Return to Transcripts main page
CNN NewsNight with Abby Phillip
Colbert Says, CBS Wouldn't Air Interview Out Of Fear Of Trump's FCC; Right Rips Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) Over Response To Taiwan Question; Mamdani Calls Hochul To Raise Taxes On New York's Wealthiest People; Fulton County Accuses DOJ of Deceiving Court; CNN "NewsNight" Honors Civil Rights Icon Jesse Jackson. Aired 10-11p ET
Aired February 17, 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, did attempts to censor Stephen Colbert backfire?
STEPHEN COLBERT, HOST, THE LATE SHOW WITH STEPHEN COLBERT: He was supposed to be here, but we were told in no uncertain terms by our network's lawyers.
PHILLIP: CBS responds to accusations that it knelt before the government.
Plus --
REP. ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ (D-NY): I think that this is such a -- you know, I think that --
PHILLIP: The right pounces on AOC for an awkward moment.
J.D. VANCE, U.S. VICE PRESIDENT: If I had given that answer, I would say, you know what? Maybe I ought to go read a book.
PHILLIP: But is there a double standard when the right ignores when Trump is stumped?
Also, did the feds dupe a judge? Fulton County says the DOJ misled the court when justifying its election raid.
And Gotham's socialist mayor makes his first big move, to tax the rich.
MAYOR ZOHRAN MAMDANI (D-NEW YORK CITY, NY): I believe that it should be the wealthiest New Yorkers, the most profitable corporations.
PHILLIP: Live at the table, Kevin O'Leary, Leigh McGowan, John Tabacco, Cari Champion and Ana Navarro.
Americans with different perspectives aren't talking to each other, but here, they do.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Good evening. I'm Abby Phillip in New York.
Let's get right to what America's talking about, a broadcast battle. He may only have a few months left on television, but Stephen Colbert isn't bending the knee to the Trump administration, even if, as Colbert puts it, CBS has. Last night, Colbert bumped his interview of James Talarico, one of the candidates in the Democratic primary in Texas from the broadcast, because he says there was pressure from the higher ups at CBS. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
COLBERT: You know who is not one of my guests tonight? That's Texas State Representative James Talarico. He was supposed to be here, but we were told in no uncertain terms by our network's lawyers who called us directly that we could not have him on the broadcast. Then I was told in some uncertain terms that not only could I not have him on, I could not mention me not having him on. And because my network clearly doesn't want us to talk about this, let's talk about this.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: CBS denies that though. In a statement, a spokesperson says, quote, the late show was not prohibited by CBS broadcasting -- from broadcasting the interview with Representative James Talarico. The show was provided legal guidance that the broadcast could trigger the FCC's equal time rule for two other candidates, including Representative Jasmine Crockett, and presented options for how the equal time could be done for other candidates.
The Late Show decided to present the interview through its YouTube channel with on-air promotion on the broadcast rather than potentially providing the equal time options. That equal time rule that they're talking about there is an old regulation from back in the 1930s that requires stations to give equal time, airtime to candidates who are running for public office.
The FCC though has exempted talk shows, like late night shows, for the last 20 years after Jay Leno interviewed Arnold Schwarzenegger on the Tonight Show when he was running for governor in California. But last month, FCC Chairman Brendan Carr said that's no longer the case, particularly for programs that he felt were, quote, motivated by partisan purposes.
Now, Colbert had a message for Carr last night.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
COLBERT: Well, sir, you're chairman of the FCC, so FCCU.
Let's just call this what it is. Donald Trump's administration wants to silence anyone who says anything bad about Trump on T.V. because all Trump does is watch T.V.
(END VIDEO CLIP) PHILLIP: This is a little bit of a he said, she said, Ana, but I also think it's -- I think there are two separate things. There's one that maybe it is that CBS anticipating that they could be in new legal waters because of what Brendan Carr had to say. They issued that warning to Colbert. And I also think it could be true that Colbert decided to pull the interview and put it online to make a point that they could drive just as much traffic to that interview, even if it wasn't aired on television.
ANA NAVARRO, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Okay. But this isn't happening in a vacuum, right, over at CBS.
[22:05:03]
We have seen where just a little bit before they were going to broadcast a 60 Minutes piece on the -- on CECOT, the prison in El Salvador, they pulled it. We have seen where they've taken Colbert off the air. We have seen time and time again that CBS is capitulating to Donald Trump and being preemptive in trying to be on his good side. They're definitely doing that.
So, I tend to believe Colbert a hell of a lot more than I believe CBS at this time. And also it's not in a vacuum as to the things that the Trump administration is doing. This is the same month when they have what hauled Don Lemon and Georgia Fort, two independent journalists critical of Trump, into court. Yes, I think there is an attempt here to silence voices that are critical of the Trump administration.
PHILLIP: Is it obeying in advance, as they called it? I mean, is that what this is what they're doing over at CBS, if Ana's version of this is correct?
LEIGH MCGOWAN, PODCAST HOST, POLITICSGIRL: Yes. I think Ana's version of this is entirely correct. I mean, I think this is another blatant attack on America's constitutional rights, in this case the right to free speech. I mean, there's a reason that Colbert only has a certain amount of shows left and it's because of the same FCC director and it's because of the same government.
