Return to Transcripts main page
CNN NewsNight with Abby Phillip
Trump's DOJ Abandons $1.8 Billion Fund To Pay Allies After Backlash; Trump Making More GOP Enemies After Primary Snubs; Dem Candidate Under Scrutiny In Reported Sexting Scandal; Iranian State Media Reports Tehran Suspending Talks With U.S.; Hegseth Accused Of Violating Military Rules. Aired 10-11p ET
Aired June 01, 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 HOST (voice over): Tonight, the slush gets hushed. Donald Trump drops his fund to compensate allies after Republican and legal backlash. But can the IRS still investigate him?
Plus, a Democratic candidate confronts reported sexting.
GRAHAM PLATNER (D), IOWA SENATE CANDIDATE: We talked about things in Amy and I's marriage that we've gone through over the years.
PHILLIP: Does scandal even matter anymore in American politics?
Also, as Iran suspends talks, the president throws his hands up and says he doesn't care. And Pete Hegseth is accused of violating military rules by striking the promotions of black and female officers.
Live at the table, Joe Borelli, Yemisi Egbewole, Lydia Moynihan, Joe Cunningham, and Josh Rogin.
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, the White House appears to be backing off from one of the president's most controversial moves yet, the creation of this $1.8 billion slush fund meant to pay allies who claim that they were unfairly targeted by the government. People, for example, like the January 6th rioters, stood to gain from it. It's a massive loss for Trump, and it comes after a judge had already ruled last week that it needed to be temporarily frozen.
Now today, the Justice Department said that it disagrees with that decision, but that it'll abide by the court. The DOJ announced that the fund last -- DOJ announced the fund last month, which was created to settle an unprecedented $10 billion lawsuit that Trump brought against his own IRS.
But that did not go over well with the Senate Republicans. They were furious, and the pushback was so intense and unexpected that it basically stalled the broader GOP agenda. Many senators are now saying that they actually need some sort of guarantee that the fund is truly dead and for good, and that this decision isn't just kicking the can down the road.
One of the reasons they're saying that is because the announcement that they were going to abandon the fund basically was an announcement that they were going to abide by the court's decision. The court's decision was a two-week sort of temporary stay for administrative reasons. Do you think that they are really going to back down given the threats from Republicans?
JOSH ROGIN, LEAD GLOBAL SECURITY ANALYST, WASHINGTON POST INTELLIGENCE: Right. Well, for the better part of a year and a half, a lot of people in Washington have been wondering, what would Trump have to do that GOP senators would speak out against him? We figured it out finally. He would have to ask them to support using taxpayer money to pay the people who attacked them. That's what he asked them to do, to help pay the people who attacked them, and that was a bridge too far.
But the reason that they're still not assured that this is a dead deal is because they know why he's really backing down. It's not the egregiousness and brazenness of the self-dealing, it's the timing. We're in the primaries. Right now is when Republicans need to worry about scandal. Right now is when they need to worry about how they look. And that state of affairs doesn't necessarily carry over after the primaries, maybe after the November election.
And Trump didn't wake up one day and think, oh, I'm no longer interested in self-dealing or paying off the January 6th rioters or whatever. He just calculated that it's not in his interest to do it right now. So, they're not going to get that reassurance because he's not going to back off of this. He's just delaying it. That's what I think is going on.
PHILLIP: So, Grassley says the only thing that's going to solve this problem to get immigration funded and law enforcement is for the president to do away with the weaponization fund. John Kennedy from Louisiana says, if the administration has changed its position on the weaponization fund, it should say so definitively. You're not talking to Bambi's baby brother here.
Your saying you're going to follow the court order doesn't tell me anything. You have to follow the court order anyway. Lisa Murkowski says, well, if it means it's completely pulled, then that would satisfy me, but I haven't heard anybody say that is actually what is happening.
Are they trying to pull the wool over the eyes of Republicans?
JOE BORELLI, FORMER REPUBLICAN LEADER, NEW YORK CITY COUNCIL: I wish you read that Kennedy quote in Kennedy's accent because he could've done that -- [22:05:01]
(CROSSTALKS)
PHILLIP: I would've applied it here.
BORELLI: Look, there --
PHILLIP: You get the idea.
BORELLI: Yes. I mean, look, there's a certain obviousness to what has happened, right? This is a political hot potato. It was passed around the table. It got in the Senate's hands, and it burns, right? And like you said, the primaries are coming up. The general elections are only five months away. This was not a popular thing with the public. It was perhaps popular with the base.
It doesn't negate the fact that there has been weaponization of the Justice Department, whether you're a Republican or not, and we've seen Democrats make --
ROGIN: Against the rioters?
BORELLI: We've seen Democrats make the case that people like James Comey and others have been -- had the Justice Department weaponized against them.
ROGIN: I don't think they're going to get the payout.
BORELLI: So, my point is it exists, and Democrats agree with me.
ROGIN: Yes, the other way.
BORELLI: The issue is, you know, how can those affected by this still recover damages from the government? And there's legal methods for them to do that, and if they feel that way, they should avail themselves of those.
