Return to Transcripts main page
CNN NewsNight with Abby Phillip
DOJ Investigating Gov. Tim Walz (D-MN), Mayor Jacob Frey (D- Minneapolis, MN) Over Alleged Obstruction; Judge Orders That ICE Must Curb Some Actions In Minneapolis; Two Children, Including Infant, Hospitalized After Tear Gas By Feds; Judge Orders ICE To Limit Tactics; Trump Pardons Father Of A Super PAC Donor. Aired 10-11p ET
Aired January 16, 2026 - 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 ANCHOR (voice over): Tonight, a storm intensifies, the DOJ launching a criminal investigation of Minnesota's Democratic leaders as ICE surges in the state.
Plus, Donald Trump suffers brutal feedback on his progress report, and conservatives are getting blunt about his fate.
BEN SHAPIRO, CONSERVATIVE COMMENTATOR: I think that they are in for world of hurt right now in the midterms.
PHILLIP: Also a shakedown to annex and NATO ally.
DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: I may put a tariff on countries if they don't go along with Greenland.
PHILLIP: And for someone on a war path against fraudsters, the president sure seems to pardon a lot of them, including one whose daughter donated to his super PAC.
Live at the table, Scott Jennings, Tiffany Cross, Pete Seat, Chuck Rocha and Stacy Schneider.
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. We have breaking news tonight, an escalation in the chaos involving ICE on American street. The Justice Department is opening a criminal investigation into Minnesota's governor, Tim Walz, and the mayor of Minneapolis over possible obstruction of federal and law enforcement.
Now, a grand jury has issued subpoenas for both of them. Walz calls it dangerous, authoritarian, and a weaponization of the justice system. He says that the only investigation should be into the agent who shot Renee Good. Now, Jacob Frey, the mayor, says that it's just an intimidation stunt. Also breaking tonight, a federal judge has ordered ICE to stop some of its tactics on the ground in Minneapolis. She wrote that ICE agents cannot retaliate, arrest or detain people who are engaging in peaceful, unobstructed protests. They can't use pepper spray to disperse crowds in those peaceful protests and they also can't stop or detain drivers in vehicles where there's no reasonable suspicion that they are forcibly obstructing or interfering with operations.
Now, she also made it clear that following ICE at an appropriate distance is not considered reasonable suspicion.
So, a lot going on on the ground in Minneapolis, and you're seeing, Stacy Schneider, an acceleration of the Trump administration using or attempting to use the levers of the Justice Department to what seems to be punish speech of the governor and the mayor.
STACY SCHNEIDER, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR, U.S. NEWS AND WORLD REPORT: Yes, it looks like law fair against politicians now who are running Minnesota. And there's a statute, there's a federal statute that the government will likely invoke here, which says that if two or more people conspire to impede law enforcement efforts using force, threat or coercion, that that is a crime.
Now, we've all seen the statements made by Frey and by Walz publicly about what's going on in their state and cities, and none of it is evidence of threat or coercion toward ICE. Basically, Frey said that crass statement to ICE, get the F out of here. That's not a threat, that's not an illegal statement or indicia of a criminal statement. Without more, if he said, we're going to hurt you, ICE, we're going to go after you, I'm going to shoot you, that's a threat. But just saying, get out of my backyard is no threat.
And Governor Walz saying, people should protest peacefully, loudly, go ahead protest, take pictures of what ICE is doing, videotape them, act as witnesses, but do it peacefully, none of that. That's all appropriate speech. It's First Amendment protected speech. And for the federal government to go after these two officials for saying words like that is abominable.
PHILLIP: Yes. I mean, in a way, the two events that are happening tonight, the DOJ's actions and this judge's ruling, which seems to reinforce that people do have a right to record. They can actually be following ICE agents recording them, as long as they're not breaking any traffic laws, they're following at a safe distance, they're basically saying that is okay.
And so for DOJ to then try to, it seems, criminalize that, how are they going to substantiate charges against these two men?
[22:05:02]
SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, I mean, that's a great speech. We don't know exactly what they're being investigated for. We have very few details about this, based on what I've heard. There are conversations potentially going on with the grand jury in Minneapolis. And, look, based on their public statements, it's pretty clear that -- and based on the statements of officials at DOJ, it's pretty clear there is concern that these two guys have used their positions and their public statements to try to obstruct the execution of federal laws. Now, whether that rises to a crime, I don't know.
PHILLIP: Can you give me an example?
SCHNEIDER: Where's that clarity?
PHILLIP: Yes.
JENNINGS: Well, I mean, I think they've both made numerous public statements that have made it perfectly clear that they do not want federal laws to be enforced in Minnesota.
PHILLIP: Such as?
JENNINGS: And they flatly said they don't want ICE there enforcing federal immigration laws. They have literally both said that's not what they said, ICE leave Minnesota. In fact, Tim Walz said, we're on the third day of Gettysburg at one point.
