Return to Transcripts main page
CNN NewsNight with Abby Phillip
Congress, Harris Certify Trump's Victory On January 6th; Ex- Proud Boy Chief, Jailed Over Jan. 6th, Asks Trump For Pardon; Trump Muses About U.S. Taking Over Greenland And Canada; "The Washington Post" Tells Ann Telnaes Her Depiction Of Bezos And Other Tech Titans Bowing At The Altar Of Trump Wasn't Worth Publishing; Trump's Lawyers Review Jack Smith's Special Counsel Report. Aired 10-11p ET
Aired January 06, 2025 - 22:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[22:00:00]
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ABBY PHILLIP, CNN HOST (voice over): Tonight, a solemn duty.
KAMALA HARRIS, U.S. VICE PRESIDENT: The votes for president of the United States are as follows.
PHILLIP: A stinging reminder of her defeat, Kamala Harris certifies Donald Trump's win and reminds the country of how things are supposed to work.
HARRIS: And what the American people should be able to take for granted.
PHILLIP: Plus, deny and dodge. Chuck Schumer says no, Democrats didn't B.S. the country about Joe Biden's mental fitness.
Also, power versus the press.
The Washington Post cuts a cartoon about its owner and the president- elect, prompting a Pulitzer winner to quit.
And Church and State, the pope sends a progressive and Trump antagonist to Washington, just in time for the Trump inauguration.
Live at the table, Van Jones, Scott Jennings, S.E. Cupp and Ashley Allison. Americans with different perspectives aren't talking to each other, but here, they do.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
PHILLIP (on camera): Good evening. I'm Abby Phillip in New York.
Let's get right to what America is talking about, now versus then. Today, January 6th played out as intended with the vice president of the United States certifying the election results. No violence, no injured police officers, no deaths, no near fatal blows to American democracy. Today, unlike four years ago, the president of the United States didn't marshal a mob and then point them toward the Capitol. Today, unlike then, the outgoing administration listened to the will of the voters. Today, unlike then, the loser of the election didn't urge their supporters to fight like hell. Today, Kamala Harris said this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HARRIS: It was about what should be the norm and what the American people should be able to take for granted, which is that one of the most important pillars of our democracy is that there will be a peaceful transfer of power.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Joining us in the fifth seat at the table, CNN Senior Political Commentator Adam Kinzinger. He's a former Republican congressman who was a member of the House on January 6th and a member of the January 6th committee.
Just talk about Kamala Harris for a second there, Van Jones. I mean, she had the unenviable job today of certifying an election for a man that she doesn't like very much.
VAN JONES, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, I mean, whether she likes him or not, she could have been certifying herself. I mean, it's like where she loved the guy, doesn't like the guy. You know, she tried to become president of the United States. She had a hundred days to do it. The ball had been dropped, she picked it up. And so it's got to be -- it's got to sting. But class act, she did what she had to do, she put the country first, she did a good job, and it shouldn't be remarkable except that the guy that she was certifying couldn't find himself to do it four years ago.
And four years ago, you know, we were sitting here watching this whole thing go down, watching the Capitol be sacked, watching the police officers be beaten up, and we thought that was -- and then the question I asked then, is this the end of something, or the beginning of something? It wasn't. Was this a death rattle of a politics that had been defeated and was being ushered off the stage, or was it the beginning of something? Unfortunately, it turned out it was the beginning of something.
PHILLIP: Yes. I mean, that very question is really where we are as a country. Are we in the middle of the thing? And is the new thing going to be something that acts as if January 6th wasn't important? Here's the National Review saying January 6th is over. The political force of the 2020 election contest and the Capitol riot are spent. Do you think there's some truth to that?
ADAM KINZINGER, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yes. I mean, look, I think I want to move on past January 6th too, right? America made a decision. That doesn't mean that this isn't a legitimate issue to continue to bring up sometimes. It doesn't mean that we can never talk about this again. And I also think it doesn't mean that history is not going to accurately reflect what happened. It will. Donald Trump is president right now. He won, okay? It wasn't the mandate they say it is. But regardless, he's not going to come out of office in four years, more popular than he is today. No president ever does. So, what happens then? And are people going to look back and say, yes, you know. January 6, four years ago, or eight years ago at that time really was a serious issue.
[22:05:02]
And so I think history is going to look at this very clear-eyed.
But I also think unless Donald Trump himself, who has been obsessing about January 6th and obsessing about retribution, if he himself keeps bringing it up, I think, yes. America's ready to talk about other things.
JONES: Well, if he pardons a bunch of people, we'll have to talk about it then. And he seems like he plans to. So, you know, this is going to rattle around in the garbage disposal for a while.
PHILLIP: Meanwhile there is this. This is a congressman from Georgia, Mike Collins, who is currently serving. And here's what he says. On this day in 2021, thousands of peaceful grandmothers gathered in Washington, D.C., to take a self-guided, albeit unauthorized, tour of the United States Capitol building. That was just a little bit of what was a pretty wild statement on X.
