Return to Transcripts main page
CNN NewsNight with Abby Phillip
U.S. Launching Strikes After Iran Fired Missiles at Warships; Trump Says, One Big Glow Coming Out of Iran If There's No Deal; 63 Percent of Americans Blame Trump for Skyrocketing Gas Prices. Republicans Pass and Sign Into Law A New Congressional Map Carving Up A Majority Black District In Memphis. Aired 10-11p ET
Aired May 07, 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 VIDEOTAPE)
ABBY PHILLIP, CNN ANCHOR (voice over): Tonight, escalation. The U.S. attacks Iran in what's being called retaliation. So, is this a restart of the war?
Plus, map contagion. Chaos erupts as Tennessee is the next state to gerrymander, a move Democrats call racist.
STATE REP. JUSTIN PEARSON (D-TN): These maps are racist tools of white supremacy.
PHILLIP: Also, 81 percent of Americans say they're feeling economic pain, and most are blaming Donald Trump. So, the administration is giving some advice.
SEAN DUFFY, TRANSPORTATION SECRETARY: We want to encourage all Americans to take a road trip.
PHILLIP: And he may be number two, but is J.D. Vance losing his advantage for 2028 to America's top diplomat?
Live at the table, Peter Meijer, Leigh McGowan, Lydia Moynihan, Tezlyn Figaro, Congressman Tom Suozzi, and Bobby Ghosh.
Americans with different perspectives aren't talking to each other, but here, they do.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
PHILLIP (on camera): Good evening, I'm Abby Phillip in New York.
Less than a month into the fragile ceasefire, an alarming escalation in the war with Iran. Tonight, the United States conducted military strikes on Iranian facilities that were said to be responsible for an unprovoked attack on American warships. According to Central Command, Iran launched missiles and drones, deploying several small boats as three American destroyers came under fire transiting the Strait of Hormuz. In response, U.S. forces destroyed missile launch sites and command and control facilities, and, ultimately, no U.S. assets were struck. But in a news conference posted to X, Central Command says it does not seek escalation, but that the military is ready to protect American forces.
Now, when he was asked about the strikes, Trump said that the ceasefire was still on, but he again threatened apocalyptic consequences if Iran doesn't make a deal.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: They trifled with us today. We blew them away. They trifled. I call that a trifle. I'll let you know when there's no cease -- you won't have to know. If there's no ceasefire, you're not going to have to know. You're just going to have to look at one big glow coming out of Iran. And they better sign their agreement fast.
REPORTER: Could you give us an update on what is the latest in those talks? You said yesterday --
TRUMP: No, it's going -- the talks are going very well, but they have to understand, if it doesn't get signed, they're going to have a lot of pain. They're going to have a lot of pain. They want to sign it, I will tell you. They want to sign it a lot more than I do.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: How many times, Peter, is the president going to threaten apocalyptic consequences if Iran doesn't sign a deal? This seems -- this is by my count at least maybe the second or the third time that he's done this, and there's no deal.
PETER MEIJER, CO-FOUNDER AND OF STRATEGY, THE NEW INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION: the fact that our response was proportionate and limited, I think tells you that there are actually productive negotiations going on. I know there's been a lot of pressure from the Saudis and the Emiratis to continue to press forward against the Iranian government.
PHILLIP: But why does he keep saying what he just said?
MEIJER: Well --
PHILLIP: Which is that if they don't sign a deal soon, there's going to be a big glow, what does that even mean?
MEIJER: Having kind of bluster and hyperbole?
PHILLIP: Yes. I mean, I guess, yes, what's the point of it, and why -- does he think that's adding to the pressure? Because it seems like if he makes that threat, Iran doesn't respond to it, and he does it over and over again, it just ceases to have any meaning.
MEIJER: But we're also only eight weeks away from President Trump killing the supreme leader. I mean, the point of the hyperbole is to get to a point where you are not perceived as a rational actor so that your actions cannot be anticipated and your adversary can't work around it. The idea that the Iranians may not know what's coming but know something severe is coming, that is a definition of leverage with a government like this.
PHILLIP: Is something severe coming? Does anyone believe that that's --
REP. TOM SUOZZI (D-NY): Well, there's no question that nobody knows what's going to happen. I mean, the unpredictability of this whole situation is one of the things that's so challenging for the American people, for the economy, for the markets. It's unpredictable. Everything's unpredictable. And it may be is part of the president's strategy to be perceived as unpredictable. But what the president really needs to do is come to the Congress and go through a process where you get some of the great minds of this country working together to actually debate this and figuring out a way that we're going to get ourselves out of this thing.
[22:05:00]
BOBBY GHOSH, COLUMNIST AND GEOPOLITICS ANALYST: The trouble is that there's no sign that the Iranians are responding to this kind of hyperbole. Yes, negotiations are ongoing, but we only hear from President Trump that they desperately want a deal. They want a deal, they want a deal more than we want a deal.
