Return to Transcripts main page
CNN NewsNight with Abby Phillip
Supreme Court Allows Alabama To Eliminate District Held By Black Democrat; Trump Demands GOP Move Primaries Amid Redistricting Wars; Trump Rejects Iran's Proposal, Says Ceasefire On Life Support; Trump Rejects Iran's Response To Ceasefire Proposal; Sean Duffy Defends Return To Reality TV. Aired 10-11p ET
Aired May 11, 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, is Iran playing Donald Trump?
DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: The ceasefire is on massive life support.
PHILLIP: The frustration builds as Tehran draws out negotiations.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The Iranians are not going to give in.
PHILLIP: Plus, breaking tonight, the Supremes allow Alabama to eliminate a district held by a black Democrat as the map wars spread across America.
Also, the president demands the government buy American, calling anything else a betrayal, yet his ballroom is on track to be built with foreign steel.
And --
SEAN DUFFY, TRANSPORTATION SECRETARY: So, over the course of seven months, we just kind of found these moments where I might be able to do some work. I could take the kids with me, do a road trip.
PHILLIP: -- despite high gas prices and incidents in the air and on the ground, the transportation secretary is under fire for making a reality T.V. show.
Live at the table, Bakari Sellers, Scott Jennings, Ashley Allison, Kevin O'Leary, and Elie Honig.
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. Tonight, it's spreading, a battle over redistricting that is playing out at the Supreme Court as Republicans and Democrats try to gain an edge in November's midterm elections. Today, the court's conservative majority cleared the way for Alabama to use a new Congressional map that would eliminate a district currently held by a black Democrat.
The Supreme Court offered no explanation in its order, which tosses out a lower court decision that blocked the use of that 2023 map. But Justice Sonia Sotomayor joined the court's other two liberals and said that the order was inappropriate, and that it will cause confusion as voters head into the polls in the next week's election.
The decision hands yet another victory to Republicans just days after Virginia's Supreme Court struck down a measure that would have allowed Democrats to redraw Congressional maps in their favor. Virginia Democrats are now asking the Supreme Court to reinstate that map.
That seems like a bit of a Hail Mary pass there on the part of Virginia Democrats. But the broader issue is that, especially when you look at what's happening in Alabama, there's already voting underway in that state. They are planning to toss out that map, go with a new map that favors Republicans, eliminates a black a district. And then you have the president, President Trump, sending a message to South Carolina, your home state, Bakari, saying, the South Carolina Senate -- State Senate has a big vote tomorrow on redistricting. He says, Republicans be bold and courageous, just like the Republicans of the great state of Tennessee were last week. Move the U.S. House primaries to August. Leave the rest on the same schedule. Everything will be fine. Get it done.
So, we're going beyond new maps here. Now, we're tinkering with the calendar. People are voting. Maybe those votes get thrown out. It's chaos.
BAKARI SELLERS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I mean, not only is it chaos, but you're literally throwing out votes as you said. I mean, I watched 60 Minutes with Governor Landry from Louisiana throwing out votes, and he chuckled about it. In South Carolina, people have already voted from overseas, and you chuckle about it.
But I want to take a step back and look at this from a 50,000-foot view, to be completely honest. I think Ashley and I have to wrestle with the fact that we are going to be the first generation to actually leave this country worse than the one that we inherited. And I think for black millennials, the progress that our parents and grandparents gave us that we're watching being ripped away from us is something that our generation's going to have to really wrestle with in figuring out how we get out of this conundrum.
If somebody fell asleep in 1896 and woke up today in 2026, they would simply say the only difference is now Negroes have a T.V. show and we wear nice suits. They swapped out Klan hoods for Brooks Brothers suits. And that is the problem. I mean, Plessy v. Ferguson was 7-1, and it gave birth to 50 years of Jim Crow.
What we have with this court right now, what we're seeing is watching people who have fought and died and bled so that we would have access to the ballot box, so that we would have access to our voices being heard in Congress, being ripped away.
[22:05:12]
And I think that there is a casual laughter from people we believe to be our friends on the right who are showing us true colors today, because the most sacred, or one of the most sacred acts you have in the United States of America is the ability to cast a ballot and elect someone and send them to Congress, the State House or a mayoral seat that represents your interest. And now black folks throughout the South are being silenced, and I don't find that to be a laughing matter.
PHILLIP: Well, you know, Scott, I mean, if this were just about partisan gerrymandering, I think that'd be one conversation. But I think part of what's happening right now is that we're in the middle of a political cycle, and maps are changing. I was reading an article today about Tennessee, and the lead of the article was two neighbors, literally across the street from each other, one white and one black, now in Memphis in different districts.
So, it's more than just are we redistricting according to partisanship, it's also what are we doing in terms of creating a precedent for the use of power across the country, in red states and in blue states?
SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yes, it's a good question about redrawing in the middle of a, of an ongoing election. In the case of Louisiana, you know, they didn't have a choice. The Supreme Court said their maps were unconstitutional. They had to redraw it. And so what they chose to do was move the -- I think what they'll choose to do is move the House back to the fall, and they'll leave the Senate primary in place, which is actually happening right now. So, I get the argument about a little bit of confusion for voters.