I think the point isn't the interview that was pulled. If anything, they gave James Talarico more time on YouTube and probably more people saw it because of this controversy. I think the point is that the head of the FCC, who represents the Trump government, has really no right to tell broadcast networks who they can interview and what interviews go on the air. And if you're someone who believes in free speech in America, that should upset you no matter what side of the political aisle you sit on.
PHILLIP: What does Brendan Carr mean by --
KEVIN O'LEARY, CHAIRMAN, O'LEARY VENTURES: 99 percent of people in America never heard of Talarico until now. He should be thankful this happened, because --
PHILLIP: I'm sure he is. O'LEARY: -- it's great press for him. Colbert, he doesn't care. There's no bad press anymore. They're getting more press than they ever dreamed of on this thing. And, frankly, the fair -- you know, the fair equal time rules, they could be re invoked in two seconds. So, if you're a lawyer saying, we don't need these headaches, but out of this comes massive exposure for Talarico. I mean, you've never heard of him until tonight. Good for him. I congratulate him.
(CROSSTALKS)
O'LEARY: (INAUDIBLE) more than equal time, more than equal time.
PHILLIP: I think folks at the state have --
O'LEARY: Good for him, and whoever he is --
(CROSSTALKS)
PHILLIP: But, John, let me ask you this. What does Brendan Carr mean by broadcasts that are motivated by partisan purposes? And if he means that, right, why isn't he concerned about the many, many broadcasts all over television that are motivated by explicitly partisan purposes, especially the ones that are partisan in a way that he likes?
JOHN TABACCO (I), FORMER NEW YORK CITY COMPTROLLER CANDIDATE: Yes., I think Leigh said, well, that's why he's not on anymore because of the FCC. That's not why Stephen Colbert isn't on anymore. He was supposed to deliver ratings. He was supposed to deliver comedy. He was supposed to deliver audience. He wasn't doing that. So, his employer said, you're out. So, there's nothing to fear more than a man with nothing to lose. So, Colbert, he doesn't care if he breaks the rules.
And I find it interesting that if they're coming at CBS and saying, we told them he could do it, he would have to give equal time to the other folks, and then he decided not to do it. So, it's almost like he cheated out the other candidates. Why not you give -- if you're all for free speech, why not give them all equal time? Why not?
(CROSSTALKS)
TABACCO: No, that is how works.
(CROSSTALKS)
TABACCO: Oh, okay. It's not law.
CARI CHAMPION, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: She just explained that --
TABACCO: She did explain that it's a law.
CHAMPION: She explained that it hadn't been invoked and especially when Jay Leno actually had --
TABACCO: So, it's not a law if it hasn't been invoked in a while? CHAMPION: If you let me finish and try to stop talking around me, you hear what I'd have to say. The reality is that it's not a law that's been enforced.
TABACCO: You're saying it's not a law but it is a law?
CHAMPION: John, must you be a jerk. Can you be nice?
TABACCO: I'm not being a jerk. Think about what you're saying.
PHILLIP: Hold on a second. Let me ask a little bit more clarity because I think this is important. The thing that has changed this week is that Brendan Carr has said that even though this equal time rule has not been utilized for late night shows, he would utilize it suddenly out of the blue to try to, it seems, rein in shows late night shows like Colbert or Jimmy Kimmel, or even dayside shows like The View, he would utilize that to try to force change in their programming. So, it's a real threat because they've threatened things like that in the past.
CHAMPION: Sure. Well, I think Leigh said it right. It doesn't matter what side of the aisle you're on. You should be concerned about this because this is another attempt, as Ana pointed out, to make sure that we don't have our First Amendment rights to speak and do what we want to do.
The reality is, is that if they really wanted to enforce is, they look over at Fox News. When Rush Limbaugh had a show, no one said anything. Rachel Maddow doesn't have to adhere to that, all of a sudden, because one particular entity at CBS chooses to capitulate.
[22:10:04]
And it's unfortunate because at the end of the day, they're protecting somebody that we know does not need protection. And, sadly, we're watching Stephen Colbert, who I think, and everyone wants to say it's about money and he makes a joke about that, we already know what it's really about. He's upset. As he pointed out, Donald Trump doesn't like to be talked about because all he does is sit around and watch television. And we have to sit up here and talk about it like we don't know what it is. And people have to pretend --
O'LEARY: Why don't you hire him? He's available.
CHAMPION: We have to talk about it like we don't pretend what it is.
TABACCO: Other times, you say he's such a narcissist, he wants everyone talking about him.
CHAMPION: I don't know what you're talking about.
TABACCO: Now, you're saying --
(CROSSTALKS)
PHILLIP: I do want to play -- let me -- NAVARRO: These rules were made back when there were three networks.
CHAMPION: Exactly.
NAVARRO: They don't -- they really don't apply to modern times.
TABACCO: This is unbelievable. So, if I don't get pulled over for speeding for 20 years, then they can't invoke it on me 20 years later? I don't understand what you're saying. It's the law. Congress passes law. It's a law. It doesn't matter when they --
NAVARRO: And I'm saying that technology changes and sometimes the issue change --
TABACCO: The left went back to 1907 to try to put an indictment on Donald Trump. Now, we're talking about what year we invoked it. The law is the law.