There's nothing really in the Iranian messaging or in the Iranian actions to suggest that that is the case. If they desperately want a deal, well, we expect a certain predictable set of reactions from them. Attacking American warships going through the Hormuz is not one of those reactions.
So, we're hearing the president say some words, but we're not hearing an echo of those words from the Iranians. On the contrary, we are hearing -- we're seeing the Iranians behave like they feel that they don't really need to make a deal.
PHILLIP: And to your point, I mean, at the very minimum, a deal would need to include a pre-war status quo of the Strait of Hormuz, which is free transit. And as of right now, Iran's supreme leader on an account on social media called for a new regional and global order under the strategy of a strong Iran, where there would be no place for foreigners and their mischief, and he specifically pointed to using the leverage of closing the strait as one way to achieve that vision.
And then as a corollary to that, they have put together this new system where they're now vetting ships going through the Strait of Hormuz. They've proposed or there's been floated the idea that they might toll those ships by millions of dollars. So, they're not acting as if they need to reopen the strait as part of a deal and just follow international law. They're acting as if now they are the authority of the Strait of Hormuz, and they control it.
LYDIA MOYNIHAN, CORRESPONDENT, NEW YORK POST: Well, that's their only point of leverage. That's exactly what they've been trying to do the last eight weeks. I mean, they're already having to cut oil production. They are not in a strong position. I think both sides obviously are trying to use the most dramatic rhetoric they can, but to say Iran has any cards, I think, is not looking at the situation. They only have the Strait of Hormuz.
And some of the early reporting about what could be in a deal is kind of staggering. I mean, there's some reporting in Axios that they could be getting rid of all of the nuclear dust, as Trump calls it.
PHILLIP: How is that staggering? That's the bare minimum --
MOYNIHAN: That there could be -- well, it's much better than the JCPOA.
PHILLIP: Well, no.
MOYNIHAN: That there could be ten years of no enrichment. I mean, if some of the reporting in Axios is true --
PHILLIP: The JCPOA had a --
MOYNIHAN: -- this would truly fundamentally alter Iran's status in the war.
PHILLIP: I don't think that's -- that's not quite accurate. I mean, let's actually take a look at the comparison. So, the JCPOA capped Iran's nuclear enrichment of uranium for 15 years. It had inspections of the nuclear sites, et cetera, in exchange for releasing the assets, lifting sanctions.
According to the Trump one-page plan, yes, they want to remove the nuclear dust, but that seems to be, according to Trump's own red lines, the bare minimum that they could get out of this deal, is to remove the nuclear material. And they're also looking at a term that could be anywhere from 10 to 20 years, but it still has a sunset provision in there.
So, I don't know. I mean, look, yes, there are lots of ways that they could get a better deal perhaps, theoretically, but they also have to get the Iranians to agree to it, and so far we're not there.
LEIGH MCGOWAN, PODCAST HOST, POLITICSGIRL: Yes. I think theoretically is an important question. You could -- there's lots of things that they could get theoretically. I just -- I think as an American, I'm very tired of watching our leadership lead with threats, talking about, you know, we're going to level this whole place. You'll see it glowing from space. I mean, I'm not a war expert at all by any means, but this attack on our part of Iran is sort of a dramatic escalation at a time when we're supposed to be in talks, at a time when our president said we were this close to a deal.
And I think the thing is, as you were talking about unpredictability, I think for somebody, it's very predictable what we keep doing. I think we should look at Polymarket and see who thought the deal wouldn't go through or thought there would be an attack today, because this whole thing is starting to feel like an up-and-down market manipulation where somebody is predictably accounting for what's going to happen, and somebody is making a ridiculous amount of money on these back-and-forths that America is doing.
SUOZZI: I think that's a very legitimate concern that you're pointing out. And also, you know, throughout this conversation we've all said they about Iran. They are this, they're going to do this. There is no they. They're fractured. They're fractured between their military, their extremists, their civilian government. There is no they because they're not a functioning government right now. And that's --
GHOGHS: I would push back against that. They have -- if you look at the entire history of Iran, and I've been following them for many, many, many years, they have never not been fractured. There's always been a hardline faction and a moderate faction within the Iranian government. They've constantly been at loggerheads, but they agree on some basic things. They agree on what they call the Islamic Republic. The overall ideology of the state is the one thing that binds them, that keeps them together. In a time of war, that keeps tight -- binds them even more tightly than in a time of peace.
[22:10:02]
Six months ago you could have said, or four months ago when there were protests in the street, you could have said that there's an opportunity here for the international community, for the United States, to take advantage of the divisions within the political system and see, not for certain, but see if we can move them apart.
But in a time of war, factions tend to rally around the flag. This is universally true. This is true in this country. This is true all country. This is a human response.
SUOZZI: But wouldn't you say they're fractured right now, and it's hard for them to actually come up to a response to a one-page memo because they're not --
GHOSH: Then why are we bothering with all of this? I mean, the fact that they are able to send a negotiating team, the fact that they have a set of demands, just as we have a set of demands, suggests to me that they have a common agenda that all the different factions agree on. Whatever their little differences, and they tend to be power plays about, you know, who wants to be -- who's up and who's down at any given time, at the bottom, they're all united behind the ideology. They're all behind this idea of an Islamic state. That's not necessarily universally popular among people.