I mean, around the edges of Congressional districts, you're always going to have some areas where, you know, one person on one side of the street, one person on the other. I live on the very western edge of a Congressional district in Kentucky, in fact.
If I might respectfully debate Bakari on this for a moment, to me, I heard you say that people are losing representation, people are losing their voice. No voter has lost their voice at all. No one's been disenfranchised. Every voter in America before these court rulings could go cast a ballot this November, and every voter in America, white, black or otherwise, can go cast a ballot right now.
The lines may be changing, but every voter still has the same amount of voting power, one vote, that they had. It's just that this Supreme Court said your race doesn't necessarily have to dictate your political identity. The fact that you're an American citizen and your franchise gives you one vote, that is your political identity. And it is incumbent upon both parties, Republicans and Democrats, to run people who speak not to just one constituency, but all American interests. To me, that's how the November election should be run.
SELLERS: Yes, I would -- yes, please.
PHILLIP: Go ahead, Ashley.
ASHLEY ALLISON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I might agree with you if they hadn't said something different three years ago. We aren't talking about in Alabama a district that existed when my grandmother was alive. We're talking about a district that was drawn in 2023 because there are injustices that are still being placed. We're talking about Memphis, where we're not -- like it's not just one person across the street. They split a whole city into three to make black voters have less power in house maps.
The Voting Rights Act, which actually was -- the last time it actually was reauthorized was under your boss, George W. Bush. It used to be a bipartisan thing. It used to be clear that the backdrop of this country, there is discrimination now, there was pervasive discrimination when the law was signed into law during the Civil Rights Movement. We can all go into our partisan corners, but to act like what is happening right now is not a direct attack on black voters' power, black voters' ability to represent themselves.
Now, we had this conversation yesterday, Scott. Black voters are allowed to elect whoever they want. And in 2024, they did. They elected a black Democrat in that new district in Alabama. That black Democrat went through a primary of 13 people, and black voters found the agency to come and decide how. That primary now will be erased.
And put a black Republican up in that district if you want black voters to have a choice, but they're not -- that's not what's happening. It is a dissemination a distribution of black power, and to call it anything other than that I just think is being historically ignoring the past of our country and pretending like we're not trying to drive our country to a different type of future.
PHILLIP: Elie, Ashley just raised an important point, which is that this Supreme Court in 2023 said that Alabama needed to have that second district.
ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Yes.
PHILLIP: And they did so on the basis of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. Let me just read a part of the ruling. This was written by Justice -- the chief justice John Roberts. He says, we held over 40 years ago that even Section 1 of the 15th Amendment prohibits only purposeful discrimination, the prior decisions of this Court foreclose any argument that Congress may not, pursuant to Section 2 of the 15th Amendment, outlaw voting practices that are discriminatory in effect.
[22:10:05]
HONIG: Okay.
PHILLIP: Discriminatory in effect. So, now they're saying the exact opposite, and they don't even bother to explain the contradiction in their decision today.
HONIG: Yes. The whole world of politics and voting is changing really quick, to your point, Bakari. The world is very different now than it was two weeks ago because we got the Louisiana decision, which essentially ended the Voting Rights Act. People's heads --
SELLERS: And Plessy v. Ferguson, just for context, was from where?
HONIG: Right.
SELLERS: Louisiana.
HONIG: Okay, and people's heads are spinning because you're Alabama, Louisiana, right, Tennessee, South Carolina. What's -- let me give you a universal theory how to make sense of all this craziness. Whether it's good or bad, you all will continue to debate, but I'll tell you how the best I can make of what's happening right now with the law.
First of all, it is essentially up to the states. And when I say the states, I mean the legislatures, the voters, governors, the state courts, right? And if a state wants to partisan gerrymander to an extreme, for the most part, they can. If you're California, and you're 60/40 Democrat, and you want to go all blue, basically, you can. If you're Texas, opposite, you want to go all red, you basically can. That's rule number one.
Rule number two is every state has its own rules, and they vary tremendously. Sometimes it has to go to referendum. Sometimes it has to go to the governor. The states have to follow their own rules. That's Virginia, which did not follow its own rules. That's why Virginia's going to lose their map, and I don't think the Supreme Court's going to intervene.
And then point three, and this is what we're all talking about now, is the Supreme Court has changed their position from even a few years ago to where it's now basically we're not going to police any of this unless there's racial discrimination either way. So, you can no longer try to specifically carve out a majority black district or two.
And if states have done that or if people want to say states have done this, this is what's happening in Alabama, in South Carolina, probably in Tennessee, they can say, well, that was a district that we carved out to be specifically majority black. Now we want to undo it. And that's why this is happening day-by-day, hour-by-hour. It's a whole new world out there.
PHILLIP: One of the interesting things about Tennessee that we should also keep in mind is that Tennessee district that they did away with existed prior to the Voting Rights Act. So, Memphis, as a city, has been a district even before they were trying to rectify racial discrimination with the Voting Rights Act.
So, you know, we're going to start to see maybe Virginia might try again and create that. Maybe they might try to create an 11-0 map because now, according to the Supreme Court, you can. We might live in a country where, all around the country, we have states where the minority political party has effectively zero representation in Congress.
