Return to Transcripts main page
CNN NewsNight with Abby Phillip
Trump To Hit Road As More Americans Sour On His Economy; Trump Plans $12 Billion Bailout To Farmers Hit By His Tariffs; Trump Backtracks On Releasing Video Of Controversial Strike; Anger Among House Republicans Erupts Outside The Family; Crockett Jumps Into Texas Senate Race. Aired 10-11p ET
Aired December 08, 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)
ABBY PHILLIP, CNN HOST (voice over): Tonight, as more Americans say, they're worse off financially this year and they're paying more for groceries, Donald Trump turns on the gaslight.
DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: Prices are way down. Inflation is essentially gone.
PHILLIP: Plus, the president walks back the green light on releasing the video of the second strike.
TRUMP: But whatever they have, we'll certainly release, no problem.
I didn't say that. You said that. I didn't say that.
PHILLIP: Also, more MAGA drama, why Nancy Mace says Nancy Pelosi was the best speaker, and Republicans are blowing it.
And one of the right's favorite punching bags announces her next career move with the help of Donald Trump.
TRUMP: She's the new star of the Democrat Party. They're in big trouble, very low I.Q. person.
Live at the table, Scott Jennings, Neera Tanden, Tim Parrish, Emma Vigeland, and Jeff Flake.
Americans with different perspectives aren't talking to each other, but here, they do.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP (on camera): Good evening. I'm Abby Phillip in New York.
If the first step to solving a problem is to admit that there is one, when it comes to the economy, the Trump administration is taking a very different approach. They're insisting that there is no problem at all, and everything is just fine, but it's fantastic.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KEVIN HASSETT, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL ECONOMIC COUNCIL: There's a lot of positive news that's positive for people's jobs, for people's incomes, and for inflation. And President Trump is just going to go out there and remind people of that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: And if you have a problem with the economy, it's the other guy's fault, the last guy.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: We inherited a mess, affordability. But you can call it affordability or anything you want, but the Democrats caused the affordability problem and we're the ones that are fixing it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Remember when Trump said this about his tariffs back in April?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: Maybe the children will have 2 dolls instead of 30 dolls, you know? And maybe the two dolls will cost a couple of bucks more than they would normally.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Well, it is officially doll season and a growing number of Americans are actually struggling right now in this economy. A new Fed survey found more Americans say that their finances are, quote, much worse now than they were a year ago, and they don't expect it to get any better in the next year either. Trump's approval rating on the economy has plummeted 15 points since he's taken office. And despite the president saying that the economy is great, he's now giving a $12 billion bailout to farmers who were hurt by his own tariffs.
Justin Amash said this, a former GOP representative. He said Trump swipes money from taxpayers to bail out the farmers who were harmed by the tariffs that Trump himself placed on American businesses and consumers. This is the Trump economy. Senator Flake?
FMR. SEN. JEFF FLAKE (R-AZ): I can't argue with that on tariffs. Tariffs are inflationary. That has been a GOP article of faith forever, and it's true, and we're finding that out. Yes, there's been some time to get there but we're there, certainly. And I think that next year will and be even worse unless there's some reversal on tariffs.
We've seen bits and pieces shift certain, sectors exempt and certain countries exempt, but, overall, it started to bite. Consumers are paying more and they're feeling it. And you can't tell them otherwise. PHILLIP: Well, yes. And Trump is not only trying to tell them otherwise, but it's also not acknowledging what his own actions are showing, which is that he's bailing out farmers, rolling back some tariffs on food items. Those seem to be clear acknowledgements that the tariff policy has hurt Americans.
SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, I think on the agriculture piece, there's a couple things going on. One, right up front, Trump said the tariffs were going to cause some short-term turbulence or pain for some sectors. He acknowledged it. Agriculture has felt that a little bit, the row crop guys especially.
[22:05:01]
But, of course, they solved some of that with the deal they cut with China.
So, I actually was in --
PHILLIP: Did they solve that? Because, I mean, I don't think --
JENNINGS: Soybean, oh, yes.
PHILLIP: I don't think we would be a $12 billion bailout, A, and, B, the amount that China has bought is not anywhere near what has been promised.
JENNINGS: Okay. So, they cut a deal with China and they're in better shape today than they were when we didn't have a deal with China. So, that's number one. Number two, I was in Texas Saturday night with the Texas Farm Bureau. I spoke to a lot of farmers down there. It was interesting. There were some people that absolutely had concerns. In fact, I talked to one guy who was going to the White House meeting today, and they were glad to get invited to that. I think they feel like what the president's doing on the ag thing is responsive to them.
They have concerns, not just tariffs. They're a little worried about the Argentinean beef issue as well. They threw that out. So, yes, I mean, he's got some issues to work out. But, overall, if you look at the Fed survey, people are happy and excited about the job market and the labor market in the United States. That's a good thing. And if you talk to Scott Bessent, he'll tell you that they think in 2026 we're going to see a boom in jobs and growth in this country, thanks to some of the structural changes they made this year.
