Return to Transcripts main page
CNN NewsNight with Abby Phillip
GOP Braces for Mass Defections on Epstein Vote After Emails; MAGA Voice on Epstein Emails, I Concede That They Sound Bad; Stewart Says Emails Won't Hurt Trump, Likens Him to Roadrunner. Trump to Exempt Certain Tariffs to Ease Costs; BBC Apologizes over Edited Trump Speech. Aired 10-11p ET
Aired November 13, 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 VIDEO CLIP)
KATE BOLDUAN, CNN ANCHOR (voice over): Tonight, as more Epstein revelation surface, a shift emerges. Why Donald Trump is bracing for mass defections from his own party.
Plus --
PAM BONDI, ATTORNEY GENERAL: I'm not going to talk about Epstein.
BOLDUAN: -- she declared case closed on the Epstein files, but given what we know now, is there a cover-up.
Also, Trump gets an apology, but not before he threatened a lawsuit. Why one of the largest international broadcast companies says, sorry.
Live at the table, Neera Tanden, Joe Borelli, Tezlyn Figaro, Jason Rantz and Dan Abrams.
Americans with different perspectives aren't talking to each other, but here, they do.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BOLDUAN (on camera): Good evening, everyone. I am Kate Baldwin in for Abby Phillip tonight.
Let's get right to what America is talking about, a changing tide in the Republican Party, perhaps or absolutely. Remember, Donald Trump and his Justice Department have resisted releasing the Epstein files, but now that Epstein's emails mentioning the president have surfaced, Republicans are bracing for mass defections in the upcoming vote. Only four signed the discharge petition to force the vote to release the files and sources tell CNN that there is, and the way it's described, a broad cross section of the conference willing to support the plan, and we are already hearing from some of them.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) MANU RAJU, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Just as Epstein votes coming to the floor, are you going to vote for it, this bill?
REP. ELI CRANE (R-AZ): Yes.
RAJU: You are? Okay.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I'm going to vote for it if it comes up.
REP. MARIA SALAZAR (R-FL): I'm sure that the president has nothing to fear. We do need to know -- we do need to know everything about Epstein.
REP. DON BACON (R-NE): If this comes on the floor, I will vote for it. I want transparency.
It's the worst P.R. job I've seen anywhere.
They shot themselves in the foot on this.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BOLDUAN: So, it's been going on for months. This is months and months and months. Does it feel inevitable now that this -- one, the vote will happen, and, two, the Justice Department will release the files, Joe?
JOE BORELLI, FORMER REPUBLICAN LEADER, NEW YORK CITY COUNCIL: Well, I mean, the vote will happen, right? I think that's inevitable. That's happening. The House is going to vote on it. I think the House passes it. I think enough Republicans defect. That part's not in question. What does the Senate do is kind of the next question. What does the president do? Does he veto any legislation? Those are the kind of things that are still TBD, right? We don't know how that would --
BOLDUAN: Do you think it's possible for the president to veto this legislation?
BORELLI: I think it'll be very hard. The reality is this really has the remnants of the Russia collusion scandal, in my opinion, right. It's the same thing. It's a distraction. It's an attempt of the Democratic Party to distract the president in an otherwise successful opening first year. That's what's happening.
The reality, though, is that if you look at the Russia collusion, if you think back to the Russia collusion, the complexity, they had to get MI6 to make some fake dossier and get everyone riled up about that. Now, they just redacted the woman's name who actually said that Trump didn't do anything wrong.
This is an embarrassing P.R. stunt by the Democrats to try to distract from the shutdown that's now ended. They're trying to move on to something else. Epstein is a sexy topic. We all talk about it in our private lives. We talk about it at the water cooler. Democrats know that media will repeat every talking point they spew out there. NEERA TANDEN, PRESIDENT AND CEO, CENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS: I'm sorry.
BORELLI: And here we are.
TANDEN: I'm sorry. What's embarrassing, honestly, is sitting around, covering up for child trafficking. It's not the Democrats who made up child trafficking. It's not the Democrats who made up Jeffrey Epstein as a prosecuted child trafficker. It is the reality of the situation. And, honestly, the reason why everyone is suspicious about Donald Trump is because he's acting suspicious. It came out that his name was in the Epstein files, and then he had his own personal lawyer go negotiate the deal for with Ghislaine Maxwell, who is in -- who went from high security prison to basically summer camp.
And I am so sorry -- no. I'm so sorry. Let me just finish. Literally, the Epstein emails say, I can take down Donald Trump. Now, why would he be able to take down Donald Trump unless Donald Trump knows something --
(CROSSTALKS)
DAN ABRAMS, CEO AND FOUNDER, MEDIAITE: Jeffrey Epstein was a notorious B.S. artist, but that's not the point. The point here is why are we pretending as if these documents might actually get released by the Department of Justice?
[22:05:03]
BOLDUAN: Do you really think it's never?
ABRAMS: No way, no chance.
TANDEN: Why? Why do you say that?
ABRAMS: Why? Because now --
TANDEN: Because then he's guilty. Donald Trump is guilty.
ABRAMS: I'm talking about the politics. You want to hear it? I'll explain. It's not complicated. It's really simple. The Senate is not -- is either not going to take it up and, B, the notion that Trump won't veto this, since when is Donald Trump afraid of taking a political hit? The idea that Donald Trump will see this on his desk and say, well, this is just too sensitive politically. I can't veto this.