PHILLIP: The issue of free speech and who gets to happen in this --
O'LEARY: What does that have to do with this?
PHILLIP: Free speech?
O'LEARY: Where is free speech at risk in this? They said, bring on the other two guys from Texas. Everyone gets to talk.
PHILLIP: Hold on a second.
O'LEARY: They didn't do it.
(CROSSTALKS)
NAVARRO: First of all, you don't know Talarico, but it's not two guys. One is a woman. Her name is Jasmine Crockett.
O'LEARY: Whatever. She's not getting free (INAUDIBLE).
PHILLIP: Let me play what J.D. Vance had to say when he was criticizing Europe for, I guess, infringing on speech in their countries.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VANCE: In Britain and across Europe, free speech, I fear, is in retreat. I will admit that sometimes the loudest voices for censorship have come not from within Europe but from within my own country, where the prior administration threatened and bullied social media companies to censor so-called misinformation. In Washington, there is a new sheriff in town. And under Donald Trump's leadership, we may disagree with your views, but we will fight to defend your right to offer it in the public square, agree or disagree.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NAVARRO: In Europe, not in the United States. PHILLIP: I'm old enough to remember when it was -- they wanted to pull Jimmy Kimmel off the air because he made a joke that they didn't like. The president has repeatedly said that these networks should fire Stephen Colbert and Kimmel because they criticize him on television. So, yes, this has to do with free speech.
MCGOWAN: This is also the same administration that's threatening social media companies to find people who have been critical of ICE, the same administration who has a pretty broad definition of what a domestic terrorist is. And this is the same administration that's acting like an authoritarian regime. And the first thing authoritarian regimes do is get rid of media, target journalists and comedians and artists that criticize them and limit the amount of information that goes out to the public that they don't like.
TABACCO: Like the Biden administration. At the risk of being called a jerk again, I just brought these quotes, exact unclassified memos from 2021. A memo to Mark Zuckerberg says, we are facing continued pressure from the White House to remove more content. And Amazon rushes to create, do not promote class to anti-vaccine books from the Biden people.
So, no one, Colbert or anyone else was screaming when the Biden White House was literally telling social media companies, take that content down.
MCGOWAN: Take anti-vaccine comments that might make people sick down.
TABACCO: Yes.
MCGOWAN: Take things that might actually be Nazi program down, like that's different than like doxing Americans.
TABACCO: we're talking about the same thing. Should the White House be telling social media companies or networks what to broadcast and not to broadcast? No, I don't think so.
MCGOWAN: No, they shouldn't. But we just had to pull a thing from T.V. because the president --
(CROSSTALKS)
PHILLIP: I'm glad we'd come full circle on this.
NAVARRO: What will you do when you invite other candidates and they simply don't come? What do you do when you are a talk show that invites Republican candidates who don't want to sit unless it's Fox News, where they're getting softball questions?
PHILLIP: It's also -- it's a fair point because I think the misconception is that equal time means that it has to be on the same programs, you have to force the candidates. It doesn't. It can be somewhere else on the network. And it happens when the candidate insists that it happens. So, if the other candidates don't ask for it, it doesn't necessarily need to happen. So, there are a lot of nuances to that. But next for us, the right is piling on Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez over an awkward answer about foreign policy, but are they ignoring Trump's missteps? There may be a double standard at play here.
Plus, this could be the first big move in the debate over taxing the rich. What New York's socialist mayor is now threatening to make happen.
[22:15:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PHILLIP: Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is facing a wave of criticism for this foreign policy flub at the Munich Security Conference.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Would and should the U.S. actually commit U.S. troops to defend Taiwan if China were to move?
OCASIO-CORTEZ: You know, I think that this is such a -- you know, I think that this is a -- this is, of course, a very longstanding policy of the United States.
[22:20:02]
And I think what we are hoping for is that we want to make sure that we never get to that point. And we want to make sure that we are moving in all of our economic research and our global positions to avoid any such confrontation and for that question to even arise.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: It comes as no surprise MAGA is having a field day with this one.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TYRUS, FOX NEWS HOST: Move over, Kamala. AOC just cooked up her own signature word salad on the global stage.
BEN SHAPIRO, HOST, THE BEN SHAPIRO SHOW: She was taking her 2028 bike out for a spin. She hit the embankment. She flipped head over heels and went all the way down the mountain. It's her fault.
JESSE WATTERS, FOX NEWS HOST: After the word salad, AOC froze like a deer in headlights.
BENNY JOHNSON, HOST, THE BENNY SHOW: To quote Billy Madison, everyone in this room is now dumber because of that answer. Thank you, AOC.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: A flub for A OC, but the question is also what happens when the president, the actual president of the United States, does very similar things on the world stage? Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: I watch our police and our firemen down on 7/11 down the World Trade Center.
When I told them about Iceland, they loved me.
Our stock market took the first dip yesterday because of Iceland.
Shifting production to Thailand and to Vietnam.
I solve wars that was unsolvable, Azerbaijan and Albania.
Miami has been a haven for those fleeing communist here in South Africa.
Nambia's health system is increasingly self-sufficient.
We all know the great prime minister of the U.K. and we just signed a document. This is -- sorry about that. We just signed it and it's done. And so we have our trade agreement with the European Union.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: So, look, I'll give you that AOC probably should have been more ready for that question, but are we going to really pretend that the actual president of the United States has not made similar or perhaps worse flubs on the global stage?