So, they're expressing optimism and exuding optimism, and that's what they got to do going into an election.
PHILLIP: There have been more than a million jobs lost so far this year, a number that basically rivals the pandemic time. So, there is a picture of the economy that is -- we're not getting from the federal government numbers because those numbers are, by and large, not coming out. But from private sector payrolls, jobs are being lost right now, right at this moment.
NEERA TANDEN, PRESIDENT AND CEO, CENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS: We've seen actually for the first time in years actually job losses, month after month revisions showing private sector job losses. And I think that is driving a lot of anxiety and it comes at a time where the facts are that the tariffs were causing middle class families, working class families to pay more money. They're $1,700, estimated by the Yale Budget Lab, of how much families are paying more for the tariffs.
And so I think what's really odd is that the president promised that inflation would come down on day one. He'd get rid of it, and instead he went on this policy that I agree is just different from Republicans, what Republicans have supported for decades, which is raising prices on people. And, of course, the whole issue with the bailout of the farmers is if we didn't have these actually counterproductive tariffs, you wouldn't have to take tax money, taxpayer money to actually bail them up because China's response on the soybeans is because of the president's tariffs policy.
JENNINGS: I know all of human history started in January of this year, but I could take you back four years when input prices for agriculture from fuel to materials, to you name it, went through the roof. I know you know a little something about it because you worked under Joe Biden when it all happened.
So, these farmers, they're in a ten-month period here with Trump, but they just came out of a four-month period where they were dying under the inflationary and affordability crisis caused by Democrats. They support this president. They like what he did today, and they're going to give him a little latitude to get out of this.
TANDEN: I don't think that's accurate when you hear from farm bureaus -- sorry, were in Texas.
JENNINGS: You don't think it's accurate that inflation happened under Biden?
TANDEN: I'm sorry. Trump talked about -- we definitely had inflation, but Joe Biden didn't pass tariffs that actually, with his own policy, actually increased prices for people. And I think what's really stunning is that one year in, Donald Trump's approval on economics is actually now worse than Joe Biden's.
So, all you want to talk about Joe Biden. The fact is people hold Donald Trump responsible because it's his policies they're adding to the burden of families.
PHILLIP: Speaking of Joe Biden, David Axelrod writes, Donald Trump recaptured the White House in part by relentlessly exploiting Biden's failure to heed widespread concerns about the rising cost of living. And now, bizarrely, President Trump is walking himself and his party into the same perilous trap by denying the economic reality that working families are living.
It's kind of hard to argue that when, in some ways, Trump is literally saying a lot of the same things that people are just not feeling it, you know, they're just not seeing how great it is, or that we just have to remind them that this is a P.R. problem and not an actual economic problem. TIM PARRISH, CONSERVATIVE STRATEGIST: Well, Abby, I think we, we should put some of the president's comments into context. I think he is taking some of the celebrations on the prices that have come down, like we've talked about on your show before, prices on fuel, certain food items, that are in fact coming down.
And I think Scott's absolutely right, we should celebrate the fact that Americans are looking at this job market and saying we have a better chance at getting good, high-paying jobs and being able to support ourselves and our family.
So, look, this is a reality that the American people are facing. The vice president came out and said, stick with us, give us some time, show a little grace on this issue. The president has said, hey, we're 11 months in.
PHILLIP: Why should they show --
PARRISH: And I think, and I do think --
PHILLIP: And I'm surprised, I don't understand --
(CROSSTALKS)
PHILLIP: This is a president --
PARRISH: We suffered for four years, as I've said before, and I'll continue to say it --
PHILLIP: But, yet, to your point --
[22:10:00]
PARRISH: -- as the worst inflation in my lifetime.
PHILLIP: To your point --
PARRISH: And in any America's lifetime.
PHILLIP: -- this is a president that came into office and he said, this is going to be my top priority, that you all are suffering under the inflation of the Joe Biden administration. I'm going to fix it. I'm going to fix it on day one, he says. Why should that Americans almost a year into this thing turn around and say, well, you know, you've raised prices on us through tariffs, but we're going to just give you some grace? That doesn't make -- I'm not -- that doesn't make any practical sense and it doesn't make any political sense.
JENNINGS: Would it make any sense to go back to the people who caused it in the first place?
PHILLIP: Well, if you ask voters -- it's funny that you should bring that up, Scott, because if you ask voters, how much do you blame Trump for the current rate of inflation, 59 percent say, a great deal, a good amount.
JENNINGS: Well, he's the president.
(CROSSTALKS)
PHILLIP: Exactly. He is the president.
JENNINGS: But why go back to the people with the shovel digging a hole?
EMMA VIGELAND, CO-HOST, THE MAJORITY REPORT: I would note that the inflation that occurred under Biden was in part naturally occurring due to supply chain bottlenecks, and because the COVID, once-in-a- lifetime pandemic, occurred.