BORELLI: They might have a veto-proof majority, right?
ABRAMS: They don't have a -- we know they don't have a veto-proof majority. Let's not -- yes, why are we pretending this is real?
(CROSSTALKS)
BOLDUAN: Here's the one real thing that we all -- there are victims here that have been shouting for years -- ABRAMS: But it's not going to happen.
TEZLYN FIGARO, PODCAST HOST, STRAIGHT SHOT, NO CHASER, BLACK EFFECT NETWORK: They don't give a damn about the victims.
ABRAMS: It's not going to happen.
TANDEN: I actually think this fatalism saying Trump will just absolutely veto is actually an excuse for him. If he vetoes legislation, bipartisan legislation, and I have to say, if there is a vote in the House in which a hundred House Republicans or 50 House Republicans vote for it, I want to say to every Republican senator, those victims will be dogging you every day, as will the American people. And --
(CROSSTALKS)
TANDEN: No. But, look, it's getting results. There's a discharge petition and Republicans are going to end up voting for it. That is getting results. And if Donald Trump vetoes this legislation, then he might as well just say --
(CROSSTALKS)
FIGARO: Nobody cares, though. That's what I'm saying. That's the unfortunate part of this.
TANDEN: That is not true.
BOLDUAN: Nobody cares what he would --
FIGARO: Nobody cares if -- if Donald Trump vetoes it, to Dan's point, he doesn't give a damn about somebody saying, oh my God, you vetoed it, I can't believe you vetoed. He has no problem taking a political hit.
TANDEN: Keep going.
FIGARO: What I'm saying, they don't --
(CROSSTALKS)
FIGARO: Let me be clear. It is the right thing to do to release the files. I want to be clear about this. It's the right thing to do. Donald Trump doesn't care about the right thing to do. So, to deal with the reality of where we are, if Democrats are -- if they want to use this for their message and say, look, he didn't veto it, you know, he vetoed it, I just don't think that's going to move his voters. This man said he can stand in New York and kill somebody and there will be no consequence.
(CROSSTALKS)
JASON RANTZ, SEATTLE RED RADIO HOST: The argument that Donald Trump doesn't care about this issue he doesn't is absolute nonsense because he was the one who brought this up in the first place. He did however -- he got into a position where he did not realize that there were going to be bad faith Democrats who were going to take emails completely out of context, which you guys have doing this entire time, every single time.
FIGARO: That's hilarious.
RANTZ: I agree. So, the reason why he's saying he's in a little bit of a tricky position by putting all this stuff out there. He knows that he's going to be cleared, but he also knows that Democrats are not going to say, well, let's all go through 20,000, 30,000 different emails --
(CROSSTALKS)
RANTZ: But they're not. Has anyone at this table looked at more than a few emails?
(CROSSTALKS)
TANDEN: Yes, I did look at hundreds of emails. I don't know why you --
ABRAMS: So, you got the evidence that suggests that Donald Trump did something wrong?
RANTZ: No, but he was embarrassed, right?
ABRAMS: Right, absolutely.
(CROSSTALKS)
BOLDUAN: But embarrassing now and getting to move on to it, walk through it later --
(CROSSTALKS)
BORELLI: The only email that Jeffrey Epstein wrote that came out today that mentioned Donald Trump actually said that Donald Trump knew about the girls that Ghislaine Maxwell was recruiting at Mar-a-Lago and told her to stop it.
TANDEN: That's nothing --
BORELLI: That stuff that you've been saying --
(CROSSTALKS)
RANTZ: but this is an important piece, thousands of times. I looked up five emails just at random, looking up his name. Some of them were links to articles in which a lot of them --
(CROSSTALKS)
TANDEN: He literally --
RANTZ: It was an exoneration of Trump. TANDEN: It wasn't exoneration. He literally says, I have information that can take him down. That is in --
BORELLI: So, why did they release on 2011? In 2017, he said --
BOLDUAN: Here's what's changing though. So, why would they release them?
(CROSSTALKS)
BOLDUAN: Here's the change. The change is, it doesn't matter what we're saying here. Republicans are -- they are -- there is a change amongst House Republicans, especially. There is a shift here. They are moving away from -- Trump doesn't want this out, very clear. But then you have -- let me just play Thomas Massie, because Thomas Massie, a Republican, hates Donald Trump.
RANTZ: He said the Republican Party?
BOLDUAN: I would definitely say he would be. He's not. He had -- he specifically had a message for Republicans about what this means to you, Republicans, on this very moment. Let me play this for you guys.
[22:10:00]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. THOMAS MASSIE (R-KY): The deal for Republicans on this vote is that Trump will protect you if you vote the wrong way. In other words, if you vote to cover up for pedophiles, you've got cover in a Republican primary. But I would remind my colleagues that this vote is going to be on your record for longer than Trump is going to be president. And what are you going to do in 2028 and 2030 when you're in a debate either with a Republican or a Democrat, and they say, how can we trust you? You covered up for a pedophile back in, you know, 2025?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BOLDUAN: Is that -- do you think that's not real? Do you think -- do you not --
RANTZ: No. I think -- so here's the deal. The polling is rather interesting on this. On the one hand, you have people who say this is being mishandled by the Trump administration. That polling is very clear. But the polling also suggests about 20 percent are actually paying close attention to this. And that's the issue for Donald Trump and Republicans in general. It's a double-edged sword.
