Return to Transcripts main page
CNN NewsNight with Abby Phillip
China's Xi Warns Trump, Draws Red Line Over Taiwan Fate; Trump Says, Xi's U.S. in Decline Remark Referred to Biden Era, Not Me; Rogan Baffled by Conspiracies About Trump Assassination Tries. Trump Continues Online Outlets For Conspiracies; Blanche Asked To Withdraw From Trump Matters. Aired 10-11p ET
Aired May 14, 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, the president gets a red line warning from China, as Donald Trump's predecessor defends the deal made to avoid a war with Iran.
BARACK OBAMA, FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT: There's no dispute that it worked.
PHILLIP: Plus, many of the talking heads who entertain conspiracies are shocked when Americans believe them.
JOE ROGAN, HOST, THE JOE ROGAN EXPERIENCE: That's the problem.
BRENDAN SCHAUB, PODCASTER: Rotting their brains out from inside of their heads.
PHILLIP: Also, the man leading the Justice Department was told to recuse himself from Trump cases. But is he?
And --
J.D. VANCE, U.S. VICE PRESIDENT: On days today, I sometimes feel like Macaulay Culkin in Home Alone.
PHILLIP: In the 2028 watch between J.D. Vance and Marco Rubio, one's overseas, while the other reacts to Trump crowdsourcing their chances.
VANCE: I just don't think it sounds like the president of the United States to have a televised competition for who would succeed him as his apprentice.
PHILLIP: Live at the table, Charles Blow, Joe Borelli, John Avlon, Emily Austin, Bobby Ghosh, and Stacey Schneider.
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.
We are moments away from the final talks in this crucial summit between President Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping. The tone so far has been broadly positive between the two superpowers, but Xi drew a red line with his blunt warning to the United States, don't mess with China when it comes to Taiwan.
According to a readout of the meeting shared by Chinese state media, Xi said, if the issue is mishandled, it could create a highly dangerous situation for the entire China-U.S. relationship. China's ruling Communist Party claims that Taiwan is its own sovereign territory, despite having never controlled the self-governing democracy of 23 million.
Washington has remained intentionally ambiguous on whether it would interfere militarily in the event of a Chinese attack and U.S. officials say its policy is still unchanged.
But now hanging over this whole summit is, of course, the war in Iran. And when it comes to that conflict, President Trump says that Xi wants to help.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: President Xi would like to see a deal made. He would he would like to see a deal made. And he did offer. He said, if I can be of any help at all, I would like to be of help, because --
SEAN HANNITY, FOX NEWS HOST: He did say that?
TRUMP: Yes, he did say that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: And today, as Trump began his day in Beijing, he posted on social media to explain Xi's suggestion that the U.S. was a nation in decline, writing, when President Xi very elegantly referred to the United States as perhaps being a declining nation, he was referring to the tremendous damage we suffered during the four years of Sleepy Joe Biden and the Biden administration. And, on that score, he was 100 percent correct.
Bobby, what do you make of President Trump bending over backwards to explain away Xi's trashing of the United States, and also to suggest that they are the benevolent force here in this relationship with Iran? They want to help. They'll do anything to help us, but they haven't.
BOBBY GHOSH, COLUMNIST AND GEOPOLITICS ANALYST: Well, if Xi Jinping wanted to help, he would've said, here's what I can do to help, and here's what I'm going to do. When he says, I'd like to do -- I'll do whatever I can to help, that is diplomatic code for saying, I'm not going to get involved in any of this. This is your mess. You fix it. There's very interesting language being used by Xi Jinping, and since he does not speak in the way that Donald Trump does, it takes a little more careful analysis. He said a couple of things around that Taiwan quote, the section that you quoted earlier at the top, which were very interesting. First, he said that Taiwan was the most important issue in relations between the two countries. That's historically not been true. The most important issue between, in relations between these two countries is trade, has always been, forever and ever.
[22:05:04]
Taiwan is an important issue, but he's setting down a new marker here. He's saying that's the most important issue.
And then he uses, this is very important language. He says, if this issue is mishandled, it could lead to clashes and conflict. Coming from Xi Jinping, that is very, very tough language. He's never going to say it could lead to war, but that's as close as the president of China's ever going to come to saying that. That's very, very tough language. And he doesn't use this language with previous presidents. He doesn't use this language to Trump before.
PHILLIP: But what's the why? Why right now?
GHOSH: Well, he's sensing weakness here. He's sensing that Trump is weak. He knows Trump has come to Beijing with his hat in his hand. He needs Xi Jinping for all kinds of reasons, economic reasons and geopolitical ones. He is now establishing that I am the big dog in this room, and I am putting down these markers. I am setting the --
PHILLIP: Well, let me just let -- Emily did want to respond.
JOE BORELLI, FORMER REPUBLICAN LEADER, NEW YORK CITY COUNCIL: When Xi pulled Biden -- when President Xi pulled Biden aside at the APEC Summit in San Francisco and told President Biden bluntly, I'm going to take over Taiwan, preferably peacefully or, if not, militarily, how is he not being the big dog then? And what did Joe Biden do to counter that? In fact, I read the readout of what Biden did afterwards, and he said, well, we hope there's peace.
GHOSH: There's a huge difference. If you spend a career paying close attention to diplomacy it, there's a huge difference between taking somebody out on a corner and having a private conversation --
BORELLI: And then leaking it to the public.