JENNINGS: Natural.
VIGELAND: And, yes, it occurred.
JENNINGS: Like they were on trees?
VIGELAND: Yes, okay. Well, no, because it's supply chain bottlenecks. That's what I'm talking about. There was a labor shortage --
JENNINGS: Policy choices were made. Policy choices were made.
VIGELAND: And then there was this thing called reflation, which was called a left-wing conspiracy theory. But then we saw record returns for corporations in their earnings, which showed that even though prices were going up, they were still taking home record returns, these corporations, and in part the Biden administration tried to address that with Lena Khan and more enforcement.
Now, Trump's in office and there are no cops on the beat. We just hit a record of credit card debt in this country, over $1.2 trillion of credit card debt. We just hit a record in terms of subprime auto delinquencies showing that people are really hurting. And there's something like the top 1 percent owns 50 percent of all stocks and trades. This is an income inequality problem as well as a tariff problem.
PHILLIP: Trump is also blaming reflation now for rising costs. And so, to your point, it was considered just sort of a Democratic talking point. Now, Trump is doing the same thing.
Again, you're seeing the same patterns playing out. And just for people at home who are just like, look, it's getting more expensive to live, they're not buying it. They weren't buying it with Joe Biden, or they're not buying it now.
FLAKE: The striking thing is, you know, Republican tax and regulatory policy has been good for the economy. Even with that, you see huge inflation because of tariffs. But President Trump's signature economic policy was tariffs, I love tariffs, that's the most beautiful word in the dictionary, he goes on and on about it. And then when tariffs cause inflation, then he tries to say, no, they don't. But tax and regulatory policy has been favorable for business, but it's the uncertainty and the higher tariffs that are hurting the economy. And that's why the president is running away from it certain times, or he'll exempt certain sectors or certain countries, but it's going to hurt coming into the elections, believe me, unless there's a reversal.
PHILLIP: And he's hearing it from not just from voters, not just from Democrats, but also from Republicans in his own party as well.
Next, the president denies saying something that he said on camera just five days ago, and now lawmakers are threatening Pete Hegseth over that video of the second strike in the Caribbean.
Plus, Jasmine Crockett has officially launched a Senate bid in Texas with a video of Trump's insults. Is she a threat or a gift to Republicans? We'll debate.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:15:00]
PHILLIP: Tonight, a reversal from Donald Trump on releasing the video of that controversial second strike against a drug boat that killed two survivors. Now, a reminder, here's what he said just five days ago.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: Whatever they have, we would certainly release, no problem.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Now, he's denying he ever said that. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REPORTER: But you said you would have no problem with releasing the full video of that strike on September 2nd, off the coast of Venezuela? Secretary Hegseth now says --
TRUMP: I didn't say that. You said that. I didn't say that.
Whatever Hegseth wants to do is okay with me.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Hegseth said this weekend that officials were reviewing releasing that video, and I'll ask again, as I asked all of last week, why not just release the video? If it is exonerating, it should be exonerating.
PARRISH: Abby, I think that I did a deep dive into this just to get some more information and I think that what you oftentimes see with videos like this or any type of evidence surrounding a matter like this, sometimes there's intelligence sensitive matters, sensitive information that the intelligence officials first need to be able to scour through, go over and make sure they have all the information and the details. I think that that might be the case here, is that they're looking through --
PHILLIP: They released the first part of the video.
PARRISH: Well, that may --
PHILLIP: And then the second part of the video presumptively shows the boat being completely destroyed. So, I'm not sure what intelligence would be left over. Why release the first video, but not the second one?
PARRISH: Well, Abby, the last time I checked, none of us are in the intelligence community. And so I'm just saying right now, everybody at this table, that could be one of the situations. And you all, we all care deeply about this incident and what happened. And so if we are to extract the most relevant intelligence information out of it, I believe that's what they're trying to do before they release it.
They say that they did nothing wrong and I think --
PHILLIP: Just a reminder, this happened in October. It is December. They've had this for a long time. That's plenty of time to go through --
PARRISH: Abby, we go over intelligence for months and years.
PHILLIP: The first -- they've released that first video within days, maybe even hours after the strike happened.
FLAKE: Let me tell you as one who sat in on those briefings for 18 years, there's nothing in this that is, you know, going to expose sources and methods or any reason to hold back after you've already released the initial one.
[22:20:09]
What's the problem with releasing the next one to show the next strike, other than I think most Americans will be appalled by it? And I think the administration knows that. I think President Trump is realizing that now. Most Americans will see that.
I think how the Democrats who came out of that briefing saw it, that, you know, we don't have any sympathy for drug runners, but, man, we should show a little humanity to those who have survived a strike are survivors. I mean, the laws of war say, protect them, and I think most Americans feel that way.
VIGELAND: But they've also shown zero evidence that these were drug runners. Let's be clear about that. One, there should be a process by which they can be interdicted and then they can go through a legal system because we're a country of long order. We don't just murder people because we see them on boats in international waters.
