Return to Transcripts main page

CNN NewsNight with Abby Phillip

Sources Say, Police Appear To Be Closing In On Suspect's Identity; NYPD Believes Suspect In CEO Shooting Is No Longer In New York City; Online Response To CEO's Killing Reveals Wider Outrage Over Health System; Trump Continues To Support Pete Hegseth To Lead The Pentagon; TikTok May Face A Death Sentence In The U.S. Aired 10-11p ET

Aired December 06, 2024 - 22:00   ET

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

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

[22:00:00]

PHIL MATTINGLY, CNN HOST (voice over): Tonight, escape from New York. Police say the suspected CEO killer has fled the city, outrunning tens of thousands of cameras, as the NYPD tries to piece together a puzzle. And the internet applauds a murder.

Plus, survivor, Pete Hegseth hopes he can outwit and outplay concerns about his bad behavior can outlast. The president-elect's pinching (ph) for changing his mind.

And TikTok on the clock, influencers may need to find a new place to put their videos as a federal appeals court gives the app a deadline to find a new owner.

Everything we know about the search for a murderer on the run with the reporters and experts who know best.

Then live at the table, T.W. Arrighi, Errol Lewis, John Brabender, Nayyera Haq, and Brian Stelter. Americans with different perspectives aren't talking to each other, but here, they do.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

MATTINGLY (on camera): Good evening, I'm Phil Mattingly in for Abby Phillip.

Let's get right to what America is talking about. Closing in, breaking news tonight, NYPD investigators are inching closer to identifying a suspected killer. Now, a word of caution here, nothing is certain. This is all very fluid, very fast-moving.

The other big lead tonight, a backpack. This, what we're showing you on your screen right now, is the latest piece of evidence in the hunt for the CEO killer. The backpack you see here discovered in Central Park now the forensic focus of police. It's at a lab in Queens where it will be picked over for DNA leftovers. Its contents will be examined for traces of, well, anything. As of this hour, police have not publicly disclosed who they think the shooter may be, but what we do know is this, police believe he's no longer in New York City, that he's managed to elude an expansive web of surveillance, thousands and thousands of cameras spread across Manhattan. Earlier today, police gave a window into how they've tracked and traced the suspect.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JESSICA TISCH, NEW YORK CITY POLICE COMMISSIONER: We also have reason to believe that the person in question has left New York City.

JOSEPH KENNY, NYPD CHIEF OF DETECTIVES: We have video of him entering the Port Authority bus terminal. We don't have any video of him exiting, so we believe he may have gotten on a bus.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MATTINGLY: My panel joins me now. Shimon, I want to start with you. That was your interview, the first one to talk to those critical officials here, get an insight into what's happening. But you also, just a short while ago with our colleague, Evan Perez, broke the news that they're honing in on a suspect. Explain to people what that means.

SHIMON PROKUPECZ, CNN SENIOR CRIME AND JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: So, look, basically they have a name, right? And they're trying to work through this name to determine if this person had anything to do with it. I think there was a fair amount of confidence over this individual, enough that it was shared with some very important people close to this investigation.

Where they are now is certainly unclear, but by no means are they even close to releasing this name publicly to say, hey, this is the guy, this is the person we're looking for, because that presents all kinds of issues. So, they're not close. So, they're still trying to work through all of that. But it's not perhaps the only name that they've worked through, but they were confident enough about this person that they have shared this information with some people. There's still a lot of work to do.

You know, I think one of the things about this is this person did such a good job of covering themselves up. It's very hard still to identify who this person is and how do you link this person to the homicide directly before you go ahead and say, hey, here we go, here's our suspect, let's put this name out.

MATTINGLY: Yes, there are critical steps. So, Juliette, you wrote about that. It was an excellent piece in The Atlantic. What did you see? I think his ability throughout what we've seen in the video, what we've seen in the pictures, it's kind of Hollywood-esque and knowing exactly or seeming to know where everything is.

JULIETTE KAYYEM, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Yes. So, the last couple days we've been talking about what the police are doing and it sort of struck me we should be also talking about what he did to make this manhunt now enter day 4, essentially. And so it appears that he understood the surveillance state that is New York City, right, the cameras, the exposure, the density of a city like this. And he was able to work around it, divert it, sort of remain underneath the radar, knowing very well what he was about to do that, that we basically had a filmed assassination.

So, beforehand, how he gets here, the bus, the hostel being -- he pays in cash, even when he takes off his mask at the hostel, he does so in a way in which they can't really capture the facial recognition in a way that if you and I took off a mask or a hood, we wouldn't be cognizant of it, and his exit.

[22:05:12]

This is -- we've done a lot of this before. They don't normally plan out the exit this well. He leaves through Central Park. He takes a bike, a taxi, then a bus to get out of the city without a trace, without getting caught. And that's why I think he's getting this mythic -- horrible, I'm not defending it, but this sort of this mythic aura around him. He's taking on the NYPD. He's taking on healthcare insurance.