Scott, I mean, as we've talked at length, look the American people, yes, they elected Donald Trump, but what he wrote there is not true.
SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yes. Some people committed violent acts, broke windows and those people should be held accountable for that. I do think it's possible that some people were swept up in prosecutions for doing far less. And so I don't know that it's necessarily out of bounds to look at those people if they were overcharged.
You know, on this Harris business, I think before we canonized St. Kamala here on the high holy day of January 6, let's remember the Electoral Count Reform Act of 2022 makes it perfectly clear that the vice president has nothing but purely ministerial duties on this day. She didn't actually certify the results of the election that's done by the voters.
JONES: And it was clear as day, four years ago as well, but because of the --
PHILLIP: Well, that's the thing. I mean, nobody's trying to canonize her. The same thing was true for --
JENNINGS: Oh, they're not? I mean, she put out a video trying to canonize herself.
PHILLIP: I mean, she was actually just saying it's unremarkable. Well, that's true.
JONES: That's the opposite of Kevin --
JENNINGS: I want to actually congratulate the Democrats today. This is the first election since 1980 --
KINZINGER: He's doing this again.
JENNINGS: This is the first election since 1988 that a Republican won and Democrats did not try to overturn the results on the floor of the Congress. So, congratulations, Democrats.
PHILLIP: I'm only interrupting you because we've heard this before.
JENNINGS: But we've heard the truth before, but I thought it was worth repeating.
PHILLIP: Here's the thing. You know, parliamentary disputes.
JENNINGS: There were not parliamentary disputes.
PHILLIP: Mr. Speaker, a point of order.
JENNINGS: No, that's not what happened. They tried to stop the counting of the votes.
PHILLIP: It's not the same thing as people taking flagpoles and taking weapons and bursting into the Capitol to try to stop or delay or obstruct the certification of election. That has never happened before.
S.E. CUPP, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I heard you doing this earlier today and I thought by tonight maybe you'd sort of give this one up. I get what you're trying to do here and it's a hard job you have, but there is no comparison. There is no comparison. And as Adam says, history will remember this correctly for several reasons. There are thousands of videos of what happened on that day. There are videos that the insurrectionists themselves took. There are C.C. videos, there are reporter videos, news cameras, videos inside the Capitol, outside the Capitol. We know exactly what happened.
So, to the Mike Collins of the world, all I would say is do you want to be on the right side of this in the history books or do you want to be the villain in this story? Because in a hundred years, your great, great grandkids are going to know you as the wrong side of this issue, not the right side. And how is that going to feel? Because you can whitewash it as much as you want in the moment. There is no confusion, none, as to what happened. And it is not the same as someone on the House floor raising their hand and saying, I have a question about this vote.
JENNINGS: That's not what happened on the House floor. They tried to stop the counting of the electoral votes in every election.
PHILLIP: Wait, no. Wait. Scott --
KINZINGER: I was there, man, so --
PHILLIP: When Al Gore certified the election, he did not even allow them to make the point of order. It was out of order.
(CROSSTALKS)
ASHLEY ALLISON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: This is why we probably won't be able to move on, on January 6th. You're my friend but I know you're smarter than that. I know that you're smarter than comparing what happened --
JENNINGS: What do you mean? The country has already moved on.
ALLISON: No.
JENNINGS: It's everybody today that's having a meltdown that hasn't moved on.
CUPP: Trump keeps bringing it up.
ALLISON: No, we're not having a meltdown. We watched the vice president do her job, just as we had to wait 14 hours, but nonetheless watched Mike Pence do his job, and just as we commended Mike Pence for having the courage to stand up to Donald Trump. It takes a -- when people lose, whether you're a child or an adult, it's hard to lose. That's why you don't want to be a loser.
PHILLIP: That's why Donald Trump couldn't do it.
ALLISON: That's why we actually are here, is because he couldn't be an adult. He couldn't stand up and say, you know what? The country is bigger than me. The voters decided four years ago. And today he still hasn't done it.
Now, you can try and compare 2000 and 2004 and -- but that's not the same. And you can -- I know deep down inside that you also know that what happened on January 6th, we have never seen anything like that in our lifetime, and God hopes we never do, and that was not what happened --
[22:10:02]
JONES: We can just -- hold on a minute. I do want to say, I remember 2000, and I remember Al Gore going through that process of trying to get a recount. And I remember the Supreme Court stopping the count. We're 287 votes down, I think. And I remember Al Gore doing something extraordinary. He gave a concession speech.
It is 100 percent appropriate to fight as long as you can. I have no problem with that, to go to Supreme Court, I have no problem with that. But once the system makes a determination, you make the concession speech. The problem was not that Donald Trump kept fighting. The problem was that after you had 60 court votes, and he's never, to this day, has never given a concession speech, and that's the damage. That's the damage.