PHILLIP: He did not say that either, okay? Sorry, but he didn't say that.
Jacob Frey has said, we want ICE to get out of our city. We don't oppose ICE enforcing immigration law. We don't want them in the city in the numbers that they are in the city. That's what he was talking about.
JENNINGS: Okay. Listen, I know they have great lawyers here at the table. I'm just telling you --
PHILLIP: So, look, I'm asking about real -- like, really, if they're going to pursue criminal charges, criminal charges --
JENNINGS: That's not what's been reported.
PHILLIP: -- against -- okay. So, what is the subpoena for?
JENNINGS: That's not what's reported. What's been reported is that there's a preliminary investigation. No criminal charges have been brought against them.
PHILLIP: Yes, it's an investigation in order to bring charges.
JENNINGS: To find out if charges are warranted.
PHILLIP: Listen, if I said if they bring criminal charges. My question is what for? What for? And if -- and then, secondly, is this risking this administration doubling down on something that is deeply unpopular in this country?
PETE SEAT, FORMER WHITE HOUSE SPOKESMAN, PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: Well, what should be -- well, sorry, what should be deeply unpopular are the agitators who are trying to harass and intimidate ICE. On this very network during the 4:00 P.M. Eastern hour, a reporter was on the ground in Minneapolis and he was explaining what he has seen with his own eyes that during the day, yes, peaceful protesters, exercising their First Amendment right. But what happens when the sun goes down? A new group of people, younger, come out and, in his words, are agitators. They are standing outside a federal facility where ICE agents are going to start their work or finish their work for the day, and these agitators are kicking the cars, hitting the cars, trying to cause problems, and we're not focused on that. Yes, there have been issues with peaceful protesters.
I would ask though, the judge, and perhaps, Stacy, you can explain this, what exactly defines peaceful? Like where's the line? And where's the line for harassment and intimidation when it comes to following ICE around? Because at some point, a line is crossed.
SCHNEIDER: So, I don't really see the line being crossed here. Unless someone took a physical hand to an ICE agent or damaged physical property --
JENNINGS: What about a physical car?
SCHNEIDER: Well, okay. So, you know what? That's a misdemeanor offense for potential --
JENNINGS: Running over someone is a misdemeanor, hitting someone with a car?
(CROSSTALKS)
SCHNEIDER: What we're talking about, Scott, we're not talking about --
(CROSSTALKS)
JENNINGS: What about parking your car perpendicular on a one way street?
SCHNEIDER: Yes, that's not harassment. Sorry, that's not how the law works.
JENNINGS: No. I'm asking you, is that peaceful protesting to block traffic with your car on a one way street and they hit an ICE agent?
SCHNEIDER: No. That's not protesting. That's being stopped by a law enforcement officer and making a decision whether to proceed or flee.
PHILLIP: All right, go ahead.
SCHNEIDER: Totally different.
JENNINGS: I hope you're recommending people do that because that's how people get --
SCHNEIDER: I'm glad you're hoping that.
CHUCK ROCHA, SUBSTACK, THE ROCHA REVOLUTION: I think this whole thing is horrible for what we're seeing for our democracy, for what we've seen with federal agents and a lot of people saying, I can't believe this is happening in our country.
What -- for all the thing that is horrible for, I'm torn with something, because me and Tiff (ph) were talking in the back, I don't want to put our stories out there, but people are literally dying. Folks are out there literally hiding in closets. But as a Democratic consultant, I'm also like, man, they cannot get out of their own way because this people, who are swing voters, folks who aren't MAGA folks, who aren't Bernie Sanders, but regular folks sitting on their couch at home know that this is crazy to be happening in America. You can give a little blame to either side, do whatever, both sides of things, all you want, but we all know this shit ain't right.
PHILLIP: Can I just ask just to clarify, what is the part that people think is crazy?
ROCHA: 78 percent of folks that we have polled, and this station has polled, had seen that video. And unlike Scott, they don't think that he was hit by a car and they think that that woman was unlawfully -- whether she was or not, they think she was unlawfully killed.
PHILLIP: Understood, all right.
TIFFANY CROSS, AUTHOR, LOVE, ME: They believe their eyes and their ears. But I just also want to correct something, a complete misrepresentation of what the reporter you were referencing. Shimon was on ground in Minneapolis and I saw the standup he did in the 4:00 P.M. Eastern hour. He absolutely did not say what you suggested he did. He was saying what he had been told.
[22:10:01]
He's been on the ground there and witnessed --
SEAT: No. He said, I have seen this --
CROSS: He didn't. The audience can look at it.
SEAT: -- and he used the word, agitators.
CROSS: He didn't. He said that he's been told --
SEAT: You may not like that, Tiffany, but it happened.
CROSS: It's not about what I'd like, but I think of the liars at the table, I'm probably not in that category, and I'm also not a cult member where I regurgitate every talking point from the GOP.
SEAT: Well, I'll show you the transcript and the (INAUDIBLE).