MATTINGLY: Jeff, to that point, mindset-wise, right, I followed these two guys when they have covered things like this in the past many, many times, breaking a ton of news, kind of walking people through what was going on. You've worked on it on the law enforcement side. But on the mindset side, when you see or listen to everything that Juliette laid out, what does that tell you about the individual the police are trying to find right now?

JEFF GARDERE, ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR, BEHAVIORAL MEDICINE AT TOURO UNIVERSITY: I think this is a person who's certainly high emotionally on this because he knows what he was getting into. He knew it would be a cat and mouse game, I can only figure at this point. This is an individual, though, they're closing in on him and he knows that. He's gotten away with it thus far, so I think that's going to increase some of the paranoia that he may have. It may interfere with his cognition. He's trying to do things in a very perfect way, but he's starting to feel that heat.

At the same time, you talked about some of the admiration, some of the things that are happening with him, where people are sort of like cheering on what happened, which is a horrible thing, by the way, and I think that emboldens him, gives him a mission. There was some sort of a mission to begin with. We don't quite -- we're not quite sure what it is. So, this is something that is fascinating for everyone else but certainly keeping him very emotionally aroused.

MATTINGLY: Richard, it was striking in the interview Shimon had earlier today where the officials were saying, look, this is a nationwide -- this is not in New York City. They said he'd left and made very clear that this is a much bigger kind of haystack, to steal from an overused cliche on some level. What sticks out to you?

RICHARD ESPOSITO, FORMER NYPD COMMISSIONER: Well, you know, most crimes are not planned this well, but this wasn't planned perfectly. He got through some of the surveillance, not all of it. But now you've got the U.S. Marshals. They're in charge of fugitive hunts. You've got the FBI. You've got 80 major police departments involved in looking for this guy. Shimon said they're closing in on a person. That doesn't mean they're closing in on a where yet, and that's why they're going to be so careful now.

And to all the points we're addressing, there is a risk when you get closer to the end of one of these. And law enforcement's very cognizant of what the risk is. This guy's killed somebody, somebody's turned him into a folk hero for the moment. But remember there was Bernie Goetz, people turned him into a folk hero. He didn't turn out to be such a great guy. And then we'll see what this guy turns out to be.

MATTINGLY: Can you take us behind the scenes? Two pieces of, I think, things that have been discussed today, the backpack, and what kind of the process was to collect that, what they're doing right now, but also the gun, which I think police were saying, or we've been reporting, was essentially like a veterinarian used weapon? Explain that for people, if you could.

ANDY BERSHAD, RETIRED NYPD DETECTIVE, EMERGENCY SERVICE UNIT: So, the weapon was unique. Originally, just from watching the T.V., I thought it was more of a target weapon. Originally, they were reporting that it was jamming, that it had to do. He clearly knew how to operate it. He put two rounds into the victim prior to it actually jamming.

Probably again well-planned, but now if you're not being aggressive with it, the round won't chamber in and you could start having a problem, obviously not too much of a problem with that. It is a nine millimeter, which is very common. Bullets kill regardless of the caliber, once you get to that point.

With the backpack, the greatest detectives in the world are doing amazing, wherever they are, just pulling clues. And a lot of what's going on here, and it's funny as I listen, I'm sorry to branch off the Bernie Goetz, it's almost like a D.B. Cooper, you know? And it kind of supports the perpetrator. We rely on the public, you know? Somebody's going to see him, whether it's the cameras that are going on, whether it's, you know, the track he obviously purposely went, I'm going to get in a cab and then get in a car and then on a ferry and then on a plane and on a horse, that's all great, but we rely on the public. Someone's going to see him. You know, people are a lot more attentive than we realize in the overall.

PROKUPECZ: Yes. But despite that, they still haven't been able to find him. I think that to me has been one of the most fascinating parts of this. Given all the cameras and all the money that's spent on all these cameras, yes, they've been able to track him, but still yet they've not -- you know, they weren't able to obviously get him before he left. But, you know, it's still amazing to me that he was able to get out.

BERSHAD: It's still the city of New York. We've grabbed people rapidly, obviously, as time goes on. It's much slower, but there are ten people in the FBI's most wanted that we know exactly who they are. Where are they? You know, if it was that magical, I heard someone at some point say, it's not T.V.

[22:10:00]

You know, we all know that. We're not new to the system. That would be great. But the tracking and the staying on top of it, and, of course, there's more of an investigation going on that we're led to aware of.

GARDERE: And that fame that he's getting now, whether it should be earned or not, it helps him. But that is a knife that cuts both ways, because as much as there may be some people who support him, these are folks who really don't have any kind of relationship with him. So, you know, they'll turn him in a minute. So, he'll be much more recognized. There'll be more of a fervor to be the person to be able to identify.