Secondly, I want to know what the actual authorization for the use of military forces that allows for Trump to even engage in what would be a war crime if he were engaging in a war. We're not at war with Venezuela. He wants to use the 2001 and 2002 AUMFs. Is this Iraq? Is this in response to 9/11? There has been no credible claim that has actually addressed that very issue.
So, it's a war crime if you're even going to use their broad theory about this as being a part of the authorization for the use of military force. But if it's -- if you don't even grant that theory, it's just straight up murder.
FLAKE: I think you could even stipulate that these are drug runners and that we're at war, neither of which have been stipulated. But even if you did, a second strike like that to survivors of an attack --
VIGELAND: It's a war crime.
PARRISH: With all due respect to your 18 years, sir, but we don't know if there is in fact intelligence in these videos. We don't know that. We can't sit here tonight and say that. And the evidence that there was no -- the video shows floating cocaine strapped and waterproofed --
(CROSSTALKS)
TANDEN: How do you know that? You've seen the video.
(CROSSTALKS)
PARRISH: We actually see that. So, there is evidence --
PHILLIP: Mike Turner --
VIGELAND: But even if there's evidence, we have a process here. People have to be proven innocent and guilty. Do we understand that's a part of like our American values or not?
PHILLIP: To that point --
VIGELAND: Do you agree with that?
PHILLIP: -- Mike Turner, the Republican representative who is a national security hawk, by the way, this is not some kind of dove, he says, if the people on these boats were captured, had a trial and were convicted, they would not be subject to capital punishment. They would go to jail. That's to Emma's point here, that, in a process, execution would not be the punishment even for those crimes.
PARRISH: Abby, the admiral who authorized this strike, who was a part of it, actually testified earlier this week. And he said that not only were these two gentlemen on a list of people that they were authorized to take action against, deadly force against, but he said in his own estimation, he did not believe that there was an illegal act done here. And he said --
PHILLIP: Of course, he'd say that.
(CROSSTALKS) PHILLIP: I guess my only point is that, obviously, he is going to say that because he is the one who has been hung out by --
JENNINGS: His lawyer told him that.
PHILLIP: -- on this issue.
JENNINGS: And his lawyer was standing right next to him.
PHILLIP: But that doesn't stop the questions being raised -- it doesn't stop the questions being raised. Tom Cotton was asked this weekend, and he was on Meet the Press, and he's been asked this a lot of different ways, and here's how he reacted to this scenario that was presented to him.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. TOM COTTON (R-AR): Right now, there's been a significant decrease in drugs trafficked into our country, and I bet there's a significant decrease in the number of cartel members who are willing to get on these boats.
KRISTEN WELKER, NBC NEWS HOST: But the United States doesn't shoot people at the border who are bringing drugs into the country. Why should it be different at sea? Are you saying we should start shooting people at the border?
COTTON: We're going -- no, I'm not Kristen, but we are going to the source where we have large scale boats that are trafficking hundreds, if not thousands of pounds of drugs that could kill thousands of Americans, hundreds of Arkansans a year. It is a highly effective and efficient way to stop these drugs from reaching our shores.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: So, he concedes that, no, it actually would not be okay. Why is it not okay on land but it is okay at sea to murder people who are suspected of trafficking drugs?
JENNINGS: Well, look --
PHILLIP: What's the logic there?
JENNINGS: I mean, my, my view is. They ought to continue to lean into this and release whatever videos they have because the American people are behind them on this. There's a Harvard-Harris survey out today. It's a 60-40 issue. The American people believe the president is right and proper to use the U.S. military to stop these narco-terrorists from putting poison in our country. They don't think our government has ever taken this seriously until now. And I do believe there is a deterrence. I think that's absolutely true.
The politicians and whatever are going to fight out the legal ramifications of it. I'll give you the political analysis, which is the American people want it.
[22:25:01]
And I'll give you the real world analysis is, if I was down there, I wouldn't get in a boat right now with a bunch of drugs, and that's the point.
FLAKE: If that were the case, if that were the case, they would release the video.
VIGELAND: I know.
FLAKE: If they thought that that would be for a political --
JENNINGS: He said if Hegseth wants to release it, he's fine with it.
TANDEN: Well, Hegseth isn't releasing it. That's whole point himself.
FLAKE: He'd release it today. That's the point.
PHILLIP: Trump is the president, just FYI. Trump is the president of the United States.
JENNINGS: I love these videos.
PHILLIP: If Trump wants to release the video --
(CROSSTALKS)
PARRISH: Last week we had a conversation about the six members of Congress who came out and said, if there's an illegal order, you don't have to obey the order from the president of the United States. The admiral that was in charge during this attack said nothing illegal here was done, and the JAG officers that are standing right next to him, authorizing him to take this action, is absolutely saying this is okay, this is --
TANDEN: Of course he is. Can I just say, of course he is, because if he said anything else, he would be engaging in a war crime. Of course, the general is going to say that.