ROGIN: Right. There's already ways for people who have been wronged without creating a slush fund based on taxpayer money to pay off rioters, people who are -- mounted an insurrection against our own country.
BORELLI: But, look, we don't know it was January 6th rioters. No one except for Michael Cohen --
ROGIN: Except for the January 6th rioters who they think --
BORELLI: We were on the show two weeks ago --
ROGIN: -- seem to think they were about to get paid for some reason. Where did they get that idea?
PHILLIP: Enrique Tarrio says, you actually think President Trump is going to surrender this fund so easily? Don't ever bet against this president. Let's see. ROGIN: Yes, the rioters are feeling good.
PHILLIP: Yes, he's feeling pretty good. They've been re-tweeting this post from the White House that says, trust in Trump. Just sit back and relax. It will all work out well in the end. It always does.
I just want to point out one other thing. Getting rid of this fund, even if they do get rid of it, it also doesn't address the other part of the settlement, which basically bars the IRS from probing Trump or his family for any returns that were filed up until that point of the settlement.
So, there are actually a lot of parts of this that stink. But this is only one of them. And that other part seems to be left untouched.
LYDIA MOYNIHAN, CORRESPONDENT, NEW YORK POST: Yes. I mean, I'm sure we will get clarity on that in the coming days, just as we've gotten clarity on this. And I think it's a positive, because for so long we've heard these allegations that everyone in Congress is essentially a human pencil who just does whatever Donald Trump wants them to, and, clearly, this was something that they didn't want to see happen, and they stood up against it, which is exactly what we should see happening.
And that's not something that we saw, for instance, during the Biden administration when they had a $30 billion slush fund that went to climate issues or the DEI COVID fund that was $300 billion. So, to me, this is an example of the system working, and senators saying, I'm not in favor of this. I don't want to see this, and pushing back forcefully, not willing to implement the immigration agenda.
YEMISI EGBEWOLE, FORMER CHIEF OF STAFF AND ADVISER, BIDEN WHITE HOUSE PRESS OFFICE: I see the restraint --
MOYNIHAN: And I think -- again, I think we're going to get clarity on the other matter in the coming days, however.
EGBEWOLE: I see the restraint, though, not coming from the president himself. I see public statements coming from the Trump administration, and I see a president who is usually so verbose on multiple platforms not speak about this at all, and when he does, he distances himself from it.
And I think he's starting to realize that he's entering into another era with Congress. You've got Senator Cassidy, Senator Cornyn. You've got Representative Brian Fitzpatrick. You have certain members now that are not as incentivized as they once were to support a president who is actively campaigning against them. And I think that's something he's going to have to contend with beyond this fund.
FMR. REP. JOE CUNNINGHAM (D-SC): I mean, it's June right now. The midterms are right around the corner, and Republicans are going to have to go back to their districts and run on their record, and they're going to have to defend the indefensible, which is this program. You've heard Republicans speak out, and kudos to those who speak out against this, but each minute that is spent on talking about President Trump's slush fund is one minute less talking about the real problems that Americans are facing, the affordability crisis.
You know, they can't afford a home, they can't afford to rent or buy, can't afford gasoline. All these different things, even healthcare, is being pushed further and further out of America's reach. And so, again, each minute, each day goes by, news cycle that focuses on those problems like that is less time for the real problems.
PHILLIP: But it's also -- I mean, let's be honest, it's like handing your enemy a knife in a fight and being like, here you go.
CUNNINGHAM: No one got asked about that yesterday, right?
PHILLIP: Like it's more than just like a distraction. It's actually a weapon that is being handed to the other side.
BORELLI: But to piggyback on what the good congressman said, I mean, you know, we see members of the Senate blaming this as part of the reason why other stuff to address all the wonderful things you pointed out are not happening. And if there's a logjam in the Senate because of this, I think Republicans do have to, you know, have -- whether it's another reconciliation or other vehicles, but I think Republicans do have to pass some legislation that delivers a bit more on their agenda before they get that test by the constituents.
PHILLIP: So, to Yemisi's point about the number of folks that Trump has now made enemies in the Congress, he just endorsed Nancy Mace's opponent down in South Carolina. And Nancy Mace is coping in some strange ways, posting a lot of different things. She's called herself the Iron Lady. She's posted quotes of Trump endorsing her.
[22:10:00]
So, we'll see where that relationship goes.
And then there's Cornyn. He put out this whole cryptic fable about a scorpion who carries -- the scorpion who wants to cross the river and asks the frog to carry him. The scorpion then stings the frog, kills him.
BORELLI: It's a great fable.
PHILLIP: It's a great fable. It's a great fable.
BORELLI: You were on some delusion, you know, that Trump derangement syndrome doesn't affect some Republicans too, right? I mean, this is some deranged stuff you got.
PHILLIP: John Cornyn -- look he's not a huge Trump fan, but he's been willing to work with Trump.
ROGIN: He voted with Trump 99 percent of the time.
PHILLIP: So, just to be clear --
ROGIN: Raised a ton of money for the party, served for decades faithfully, had a shoe-in for winning, and Trump -- PHILLIP: And he's not like an impetuous guy, right?