PHILLIP: And even when the violence was unfolding, he said, this election was stolen from us. He literally said that, as officers were being beaten. The question of pardons has come up and it's pretty clear from the reporting that Trump is not just considering them, but considering pretty sweeping pardons. One of the people looking for a pardon, asking the Trump folks for it is Enrique Tarrio. He was sentenced to 22 years for seditious conspiracy for some of the most broad ranging charges against people who were involved in not necessarily breaking the windows, but in organizing some of the violence that occurred.
If he pardons Enrique Tarrio, what do you think is going to be the consequence of that?
KINZINGER: Well, I mean, it's obvious, he has no real belief in the rule of law at that point. I mean, it's just like, go out, break the law. I'll pardon you. And that's just political violence. I mean, that's what we're going to do when he pardons all these people, he's going to pardon anyway. So, I think it sends a bad message.
I'm not convinced he'll pardon Tarrio. I'll say that. I actually wouldn't be surprised if he commutes his sentence. It keeps the conviction which don't let people believe that that's anything -- you know, that is a pardon, basically, because this guy's going to go still be a Proud Boy then.
So, look, it's awful, but, you know, it's going to be four years of awful, probably. I hope I'm wrong.
PHILLIP: Should he pardon him?
JENNINGS: I don't condone the pardoning or commuting the sentences of people who committed violent acts. And I have never denied what happened on January the 6th was bad. People who committed violent acts or assaulted police officers should face the consequences of their actions. So, no, I'm not for --
PHILLIP: By the way, that's hundreds of people.
JENNINGS: I'm not for mass pardons and commutations of people who committed violent acts. I do think there may have been people swept up in prosecutions who did not necessarily commit violent acts and perhaps were overcharged or oversentenced. I don't have a problem with looking at that. But, no, I'm not -- look I didn't like it when Joe Biden commuted the sentences of all these people who committed all these heinous acts that got him the death penalty the other day. So, I'm generally for punishing people who commit violence.
CUPP: But even more than that, like, over the course of this election, I interviewed hundreds of voters. Not one told me. I'm voting for Donald Trump because I want him to pardon Jan. 6th insurrectionists. It's not why he was sent there. It's not why Republicans won the way they did. Voters were really clear about what they want Trump to do. It's fix the economy, close the border, and make their town safer.
So, this other stuff, like ending birthright citizenship and pardon, this is meat for the base, but it is not why he got a second chance. And Republicans and Trump would be smart to remember why they were sent to Washington. PHILLIP: Adam Kinzinger, thank you very much for joining us. Everyone else, stick around.
Coming up next, moments ago, Donald Trump is adding another country to his wish list, saying that his son is going to travel to Greenland in the hopes of the U.S. acquiring it. This as he muses about the U.S., quote, merging with Canada. Yes, really. We're going to talk about it.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:15:00]
PHILLIP: Tonight, a friendly visit or checking the goods before you buy. President-elect Trump confirming that his son, Don Jr., will be visiting Greenland, saying he hears people there are MAGA and calling for it to become American. The post ends, make Greenland great again. This follows his musings of merging with Canada today after Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced he's going to step down.
Trudeau has been deeply unpopular in Canada for months now for multiple reasons, but to President-elect Trump, because of one reason, his tariff threat. He trolled Trudeau and called for Canada, which is, by the way, larger than the United States to become the 51st state.
S.E., this could be funny if it weren't something that Trump keeps talking about. I mean, what do you think is going on here?
CUPP: I've not heard that Greenland is MAGA. That would be very surprising for me to learn. But, listen, I'd love to acquire Canada too. Doesn't mean I can't, doesn't mean I will. In fact, the last time a country peacefully acquired another country was in 1853 in the Gadsden Purchase, when we purchased territory from Mexico, and the peacefully part is negotiable. Because, usually, we don't go around peacefully acquiring sovereign countries, including, and especially, giant ones, like Canada that are doing just fine without us.
So --
JONES: Are they?
JENNINGS: I don't know. I mean, I don't know how well they're doing. They're throwing out their prime minister. And I don't know if they're doing well or not.
CUPP: Do you think they need Trump to buy them?
(CROSSTALKS)
JENNINGS: Acquire us?
JONES: Yes, we just got rid of our president.
PHILLIP: If they're not your prime minister is the reason that they're not doing well.
JENNINGS: I don't know. I mean, people just seem unhappy to me. JONES: Can I say something?
CUPP: This is a troll. This is a troll.
JONES: I don't understand why anybody's mad at Trump about this. I'm serious. If Trump wants for Canada to become the 51st country, that would be a huge blue state.
[22:20:04]
JENNINGS: Yes.
JONES: A huge blue state. I would be --
JENNINGS: Retracting my --
JONES: Exactly, like I don't think that Trump has thought this through.