TABACCO: Yes. I don't think we have to pretend. Everyone makes some flubs. We're all T.V. personalities. We have mistakes here and there, but it's interesting that you would play ten consecutive clips of Trump actually saying things. Maybe they may not have been pertinent or taken out of context.
PHILLIP: Yes, saying incorrect things.
TABACCO: You played one of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, which the whole world is still trying to figure out exactly what she was saying. So, you know, the big buzz now is maybe Kamala-AOC 2028. I say bring that on based on that performance right there.
MCGOWAN: Yes. Listen, stumbling over your words for 15 seconds is not the same as being incoherent or uneducated on foreign policy.
TABACCO: That was incoherent.
MCGOWAN: She had a ton of amazing answers in that same interview, which we are not playing. We are playing in its entirety, ah, um, oh, ah, which we do not do for the president. Personally, I was more interested in the thing she said, where she said, we're entering an age of authoritarianism, where a group is working in tandem to carve up the world into pieces to have served themselves, and the president is interested in taking on the Western Hemisphere. First of all, that seems kind of true to me, but going to the Munich Security Conference and saying that out loud in the world is kind of ballsy, and I liked it. So, a couple of ums before answering a question on Taiwan --
CHAMPION: Not a big deal.
MCGOWAN: -- less interesting.
TABACCO: She should go to Queens once in a while before she goes to Munich. That would probably help.
NAVARRO: She has gone to Queensland a few times and she's -- listen, she doesn't -- she's not a foreign policy expert.
TABACCO: Clearly.
NAVARRO: And so -- no, she's not.
TABACCO: Clearly.
O'LEARY: You don't say. Come on, give her a break.
PHILLIP: Guys, this is --
NAVARRO: You don't even know who's running in Texas.
(CROSSTALKS)
CHAMPION: For five seconds, let somebody finish that thought before you have to be --
NAVARRO: I want to know how you would be able to answer that. Look, I think that it takes a lot of courage and I think for her to expanding her message, for her to be expanding her areas of policy interests are a good thing. She is 1 of 435 members of Congress. There's a lot of them there that don't come with a breadth of foreign policy knowledge.
O'LEARY: You're right, she was fabulous.
CHAMPION: It's not about her being fabulous. It wasn't --
(CROSSTALKS)
O'LEARY: Let's say you're hired to give a speech, let's say you're hired because you're expected to deliver information to an audience. Let's say you're even paid for it. When you go and do that, what happens is the agency that hired you, whether it's the government, your own party says that was not your best moment. In fact, they tied you back to Kamala Harris. You were so bad, you sounded like her.
And, by the way, I'm sorry, it's not a partisan issue. She was terrible. Get over it. Maybe she would get better.
(CROSSTALKS)
CHAMPION: No. But the reality is if you take just a minute and not be condescending, I really believe what she was --
[22:25:02]
O'LEARY: I'm trying to help her, lift her up --
CHAMPION: One moment. You had your moment. You had your moment.
PHILLIP: Kevin, just let her respond.
CHAMPION: The reality is --
O'LEARY: They always more moments. That's what's great about it.
CHAMPION: The reality is, Kevin, is that she was taking a beat and, yes, she wasn't great for less than 20 seconds, if you ask me. But I thought she was doing something that the president of the United States rarely does, and that's think before she speaks. She was trying to get her words together so she knew how to handle it appropriately.
O'LEARY: It's not partisan.
CHAMPION: And if people did that, we wouldn't be in this situation that we're in right now.
PHILLIP: Let me ask you --
(CROSSTALKS)
PHILLIP: Everyone stop talking please for just a moment. Stop talking. Thank you. John and Kevin, you all are strongly criticizing AOC for making flubs.
O'LEARY: She was terrible. That's why.
PHILLIP: All right. We just played several bites here. Okay. Let me -- hold on. He stood next to someone from the E.U. and called them the Prime Minister of the U.K., okay? He called South Africa -- South America -- he called South America, South Africa. He called Greenland, Iceland.
NAVARRO: He called you Namibia, Nambia.
PHILLIP: So, my question to you is, okay, bad answers, bad answers. What do you think should happen to Donald Trump as a result of his bad answer?
O'LEARY: AOC wants to become the president, the United States, he already is.
PHILLIP: Okay. So --
O'LEARY: So, he's not worried about running again.
PHILLIP: So, what are you saying?
O'LEARY: She's trying to become president. PHILLIP: So, what are you saying? That it's okay, no consequences because he's already president?
O'LEARY: No, I'm just saying that moment was not her best and I, above all of the rest of you, I am encouraging her to say, listen, watch the tape, don't do that again, or you'll be prepared to what word salad girl in the last election.
PHILLIP: What about Donald Trump in 2024 said, I think Taiwan should pay us for defense?
O'LEARY: Yes, but I'm sorry, it's not working, Abby.
PHILLIP: I don't we are any different from any insurance policy.
O'LEARY: She was terrible. Let's focus on her.
PHILLIP: Hey, he was running for president at that time.
O'LEARY: Let's lift her up. Let's help her.
PHILLIP: He says, I don't think we are any different from an insurance policy, why are we doing this, when he was asked if the United States would defend Taiwan.