KAYYEM: One of the things that. And I think one of the things that has come up in talking to police officers, like Shimon has as well, is that he also -- he's successful at evading the surveillance state so far, right? I mean, and maybe they're honing in on him, but it is kind of remarkable that we're still talking about this man, given how public this has been. But one of the things that's slowing this process down is because it's so public.

The system is somewhat overwhelmed. People are calling in hints. They have this lead, they think they know the guy, whatever. And, in some ways, he's benefiting from that as well, right? In other words, this sort of perverse, see something, say something, that the NYPD, the FBI have to look at every clue, it's going to distract them from maybe real clues. And so it's just that the system is overwhelmed because of the surveillance and also because of the speed that information is coming in because there's so many photos or there's so much speculation.

BERSHAD: Which is common, it definitely gets -- the water gets clouded.

MATTINGLY: Yes, I mean, we're -- to paraphrase kind of the discussion before we went on air where it can get really messy until it's not anymore.

Shimon, if we could, I want to bring the gun back up again. Because I'm just -- as we watched the video, I remember watching the video, you were reporting it, we're talking as it was released in short thereafter, the professionalism, almost, of what we saw in that video was astonishing to me. What does this gun tell you and kind of its origin?

PROKUPECZ: So, it's interesting. Because when the police first came out in the hours after, and I'm glad that we're talking about this, because I do think some of this information is bad information that's out there. Because in the hours after this happens, the police are saying the gun jammed and malfunctioned. If you speak to gun experts and literally that night, I was getting inundated with text messages from friends who understand guns are saying this gun did not malfunction. It is meant to fire this way. And what they're not understanding is that this shooter expected this gun to malfunction or act in this way. It didn't malfunction. He knew how to move it back and rack it back. And that's why you see him, as he's firing, he's doing this to the gun.

ESPOSITO: It's because it's a single shot gun, right? It's not. It's not an automatic pistol. It's a covert weapon originally, and it grew out of that.

PROKUPECZ: I have to say, even today when I was asking the chief of detectives about this, he still would not confirm. He still said, oh, we're still trying to figure out what kind of gun it is, and we need to know more information. The bottom line is they don't have it. If they have it, obviously, it'll make everything much easier. I don't know if they're going to find it. You know, we'll see what's in this bag.

I think a guy who has planned for this, the way this guy has, there's no way that I can't see how that gun will be in that bag. He knew someone would find it eventually, I assume. So --

MATTINGLY: Yes. No, I mean, it's clearly something they're looking for. We'll see what actually happens.

Everyone stick around, a lot more to get to here. Moments away, catch a special edition of Laura Coates Live, Manhunt, The Search for the CEO killer. That's at 11:00 Eastern, right here on CNN.

But, first, when the internet outrage goes too far, the murder of a CEO provokes anger, and not at the shooter.

Plus, hold him, don't fold him. Pete Hagseth places his bet that he can get confirmed. New sound from his would be boss hints he may be right.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[22:15:00]

MATTINGLY: Welcome back. We want to continue the discussion about where the investigation stands, what our experts have been seeing in their reporting and their past lives in their own expertise.

Shimon, we were talking during the break about the decision to go via bus or the belief that he went to -- we know he went to a bus station, right? But we don't know -- he never left. Explain what's going on, because there's this assumption that he took a bus out of New York City, but there's no actual specific evidence that he did.

PROKUPECZ: No, there isn't. In fact, I spoke to someone right before we came on air, and they said that there's nothing right now to actually indicate he got on a bus. Again, they've been trying to review video. I mean, detectives are literally sitting in rooms for hours, hours and hours each day, just reviewing video. And they're doing that, but so far they have not seen anything conclusively to say, okay, yes, he got on this bus. All they know is, okay, we have video. He's going in, but we never see him come out. And that is what they're basing it on. It's not a witness. It's not something they know definitively. It's just this is what they believe and based on everything they have seen. I mean, the entire way that they've been piecing this together is through video. It's amazing. That's the only way that they've been able to figure anything out here. And that's what they're relying on.

ESPOSITO: It's all pictures.

MATTINGLY: Yes, that's what I was going to say. They've kind of built a mosaic to show, and I think we were showing kind of our version of it in the last block, of this is everything we've got, let's lay it out and try and piece it together.

ESPOSITO: And they are laying it out, and it's what Shimon said, they knew he came in by bus. But we don't know where he got on the bus that he came in on. It started in Atlanta.

MATTINGLY: Is that strange to you?

ESPOSITO: No, it's not strange. Greyhound bus, he is paying cash, no I.D. It's one of the reasons people ride Greyhound buses is a great deal of freedom and anonymity to come and go as you please.

[22:20:02]

So, he went into a bus terminal on the way out maybe. Maybe not. Maybe he's in the Bronx.

PROKUPECZ: You can also travel with a weapon, right? It's not like going through -- right? There's no metal detector. So, there's no indication right now that he dumped a weapon anywhere here. So, maybe, you know, I mean, who knows? Maybe he took it with him and maybe he came here with it. So, yes.