GHOSH: -- and doing this at home to your invited guest. If you pay attention to Chinese culture, this matters. When you have a guest in your home, and it's the president of the United States, there's some language you use and there's some language you don't use.
Taiwan has been a matter of friction between China and the United States forever and ever, but there's a reason why the -- and this Chinese president has been there a long time. He's run through several American presidents. There's a reason why he doesn't do this in the past, and he's doing it now. EMILY AUSTIN, PODCAST HOST, THE EMILY AUSTIN SHOW: Well, first of all, Trump went on his turf in his country and sat at his place with a very warm greeting, I might add. And I really didn't expect things to go this way, but I believe that Xi is just using the theatrics to make him look good in front of the Chinese media.
But let's be real, if there's a big dog at any table, it's President Donald Trump. And, no, let's be honest with ourselves. You might not like him, but you have to agree he is crazy and nobody wants to mess with him. In a world full of crazies, you might just have to -- no, of course.
First of all, our military capabilities have just been proven with Iran. We've interjected arguably in too many wars. And if there's one person who really is not in a place to be making demands, it's President Xi. So, that's why I just believe it's all words. He's not going to do anything. I agree with the U.S.'s stance on the ambiguity when it comes to Taiwan. I also feel that they're choosing that way because I don't believe they actually think Xi will do anything. So, why create unnecessary tension for no reason?
CHARLES BLOW, SUBSTACK AUTHOR, BLOW THE STACK: Donald Trump's own behavior has endangered Taiwan. Donald Trump has bombed ten countries in one year. Eight of those ten have fewer than 100 million population. Seven of that eight, less than 50 percent. He's picking on small players.
What does that message send to other big, powerful countries about other countries that they may want to invade? What does this say to Russia about Ukraine?
AUSTIN: Why are you talking about a ceasefire that Trump negotiated?
BLOW: Well, I'm just saying. When you start the war and then you stop it and call that a problem.
AUSTIN: You didn't start Israel and Gaza. Wait, excuse me. Wait. None of these wars started under Donald Trump besides Ukraine.
BLOW: But the ten bombings started under Donald Trump.
AUSTIN: Obama dropped a bomb every 27 minutes when he was president.
BLOW: On ten countries? On ten countries? No, you don't know the answer to that question. That's what the problem is.
PHILLIP: Okay. Let me just --
JOHN AVLON (D), FORMER U.S. CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATE, NEW YORK: Yes. So, a couple things, Joe, you've forgotten that Biden actually was routinely criticized for taking too tough a line on China and Taiwan, so the exact opposite of what you're saying.
BORELLI: So, what did he do after he was told that?
AUSTIN: Bingo. AVLON: Oh my God, you're totally missing the point. The point is that Donald Trump has --
(CROSSTALKS)
AVLON: No.
AUSTIN: That's what he did.
BORELLI: Biden -- read the readout of what he said after he was told, I'm going to take over Taiwan.
AVLON: Joe, I can't help you. Go to Google and do Google at home. You're just wrong about this.
BORELLI: I did actually. Let me pull it up. I'll read it to you.
AVLON: Okay. Well, then you should read a little deeper. Second thing, Trump has --
BORELLI: But, literally, here, I thought I'd read it.
AVLON: Trump has done a consistent yellow light on Taiwan since he flip-flopped on TikTok after getting a huge campaign donation in the 2024 campaign, which he believes helped him win election.
Third, Xi is bringing him into sort of a strategic patience detente mindset. Using rare earths as a way to sort of mollify the U.S. That is not a position of strength. He's got time on his side because he's a dictator for life, and Donald Trump has hurt America's strength in the region by alienating our allies and driving a lot of allies to China.
AUSTIN: I don't think Trump wants China having all the semiconductors.
(CROSSTALKS)
BLOW: When you say that Donald Trump is always the big dog in the room, right, so the Chinese government has basically said that the Iran war is an illegal war. Xi himself has --
[22:10:00]
AUSTIN: Xi is in a place to talk about legalities?
BLOW: Xi himself has said that, you know, it violates the rule of law and it is probably --
AUSTIN: Oh, do you realize your --
BLOW: Can you let me finish?
AUSTIN: This is ridiculous.
BLOW: Or do you have a problem with like talking -- letting people talk or can you let me finish?
PHILLIP: Let's just let him finish.
BLOW: All right.
PHILLIP: And then you can respond.
BLOW: And then he's also said that it risked making this the international order into a law of -- a rule of the jungle. That was his phrase. The pope didn't say anything like that, right? But he had all the smoke for the pope, but he has none for Xi Jinping. He's still trying to make him his friend. He is still saying things about the United States being in decline. He refuses to say anything negative about Xi because he's a bully. He knows the pope can't do any doesn't want to do anything. He doesn't have anything to offer him, but he wants -- he can bully the pope. But he can't bully Xi. And so he has nothing but --
AUSTIN: Do you think he should?
BLOW: No, but you said he's the big dog in the room. You said he's the big dog in the room.
AUSTIN: If Xi's saying it is a declining nation, it is most certainly not the United States of America.
PHILLIP: Well, Emily, let me ask you to respond to what he's saying, which is, fundamentally, President Trump doesn't seem to be willing to stand up to Xi Jinping in terms of China's relationship with Iran, in terms of how he's described the United States' military actions with Iran. Why not?