Now, I think the truth of all of this is we don't know. We don't really know what happened here. And I think if you think it's so popular, show the American people. And if they think the fact that Hegseth is basically hiding behind this, won't release the documents, the president, 100 percent, 180 percent reversed himself, tells us that actually when people see the video, they will be horrified by what their government has done in their name. Because the rules of engagement for not just 10 years, 50 years, it's hundreds of years, are that you're not supposed to be -- you're not supposed to -- the United States government is not supposed to be shooting to kill people who are may well look like they're trying to surrender, but are definitely no longer a threat.
FLAKE: This is where it really hurts. This war on terrorism, and it's real all over the world, and we need allies. We desperately need allies. They need to stick with us. And there's evidence that some of them are backing away from us. The Brits and others are hesitating sharing intelligence with us because they see what we're doing is not living up to our values. And our values is not to just be efficient but actually to --
JENNINGS: Did you ever ask or wonder if Obama was committing war crimes?
FLAKE: Yes.
(CROSSTALKS)
PHILLIP: For the record, okay, for the record, there was bipartisan outrage over President Obama's very liberal use of drone strikes.
JENNINGS: Did anybody say Obama committed war crimes?
PHILLIP: Hold on a second, yes.
JENNINGS: Who?
PHILLIP: Many people did. Many conservatives, many liberals did.
So, just my only point about that is that, look, I know we have short memories. I know we have short memories.
JENNINGS: He's on the board of Netflix. It doesn't seem like anybody were --
PHILLIP: I know we have short memories, but this was actually a highly controversial thing.
JENNINGS: Yes.
PHILLIP: You were actually -- you were there, were you not?
FLAKE: You know, Tim Kaine and I spent six years trying to change the AUMF, to reform that so that Congress could have a say because a lot of us were troubled with what was going on with these, basically --
JENNINGS: Did you use the phrase, war crimes?
FLAKE: No.
JENNINGS: Okay.
FLAKE: Yes.
(CROSSTALKS)
VIGELAND: We're not at war with Venezuela.
JENNINGS: We're at war with narco-terrorists.
PHILLIP: I'm just saying it's just not true that there was no outrage about that. It just was not. That's just not true.
All right, next for us, Nancy Mace is the latest Republican to call out leaders of her own party and she says that Speaker Mike Johnson is no Nancy Pelosi. We will discuss. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:30:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PHILLIP: Tonight, anger among House Republicans is erupting outside the family as Congresswoman Nancy Mace becomes the latest lawmaker to publicly slam the party's leadership. She's calling them ineffective and warning that without changes, the GOP could end up losing its majority. The hard truth Republicans don't want to hear, Mace wrote in the op-ed is what she's talking about now.
She says, "Nancy Pelosi was more effective of a speaker than any House Republican in this century. I agree with her on essentially nothing, says, but she understood something that we don't. No majority is permanent. Pelosi was ruthless. She got things done."
Now so far, more than two dozen House Republicans have already announced their retirement at the end of the term. But when asked about the growing exodus in the House, President Trump went on the defense.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNKNOWN: There's at least 20 House Republicans who have either said they're going to retire or not run again.
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Democrats also. And Democrats also.
UNKNOWN: Right.
TRUMP: But why didn't you mention them? How many Democrats are going to retire? How many Democrats?
UNKNOWN: Well, that's what I was going to ask.
TRUMP: No, no. Why don't you tell me the number of Democrats, too? You tell me that --
UNKNOWN: Are you concerned about the narrow margins? And --
TRUMP: No, I'm not concerned. I think we're going to do well.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Yikes. I have the answer for him. The number of Democrats is 18. The number of Republicans is 23. So there's something happening. I mean, some of it is just the natural order of things. We're going into a midterm that is likely to be very bad for Republicans. But this criticism from Nancy Mace, from Marjorie Taylor Greene, directed, yes, at Speaker Johnson, but really directed at the fact that the House has become a doormat to this administration. That's part of the problem.
[22:35:04]
NEERA TANDEN, FORMER DOMESTIC POLICY ADVISER, BIDEN ADMINISTRATION: Yes, I mean, I think the fact that you are hearing so much from inside the House. I mean, the fact that Nancy Mace is writing a "New York Times" editorial where she's critical of how the House is operating. I mean, it's relatively unprecedented to see that.
Of course, you know, there's criticisms in parties all the time, but I'm really surprised Nancy Pelosi did have a four seat margin. Johnson has a three seat margin at this point. It's not that different. And yet the level of criticism and chaos, and the fact that he has put bills up, takes them down, cannot get consensus. You know, I think it's relatively surprising.
PHILLIP: Yes. And you served in Congress. Do you think she's right, first of all? I mean, do you think that Speaker Johnson's doing a bad job?