BERSHAD: It could have been in the bag. We still don't know the contents of the bag. You're getting a bag --

MATTINGLY: Is that strange to you? At least as last I heard, they had an --

BERSHAD: No, jump with that. But if I'm not a bad guy, I don't want to carry this gun on me and potentially get stopped. That's kind of my mindset. You know, if I get stopped for something minor, oh, here's this gun, hey, didn't I see you down by the Sheraton killing somebody? Probably not going to end well, you know? Your bad guys will tend to hang on to it. Well, I need this for my next crime. You know, a lot of just even the track for piecing it, we was just saying before. When we get him, we have to put that case together for court. If we grab him in another state, well, how do I know it's him?

MATTINGLY: Can I connect this to something that we were talking about last block in terms of the persona that this individual has taken on? And it has been remarkable, unsettling to watch the public response to what has happened here and just kind of caustic reaction to a father, to a human being.

KAYYEM: A part of the social media response. I mean, I think, you know, outside of social media, maybe everyone sort of just sees this as a cold blooded murder. Look, never -- if your tweet starts with assassination is bad but, you might want to rethink that tweet, right? I mean, in other words, and if your important social policy mission to change healthcare can only get traction because of an assassination, you might want to rethink your political strategy.

I am as liberal as the next person and I find this horrifying. Because if we are a society who thinks that we can get progressive change only through highlighting -- no one quite says it, but, you know, essentially highlighting that there might be a reason for the assassination that isn't somehow justified. We are no longer a civilized society. I really believe that. I feel quite strongly on it.

And people -- and the NYPD is getting in this too, so that it sort of fits this whole thing, like the big man, we're going after the man, you know, like the NYPD and healthcare. And I don't know the motivation of the person.

MATTINGLY: We should have some examples of what we're talking about here, things like, unfortunately, my condolences are out of network, prior authorization is required for thoughts and prayers. I can't even pretend to care. I hope he's looking up at us. When you make millions off the suffering of others, don't expect sympathy. This needs to be the new norm, eat the rich. I've seen dying patients get denied by insurance, makes me physically sick. I just can't feel sympathy for him because of all those patients and their families.

I think the thing I struggle with here is people are viscerally angry about insurance. And you can pull up the statistics. You know, percentage of people in the Gallup poll quality of health care coverage is excellent or good, 28 percent, had any problem with their insurance in the last year, 58 percent said they did. Insurance didn't cover or required a very high co-pay for a prescribed drug that people had to take, significant portion of people, the denial claims with the company that the CEO ran, high.

But --

GARDERE: Well, a lot of this is about grievance, right? We have a healthcare system that many people say is broken, an insurance system that many people feel that they're being ripped off. So, I think a lot of what we're seeing here is a pure psychological projection against this CEO who is now deceased and, in many ways, we're talking about not just grievance, but people feeling disaffected, disillusioned, angry, not just with the insurance companies, but this is about a class war, a culture war, people feeling now they are justified in expressing a lot of their anger and rage because that's what we're seeing out of this presidential election, out of the results, what's happening in society.

So, people are losing a lot of that empathy and feel it's okay to put these things on social media and to express these things. We shouldn't lose sight of the fact that people really do feel ripped off by many of these large corporations, but at the same time, to point at that one person. And, you know, this is a guy, you know, who has a wife, had a wife, two children, and so on.

[22:25:02]

So, in losing that empathy, I feel that this is not healthy for us at all to move in this direction and we really have to dial it back as to what the psychological ethos of all of this is about.

MATTINGLY: Yes, from a risk safety perspective, where does that put us in this moment?

ESPOSITO: Right. I mean, there's two thoughts came to mind. From a risk safety perspective, every corporate CEO who didn't have good security is going to stop and say, let's take another look. Why was he traveling alone? Let's take another look. From the perspective of empathy, what business do you feel most powerless in front of? And it's the insurance industry. So, you're seeing all of this commentary. And it's baseless. Somebody died. He's a father of two. But you understand their rage because they've never had a chance to express it. So, he did a bad thing, he's a bad guy, let's face it, he killed somebody, but it's put a spotlight on an industry that makes a lot of people feel powerless.

MATTINGLY: Does that complicate the work that law enforcement is engaged in right now?

BERSHAD: Absolutely not. It's still the act that we're trying to go after, you know? You can hate him, it could be, you know, another notorious killer, you committed a crime. Our job is to find you, bring you to justice and let the system play out. We don't get to pass.

I do wonder, though, just to add the lack of security for the gentleman. There were death threats or (INAUDIBLE), whoever it may be. I think a lot of people are sitting back at the table. And even if they want to waive it, I've done a lot of executive protection like, no, I'm good. That's a great story. Let's go together. You know, we're going to hold hands. You don't get that option. I got one job, you know, and this is it.

MATTINGLY: Yes. No, absolutely.

GARDERE: But if nothing else, I think what people will be talking about, to your point, what we need to do as far as insurance reform, enough with those horror stories, people being denied, it really is a debacle, and that has to be addressed in a more productive way.