AUSTIN: Well, China today, if I'm not mistaken, I saw a big headline on CNN that they said Xi is committing to not send any military weapons to Iran, which is a big step. I mean, we're talking -- the bar's pretty low, but the countries were discussing --
(CROSSTALKS)
PHILLIP: Well, to that, let me just play this because Trump was just talking about this in his interview with Sean Hannity tonight. Let me just play that clip.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: He said he's not going to give military equipment. That's a big statement. He said that today. That's a big statement. He said that strongly. But at the same time, he said, you know, they buy a lot of their oil there, and they'd like to keep doing that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BORELLI: That aired at 9:00 P.M. last night, 24 hours have passed, and the Chinese have not substantially walked it back. And I think just -- part of me just thinks it must be so exhausting to just constantly be Negative Nancy when the bulk of this summit over the past I guess 48 hours now has been positive. We have agreements on soybeans, on beef, on Boeing. Boeing's going to potentially get 200 planes purchased. That's about a third of the planes that they make in a year. These are positive developments. And we should be rooting for the fact that the president got some commitment on Iran.
Yes, they need oil. I know that part, right?
BLOW: The economic positives are there. Nobody's arguing that. We're talking about this kind of diplomatic international policies around use of force, and that is not resolved. And I don't trust what -- first of all, I don't trust anything Donald Trump says. I definitely don't trust until this is confirmed.
BORELLI: They haven't walked it back.
Well, I want to wait until it's confirmed.
AUSTIN: It's important that they had a date and a time though.
GHOSH: Literally, what I wrote about today, sorry to self-publicize on my subtitle, which is that the Chinese do not sell military equipment to Iran. That's not the problem. The Chinese are never going to sell tanks and planes and bombs directly to Iran. He was not promising -- he's promising something that is already true. What they sell is they sell intermediate parts and systems that can be used and are used, that they sell chemicals that, with a little bit of tweaking, can be used for rocket fuel. They sell they sell satellite imagery which can be used for targeting. He's not committing not to do that. All that still remains on the table.
And that oil he buys, that's the money that Iran uses, the Iranian regime uses to buy --
BORELLI: So, you think this summit was a net negative for the world? You think this is a net negative for world peace?
GHOSH: Absolutely, it's a mess. Whenever America looks weak on the world stage --
BORELLI: But this just has to be exhausting.
GHOSH: When America looks --
(CROSSTALKS)
PHILLIP: Okay. So, look, I mean, I think that the question is what really are we going to get out of this, okay? We're not quite there yet. We don't really know what the deliverables are. But we do know, and I think based on as Bobby pointed out, we know exactly what China wants, and what they want is for us to change our position on Taiwan. They want more access to our semiconductor chips. And according to Marco Rubio tonight, he told NBC we, h- the president didn't ask Xi Jinping for anything. We are not asking for China's help. So, what are we going to get in exchange for any concessions that we make?
AVLON: So, clearly, the gains are economic, and that's an under a rubric of stability on China's terms. Here's the larger danger. If you look at the threat matrix we're facing today, it's A.I., China, and polarization. And when China talks about America being a nation in decline, it's referring to our polarization at home and our isolation from allies abroad. The fact that the Trump administration seems to be increasing access to chips, American-made chips for Chinese A.I., is a very big and dangerous deal down the road. It may be short-term benefit for our economy, long-term bad for national security.
[22:15:04]
PHILLIP: And he's already done some of that already.
AVLON: Yes, he has.
PHILLIP: He's already made some deals with U.S. companies to allow them to basically get carve-outs to do business in China.
AUSTIN: I just feel like that China isn't really -- like you were quoting earlier, like Xi said that Trump is violating law. Xi said. What is Xi doing? Is he taking the higher ground here? Is he the good guy in the room?
AVLON: Of course not.
AUSTIN: Is he the litmus test? Of course not.
(CROSSTALKS)
AUSTIN: You're quoting him as if that's like a credible source --
PHILLIP: Well, Emily, I think that's actually his point. His point is that, you're exactly right, that he's --
BLOW: Exactly.
PHILLIP: That they're not necessarily acting in good faith when it comes to Iran.
AUSTIN: Oh, I don't think they are.
PHILLIP: The question for you that I asked you and that he asked you was why won't the president say anything about that?
AUSTIN: Here's my takeaway from this whole thing. I obviously am no fan of Xi Jinping, needless to say that. I would still rather my president have more friends than enemies. That includes Xi, that includes Putin.
AVLON: I've got bad news for you.
AUSTIN: I know. Listen, I'm not talking about our allies that don't do anything when we need them. That's not who I'm referring to, because then what's the point of having an ally if it's just for social --
AVLON: I don't know. NATO? AUSTIN: Yes, I know. They need to back us up when we need them.
BLOW: So, your idea of friendship is to make friendship with the world's dictators?
AUSTIN: Would you rather Trump and Xi start beefing with each other? Is that an ideal situation? If that were to happen --
(CROSSTALKS)
AUSTIN: I feel like they wanted them to start fighting. That's what I feel.
PHILLIP: He's decided that it's just easier to beef with the pope than it is to beef --
BLOW: Yes, quite correct.
AUSTIN: Because the pope is a hypocrite --
PHILLIP: -- with American adversaries.
AVLON: Whoa.
AUSTIN: A big hypocrite.
PHILLIP: All right. Well, we can't -- we are not going to let -- going to get that tonight.