Again, you can put all this information out. No one is going through all the details. No one --
BOLDUAN: So, wait, are you saying this is actually better for Democrats to have it not --
RANTZ: 100 percent, Democrats are in a way better strategic position to hope that this never comes out because they can continue to lie about that --
TANDEN: That's not a strategy. We just want the information.
RANTZ: No. If you wanted it, you to put it out over the last four years and you know it. You know it.
TANDEN: No, because Garland would not. I have seen this. Garland would not --
RANTZ: Yes, Garland doesn't want to do anything that might let upset Republicans?
TANDEN: Also if the information is exonerating, put it out. So, here's the thing. What's different about the House Republicans, what's different about house Republicans and this panel is House Republicans are basically worried about facing voters and covering up for pedophilia. And unlike -- and I feel like it's so sad to say this, but the people on this panel are not worried about covering up pedophilia. You're sitting here running interference for not getting the information out with a lot of like saying this or that.
RANTZ: It's not defending people who are --
(CROSSTALKS)
RANTZ: So, let's be clear about this. Republicans have been saying for the longest time that we should absolutely put it out.
TANDEN: Then put it out.
RANTZ: Then we saw the Democrats who, all of a sudden, started to talk about this.
TANDEN: But this is ridiculous.
RANTZ: And I would ask, do you feel bad -- I'm sorry, hold on. Do you feel bad --
TANDEN: If it's exonerating, put it out.
BOLDUAN: Okay, Jason, pause. We're going to -- you're going to pick it up. I promise. I promise.
RANTZ: I appreciate that.
BOLDUAN: Pushing pause on this because we're going to continue talking about it because we're also going to focus it in next to talk about whether the Justice Department did try to cover this up since it declared the case closed months ago.
Plus, also we have breaking news tonight, despite the president saying that prices are down, a new report says that he may be preparing to roll back his tariffs, certain tariffs, to help the affordability crisis.
Stay with us. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:15:00]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: If Trump were to be in the Epstein files, and that's a very big if --
JON STEWART, HOST, THE DAILY SHOW: If, I'm sorry, if? Did they not look at the emails today.
When Trump comes out, he says, I'm going to sue Rupert Murdoch for insinuating, that it's -- when was the last time you heard about that lawsuit? It's gone. It's gone. Because he's in it?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes. Do you think he would lose any support?
STEWART: No. It's Wile E. Coyote versus the Roadrunner. And every time we keep thinking 34 felonies, that'll get him, oh my God, that thing he said on Access Hollywood, oh, and every time Trump just comes in and goes, and flies away. And I think it's the same thing.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BOLDUAN: Dan, does he remain a Roadrunner?
ABRAMS: Yes, to some degree. I mean, look, I think that this is a perfect example of it, right? The question you asked before the break, is this a cover-up, right? Of course, it's a cover-up. How do we know? We know because Pam Bondi said she was going to release all of the documents. The FBI said they were going to release. Kash Patel was calling for the release, and now they're not releasing the documents.
Now, does that mean that that's because Donald Trump engaged in criminal activity? No. In fact, you talk to the people who've actually talked to all the victims in this case, and they will tell you that they don't have any evidence of Donald Trump engaging in any criminal activity.
So, the truth is if they release the documents, it is probably the case if there wouldn't be any evidence of Donald Trump engaging in criminal activity. But there would also be probably evidence of things that are embarrassing for Donald Trump, things he doesn't want out there.
And I think there's an important distinction there to talk about in connection with that, but there is no question that anyone else would not be able to survive this. Donald Trump, I think, by 2026 this issue will be forgotten.
TANDEN: Can I just ask -- you just argued a second ago.
ABRAMS: Yes.
TANDEN: Because you said it was a cover-up. ABRAMS: Yes.
TANDEN: You said at the beginning of what you just said, you said it's a cover-up.
ABRAMS: Correct.
TANDEN: And then you said there's nothing criminal in there.
ABRAMS: Correct.
TANDEN: That -- according -- now I don't know how you -- none of us know if it's criminal. You are alleging --
ABRAMS: I'm just suggesting based on what we know, yes.
TANDEN: But like since embarrassment is usually not a big thing for him, why would he go to the lengths of covering up, Pam Bondi not testifying, Pam Bondi being asked, saying she's going to release then not release, these files come out, they're stonewalling reporters? If there's nothing to hide, why --
ABRAMS: Wait. You just switched the conversation. Nothing to hide is what I said.
TANDEN: Why -- if there's nothing illegal given the -- you know, lots of things have embarrassed Donald Trump and he doesn't get embarrassed.
ABRAMS: Well, no. But it's not that he doesn't get embarrassed. He gets very upset about stuff that's supposedly embarrassing.
TANDEN: If it's not illegal, why are they going to this level of lengths where they go to Lauren Boebert -- can I just finish -- why they're going to Lauren Boebert, who signed the discharge petition, pull her into the Situation Room to browbeat her to change her vote?
[22:20:010]
She leaks it to the press that they did it.
ABRAMS: Yes.
TANDEN: Why go to those extraordinary lengths?
ABRAMS: Because he doesn't want be embarrassed.