CROSS: Okay, great. But the point is he was saying what he had been told on ground in Minneapolis. But even that aside, I mean, we're still dealing with an agency that has been told that they can kill people with immunity. The president of the United States has essentially given them permission to act unhinged. This, our last year, was the deadliest year for people in custody of ICE agents. 32 people have died. So, for all of these purported Christians and all the people who followed Mr. President, 2 Corinthians into the voting booth, I just really want to know what Jesus are you serving that's looking at this right now, that's saying that's okay. It is not. It is hypocrisy for you to sit here and try to -- for anyone, not just you, for anyone to sit here and try to justify that.
What's more concerning, I -- look, with all due respect to the law, I'm concerned that the judiciary will hold the line for what's happening in the country. Right now, ICE has contracts for up to $25 million worth of contracts where they will have an array of spy tools and utensils, things that are like facial recognition, social media tracking, phone hacking, and the federal government has said they will use these tools for people they claim are domestic terrorists, just as they claimed with Renee Nicole Good. How terrifying is that?
So, if you're a peaceful protester, if you're an agitating protester, they can start using this technology on its own people.
SCHNEIDER: And you know what's crazy? The administration is calling domestic terrorists, applying that name to protesters, or you can call them agitators, screamers, yellers, people voicing their opinion under the First Amendment that they're not happy with the actions of the government. And the ironic thing is if they have the facial technology and any one of us is subject to that facial technology by being on a public street, why not use that in your enforcement of the immigration laws and rules to find illegal immigrants rather than using it against the American people who are engaging in their First Amendment right to protest? The fact that --
PHILLIP: Well, you know, I think they may very well be doing both, but I --
SCHNEIDER: But they're not signaling that they're doing both.
PHILLIP: But I do wonder, I mean, on the facial recognition piece and the surveillance piece, I feel like there was a time when conservatives would have been completely up in arms about that. They would have been just like they were up in arms about, you know, the Patriot Act and that era of surveillance that really actually was not supposed to have ever been applied to Americans. Why is it that it's okay now for an agency that is supposed to be charged with dealing with undocumented immigrants or immigration, in general, can now use that technology on Americans, and there's no check and balance on it?
SEAT: What I find so interesting about it is it's been utilized a hundred thousand times, according to The Wall Street Journal story today, and yet this is really the first time we're hearing about it. There was a story in a much smaller outlet back in June.
PHILLIP: Yes. I mean, people have been talking about it but it hasn't arisen to --
SEAT: But the reason why, Abby, is because it's working.
PHILLIP: What do you mean?
SEAT: It's because we don't cover things unless they go haywire. PHILLIP: No, I don't necessarily agree with that.
SEAT: So, it's working, it's doing its job.
PHILLIP: I don't agree with that.
SEAT: It's ensuring that we identify people and make sure that they don't are who they say they are and make sure that they aren't U.S. citizens.
PHILLIP: I don't think that's the reason that it hasn't been talked about.
SEAT: And it's also because we have facial recognition everywhere we go.
PHILLIP: Hold on a second. I don't think that's the reason, okay? I think the reason that we are not -- we had not been talking about it is because a lot of these contracts are relatively new. And it takes a while for us to see how they're being utilized. But the question remains, are you comfortable with a federal agency using, with the widespread use of technologies, like facial recognition technologies, surveillance technologies being used against Americans, are you comfortable with that?
SEAT: I have no reason to be against it at this point. And as I was trying to say, we are used to this. I use facial recognition technology this morning flying here from Indiana --
PHILLIP: Yes. But, you know --
SEAT: -- to get into the pre-check line. Disneyland took my picture last Saturday to get in the cart (ph).
PHILLIP: The disclaimer at the airport, when you do go to the airport, is that you can actually decline to have your face utilized. And you can do that as an American citizen. So, that's that.
But, look, I do want to play -- Todd Blanche was in -- he was in -- he was -- I think he was in Minneapolis today. Let me play what he said about what I guess they might be looking at when it comes to the governor and the mayor. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TODD BLANCHE, DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL: When the governor or the mayor threaten our officers, when the mayor suggests that he's encouraging, encouraging citizens to call 911 when they see ICE officers, that is very close to a federal crime.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: So, first of all, I should say, what he just said is not actually what Mayor Frey said.
[22:15:05] So, I know this is a running theme, but there's just been a lot of taking things completely out of their appropriate context. He was actually saying what Mayor Frey was saying was that Minneapolis residents are calling 911 when they encounter ICE and that the Minneapolis Police Department cannot respond to all those calls because they don't have the manpower. But you were saying?
SCHNEIDER: Right. Well, for Todd Blanche, the deputy attorney general of the United States, to say that Tim Walz and Mayor Frey are threatening is -- he has a duty not to make statements like that. That is not true. He knows that's not true. We've all seen the video. It's public knowledge what they have said. They have not made any threats under the law. Their speech was not even close to being threatening. And to have the deputy attorney general make a statement like that is horrible.