BLOW: But Trump is not.
PHILLIP: Next for us, Joe Rogan is baffled that many Americans think that the assassination attempts against President Trump were staged. But should the right be surprised after years of peddling conspiracies?
Plus, exclusive CNN reporting tonight, Trump's personal lawyer turned acting attorney general was told last year to recuse himself from matters involving the president. But is he doing that?
We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:20:00]
PHILLIP: Tonight, Joe Rogan is looking for someone to blame for the growing number of Americans who believe that the three assassination attempts against Donald Trump's life were a hoax. Calling out an alarming trend of conspiracy theories, Rogan had one boogeyman in mind.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ROGAN: Anybody that thinks that's staged is out of their (BLEEP) mind. SCHAUB: Or the guy at the correspondents dinner who rushed in?
ROGAN: Yes.
SCHAUB: They think that's fake? It's like, hold on, so you think this guy who's a teacher, educated, clearly kind of has his (BLEEP) together, threw away his life?
This is TikTok. It's (BLEEP) with people's brains.
ROGAN: That's the problem. That's the (BLEEP) problem.
SCHAUB: Rotting their brains out from inside of their heads.
ROGAN: I know. It's not good, dude.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Something tells me that the conspiracy theory problem that we've been having predated TikTok by quite a lot, actually.
AVLON: It did. I mean, I wrote a book called Wingnuts during the Obama administration that detailed some of the growth of conspiracy theories, both about 9/11, about whether -- you remember the whole President Obama was secretly, you know, Muslim Manchurian candidate? That had like 40 percent belief.
So --
PHILLIP: That he was born in Kenya.
AVLON: Born in Kenya. Now all that stuff --
BLOW: And Donald Trump (BLEEP) some of that himself.
BORELLI: Or that Donald Trump colluded with Russians to overtake the 2016 election. That was total bullshit.
AVLON: There's a whole Senate Intelligence report, which you can read in your leisure.
But what the TikTok point is relevant only because it is a foreign disinformation -- a foreign-owned disinformation vehicle that spread a lot of conspiracy theories. But the problem is deeper, and it's been going on for decades, and it's on the hyper-partisan side.
So, I like seeing Joe Rogan call it out, but it ain't just TikTok. TikTok's not helping.
AUSTIN: It's also -- yes. I just want to add to the point of TikTok. I think it goes beyond foreign ownership. I actually think America buying it would not even solve the problem. I think it's more of an algorithm issue. And, by the way, I think Meta, X, TikTok, they're all being investigated now for pushing deliberate, first of all, obsession, addiction, all these things are being looked into now.
PHILLIP: Yes, it's not -- it's -- TikTok is like a boogeyman in this situation, to be honest.
AUSTIN: But it's not just TikTok. I think it's general algorithms. They show you what they know you want to see. They bring you down the echo chamber. There's no accountability in misinformation. X has community notes. We know it takes way too long. TikTok doesn't even have that. So, it's just pushing conspiracy theories.
BLOW: But that's the technology side. But there's also the president himself, who is consistently pushing conspiracy theories like right now, like constantly --
AUSTIN: We're also -- we also see them being used against him.
BLOW: -- pushing conspiracy theories. So, it's hard to have any sympathy for people pushing conspiracy theories about him.
BORELLI: Do you believe he worked with the Russians to steal the election in 2016?
BLOW: I think that the Russians -- if you read the report, the Russians were actively engaged --
BORELLI: Partisan intelligence.
AVLON: It was a bipartisan Senate repor.
BLOW: -- with that election. That's just what the intelligence says.
BORELLI: But you still -- okay, so you just -- you still believe it.
Look, I think Americans --
BLOW: Wait, you don't believe what the intelligence said?
BORELLI: No, I don't believe that Donald Trump colluded with the Russians to steal the 2016 election.
BLOW: That's not what I said. That's not what I said.
(CROSSTALKS)
BLOW: I said that the Russian -- that the report clearly said --
BORELLI: The top line was that --
BLOW: -- that the report clearly said --
BORELLI: Four years, you had the inquiries, everything.
BLOW: Clearly said that the Russians were interested and active.
BORELLI: Okay. Just going forward --
BLOW: So, wait now Is that true or not true? I get to understand where you're coming from.
BORELLI: There is no truth that Donald Trump or his campaign colluded with Russia.
BLOW: So, you're saying a different thing. But you won't answer the question that I'm asking, which is that the Russians were active and interested.
BORELLI: Yes, there's no -- I don't doubt for a minute that the Russians wanted to influence --
BLOW: Is that yes or no? I don't understand what all these words are.
(CROSSTALKS)
BORELLI: The whole point of the investigation was whether Donald Trump did it. That was the charge.
BLOW: So, you don't have a yes or no in that box?
BORELLI: You're changing the Democratic charge from 2016. The Democratic accusation was that Donald Trump and his campaign were trying to --
[22:25:01]
BLOW: The words yes or no don't exist for you? Okay, I got it.
PHILLIP: Just be clear that the whole point of the investigation was not whether Donald Trump did it. It was whether or not Russia tried to interfere in the 20 --
BORELLI: Collusion means two sides --
PHILLIP: -- in the 2016 -- hold on. Hold on.
BORELLI: It's literally called collusion.