PHILLIP: I think Bobby posed an important question, which is, if we -- I think the administration agrees with your assessment that they're fractured, that they're divided, that maybe they're in a state of disarray. If that is the case, why are we bothering to hang our hats on this idea that whoever walks into the room has the authority to essentially hand over Iran's nuclear ambition on a platter to the United States, which runs counter to everything that the regime has been about for the last 50 years? Why do we have any confidence that those people would even be in a position to do that? MEIJER: Well, I mean, that's the entire point of the negotiation is that you don't just sign the paper and say, oh, great, we're done, right? There are steps to prove, to validate, to verify, to make sure that what needs to happen actually happens.
But to your point as well, very early on in this conflict, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, part of their strategy was in the event of a decapitation, you know, units could operate autonomously in ways they saw fit to defend the Islamic regime. In that specific case, I mean, if we look at the strikes that just occurred today, I think it was very clear if Donald Trump viewed that as coming from the people he was negotiating with, it would be a very different scenario than not allowing potential spoiler factions that are trying to upset what could be taking place productively in Islamabad from going to fruition.
GHOSH: I think that is one interpretation. I don't think we know for certain that is the case. Again, this is something we've heard several times from the administration that there could be rogue elements within the IRGC, but there's no history of that. And there's nothing --
MEIJER: The Supreme Leader being killed in an airstrike and the vast majority of their security apparatus.
GHOSH: No, but that's not the same thing as suggesting that there are individual elements. All we've seen from the IRGC throughout their history is a certain message discipline and a discipline of action. Remember, all of these people, whether they're hardliners or they are moderates, I don't like the term, but it's sometimes used -- pragmatists, I think is the better term, within the regime. All of them have one thing in common. They know that if they show weakness, that they will be pounced upon by their own people.
They are highly unpopular, whether they're moderates or whether they are hardliners, they are hated by the Iranian people. So, none of them can afford to break ranks from the overall group. They have to stick together even for their own survival, otherwise they wind up hanging from lampposts in the streets of Tehran.
So, I'm not particularly optimistic about this idea that the regime can be separated in this way, and that what we are seeing is actually a symptom of divisions within the ranks.
PHILLIP: Yes. And I just want to remind everyone, we're still waiting for a response from Iran on this supposed one-page memorandum that was supposed to come at some point today. It has not yet, as far as we know. So, we'll see if it does come at all.
Bobby Ghosh, thank you very much for all of that.
Next for us, a number the president won't want to hear, 81 percent. Yes, 81 percent of Americans say that they are feeling financial pain right now, and most of them are blaming the president. Another special guest is going to join us at the table.
Plus, chaos erupts in Tennessee as the state redraws the maps to eliminate a Democratic seat. Lawmakers there are calling it racist.
We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:15:00]
PHILLIP: As the war in Iran drags on, the vast majority of Americans say that they're feeling the strain of these surging gas prices. New polling is finding that more than eight in ten people say filling up is squeezing their household budgets, and 63 percent believe it's President Trump's fault.
The national average for gas is inching closer to $5 a gallon. In Ohio, Michigan, and Alaska, they've seen the biggest one-year increase in the country, all of them states that Trump won in 2024. But his transportation secretary is dismissing cost concerns, and he has this advice instead.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DUFFY: I think opens up, you're going to see prices come down immediately. You saw yesterday energy prices came down below $100 a barrel. I think we're at $93 this morning. Don't quote me on that, but I was looking at it. I think it was like $92, $93 for Brent crude.
[22:20:00]
So, we're in a good place. We want to encourage all Americans to take a road trip.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Tezlyn Figaro joins us at the table.
Gas prices tend to go up really fast and come down very slowly. And I'm not sure that they can be sure that even to the extent to which they're coming down is going to last all that long given the uncertainty in the Middle East.
TEZLYN FIGARO, MANAGING EDITOR, REVOLT NEWS: No, I'm positive that it's not coming down fast enough, but I'm so glad that you mentioned Michigan, Abby, because what I really came to say tonight is that if Democrats are depending on simply winning by default, thinking that the high gas prices, the high fuel rates, all of these things that people are actually being affected.
Last week in Michigan, I was with an organization called New Era Detroit. Thousands of street organizers were out talking to these folks who are hurting, you know, by these gas prices, who are hurting with grocery prices. And I'm very concerned, Abby, that these organizations are not being involved with actually getting the almost disenfranchised folks involved in the process.
So, if Democrats think that they can just simply win by default, which I think they're looking good for the midterms, but people are hurting, and it may not be a lot of people, you know, in the political sphere that's actually feeling it. And I was out there knocking on doors last week. I want to see more of them be involved in the process to actually bring the resources to make up the difference on how people are hurting.