Todd Blanche also, a few days ago, tweeted that he had his eyes on Walz and Frey. And he was looking for them and he was calling them domestic terrorists. This is not American. That is not the way he should be behaving.
PHILLIP: This is not a threat. It's a promise, he says.
SCHNEIDER: It's a promise, right.
PHILLIP: But to Stacy's point, where are the alleged threats from the mayor and the governor toward federal officials? Do they exist?
JENNINGS: Yes. Look, I think they've made statements that you could reasonably consider to be threats toward ICE agents.
PHILLIP: Like what?
JENNINGS: And they're going to take these statements to a grand jury. Abby, they've made plenty of --
PHILLIP: Like what, Scott?
JENNINGS: They've made plenty of comments --
PHILLIP: I mean, you've got to substantiate --
JENNINGS: -- that indicate these people are, we're under federal occupation, we're under federal occupation.
PHILLIP: Is that a threat?
JENNINGS: It sounds like a threat to me, but we'll see what a grand jury -- that's your opinion. I've got a different opinion. We'll see what the grand jury --
SCHNEIDER: Those words are opinion words. Those words were not threats.
PHILLIP: Yes. He might be wrong. It might be inappropriate, but it's not -- JENNINGS: I mean, if you want to move to Minneapolis and take up for these guys, go ahead. I'm just telling you what the point of view of the federal government might be.
PHILLIP: I'm just trying to understand what the point of view is. I'm still listening. What else do you got?
JENNINGS: They have made numerous statements, Abby, over and over and over again that they don't think ICE should be in Minneapolis, that they don't think federal immigration laws should be enforced opinion, that they think law enforcement has been put in danger by incitement. That's their view. And they're going to take that to a grand jury. I don't know what's going to happen in the room, but we'll see.
PHILLIP: So, none of those are threats.
Look, here, listen --
JENNINGS: You're welcome to just say things out loud and speak them into the air and hope and pray that that's what happened?
(CROSSTALKS)
PHILLIP: Just, look, this is not something -- you're not -- you don't work for Todd Blanche or Donald Trump, as far as I know.
JENNINGS: And you don't work for Tim Walz, as far as I know.
PHILLIP: You don't have to defend things even when you can't figure out what the defense is. Because, to me --
JENNINGS: I'm not defending or --
PHILLIP: -- if you're going to open an investigation into someone, a criminal investigation, and you can't even point to me -- if we're talking about words, you ought to be able to just point on plain paper what are the threats, okay? If you can't do it, then you can't do it. That's the end of the story.
JENNINGS: You're right. You're right. This story shouldn't even exist. You're right. Let's do something else.
PHILLIP: Well, Scott, I'll let you say that.
JENNINGS: We'll just wave it away.
PHILLIP: We're going to hit pause and we're going to continue this debate.
We also have some new brutal polls for President Trump showing that Americans are seeing the president's first year as a failure.
We'll be right.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:20:00]
PHILLIP: Let's pick up where we left off. The Trump administration is now facing a lot of public backlash about how immigration enforcement is going in the country. And according to Axios, Trump's advisers are quietly talking about recalibrating the White House's approach. Though it's unclear what Trump -- what changes Trump would embrace if any. A top adviser told Axios, quote, he wants deportations, he wants mass deportations. What he doesn't want is what people are seeing. He doesn't like the way it looks. It looks bad. So, he's expressed some discomfort at that. There's the right way to do this and this doesn't look like the right way to a lot of people.
Do you believe that they would change course?
CROSS: No. I think this is unfortunately what a lot of people in America voted for. I think it looks bad to people with a sense of moral compass. I don't know that that we have that a lot among Trump supporters, unfortunately.
We already are -- you keep smirking, Scott, but, I mean, you say on this show routinely horrific things. You make jokes about people in prison in El Salvador. I mean, these things are -- they speak to the heart of Americans and what we see people are going through. It's not a political standpoint to me. You know, we try to see the humanity in people and it doesn't seem like people on the right side are capable of that.
This is what people voted for. We saw -- we knew very well who Trump was during the first term, where he had the family separation policies, where he was putting children in cages. People voted for that again and again. I'm done pretending that there are people out there who will see this and be outraged by it. The polling numbers just show that's not true. People will say they don't like it, but they showed up to the voting booth and voted for him again and again. Of the over of nearly 70,000 people in ICE custody right now, less than, I believe, 10 percent have criminal convictions. I mean, the data shows time and again that this is an unfair, inhumane policy. And so, no, Abby, I don't think this is going to make a difference.
I'm really concerned about who exactly is working for ICE.
[22:25:00]
Like there has not -- as far as I know, there has not been any extensive investigation into these hiring practices. I'm curious how many Proud Boys are on the payroll at ICE? There was a slate journalist who tried to get hired at ICE after a six-minute interview. She was offered a job without any of the background checks, without even a domestic violence background check. They are casting a wide net of deplorable people who hold certain ideological beliefs, people who have Nazi tattoos on their neck and defending them on American cities. And it's costing local municipalities millions of dollars.