FIGARO: But that's not --
ABRAMS: Is that ridiculous? I mean, it doesn't seem ridiculous.
TANDEN: It seems obvious to me that what, that we should consider a real possibility he has engaged in illegal activity.
RANTZ: Or the easier thing is that he did not realize that every single document that was there would have his name attached to things that can be taken out of context. And the reason why he originally said, we want to put it out there was because he knew he didn't do anything illegal.
TANDEN: You said he doesn't get embarrassed and nothing -- there's no political gravity --
BOLDUAN: But if Donald Trump is -- it feels like everyone seems to agree that Donald Trump is not going to pay a political price.
FIGARO: I disagree.
TANDEN: I actually think very strongly.
RANTZ: Which is why for the last four years he's been charged, and all the documents today --
BOLDUAN: Hang on. Tezlyn, why do you think.
FIGARO: Listen, as an independent at this table, I am here to talk about the reality of what it is. I get it. It's not whether it's legal, not legal. I don't know if you're confused on the what's going on with the Republican Party. They don't give a damn what consequence has to be paid in order to push their agenda. And Democrats, I'm warning you that if you think you're going to continue to just wag your finger at this party and say shame, shame, shame, they don't care if it's pedophilia, whatever, the murder, whatever, they don't care.
So, if Democrats are using this as a way to say, all of a sudden, there's going to be some moral high ground that all of a sudden that these voters are going to switch -- no, let me finish -- that they're going to switch their opinion, it's simply not that.
What's going on with the midterms? Who are you running in the midterms? What's happening on the state level, the federal level? My uncle died 24 hours ago, 24 hours ago because his sugar went down and it's diabetic medication. Who's talking about that? If you think that Epstein files is going to all of a sudden bring people to the polls, Donald Trump and the Republican Party, they're better at messaging the Democrats even when they're wrong. But they're going to switch this. They're going to switch back, and Democrats are going to steal.
Listen, I think in the federal penitentiary, that's the only place you can go where actually pedophilia actually can get you killed. Inmates have a better --
TANDEN: That's why Ghislaine Maxwell --
FIGARO: Right. But guess what? Republicans are not that. At some point, you're going to have to deal with the reality of what it is. Pedophilia is the worst thing you can possibly ever be. But this Republican Party does not care. Donald Trump does not care. There's no --
(CROSSTALKS)
BORELLI: That was a quote from your damn email that we got released. Here's a direct quote.
BOLDUAN: Pause. Go ahead, Jason.
RANTZ: Here's the problem that we're thinking of as a Republican. I want all of this information out, but I also don't like the idea that there are bad faith actors on your side who are using the suffering of those victims purely for political points. You are one of the few people -- I give you credit on this because you have been tweeting about Epstein for a while. The problem is you started just a few months ago.
TANDEN: No, I didn't.
RANTZ: Yes, you did. No, you didn't.
BOLDUAN: So, let me just -- let me shift this in one direction.
RANTZ: I do. I looked it up.
BOLDUAN: If there needs to be, and I'm not saying that there needs to be, but if there ends up needing to be, or ends up being a fall guy or a scapegoat in this, in terms of how mismanaged this has been from the White House, does it have to be, is it out of necessity going to be Pam Bondi?
BORELLI: I don't know if it has to be Pam Bondi. I think she does look, obviously, you know, maybe compromise or questionable when she said, I have the documents on my desk and then said they don't exist. That's going to -- that's right, that's a mishandling bar none.
I think the political consequences though, as you pointed out, are not for Trump in the four-year from now presidential race. It's the midterms in this current 12-month cycle, right? That's where I think you'll see the fallout from this vote in the house and potentially the Senate play out. That's why I do actually think that if there's 50 Republicans voting for it, 150 will end up voting for it. And I think --
BOLDUAN: Because then they can use that cover.
BORELLI: It's the cover. And then, eventually, it gives a veto-proof majority.
BOLDUAN: No matter if it -- yes, no matter if it gets to the president's desk or not.
RANTZ: But that's different question and that this does not matter to the voters. It doesn't.
TANDEN: You are making announcements --
BOLDUAN: Well, I mean, I guess if you presented as do you care about Jeffrey Epstein, or do you care about being able to pay your bills, you know what people are going to choose.
RANTZ: Yes. And there's not a single person who's taking the other side during the last election.
BOLDUAN: Do you -- are you open to the possibility that voters are -- can hold two thoughts in their heads at once and they are nuanced?
FIGARO: Actually, Democrats can't. And I want to be clear, the foul should be released. The files should be released. What I'm saying is Democrats are failing in their messaging. Every day in my comments, somebody says, release the files, release the files, when they should be hashtagging, build the bench, build the bench, build the bench. There should be a nonstop training, a not -- let me just finish. You guys don't have a bench. You don't have anybody in the midterms. Your only whole is just a couple of candidates and talking about what's going on in New York.
When are Democrats going -- because if you're getting everybody motivated -- no, I'm serious.
[22:25:00]
If you're getting everybody motivated on Epstein files, Epstein files, Epstein files, and there's no plan B, there's no plan B, like we just saw with this government shutdown, there's no plan B --
TANDEN: I just like to respond, which is to say --
BORELLI: I think she hit the nail on the head.
TANDEN: Of course, I'd say --
FIGARO: And I'm not bouncing for Republicans, by the way. I just want to be clear.