First of all, it would be wonderful to have a massive blue state. They have an amazing healthcare system. It would be wonderful for us to -- listen, if Canada wants to come here and rescue us, I am more than happy to work with --
JENNINGS: Rescue us?
ALLISON: They would make Canada like D.C., taxation without any representation. So, they would figure out a way to bring it.
PHILLIP: So, Kevin O'Leary, who has been on this show, Mr. Wonderful, if you will, he has this proposal. Here's how he laid it out.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KEVIN O'LEARY, CHAIRMAN, O'LEARY VENTURES AND INVESTOR, SHARK TANK: Number one was integrating Canada towards a North American union for greater strength, just period. The world's a difficult place these days, and most Canadians would like to look at that opportunity without giving up their sovereignty. So, low hanging fruit would be combined currency, for example, combining the Bank of Canada with the Fed, things like that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUPP: Listen, on their money, they've got hockey players. Okay, they're not doing our money.
ALLISON: What are we doing?
(CROSSTALKS)
ALLISON: Like what is happening? Okay, like, what is happening, Abby?
PHILLIP: One of the big questions is --
JENNINGS: We have Alaska, we have the -- I mean, we're already basically around them. I mean, and we just --
PHILLIP: I think one of the questions, though, and it's a serious question, honestly, with Trump, okay, at this point, I mean, is it really smart to just be like, ah, he's just joking?
ALLISON: I know. That's what I'm like. It's like you think it's a joke and then -- but it's Trump, you know what I mean? So, like I don't want to just like take things he's saying as a whim or --
PHILLIP: And there's a lot of people around him who are whispering in his ear, Mr. President, you know?
ALLISON: And so your earlier point, S.E., I was like, I just am not sure that's what people went to the ballot box for on November 5th. And I want to just caution people not to get lost in these distractions as serious business is about to take place when Donald Trump becomes the election and we're about to have Senate confirmations.
And so we can, you know, talk about Canada, but like that's not -- well you should never -- I feel like I can never say never anymore because Donald Trump is a reelected president, but it's likely not going to happen. And so if the country is so bad off, like why doesn't he actually focus on domestic issues?
CUPP: Let me just say, there's a moment at which Scott was right and Van was wrong. Go with me for this.
JONES: Okay.
CUPP: Canada, I don't know, is all that blue right now. Canada, to your point, was very, very upset. And what happened was very similar to what happened here. Back in April, there was a poll, and a majority, two thirds of Canadians, said they did not feel like the economy was improving and did not feel like their lives were getting better. That very same month, that should have been a canary in the coal mine for Justin Trudeau, that very same month, Justin Trudeau goes on a media blitz handling his economic policies as making everyone's lives better and blaming irrational populism for his lack of popularity. If that sounds familiar, it should.
And I don't know how Blue Canadians are. They are very upset about inflation and immigration as well.
JONES: That's a global --
CUPP: That doesn't mean Trump gets to buy them.
JONES: Hold on a second. That's a global phenomenon. And Trudeau is now out the door, but the average Canadian, even the average Canadian conservative is more liberal than most Americans. Like I've spent a little bit of time in Canada, so I just want you guys to know, except for Ontario, it is very, very blue up there. And Pierre, who's like the kind of Trumpian candidate, he will almost certainly win. They do some right wing stuff. But please do not be mistaken to think that Canadians are to the right of the United States or not. CUPP: They're not.
PHILLIP: Let's call him an American president, right? He's about to be president, he's doing things like this, throwing up this fake A.I. image of him with a Canadian flag standing over what I believe is a photo of like the Swiss Alps or something.
CUPP: That's the Matterhorn.
PHILLIP: Like, I mean, does that kind of erode any kind of seriousness about Trump, what he says, what he means, what he's really going to do? I mean, even the fact that Don Jr. is going to Greenland --
JONES: I want to buy Greenland, though.
JENNINGS: Yes.
PHILLIP: I mean, look, everybody would like to buy Greenland, but are we going to take it by force?
JENNINGS: I don't know. We could. There's not that many people there. But I don't think we should have to. And here's why we should want it. They got rare earth minerals. We already have some kind of a space base there. And it would fortify us against the Russians.
This is -- I mean, Trump's a wheeler dealer. Make an offer to the Denmark and see what they have to say.
PHILLIP: How much are we willing to pay?
JENNINGS: I don't know. How much could it possibly? I mean, people pooh-poohed buying Alaska and it turned out fine.
JONES: I mean, look, I --
JENNINGS: I mean, they called it Steward's Folly. They were mad about it then. And look what, it's great. We got all the --
PHILLIP: So, now we're going to just hand over a big old check to Denmark.
JONES: Just to be serious for one second, there is a --
[22:25:00]
PHILLIP: Totally serious.
JENNINGS: Man, you don't need to show that off.