ROGIN: -- billed him for what?
EGBEWOLE: Right, yes.
PHILLIP: He's not some kind of hothead who's going to pop off. But then when he was asked by a reporter today about what the fable meant, the reporter asked, is Trump the scorpion? Cornyn says, if the shoe fits, wear it. So, Trump is just making enemies every day that goes by.
MOYNIHAN: Hell hath no fury like a senator scorned. Okay, this truly felt like a circa 2000 oughts sort of e-girl posting on her MySpace these really sad song lyrics about how she'd been rejected. Like just come out and say it.
I think the Cornyn endorsement had a lot more to do with Trump trying to throw his base a bone and win them back and keep them happy by, you know, endorsing Paxton, and less to do with Cornyn, and obviously there were reports he was initially going to endorse Paxton.
BORELLI: But you're saying it's making enemies. You know, in the other side of the coin there is he's establishing that he's still the top dog in the Republican Party. He had a pretty damn good primary night over the past month of primaries where he won just about -- I think he won every single endorsed race that he made an endorsement on.
ROGIN: Against bunch of Republican incumbents.
BORELLI: But the point is --
ROGIN: And weakened his party's chances of losing all those races in the general.
BORELLI: But the point is he is still the one who Republican voters are backing when it comes to endorsing candidates.
ROGIN: But the other point is that he cares more about his own control over the party than the success of the party and the movement that he claims to lead, and that is a disaster for the Republican Party heading into the elections to distract fans, the money wasted --
BORELLI: Look, if the Bush wing --
ROGIN: -- promoting candidates that are problematic.
CUNNINGHAM: You know, I just don't -- I don't think -- I reject the idea that President Trump is making these endorsements blindly without polling and data to support it. You know, he threw his weight behind you know, Ken Paxton probably because the polling indicated he was going to win, and did the same with Pam Evitt. You know, Nancy Mace has been polling consistently in fourth, sometimes fifth place.
So, you know, he likes being with the winners. He likes picking winners. ROGIN: Massie would've won if Trump hadn't gone against him.
CUNNINGHAM: Well, I mean, in the past he's paired his endorsement with people who are leading.
ROGIN: Sometimes.
CUNNINGHAM: So, most times, most times.
PHILLIP: This is about having that record that he wants to be able to tout is what you're saying.
CUNNINGHAM: Yes. I mean, like he likes standing with the winners, and he doesn't want to throw his weight and his name and endorsement --
ROGIN: Still with the voters, and the voters back him and punish people who want to see the Epstein files.
PHILLIP: Well, I mean, look, I think that both things can be true. If he had endorsed Cornyn early on, it might have made a difference. But by the time he made a decision, it was -- the cake was baked. And now Republicans have a race in the Senate where, you know, maybe the Democrats have a flawed candidate, but now the Republicans have just as flawed, maybe more flawed candidate.
EGBEWOLE: And more money to spend too. They basically sacrificed Cornyn, who was a huge, prolific fundraiser, had a leadership position. For somebody who has legal issues will come in and have to hit the ground running, it's --
ROGIN: And why is James Talarico flawed? I don't see, think he's flawed. He's not even vegan, if that was a flaw. Being vegan is not a flaw, by the way, but they're accusing him of being vegan because they don't have any real dirt on him. If they had some real dirt on him, they would accuse him of something worse than being vegan.
EGBEWOLE: I'll give people --
ROGIN: And, by the way, being vegan is not a flaw --
MOYNIHAN: (INAUDIBLE) a few sound bites. I think you haven't been spending enough time watching campaign ads with --
EGBEWOLE: I think my grandma would say he's a little progressive on his ideology.
MOYNIHAN: Ken Paxton is going to turn voters out though. That's the bet that Trump is making and a lot of other Republicans. Cornyn did not engender a lot of excitement.
PHILLIP: All right. Next for us, between Ken Paxton, speaking of, and Graham Platner in Maine, do scandals even matter anymore in American politics? We'll debate.
Plus, did the president just give up on Iran talks? Why he says he doesn't care, and reportedly told Benjamin Netanyahu that he's, quote, f-ing crazy.
We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:15:00]
PHILLIP: Tonight, does scandal matter anymore in American politics? Senate races in Maine and in Texas suggest that voters are willing to overlook what was once seen as disqualifying. We're learning Democrat Graham Platner reportedly shared sexually explicit messages with multiple women in the early days of his marriage.
His wife flagged the texts to a campaign aide last year as a potential liability for him. Platner has faced significant controversy over a series of offensive online posts that he has since apologized for, and for a tattoo widely recognized as a Nazi symbol that he has since covered up.
Meanwhile, in Texas, as Republicans accuse Democratic State Senator James Talarico of being a vegan, the man Donald Trump is endorsing, Ken Paxton, has faced fraud charges, 16 articles of impeachment accusing him of corruption and bribery, and allegations of infidelity. Paxton's criminal charges ended in a pretrial agreement, and he was ultimately acquitted in his impeachment proceedings following a two- week trial.
Joe, let's start with you. You just wrote this up.