TANDEN: 1,000 percent Democrats should talk about multiple things. As they attack.
FIGARO: They can't though. They don't know how.
TANDEN: I just disagree. We just won New Jersey. Can I just finish? Can I just finish?
RANTZ: In the last 24 hours, all you guys have talked about was Epstein. It went from healthcare --
TANDEN: Why did Mikie Sherrill win by 15 points? Why did Abigail Spanberger win by 15 points? Because those people talked about the cost of living.
FIGARO: Sweetheart, I live in the south. So, what you're talking about, and let me be clear --
(CROSSTALKS)
FIGARO: Right. You won blue states. And what I'm saying, you still have to win something called the swing states in the south. You still have -- it was purple. I'm not impressed.
TANDEN: Okay, well, I'm sorry you're not impressed. I really am. But Democrats can talk about cost of living --
FIGARO: But you don't though --
TANDEN: -- which this president is failing at.
(CROSSTALKS)
TANDEN: With all due respect, that's totally wrong.
ABRAMS: Okay. But here's the other problem.
TANDEN: We talked about healthcare --
ABRAMS: Here's the other problem.
FIGARO: It's not enough. To my community, it's not enough.
TANDEN: Okay.
FIGARO: And let's clear --
TANDNE: I had very high turnout --
FIGARO: Let's be clear, the community I represent, which is the poor in the hood, let me be clear about it, they need to be motivated based on what's actually going to change their life. And I want to be clear the Epstein files should be released. I am not defending a pedophile by no stretch.
(CROSSTALKS)
ABRAMS: For one second, can you guys stop yelling over each other for one second?
(CROSSTALKS)
FIGARO: I'm saying that you can't put all your chips on that alone.
TANDEN: No one is. Nobody is.
BOLDUAN: No one can hear what you're saying. Dan?
ABRAMS: We still have time? All right, so all I was going to say was that on the issue of Epstein, the other problem for Democrats is that there is a hypocrisy on this, right, is the fact that it is true, that suddenly this is an issue that's interesting to Democrats.
Now, I understand why. Donald Trump is the president. Donald Trump is in the Epstein files. That makes it more interesting. But it's also true that in the years leading up to this, during the entire Biden administration, there wasn't this call.
TANDEN: Yes, because he was too scared to do anything.
ABRAMS: Who was too scared?
TANDEN: Garland was basically intimidated by Republican attacks.
(CROSSTALKS)
ABRAMS: Wait. The attorney was scared? Who was the attorney general scared of?
(CROSSTALKS)
TANDEN: I'm giving you the answer. I'm sorry you don't like it. He was definitely intimidated by Republicans saying --
BORELLI: By who? Sleepy Joe?
(CROSSTALKS)
ABRAMS: Wait. But which Democrats were calling -- wait. Which Democrats were calling on Garland to release it?
TANDEN: He should have.
ABRAMS: No, that's not what I asked you. Which Democrats were calling on Garland?
TANDEN: I'm saying they should have.
(CROSSTALKS)
BOLDUAN: I know of a narrow few. I know Ron Wyden has been asking for financial records for a very, very long time. I know there are some, but it's not like there is a drumbeat campaign. I'm just stating that.
ABRAMS: Yes. No, that's a fair answer.
FIGARO: Can I say this, because this is important because I don't let nobody play with my character like this, ma'am. I have never defended a pedophile. And I'm --
TANDEN: I hear you.
FIGARO: No, let's hold up. No, wait a minute. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. I'm going to finish my statement. I'm going to finish my statement because we going to get this clear on the record. I have never defended a pedophile, nowhere I ever. What I'm telling you is in the community that I represent, in the community I represent, who are focused on jobs, housing, transportation, talking about these white men and these young girls they were sleeping with is not going to change their life at all.
Wait a minute, because you've said enough. Release the -- yes, release the files, do it all.
TANDEN: Yes, we should do that.
FIGARO: Send people to jail. Do it all. What I'm here to tell you is there has to also be a focus on what is going to happen when healthcare goes up in January. TANDEN: Absolutely.
FIGARO: What is going to happen with people who have jobs, housing, transportation, and the messaging has all been Epstein, Epstein, Epstein, and not enough on who are you running in the midterms that are actually going to change the lives of every --
BOLDUAN: Here's what we're going to do. We're going to hit pause this again because I can promise you the government is open, but may also shut down again at the end of January. And they're now going to negotiate the entire month of December over healthcare. So, we know it is coming.
TANDEN: Yes.
BOLDUAN: And we're going to go to this now.
We have breaking news tonight from The New York Times. Despite the president insisting that prices aren't up, he reportedly may roll back some of the tariffs over affordability concerns of Americans. We are going to debate.
We'll be right back.
[22:30:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BOLDUAN: President Trump appearing now to be facing the reality that food prices are too damn high because the breaking news tonight is that the Trump administration is preparing exemptions on certain tariffs in an effort to ease those costs. Like coffee, fruit, possibly beef is where the discussions may be. That's according to the "New York Times."
The issue of affordability has become Donald Trump's political nemesis in recent days. A new Bank of America analysis finds nearly a quarter of U.S. households are living paycheck to paycheck. And new polling also shows that most Americans think the economy is in bad shape and they are blaming Donald Trump for it in large part.