PHILLIP: Yes. I mean, Americans are experiencing economic pain in all sectors of their lives, gas prices, food. There was a report today about fast food chains, which last night on the show we had a discussion about people going to Disney World. I think that's one segment of the economy. The folks shopping at McDonald's, Papa John's, Domino's, Shake Shack, according to these fast food chains, high beef costs, weak consumer spending are all taking a toll, including gas prices. People are not spending their disposable income even on food like that, cheap food.
MCGOWAN: Yes. Well, normally, I would say that you can't equate everything to the president. You can't say gas prices are the president's fault. Normally, I would make that argument, except when you start a war in a place where the gas comes from, and then you block the strait for the gas to come out, then it does become the president's fault because that was his choice.
I think the thing is that we have to remember that it's not just cars that need gas. It's diesel fuel that takes trucks from place to place. So, like if you are bringing manufacturing, if you are bringing lettuce, if you are bringing food, if you are moving things around America, that is also costing more money.
So, every price is going up, and we all know that corporations, once they bring prices up, they don't often bring prices down. They're like, what can we do? It's the war. And even if the gas prices come down, they're going to keep those prices up.
And I think we have to remember that everything has a resulting effect. So, the fertilizer not coming out of the Strait of Hormuz right now meant we did not plant in the spring, as we were supposed to, which means come the fall, we're going to have a food shortage problem, and that's going to be a major problem for us.
Listening to Sean Duffy say stuff like, we're all good, it's good, take a road trip this summer, I just think how delusional are these people? People can't take a road trip to their office right now. So, to be talking about us like tooting around America on our summer road trip when we can't afford fast food is problematic and out of touch.
SUOZZI: Yes. The gas prices in my hometown today were $4.59 a gallon. I was on a text chat with people today. Everybody's talking about how much it costs to fill their tank. Some people were saying it costs $75, other people were saying over $100. This is --
MCGOWAN: It's $6 to $7 in California.
SUOZZI: Yes, this is real life, and real life is what affects people, and that's what gets people involved in politics.
And the president, in his inaugural address, said, I'm going to rapidly reduce prices, but prices are going up, not just the gas, not just because of the war, but because of the tariffs because of the high debt. We have the highest debt in the history of our country, causes upward pressure on interest rates. You can't buy a house, you can't lease a car because interest rates are so high. Energy prices are through the roof. Healthcare is through the roof. High prices is one of the biggest issues in our country, and that's one of the reasons the Democrats will do well in November. But you're 100 percent right. The Democrats have to talk about what we're for, not just what we're against.
PHILLIP: Let me play what Donald Trump said just 24 hours ago about the state of the United States' economy right now.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: It was a great term, a very unbelievable term. We had the best economic numbers that the country's ever had. Now, we're going to blow them away. We're blowing them away right now. But --
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: He's blowing them away, but perhaps not in the way that he meant. He's blowing them away in the sense that, really, record numbers of Americans disapprove of his handling of the economy. 34 percent approve of his handling of the economy. 27 percent approve of his handling of inflation. 23 percent approve of his handling of cost of living. I mean, the president is getting -- he's getting Ds from the American public, essentially, on this.
MEIJER: No. And all the polling questions, you could just, if it's asking, do you approve of Donald Trump's handling of X?
[22:25:02]
You could just stop it at, do you approve of Donald Trump? I mean, there's no significant deviation, whether it's on handling of issues or handling of everything else.
PHILLIP: That's not true. You ask about border security and immigration, there's a pretty big --
MEIJER: But that has also been tracking with the --
PHILLIP: Yes, it's been -- these are things -- you're right. Trump overall, his standing with the American people is going down. But this issue is typically one of his best issues, the economy. It wasn't his first term. It is not now.
MEIJER: I mean, I think one of the biggest differences between his first term and now, I mean, obviously we have high gas prices, 100 percent. In Michigan, I'm from Michigan, we also have refineries that were shut down for maintenance that boosted it up even further. So, we were -- that's one of the reasons why Michigan and Ohio were even higher than the rest of the national average.
But at the end of the day, you know, it's -- we have six months until the November midterms. That is certainly a timeline that the president and his staff keep in mind every moment, and it's one of the reasons why I'm sure my old colleague, Mr. Suozzi --
PHILLIP: Should he be saying that the economy is booming?
MCGOWAN: But can I ask -- yes, this is what I'm saying. Can I ask, are we supposed to just live in a collective, like delusion that the economy is booming, as if we don't fill up our own gas tanks, shop at our own stores, go to our own restaurants? Because we don't have enough money for things, and he's telling us the economy is amazing. And like how long are we supposed to go with that?
SUOZZI: One of the great comments that Bill Clinton always had was, I feel your pain. And when the president says affordability is just a word and it's a hoax, that's him showing he's out of touch with what people are really feeling.
MCGOWAN: Also give me a billion dollars for a ballroom. And people are really hurting when they go to the grocery store, when they go to the supermarket, people are hurting. And when he says the economy's booming, affordability is a hoax, it's just a word, that's like he's out of touch with how people really feel.