JEFF FLAKE (R), FORMER U.S. SENATOR, ARIZONA: Oh, he's got a tough task. That's a thin margin. And you have some Republicans who are, you know, all over the map in terms of ideology. So it's a tough job for anybody. But it's definitely difficult when you have a president that's driving the agenda. And right now, that's an unpopular agenda.
You know, prices are still high. You know, this adventurism with, you know, things like that that are tough to defend. And then you have tariffs and that's something that Congress Republicans know that they should be in charge of and they're not.
And so, I think they're feeling like they're out of control going into what are always difficult midterms whenever, you know, know presidents elected his party tends to do worse. So, it's a tough situation and it's made worse by the situation they're in with the president.
PHILLIP: Marjorie Taylor Greene has also said historically that this is also about women. She says, "There's a lot of weak Republican men and they're more afraid of strong Republican women. So they always try to marginalize the strong Republican women that actually want to do something and actually want to achieve. Jealousy may be part of the dynamic," she added. "They're always intimidated by stronger Republican women because we mean it and we will do it and we will make them look bad."
Elise Stefanik, Anna Paulina Luna, Kat Kamak, Marjorie Taylor Greene -- there a lot of women are speaking out and they're saying that they're not being listened to, that they're being used to sort of sort of trophies and not actually --
UNKNOWN: Tokens.
PHILLIP: Yes, tokens. That's a pretty harsh criticism.
SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yes, I mean look, I think the President himself has a really strong track record of promoting Republican women. I mean, we've got White House chief of staff Suzie Wiles sitting at the top of, you know, one of the most functional White Houses we've had in modern history.
That's a great thing. In the House, I guess they're willing to, they're happy to have their own opinions, but I personally believe Mike Johnson with thin margins has done a pretty darn good job. And we're not as authoritarian as Democrats. We don't force everybody to have the same opinion all the time.
And the fact is we've got some old school Republicans, some MAGA Republicans, some libertarians, and it's a broad coalition and it's hard to manage. But when he's needed to get a vote, he's mostly got it, particularly on the President's domestic agenda, which most Republicans are happy with.
PHILLIP: Let me just play one more thing from Marjorie Taylor Greene. This was the interview that Trump was really upset about on "60 Minutes". But here's what she had to say about what's going on behind the scenes.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LESLIE STAHL, "60 MINUTES" HOST: Behind the scenes, do they talk differently?
REP. MARJORIE TAYLOR GREENE (R) GEORGIA: Yes.
STAHL: How?
GREENE: Oh, it would shock people.
STAHL: Well, let's shock people.
GREENE: Okay. I watched many of my colleagues go from making fun of him, making fun of how he talks, making fun of me constantly for supporting him to when he won the primary in 2024, they all started, excuse my language, Leslie, kissing his ass (ph) and decided to put on a MAGA hat for the first time.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Making fun of Trump behind the scenes.
TIM PARRISH, CONSERVATIVE STRATEGIST: I think this is like as my colleague said, she is allowed to have, and all these members are allowed to have their opinion or how they feel about the president or what have you. But I will echo -- this Speaker has absolutely passed transformational legislation that has brought relief.
The one big, beautiful bill has brought amazing relief to American families across the country. And he's done so within margins. And I would say, and we're comparing it to Speaker Pelosi, who gave us the unaffordable non care act out of her speakership. This Speaker has absolutely passed transformational legislation and is doing absolutely an amazing job on behalf of American people.
So, these folks are entitled to their opinion but the results that are coming out of this House say a totally different story. EMMA VIGELAND, "THE MAJORITY REPORT" CO-HOST: I would say yes, the
legislation is transformational and taking millions and millions of people off of their health care that is exactly what's going to happen.
PARRISH: And the ACA was supposed to fix that.
VIGELAND: The ACA passed before the --
(CROSSTALK)
PARRISH: Wasn't the ACA supposed to be the magic pill that fixed everything?
VIGELAND: That's not my contention. I'm a believer in Medicare for all.
[22:40:00]
TANDEN: There's 45 million people at healthcare --
(CROSSTALK)
VIGELAND: ACA expanded, covered, but it did not solve everything. We need to have a single payer system that can change that. And that's something that I advocate for on my show all the time. So, I'm not going to say that the ACA is a panacea, but the Republicans right now are not extending the 2021 ACA subsidies, meaning, that people's premiums are going to be double skyrocket because of the Republican Party right now. So yes, it's transformational legislation --
PARRISH: That's the Republican Party's fault.
(CROSSTALK)
VIGELAND: Yes, it is -- that you control Congress and you control the White House. So, of course, it's the Republican Party's fault.
JENNINGS: Who wrote the Sunset -- who wrote the Subsidy Sunset?
(CROSSTALK)
VIGELAND: So, no, hold on. Let me finish my point please. Let me finish my point please.