But when asked about it tonight, the Vice President said there is only one side and really one person to blame.
[22:35:08]
J.D. VANCE, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: I know that there are a lot of people out there, Sean, who are saying things are expensive. And we have to remember they're expensive because we inherited this terrible inflation crisis from the Biden administration.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BOLDUAN: I know there are a lot of people out there saying things are expensive, but it's like, but things are expensive. Like acknowledging this and potentially rolling back tariffs now, Joe, is this like game over? I acknowledge that this didn't work.
JOE BORELLI, FOREMER REPUBLICAN LEADER, NEW YORK CITY COUNCIL, AND MANAGING DIRECTOR CHARTWELL STRATEGY: No, I think Trump ran acknowledging that things are too expensive. But let's be clear, the Vice President is correct.
CPI under Joe Biden was 21 percent. That means in the presidency of Joe Biden, every American had one-fifth of their income just slashed.
BOLDUAN: And the Biden administration sucked at messaging on that. That is in large part what happened with Kamala Harris, but let me ask you this.
BORELLI: And they paid a price.
BOLDUAN: At what point does it become Donald Trump's economy?
BORELLI: It is Donald Trump's economy, no question. And the consumer price inflation now is 1.4 percent, actually below inflation, below target inflation. I think it does.
I think it does because we've been debating on this show and other shows about the cost of eggs. I googled it just before I came on. $2.69 price of eggs, shop right.
Things are a lot better than they were when they were $4. The price of eggs were $4.69, something like that.
BOLDUAN: Coffee is up 19 percent year over year. Beef is up between 12 percent and 18 percent.
BORELLI: And I don't doubt that you can find that. And I think that's why the President is electing to twinkle, to tinkle with some of these tariffs.
I think this is a--
BOLDUAN: I actually really want to use twinkle from now on.
BORELLI: You can twinkle with tariffs, but this is a good argument for keeping that power within the President, which is what they're in court for right now, allowing the President to be able to fluctuate tariffs as needed.
TEZLYN FIGARO, PODCAST HOST, "STRAIGHT SHOT, NO CHASER", BLACK EFFECT NETWORK: But is he going to admit that he made a mistake? And this is where I will say, because, again, I can give it on both sides.
Is he going to admit that he made a mistake and say, hey, you know, I got it wrong on that, so now I'm going to fix it?
BORELLI: It's not a mistake. It's a change of tactics. It's an adjustment to reality.
BOLDUAN: Dan and Jason, this is not the whole point of the trade war to boost domestic production. We're not boosting domestic production. JASON RANTZ, SEATTLE RED RADIO HOST, AND AUTHOR OF "WHAT'S KILLING
AMERICA": But he's dealing with things beyond that. I mean, beef is a perfect example of that. No one here is going to claim honestly that beef is as expensive as it is, purely because of the tariffs.
We've had a cattle herd problem since, like, the 1950s.
BOLDUAN: Prices are up now. Prices are up now. All you've got to do is listen to the ranchers.
You know what else is up? It's equipment and it's feed. And that is because of the tariffs.
RANTZ: It's not fuel, though. It's not fuel.
NEERA TANDEN, FORMER DOMESTIC POLICY ADVISER DURING THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION AND PRESIDENT AND CEO, CENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS: Listen to the ranchers. That's a really good point.
There's a difference.
RANTZ: There are some things that are down. There are some things that are up.
And so what the President is doing is looking at this and saying, how can we twinkle things and make it just a little bit better where we can? Because, look, I just want to say --
DAN ABRAMS, CEO AND FOUNDER, MEDIAITE, AND YOUTUBE HOST, "THE DAN ABRAMS SHOW": Isn't that a concession? Isn't that a concession that he wasn't doing it right?
RANTZ: No, I think it's a concession.
BOLDUAN: It's saying the same thing two different ways. Because if you go carte blanche, I'm tariffing everyone, which is exactly what happened.
This is a rollback saying, actually -- Scott Bessent was just on Fox News to say we actually need to bring tariffs down now because we need to bring prices down immediately on things that are not made in the United States.
RANTZ: There are two separate--
RANTZ: But that can be true at the same time.
So you hurt people by raising prices for no good reason.
ABRAMS: No, not the entire. But it means it's a concession that part of the strategy is wrong. Or that it wasn't working as quickly as he had hoped.
And that's a different point.
But if the point is quickly as he had hoped, then how is this going to expedite that?
RANTZ: No, he's saying that in the long term, things are going to even out. That has always been the argument.
The problem with this strategy and this is a messaging strategy that faces every single politician. You say, day one, I'm going to have prices come down. Housing is going to be affordable.
Legit he said day one, inflation is over.
RANTZ: But it doesn't work that way. Of course it doesn't work that way.
And by the way, shouldn't we have wished that Joe Biden, when inflation was 21 percent, shouldn't we have wished that he made the good decision to change some of his tactics at the time? It was transitory. Boy, did they work here.
BOLDUAN: It's actually not Joe Biden.
RANTZ: They called it Bidenflation. I didn't make that term up.
BOLDUAN: I'm not saying that-didn't I just start the segment by saying they completely screwed that up? The Biden administration admitted --
ABRAMS: But the trend was going in the right way.
BORELLI: They can't have negative inflation. They can't have negative inflation.
