talking. Coming up next, DOGE -- we got to go. DOGE is the new department that will be held by Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy. We'll tell you what they plan to do and what Musk will not tell Americans about those plans. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[22:35:34]

PHILLIP: Tonight, DOGE, Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy have a really big mission that requires really big plans to get your government to work better while making it much, much smaller. So far, the specifics of how exactly they're going to do that are hard to nail down. But ask your Republican lawmaker by passing in the Capitol Hill hallway and they like what they've heard so far.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. AARON BEAN (R) FLORIDA: If we don't make changes, those programs right now are unsustainable. So, we have to make our government more efficient so we can afford the promises that we've already made.

REP. MARIA ELVIRA SALAZAR (R) FLORIDA: We've got to be more efficient. And we do what we have to -- and Vivek said we had to do it with compassion. More efficient, compassionate regulations.

MARJORIE TAYLOR GREENE (R) GEORGIA: Elon and Vivek talked about having a naughty list and a nice list for members of Congress and senators and how we vote and how we're spending the American people's money. I think that would be fantastic.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIP: You know, this has the potential, actually, I think to be one of the more popular things that the Trump administration does. If they take two successful business people and say, let's use technology, let's deal with the ways in which the money is not being spent properly, let's deal with that in a way that is, you know, has bipartisan support, that could work really well, potentially.

But then we're also talking about Congress, and they have to do this stuff. And I'm just not convinced that Congress has it in them to do it without a lot of the extraneous stuff that makes it showy, that goes after democratic priorities just to stick a thumb in their eye.

SCARAMUCCI: So, I would recommend to both of them to go back about 30 years to the Pay-As-You-Go legislation. Dick Dorman was the OMB person for George Herbert Walker Bush. They put in legislation that had guardrails on the Congress. Bill Clinton adhered to those and we ran a budget deficit at the end of Bill Clinton's -- I'm sorry, budget surplus at the end of Bill Clinton's term.

And I think this up there talking about is great but if you really want to guide the Congress do something that worked in the past, get a bipartisan commitment, tighten up the legislation so if they want a tax cut have to find something in the budget to cut. If they want more government services, they have to raise taxes. That was Dick Darman and George Herbert Walker Bush's strategy 30 years ago. And it worked and it got us to a budget surplus in 10 years.

MONDAIRE JONES (D) FORMER U.S.: We're not just talking about a dysfunctional Congress. We're talking about Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy who have demonstrated that they don't know very much about the way government works.

I do think this is a real opportunity for there to be bipartisanship when it comes to cutting waste. Democrats, especially progressive Democrats in Congress have laser -- been laser focused on the Defense Department for example, which just this year failed its seventh consecutive audit.

And so, if there is seriousness about getting rid of waste in government, that would be one area where folks on both sides of the aisle should be able to commit to looking into.

PHILLIP: I mean, let's take a look at like where the money is, you know I mean because that matters and the big -- the big money is in Social Security National Defense. That's DOD health -- healthcare care interest paid on debt, there's that. And Medicare, veteran services are right up there.

I mean, these are hard choices, right? So, like it's easy to say let's just get rid of all the things we don't like. But when you really want to make a dent in this thing, you're going to have to touch some of these priorities.

JENNINGS: To me, it's not just the money at which, you know, they'll have to fight with Congress about. The fact that most people believe the government is too big that the bureaucracy stacked on the bureaucracy stacked on the bureaucracy crushes a lot of people, crushes a lot of small businesses, kind of puts a stranglehold on a lot of things going on in American life. It crushes innovation.

Right now, we have federal government unions negotiating with the Biden administration to let some of these federal employees work from home for years and years and years stuff that started during the pandemic. Now, they want it to continue for years and years and years cutting deals with Biden on the way out the door.

This drives people crazy. Like why is the government getting so big? Why are there so many people working there and why do they get so many perks and such good salaries when I don't feel like as a taxpayer, I'm getting that much out of it.

So, to me, yes, you're right about where the money is, but there's something to be said for just shrinking the size of government and jettisoning the stuff that nobody believes is necessary.

[22:40:04]

PHILLIP: Yes, I mean, I hear you, but it is also about the money. I mean, you cannot do that.

BRABENDER: Yes, but here's where everybody's missing the point. This is not about the Republicans and Democrats and the House or Congress coming together. This is the president saying, you all had your chance and you screwed it up. This is the most inefficient bureaucracy probably on the planet of the earth is the United States federal government.

Let's take two people who have been successful in other places who will also know about innovation, which we never talk about. This isn't just about cutting the waste, is there? That's priority one. But the second of all is how to work better and be more innovative to get more results.

We talk a lot about the Department of Education. We've been teaching kids the same way for centuries, at least a century, and it's really not improving test scores dramatically or anything else, yet we're wasting money doing it. Why not cut the fat but find new innovative ways to do this. We have to.