(CROSSTALKS)
[22:20:00]
BORELLI: Yes, Joe, you know about bribery and corruption.
PHILLIP: Not you, Joe. The other Joe.
BORELLI: Okay, which one?
(CROSSTALKS)
PHILLIP: This one.
BORELLI: Joe looks good. He's the man.
PHILLIP: He wrote a book called Life of the Party, How the Democrats Lost America's Trust and How They Can Win It Back. What is your take on this Graham Platner situation and the fact that Democrats are doing what I would argue maybe Republicans have been doing since 2016, and just saying, eh?
CUNNINGHAM: Yes.
PHILLIP: They're shrugging.
CUNNINGHAM: Yes. There, there's a lot to unpack here, right? And I'll withhold my comments about, you know, the Republican Party having -- you know, speaking from the high ground of moral clarity, which I don't believe that they do considering the candidates that are running this cycle under the Republican banner. But I want to speak specifically to the Democratic Party.
And, look, because of last cycle and the ones leading up to, I think the bar for entry, the Democratic Party, has been placed so low because we put it there. You know, Democrats right now just want a candidate who can, you know, speak plain English, and communicate to voters and be authentic, and talk about issues that resonate with people, not, you know, these obtuse issues, like whether it be like, you know, save democracy, and so vague. They want actual things that can drive down the cost of price and make life affordable, and just speak like a normal American, and enter Graham Platner, you know?
And so I think he's enjoyed a lot of that success mainly as a Democrat because he doesn't sound like a Democrat and he doesn't look like a Democrat. And I think that says a lot about where the party currently is right now.
PHILLIP: But is it a good thing or is it a bad thing?
CUNNINGHAM: Well --
PHILLIP: Because when you put the bar low, then anybody can jump over it.
CUNNINGHAM: It needs a reset. It needs people though who can speak normally and not talk down to people and not talk at them or above them, but can communicate with voters and then can speak to the issues themselves. And, again, yes, it's been reset, of course, but we're going through that process right now considering everything the Democratic Party came through in 2024 with Biden and then Harris.
EGBEWOLE: But I think we've lost the plot on authenticity. I think Graham Platner is cosplaying working class. He wears it like a Halloween costume, and that has been placed on him by the same people who have run a lot of progressive candidates across the nation.
In this pursuit of getting to know the everyman, we keep picking these people who I think show the worst parts of society. If I am to believe that Graham Platner can relate to everyday Americans, then that means I am to believe that everyday Americans are okay with Nazi tattoos because they get them accidentally when they're drunk or because they served in the military. They have very regressive views on race and on gender.
I just cannot accept the fact that to gain the working class, we have to dress up people who show the lowest of our values.
CUNNINGHAM: It does speak to how hungry Democrats are for new blood, though.
EGBEWOLE: Then give them real anti-establishment people.
CUNNINGHAM: You know, well, we had Governor Janet Mills, a very credible person. Governor Janet Mills, a very credible and she lost.
PHILLIP: Right. I mean, okay, this is just --
EGBEWOLE: Someone under 50.
PHILLIP: Voters have a say in this. And if you look at the numbers, Graham Platner, he has only gotten more popular, okay, since the controversy, since the tattoo, since all of it. That's a real thing. And then, you know, down in Texas, you know, where Ken Paxton was going up against John Cornyn, all of the dirt is out there on Ken Paxton.
And I was looking at some favorability and unfavorability numbers for the two of them, Paxton and Cornyn, and voters are just as favorable toward Paxton as they are to Cornyn. They are not the same. But voters don't seem to care about the scandals.
BORELLI: Well, I would be very clear, they are not the same. Ken Paxton was acquitted at his trial in the Senate of the crimes he was accused of.
PHILLIP: Yes, but his wife has accused him of -- his wife has accused him of things that has led her to seek a divorce on biblical grounds. So, yes, I mean --
BORELLI: I'm sure we're going to hear all about it.
PHILLIP: -- it's not just the -- there's a lot of corruption, but there's a lot of personal issues too with him.
BORELLI: But just to be clear, on the corruption stuff that he was impeached by the Texas House, he was acquitted by the Texas Senate, so I think we should be clear about that. That is not the same as someone who has exhibited a pattern over 20 years. I mean, it's not just the Nazi tattoo.
ROGIN: There's a pattern of prosecuting, attacking whistleblowers.
BORELLI: It's the belief that women are responsible for their own rape.
ROGIN: He was accused by eight people, I mean, eight people in his own administration of taking bribes.
BORELLI: To have someone believe that women are somehow responsible for being raped, to have people who obviously, you know, sexually message their women while they're married, like these are all bad things and they just keep getting worse with Graham Platner. And I think Democrats, as you've seen a couple of them make pretty strong statements against him.
PHILLIP: So, wait --
BORELLI: I think they're realizing that the wheels are coming off the bus.
PHILLIP: So, Joe, are affairs disqualifying, this one?
(CROSSTALKS)
PHILLIP: Are marital affairs disqualifying?