PHILLIP: Hold on a second. It was about whether Russia was trying to interfere in the 2016 election. Now, Donald Trump believed that he was at the center of it, which is why he tried to fire the special counsel, and that's when he became embroiled in the whole thing.
So, let's not rewrite history about how this really started, and about the bipartisan report that Trump's now secretary of state is a co- author of, that is all about this.
But, you know, to Charles' point, the president of the United States every single night is sending out on Truth Social, frankly, hundreds of conspiracy theories over the course of the last several months. And he started his career with a huge conspiracy theory, which is that the president of the United States, Barack Obama, was a Muslim who was born in Kenya. So, it is -- as I was saying, it's not a TikTok thing.
It's also not even a Democrats believe Trump assassination things weren't true. Conspiracy theorism has been growing for a long time, and Trump is at the center of it.
BORELLI: Look, the birth certificate thing, obviously proven wrong, right? Complete farce. But there is, like -- there has been times over the course of American history, and I can think of a couple, MKUltra, the idea that we were giving LSD to people, the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, the FBI was, you know, shadowing Martin Luther King, people were denying these things at the time, and they were dismissed as conspiracy theories and proven true.
Then you go forward to --
AUSTIN: Aliens, UFOs.
BORELLI: You go -- right, aliens. Now, we're talking about it as a regular occurrence, right? You can go through to COVID, when a lot of Americans lost trust in the government.
(CROSSTALKS)
BORELLI: I'm talking about things that were dismissed as conspiracy theories. During COVID, the government used the science to justify a lot of things that didn't pan out to be true, the vaccine effectiveness, the mask effectiveness, the idea we should be closing schools. I think a lot of Americans lost trust in the institutions of government. And Joe Rogan oftentimes can introduce these topics in a way I think Americans have a right to question.
PHILLIP: Well, look, I think you -- let me just actually play this, because Joe Rogan, I think, is not the best person necessarily to be complaining about conspiracy theories.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ROGAN: Tim Burchett, who I had on the podcast, the congressman --
SCHAUB: Yes.
ROGAN: -- he thinks that guy was, like, some sort of an MKUltra type deal, and he says he thinks they still do that.
For sure they're still doing that, and that could've been Thomas Crooks too, the guy who tried to shoot Trump in Butler, Pennsylvania.
SCHAUB: Yes.
ROGAN: That one was weird as (BLEEP). That one's so weird because that guy's house was professionally scrubbed. He didn't even have silverware there. He had no online activity. He had no like social media --
SCHAUB: Black Rock ties.
ROGAN: -- Black Rock ties.
SCHAUB: And have you heard anything about him?
ROGAN: Nope, gone.
SCHAUB: How weird is that, dude? ROGAN: Vanished like Kanye's social --
SCHAUB: What about the Charlie Kirk guy? What about the guy who killed Charlie --
ROGAN: Right. We haven't heard one interview with him.
SCHAUB: Is that not weird, dude?
ROGAN: It's super weird.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BORELLI: I literally watched -- listened to this episode today of Joe Rogan with Tim Burchett. The whole subject matter that they spoke about was dismissing the conspiracy theory. They were talking about some of the inconsistencies that should be investigated of why there was a breakdown of security --
PHILLIP: Well, Joe Rogan clearly did not get that out of the conversation.
AUSTIN: By the way, honestly, who cares what Joe Rogan thinks?
PHILLIP: He takes the conversation and then he turns it around and says that that the White House Correspondents' Dinner shooter, that Tim Crooks, the Butler Pennsylvania shooter, that he basically suggested there are conspiracies around those things too.
BORELLI: (INAUDIBLE) something that there are.
PHILLIP: And, look, I mean, there are definitely questions that need to be answered about all of these events, but the idea that you just posit a conspiracy as an answer without evidence is the definition of a conspiracy theory.
AUSTIN: I agree.
GHOSH: This is the sort of thing that used to be in the National Enquirer, and it used to be in the fringe of the public discourse, and now it's in the mainstream thanks to people like Joe Rogan.
Joe Rogan, on the record, and this is all on tape, is available for anybody who looks, says things like whatever happened that day in Dallas in 1963, the stuff they're telling you is not it. So, if he's in the business of purveying conspiracy theories about presidential assassinations, for which, you know, there's an enormous body of evidence --
BORELLI: As the only one who listened to the episode --
GHOSH: -- then no one is --
BORELLI: -- he literally said, this is not true.
(CROSSTALKS) AVLON: I think we're in a risk of ignoring the obvious here. The Wall Street Journal, the notoriously liberal Wall Street Journal put out a very thorough investigation --
BLOW: Not liberal, conservative.
AVLON: That was a joke, obviously. Sorry, that was a joke.
BLOW: I didn't even get it.
AVLON: Looking at Trump's habit of sort of late night tweet storms, 55, 103, the president is disseminating -- the president of the United States -- this isn't coming from the National Enquirer, it's coming from the White House, and it's coming in the middle of the night. And if you had any friend who was sending out 55 conspiracy theory tweets a night, you'd think, maybe there's something wrong with that cat. And instead, it's the president of the United States, which isn't just a force for spreading disinformation, it also makes him easy to delude and a -- not only is he a disseminator, but someone who could be manipulated by conspiracy theories.
[22:30:08]
And this is incredibly not just weird and odd, but unstable and unhinged. And I would just like more Republicans to acknowledge that if a Democratic president were doing this, they'd be saying, hey, this is not okay.