PHILLIP: Scott?
JENNINGS: Respond to what? PHILLIP: What she just said.
JENNINGS: Oh, you're worried about tattoos, like the guy that's going to win the Maine senator primary with the Nazi tattoo?
CROSS: Here we go. Let's deflect. Like let's --
JENNINGS: No, I'm asking. If you're worried about tattoos, I'd just ask --
CROSS: But let's talk about what's happening in America.
JENNINGS: Yes, look, I don't, I'm not going to respond to ad hominem attacks on 70 million Americans who decided to vote Republican in the November 2024 election. I don't think it's right to come out here, you call people liars. You call anybody who votes Republican, you say they don't have a moral compass. I think I'm just -- I don't feel --
CROSS: I didn't say anybody who votes Republican. I said the people who voted for Donald Trump.
JENNINGS: Okay, that's a Republican and he won in November with Republicans who voted for him. So, don't back away from your feelings (ph). That's how you feel.
CROSS: I'm not backing away. I don't think they have a moral compass.
JENNINGS: That's how you feel. But I'm not --
CROSS: You don't ever have to worry about me backing away from that point. I say they don't have a moral compass.
JENNINGS: I don't feel like I have to respond to these attacks. In fact, I think you ought ask her if she really believes 70 million people lack a moral compass.
CROSS: I believe people who thought what Trump did and voted for him lack of moral compass, yes.
PHILLIP: There are a lot of Americans who actually do look at the way that ICE enforcement has been carried out, what seems to be sometimes the randomness, the capriciousness of it, and it does offend their moral compass. Are those Americans wrong?
JENNINGS: They're welcome to their opinion, and I'm sure there are people who don't like the immigration enforcement. A lot of Democrats don't want immigration laws enforced, or they think certain people ought to be allowed to stay in the country. Trump has been pretty clear that he thinks if you're in the country illegally, you should be deported 70 --
PHILLIP: So, you don't think anybody who -- let me ask you, I mean, do you think that there are some people who are here in the country illegally, without status, undocumented, whatever you want to call it, you don't think that any of them deserve to have a chance to be here if they haven't broken any other laws? JENNINGS: Look, I think the American people voted to end the illegal immigration crisis in this country.
PHILLIP: That's not what I asked.
JENNINGS: And that includes mass deportation.
PHILLIP: I'm asking you, Scott Jennings, do you think that there are some people in this country who might not have a legal immigration status who deserve to be in this country, who deserve an opportunity to be in this country?
JENNINGS: I think if they want to be in this country, they should go back and do it the right way.
ROCHA: The immigration system is so broken is that there's no line to get in. I think that there's a lot of folks who say you should do it the right way, and the right way 15 years ago was not the right way, you do it right now.
But I want to go back to what you started this with. There's a reason why in the Trump administration you see a little backpedal. Whether do they do it or not, I'm telling you why that conversation is being had. We are less than ten months from an election, and I've been asking voters in swing Congressional seats, that's the only thing that matters in the upcoming midterm elections is Congressional seats, the way they feel about the questions you just asked them too. And what Trump supporters have said to me and lots of other consultants are, yes, we want to see folks deported who have crimes, but they don't like what they're seeing on their T.V. every night, because I've got to figure out how to make the T.V. ad to get them to vote for the Democrat after I hear that.
PHILLIP: There was a story that was being talked about a lot today, because it happened on Wednesday night. A family was trying to get out of the neighborhood where there were ICE protests and they got caught in the crossfire. They were pleading with ICE agents to let them go through. There was tear gas that was let loose near their car. They were driving with six of their kids. Their youngest child was hospitalized and couldn't breathe.
That alone is pretty horrific. But then you had DHS sending a tweet that says, it is horrific to see these radical agitators bring their children to their violent riots. Please stop endangering your children. These are people who were living in a neighborhood. This is the type of thing that, to Tiffany's point, there's a lack of empathy that is coming from the top at the government level that seems to be a permission slip for ICE agents, federal officers on the ground, to act in a particular way that wouldn't take into consideration of family trying to flee the chaos and allow them to get out.
Again, I'm talking about regular people who are sitting at home and they're watching the news and they hear things like that and they don't like it. And I just wonder how can Republicans not see that as a political problem, if they don't see that as moral problem, at least a political problem. SEAT: Despite what Tiffany might think, I'm not blind. Yes, there are overzealous ICE agents, people who have spent far too much time watching Cops and Live P.D., and they were once living vicariously through the screen and now they get to be the big, bad guy and they're taking it a step too far.
[22:30:10]
The White House in the administration absolutely needs to rein that in. You started this segment with blind quotes or comments from within the White House that they're concerned about this.