CARDONA: I actually think you can find a lot of agreement with Democrats on all of these issues -- waste, fraud, you know, anything that you can look at that is an overreach in government and there is a lot of over reach. I was in the Clinton administration and it was impossible -- impossible to fire people who would just come to work, do nothing and cash a paycheck. So, I completely agree with that.

But here's the problem, right? And you hit the nail on the head, Abby. It's the money, but it's not just the money. There was some reporting that said that Elon Musk and Ramaswamy want to completely defund the National Institute of Health. That would be catastrophic for the country. So, it does matter, not just where the money is, but what programs are there.

PHILLIP: Here's also Manu chasing Elon down on Social Security. Watch -- watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNKNOWN: Is Social Security and Medicare, is it off the table? Is it off the table?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIP: No answers really on that. And it's -- it's pretty important, but not, I see you shaking your head, don't shake your head just yet because I do think that there are, first of all, there's a necessity to do something there, but I also think there are opportunities.

I mean, there was talk about just finding out where the money is going and stopping it from going to people that it's not supposed to go to proper payments. I mean, there are savings that can come there but why -- I think, transparency is the issue.

JENNINGS: OK, Vivek was not elected president, neither was Elon Musk. Donald Trump wasn't. He has clearly stated from the minute he got into this race in 2015 that he would not cut Social Security and Medicare. It has never changed. That's number one.

Number two, here's what I heard about the meeting today -- that it went great, that they were very upbeat, there was a vibe of teamwork. Elon's kind of a visionary but I'll tell you what I heard was that Vivek gets it. That was the phrase I heard today, he gets it.

So, you have two guys here, they're creative. And with Vivek, apparently, came in armed with a lot of technical knowledge about how to achieve some of the things they're talking about. But they're not going to cut Social Security and Medicare for people. Is there efficiency to be saved in the bureaucracy? I'm certain that there is.

SCARAMUCCI: Can I make a quick recommendation? Get some Democrats involved with it.

PHILLIP: Yes, I know there are some.

SCARAMUCCI: They can win some successes.

JENNINGS: Ro Khanna, I think, is already a good example.

SCARAMUCCI: Ro is a good example.

PHILLIP: There are several. And -- but it would probably be smart.

JONES: Ro specifically identified the Department of Defense.

PHILLIP: It would be smart for there to be more, actually. Because one way or the other, I think to Scott's point, the American people are ready for the government to work better for them. Everyone, hang tight for me. Coming up next, why the conspiracy addicted are applauding Trump's pick to lead the FBI. We have a new CNN report that goes down a deep rabbit hole to find out.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[22:48:07]

PHILLIP: Tonight, Kindred, QAnon followers feel good about Kash Patel potentially leading the FBI and you don't need to believe in conspiracies to see why. He has said nice things about them again and again.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KASH PATEL, TRUMP'S FBI DIRECTOR PICK (voice-over): Whether it's the Qs of the world who I agree with some of what he does and I disagree with some of what he does, if it allows people to gather and focus on the truth and the facts. I'm all for it.

WARREN: Q has been so right on so many things. I'll get off that subject.

PATEL: No, he has. And I agree with you. He has. He has. And you got to take a bit, you got to harness that following that Q has garnered and just sort of tweak it a little bit. That's all I'm saying.

PATEL: People keep asking me about all this Q stuff. I'm like, what does it matter? What I'm telling you is that there is truth in a lot of things that many people say. And what I'm putting out there is the truth. And how about we have some fun along the way. There's so many people who subscribe to the, where we go on, we go on all mantra. And it's a -- it's what's wrong with it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIP: Well, that's interesting. Donie O'Sullivan is here with us. First of all, who is Q? But Kash Patel seems to think that this person is real and telling the truth. You spent some time going down the rabbit hole. The followers of this conspiracy, which by the way, has some really bizarre, vile aspects to it, they are thrilled by his nomination.

DONIE O'SULLIVAN, CNN SENIOR CORRESPONDENT: Yes, they're really excited. I mean, you can sort of see there how Patel flirts with or engages with the QAnon community. Look, a lot of the times when he was on the shows, on the many kind of online MAGA media universe networks. It was to sell something, it was to sell his books or whatever. And we should point out that a Trump transition spokesperson today pushed back against any links between Patel.

[22:50:00]

And QAnon also said that this story was a pathetic, which is a difficult word for an Irish person, for me to say at least, pathetic attempt at guilt by -- at guilt by association.

PHILLIP: We won't hold it against you.

O'SULLIVAN: Look, it's late. But we do have a clip. We went to Florida this week, spoke to a quote, unquote "QAnon influencer", a really big Q superfan, and here's what he had to say.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

O'SULLIVAN: For a lot of people, Kash Patel, engaging in the world of Q and QAnon at all, they'll say, well, that's disqualifying.

JEFFREY PEDERSEN, "THE MG SHOW" HOST: But what you're going to find out is that we have a mandate in America, and we want the FBI clean. You know, 99 percent of the FBI is good, you know. But there's a one percent that is not good.