ABBY PHILLIP, CNN ANCHOR: The situation might be even worse than what you're describing, because some of the reporting is that there's actually a structure inside the White House to provide him with these unhinged posts. People are finding things that they think he might like, handing them to him, and he OKs them. And then they tweet it on his behalf. Some of them he does himself. But many of them are brought to him. He approves it and then puts it out. So, it's actually kind of layers worse than just he's on his own.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: "The Wall Street Journal" reported today, "Natalie Harp, Trump's executive assistant, plays an integral role in his Truth social activity. She brings the president stacks of printed out draft social media posts for his approval."
UNKNOWN: It's a stretch to say she's feeding --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: So, there's a lot more in the story that you can read.
(CROSSTALK)
CHARLES BLOW, LANGSTON HUGHES FELLOW, HARVARD UNIVERSITY: Well, I think she's feeding it to him to him or he's doing it himself. I wish he's learning those his best.
PHILLIP: There's a lot that he posts that is coming from inside the house, so to speak. All right.
BOBBY GHOSH, COLUMNIST AND GEOPOLITICS ANALYST: There's a serious problem which is that if there's so much of this out there that it doesn't matter.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: All right.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Bobby has got the last word. We have to go.
(CROSSTALK) GHOSH: At some level, it doesn't matter on which side. There's so much of this is out there that when real things happen and when real news needs real attention from Americans, they no longer believe it. And that's the real danger to the Republic.
PHILLIP: That is the big risk that we face. Coming up next for us, I see an exclusive report on the president's former personal attorney, who's now the acting attorney general, Todd Blanche. He was told last year to recuse himself from DOJ matters involving the President. But has he been doing that? Another special guest is going to be with us at the table.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:36:33]
PHILLIP: We have exclusive news CNN reporting about the man who's now in charge of the Justice Department Todd Blanche. Sources tell us that just before becoming Deputy Attorney General last year, the DOJ's top ethics lawyer warned Blanche to recuse himself from the cases involving President Trump. Before joining the DOJ, Blanche had represented Trump in criminal cases tied to the President's handling of classified documents and the 2020 election.
In a statement, the DOJ said that Blanche is recused from some on- going investigations, but it did not specify which ones. And it adds that Blanche would hypothetically recuse himself when a case involves Trump. Stacy Schneider joins us at the table. Stacy, this is actually interesting because I, you know, there are a lot of cases, frankly, that involve Trump.
Some of them are cases -- some of them, for example, that a potential settlement with the IRS over his lawsuit that will have to be decided at the DOJ. And then there are also a lot of cases where Trump has explicitly asked for his enemies to be prosecuted by the DOJ and they have been.
STACY SCHNEIDER, CRIMINAL DEFENSE TRIAL ATTORNEY: Yes, it's the most unusual situation for an acting attorney general in history who is with the private counsel to somebody before right before they were president and Donald Trump was involved in all these lawsuits and prosecutions. And Todd Blanche represented him in his New York criminal trial. And what's interesting is when Todd Blanche first got into his position as Deputy Attorney General with Pam Bondi there in March of 2025, he actually got a PowerPoint presentation to him on his ethical obligations because of this unusual situation of him taking this job.
But the interesting thing is he's blasting back that this is even being reported about, and he actually addressed CNN on Twitter directly saying, dear CNN, I am fully compliant with the DOJ ethical obligations. They are black and white.
PHILLIP: But shouldn't he say which cases he's recused from?
SCHNEIDER: He's not willing to do that right now. And I don't see what the secret is to the public. People should know what where he found himself having a conflict of interest in the fact that he -- if he took himself off of something, I think that would give everyone peace of mind knowing that some of the things he's done in office already are not exactly on the black and white spectrum. So, I mean, I --
(CROSSTALK)
CHARLES BLOW, LANGSTON HUGHES FELLOW, HARVARD UNIVERSITY: -- not only need to know which cases, but where's the bar? Like what is the thing that trips these cases over into ones that would require refusal and which was not because like you said, so many of them touch Trump, maybe they're not all requiring recusal but something trips the wire.
SCHNEIDER: Right.
BLOW: We need to know what the wire is.
SCHNEIDER: And there could be so many different instances. Is Trump a witness in something? Is Trump -- have an interest in something? But this is the job of any attorney who's been a defense attorney and then goes to the prosecution side or vice versa. You have an ethical obligation to recuse yourself. You don't need a lecture or a PowerPoint from, you know, ethics experts on that, and that should be done all the time. And I --
PHILLIP: He's not the only one. I mean, there's also Joe Digenova, a former Trump, another former Trump lawyer who was tapped to run this 2017 election -- Russia election interference probe. Digenova joined the Justice Department in the Southern District of Florida and a Justice Department official confirms that he will work on an investigation into CIA Director John Brennan.
[22:40:05]
That investigation into Brennan focuses on one of the President's longest standing grievances, the 2017 intelligence assessment that found that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election to help him. Why wouldn't Digenova be subject to some kind of ethics, you know, cordon, that basically says you can't be involved in something that is something that you were a party to as a private attorney JOE BORELLI, FORMER REPUBLICAN LEADER, NEW YORK CITY COUNCIL: Look, I think Stacey brought up a very good point that this is a very unique situation because the President has been involved in so many lawsuits and he made the decision, which is within his jurisdiction, to choose a private attorney that represented him to be, at the time, acting attorney general and then the, sorry, the deputy attorney general and now the acting attorney general.