[22:25:00]
BORELLI: To be clear, I think the Nazi tattoo is disqualifying. I think the idea that women are responsible for their own rapes is completely disqualifying and he should be punched in the face, to be frank with you. I mean, that's an appalling thing to say.
I think that's different from someone who's accused of bribery and was acquitted. I think that someone who's had issues with his wife that we're going to all hear, we are going to hear all about Ken Paxton's divorce as the trial, I believe, even starts while he's campaigning.
PHILLIP: Yes, in a couple weeks.
BORELLI: It's going to be an open season on that.
PHILLIP: But this latest Graham Platner scandal is over sexting with staffers.
Let me just read -- I have to read this statement, because this is from his wife. His wife told CNN or to -- and reporters, I confided deeply personal details about my marriage to someone who I considered a friend. In the months since, I've had to watch as she spreads malicious gossip to anyone who would take her call. I trusted this person with the most private chapter of our lives, early days of our marriage, before any campaign was on our mind, and I'm deeply hurt by her betrayal and invasion of our privacy.
I know who Graham is. I know the man that I married and the husband that he has been to me on the best and worst days of my life. That hasn't changed, and it won't. That is what his wife says.
But the piece of this is that it's adding to many things. But do -- are voters sort of just, they just don't care about -- I mean, and maybe I should go further back because, you know, Donald Trump has cheated allegedly on his spouses before. He's been divorced several times. There was also Bill Clinton, you know? Are we done with this stuff? Do personal mistakes not matter in politics anymore?
MOYNIHAN: Sadly, I mean, I'm nostalgic for a time when Bush getting a DUI or Obama smoking weed was shocking and led the news for a couple weeks. And, sadly, I think we're at a point in American politics where it isn't disqualifying. And it's funny, I mean, I was kind of surprised to see the reaction from folks like Cory Booker now sort of raising questions about support for Graham Platner in light of these affairs because, frankly, adultery and infidelity now seems so ubiquitous in American politics.
So, to me, that wasn't even the most shocking thing. I think Democrats, though, now are trying to backpedal a little bit because they realize it's this constant drip, drip. It wasn't just the Totenkopf tattoo. It wasn't just the basically making fun of veterans for getting shot at. It wasn't the sexual acts in porta-potties. It's continuing to drip, drip, drip. And so I think they're kind of aware that maybe they've made this Faustian bargain.
And bear in mind, I think for so long they tried to say, oh, we have the moral high ground because Donald Trump, that was their argument for everything. And so now they've somehow embraced somebody with a Nazi tattoo? I mean, it's kind of beyond the pale.
And I would also note too that this is all in the name of getting out Susan Collins, who is the most moderate Republican in the Senate. It's a really tough situation for them to say, oh, yes, elect this guy with the Nazi tattoo to beat out Susan Collins --
ROGIN: Correct, right.
MOYNIHAN: -- who's the moderate.
ROGIN: These personal and professional failings by both of these bad men are not disqualifying, but they might lose them the election. It might be enough. Because not everyone cares that they're allegedly corrupt and take -- allegedly taking bribes. It is a pattern with Paxton, by the way, a lot of different accusations. But some people do, and that could be the difference in these tight races, and they didn't have to choose these people who have these problematic records.
And I'll just say one last thing. As someone maybe who's the only tattooed person on the panel that you know what you're tattooing.
MOYNIHAN: Yes.
CUNNINGHAM: Yes.
ROGIN: Okay?
EGBEWOLE: Yes.
ROGIN: You know, I have two tattoos. I know exactly what they mean, okay, because they're tattooed on my body. And if I got drunk and got something tattooed, I wouldn't keep it for 15 years without checking it out, you know? You could Google it now. You do a Google image, 15 years, 17 years later, I don't buy it. I think people know what their tattoos are. I'm here to tell you.
PHILLIP: Now I want to know what your tattoos are.
BORELLI: Yes.
PHILLIP: All right.
CUNNINGHAM: Show them during the break.
PHILLIP: Next for us, an expletive-filled phone call between President Trump and Netanyahu over Israel's actions.
Plus, the president says that he's bored by the Iran talks and doesn't care if they collapse.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:30:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PHILLIP: Tonight, he-said-they-said is playing out in the Iran negotiations. This morning, Iran's state media reports that Tehran has suspended talks with the United States. But hours later, President Trump posted on Truth Social that the talks are continuing at a rapid pace. He later shrugged off this possibility that the negotiations could be collapsing.
He told CNBC that he doesn't care if the talks were over. And he added that he couldn't care less, and that the protracted discussions, quote, "started to get boring." That's a strange choice of words given that this is what he said three days into the war.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: We projected four to five weeks, but we have capability to go far longer than that. Somebody actually said from the media, I think he'll get bored after about a week or two. No, we don't get bored. I never get bored. If I got bored, I wouldn't be standing here right now, I guarantee you that, to go through what I had to go through.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: So Josh, I know you've been following this very closely. It feels like a never ending, we're talking, the deal's close, but no deal ever really comes to pass.
JOSH ROGIN, LEAD GLOBAL SECURITY ANALYST, WASHINGTON POST INTELLIGENCE: Right.