MATTINGLY: Yes, it'll be interesting to see where this goes from here, hopefully in a more productive way certainly than we've seen on social media. Everyone, thanks so much for being here.

And just to note, Richard Esposito's new book, available now, Jamie Breslin, The Man Who Told the Truth.

And coming up, Donald Trump standing on business reiterating his support for one of his controversial picks. Will Senate Republicans follow his lead? We'll discuss up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[22:31:44]

MATTINGLY: Tonight, standing by his man, Donald Trump going full Tammy one-net, telling NBC's "Meet the Press" that he still supports Pete Hegseth to lead the Pentagon.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT-ELECT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (R): It looks like Pete is doing well now. I mean, people were a little bit concerned. He's a young guy with a tremendous track record, actually. He went to Princeton and went to Harvard. He was a good student at both, but he loves the military. And I think people are starting to see it. So, we'll be working on his nomination, along with a lot of others.

KRISTEN WELKER, "MEET THE PRESS" ANCHOR: Since you bring him up, do you still have confidence in Pete Hegseth?

TRUMP: Yes, I do. I really do. He's a very smart guy. I've known him through Fox, but I've known him for a long time. And he's basically a military guy. I mean, every time I talk to him, all he wants to talk about is the military. He's a military guy.

WELKER: Have you gotten assurances from senators that he's going to be confirmed?

TRUMP: No.

WELKER: Do you think he can make it?

TRUMP: No, I think he will, yes. I've had a lot of senators call me up saying he's fantastic.

WELKER: You don't drink yourself.

TRUMP: No.

WELKER: You've talked about how devastating drinking can be. How concerned are you that the person who you picked for this top job at the Defense Department, at least according to those who've worked with him, has struggled with drinking?

TRUMP: But I've spoken to people that know him very well, and they say he does not have a drinking problem.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MATTINGLY: My political panel joins me now. Errol, I want to start with you because over the course of the last 90 hours, Pete Hegseth had a pretty rough go of it. I think there are a lot of people predicting his demise. He had a very death spiral to your nomination vibe going for him Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday.

Kind of in the mind between that, the Truth Social Post from -- very strong Truth Social Post from Trump, J.D. Vance, as well. This is probably the best place he may have been in since the nomination. ERROL LOUIS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, that's right. It's not

looking like it's a freight train running in the wrong direction for this nominee. On the other hand, you know, we do have people like Senator Blumenthal saying, look, I've been privately told by 10 Republicans that they're just waiting for the right moment, and then they're going to send him packing.

There's reality, though, that we should also make sure is present in the conversation. And the reality is this is somebody whose qualifications very much need to be called into question, not just around alcohol abuse or alleged sexual misconduct, but around just sheer qualifications.

Has he ever run anything remotely as large as the American military? Is this the right person? Is this somebody who we should have really looked at very closely? I think those are the kind of questions that the senators are going to ask.

The political side, of course, the president and vice president-elect are going to put a lot of pressure on them, but in the end, their oath of office, I think, is going to be what makes the determination.

MATTINGLY: Can I ask you, to the point about kind of where senators are behind the scenes versus what they say publicly is not an unimportant element here in the sense of, my theory has been if he gets to the floor, he will get 50 votes because you know your party.

JOHN BRABENDER, GOP STRATEGIST AND MEDIA CONSULTANT: Well, look, I think a couple things have happened in the last 48 hours. I think one, Joni Ernst has actually moved a little bit.

MATTINGLY: Yes.

BRABENDER: If you look at her statement today versus her statements previously in a week, now it's like, well, let's learn more, you know, and that is a movement.

[22:35:00]

Number two, I think everybody has to remember, Trump is coming into this completely different than after he got elected in 2016. He has way more of an asset of people saying, America voted for him. They understood what they were voting for him. That's what they want. They want to see radical change in how government is run. I better go in all with this.

So, I think you also have that going on. Plus, Trump did not blink. You know, he did on Matt Gaetz, you know, on others where he said, look, we've got to make a change here. On this one, I think people are waiting to see how the president reacted. And as you already saw, the president said, look, I've asked around, I've talked about it. I think he's going to be a great nominee and I'm sticking with him.

NAYYERA HAQ, FORMER OBAMA WHITE HOUSE SENIOR DIRECTOR: Here's the challenge, and we've done many confirmations at various levels of government, is that when you're already dealing with the character challenges up front, we haven't even gotten to the policy questions or how we would actually run the military.

It's the country's largest workforce. And nearly 20 percent of it is women. This is the leader or potential leader of this institution that says women should not be serving the military. How are you going to unravel that? What does that do for your command and control? What does that do for recruitment at a time when the U.S. military is desperately looking for more people to join? Those policy questions, we haven't even gotten to those yet.

MATTINGLY: And I think that's why the Ernst movement today, which you astutely picked up on, she put out that she wants, she believes he deserves a hearing. That is an important step and an important signal. It's not a yes vote. But moving that ball forward is important.