The President himself is concerned with what he's saying. We know that he is visually minded, and he cares about pictures. He cares about images. And if he's seeing something that makes his administration looks bad -- that he thinks makes the administration look bad, he's going to take action.
SCHNEIDER: He can easily fix this because ten years ago, maybe 15 years ago, and it happens in New York and happened in many other states. The way ICE operated was they weren't deployed into villages. They weren't deployed into cities, boots on the ground like storm troopers. They went to the courthouses. They went to the jails. They picked up illegal immigrant --
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: Why can't they do that in Minneapolis?
(CROSSTALK)
SCHNEIDER: Why can't they do that all over the place? Exactly.
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: Why can't they do that in Minneapolis?
SCHNEIDER: Because the sanctuary cities -- and I'm going to agree with you on this point. The sanctuary cities precluded the federal government from doing that anymore. They used to do it. New York is a sanctuary city.
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: So, you think they should?
(CROSSTALK)
SCHNEIDER: They should do it in New York. Wait a minute. There's one point I want to make. We have --no -- notorious Rykers Island jail. ICE had an office at the jail where when somebody was released from their sentence from prison and they were illegal immigrant, they were immediately taken with the cooperation of the state -- federal and state working together. They were taken into immigration custody immediately, gone through immigration proceedings and shipped out of the country. That was a way that worked. JENNINGS: It works all over the country today. Except for Minneapolis.
(CROSSTALK)
SCHNEIDER: But the Trump administration could employ, instead of two to 3000 -- wait, let me finish my point.
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: They won't let them in the jails.
PHILLIP: Hold on, just a second. Can you just let her finish her point? We can't even understand what she's trying to say.
SCHNEIDER: Things are not working now. So there are two to 3000 ICE agents there now or being deployed there in total. That's not working. Somebody died. Somebody else got shot. So, if the government would even be willing to go back to the old policies and discuss them with Minneapolis, there's no discussion about anything. There's brute force --
JENNINGS: Can I respond to this?
SCHNEIDER: -- and brute defense. So, you're going to, anyway.
JENNINGS: Okay, so your point is this. That there should be cooperation between state, local and the feds. Totally agree with you. In fact, there is cooperation. States and cities, locales all over the country are doing this. They are not doing it in Minneapolis because Walz and Fry, and the Democrats who run the state and the city of Minneapolis will not permit it.
The feds have been begging them to go into the jail in exactly the manner that you are prescribing. They're doing it all over the country. The reason you have 2000 ICE agents in Minneapolis is because they have to catch illegal aliens on the streets, not in administrative transfers in the jail.
SCHNEIDER: But they're not doing that. They're not that. They're going after American citizens and stopping them and asking them to identify themselves as citizens of the United States. That is not a country I want to live in.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: We'll pick up on that very point when we come back from a quick break. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:37:52]
PHILLIP: All right, welcome back. We were just discussing the idea that American citizens in Minneapolis have had to show identification, proof of citizenship. Here's what the mayor said about that today.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JACOB FREY (D) MAYOR OF MINNEAPOLIS: People are walking around on the street with their passports. That's not American. That's the furthest thing from it. Please take back to your respective constituencies and your colleagues the message of if you love your own community, do not let this happen in ours.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: I think you were saying, Tiffany, this is happening. We know that it's happening. We played earlier this week video of it. DHS says that they don't stop people unless they have reasonable suspicion. But we've seen enough cases to know that many people do not believe that they had reasonable suspicion other than that they were walking down a street.
CROSS: I mean, the social media is flooded with these videos, but even verify reporting outlets show this. And again, I have to go back to who are these people? Who are the people being employed? Tom Honan, who of course oversees this whole operation, has met with at least one member of the Proud Boys on four different occasions. This is according to social media posts monitored by hate watch and verified reporting.
And so yes, when you give a license to people who hold racist, xenophobic, ideological beliefs and you unleash them on communities, regardless of if they're working with the federal government or not, you are -- emboldened these people to do that, then you are going to have all types of unlawful stops. And eventually, there will -- already been 16 shootings resulting in four people dying, eventually that number is going to balloon. It's going to swell. And I understand --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: But do you think it's possible, Tiffany, that this is just a policy that they are -- they have put in place in order to catch a dragnet. And they've been emboldened to do it because the Supreme Court in that writing by Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh seemed to indicate that what he called "brief stops" for citizen checks, citizenship checks, would be okay.
But Kavanaugh has addressed that subsequently, and a lot of people have pointed out that this is happening with frequency and also that DHS seems to be taking it to a pretty far extent where people, a Somali woman was stopped, people are being stopped because they're Uber drivers and maybe they're brown or black or whatever it is, that's where we are. I think, it seems like it's not -- it doesn't necessarily need to be racial animus. It can also be policy.
CROSS: But it is policy informed by racial animus.
PHILLIP: Well, if the individual ICE agents -- is what I'm saying.
(CROSSTALK)
CROSS: But it's a disservice to not acknowledge that part. I think that is a huge part of it.