(CROSSTALK)
VIGELAND: I want to go back to what Marjorie Taylor Greene said. I want to go back to what Marjorie Taylor Greene said about Mike Johnson and about this White House because I do think that there's a buy-in from certain Republican women that if you toe the line, we'll allow you to be a professional woman. We'll allow you to speak your mind, but only in this very narrow context, and then we'll marginalize you on the scenes -- along the lines.
They have played ball, but when it came to the Epstein issue, they saw women who were victims. They saw them crying out saying, can you please release this information? And they saw this White House whipping votes to make sure that that information would not get out there. They-- not seating Representative Grijalva for weeks and weeks so that she wouldn't be that 218th vote on the discharge petition.
So, I think that these Republican women are hypocrites and -- in many ways, and they bought into a far right agenda that is harming the American public. But we should also listen to them when they say this administration does not respect women in their actions and the way that they treat the Republican women in their caucus. And then of course in the victims of Jeffrey Epstein and the cover-up that they've engaged in.
PHILLIP: All right, next for us. Jasmine Crockett announces her bid to be Texas' next senator by one Democrat says that decision is a gift for Republicans. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:46:26]
PHILLIP: Democratic Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett, the outspoken liberal and one of President Trump's toughest critics, is now jumping into the Texas Senate race. She wants to take on Republican John Cornyn and give Democrats a shot at flipping the chamber next year. And she's using President Trump to launch her campaign.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: You have this woman, Crockett. She's a very low I.Q. person. I watched her speak the other day. She's definitely a low I.Q. person. Crockett. Oh man, oh man. She's a very low I.Q. person. Somebody said the other day she's one of the leaders of the party. I think you got to be kidding. Now, they're going to rely on Crockett. Crockett's going to bring them back.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: First of all, Emma, your thoughts on this video and opening Salvo in this race and the decision to run.
VIGELAND: I think that she has a right to use those attacks as something in her favor. There are obviously -- when Trump talks about low I.Q., he's usually referring to women of color. It's a frequent racist trope that he engages in. So, she's trying to change that kind of narrative and put it in her favor.
But I will say that I would have preferred an ad that talks about what she wants to do for the America or for the -- for Texas and for the people there and a policy platform. There's a concern in my view that there's a lot of focus on Jasmine Crockett and less necessarily on what she's advocating for. But I want to see what she stands for. So I'm kind of the jury's out for me on Jasmine Crockett.
If she supports things like Medicare for all. If she supports things like ending the funding of the genocide in Gaza. If she supports things like taxing the rich and all of that. I'm going to be in favor of it. So, it all depends on what her policy platform looks like.
TANDEN: I mean, I guess I'd say the job here is actually to win a Senate seat in Texas. It's not to win the primary. It's if you actually think democracy is at stake and you really think oversight of Donald Trump is really important, then the Texas Senate seat is really crucial. And it could well be the defining race on whether there's a Democratic senator or not. So, I think the voters of Texas have to decide who can win the general election, not who makes us feel good.
JENNINGS: Who do you think will win?
TANDEN: I don't know. I guess we'll see.
PHILLIP: What I was going to ask you was, mean, the argument that Republicans are making is that she is their favorite candidate because they think that they can beat her. What do you think?
TANDEN: I think that she will, like anyone else, will have to prove the case of how she can defeat Cornyn or others. I think Talarico is running. He will have to make that case, too. I think the issue is that in Texas, it is a state where you have to attract Republicans and independents, as well as Democrats to win the Senate seat.
And, you know, she's a talented person. I expect her to make that case. But it is not who gets the most clicks online or who we all agree with, but who can put together a broad coalition
PHILLIP: Right.
TANDEN: -- in the state of Texas.
PHILLIP: Although the party right now, they want fighters. They want people who are pushing --
JENNINGS: But just for the record, you're against Crockett.
TANDEN: No, I'm not against Crockett. I'm saying she has to make the case about -- it's not --
JENNINGS: Who's best? You're a Democrat strategist. Which one is better?
TANDEN: I -- you know it's crazy. I think we should have a primary and see who actually
JENNINGS: Okay.
TANDEN: -- is the best candidate. It's not for us to decide. It's for the -- a lot of people do.
PHILLIP: Is it a little bit of hubris on Republicans' part to say off the bat that they think that she's beatable? I mean, I think that that's again, it's like on both sides, there are some -- there's some adherence to whatever's going on on the internet.
[22:50:02] But is it really true that she is that beatable?
FLAKE: I think when she has top policy, it's very much to the left and you're not going to win in Texas when you're running very much to the left. Neera's right. You have to build a coalition that includes Independents and Republicans to win there. And I doubt that she can do that. And so, I think it is a gift to Republicans. So, if I were her, I would continue to do ads like she just did rather than talk about policy prescriptions because my guess is that's not what Texas --
PARRISH: Can you name one of her policy positions that she's talked about that she's a champion for?
FLAKE: Oh, she -- Medicare for all I think is something she would like.