What's interesting to me, to your point, and I've been very much of this mind, Trump told you what he was going to do and told you the types of people he wanted to nominate. Fine, totally accurate. I covered enough of his rallies.

Hegseth's issue is not that he's, right now, is not that he's not qualified or he's different or he's going to break everything apart. His issue is his personal actions that he did that in any other confirmation process, he'd be gone yesterday.

T.W. ARRIGHI, VICE PRESIDENT, PUSH DIGITAL GROUP: Yes, which is underscoring why I think Joni Ernst's comments today were so interesting but also, you got to also listen to the words of other senators -- Lindsey Graham, who's often a weathervane on a lot of these things, is feeling a lot more bullish on it.

Katie Brick came out very strongly endorsing him. He meets with Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski next week. That's going to be fascinating. But look, he's out there fighting. And Trump, I think, likes that. Matt Gaetz does not have a very good relationship with any senator.

That's why that was very short lived. And he's answering the questions fully. He's going to have to do more. But every day that moves forward, we get closer to an actual hearing. And that's the goal.

BRIAN STELTER, CNN CHIEF MEDIA ANALYST: Well, he threw out the rules and it worked, right? The first rule of confirmation about let's stay quiet, wait until they're hearing. And something changed dramatically about 48, 60 hours ago where Hegseth started speaking, his mom spoke out. All of his Fox friends spoke out.

I've spoken with several of his former fellow hosts and producers -- current producers of Fox. They have his back. They are defending him in a very aggressive way. And I think that's also helped shift the narrative a little bit.

HAQ: Which really should have been what you do up front, right? That's part of it. The idea of full-throated support from the person who's nominating you as the president. And then you have this conversation with reporters.

You bring out all of the surrogates and other people speak about you. By and large, Trump has nominated people and throw them out there and said, all right, you go figure it out. Can you make it work or not?

STELTER: Also, his friends are not denying that he likes to drink. His friends are not denying that he likes to party. That's interesting to me.

MATTINGLY: But to that point, I think this is kind of what I was getting at, which his base case of, I will acknowledge that I had, in the best case scenario of what's being described, consensual sex while drunk with a married woman while I had a new child in between. It's a mess.

STELTER: It's a mess. It is scandalous. Just -- it's scandalous except in any other environment except in 1925-24.

LOUIS: It would result in command discipline if you were an officer in the military that he's supposed to lead. I mean, let's be clear about it, right?

STELTER: But if the result of this election is nothing matters anymore and the rules don't matter, then --

LOUIS: Well, I don't know if it does. I mean, I remember when President George H.W. Bush tried to make John Tower his Secretary of Defense. Similar accusations. Womanizing, alcoholism, defense contracts that were maybe a little bit dodgy and so forth.

And what the Senate did was just draw it out. They had FBI actually doing background checks. And it just went on week after week after week. And it became clear that he didn't have the support. They forced it to a vote anyway. And he was not approved.

BRABENDER: Here's one thing. This president has done complete paradigmship on how he makes picks. He was very clear. I remember riding with him on his plane one night, coming back from Michigan. And he said, you know, when I got elected, I had only been to Washington, D.C. like nine or ten times in my life.

UNKNOWN: Right.

BRABENDER: And I was dependent upon people I barely knew telling me to hire other people I didn't know. And I found out that I either didn't like them, didn't trust them, or they weren't as good as everybody told me. Now, I'm going to hire people I know I trust, I believe are going to do what I want to do. And frankly, he's earned that right, in my opinion.

HAQ: I mean, that's about a presidency that is about one person and one person only, rather than institutions and campaigning, which we've all done plenty of, is fundamentally different than governing.

[22:40:00]

HAQ: Governing is about maintaining, actually, some of the institutions, like the strength of the military, the strength of our, you know, our health care, our food supply, all of those. And you need people there who actually know what they're doing in those situations. ARRIGHI: Well, I want to just make a quick, quick point. The

infidelities and such, obviously a mess, and he will have to answer for that. We can go through American history, name our presidents who've been quite unfaithful to their spouses. But let's also go to the experience thing.

The longest-serving Secretary of Defense in our nation's history never even served in uniform. John McNamara. Robert F. Kennedy Sr. He was the 35-year-old brother of the president. He's attorney general. So, I think we --

HAQ: That was also highly controversial at the time.

ARRIGHI: Sure, but now we laud him as some giant. So, I would really pump the brakes when we sort of make this commentary. Pete Hegseth is a bright guy. I know a lot of people who know him personally who sing his praises.

He has been very outspoken about the coming, you know, conflicts with China, putting us on a war footing that, in supporting our war fighters. And I think that's music to a lot of people's ears, especially President Trump.