PHILLIP: So, I thought this was interesting, Lydia. Florida is supposed to be the promised land for conservatives right now. Got a conservative legislature --
MOYNIHAN: A lot of people are moving down there. A lot of capital is going there.
PHILLIP: A lot of capital going down there. But here's what Rick Scott said this morning. He says -- about Florida. We're losing tens of thousands of jobs every month, and our unemployment is behind the national average again. Something needs to change. There needs to be a relentless focus on growing our economy, recruiting more job creators, and getting Florida back to work.
What's going on in Florida? Well, I thought that the economy in general was doing well, and in Florida in particular should be doing well.
MOYNIHAN: I think it is. Actually, if you look at how New York and California are doing, there's a massive exodus of both people and capital from New York and California. And it's interesting you mentioned gas prices. Obviously, they are high federally, but they're particularly high in states like California and New York, where there's huge taxes on top of that.
PHILLIP: But I guess my point is that if that is -- let's say that's true. But if Florida -- no let's just stipulate that I'm not -- because I can't really adjudicate whether New York's economy is doing better than Florida's right now. But Rick Scott says that the job numbers this morning confirm what he's been sounding the alarm for months. Florida is -- Florida families are feeling that they're losing jobs, that they're falling behind. He's acknowledging an economic problem in this state that's supposed to be the promised land for job creation, for low taxes, you know?
MOYNIHAN: I guess I can't speak to specifically job creation in Florida for a certain group of people. What I will say covering the New York economy, covering California, people are fed up with New York and California government. I think Spencer Pratt is sort of a bright spot for the GOP right now.
MCGOWAN: The question is about Florida. You keep bringing up California and New York. The question is about Florida.
MOYNIHAN: Well, everyone from California and New York is leaving to go to Florida.
MCGOWAN: Florida is completely run by Republicans and they're not doing well, so says the Republican senator.
(CROSSTALKS)
MCGOWAN: Put California and New York to the side. The question is about Florida. It's not everyone. The question is about Florida.
MOYNIHAN: If it's such a fabulous economy, why is New York bankrupt?
PHILLIP: But here's the thing. But hold on a second. Here's the thing, here's the thing. It's not even really about Florida versus New York or Florida versus California. It's really more about if Florida is doing better than all the other parts of the country, then why is Rick Scott so worried? He clearly is seeing a problem. And if there's a problem in Florida, there's definitely a problem in the rest of the country. Would you agree with that?
MOYNIHAN: I guess so. I haven't specifically looked at the job creation numbers in Florida. What I can tell you is the GOP is very excited about Spencer Pratt and what's happening there, and noting the disastrous rule that's happening in New York with Mamdani, can't balance a budget, in California with Karen Bass, who's saying homeless people shoot up in front of school.
(CROSSTALKS)
FIGARO: Well, I actually do live in Florida, so we don't have to guess. I can make it plain for you. People are struggling in Orlando, Florida. I live in Central Florida. I put hundreds of employees to work in Central Florida. We have a workforce program that's coming out next month in order to help people to be able to get back to work, to get reemployed. So, I can help you. I don't have to do a compare and contrast to New York.
[22:30:00]
And the bottom line is even the Republican governor is saying that Florida is struggling, and it's better to just own it. You guys were saying that President Biden never owned it, that he was saying all was --
(CROSSTALK) LYDIA MOYNIHAN, "NEW YORK POST" CORRESPONDENT: He's addressing it. Isn't that a good thing if he's addressing it?
FIGARO: Well, no, it's not addressing it. I actually want you to do something about it. So, addressing it versus actually doing something about it is two different things. When you mentioned we got six months until the midterm, these people may not be living six months. We're talking about health care that is going up. We're talking about people that cannot feed each other. And when you said Democrats will do well, I just want to urge, I want to be very clear that they may not.
If we are not involving people on the ground that are hurting, that actually have respect in these communities, to give them resources in the meantime, they may not be around in six months. So, I do think the Democrats will do well, but I do not want to take it for granted, Sir, because the word on the curve is, Bunder (ph) said that they're going to wait and see what happens. And that just cannot happen at all.
REP. TOM SUOZZI (D-NY): We cannot take anything for granted.
FIGARO: We cannot take nothing for granted. People need the resources. They need to be able to get to and from work. They need food on their table. We were knocking on doors with houses that were barely standing in Michigan. So, we can talk about polls. We can talk about the unemployment. But the reality of it is people are hurting, and there are people out there who need to be engaged, and the same organizations are being paid, the same folks are talking to the same voters over and over, they're just recycling. And Abby, I'm concerned that people are not upset enough in order to do something about it.
SUOZZI: And we can't take anything for granted because of these redistricting wars that are taking place that are so crazy and because of all the money that President Trump is raising and is expanding on campaigns.