[22:35:00]
This is what a quagmire looks like. This is what happens when you have a President who has no clear frame of what he's doing, what the end goals are, what the strategy is to get there, what the Iranian red lines are, what his red lines are. And then he's empowering a team of experts and officials about the ability to do difficult negotiations in the middle of a war. None of that exists right now. And that is just a stunning amount of incompetence coming out of -- from our policy apparatus.
And then to pile onto that by saying that he doesn't care and he's bored of the thing, I can imagine a more dispiriting message to send to U.S. men and women in harm's way. Thousands of American troops were getting fired at. There is no ceasefire, by the way. There's a grounded invasion in Lebanon, that we've been firing at ships from all of over the world. We fired on the ship from Gambia, but what did the Gambians do to us? Does anybody know what our gripe is with Gambians? No, but they're
getting fired on and the Iranians have no intention of meeting Trump's demands. That's the quagmire. That's what we've been predicting. It was predictable and predicted, and Trump is now throwing his hands up. It's a disaster for America. It's a disaster for the world, and it's a calumny on our troops who are risking their lives for our country based on a war that was based on a lie with no clear endpoint, and it's a tragedy.
PHILLIP: Why is Trump, Joe Borelli, saying that he's bored of the talks? I actually saw an Iran, an analyst basically saying that's their whole strategy, that's their whole modus operandi. Just drag this out as long as possible and whoever taps out first, loses. Now, Trump is already signalling that he might be willing to tap out first.
JOE BORELLI, FORMER REPUBLICAN LEADER, NEW YORK CITY COUNCIL: Well look, I don't know, I mean, you know, we had clear setbacks in the negotiations today, that's certainly the only conclusion we can --we can gather from what statements from both sides are. But you have a Brent Crude down, I think $90 today. You have the stock market reaching a record high.
So, it seems like the world is adjusting to almost a new reality where the U.S. is blockading the strait and letting in as few Iranian ships in and out as possible. And that pain is going to have to produce results. I mean, the President has to get results here.
PHILLIP: Is it going to have (inaudible) results?
BORELLI: There's no -- there's no question, but he's got to get results. And you know, Scott Bessent was on the interview today.
(CROSSTALK)
BORELLI: Bessent was on the interview today. He said that the mission hasn't changed, that were going to see the Iran nuclear-rich material, and we're going to open the Strait of Hormuz.
ROGIN: Do you think that's true?
BORELLI: I think the only way to do that is like a fullback. In football, you just got to go through it.
ROGIN: Now, the only way to do that is to negotiate a deal with the Iranians. That's the only way to end this thing. Or he can admit surrender and just leave.
(CROSSTALK)
ROGIN: You've got to negotiate a deal with the Iranians.
BORELLI: Other than continue the blockade, other than continue the threat of military action,
ROGIN: Diplomacy --
BORELLI: -- what else can we do for leverage?
JOE CUNNIGHAM (D) FORMER U.S. CONGRESSMAN, SOUTH CAROLINA: I think take a step back. This is very unpopular war to begin with. He didn't build a broad coalition. He didn't put the American opinion behind it as well. And you know, the number one goal of an American president is to keep Americans safe. And I don't think Americans feel any more safe after this engagement. In fact, America feels less safe economically, specifically as they watch the price of gas go up, they watch the price of health care go up.
All these things are the cornerstones of the affordability crisis. And if the Democratic Party continues to run those things, I think it'd be more successful in the midterms while President Trump is defending these actions overseas.
PHILLIP: So, sidebar in all of this was this kind of back and forth with Israel. Trump said this morning, He had a productive call with Netanyahu, there will be no troops going to Beirut because this is one of the reasons the Iranians called off talks this morning. Meanwhile, Netanyahu says, if Hezbollah doesn't cease attacking to our cities, Israel will attack terror targets in Beirut. And he says, the IDF will continue to operate as planned in southern Lebanon.
That's the public facing part of this. Apparently in the private part of this, "Axios" reports that Trump said to Netanyahu, "You're (EXPLICIT) crazy. You'd be in prison if it weren't for me. I'm saving your ass. Everyone hates you now. Everyone hates Israel because of this. A second source briefed on the call says Trump was pissed and yelled at Netanyahu at one point, what the (EXPLICIT) are you doing?"
UNKNOWN: I didn't know we could say that word.
(LAUGHING)
PHILLIP: I can tell -- I can say like it says --
(CROSSTALK)
ROGIN: We all giggled like schoolgirls like --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: I can say it if the President says it.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: But this is, I don't know, I think it shows a lot of things, including some rifts in the relationship, but also Trump's deep frustration here that -- he can't even really fully control Israel, and then Israel is maybe standing in the way of him getting what he needs out of Iran.
YEMISI EGBEWOLE, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Back to who's in the driver's seat, which is something that Democrats had brought up what feels like six months ago about this entire war. And the fact that it was Netanyahu's pushing and doing, and Trump saying, no, no, I'm doing this of my own volition. And then he sent out Secretary Marco Rubio, who really is a good messenger for the Trump agenda.