O'LEARY: Well, what does that have to do with her performance?
PHILLIP: So, even on the sub --
TABACCO: (INAUDIBLE) Trump, that MAGA is having a field day and now we make some comments, which you were all thinking in your head and now you're getting mad at us for having a field day. We deserve it.
PHILLIP: John, hey, I'm just asking for you all to apply the same standard --
TABACCO: I think he makes mistakes all the time and I crack and laugh, just like I cracked up at Joe Biden when he made mistakes. It happens.
MCGOWAN: When you're not cracking up when the woman's laughing, you're mocking her. You're saying she's on --
TABACOO: I'm cracking up when I see her because she's not even forming sentences.
MCGOWAN: And then you're comparing her to the other strong women who ran.
TABACCO: She's not giving like a wrong fact or wrong name. She's not --
(CROSSTALKS)
MCGOWAN: But when women make a gaffe, they're monsters and should never be invited back. NAVARRO: You know what one of the differences is though when Trump makes these mistakes as president, he's actually reading from things that people supposedly experts on these issues have written. AOC was beyond her skis, I think, in a place that is a new horizon for her.
O'LEARY: Don't say that.
NAVARRO: Enough, Kevin, you're so damn repetitive.
PHILLIP: Kevin, please stop. Let her finish her thought.
NAVARRO: And, you know, she can't -- I mean, Donald Trump can't read a script. She was answering an impromptu question of something that she's not an expert in, and she's there making -- you know, making mistakes and learning from them.
Listen, I'm old enough to remember when George W. Bush was running for president, and they asked him about the guy running Pakistan, what was his name? And he kept saying General, General, General, because he couldn't remember the guy's name.
PHILLIP: An iconic moment in American history.
NAVARRO: Yes, and he went on to become president.
PHILLIP: All right. Next for us, Zohran Mamdani sets an ultimatum for New York's governor, raise taxes on the rich, or property taxes in the city are going to go up. Does this justify Republican fears? We'll debate.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:33:40]
PHILLIP: Zohran Mamdani is issuing an ultimatum in an effort to close the city's massive budget gap. He's calling on New York Governor Kathy Hochul to raise taxes on the city's wealthiest people or he'll have to increase property taxes by nearly 10 percent. But that's not enough to balance the books. In addition, he says you also have to pull millions from the city's rainy day fund and from retiree benefits. It is a path that Mamdani says he does not want to go down.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ZOHRAN MAMDANI (D) NEW YORK CITY MAYOR: And if we do not go down the first path, the city will be forced down a second, more harmful path. The options of the second path are the options of last resort. Options that we will only employ if there's no other means of arriving at a balanced budget.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: So, I guess he's asking what's a two percent tax increase on a multi-millionaire?
O'LEARY: If you're already the highest tax jurisdiction in America, it's a massive tax. You know, what I love about this guy, and I'm giving him credit, he goes big. He goes big and he's got a fantastic social media team. This is great.
This is bat poo poo crazy what he is proposing. And probably sometime next year, within 12-18 months, I will meet him in Miami and give him Real Estate of the Year award.
[22:35:00]
Because I'm not happy with what's happening. I can't get across the bridge anymore. I live in Miami Beach. Everybody from New York and New Jersey and Massachusetts is moving into my neighborhood. I'm pissed off. And this guy's just doing more of it. What he's proposing is beyond insane, but I love it.
PHILLIP: You are very dramatic --
(CROSSTALK)
O'LEARY: Listen, you guys live here. You're not paying your fair share.
NAVARRO: I don't live here.
O'LEARY: You've got to pay 110 percent. That's the right thing to do.
PHILLIP: All right.
O'LEARY: Because he's not cutting and stabbing. He's just going to tax you into oblivion.
PHILLIP: I found this very interesting charts. Some data for you, Kevin.
O'LEARY: Thank you.
PHILLIP: The last time there was a tax hike on the wealthiest, this was in 2021. Take a look at this chart. You see what's going on there? The number of people making more than $200,000 in the city increased. The number of people making between $200,000 and $1 million increased. Everybody who makes a lot of money, there were more of them in New York City. So, the idea that there was some --
(CROSSTALK)
O'LEARY: Okay, so, Abby, if that's true, why not increase taxes to 110 percent if it's so good? Let's go.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Well, l don't -- look. Hey, don't get mad at me.
O'LEARY: I'm not mad. I'm excited about it. I love it.
PHILLIP: I'm just asking you --
O'LEARY: They want you to pay, not me.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: I'm just asking you -- I'm asking you, is there really proof of the brain drain that you say? Money drain.
O'LEARY: Yes, it's called England in the late '60s called --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Okay, so then why are there more multimillionaires in New York now than the last time they raised taxes?
(CROSSTALK)
O'LEARY: I don't think they're paying their fair share.
NAVARRO: I have lived in South Florida for 46 years. And there is no doubt that we are seeing an exodus of very, very wealthy people, billionaires from California and from New York into South Florida. In Florida, there are no state taxes. Every day I open up the news, and there's a new real estate record that has been broken in home sales because Larry Page is moving down and he just bought a place for a hundred and some million dollars. Zuckerberg's moving down.