ABBY PHILLIP, CNN ANCHOR: Speaking of redistricting wars, that is exactly what we will be talking about next. Quote, "the racist tools of white supremacy." That is what one opponent has called the new gerrymandered maps in Tennessee. We'll discuss that next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:36:18]
PHILLIP: Tonight, outrage in Tennessee after Republicans passed and signed into law a new congressional map that would carve up a majority black district in Memphis. Here's a 2024 map. You can see that there is only one of these nine seats that is in blue. But the new map completely divides the lines in Memphis, and it all but guarantees that Republicans will win every seat this November. Republicans didn't hide the fact that the move was political and a direct answer to President Trump's call.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JASON ZACHARY (R) TENNESSEE STATE REPRESENTATIVE: Members, it's important to know that this-- the map that you have in front of you was drafted based on the census population related to the last census, but it was absolutely drafted on politics.
This gives us a unique opportunity to, for the first time in history, to have an all Republican delegation sent from Tennessee to Washington, D.C. to represent conservative values, to represent conservative principles. And this gives us a historic opportunity. And so, we're taking advantage of that as the supermajority in this body. So, that's why we're doing it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: And if that wasn't clear enough, here is one Republican representative draped in a Trump flag before the vote. As the session grew more chaotic today, Democrats linked arms during the vote in protest, with some of them calling the new law blatantly racist.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GLORIA JOHNSON (D) TENNESSEE STATE REPRESENTATIVE: This is not a special session. This is a white power rally and a white power grab. Vote yes. You're telling everyone you're a racist.
JUSTIN J. PEARSON (D) TENNESSEE STATE REPRESENTATIVE: These maps are racist tools of white supremacy at the behest of the most powerful white supremacist in the United States of America, Donald J. Trump. We are here because this Republican Party has to seek to steal elections in seats because the President and the party have refused to address the pain, the suffering, and the struggling of everyday Tennesseans.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Congressman, do you agree with some of these Democrats that this is racist to have a state, I mean, the state on a political level is 35 to 40 percent Democratic. They have zero representation now potentially in Congress. But Memphis, specifically, is a majority black part of the state. And those voters now have no opportunity to directly appoint -- elect their representative.
SUOZZI: We have to recognize that this redistricting was done in response to the Supreme Court decision to weaken the Civil Rights Law, the Voting Rights Act, which was put in place to protect African Americans' right to have representation. And right now -- and you know, this is so awful what's happening in our country with all this gerrymandering on both sides. It's awful.
It's terrible for our country because you create these safe Republican seats, these safe Democratic seats, and the general election doesn't matter because you're going to win anyway. You only have to worry about the primary, and everybody just panders to their base to win the primary, and that's dividing our country further.
And so, it's very much race involved. I can't stand the fact that you're splitting up Memphis into three different congressional districts. That's awful that you're cutting up communities like that. And that's happening in places throughout our country right now, and it's bad for America.
MOYNIHAN: Are you opposed to the gerrymandering efforts in New York?
(CROSSTALK)
SUOZZI: I'm opposed to all gerrymandering. I've always been opposed to gerrymandering. It's bad for the country to set up these seats like this. We should have independent redistricting. We should allow independents to vote. We should have open primaries. But this is being done in response to what took place in Texas. And there's going to continue to be this tit for tat, they'll do this, then we'll do that, then they'll do this, then we'll do that.
[22:40:02]
And it's bad for America. And this is making it worse.
LEIGH MCGOWAN, "POLITICS GIRL" PDCAST HOST: I think we also have to understand the black Americans have faced barricade after barricade after barricade in front of them forever for voting. So, to take a majority black district like Memphis and split it up, pull it into three separate sections so it goes into right rural, Tennessee, if you aren't familiar with the state, they're taking a black district and stretching it out so that the white voters overtake the black voters in those three districts.
That's deliberately trying to make one party have no representation. It is an abuse of power. We should say that. This is not just a black voter problem because if anyone thinks their vote should count, this is a problem. This is starting with black voters, but it'll carry on to all of us. The bottom line is Trump and the mega Republicans are losing. People are not happy with how they are running the country.
So, they are desperate to control the outcome of elections by stripping away their opponent's power piece by piece, particularly in the South where they have the most control. We need a national ban on gerrymandering. It doesn't matter what party we have. Any law that limits who can vote, how they can vote, if their vote is counted, is wrong. We need fair, non-partisan maps. Take a grid to the entire country if you have to.
We shouldn't have what happened in Texas, in Florida, in Oklahoma, and yes, in California and Virginia. That should not be happening. It should be fair. And if you are someone that believes that your vote should count, you should be angry. You do not have to be a black American for this to happen. But you should be angry on behalf of black Americans that it's happening to them again.
PHILLIP: Let me play an exchange that a Democratic state lawmaker had with a Republican about how they managed to carve up the black voters in the state in the way that they did.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOHN RAY CLEMMONS (D) TENNESSEE STATE REPRESENATTIVE: So, is that correct that the census data was the sole basis for drawing these lines for 2020?
UNKNOWN: Speaker Zachary.