KEVIN O'LEARY, CHAIRMAN, O'LEARY VENTURES: I think everybody should take confidence in the fact the Supreme Court basically supported one vote, one person guaranteed in perpetuity, and the rest is just map wars. And I think we should get used to it. And I think it's, as you said, a state-based situation. Add this to the mix. At the end of the day, the state decides at the state level. It's in the Constitution. Get over it.
SELLERS: The problem with that sentiment is that you were born in 1954.
O'LEARY: Yes.
SELLERS: Okay? You're 71.
O'LEARY: Yes.
SELLERS: Right? In 1954 --
O'LEARY: By the way, I'm a vampire. I'm going to live until I --
SELLERS: -- during your lifetime, we've actually had Brown v. Board of Education.
O'LEARY: I remember.
SELLERS: Yes, Brown v. Board of Education, I don't know how you remember it. I think you were like two months old.
O'LEARY: But your point is --
SELLERS: But Brown v. -- but I'm not finished yet. Let me finish my thought.
O'LEARY: You're going to drill back to '54?
SELLERS: Yes, because you're still alive, right? And so there is an entire generation of people, Brown v. Board, it overturned Plessy v. Ferguson in 1896.
O'LEARY: And your point is? Bring it. Bring it. Bring it.
SELLERS: And my point is that my mother was born in 1951. She desegregated schools. My father was shot in the Civil Rights Movement. Those people --
PHILLIP: Let him finish.
SELLERS: I'm going to finish, because you're being utterly disrespectful.
O'LEARY: Not at all.
SELLERS: So, I'm going to finish this comment. So, what I'm telling you is that there are people in this country who fought, died, and bled for the right to vote. Don't be a dick, just understand.
PHILLIP: Okay, Bakari, please.
SELLERS: Just understand.
O'LEARY: The Constitution's being upheld. You have a problem with that? You have a problem with the Constitution of the United States of America?
PHILLIP: Hold on a second. Bakari, I'm going to stop you, because I just want everybody to reset with a modicum of respect at this table. Please stop, okay?
SELLERS: I want you to understand that there's a price that was paid for this right. There is a price that we uphold. And whether or not you value that --
O'LEARY: Where are you going with this?
SELLERS: Whether or not you value that or not, there are people who bled, sweat, and died, and were in prison for access to the ballot box. And what we're seeing --
O'LEARY: They still have access --
SELLERS: What we're seeing throughout the South is that their voice, their vote, their representation, and people who have lived experiences to represent them are not being sent to Congress or where they need to go.
HONIG: This debate, by the way, is happening among the justices. If you look at the Louisiana decision, the conservatives are saying, we've made great progress.
[22:15:00]
It's time to let go of this, of using racial discrimination.
SELLERS: And that's why I utilize the description of --
HONIG: And the liberal justices say exactly what you just said, Bakari, which is there's a history here that we're overlooking.
PHILLIP: But, Elie, I mean, the three years have passed since 2023 to 2026.
ALLISON: Yes.
HONIG: Exactly.
ALLISON: There's not that long of a gap.
PHILLIP: All of a sudden, the country has made that much progress.
ALLISON: That much progress?
PHILLIP: In three years.
HONIG: And that's the criticism of the majority.
Look, there's a famous quote by Ruth Bader Ginsburg, right? When the Voting Rights Act --
SELLERS: Who should've retired, but go ahead.
HONIG: When the Voting Rights Act came up, when she was on the bench, she said, you know, the conservatives said, well, we've made great progress, so we don't need this anymore. She said -- I'm paraphrasing, but she said, that's like getting rid of your umbrella in a rainstorm because you're not getting wet.
SELLERS: Yes.
HONIG: And the question is it still raining? Is it drizzling? Is it clear? People differ strongly on that.
ALLISON: And guess what? It can be clear one day and rain the next. And so that's the inconsistency.
SELLLERS: And the (INAUDIBLE).
ALLISON: I just want to point out the one person, one vote. I think, Bakari, us millennials, will have to wrestle with how we're going to leave this Earth, and I'm determined to leave it better than I found it. And I think that this decision is actually going to open a rush to reevaluate a lot of things that you say are in the Constitution, because right now you have a hat on that says, Utah, and they have more representation in the Senate than the people actually in Alabama has in the Senate.
O'LEARY: I got a situation in Utah going on.
ALLISON: I know. That's not why you have the hat on.
O'LEARY: No, I have it on.
ALLISON: But like you have it on, and so there are states right now that have two senators when we're sitting in a state right now that has more population than Utah multiplied by ten. And so if we really want to talk about --
O'LEARY: You don't like Utah? I love Utah.
ALLISON: I'm talking about all the states that have smaller populations. If we really want to talk about one person, one vote, and if we really want to go down a path to see what real franchise mean, you might have just opened a discussion that this country should be -- it's timely to actually have.
PHILLIP: All right. Let's leave it there. Elie Honig, thank you very much for joining us.
Next for us, breaking news tonight in the war in Iran, we're learning that the president has more seriously considered a return to combat in Iran after frustrating development.