[22:40:02]
But then when he, I mean, in comparison, comparatively, comparatively. But then when push comes to shove, who really is in the driver's seat? And I do think that that the President does underestimate Bibi Netanyahu. Look, look, he was here before Trump. He will be here after Trump. This is not his first tussle with an American president.
LYDIA MOYNIHAN, "NEW YORK POST" CORRESPONDENT: Yes, I think it confirmed a lot of concerns that people on both sides have had. There are a lot of conservatives who are quite vocal saying this was our worst case scenario. And look, I disagree with the Democratic analysis that we are worse off. I think we are safer.
But I also think the President needs to message and needs to be very direct and clear, certainly to his base and the entire American people about what the end game is here. Because obviously, a lot of people in America are concerned. We have a habit of getting into the Middle East and not a great track record of getting out of it with what we want to accomplish.
PHILLIP: I mean, I would argue we're past messaging at this point.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: We just need to get a deal.
CUNNINGHAM: But knowing that, knowing the track record in the Middle East, you know, President Trump was still dog-walked into this engagement. And here we sit with everything going up during this conflict, and with no timeline, no idea of when, and how --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: So, I have two related questions. One, do you think Israel wants the United States to get a deal with Iran?
ROGIN: No.
PHILLIP: And two, do you think Iran will ever give up its nuclear stuff and its right to have nuclear stuff?
ROGIN: It might give up the dust. It's not going to give up its right to produce more dust. And everybody knows that. And that was the premise of U.S. diplomacy with Iran for 25 years. Trump doesn't just seem to care, which is one reason we don't have a deal. The other reason we don't have a deal, or one of them anyway, is that Iran is not going to declare an end to the war while Israel is still attacking Lebanon. It has to be part of the deal.
And of course, Bibi won't play ball because he doesn't want the war to end. And Trump is just waking up to that fact three months into the war and he's not happy about it. And you know, a lot of what he's saying is that Bibi should do everything that he says and now he's learning that's not the way that the world works. So constantly, the past three months, Trump is confronted by reality,
which totally contradicts the made-up story he has about the Iran war in his head. And guess what? In the end, reality is winning out. And again, that's why we're in the quagmire we're in, because Trump won't accept the reality. He only wants the world to bend to what's in his head. In this case, he's not getting what he wants, so he's throwing a tantrum.
PHILLIP: And i's worth just noting that the reporting is that it was Netanyahu's briefing that pushed Trump into the war in the first place. Now, Trump seems to be lashing out at Netanyahu for getting in the way of the war ending potentially. That is quite a predicament that he's found himself in.
Next for us, a new report finds the Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth once again blocked military promotions, this time for nine Navy officers. Three of them are women and two are black. We'll discuss that next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:47:46]
PHILLIP: Tonight, Pete Hegseth is being accused of violating military rules by disproportionately striking the promotions of black and female officers. According to "The New York Times," the defense secretary blocked nine Navy officers who had been selected by leadership to become one-star admirals. Three of the nominees are women and two of them are black. Current and former Navy officials call the move highly unusual. Military rules dictate a promotion system that's supposed to be apolitical and merit-based.
But the net effect of Hegseth's intervention is that no women are included now in the one-star list, despite women making up 21 percent of the active-duty Navy. And just two non-white officers are included, despite racial minorities making up nearly 40 percent. Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell declined to say why Hegseth pulled those officers' names off the list, but that color and gender were not factors in the decision.
Now, it would be one thing if this were an isolated move, but it's not. Hegseth earlier this year targeted two officers that are black and two officers that are women who were on a promotion list for the army. And just this last part of this excerpt of the story that's critical here, two military officers, Mr. Driscoll and General George, both refused to strike those names, citing the officer's records of exemplary service.
What is happening here, do you think? And I mean, I don't know, I just -- it feels so brazen and so transparent that if this is really all about merit, this seems to be quite the opposite of that.
EGBEWOLE: Yes, I have a hard time believing this is simply just a coincidence because I listened to Secretary Hegseth directly. And I think he's been very, very open about his views on how he thinks the military should run, but also on how it should look and who should, who the military should be comprised of.
And so, I think when little things like this happen where you don't need a system overhaul, there's already a process, senior officials already make these decisions.
[22:50:02]
So why intercept? Especially at a time where you don't even need to be looking at, at these, at this. You don't even need to be kind of going down the road of DEI. We are engaged internationally. We are quite busy. I think it's a little odd that the Secretary of War is so engaged in this particular.
PHILLIP: And it's not as if women and Black people are overrepresented in the ranks of military officers. In fact, quite the opposite. So, the idea that they are being unfairly promoted because of DEI seems to be transparently biased.
MOYNIHAN: Well, it's hard when we don't know the specifics of each case. It is commonplace for a secretary of war in previous administrations' defense to look at the list.
PHILLIP: Especially not -- that's the opposite of what is --
(CROSSTALK)
MOYNIHAN: He does have oversight of that. What I would like to --
PHILLIP: No, no. But I just want to be clear because this is important. It is highly unusual for the defense secretary to weigh in on these promotional lists to the point where when it came to the army, it was argued to him that it might not even be legal for him to do it. So, it's not commonplace at all. Other defense secretaries did not do this.