ZACHARY: Thank you Mr. Speaker. Yes, it's my understanding the census was used to draft the map you have in front you --
(CROSSTALK)
ZACHARY: -- based on the population.
CLEMMONS: Okay, well that's pretty interesting because census data doesn't include any partisan scores or partisan data. And your whole entire argument this entire week has been that this is about politics and partisanship. So, if you solely relied on census data, I'm confused about how you knew partisan scores when drawing this map if that wasn't even considered.
UNKNOWN: Speaker Zachary.
ZACHARY: Thank you. Did you have a question?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: He doesn't answer the question, because it is a good question. Are they using just census data, or are they using race as a proxy for partisanship? And is that really, I mean, is that a smoke screen for carving up black voters?
MEIJER: I mean, you use proxies for partisanship based on socio- economic factors, on income, on geography, on zip code.
PHILLIP: On race?
MEIJER: Frankly, I've never seen that in any analyses that I've seen. Though prior to the Calais decision, when there were redistricting efforts, they would look at that factor. They would look at race to figure out whether or they're in compliance of Section two with the VRA. Now, we're in a different world where we're not cabining specific districts. Just like to state for the record, this is the guy who is currently representing that area. But we have this independent redistricting commissions --
PHILLIP: Yes, so what? I mean I don't understand. But what's the point of pointing out that Steve Cohen is one?
MEIJER: My point is that we have the same issue in Michigan where we had -- we have an independent redistricting commission, right? It's independent. There's always going to be politics and gerrymandering. Regardless of how you try to dress it up with nonpartisan commissions, you can try to control for the partisanship, but you're never going to eliminate that element.
But I will say that the rich irony is that in both California and Virginia, they had independent redistricting commissions. They wanted to reform it, and then they cast off the shackles of the principles as soon as it was politically convenient. MCGOWAN: Well, they asked the voters, unlike any of the other states
that did not ask the voters.
(CROSSTALK)
FIGARO: I'm actually glad. Let's show the picture again. I'm glad that you brought up that he's a white representative that represents black districts because guess what? They had the opportunity to choose. This is about taking away black Americans' opportunity to choose who they want to represent them.
So, whether that is white representative Cohen, if that is Representative Pearson who's black, who's running for that same district, who is, you know, running against Cohen, the bottom line is, it was set up, the Article two of the Voting Rights Act was set up to allow my community to have the choice because so many choices have been taken away from us. And so when you take that away
(CROSSTALK)
FIGARO: That's the element we're going to focus on tonight. And so --
MEIJER: Let's look at Michigan's congressional delegation.
FIGARO: Yes.
MEIJER: I mean, there were a number of VRA seats that were drawn to make sure they had the appropriate amount of African-American voters, which, you know, the assumption there is on the partisanship, not a single one of them is represented by an African representative.
(CROSSTALK)
MEIJER: The only representative in Congress from Michigan --
(CROSSTALK)
MOYNIHAN: You have to admit.
[22:45:00]
It is a little ironic that the woman now who is likely going to win the 9th district in Tennessee is a black Republican woman as a result of this redistricting effort. It's likely going to be black Republican woman who beats that old white man.
SUOZZI: Could I make this very simple point?
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: We're going come back.
FIGARO: It actually is.
PHILLIP: We're going to come back. We're going to take a quick break, and then Tezlyn and Congressman, I'm going to have you both respond. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:50:00]
PHILLIP: Back to our discussion on redistricting wars. Congressman, you were saying.
SUOZZI: I just wanted to make the basic point that in the presidential election, Trump got 65 percent, Kamala Harris got 35 percent. So, it's easy to assume that Tennessee is 35 percent Democratic. Of the current nine seats, one seat is Democratic. If 35 percent, it would be three seats would be Democratic. Right now it's one. Under this new redistricting, it'll be nine Republican, zero Democratic. That's just not right. And this is happening all over our country and it's destroying our country.
PHILLIP: Yes, I mean, Republicans were just complaining about this very thing in Virginia a couple weeks ago. And so now, this is an even more extreme example of how -- putting aside race for a second, just, if you're a Democrat in the state, you have no shot of having a representative that has your interests in mind in Washington at this point.
MEIJER: Which is similar to many places in the northeast. And I will say, I mean, I think the Tennessee move is in direct retaliation. And I'll say retaliation because Hakeem Jeffries said it was maximum warfare. That's what he said after the Virginia redistricting --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Hakeem was talking -- he was responding to Trump redistricting Texas. He didn't say that --
(CROSSTALK)
MEIJER: Which was in response to --
(CROSSTALK)
MEIJER: Why don't we all agree --
(CROSSTALK)
MOYNIHAN: Yes, let's just not do it.
(CROSSTALK)
MOYNIHAN: Truce.
MEIJER: Why don't we all agree this is wrong?
(CROSSTALK)
SUOZZI: -- started. Gerrymandering is wrong. Safe seats is hurting our country because people do not listen to the people when they're in safe seats. They just pander to their base, and that's killing our country. Let's all agree. Conservative, liberal, moderate, whatever you guys are. Let's all agree this is wrong.