Plus, Trump is demanding that the government buy everything American, but his ballroom is going to be built with foreign steel. We'll discuss next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:20:00]
PHILLIP: Tonight, the prospects for a deal to end the war in Iran are grim as President Trump more seriously considers resuming combat operations. Sources tell CNN that Trump is frustrated with how Iran has handled talks. And he met with his national security team tonight at the White House to discuss his options moving forward.
Iran offered its counterproposal for peace, which demanded recognition of Tehran's sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz, compensation for war damage, lifting of sanctions, and releasing frozen assets. Trump called that totally unacceptable, and then he went further with this dire prognosis today.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: After reading that piece of garbage they sent us, I didn't even finish reading it. I said, I'm not going to waste my time reading it. I would say it's one of the weakest. Right now, it's on life support.
I would say the ceasefire is on massive life support, where the doctor walks in and says, sir, your loved one has approximately a one percent chance of living.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Oil prices climbed today on the heels of the news, with Brent crude rising to more than $100 a barrel.
In an effort to tamp down on surging gas prices, Trump told CBS News he wants to suspend the federal gas tax, which is a little over 18 cents a gallon. That, however, would require action from Congress.
All of this seems to suggest what a lot of people have been saying for a while, which is that, fundamentally, the White House is grappling with the fact that they have not changed Iran's behavior. They have not changed their psychology or their thinking about nuclear weapons, about what they want out of this settlement, and so that's why we're where we are.
JENNINGS: Yes. I've talked to a number of high-ranking military and foreign policy people over the last couple of weeks. And, honestly, everybody thinks you're just going to wind up back in a place here where you're going to have to attack these people again if you want them to believe that you're serious about enforcing your edict, and the edict is simply you can't have a nuclear weapon. So, that's number one.
Number two, on the gas tax issue, it feels to me like there actually might be some bipartisan momentum for doing that thing in Washington. I think most people would agree that sounds like a good idea.
And number three, the wild card in all of this, to me, is the president's trip to China because, obviously, China gets all this oil from Iran. My suspicion is this topic will be on the table for President Trump to talk to President Xi about and see if they can bring some Chinese pressure to bear to help end it.
So, I think this is a pivotal week because the China meeting in the middle, but also, you know, let's be honest, if he's saying the ceasefire is like at 1 percent, you know, life support, you know, to me, what I hear, attacks, you know, will begin imminently.
PHILLIP: Well, you know, this is a pretty big change from what he has been saying. For weeks, Trump has been saying that they're close to a deal, that Iran is about to capitulate. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: We have points, major points of agreement, I would say almost all points of agreement.
They're not going to have a nuclear weapon. That's number one. That's number one, two, and three. They will never have a nuclear weapon.
REPORTER: They've said yes to that?
TRUMP: They've agreed to that.
Well, they're agreeing with us on the plan. I mean, we asked for 15 things, and for the most part, we're going to be asking for a couple of other things.
Most of the points are already negotiated and agreed to.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[22:30:00]
PHILLIP: It seems like that was very much not true.
ALLISON: Yes. And I think the issue -- there's lots of issues with this war, but one of the primary ones, as a citizen of this country, is it just doesn't feel like we're getting the truth from this administration. And it feels like we're not getting the truth from this administration because they aren't clear on how to get out of the thing that they got into.
I understand we do not want Iran to have a nuclear weapon, but when I hear you say we have to attack them again, we did, and we were -- so we did it back in June, and we were told that we got rid of all of their stockpiles, and we did it again, and now they were on the ropes, and now we're having to do it again.
So, it feels like those two things can't be true at the same time, and the marker just keeps moving. And I worry that if the marker keeps moving further and further, that at some point, perhaps, troops do have to go. We've also heard that it, the only way to truly get their enrichment to get it out, we'd have to send people in. And so that makes me nervous.
I do hear on the gas prices, yes, Americans are suffering. They're suffering because of this war and other things, and maybe there'll be bipartisan support. But the other side of that is that it's a short- term solution because then they still have to raise the taxes up again.
So, it just feels like we're --
PHILLIP: Yes, it's like putting a Band-Aid on a bigger problem. The problem is that the Strait of Hormuz is closed. They don't have a plan to reopen it. And it sounds like even this idea of suspending the gas tax seems to suggest that the president thinks this is going to go on for a long time.
O'LEARY: North America does not have a problem with access to energy or oil. Between the Canadians and what is domestically brought out of the ground, we have an abundance of nat gas and oil. The problem we have is it's priced internationally, where people have limited supplies as a result of this strait being closed down. So, it's very easy to drop the 18 or 16 cents off. If the Congress wants to do that, they can.
The bigger issue around getting Iran back to the negotiating table, one of the strategies is to do further tenderization. And what I mean on that is don't kill people. Just tell them, look, you don't have any air force anymore. We're going to go in and take out bridge by bridge by bridge by bridge and just make it really friggin' miserable for your people until you come to the table, get rid of the nuke and the processed uranium, whatever that is, 96 pounds, and you admit that you do not own the strait, and you let the people, because, by the way --
PHILLIP: So, making life miserable --
O'LEARY: -- as I agree with Scott, when he gets to China --
PHILLIP: -- for the people of Iran intentionally, that is inching very close to a war crime.