So, the bottom line is this. When you put a hike on taxes on just the very wealthy, you run the risk of those very wealthy not paying it because they will find a way to have a loophole and to skirt those taxes, even if it means moving to Indian Creek and you know, living in billionaires' bunker. They can afford to do so.
The people, you know, the people who have to live in New York to work may not be able to afford to do that. But if you've got your private plane, you've got the ability to move, people are moving.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: But we're talking about -- Ana, we're talking about people who make more than a million dollars a year. It's not exactly, I mean, maybe in New York, it's little packed.
(CROSSTALK)
NAVARRO: Is that what he's going to tax people -- in California there's billionaires --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: That's what the proposal is. People who make more than a million dollars a year. It's a very -- it's a very specific group of people. And I'm not -- listen. I'm just asking, realistically, are we really going to see what you're claiming we're going to see? And yes, there are --
NAVARRO: We're seeing it.
PHILLIP: -- tons --there are tons of wealthy people moving from California, from all over the country to Florida.
(CROSSTALK)
NAVARRO: But it's not the person making a million dollars a year, which in New York is not as much as it sounds in other places.
PHILLIP: Right. So --
NAVARRO: It's the person making $50 million a year that's moving.
PHILLIP: Exactly. So, people making $50 million a year are moving. But many other people who are making much less than that, but so much more than middle class people are probably not moving.
TABACCO: I feel like husbands and wives, school teacher, nurse, they're moving to South Carolina and North Carolina. They're trying to get away from the overburdened some tax code in New York. And when you see Mamdani, you know, news break to everyone here.
Mamdani cannot raise taxes, okay? And Kathy Hochul is up for reelection this year. So, there's no possible way that she will allow him to raise taxes this year because she won't get reelected. So, a lot of this is kind of smoke and mirrors. And, you know, it shouldn't come as no surprise to anyone that he wants to take from the rich and give to the poor.
He said in his campaign, white people have been trolling the levers of capitalism for too long. And we need to transfer that to brown people. He said those words.
(CROSSTALK)
NAVARRO: He can't raise -- he can't raise --
TABACCO: He can't do anything.
NAVARRO: He can't raise income tax, but he can raise property tax in the municipality of New York.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: He is asking -- he is asking all the --
(CROSSTALK)
TABACCO: I don't think he can do that by executive order. I don't think he can do anything.
PHILLIP: He's asking Albany -- but hold on. To be clear, he explicitly said -- he's asking Albany to raise taxes on people making over a million dollars.
(CROSSTALK)
CHAMPION: I think that's what he's doing. But to his point earlier --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: So, so that's how he started --
(CROSSTALK)
CHAMPION: -- he's swinging for the fences. I don't think anybody is -- well, yes, it is surprising to actually hear him say it. But this is what he ran on. He talked about what he was going to do. I feel like why not? Why not? Because he's doing exactly what this president is doing. He's leading and he's doing it by any means necessary, whatever he says, he's leading with this boldness. Like, I'll try this. Let's see what happens. I mean, like, why the hell not? Let me just go right here and see what happens.
TABACCO: This is interesting.
MCGOWAN: I think it's really clear that he doesn't want to raise property taxes. He wants to do everything he can to make sure he doesn't want to. He wants to increase taxes on the richest people in the biggest corporations but he needs Albany to do that. He needs the governor to do that. And like you said, she's not going to do that in election year.
TABACCO: That's right.
MCGOWAN: So I think that's pretty valid.
TABACCO: Right.
MCGOWAN: But I think this idea that people are all going to leave New York --
(CROSSTALK)
CHAMPION: The state of New York.
TABACCO: They are.
MCGOWAN: Well, here's the thing. My guess is the people buying houses in Millionaire Row in Florida are not also giving up their apartments in New York. They're just changing where they live.
(CROSSTALK)
MCGOWAN: They're making a little loophole for the very, very richest to say, I live in a different state. But then they're going to come back to New York as New York is still New York.
(CROSSTALK)
O'LEARY: Ban the rich from New York. I love it.
PHILLIP: But hold on.
O'LEARY: Not 180 days in New York. No days in New York. No wealthy people in New York. I love this idea. (CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: John made a really important point. Zohran Mamdani ran on this, okay?
O'LEARY: I love it.
PHILLIP: He ran on it. The people voted him in. He beat out all the other Democratic candidates. He threw Kathy Hochul, who you're claiming won't back this, a lifeline by supporting her in her primary. I think it feels like you guys have the politics of this backwards, okay?
TABACCO: Oh, really?
PHILLIP: She is the one.
MCGOWAN: They're working together too, I think.
PHILLIP: Just as much as she needs her.
TABACCO: So, the unknown assemblyman threw the lifeline to the incumbent governor, is what you're saying. He threw her the lifeline.
PHILLIP: I mean, he is, of all the New York politicians --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: -- of all the New York politicians, he's the most popular.
MCGOWAN: Correct.
CHAMPION: That's right.
PHILLIP: He is the most popular.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: So, I know that it's not an easy thing to understand. But I think Mamdani has shifted the politics in this city. And I think it's a really -- it's a real question that if the voters who voted him in to raise taxes on rich people don't want him to actually do that.