SCHNEIDER: I agree with part of what you're saying and that it seems like the agency itself is emboldened to -- whenever law enforcement engages in public activity or public arrests, or public involvement with violence with the public or restraining someone in public or a suspect, people on the streets videotape it.
They're allowed to videotape it. They have a First Amendment right to gather on the streets and watch what goes down in public. And it seems from all the images coming out of Minnesota that ICE is extremely aggressive in responding to people exercising their First Amendment rights.
And I think, Abby, you're right. I think maybe the administration is emboldened by the Supreme Court ruling. But the administration itself, the messaging they're giving by calling American citizens domestic terrorists, and Kristi Noem coming out the first day without any investigation or evidence in calling Renee --
(CROSSTALK)
SCHNEIDER: Thank you. The victim of that stop, a domestic terrorist who perished in her car, it's not messaging that should be coming out of these departments.
SEAT: There's something else at play here that we are totally walking past and that is there's a reason why Donald Trump sent more troops and even after the good thing that Miss Good got killed is because as a, -- again, I don't want to be crashing, bring this back to politics, but it is a lot about politics is they want to have this fight.
Anytime Donald Trump's talking about law and order or deporting illegal immigrants, or doing something that quote unquote, keeping America safe, that's where he wants to talk. So, he's not talking about the issues that CNN's reporting today that he's underwater on, which is the economy in process.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: But it seems that, to that point, this is a complete miss for them because instead they're being -- they're being forced to justify constitutional violations of people's rights, their rights to protest, their right to live, and walk around in their neighborhoods without having to produce proof of citizenship, example.
JENNINGS: Well, there's obviously a dispute about what is a legitimate protest and what is trying to impede and obstruct law enforcement and their duties. That's obviously a debate that's going on. Any idea how many people ICE has arrested and removed from Minneapolis in the last five weeks? Twenty-five hundred. Rapists, murderers --
UNKNOWN: How many?
JENNINGS: -- pedophiles, gang members --
CROSS: How many of the 2500 -- who are rapists, murderers, pedophiles? JENNINGS: Twenty-five hundred -- over 2500.
ROCHA: That's arrest. I don't think all --
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: So, you have the worst of the worst.
PHILLIP: I mean, Scott, that's not the number of all of those types of people. But just--
CROSS: That's inaccurate.
SCHNEIDER: That's pretty big coincidence that 2500 people have conviction records for those particular offenses.
CROSS: It's inaccurate. And I honestly, Scott, and when I say it's a lie or I'm saying someone is a liar, it is not meant to be an insult. It is when you say things like that. It's just not true.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Let me just ask you --
(CROSSTALK)
CROSS: I mean, if somebody's insulted that's okay but that's not my intention. It might be an insult but if you lie then can acknowledge that you're a liar.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Let me just give Scott an opportunity to clarify. Are you saying that the number of people with serious violent criminal records is 2500?
JENNINGS: I'm telling you that according to the Department of Homeland Security and their official statements in the last five weeks they have removed, quote, "over 2500 murderers, fraudsters, predators and gang members the worst of the worst from Minnesota."
PHILLIP: So, have they substantiated that all 2500 of those people fall into those categories?
JENNINGS: I'm reading you an official government statement.
PHILLIP: Because you recognize that there are many people that are being arrested that don't necessarily fit into those charges.
JENNINGS: Well, I'm sure some people --
PHILLIP: And that it would be important to know that before you characterize that such a large number of people as all being --
(CROSSTALK) JENNINGS: Look, it's your right to call the government a liar if you want to. I'm literally giving you the official government data that they're putting out in the public.
PHILLIP: I'm not calling them a liar. All I'm saying is that I would like to see the actual hard numbers. They should release a list. They should release the charges. And we can see for ourselves what the divide is. And so if they were to do that, I'm not going to just go with a number that said the worst of the worst.
That's not a charge, okay? want to know what they're charged with. I want to know what they're convicted of. And I want to know the full list. And I've seen that they've released a shorter list of people that they've actually produced names and charges and all of that stuff. It's a shorter list, a much shorter list.
[22:45:00]
PHILLIP: But I have not seen a list of 2500 people. And I think if that list existed, we would need to know that before we could go with that number being characterized as the worst of the worst being taken out of Minneapolis.
PHILLIP: Also, breaking tonight, Donald Trump is issuing nearly two dozen new pardons, including more fraudsters. We'll discuss that.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:50:03]
PHILLIP: Breaking tonight, the President has issued more pardons, 21 in total. And once again, it includes fraudsters. In one case, a bribery convict whose daughter donated millions to Trump's super PAC. And in another, a woman who was granted clemency in Trump's first term received another pardon for another fraud conviction.
It's in stark contrast with the President's tough talk about fraud in Minnesota. I'm actually shocked that they didn't even wait until the week was done to pardon another fraudster. I mean, I -- somebody who already received a pardon and then was --
ROCHA: Went back and did it again.