MOYNIHAN: He does have jurisdiction over this, but I would say it, it's hard to comment because we don't know exactly what is happening in each specific case. But what I will say is under the Biden administration, we did see a huge push for DEI and they did roll back some of the requirements for the physical test. We know that the Pentagon established a DEI office. There was Pentagon funds that went to drag.
(CROSSTALK)
MOYNIHAN: So, it raises the question of if this was a push for four years where people pushed along who maybe didn't deserve it. And it's hard to comment on --
(CROSSTALK)
ROGIN: First of all, that's one of those people that we're talking about. Second of all, as Abby pointed out, this is a pattern. Ever since Hegseth came in, he's been purging leaders in all military branches who are women or people of color. And it is brazen, and it is obvious. And it resurrects -- (CROSSTALK)
BORELLI: The people on the list, the majority of them who were cut were white men.
ROGIN: Yes, but that's --
PHILLIP: Actually, in the case of --
BORELLI: There were seven. There were seven.
PHILLIP: -- there were --
BORELLI: There were seven men cut, four of them are white, two of them were black if i read the numbers correctly.
PHILLIP: Right, but overall, there were more if you add the women and the black men together, it was a majority of --
(CROSSTALK)
ROGIN: The point is we don't have to count women and men to know that since Hegseth came in, he's been purging women and people.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Let me just play this because this was -- this was said in an Armed Services Committee hearing by Senator Jack Reed. Just play this, when he was questioning Hegseth.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. JACK REED (D-RI): Of the two dozen officers that you have fired for reasons unrelated to performance since you have not indicated any cause. Sixty percent are black or females. Now, did the president direct you to single out female and black offices to be dismissed?
PETE HEGSETH, DEFENSE SECRETARY: Senator, of course not. And as we've emphasized at this Department from the beginning, the only metric is merit. The previous leadership of this Department were focused on hype, social engineering, race and gender in ways that we think were unhealthy for the Department. Focusing on those things, making decisions based on those things. In President Trump's War Department, we make decisions based on only one thing, merit.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUNNINGHAM: I don't know all these women that Secretary Hegseth has fired by no one. Her name is Nancy Lacore and she's running for my old seat in Charleston, South Carolina and she is a damn good candidate who deserves a look.
PHILLIP: All right, next for us, the panel is going to give us their night caps, "Put Me In Coach" edition. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) [22:58:23]
PHILLIP: A lucky student who attended a performance of La La Land concert in Australia was asked to fill in after the keyboardist fell ill. So, for tonight's News Nightcap, what's something you'd nail if you had to step in at the last second? Josh?
ROGIN: Every time I'm at the Japanese ramen counter, I'm on alert. Just in case the ramen chef goes down, gets sick, or gets a call or something, I can step in. I've done the homework, I've eaten thousands of bowls of ramen. I've watched it (inaudible) cities all over the world. I'm ready, all I need is my chance to shine.
PHILLIP: I believe in you.
PHILLIP: Okay, Yemisi.
EGBEWOLE: I could be Ellie the elephant, the official mascot for the New York Liberty. Ellie girl, if you ever go down, put me in the room, I know all your moves.
PHILLIP: You got to --
(CROSSTALK)
EGBEWOLE: I could do the hair.
PHILLIP: All right, go ahead.
MOYNIHAN: Every Broadway show I go to I am prepared. I know "Wicked" is the only one that's on Broadway right now, but I could do "Thoroughly Modern Millie," "Little Women," --
EGBEWOLE: I --
MOYNIHAN: Vocals, vocals.
UNKNOWN: I'm here, I'm here. Once you show your tattoo, I will.
BORELLI: So, in this head movie I've been at drinking for quite a while. But I'm at the concert and Noel Gallagher goes down, and they put out a call, does anyone know all the words and can hit the notes for "Wonderwall?" And I'm like, yes, I sing it in my shower every night.
PHILLIP: Guys, we're going to have a concert. You're all going to be in it, okay? All right, Joe.
CUNNINGHAM: I just want to talk about the book that wrote.
(LAUGHTER)
UNKNOWN: Go for it.
CUNNINGHAM: Can I do that?
PHILLIP: Yes.
CUNNINGHAM: It's called, "Life of the Party" and I wrote this book out of a place of love as a lifelong Southern Democrat who has watched the trust erode between voters and the Democratic Party. And so I wrote this book from experience on the inside, but also from the outside as to how that trust has been breached.
[23:00:04]
But most importantly, how to repair it, because we have an enormous opportunity in front of us, not only in 2026, but 2028. But we have to repair the faults. We have to speak authentically about the issues that matter to American voters. Democratic Party has done great things and is capable of doing great things. We just have a little ways to go.
PHILLIP: That's in the South.
CUNNINGHAM: And you go online, lifeofthepartybook.com.
PHILLIP: All right. Everyone, pick up that book. Thank you very much for watching us at "NewsNight." And you can stream the show anytime with an all access subscription in the CNN app or at cnn.com/watch. "Laura Coates Live" starts right now.