That creates, obviously, instances where there could be conflict of interest. This is the system I think working properly. If you get a briefing saying you have to recuse yourself from cases where you've accepted compensation from a previous client, that's not out of the normal. That's pretty standard conflict of interest --
(CROSSTALK)
BORELLI: That's pretty standard.
(CROSSTALK)
BLOW: Nothing about this is standard.
(CROSSTALK)
BORELLI: You always tell people nothing's --
(CROSSTALK)
BLOW: Go for it.
BORELLI: When you join government service, you get different types of ethical and conflict of interest training. You get the Power Point. Maybe it wasn't the same power point as the deputy attorney general but you are expected not to -- not to -- now do government service --
(CROSSTALK)
BLOW: So, there's still nothing normal about this. He creates the quandary on his own. He is the person who appointed these people.
BORELLI: But he can pick whatever he wants.
BLOW: But you create the quandary because these are people who have represented him --
BORELLI: And the solution --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: I guess one of the biggest problems with this is that we don't actually know which cases he's recused from and which he's not.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: They want us to take his word for it in terms of he's compliant, maybe. I'm also curious about a lot of the other people. When Emile Beauvais was in the administration, was he recused as well? Joe Digenova, is he recused from things that touch on the President? I think those are legitimate questions.
EMILY AUSTIN, PODCAST HOST, "THE EMILY AUSTIN SHOW": I think, first of all, I think your question is good, like what is the wire? I actually agree with you. Then, Joe, listen, like, I don't love this either. I think the optics are bad. I don't think, I think it's a bit premature to be outraged about it. I think it's premature to start assuming he's going to abuse this power. I actually think Todd's a professional, and if I'm being honest, I'm a lot more content with seeing Todd there than Pam Bondi because Todd is a lot more professional.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Let me let have Avlon have a last word. Yes.
AVLON: Yes, the problem is that none of this is normal because Donald Trump is on record demanding prosecutions of his political enemies. The Reuters has a list of 475 individuals, institutions and organizations who are being targeted because they are perceived as being enemies of the President. And because the acting attorney general wants to be the permanent attorney general, and he's mindful of Jeff Sessions getting in trouble with his audience of one when he recused himself because of conflicts.
So, that's where the opaqueness comes in. And that's a problem with transparency and honesty, but also the weaponization of the DOJ against the President's enemies at the President's request. None of this is normal.
AUSTIN: Well, they did that 91 times to Donald Trump. We can end it there.
SCHNEIDER: But with Todd, you said, oh, he's a great guy and we should relax. The problem is -- and he might be. He has a good reputation before he joined the administration in New York. But he is the one who went down to Ghislaine Maxwell through her softball questions as the deputy attorney general, and then as an apparent reward for her answering those questions favorably as to Donald Trump was then transferred to a minimum security prison while she is a convicted sex trafficker serving 20 years in jail.
And I can tell you that no attorney general or assistant attorney general at that level does ground level investigations in a prison of someone who's already been convicted. That was unusual and it leaves reason for suspicion about some of his behaviors.
PHILLIP: All right, next for us, it sure sounds like Donald Trump is dreaming up a shadow race between two people who could succeed him. We'll discuss that next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:48:47] DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: So, who's it going to be? Is going to be J.D.? Is it going to be somebody else? I don't know. Does anybody have, okay, let's go. You ready? Who likes J.D. Vance?
(APPLAUSE)
TRUMP: Who likes Marco Rubio?
(APPLAUSE)
TRUMP: All right. Sounds like a good ticket.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Tonight in the succession sweepstakes between J.D. Vance and Marco Rubio, Rubio is in China while Vance is back home left on the sidelines.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
J.D. VANCE, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: You may know that because of secret service protocols that I don't travel outside of the country with the President of the United States. So, on days today, I sometimes feel like Macaulay Culkin in "Home Alone." I walk into the White House and it's very quiet and no one's there. And I -- it takes me a second to realize exactly what's going on.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Earlier this week, Vance was asked by CNN to respond to Trump fueling that speculation about his own future.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNKNOWN: Do you think it's a little bit of toying with you both over your succession? Why do think he brings that up? Just number one.
VANCE: Well, I just don't think it sounds like the President of the United States to have a televised competition for who would succeed him as his apprentice.
[22:50:03]
I just think that's not at all what you would expect the President to do. I think it's natural for him to, you know, joke around with us a little bit, to play around with the idea.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: And that's got to be tough. Stacy, you're a former apprentice contestant yourself?
SCHNEIDER: Yes, so 20 years ago, yes --
BLOW: Really? SCHNEIDER: -- twenty years ago. And I have to tell you, when I saw that, I burst out laughing because he did that on the show all the time. So, he would take two candidates, usually men, and he would put their attributes out in front of everybody and their flaws, and he kind of toyed like which one, which one and you never knew who he favored until he fired that person. Then you knew who was the lead candidate. But it was just like the good old days.
PHILLIP: But it is also like, mean, I don't know, I think there is a lot of speculation in this moment because you know, Rubio is having this opportunity to seem magnanimous on the world stage, to look like a statesman. And Vance is kind of doing small ball stuff back home, and the optics are not so great.