O'LEARY: Why is that a war crime?
PHILLIP: Because have to have a military rationale for attacking --
O'LEARY: You do. You do. You're saying that they're bringing troops over these infrastructures?
PHILLIP: Well, look, I'm just saying, you just said it, what the point was to make life miserable for Iranians. That would not be a sufficient rationale for doing what he's suggesting.
JENNINGS: The problem with that -- I fundamentally agree with you, we may have to go back in. Making life miserable for the people of Iran, that's what the regime already does. They make their lives miserable. What I would just slightly modify the position to say we have to make life miserable for the regime. And we did that with the way that we already took out --
O'LEARY: Taking out the bridges causes huge headaches.
JENNINGS: but that's the question, is can you ever -- can you do the military thing in a way that the regime -- it's not tenable for the regime?
O'LEARY: That's why I like tenderizing. Tenderizing is better. Don't kill people. Tenderize.
PHILLIP: Well, there's -- look --
SELLERS: I don't know what that means.
PHILLIP: -- people are getting killed.
SELLERS: I have never heard of tenderize in war. But I will tell you, there are two fundamental problems with that. The average price of gas right now is, like, $4.50, $4.52, and that is a problem for the American public. What Donald Trump is signaling by saying that he wants to eliminate the gas tax, we've seen everybody who's running for governor throughout the South say they want to eliminate their state gas tax or freeze it. It's the ploy of the Republican Party, as if voters don't know why gas prices are so high now.
What he's signaling, though, is that gas is going to get to $5, or $5.25, and you're going to have to pay that price. Then you're going to have to phase that tax back in. What Americans don't want is for you to take something away and then phase it back in so it raised the cost.
To get to Scott's ultimate goal, which actually is my ultimate goal, we share the same goal, which is to make sure that we have a denuclearized Iran. I don't know if that's a word, but we want to make sure that Iran does not have a nuclear weapon. The only way you can do that is to have United States military boots on the ground. That's the only way you can do that. That's the only way you can destroy their nuclear arsenal, and that is another cost to the American public.
I just wish Pete Hegseth -- I have to always slow down when I pronounce his last name -- Pete Hegseth and Donald Trump would look into the camera and tell the American public the truth. Like just tell us the truth, because right now they're not.
ALLISON: But that's why the last segment is so relevant. That is actually why they're trying to redraw the maps, is because they can't tell the truth and still win.
[22:30:02]
They just can't. It's not popular --
(CROSSTALK)
O'LEARY: Nobody knows the outcome of the war. You don't know if you need boots on the ground yet. At some point -- (CROSSTALK)
ALLISON: Well, every -- most military experts have said that.
(CROSSTALK)
SELLERS: In order -- and I think, I mean, Scott would agree with me, I believe, on this point. In order to actually destroy their nuclear arsenal, the only way you can get to their nuclear arsenal is to have military boots on the ground.
O'LEARY: They do know they're losing $208 million a day in come.
SELLERS: And the other point I want to make is that while we may not know when the war is going to end, I can tell you that Donald Trump told me this was going to be a one-week thing, a two-week thing, a three-week thing.
O'LEARY: I don't think you can call it. No president knows when a war starts.
(CROSSTALK)
SELLERS: Well then don't lie to me.
ALLISON: Then don't say it.
SELLERS: Don't peel me and tell me it's raining, right? I mean, it's like --
O'LEARY: How do you know when it's going to end? You don't know.
ALLISON: Exactly. Go tell the president that.
SELLERS: Exactly. That's the point.
O'LEARY: I think everybody --
(CROSSTALK)
O'LEARY: -- knows that.
(CROSSTALK)
SELLERS: I'm sorry. I thought you agree with me.
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: I agree with you that some personnel could be required. The only question is under what conditions. Is it a negotiated diplomatic condition where they say, okay, we know you're coming in, you're going to get the stuff in route. Is it an international force? Have you agreed to ongoing monitoring? Is it Americans? Is it other countries?
OLEARY: You're talking fighting boots, right?
SELLERS: I am.
ALLISON: But do you think that's even on the table, though, Scott? Because it seems like --
JENNINGS: Well, I think that's the President wants. It's a question whether Iran will accept it. I'm a little skeptical just because of the way they've been acting against Iran. And we appear to be negotiating with different groups of people at different times which I'm sure makes it difficult.
ALLISON: Yes.
JENNINGS: So, I agree with you about needing personnel. I just -- the conditions under which they go into me is still very much up in the air.
PHILLIP: All right, next for us. The President is demanding that the government buy American, but whose ballroom will be made from foreign steel? We'll discuss next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:36:31]
PHILLIP: Tonight, Donald Trump is urging federal agencies to buy American. No excuses, he says, but his actions on a high-profile project suggests a major contradiction. In a social media post, Trump accused Washington politicians of sending taxpayer dollars overseas and letting foreign countries rip America off. "America First" means buy American, he concluded.