MOYNIHAN: Agree. It's wrong.
(CROSSTALK)
FIGARO: Let's also agree that they won't be changing it. And let's also agree it's time for tit for tat. I know you say you don't want tit for tat. I support tit for tat if --
(CROSSTALK)
MOYNIHAN: What's the problem? We're not going to --
(CROSSTALK)
FIGARO: Oh, no, it's okay. But you guys want to go there, so let's go there. Let's tit for tat. And what Representative Pearson, the energy they brought today and I put it out of my social media, everybody was loving it. They're not going to change it. Also, crying about is not going to make a difference. California's going to do to make up the difference. Virginia's going to make up the difference. Organizing voters, Democrats need to flip the house and need to expand the Supreme Court because that's what this is about.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: But where does this end?
MCGOWAN: It ends at the For the People's Act, with the Democrats tried to pass an all-voted board that banned partisan gerrymandering. It ends where we make money, dark money out of politics. It ends when you put Democrats who already voted for the John Lewis Voter Rights Act back in power, and you actually pass those things that make voter election day a holiday, that give us mail-in ballots, that give us safety in voting.
All the things the Republicans are currently trying to rip away. It started -- the voter suppression started with gerrymandering, then closing polling stations, then limiting drop boxes, and then mail-in voting and early voting and same-day registration. Those are all taking away from certain communities that vote Democratic. We have to stop doing that and it ends when you put Democrats in charge and you actually passed the laws that they tried to pass before all voted for Republicans --
(CROSSTALK)
MOYNIHAN: Ends when Democrats in charge? That's the goal? Okay, what is the goal?
(CROSSTALK)
MCGOWAN: But this is why gerrymandering things happen. Democrats in charge and you actually pass the law that they tried to pass before when all voted for Republican --
PHILLIP: Lydia --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: But Lydia, should Republicans -- should Republicans end -- put their weapons down and say, hey, let's stop.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Let's --
MOYNIHAN: They actually did. They actually did. In Indiana, they tried to do just that.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: No, no. Wait a second.
MOYNIHAN: They you know what?
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: No.
MOYNIHAN: And you know what?
(CROSSTALK)
MOYNIHAN: In Indiana they said we're not going to gerrymander.
PHILLIP: Hold on, hold on, Lydia. That is not what happened, okay? Republicans did not say we're going to stop doing this. Some Republicans --
MOYNIHAN: They actually voted against it.
PHILLIP: Some Republicans voted against it and they were targeted by the President this week, and five out of seven of them voted out of their seats. And while that was happening, down in Florida, the Republican governor, Ron DeSantis, said that he was going to redistrict his state to eliminate Democratic representation.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: There is no ceasefire happening on the part of Republicans.
(CROSSTALK)
MOYNIHAN: In response to the ceasefire in Indiana, Virginia said hold my beer. Let me get rid of --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: You know, it wasn't a ceasefire, it was more like a mutiny. And President Trump hated the fact that they pushed back on him. And you know why he hated it so much? He hated it because it's not --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: I'm just saying, that's not the same -- that's not the same thing as Republicans saying, we're not going to gerrymander anymore because at the same time that was happening, they were planning to gerrymander in Florida.
MOYNIHAN: But you know what?
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: So, no.
(CROSSTALK)
MOYNIHAN: All of those Republicans who were upset were right, because Indiana said, we're going to stop it, and then --
(CROSSTALK)
FIGARO: And guess what?
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: And then Republicans spent $6 million voting them out of their seats.
FIGARO: And Democrats --
(CROSSTALK)
FIGARO: So, no ceasefire.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: All right, everyone, we've got to leave it there. Thank you very much for being here. We'll be back in just a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:59:31]
PHILLIP: Secretary of State Marco Rubio gifting Pope Leo with a crystal football during his visit. So, what would you get the man who has everything in the world? Lydia, you're up first.
MOYNIHAN: I would give him the most quintessential gift from the New Yorker, "The New York Post" subscription.
FIGARO: A picture of how I see Jesus, which is brass feet made of brass and hair of wool. So, Black Jesus.
SUOZZI: I'd give him a white socks jersey of Mike Vasil, the ready relief pitcher who my son is living with in Chicago right now.
[23:00:04]
My son's a minor league baseball player. Going to make the movie. I need the Pope's -- to help pray for -- Mike Vasil's got Tommy John surgery and my son.
PHILLIP: That was unexpected. Okay.
MGGOWAN : The Canadian part of me will give the man some maple sugar for the pockets of his robe. He might get a little sugar fix.
MEIJER: Tiger season tickets so we can support a team that will not disappoint us much.
SUOZZI: Oh.
PHILLIP: Everybody, thank you very much for joining us, and thanks for watching "NewsNight." You can stream the show anytime with an all access subscription in the CNN app or at cnn.com/watch. "Laura Coates Live" starts right now.