BOLDUAN: That does not mean that it absolves the Trump administration from taking any responsibility.
BORELLI: No. Help me target inflation's 2 percent. That still means 2 percent going up.
ABRAMS: We're not talking about reducing prices. This is changing the subject. The bottom line is Trump and the administration are realizing that this isn't working for them in the way that they had hoped. Period.
BORELLI: Getting rid of all the tariffs?
ABRAMS: No. It's not what I said. It's not what I said.
TANDEN: It's worse than that. I didn't say it's worse than that.
He literally raised taxes. He raised tariffs, which are a tax on people. So the difference between Joe Biden and Donald Trump is actually not on messaging.
[22:40:00]
Unfortunately-apparently not, because he falls asleep during Oval Office meetings. But second of all, the truth is both of them and this was a mistake by Joe Biden to try to talk people into the economy being better than it is. And it is a mistake that Donald Trump is making now.
But another mistake he made is actually raising prices when people were concerned about inflation. And don't listen to me. Listen to the Fed.
He physically said he's increasing tariffs. No. He's increased prices, and he's made a mistake.
He's acknowledging now.
BOLDUAN: If you're talking about messaging, though, there is a new aspect of this, right? The White House -- CNN reporting is the White House is talking about, like, he really needs to talk-they're thinking of doing a series of trips around the country to make economic speeches, because they need to talk about affordability in a different way and stop denying it is what the talk in the White House is. At the same time, you've got -- the latest numbers are they've collected $220 billion in tariff revenue so far.
And what Trump has said is he wants to do with the excess is send everyone except for rich people $2,000 rebate checks. That is something that you know people will love, even if it might not happen. They will love that messaging.
RANTZ: It's the thought that counts. I mean, it's obviously true that we don't know if it's going to happen.
BOLDUAN: The Republicans are planning to do it.
RANTZ: No, I'm sorry, but we don't know if it's actually going to happen.
BOLDUAN: No, you do not know.
RANTZ: But I do think he wants to actually do that. And while there are some conservatives who would perhaps rather it go to paying down the debt, this is a smart political move, and it shows that he does actually care.
Despite what some folks on the left are saying, nobody's (inaudible).
You know what's cheaper now? Gas.
And for the longest time, y'all were telling us that wasn't happening. It wasn't going up. And anyone who was-
TANDEN: Who said that?
RANTZ: The entire Biden administration for four years.
Here's the fact.
BORELLI: Here's the fact.
Today, Americans are paying less on food and commodities than they were related to their income at any point since 2005. TANDEN: I love saying related to their income.
BORELLI: Yes, because wages have gone up, which is good.
TANDEN: Inflation was coming down.
BORELLI: People are spending less of their income on--
ABRAMS: So why don't they feel that? Why don't they feel that?
BOLDUAN: Dan makes the point. You're right. It's about-- People don't feel good about it.
I don't care how many numbers we throw out. People don't feel good.
BORELLI: I go to the grocery store.
When I see the bill, I don't feel good. I get that. But when we're dealing with real economic numbers, we're not talking about --
ABRAMS: But you sound like Biden now.
BOLDUAN: Exactly.
ABRAMS: You sound like the Biden administration.
BORELLI: I'm not.
ABRAMS: You're citing statistics.
BORELLI: I can navigate a flight of stairs.
ABRAMS: No, but that was the problem, right? The Biden administration would constantly try and cite statistics to say, the economy is not nearly as bad as people-- We have been doing great.
We've got these statistics and those statistics. And then people would be like, wait. What are you talking about? Big difference in 21 percent.
I'm not feeling it. Right? You feel 21 percent because it's quick. But it's hot and heavy.
Rather than 3 percent, 2 percent?
FIGARO: I'll raise my hand like I'm in class. The last word. Okay, last word.
Bottom line is, Donald Trump, when he does this tinkering, as you call it, he's going to come -- twinkle, tinkle -- he's going to come in and say he saved the day. Democrats have an opportunity to say he screwed up. And that is the type of messaging that Democrats need in order to keep people mobilized and to the polls, to your point, on how they won, based upon affordability.
BOLDUAN: Absolutely. All right, so coming up next, the BBC apologizes to Donald Trump.
But there's a caveat. They are refusing, though, to pay and bend to his demands. We're going to discuss.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:45:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BOLDUAN: Tonight, the BBC is apologizing over a documentary Donald Trump's lawyers are calling false and defamatory. But the company is rejecting the president's demands for damages. Trump had threatened to sue the BBC for a billion dollars unless it retracted an October 2024 documentary and apologized over misleading edits of his January 6th speech.
In an interview on Fox, President Trump said the BBC defrauded the public. The scandal has already led to the resignation of the BBC's director general and head of news. And also, here's an interesting part about this. Because the BBC is funded by British taxpayers, any settlement paid will not be secret, if a settlement would be paid, because it would need to be publicly disclosed.
So, Dan, on this one, and there have been--
This is one of a series of threatened or actual lawsuits that have been filed from President Trump against media companies.
BBC apologized. People resigned. They acknowledged that they screwed up and it was a misleading edit.
They said they weren't going to rebroadcast the documentary, but saying they strongly disagree with the claim of defamation. Do you think Trump would have a defamation claim here?
ABRAMS: Well, look, Trump should just take the win, right? Two senior people have resigned, they've apologized, etc. If he doesn't, right, and he decides to sue, one of two things happens.