JONES: No. But there is a strategic problem that we have both geopolitically and when it comes to critical minerals. Because as the Arctic thaws out, you've got a bunch of sea routes that are up there. There's going to be a lot of geostrategic competition in that part of the world. So, Greenland is going to become more important. Whether we buy it or take it is not the issue. The issue is, that has not been important to us in the past and it will be in the future. PHILLIP: Respectfully, I think whether we buy it or take it, very important. I mean, we could also develop a relationship.
(CROSSTALKS)
JENNIGNS: But we have a relationship with Denmark.
CUPP: Deals, trade deals?
JENNINGS: And they're our friends, but friends make deals all the time. I wouldn't pooh-pooh this idea. I'm with Van. I like the rare earth mineral.
PHILLIP: All right, you all. Everyone hang tight.
Coming up next, new fears of censorship as a Pulitzer winner quits The Washington Post after her cartoon is killed. Another special guest is joining us in our fifth seat.
Plus, see what happened when Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer was confronted about whether he misled Americans about Biden's mental acuity.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:30:33]
PHILLIP: Tonight, the cartoon at the center of a new controversy, this, to one Pulitzer Prize winner, was worth quitting over. "The Washington Post" told Ann Telnaes that her depiction of post owner Jeff Bezos and other tech titans bowing at the altar of Trump wasn't worth publishing.
The cartoonist says the decision left her with no choice but to resign and that she couldn't stay quiet while Bezos tries, quote, "to get in the good graces of an autocrat in waiting". "The Post" says the decision was more kill than anything else, explaining that the paper shelved that cartoon because it has already published multiple columns about the too cozy for comfort relationship between Bezos and the incoming administration.
Joining us at the table is CNN politics and media and business reporter Hadas Gold. So, Hadas, this is the latest in a lot of drama from my former newspaper, "The Washington Post". They're losing a ton of reporters. They're losing a ton of subscribers. And now, this really specific allegation. What is going on here?
HADAS GOLD, CNN MEDIA CORRESPONDENT: Look, we don't have any evidence this was Jeff Bezos saying, don't publish this cartoon. We do have the editorial page editor saying this was more -- this was the only bias was against repetition, not politics. But Ann does say that she had never before had a cartoon killed, just outright killed in this fashion. And that is why she chose to resign.
Now, in a way, this is kind of having the Streisand effect. Because honestly, if they had just let the cartoon run, I doubt any of us would even be talking about it. But because they did kill the cartoon and because she decided to come out with this big statement, here we are all talking about this. And it's adding to this long list of a very tough year for "The Washington Post" -- lost more than 250,000 subscribers. That's the last we heard from "NPR".
Losing a very, very big string of high -- high-profile reporters. And, you know, honestly, I have to tell you, just before I came on, I want to check if the democracy dies in darkness slogan is actually still on their front page. Because for a second I was like, wait, is it still there? It is still on the front page?
But there are people within "The Washington Post" who they themselves wonder how much longer that slogan that came about in the 20-teens and the height of the sort of "Washington Post" versus "New York Times" reporting on the Trump administration, how much longer that slogan will actually last for.
PHILLIP: And by the way, I mean, you know, this is no knock at Ann's cartoon but it's not an especially provocative cartoon. I mean, it's actually pretty standard of the genre, and it's from the left, but she's an editorial cartoonist. That's what she's supposed to do.
CUPP: Well, and because -- because Ann is a cartoonist, it made me immediately think of Charlie Hebdo, of course, and Charlie Hebdo, the French satirical publication, was attacked three times in three different terrorist attacks, including a firebombing, including a terrorist attack that killed 12 people. And it survives today.
And "The Washington Post" kills a cartoon that is lightly unflattering to its owner. Charlie Hebdo survived for that. I fear that the memory of courageous journalism is dying. Because if a publication like "Washington Post", which helped invent political courage, journalistic courage, is bowing so easily and then calling it, oh, it's just repetitive. I worry that the courage that journalists have shown repeatedly over history is dying -- dying in darkness.
ALLISON: I don't know if it's dying but the institutions that may be used to house them could be really being pressure tested right now. Because I think quitting is a sign of courage. And I think what we all saw this election cycle is that people are actually getting their news in different ways. They are using social media platforms. They, you know, the migration from X to Blue Sky and people having hundreds of thousands of followers now might have more readers than some colleges.
CUPP: But that's a different thing. You're right, but that's a different thing than an institution standing by something that might be politically dangerous for them.
ALLISON: That's true.
PHILLIP: But perhaps, more to the point, I mean, I think the undercurrent here is the influence of the ownership.
CUPP: Yes.
PHILLIP: That for profit reasons -- ALLISON: Yes.
PHILLIP: -- the direction of the paper is changing, the journalism is being influenced.
CUPP: Yes.
PHILLIP: That's what's really concerning a lot of people.