(CROSSTALK)
VIGELAND: But I will say that -- I mean that if your theory is correct then, then it just helps James Talarico because a competitive primary is going to have them duke it out and they're going to determine what is better for the people of Texas. And they're going to be able to hash these ideas out and train off of one another. That's why competitive primaries are good and it's a lesson the Democrats should take.
PHILLIP: Let me just make a bit of a pivot. But you may have heard -- you may have heard that Michelle Obama says that we're not ready for a female president. Well, Congressman Jim Clyburn said that he agrees with her. Listen to what he said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. JAMES CLYBURN (D-SC): Michelle Obama is absolutely correct. If you look at the history, we demonstrated that we were not ready. These are incredible women who have run Hillary Clinton, Kamala Harris, and I think that we are getting there. That's why we can't afford to turn the clock back. Just because it doesn't seem that we are ready, doesn't mean we should stop the pursuit.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Neera, you worked for one of those women. And actually, Jasmine Crockett brought up --
TANDEN: Yes.
PHILLIP: - running as a woman. Do you think he's right? Is Michelle Obama right?
TANDEN: You know, I mean, I understand that anxiety that people have. But I also look at the recent elections and just a few weeks ago in New Jersey and Virginia. And you know, we had women run for governor and in both of those states, they have military backgrounds, Democratic women who won historic victories, more than any Democratic man has won in recent past. And so, I think you know, I think the most important thing is that we
have to think about who the right candidates are for the moment. But I do understand that there's some trepidation out there. But among --
PARRISH: Who?
(CROSSTALK)
TANDEN: I think amongst the country. I think actually a lot of women leaders have trepidation about whether the country is ready. I don't think Michelle Obama was just manifesting --
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: Hillary Clinton won the national popular vote.
TANDEN: Yes. Yes.
(CROSSTALK)
TANDEN: Great. Great.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: All right everybody, stick around because Jasmine Crockett is actually going to be with Laura Coates in an exclusive interview, her very first since announcing her Senate bid. That's coming up in just a few minutes. But next for us -- nightcaps, A.I. resurrection edition. Be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:57:48]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNKNOWN: The greatest danger to our Republic lies not in foreign arms or political faction but --
(CROSSTALK)
UNKNOWN: May I interrupt you for a second? Could you just dumb it down just a little bit?
UNKNOWN: Okay.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Wow. That is Glenn Beck interviewing an A.I. version of George Washington, if you couldn't tell, who's apparently ripped now wearing a tight T-shirt and he echoes Beck's beliefs. So, for tonight's news nightcap, who would you resurrect for your A.I. interview? Scott, you're up first.
JENNINGS: He was probably ripped then. I mean, I mean those -- those are revolutionary war guys. They were in pretty good shape, right around -- I would pick Jesus. The implications of resurrecting Jesus not withstanding, my imagination is that it would be ratings bonanza for us here at CNN if we hear at "NewsNight", Abby could get an interview with Jesus at the beginning of that process I suspect we would have a pretty decent period viewership. So I'm going to go with Jesus. I don't think you could top it.
PHILLIP: Christ the Lord would definitely be a huge booking get.
JENNINGS: I say we put him right on fifth seat. It's the fifth seat.
PHILLIP: All right, Tim.
PARRISH: Abby, for a change, I'm going to disagree with my colleague because Jesus resurrected once. He said I'm never doing that again. The first one was good enough. So I'm going to go with Ronald Reagan. I think his wit and his comedic relief in this moment would be very appropriate.
PHILLIP: All right. Emma?
VIGELAND: I'm going go with Jeffrey Epstein. It'd be pretty easy to train that A.I.-based on all of the damning information that the House Democrats have released via the Oversight Committee. So we'd be able to actually get some answers instead of the cover up that the Trump administration's engaging in.
(CROSSTALK)
PARRISH: Assuming he would --
(CROSSTALK)
VIGELAND: Looking right at the camera. Oh yes, well, I mean, look, we trust in the power of A.I., don't we now?
FLAKE: I guess I'm a pretty shallow guy. I would interview one of the statues at Easter Island and say, how in the world did you get where you were? I mean, that's a tough job. These things are heavy.
TANDEN: That's pretty cool.
FLAKE: Yes.
TANDEN: I would go with Abraham Lincoln. And I guess I would just ask him, you know, what does he think about America today, this wonderful experiment? And you know, what do you think about the divides and the divisive?
PARRISH: I'm glad you chose a good Republican. I appreciate it.
TANDEN: Yes, I wonder what he'd think about the Republicans today.
[23:00:00]
PHILLIP: All right, well, so Scott, if you're bringing Jesus, I think we should interview Satan as well to find out about his fall from grace. I think that would be a controversial.
(CROSSTALK)
TANDEN: Yes, that would be so great.
JENNINGS: I don't want to be in a room when you do that, Abby.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Everyone, thank you very much. Thanks for watching "NewsNight." You can catch me anytime on social media -- X, Instagram and on TikTok. "Laura Coates Live" starts right now.