PHILLIP: -- a recidivist and came back and did it again. I mean, why? Chuck.
ROCHA: Look, when I saw this, every time I see one of these stories and I've talked about it here. And I think it's ludicrous that he had pardoned somebody and everybody deserves that they deserve a pardon, they should get a pardon. That, my friends, is where I come in because there's a lot of folks sitting in jail or that did their time who deserve a pardon. And that's why the pardon was enacted so folks could get a second chance and I'm all about it.
But the way we're doing it now, I call it the bastardization of the pardon powers is what i call it. And it's not just right. And for those legal eagles listening, you should know if -- big if -- if Donald Trump was taking money so that he could actually pardon somebody because they gave money to a super PAC. Did you know because of the Supreme Court laws or the thing that they passed that he could not be indicted for any crime?
PHILLIP: Well, and I mean maybe even more than that, the way that this -- I don't want to -- look. I don't want to say that there was money exchange for a pardon, but one of the people here who was pardoned, Mr. Julio Herrera, his daughter donated $2.5 million to MAGA Inc., a super PAC devoted to Trump run by his allies.
In May, her father's lawyer, Christopher Kies, who served in Trump's legal defense team, negotiated an unusually lenient sentence with the Justice Department. And then in July, Ms. Herrera donated another $1 million to the MAGA Inc. PAC and now pardoned.
CROSS: I know you were so concerned about fraud, Scott. I'm curious like when you see things like this, why can't we say this is something that is not proper. This is Donald Trump abusing his pardon power and pardoning people as personal favors and not as correcting a misstep in the criminal justice system.
JENNNIGS: I truly don't know anything about these cases. Some of these were recommended by Alice Johnson who everybody in the criminal justice community respects her opinion. So, look. If I were the President, I would not pardon as many people as either Donald Trump or Joe Biden has pardoned. I think, to your point, I do think it's a little out of hand.
The President does have broad latitude here to show mercy to people. That's what the White House says they're doing in some cases. And I agree with Chuck. There are some people who have been over prosecuted, mistreated, need a second chance, have earned a second chance.
In these particular cases you're bringing up tonight, I wouldn't be able to sort them out. I do think this, Alice Johnson being involved does give me some confidence in the process because she's been really, really good at bringing some of these cases up to the President.
PHILLIP: Given that they are trying to rescind federal dollars for funding for school -- kids to eat in schools, for small business funding, for any number of things, health and human services funding, to an entire state based on the premise that they're going to go after fraud. Does it make any sense to you that they would then in the same month, pardon a fraudster who had already received a pardon and went back and did another offense?
JENNINGS: Yes, okay, I agree with you. If you're go after fraud on one hand, and give leniency to people who have committed fraud on the other, this will create an optics issue for you. But I don't know the specifics of these people's cases. But yes, a political optics issue? Yes, I don't disagree with you.
SEAT: What sold out to me about this is the woman you mentioned who's now been pardoned twice, the argument they were making is that it was a political prosecution and President Trump feels a special kinship with people who claim to be politically prosecuted. And if you're making that argument to him --
(CROSSTALK)
CROSS: Oh my God. Oh my God. Like, are you kidding me? Are you kidding me?
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Hold on.
(CROSSTALK)
CROSS: No, not analysis -- idiotic cult regurgitation is ridiculous to hear.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Hold on a second. Hold on a second. Here's one thing that you should understand.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Guys, just one second, one second. Tiffany, just one second. Hold on, Tiffany. One thing that you should know before you determine whether or not this person was politically persecuted was that she -- the investigation into this second charge was initiated while Donald Trump was still President in 2020. So --
[22:55:04]
SEAT: Yes, I didn't say that she was. I said that she's making the case.
PHILLIP: I get that, but he's --
SEAT: And that probably mattered to the President.
PHILLIP: -- but he's the President of the United States and he has the benefit of some of the best information available to any person on this planet. And you're telling me that he doesn't have the judgment or the discernment to say, actually this is not a political prosecution, actually, maybe I gave this lady a chance one time, you don't get a second chance for the same type of offense. Why is it that the bar is so low for the President of the United States that we can't even have that conversation?
SEAT: Probably because he feels like he's making a statement.
PHILLIP: Which is?
SEAT: Which is that he was politically prosecuted and people that he believes are also being politically prosecuted.
PHILLIP: Or that some fraud matters but other fraud maybe doesn't matter.
(CROSSTALK)
SEAT: Again, not saying I agree with it. Just offering an analysis.
PHILLIP: Everyone, thank you very much for being here. We will be back in just a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:00:07]
PHILLIP: And a programming note before you go, you can join us tomorrow morning, "Table for Five" at 7 A.M. and at 10 A.M. Eastern. That's our Saturday morning conversation show. We've got a great one for you tomorrow, and anytime on your favorite social media -- X, Instagram, and on TikTok. "Laura Coates Live" is right now.