GOLD: Well, I think there's sort of three strains of fears that we hear from a lot of people in the media right now.
[22:35:03]
One is the fear that their owners are making these business decisions because they have other business interests -- Jeff Bezos, the owner of the "L.A. Times", all of these places have other business interests that they need to kind of be in the good graces of the next incoming Trump administration if they want to care about those businesses.
There's also, of course, fear, increasing fear about lawsuits. We've already seen ABC, of course, pay out $16 million to Donald Trump. There has been threats of further defamation lawsuits. And also, there is actually a fear that we are, the media writ large, has sort of lost sight of the readership and of the population of America that maybe they're kind of getting them wrong.
You know, when you do look at the favorability polls, Donald Trump's favorability, he's in a bit of a honeymoon phase right now, so that is changing. And some people, so far, a slight majority are OK with how he's handling the transition. So, there is sort of this feeling like maybe there needs to be some sort of change. That's what you hear from. people like the "L.A. Times" owner.
CUPP: So, the change is you add a voice like Scott Jennings. The change is not that you silence the killer you already have.
JONES: The "L.A. Times" did add a voice like that.
CUPP: That's what I said.
JONES: You add not the fact.
CUPP: You add. That's right.
JENNINGS: But you said there's no evidence that Bezos had anything to do with the killing of the cartoon, right?
GOLD: As of right now, the editorial page out of the door is saying it was all on me and it was an issue of repetition, that we already had a lot of these statements, but not necessarily a cartoon just like that.
JENNINGS: So, my answer to your question would be, is it courageous to draw a cartoon that makes the same point that hundreds of other people are already making in the same kinds of spaces? I mean, how courageous is it? PHILLIP: Doesn't that happen every day?
CUPP: All the time. Don't you make points that other people have made?
JENNINGS: Well, I try not to. But the stated reason for the killing of the cartoon was this was just sort of repetitive to what everyone else is already saying. Come up with better content is what I'm hearing. And so, what's -- what's courageous about just doing what everyone else is doing when the point's already been made?
GOLD: Why not just run it on a different day? And also, the art, the form is so different, the art form of cartooning versus an editorial.
PHILLIP: I want to make sure we -- I raise this because I think it's part of this conversation. You have a bunch of billionaires basically running, racing to donate to Donald Trump's -- his inaugural committee.
And one of them who is basically at the head of A.I., he basically says, "I don't support everything that Donald Trump will do, but I think AGI, this is artificial intelligence, will probably get developed during his presidential term. And getting this right seems really important. Supporting the inauguration, I think that's a relatively small thing."
It's pretty transparent what these folks are doing. They have this technology. It's a race to get to the front of the line. And they all know that the entrance fee is a million dollars to the Trump inaugural, and they're just paying it.
JONES: Well, yes. Look, Sam Altman's not wrong, though. While we were talking about, you know, Canada and all kinds of other stuff and cartoons, we are getting close to AGI, which is basically going to have computers that are as smart as me and you, and then very soon way smarter than all of us combined, that's a big deal.
Now, Sam doesn't want to have to fight Donald Trump while his company's doing that, and he wants to pay his million-dollar fee. That million-dollar fee is a .0001 rounding error on his company. I think sometimes we miss big stuff. However, I want to say something about cartoonists. It is amazing in the age of artificial intelligence and space flights or whatever that somebody picking up a pen and paper, that was not just pen and paper and drawing something is much more powerful.
See, the thing about a cartoon which is different, which I do think it's wrong to knock out a cartoon because an essay was written. You don't, in two seconds you know what a cartoon is doing. You have to read the whole essay and whatever, think about it.
The power of cartooning, even today, you hate it when that guy in third grade, do that picture making you look stupid. That is the power that was knocked out at "The Washington Post". I think that's unfortunate. PHILLIP: Yes, and the power, honestly, to create a very important
conversation around what is happening in media today. Just with the little picture -- Pulitzer Prize winning one at that.
Hadas Gold, thank you very much for joining us. Everyone else, hold on. Coming up next, a new voice at one of America's highest pulpits. Pope Francis just tapped a Trump critic to be the Archbishop of Washington. An expert is going to join our panel to explain what this means and what is in store for the next four years.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:43:47]
PHILLIP: Tonight, the Vatican's man in Washington, Pope Francis, using his choice of the church's emissary to the Capitol to send a message to the new president-elect. This is Cardinal Robert McElroy. He is a progressive as far as the diocese goes, and he has been a vocal critic of Mr. Trump's.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ROBERT MCELROY, DIOCESE OF SAN DIEGO: The Catholic Church teaches that a country has the right to control its borders, and our nation's desire to do that is a legitimate effort. At the same time, we are called always to have a sense of the dignity of every human person.