O'LEARY: What happens if he doesn't deliver? By chance, maybe he doesn't deliver. I still can't get on a free bus yet and I'm pissed. My hotel still costs me money in New York --
(CROSSTALK)
CHAMPION: Are you getting on the bus?
(CROSSTALK)
CHAMPION: Are you legitimately getting on a bus?
O'LEARY: I won't pay $5 for coffee. I'll get on a bus if it's free. CHAMPION: So, if the bus is free, you yourself will get on the bus. Is that what you're saying?
(CROSSTALK)
O'LEARY: I want a free hotel. I want a free bus. I want (inaudible) groceries. I'm getting stuff from him. I want it.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: All right. We got to go.
NAVARRO: This is not all about you. The Catch-22 here in New York is that there's a balanced budget law, right? And so, they can't be like the federal government and spend more than what they have.
O'LEARY: All right. Just -- let me ask you a quick question.
PHILLIP: All right, don't respond, Kevin.
(CROSSTALK)
O'LEARY: Did he promise money for nothing chicks for free? Yes or no?
NAVARRO: Chicks for free?
(CROSSTALK)
O'LEARY: Money for nothing chicks for free? And we didn't get either of them. I'm upset.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Kevin, that free bus is going to cost you two percent more on your upper tax bracket.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Next for us --
(CROSSTALK)
NAVARRO: You're a Canadian who lives in Florida. What the hell are you upset about?
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Next for us, did the DOJ pull a fast one on a Georgia judge? That is what the Fulton County is claiming happened with the orders to raid its elections office. We're going to debate that next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:47:41]
PHILLIP: Tonight, Fulton County is accusing the DOJ of duping the court in its efforts to obtain a search warrant for materials related to the 2020 election. Last month, the FBI raided the county election center and it's been revealed that the call came from within the White House.
In a court filing today, the court argues that there is no probable cause and that the DOJ fails to prove any intentional wrongdoing whatsoever. Also, the county says that the feds didn't tell the judge that the claims have already been debunked.
As we've discussed repeatedly on this show, that document that they used to raid this office has a bunch of falsehoods in it that are easily disproven. And yet they not only raided the office, but they took thousands of ballots with them to do God knows what with them. I mean, frankly, it's a scary situation.
MCGOWAN: Yes. No, it's a completely scary situation. I think there's a reason that election security expert Marc Elias has said that this ballot seizure looks like a dry run for '26. Like, can the president just come in and to a Democratic stronghold and seize their ballots under false means? And it looks like they can. It looks like they took a dry run for this.
I mean, I think the takeaway is that the Trump regime is aware that they've lost popular support, that they're vulnerable in the midterms, and they're trying to take every single step they can to make sure that they can make the elections go their way. This is like kind of dictator playbook stuff, taking over the media, trying to protect -- prevent free and fair elections.
This is a playbook that I believe that they're following. And it happens in other countries, and they're doing it pretty efficiently. I mean, 700 boxes worth of ballots, that's the official ballot. So who knows what they're going to do with them? There's no chain of command.
And then the voter rolls, the information from the voting machines from a huge Democratic stronghold. That is a major problem for a county that had 70, you know, lawsuits for fraud and the Trump administration lost every one of them.
TABACCO: The judge's order that allowed them to take all those boxes. Now they're going to take them. And what are they going to do? Are they going to get Trump reelected in 2028 with the ballots from 2020? How does this have anything to do with it?
(CROSSTALK)
MCGOWAN: Are you actually asking me that question?
TABACCO: Yes, I'm asking you that question. You're saying it's such an affront to democracy. What are you going to do with six-year-old ballots? What are they going to do?
MCGOWAN: I think he's still trying to prove his false narrative.
[22:50:00]
(CROSSTALK)
NAVARRO: Donald Trump is obsessed -- okay --
(CROSSTALK)
TABACCO: But say something intelligible related to that. What are they going to do with them? Why are we even talking about it?
(CROSSTALK)
NAVARRO: Number one, we don't know because they haven't said. Number two, Donald Trump has been obsessed with not losing the 2020 election despite the fact that he won again in 2024. And the bottom line is no matter what he does, his obituary is still going to say that he lost 2020, that he -- you know, that he helped bring out a jurisdiction.
TABACCO: You're right. You want to know something? I wish most of the right would sit back and say, okay, whatever we thought about 2020, let's bury that. Let's find some like-minded people on the other side, get some sane voting rules going forward, like the SAVE Act -- the SAVE America Act. And let's let everybody show ID and have fair elections going forward and forget about 2020.
(CROSSTALK)
CHAMPION: What Leigh is saying is right. She's like, this information, he's using it. There's a reason why they want it. You can't act like this.
NAVARRO: He wants to change history.
MCGOWAN: Correct.
CHAMPION: So what if it was six years ago? He wants to change history.
(CROSSTALK)
CHAMPION: You don't know what he's going to do with that? What is it -- what do you think he wants to do?
TABACCO: Maybe the guy's obsessed that he wants to recount him for the 14th time.
(CROSSTALK)
MCGOWAN: No, he called that state and said, find the 11,780 votes. Now he has taken 700 boxes of votes and guess what he might find -- 11,780 votes.