Either the British government puts pressure on the BBC to settle the case, as happened in the cases here, or there's no way it's going to go to trial. Why?
Because Donald Trump can't deal with what's called discovery, meaning in the British courts it's called disclosure. And it means you've got to turn over all of the documents, all the information that is relevant to the case, even adverse to your own position.
There is no way that Donald Trump is going to go through the process of discovery and turn over all the information related to January 6th, connected to everything and anything he knows. So one of two things is going to happen. Either he's not going to sue, the BBC is going to settle.
[22:50:09] One thing that's not going to happen is it won't go to trial.
BOLDUAN: But it does, once again, raise the question for media companies of when is or where is the line of take a stand.
ABRAMS: But it's where the pressure is. It's not about the media companies, right? It's about where's the pressure points.
Because, look, the Kamala Harris case with CBS, that was a ridiculous lawsuit. It was absolutely ridiculous.
Why did CBS cave? Because of the pressure from the government. It wasn't that they had a valid lawsuit. It was a ridiculous lawsuit.
But they got them at a pressure point. And that's going to be the question here.
BOLDUAN: Is there a pressure point?
ABRAMS: Exactly.
Is there a pressure point? So I think evaluating this through the prism of media companies, journalistic standards, it's not what this is about. It's about are they going to cave to a pressure point?
RANTZ: Or, perhaps, all of this could have been settled had they not actually defamed him, had they not made a deeply deceitful edit.
ABRAMS: But what else do you want them to do with this?
RANTZ: I do agree with you in that I think Donald Trump should take the win here as someone who works in media. I don't make mistakes, but others make mistakes all the time. And if they're doing so acting otherwise in good faith, I don't want to have a situation where we're now just starting to sue media companies.
The problem, however, is I think in the case of BBC, and several cases here in the United States with our media, there have been bad faith attempts intentionally made to smear him. And that's the problem. And I don't know, honestly, what message the President or anyone who's the victim here can truly send to change that.
That doesn't also make me uncomfortable as someone who works in media and who could make a mistake and doesn't want to get sued.
BORELLI: Jason, maybe, just maybe, media in general cannot put on every Tom, Dick, and Harry who has some unverified salacious claim about Donald Trump, treat it as gospel, run with it in a news cycle for 24 hours.
RANTZ: What is the example? What are you talking about?
BORELLI: So Trump's in a helicopter saying that people died in battle were losers.
Or the entire first term, Trump colluded with Russia to steal the election. Fact check, that didn't happen. And maybe the President's just sick and tired of being run through the mud.
He's the President. Criticize, you don't like terrorists, you don't like his foreign policy, all fair game. You're going to make up stories, you're going to put people on like Mary Trump, just making stuff up out of thin air, unverified.
Maybe the guy gets a little effing pissed.
TANDEN: Can I just say what this entire episode is about? They basically took his speech and they connected two parts of the speech he said. He did say everything.
He talked about how important January 6th was, how important all these people were, and the big rally and how important it is. And then later he was like, I'm going to go down with you. Now, the terrible thing these people did is take these two things he literally said and put them together.
ABRAMS: That created a completely different context.
BOLDUAN: They did give the impression of a direct call for violent action.
BORELLI: Even the BBC is not saying what you're saying.
TANDEN: No, what I'm saying is it's wrong that they did that. It doesn't sound like that's what you're saying. All of this, Donald Trump constantly is viciously attacking people.
He's smearing people. He lies all the time.
BORELLI: There was a story that he had diarrhea on a golf course.
Like, give me a break.
Wait, what about everyone gets one scoop of ice cream, Donald Trump gets two. Give me an F-ing break with that.
Give me a break.
FIGARO: I don't want to talk about any of that. I just want to bottom line it.
The bottom line is they apologize. Trump's going to run on that. He's going to say that I told you all along that the media is the fake news.
We can sit here and debate and write articles about it and white papers about it. At the end of the day, the voters are going to hear that the news is fake. And what I suggest Democrats do is get some messengers on your squad.
Get behind the Jasmine Crockett's. Get behind Governor Newsom. Get behind folks who have the same energy, the same delivery as Donald Trump. Because whether it's right, wrong, indifferent, a lie, not a lie, he's going to run with that message. And it's going to unite his base. And Democrats have to have an opposition.
You're always working from the offense. I mean, from the defense and not the offense. And midterms are coming up.
I can't say it enough.
BOLDUAN: Offense and defense. No one plays that on the show, as I'm quickly learning. Thank you guys very much for being here.
Also breaking tonight, the Trump administration has referred Congressman, Democratic Congressman Eric Swalwell, for a federal criminal inquiry. Swalwell joins CNN next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:55:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BOLDUAN: The new CNN film, "Prime Minister," takes an intimate look into the extraordinary political career and life of New Zealand's former prime minister, Jacinda Ardern. Ahead of the film, Abby Phillips sat down for a candid discussion with four influential women about the new generation of politicians. You can catch more of Abby's discussion on Monday exclusively on the CNN app.
And don't miss the CNN film, "Prime Minister," this Sunday at 9 p.m. on CNN and the next day on the CNN app.
Thank you so much for watching "NewsNight." I'll be back on your screens tomorrow evening. In the meantime, "Laura Coates Live" starts right now.