MATTINGLY: To be clear, I think a hearing would be great to A, go through all of the policy differences. But B, get at the issues of this is why Trump won, this is what he said he was going to do, let's lay that out. It's just wild that we're at this point, given --

BRABENDER: Yes, but let's be clear. It's not like he's picking somebody that was on season two of "The Apprentice". I mean, you know --

ARRIGHI: They still got some picks left.

BRABENDER: But I'm saying it's almost like, yes, yes, well, yes. But you know, these people all have a reason why they are there that they are credible. Now, you may dislike them. You may say policy-wise, I don't agree with them, but they're not like he's just picking looted.

HAQ: OK, so they're good on TV.

LOUIS: Why not have FBI checks then? And why insist that they're being --

STELTER: They said they are doing the FBI checks.

HAQ: They are all consistently very good at presenting on television, right? Convincing messages, you know, latching onto a narrative and going to the idea that Americans have lost touch and trust in government institutions. I get that. It's a great reason and all government officials should be better at communicating.

That does not mean that because you tangentially touched a department for part of your life, that you should suddenly be in charge of running it, let alone running it in a fashion that potentially could dismiss a fifth of the workforce arbitrarily. MATTINGLY: Everybody, stand by. We've got a lot more to get to. Up

next, the clock is ticking for TikTok, as the popular social media app tries to avoid a U.S. ban. We're going to discuss, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MATTINGLY: Tonight, TikTok may be facing a death sentence. A federal court upheld a new law that may banish the app from all platforms here in the U.S., unless the company's Chinese owners can find a new buyer. It's a day one decision for Donald Trump, who is going to sway both ways in the end, in the wind when it comes to this issue.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: We're looking at TikTok. We may be banning TikTok. We may be doing some other things. There are a couple of options. But a lot of things are happening. So, we'll see what happens.

UNKNOWN: What do you think? TikTok?

TRUMP: This man's with TikTok. We love TikTok. I'm going to save TikTok. Biden wants to get rid of TikTok. You know why? Because he has no idea. He has no idea what the hell he's doing.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MATTINGLY: Every politician in America was watching that, being like, I wish I could have that ability to completely --180. You worked on this issue on Capitol Hill. My question is actually a technical one. Does he - it's actually not a day one thing for him. It's a day minus one. It's a January 19th, one day before the inauguration came. Can he do something here?

HAQ: Really hard for him, especially with this potentially not going higher up to the Supreme Court. This is the legislation was very carefully written to be a forced divestment, meaning TikTok, the parent company has a choice. They can sell it to a U.S. owner, which is similar to the other platforms that exist, social media platforms, or they lose access to, you know, Apple Store and all the others.

The idea being that the Chinese Communist Party, which has people directly on the board of the parent company, should not have direct access to our location data, our phone numbers, our geolocation, all of that data, that TikTok, first and foremost, compared to the other companies, they were first to the short form video. There's a lot of American data there that they have not proven an ability to keep their hands off of.

MATTINGLY: Brian, when the legislation was moving, the blowback was super intense. It actually worked against them on some level, if I recall correctly. I mean, we've seen some of it today -- fierce anger, deep, deep dedication to this app and what it produces.

STELTER: Yes, at the same time, Meta's stock rose today. That's the owner of Facebook, right? Because all the other social networks will benefit. TikTok's actually banned. It seems to me, though, this is one of those cases of fighting the last proverbial war, you know, three, four, five years behind. Chinese-owned firms will find other ways to go viral, find other ways to make apps that are super successful in the U.S.

And meanwhile, every day or every week or every month, TikTok is still around in the U.S. Americans just get more and more addicted to it, not just to TikTok, but to the form that it, you know, that format of vertical video right, right to your face. That's going to be with us regardless of TikTok.

ARRIGHI: Yes -- no. And I would be surprised if Elon Musk bought Vine back, if we remember that.

STELTER: Oh, what a great throwback reference.

ARIGHI: Yes, we love the Vines. We did it for the Vine. But no, look, I think you hit the nail on the head. Chinese Communist Party not only has access to that data or can have access, but not only that, the algorithm and what it feeds us. Look, I love the Costco guys as much as anybody.

[22:50:00]

They get a big boom. But the problem is, it changes the chemical make- up of our brain when we see certain things.

STELTER: It's true.

ARRIGHI: And there are studies that people are getting fed information and it's impossible to track exactly who's making these calls at TikTok.

STELTER: And that's my point. That's my point.

ARRIGHI: The American government needs to put their foot down and enforce it.

STELTER: If it's not TikTok, it'll be something else.

LOUIS: And the problem is not that it's foreign ownership in charge of this very aggressive, very seductive algorithm. The fact is that it's there. It's not age-gated. It's aimed at our kids. They're sucking up all kinds of data. And whether you're doing it for a corporate purpose or for a nefarious foreign political purpose, in some ways doesn't matter.

Who owns it, I think, is very important. But what they do with it and whether or not they're going to try and get some control over it. There's no legislation control any of this regardless of who owns the platform.