(CROSSTALK)
TABACCO: Who cares? But why do we care about six years? Why? You care about it. You're sticking up for Marc Elias? He's one of the biggest enemies of democracy on the planet. Marc Elias is an enemy of democracy, period. He comes in and tries to ruin the freedom of election all the time. PHILLIP: Hold on a second. I really want to understand this. So, Trump takes a bunch of ballots. He puts Chelsea Gabbard in charge of a so- called investigation. And you think it's just for kicks and giggles?
TABACCO: I didn't say that at all.
PHILLIP: So what do you think it's for? What do you think it's for?
TABACCO: I'm saying maybe they want to look at the election results again.
PHILLIP: And for what?
TABACCO: I don't know. Why are you obsessed with him having them if he can't do anything with them? You know what I'm saying?
(CROSSTALK)
TABACCO: Like, what are you talking about?
NAVARRO: Because you're creating a likelihood where he can --
(CROSSTALK)
TABACCO: What likelihood? He's going to make fake ballots for the next time out of the old ballots?
MCGOWAN: Yes.
TABACCO: Oh, okay. Got it. Got it. This is deep. This is deep stuff, ladies.
NAVARRO: Okay, let me just say something, though. We are seeing this happen over and over again where the federal government is fabricating things, lying. Just in the last few weeks, we have seen cases involving --
(CROSSTALK)
NAVARRO: May I? May I? We have seen cases involving federal agents with a Venezuelan national in Minneapolis who they claimed was -- had charged them with a snow shovel and attacked them.
O'LEARY: This didn't have nothing to do with the ballots.
NAVARRO: Let me get my point off and then you can -- the point is --
O'LEARY: Help me. Help me.
NAVARRO: The point is that they charged them criminally, and when they went to court, evidence proved that what they had said was a lie.
O'LEARY: What does that have to do with ballots?
NAVARRO: That this government lies. That's the point.
TABACCO: My goodness.
PHILLIP: All right, Kevin, a quick last word.
O'LEARY: Oh, wow.
PHILLIP: Which I'm not sure --
O'LEARY: My last word is, you're all nuts.
(CROSSTALK)
CHAMPION: Oh, my God.
TABACCO: Thank you, Kevin.
PHILLIP: Guys, guys, please.
O'LEARY: Am I in on that?
PHILLIP: We've got to keep it together here, okay?
O'LEARY: We are.
PHILLIP: Honestly, I mean, there's a way to talk about these things. If you don't have anything to say, just say that, and I won't come to you next time.
NAVARRO: You don't have basic information, Kevin.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Everyone, thank you for being here.
O'LEARY: That was a stretch. It was insane.
PHILLIP: Excuse me.
O'LEARY: A shovel to the ballots?
PHILLIP: Excuse me. Stop. Kevin, stop.
NAVARRO: The federal government lies.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Next for us, we are honoring a civil rights icon when we come back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:57:34]
PHILLIP: The world lost a civil rights icon and a political history maker today. They also lost a cultural figure with few parallels in modern American history. For much of the last 60 years, Jesse Jackson has been a ubiquitous presence in the lives of Americans. News, TV, comedy, and music.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: He came from the humblest of beginnings in the segregated South. He harnessed, though, the power of media to move social justice forward. In the early 1970s, he founded the Black Expo in Chicago and brought major acts like B.B. King and the Jackson Five to support black businesses.
When black Chicagoans turned against the incumbent mayor, Jane Byrne, in 1982, Jackson successfully convinced acts like Stevie Wonder to stay away from the city's premier event, the Chicago Fest, in order to send a message. Now, over the next few decades, he could be found among the likes of Michael Jackson, Aretha Franklin, Roberta Flack, and so many more.
Spike Lee cut an ad for his presidential campaigns in the 1980s, and Bill Cosby, then one of the biggest black stars ever in America, was a supporter. Now, Jackson knew better than most the power of pop culture in changing the hearts and minds. He took his message of hope and self-empowerment to "Sesame Street."
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JESSE JACKSON, CIVIL RIGHTS ACTIVIST: I am.
UNKNOWN: I am.
JACKSON: Somebody.
UNKNOWN: Somebody.
JACKSON: I am.
UNKNOWN: I am.
JACKSON: Somebody.
UNKNOWN: Somebody.
JACKSON: I may be poor.
UNKNOWN: I may be poor.
JACKSON: But I am.
UNKNOWN: But I am.
JACKSON: Somebody.
UNKNOWN: Somebody.
(END VIDEO CLIP) PHILLIP: And "Saturday Night Live", and even in a dark moment for the campaign in the 1980s, the show took his characteristic smooth talking to a whole new level.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNKNOWN: As I said, I'm Jesse Jackson, and I'm running for president of the United States. I'm a Libra, and this is a very special message to all you chosen people out there.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: It wasn't just music and entertainment. Jackson could be found around boxing promoter Don King, and then there is Donald Trump. In the 1980s, Trump once invited Jackson to tour his Trump Plaza in Atlantic City after a Mike Tyson fight. The scene was so chaotic with fans swarming both men that the escalator they were on broke, causing them to lurch forward.
[23:00:06]
For Jackson, his notoriety was a critical tool to draw attention to the need for greater economic parity between minorities and whites, to push for housing and healthcare, and even aid for white farmers. It was also something that made him an icon and a beacon of hope to a generation of young black Americans who for the very first time saw themselves in a man like Jackson.