And thus, plans which have been talked about at some levels of having a wider, indiscriminate, massive deportation across the country would be something that would be incompatible with Catholic doctrine.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Joining us now at the table is Father Edward Beck. He is a Catholic priest, a religion commentator, and chaplain at Manhattan University. Father, thank you for being here. What message is the pope sending here by sending Father McElroy here to the Washington Archdiocese?
[22:45:00]
EDWARD BECK, CHAPLAIN, MANHATTAN UNIVERSITY: Well, I think you'd be hard-pressed to make an argument that one of the most vocal supporters of the Pope on issues such as immigration, the environment, LGBTQ plus issues, is appointed to this prominent position in Washington, the backyard of the president-elect in two weeks. And it just happens to be a coincidence on January 6th.
I mean, some people say it is, but I do think the Pope is sending a message by his appointment. And by the way, there were some rumors that the Pope was deciding on somebody else before the election for this particular position, and that after the election he changed his mind and went toward Cardinal McElroy.
So, I do think he is sending a message, and I think it's a pretty clear one, because the Pope is divergent with the President-elect on many issues, and I think the archbishop is going to speak forcefully. And you know, with a lot of power and certitude about issues that he believes in.
PHILLIP: And immigration, as you point out, is one of the big issues that he's been really outspoken on. I'm going to play this other clip from 2018 when he talked about the Family Separation Policy, because I remember when he said this and made a lot of waves. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MCELROY: I couldn't help but think that the Holy Family had come to our border during the past weeks, that the Child Jesus would have been ripped from the arms of the Blessed Mother and put into a cage.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: That's a pretty strong point of view to be coming to Washington at a time when we know on day one this is going to be at the top of the agenda.
JENNINGS: Yes, just what we need in Washington, someone else who's prone to extraordinarily hyperbolic political statements. Look, I think what the Pope is doing is sending someone and sending a message that he doesn't care what his parishioners in the United States think.
Trump won the Catholic vote 56 to 41, a big shift from what happened in the 2020 election. And so, a majority of U.S. Catholics voted for Donald Trump and everything that he stands for and everything that he ran on.
My advice would be maybe instead of being antagonistic, maybe instead of being hyperbolic, maybe try to have a closer alliance with the U.S. government. I don't understand this as a matter of statecraft or foreign affairs, to be honest.
ALLISON: You know, I think this is interesting, particularly on the issue of immigration because faith leaders have been one of the largest proponents of making sure immigration is immigrants are treated in a humane way and many times churches were safe places for immigrants to go during the Trump administration.
So, I do think it is sending a message and I think the Pope has allowed to send messages and put whoever he wants to be as a privilege that he has and his listen justice Donald Trump has the privilege to nominate whoever he wants to his cabinet.
So, I think the Pope is kind of saying, checkmate, I'm watching you. And I'll be interested to see though what the bishop does in D.C. What type of, there may be protests during Trump's administration. Will he participate in those? I mean, that is kind of what the backyard of it being in Washington, D.C. could really draw the contrast.
BECK: Yes, and I also disagree that because they voted for Trump, they bought into his whole agenda. I mean, really abortion was a key issue that bishops in this country pushed their parishioners on and Trump supposedly is pro-life. And they seem to lean toward him based on that issue. I wouldn't say to say that they bought his whole agendas.
JENNINGS: I don't think they're one issue voters. And I think you all seem to be keying in on immigration as a key issue.
BECK: Well, the environment is another issue, I said.
CUPP: But Pope Francis --
JENNINGS: And certainly, these Catholics know where the difference between Trump and Harris on climate change --
CUPP: But Pope Francis is also not a one issue pope. He has explicitly told parishioners not to put all of their weight on abortion at the expense of all the other issues like immigration and climate. And, in fact, he's been a very political pope. And that cuts both ways.
During the election, he told parishioners, you must make the choice between a lesser of two evils. Call Kamala Harris an evil because of her stance on abortion. So, he's political, I think, in all the ways, and is probably, I would imagine, putting a progressive political person in this spot to help steer the people who voted for Donald Trump to more of the Church's teachings.
PHILLIP: I'll let you get in just a second. Father Beck, one more thing. I mean, what of -- what Scott is saying about Trump winning the Catholic vote, is there a slide happening that you see in other communities among Hispanic Americans, many of whom, by the way, are also Catholic, toward conservatism, more so than we've seen before in this country?
[22:50:04]
BECK: There has definitely been a shift, that is true, and especially among church-going Catholics. And there's been an increase in Hispanic Catholicism, and they did, a lot of them, vote for Trump. So, there definitely has been a shift toward this conservative element who attend church.
But I think with Catholics in general, I mean, you really run the gamut. I mean, the issues of Catholicism as S.E. said, run the gamut. So, you can't just say that because they voted on one issue, it's the --
JONES: But, look, I think part of the job of people of faith is to bear witness. Sometimes it's popular, sometimes it's not. Sometimes you stand in front of your parishioners and they agree with you, sometimes they don't.