AUSTIN: Yes, I mean, clearly, Vance doesn't care, but he's very nonchalant in general, and I don't know if I necessarily love that. I just know I'm really happy about Vance or Rubio personally. I really think Rubio is showing under the Trump administration exactly what he's capable of doing. The reasons I like Rubio -- I'm not dismissing Vance, I'll be very happy Vance as the president. Honestly, I really like that Rubio is a Latino. I like that his kids are older than Vance.
As Vance repeatedly says on podcasts, family time I'm looking forward to, family time his wife is pregnant. So, I feel like Rubio's maybe just more willing because Vance doesn't seem so excited to me and that's the vibe that I'm getting.
BLOW: Well, since neither one of them is going to win.
AUSTIN: Oh please. I will bet you right now. Vance or Rubio.
BLOW: I'm not going to bet you.
AUSTIN: On live TV.
BLOW: I don't need the dollar. But I don't think that this is setting well with Vance because he's just not that into you. And he probably never got over that you might be America's Hitler thing. And he only chose you because he needed to show that he could pick a young guy because he was approaching 80. And the age thing was dogging both him and Biden. And as soon as Kamala got into the race, then the age thing became a real issue. So, I don't think he's really into Vance at all. And it must hurt.
AVLON: Look, he -- first of all, Vance has the disadvantage of, you know, he was a first term senator and Rubio has a much greater stature. There's no question Rubio would be a tougher general election, stronger general --
BLOW: He's little Marco.
AVLON: Is he a stronger general election candidate?
PHILLIP: Not anymore. AVLON: Vance has his own constituencies. But this is all a
distraction. We're a long way away. Trump's definitely playing with both their psyches and Rubio looks a lot more presidential because he has greater stature in his career and as Secretary of State.
AUSTIN: And he seems more enthusiastic.
BORELLI: Last week, we had a California gubernatorial debate to replace who some say is the leading Democratic candidate for governor. And when you watched that debate you noticed that his record was being attacked by candidates from both the right and left. That's the leading candidate Democrats have right now. I think it's a great thing that we have two candidates on the Republican side that are wildly popular with the base that can keep the momentum Trump had to win in 2024. I think it's a good thing.
And you know I'm friends with one of the members of the cabinet. You know personally, we talked from time to time and I asked him, I said, hey, what's it like? What's it like being in the cap? I'm curious. And he said, you know, the strangest thing is I thought, I used to think the team of rivals was the best method. I read the books about Lincoln, et cetera.
The truth is we all kind of like each other. We all kind of get along and we all kind of swim in the same direction. I think it's a great thing. I think it's a great vibe to keep through the remainder of President Trump's term. I hope this battle doesn't come to a head until as late as possible.
SCHNEIDER: But why does Trump need to humiliate these two guys? I mean, he has to let you know that you're not --
(CROSSTALK)
BORELLI: It's great TV.
SCHNEIDER: It's not great TV. It doesn't belong on TV.
PHILLIP: Next for us, the panel's going to give us their nightcaps, "Unifying Song" edition. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:57:55]
UNKNOWN (voice-over): CNN breaking news.
LAURA COATES, CNN ANCHOR: Good evening everyone, I'm Laura Coates picking up the live coverage of President Trump's second and final sit down with Chinese President Xi Jinping in Beijing. They're going to meet in what is the equivalent of the White House, Zhongnanhai. Only a handful of Americans have ever stepped foot inside of it. And moments from now, the two leaders will sit down to talk over tea and then lunch before the President departs Beijing and returns home.
The question will be, what did either side get out of this two day summit? And will China do anything to actually help end the war in Iran? Now, Trump says that yesterday's meeting went well. He says Xi even offered to lend a hand with Iran, but we'll see. And Xi apparently made it clear that his priority is Taiwan. According to state media, Xi flat out told Trump if the Taiwan issue is handled poorly, it would put the U.S.-China relationship in a quote, 'extremely dangerous situation." Translation, don't test us.
Let's begin with CNN senior White House correspondent, Kristen Holmes, who is traveling with the President in Beijing. Kristen, good to see you. You've an excellent job with the reporting and keeping us apprised of everything. I mean, the President talked to Fox earlier about yesterday's summit. He said it went well, but he didn't give a lot of details. So, what are we expecting to hear from this final face-to-face?
KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, Laura, this is really the last time these two leaders are going to sit down, and this is when they're going to hammer out all of those details. One thing to keep in mind about yesterday's bilateral is that it had to end on good terms. It wasn't going to get incredibly contentious because you have to remember that they still had a toast, a dinner. They had several events to go to. They had a tour to go to.
So, that was really the preliminary sit down. This is where you're going to see a smaller group really trying to hash out details, hash out what exactly China will agree to purchase from the United States. In particular, they're looking at agriculture deals, soybeans. You're also likely to hear those stickier issues come up -- Taiwan, Iran. And there might be some pushing on either side.
Now, it's really unclear what we're actually going to see out of these meetings. It is unlikely we're going to get any kind of fulsome readout until at least President Trump is out of China. One of the things that we've been reporting on is this idea that the United States has so -- such high security protocols around these officials that are here because of cybersecurity threats in China, that most of them are using burner devices, they're having a hard time communicating, getting through even logistics.
[23:00:06]
So, in terms of detailed readouts, that's likely things we're going to see in the next coming days to even weeks.
COATES: That's very telling to think about that. I mean, is it your sense given the scope of all that there is to discuss, is the President more focused on the business and trade deals or on pressing Xi for help on Iran?