Not lost on many observers is that Trump, a self-proclaimed champion of U.S. Steel, has secured tens of millions of dollars' worth of donated foreign steel for his White House ballroom project, in arguably the most recognized building of the United States. Steel, from a Luxembourg-based company, will provide the structure for Trump's ballroom. Celebrating the various changes he made, Trump had some choice words for the House as he moved back into last year.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: This place was not properly taken care of. I was told by my wife, you have to act presidential, so don't use foul language. I won't, therefore, normally I would have said it was a shithouse (ph), but I don't want to say that. The columns were falling down. The plaster was falling off. This place is tippy-topped now.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: So, just for starters, the President of the United States referring to the White House as a shithouse (ph)? Never heard that one before. But yes, I mean the broader issue is that Trump is being pretty hypocritical by using foreign steel on the White House when he's ordering federal agencies to do the opposite. O'LEARY: I wouldn't have said shithouse (ph). I would have gone poo-
poo house. But the point is people either like him don't in the way he's just visceral that way. But I think what's important is that house should be the shining emblem of the American dream. And so, it should be great when foreign leaders come there. And so whatever that takes, it's a rounding error in terms of the cost of the brand, the American dream. So fix it. Somebody fix it. Whether it's this administration, or the next one, or whatever it is, make sure it's El Supremo.
PHILLIP: But take the foreign steel.
ALLISON: Right.
O'LEARY: Yes. Why not? It's free.
SELLERS: Can we play one game? Like imagine Barack Hussein Obama --
ALLISON: No.
SELLERS: -- called the White House a shithouse (ph), used foreign steel, ran the price up from 200 million of private dollars, raising money, to $1 billion appropriated from federal taxpayers.
O'LEARY: Do you like the free steel, right, from Luxembourg?
SELLERS: I don't like the free steel.
O'LEARY: It's free. It's still steel.
ALLISON: I mean, I come from steel country and so --
SELLERS: I actually don't like the free steel. I think that there are people who are --
ALLISON: Yes, I think it's just like -- can we just call it hypocritical?
SELLERS: Can we call it a grift? Can we say he's wrong? Can you say he's wrong?
ALLISON: Fine. If you want to use the steel, use it, but then don't say you're "America First." Just like be honest about it. It's like so easy.
PHILLIP: And I think, also, the broader thing is that Trump himself has a long history of hypocrisy on him --
PHILLIP: Yes.
PHILLIP: -- on buying American. His products and his properties are foreign-made. The Trump phone that they advertised and took millions of dollars from his supporters for, and haven't delivered, will also be foreign-made. So, at what point does Trump get help to his own standard? JENNINGS: You know, buy American has two operative words. First being,
"buy". He's not buying anything. He's getting a donation, which was, I'll point out his pledge.
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: At the beginning of this, that he would take donations so that would be free to the taxpayers.
PHILLIP: Just to be clear, rather than actually purchasing steel from American companies which would support American businesses --
[22:40:01]
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: -- he's taking a freebie from a foreign competitor, bringing it into the country and using it in the White House --
(CROSSTALK)
SELLERS: That's a great question, Abby.
JENNINGS: I did a little homework on this tonight, on this company. Number one, it is a foreign-owned company. Number two, it does own a steel production facility in Alabama outright. Number three, it does business with an iron mine in Minnesota. They do have books in the United States --
PHILLIP: Okay. Globalization. But that's not what he told his federal agency. "Buy American." He said that.
JENNINGS: And on top of that, it's sort of a, the tariffs are the reason they're here actually. So, it makes a larger point about his tariffs. But I did make a phone call.
PHILLIP: Wait, sorry, say that again.
JENNINGS: So, part of the whole issue with tariffs is that it made it more attractive for foreign companies to actually invest in American production, which is what this company actually did. So, that's number one.
(CROSSTALK)
O'LEARY: -- we celebrate taxpayers? They didn't pay anything. He got free steel.
JENNINGS: Number two, I do think inside the steel industry, based on my homework tonight, there are some raised eyebrows. But if you ask them, do you broadly support the President, his policies, et cetera, cetera, you get a resounding yes that his economic and tariff agenda has been overwhelmingly good for U.S. Steel. So, I don't think you're going to get a ton of grumblings.
PHILLIP: So, just to be clear, you do not think there is any hypocrisy at play here that Trump would tell federal agencies in no uncertain terms, buy American, no exceptions, and then proceed to do the exact opposite.
JENNINGS: He didn't buy anything. He got it for free.
PHILLIP: Okay.
ALLISON: I mean --
PHILLIP: So, he rather, again, rather than contracting with an American company at U.S. Steel --
JENNINGS: That would be buying. That would be purchasing which he told people he would take their --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: -- he is basically saying, we're not going to support the American business. We're going to just go ahead and give a free ag to this Luxembourg-based business.
SELLERS: But then we just -- we just -- the problem with that are the fallacy in the argument is he just asked for $1 billion. I mean, I'm not making that up.
JENNINGS: Well, the secret service --
(CROSSTALK)
SELLERS: But that -- correct. It was an ask from the federal government from his administration $4 billion. I would prefer, to Kevin's point, I would prefer to support American business than take something free from a foreign entity. That's just my philosophy. I am sorry for wanting to pour back into our businesses in the country. Maybe I'm more "America First" than Donald Trump.