But I love the beatitudes when Jesus says we're going to be judged by how we treat the least of these, the addicted, the evicted, the convicted, the afflicted, the poorly depicted, the folks who don't have much and I'm glad we have a pope that is standing up for those folks.
PHILLIP: All right, Father Beck, thank you very much as always for joining us. Everyone else, stay with me. Breaking news, we are getting word that Donald Trump's lawyers have reviewed Jack Smith's special counsel report and are right now trying to block its public release. We'll give you more in a little bit.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:56:02]
PHILLIP: Tonight, there's what Chuck Schumer will answer and what he won't. Listen to this revealing exchange between the top Democrat in the Senate and NBC's Kristen Welker about Joe Biden and if Democrats knew more than they let on about the president's mental acuity.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KRISTEN WELKER, "MEET THE PRESS" HOST: What do you say to Americans who feel as though you and other top Democrats misled them about President Biden's mental acuity?
SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D) SENATE MINORITY LEADER: No. Look, we didn't. And let's look at President Biden. He's had an amazing record when he stepped down. He did it on his own because he thought it was better, not only for the Democratic Party, for America.
WELKER: Do you feel as we have this conversation today that President Biden could serve another four years had he stayed in the race and potentially won?
SCHUMER: Well, I'm not going to speculate.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Some eyebrows raised at the table. Van, what do you make of that?
JONES: Oh, this is foolish. Look, obviously, Biden was in bad shape. And I was surprised, and other people were surprised, who were not having regular contact with Biden. You know, Biden had done a good job in the interview with Anderson Cooper, so -- those of us at CNN.
But there were people who were close who must have known better, and people should just have quit. Look, obviously, you know, a lot was known and wasn't said and wasn't shared, and now it's leaking out all the time, anyway. So, I was just, look, I think to have any credibility and integrity, people have to quit playing around. Schumer knows he's going to start growing stuff like that.
PHILLIP: I mean, the other part is where he wouldn't answer whether he thinks Biden would have been able to serve out another four-year term. I think that's incredibly telling.
CUPP: It's delulu. This is delulu, OK? We all saw it. Just as we all saw all the video of Jan 6th, we saw both Joe Biden and we saw Democrats all over the place defending him and telling us with a straight face that he was super strong. Just the same as when he got in. JONES: Doing back flips and Pilates, yoga.
CUPP: That he'd be great. Come on. That's delusional. Admit it. I think they're going to lose anyway, but admit it and move on. You keep going on TV and talking like this and to Van's point, you're just going to lose all credibility for the next time.
JENNINGS: Of course, to admit it now would be to effectively be admitting one of the biggest cover-ups in modern American political history. Democrat politicians lied. Democrat pundits lied. A lot of people who cover the White House looked the other way --
CUPP: Yes.
JENNINGS: -- or believed absolute crap they were being fed by the White House press secretary.
CUPP: I'm not disagreeing.
JENNINGS: Cheap fakes.
CUPP: Yes.
JENNINGS: So, you think about the pantheon of people who were engaged in the lying, believing the lying, or the cover-up itself to admit it now would be to say, you know what America, boy, we did try to pull over your eyes you are buying -- I mean, I guess, I understand why keeping up with the charade now to some degree because to admit it now would be to admit this massive, huge cover-up.
PHILLIP: And it would also be to, you know, kick a guy when he's down. I mean, I think we live in the real world and this is politics. He's not going to throw Joe Biden all the way under the bus at this stage.
ALLISON: Yes, you know, I think if that debate hadn't happened, Joe Biden would have probably still been at the top of the ticket in November. But that debate was telling, and I think anybody who watched it, we all were shocked. We were all also very sad and hurt. I mean, it was hard to watch someone who I've worked for --
JONES: Me, too.
ALLISON: -- be in that condition. I'll also say I saw the president a month ago and he's like, where you been all-day? You know, it's like, so --
JONES: You have good days and bad days.
ALLISON: Yes, right. And so, I'm not saying I'm not giving anybody permission structure. I'm not going to call anybody a liar. I wasn't there. I wasn't in -- somebody with the president. But the debate was telling and I think he did the right thing.
PHILLIP: And Schumer could have acknowledged that.
CUPP: Yes. PHILLIP: And not answered by saying, you know, I didn't realize it was
quite that bad. But once we saw what we saw.
[23:00:00]
CUPP: Yes, yes. You can admit some stuff without saying, well, we're just a bunch of liars. I mean, you could say listen, we saw him have good days. We saw him have bad days We were promised that he was in good condition and we wanted him to win. We'd understand that.'
JONES: The tell was not putting him out there very much. You know, so it's like when he wasn't being put out there very much that was that was the tell.
CUPP: We're going to debate there were a number of moments that were that were not --
PHILLIP: Everyone, thank you very much. And thank you for watching "NewsNight". "Laura Coates Live" starts right now.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