O'SULLIVAN (voice-over): The anonymous Q persona hasn't posted in a few years, but the world of QAnon is still very real for people like Jeffrey.

PEDERSEN: News unlocks what the Q posts are. Like, you know, like for example, Kashyap Patel, a name to remember. Kashyap Patel has just been nominated as the FBI director, right? That's a Q proof, what we call.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

O'SULLIVAN: And look, obviously a lot of this stuff is really wild, it's really out there, it's quite crazy. One thing though that in one of the clips we played there of what Patel spoke about was this community and tapping into the community. I mean, whether we like it or not, there is a lot of people who spend a lot of time on the internet alone, some of them, and folks are looking for community.

And I think that is a big part of these conspiracy theories and groups and cults and everything else we're seeing. It's people trying to connect, but in this way, obviously channeling that energy one quite dangerous.

PHILLIP: Yes, shared beliefs, even if it's completely made up.

JENNINGS: Well, hopefully we're not disqualifying people from serving or trying to sell books, because, Lord have mercy. Virtually everybody who gets nominated for something has a book. I would just point out two things.

One, politically, Patel, to me right now, has a lot of support in the Senate. I think a lot of these nominees, you know, some are in trouble. I don't think he is right now. I mean, he's going to obviously have to go to the table and answer questions just like everybody else, but there is enthusiasm for him.

Ten years ago, the FBI had a 59 percent approval rating. Today, it's like 41 percent. There's a lot of restoration work that needs to be done to restore public confidence in this agency. It probably does need a change agent, an outside change agent, and the Republicans right now, they like this nomination. There's a long way to go, but they like it right now.

PHILLIP: This is kind of like how, you know, you tell everybody that elections are rigged and then when confidence in elections go down, we're like, everybody, we need to change elections.

JENNINGS: Are you saying the FBI hasn't made any mistakes?

PHILLIP: I'm just saying, when you spend years and years telling everybody the FBI is corrupt, they're going to believe you, so --

JENNINGS: They have admitted some corruption. There have been internal reports where they have admitted there have been FBI agents that themselves have gotten criminal in trouble. They made mistakes.

PHILLIP: Yes, I actually think that's exactly the correct point, which is that the FBI has a process for going over their own misdeeds. And they did it multiple times in the case of the accusations that Trump has made about the agency, including in the John Durham report, which was heralded by Republicans.

That was an attempt to look at all of these things. And he found problems.

JENNINGS: Right.

PHILLIP: That's called a process.

JONES: -- process -- don't cover that now. The other piece of this is, I just want to go back to something Maria said earlier, you know, and my friend Scott says the president should get to a point whoever he wants to lead an agency.

And there's a lot to that. But again, I still don't have an explanation for why the guy to lead the FBI would be someone who believes that there's a secret group of Satan worshipping pedophiles who is like controlling the world order. I mean that is literally what an admirer of the QAnon movement is supporting here in the case of Kash Patel.

JENNINGS: Literally on the record -- literally an on the record denial of connections, right, between from the Trump transition between Patel and this.

UNKNOWN: We saw footage of it.

JENNINGS: Literally on the record.

UNKNOWN: We saw footage of it.

BRABENDER: He said I disagree with them on a lot of things.

UNKNOWN: I'm glad we have the tape that we just saw in this intro.

PHILLIP: But I think that -- yes, I mean, I think that's part of the point is that there's -- I don't know about connections to QAnon, because it's not really a real thing, but he's talked favorably about it.

O'SULLIVAN: Yes, and I think, like, you know, as they say, every conspiracy theory has that kernel of truth in it. And what we've seen is the S, whether it's mistakes the FBI have made or corruption or whatever, everything just like election denialism movement, it gets spun out of absolutely all proportions.

So, it goes from, you know, a problem with a group within an organization to actually it's a whole conspiracy. And oftentimes then gets wrapped up in this kind of radicalization. A lot of the QAnon is really racist and anti-Semitic when you really get into it.

So, again, I think it goes back to taking advantage in a lot of way of people who are susceptible, falling into these rabbit holes. Like if you're a QAnon follower, the world is a scary, scarier place than, you know, it is in reality.

[22:55:04]

Because the stuff that these people are being told on a day-by-day basis, which Trump and Patel is supposed to save them from, is really messed up.

PHILLIP: Yes, count yourself lucky if you're not deeply steeped in what this particular conspiracy is all about. But if you want to be, you can read Donie's piece. Everyone else, thank you very much for being here. Coming up next, protecting their own -- what Republicans in Congress just did to provide some cover for a former colleague. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:00:12]

Breaking tonight, the Republican-led House voted to keep an Ethics Committee report about Matt Gaetz's alleged sexual predation out of public view. That vote raises questions about whether or not the findings of the investigation will ever be made public. Thank you very much for watching "News Night". Special edition of "Laura Coates Live" -- it starts right now.