HAQ: Also the part of that is a broader tech challenge of data privacy and what kind of regulation. This is not -- we're not expecting this to be a pro-regulation administration that's part of why this legislation was dated to be in effect the day before the inauguration. But the other challenge we see is that the Chinese communist party had

access to grinder and had used their data to, you know, bully journalists about their -- their own personal habits. So, there's evidence there.

And in 2018, they sold it to an American company. There's plenty of American binders lining up. If TikTok is going to survive in America, which it can, it's a very easy choice for ByteDance to just divest, make a ton of money that way and share the algorithm with an American owner.

ARRIGHI: I am optimistic that people like the incoming Secretary of State Marco Rubio and the team Trump's putting around him are going to continue to put the pressure on China. Because you're right, there will be other stuff, but we need a blanket rule in this country that we need to go after these Chinese companies that are influencing our people.

BRABENDER: The thing I will tell you, the campaign and President Trump went on TikTok. The campaign was on TikTok. And before that happened, there was the requirement by the president that we have proof that all the things TikTok was told said they would do as far as those servers not being able to be accessed, all these things happening.

There were many, many meetings where that did have to be proven to people much smarter than I am technologically within the campaign. And you went and done it. But I think Brian made the most important point. You can get rid of TikTok. It's going to be called something else and somebody else going to -- the platform concept is not going to go away.

STELTER: And regardless of the owner, what are these apps doing to our brains? Sorry to give everybody a nightmare. We all need to sleep tonight, but --

HAQ: There are 170 million American users on TikTok, right? About 40 percent of those users get their news just on TikTok. That's several million people. There is no universe in the 1980s in which we would have allowed the Soviet Union to own the equivalent access of a broadcasting network to deliver news to people. Now, this is, the legislation again was not written, anything dealing with content or first-memory, but that's a national security concern.

MATTINGLY: Yes, it's an important point. All right, everyone stay with me. Next, the panel gives us their night caps including the end of an era and the latest controversy over yacht rock.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[22:57:44]

MATTINGLY: We're back and it's time for the "NewsNight" cap. You each have 30 seconds to say your piece. Errol, you're about to lead off.

LOUIS: There's a 23-year-old rapper named Dave Blunt. He's been on stage recently in Chicago. He is 500 pounds. He was performing with an oxygen tank. It is so dangerous. It is so disturbing. I almost want to tell some of the young kids, there were groups called, you know, the Fat Boys and Heavy D. There was a rapper who performed under the name Fat Man Scoop who died on stage just earlier this summer.

It is a very serious problem. They should either write some morals clauses into the labels or the venue should refuse to put this stuff out in front of people. Very disturbing, something for people to pay attention to.

MATTINGLY: T.W.

ARRIGHI: It's history time, America. Yesterday, we celebrated the birthday of our eighth president, Martin Van Buren. And unless you're in the Van Buren boys game from Seinfeld, you probably don't know much about him.

He was not only the only president to learn English as a second language, but he's likely the source of the term OK. It stood for old Kinderhook, his nickname in his hometown, and his staff in the press would put OK when something was approved by the president. So, raise one of his beloved glasses of whiskey to his honor tonight.

STELTER: OK.

HAQ: OK.

MATTINGLY: Nayyera.

HAQ: It's me. Hi. August just slipped away into a moment of time tonight on a Friday night beneath the stars. It is the end of an era. Taylor Swift's last concert after 152 shows, five continents. I don't know how it gets better than this for Taylor fans. So, just capture it, remember it, and long live the Eras tour.

MATTINGLY: John, you're up.

BRABENDER: In the rough and tumble world of Yacht Rock controversy this week, it was exposed on CNN and "Variety" that in a secret documentary that was being made, there was a secret phone call released where they had asked Steely Dan, Donald Fagan from Steely Dan, to participate where he basically very quickly told them in very colorful worlds, absolutely not. And it became somewhat of a controversy whether Steely Dan is or is not Yacht Rock.

And I just want to stand up for them and say, thank God they did this. They are not Yacht Rock. They've been in the Hall of Fame since 2010, I think it is, and they're album-oriented rock. And thank God they did this.

HAQ: So, throw them off the boat.

[23:00:00]

MATTINGLY: Close the show, bro.

UNKNOWN: Throw them off. STELTER: Yes, exactly. All right, a plea, OK, on behalf of parents everywhere, we've got a rain in this elf on the shelf phenomenon. For those who don't know what it is, don't Google it. For parents who know, this is these elves. They're pulling pranks. They sneak around your house at night.

Somebody's got to go out and move them around the house. I have to hide these elf toys for 18 more days, Phil. I don't know what I'm going to do, although we were talking about TikTok earlier. The one great thing about social media is you can find great ideas for pranks on Instagram. Phil, do you have this problem?

MATTINGLY: Plus one, ban the elf.

STELTER: Ban the elf.

MATTINGLY: Everyone, thank you guys very much and thank you for watching "NewsNight". "Laura Coates Live" starts right now.