JENNINGS: But if he had done that, wouldn't you be saying, oh, I thought you said this was going to be free?
(CROSSTALK)
SELLERS: I'm still trying to figure out how they went from a couple hundred to a billion.
PHILLIP: Well, no, mean, he said he was going to fund the whole thing with donations. So, why can't he fund the steel with donations? I don't get -- I mean, that's not hard to do.
ALLISON: This is -- this is you, guys. This is not one to a heel to dial, and just call it like, okay, maybe not the best optically, not supporting American. There are some holes in his, like, "America First." Just --
(CROSSTALK)
ALLISON: I would have bought it here. But like, the American people are not stupid. And this won't pass the smell test. Okay, now --
(CROSSTALK)
ALLISON: Let me --
PHILLIP: Okay, Ashley's got the last one. We have to go after her.
ALLISON: Now, overwhelmingly, maybe they will support his policies, but on this one, on this one --
(CROSSTALK)
O'LEARY: What about steel workers? Do we want to party in the ballroom? I want to.
PHILLIP: All right.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Next for us, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy, no stranger to reality TV, has a new show now. Critics want to know how he would tape it while still serving in the President's cabinet. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:47:47]
PHILLIP: Tonight, with gas prices averaging over $4.50 a gallon, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy is defending his return to reality TV. Duffy said that costs for the five-part series, "The Great American Road Trip," featuring his family were paid for by a non- profit. But he did not receive a salary or royalties, and that zero taxpayer dollars were spent on his family over the last seven months of filming. On X, Duffy accused the radical, miserable left of lying about this trip. The series will air for free on YouTube ahead of America's 250th birthday.
In addition to the fact that he's doing all of this while serving in the job that he has, it's also worth noting that this series is being sponsored by a bunch of companies that have business before the Department of Transportation -- Boeing, Toyota, Shell, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. Lots of problems here.
SELLERS: Tone deafness, self-awareness, like thereof. At the end of the day, Americans are struggling. Cost of gas, which you mentioned. You know, roads, highways, bridges, which we're still repairing from the bipartisan infrastructure act that Joe Biden passed, which Nancy Mace and other Republicans try to take credit for.
The fact that you are filming a reality TV show while Americans are trying to make ends meet, I think it's just that it's the definition of being tone deaf. And I think that there are people who do not take this administration seriously because of people like RFK, because of people like Duffy, because of individuals like this who do not feel as if they're up to the task, and then every week we get another headline.
Spirit Airlines shut down last week. We had Frontier, I believe, that had a very tragic accident that happened on the runway where somebody trespassed. There's something every week that I believe my Secretary of Transportation should focus on instead of filming another reality show.
JENNINGS: You think Sean Duffy should be up on the fence blocking deranged --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: There have been a lot of --
(CROSSTALK)
SELLERS: Wait a minute -- air traffic control --
PHILLIP: There have been a lot of issues. Hold on. We're not talking about reality TV. We're -- there have been lot of incidents. Bakari mentioned a few. I mean, one of the first, a massive mid-air collision near Reagan Airport, but also a fire truck and an airplane colliding, killing several people.
[22:50:03]
Mass resignations and shortages at the agencies that he oversees, air traffic controllers taking trauma leave after close calls in Newark. I mean, lots of problems with our air traffic control systems, our aviation systems right now. And you do have to ask the question at this very moment. Why? Why do this?
JENNINGS: Well, I think the purpose of it is, as I understand it, is to promote American visitation. We have a lot of things in this country that are great. There's something in every state. We have national parks and other things. You know, truly, it's a great country. And I think the whole point, even --
PHILLIP: He's not the head of tourism.
(CROSSTALK)
ALLISON: Or interior.
PHILLIP: I mean, he's the Transportation Secretary.
JENNINGS: But you have to -- but you got to get there. That's the point.
PHILLIP: The one thing that people want him to do is keep them safe as they travel in planes, trains, and automobiles. And Americans, a lot of them are not feeling great about that right now.
JENNINGS: Well, they shouldn't because the Democrats shut down the DHS, put all the TSA guys out of work, 13 of them left the agency -- we had to say that -- (CROSSTALK)
SELLERS: You know what's crazy?
ALLISON: Fix it and don't do a reality show.
SELLERS: I know. Fix it and don't take a road trip (ph) --
(CROSSTALK)
O'LEARY: Didn't that get someone in the White House? If I'm a politician looking at the power of television -- by the way, I'm a participant reality TV. It's open so many doors around the world for me. It's a powerful vehicle.
SELLERS: Thank God for Mark Cuban.
O'LEARY: Well, Mark and I did some wonderful things together. But the point is, this politician sees the power of media and social media clashing and coming together on social media as a result of reality TV and says to himself, what's wrong with this?
ALLISON: I think you're right.
O'LEARY: Maybe one day I want to run for President and --
(CROSSTALK)
SELLERS: I think you're right.
(CROSSTALK)
O'LEARY: I rest my case.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: A couple of years ago when Pete Buttigieg was Transportation Secretary, you've heard a lot about this from his partner, Chasten, over the weekend. This is the criticism that he received for taking a paternity leave.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TUCKER CARLSON, THEN-FOX NEWS HOST: Pete Buttigieg has been on leave from his job since August after adopting a child -- paternity leave they call it, trying to figure out how to breastfeed, no word on how that went. But now, he's back in office as the transportation secretary and he's deeply amused, he says, to see that dozens of container ships can't get into this country.
GREG GUTFELD, FOX NEWS HOST: Yes, while he bottle-fed, we bottle necked. And while he brought home the bacon, our actual bacon doubled in price.
JENNINGS: I'm a pro-family leave guy, I believe in it. But when you accept an assignment from the President of the United States, and you are confirmed by the U.S. Senate, you're accepting a higher level of responsibility, a higher level of public service, and frankly, you ought to know that goes with some personal sacrifice. He's not a middle manager at Dunder Mifflin Scranton, PA, okay? He is the Secretary of Transportation.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: First of all, first of all, Scott, I miss the hat.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: I was in Arizona. Tombstone Arizona, for the record.
PHILLIP: Second of all, you weren't okay with Pete Buttigieg taking a paternity leave, which according to his partner was because their son was in the ICU --
SELLERS: Correct.
PHILLIP: -- their newborn son was in the ICU. How can you be okay with John Duffy going on a road trip sponsored by people who he has to regulate?
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: There's no allegation that he's not doing his job -- A. B, I do think it's good for the U.S. government to promote U.S. interest to the American people.
PHILLIP: So, but there wasn't -- I mean, there wasn't any evidence that Pete Buttigieg wasn't doing his job.
JENNINGS: You don't remember the containers? Miles and miles of containers off --
(CROSSTALK)
ALLISON: You don't remember the plane crashes? I mean --
PHILLIP: I'm sorry, what? What are you -- you just listed a whole bunch of things that have been going on. This past weekend --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: - somebody was hit by an airplane on a tarmac.
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: By the way, they filmed this months ago. They didn't film it yesterday and put it out today.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: It's okay to acknowledge when you were wrong.
ALLISON: Yes. PHILLIP: And when it was not okay --
JENNINGS: What was I wrong about? Buttigieg was a horrible - and he would be horrible president.
PHILLIP: You tell me which part is wrong. Is it Pete Buttigieg's paternity leave, that was wrong to criticize that, or is it wrong to criticize Sean Duffy now?
JENNINGS: Well, people have every right to criticize him. I just don't know what the allegation is that he's somehow not doing his job properly. I think he's overseeing a transformation of our air traffic --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Hold. Everybody stop.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Stop, Kevin.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: We got to go.
ALLISON: We all do television and some of us prepare to do television. And when you are actually doing something you put an effort, you get -- you pay attention to it. But I don't want any of our secretaries paying attention to is how they do television. And it feels like --
JENNINGS: Communicating?
ALLISON: No, no.
JENNINGS: With the American people?
ALLISON: He's not communicating. He was filming it for seven months while train -- or plane crashes were happening. And you don't think this was a distraction?
PHILLIP: All right.
JENNINGS: No.
ALLISON: Okay, well,
PHILLIP: All right, we got to leave it there.
ALLISON: The people who experienced trauma from --
O'LEARY: If that show beat "Shark Tank" I'm going to be pissed.
PHILLIP: Next for us, the panel's going to give us their nightcaps, game show edition. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:58:59]
PHILLIP: The popular word game from "The New York Times," "Wordle," is set to become a new game show. So for tonight's News Nightcap, what else needs a game show? Kevin, you're up.
O'LEARY: It's a fantastic show. It's going to be huge hits called "What's on Your Wrist?" So, you have to guess the price of these watches. And I think if you win, you actually get the watch. Most people can't do it because one watch, it could be worth a million, looks the same as one that's worth 300 --
SELLERS: Show them the watches. Show them the watches.
O'LEARY: Come on, look at that.
(CROSSTALK)
ALLISON: If we do this game right now --
(CROSSTALK)
ALLISON: If we do this game right now and I win, can I get that one?
O'LEARY: Well, Putin's watch? This is Putin's watch
ALLISON: I don't care. It's yours now. I -- any name that anything, name that language, name that instrument but like you've ever hearing somebody speak in a different language and you don't know what they're saying but you're like I think they're speaking Russian or German. That game.
O'LEARY: Interesting.
SELLERS: Supermarkets sweep my wife, took my kids to Trader Joe's the other day, it's too expensive.
[23:00:02]
So, I was like supermarket sweep come back, bring it back. Let's see if people can afford to do something with the prices we have today.
PHILLIP: All right.
JENNINGS: I want a game show called -- Hollywood's always depicting dads as like, you know, idiots who can't do anything right. I want to show called "Feats of Domestic Strength" where average dads do things like --
O'LEARY: Change diapers.
JENNINGS: -- who can carry the most garbage bags in from the trunk of a car, speed mowing --
(CROSSTALK) JENNINGS: Maybe catching --
ALLISON: There's a show like that.
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: -- athletic equipment to the car, all sorts of things.
PHILLIP: All right, everybody, thank you like very much. Thanks for watching "NewsNight." "Laura Coates Live" starts right now.
