Return to Transcripts main page

CNN NewsNight with Abby Phillip

Bondi Blames Blanche for Epstein Chaos as Trump Selects Him; Senate Rejects Attempt to Kill Trump's $1.8 Billion Payout Fund; Trump Says Intel Pick is Only Temporary Amid GOP Backlash. New York Times Reports Six Women Who Dated Graham Platner Recalling Their Unsettling Behavior. Aired 10-11p ET

Aired June 04, 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, lawyer turned enforcer.

TODD BLANCHE, ACTING ATTORNEY GENERAL: Obviously I'm honored and humbled.

PHILLIP: As the president selects Todd Blanche to lead Justice, his would-be predecessor appears to throw him under the bus.

Plus, Donald Trump reveals why he chose a man with zero intel experience to lead the nation's intel agencies.

DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: You may find out some things about the rigged election.

PHILLIP: Also, as Democrats can't figure out what to do about Graham Platner, his former girlfriends speak out about the candidate's unsettling behavior and his tattoo.

And party crasher. After musicians bail on his concert, the president declares himself the headliner.

Live at the table, Keith Boykin, Caroline Sunshine, Ashley Allison, Arthur Aidala, and Terry Moran.

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.

And tonight, as President Trump officially chooses his former personal attorney, Todd Blanche, to be the nation's top law enforcement officer, Blanche's predecessor is appearing to blame him for one of the biggest controversies facing the Justice Department, the release of the Epstein files. Former Attorney General Pam Bondi reveals that Blanche was in charge of the process the entire time, she says. That's according to the newly released transcript of her interview last week with House Oversight -- the House Oversight Committee.

When she was asked about what her role was in carrying out the Epstein Files Transparency Act, again, Bondi said that it was Blanche who supervised the entire process. And today, Trump says that he plans to formally nominate Blanche to be attorney general soon, but he's facing a tough confirmation process potentially.

There's been bipartisan anger over that controversial $1.8 billion slush fund that the DOJ established to pay Trump's allies, and the settlement giving Trump and his family and his businesses protection from IRS audits.

Now, Todd Blanche has been doing a heck of a job auditioning for the full-time role, and it seems like maybe he's gotten it. But part of the problem is that Trump has really angered a lot of people in the Republican -- at least the conference in the Senate. And the slush fund, the IRS settlement, even some of the appointments that he's been making, ultimately, do you think that Blanche is going to actually face a tough confirmation process?

TERRY MORAN, VETERAN JOURNALIST: No, I do not. I think the Republicans, at the end of the day, are going to rally around him and confirm him as attorney general. I think that's wrong for the country, because he was Donald Trump's personal lawyer.

Now, look, we've had attorneys general of all different kinds, right? Bobby Kennedy was the president's brother. There have been an attorney general went to prison. But what Todd Blanche has demonstrated already, he has the qualifications, no question. He was a top lawyer, top prosecutor in New York. He doesn't have the character. Okay?

Pam Bondi essentially made a confession by saying that it was Epstein -- it was Blanche who handled the Epstein files. She was really a show horse. He was the workhorse. So, the work of this Justice Department over the first year and a half was really Todd Blanche's. And time and time again, when Donald Trump's personal interests are at stake, and they conflict with the nation's interest, like the slush fund, like the tax settlement with the Trump family and companies, he goes with his client, Donald Trump, rather than with the country.

PHILLIP: Well, let's not also forget the prosecutions that he has attempted to launch just in the last few months. I mean, Jim Comey over the seashells and so many other things. He was talking to Sean Hannity, the Fox host, on his podcast earlier this week, and here's how he said he looks at the task ahead of him in his job at DOJ.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BLANCHE: This is blatant, the purest form of weaponization because he was the president.

[22:05:01] It's not -- yes, we can talk about what happened after he left, but this is -- he was the leader of the free world, and his people that worked in the executive, okay? So, they work for him. And make no mistake, everybody in the executive works for the president of the United States.

And now we're sitting here saying, okay, so what are we doing? We're investigating. We have a bunch of guys investigating. Anybody -- honestly, any prosecutor in this government that raises their hand and says, I want to find out what happened, I want to investigate, we have the tools in place to get them where they need to be to do it. And so -- but time is not our friend.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIP: You know, Arthur that's quite the view of the DOJ. I mean, I think about all the various things that the DOJ is responsible for prosecuting, and it seems like Todd Blanche seems to think that the most important thing is finding attorneys anywhere in the nation who want to go after President Trump's perceived enemies.

ARTHUR AIDALA, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Well, I don't know. I'm not sure that was my takeaway from that. Look, I --

PHILLIP: What was your takeaway from it?

AIDALA: Well, let me just give you a little base -- my basis of speaking here. You know, I work in the community where Todd was a U.S. attorney in the Southern District. I didn't know him personally then. I did have an encounter with him when he was representing the president in the courthouse. But he does enjoy amongst his colleagues an excellent reputation for his integrity, his knowledge of the law, and knowing like, look, if you go look at the Trump administration, there were a lot of people who were in positions, and we may talk about one of them today, that really have no base -- no reason to be there.

Todd does know the law. I mean, he knows the federal law, and he was in the Southern District, and that's where he was trained. I think a lot of people in the legal community who have to deal with not the stories you cover but the day in and day out cases that I deal with on a regular basis, not the headline cases, they're happy to have Todd Blanche there because he's level-headed, he's reasonable, and, you know, he was the DAG. The deputy attorney general really runs the office.

Now, when people say about, you know, the Epstein files, he was covering up for Trump, no one is -- there's so much misconception. You know, you had Ana Navarro on here who went off on Brett Ratner, the director, about the Epstein files, and he's all over them. That's just blatantly false. That's an absolute lie.

PHILLIP: Just to be clear, she was talking about Brett -- the allegations about Brett Ratner that were actually not related to the Epstein files that caused him to be, you know --

AIDALA: Well, I know she mentioned something about --

PHILLIP: -- his fall from grace, so to speak, from Hollywood.

AIDALA: -- was all over the Epstein files, and he's not. There's a picture of him and his fiance with Jeffrey Epstein.

PHILLIP: But there are other allegations against Brett Ratner that have nothing to do with the Epstein files. That's also what she was talking about.

AIDALA: But, I mean, the bottom line is I don't see -- I don't know how Todd Blanche covered up for Donald Trump regarding the Epstein files. There may be ways that the Epstein files came out that people aren't happy with, but I don't think that's one of them.

KEITH BOYKIN, FORMER CLINTON WHITE HOUSE AIDE: I can tell you how he covered up for him. Todd Blanche went down to Florida and met with Ghislaine Maxwell --

AIDALA: My client.

BOYKIN: -- met with her in prison and then mysteriously she ends up in a lower security prison in Texas. That does not pass the smell test.

PHILLIP: Well, I mean, but you said at the time, Arthur, that you thought that that was basically a quid pro quo.

AIDALA: I don't -- let me just be very clear. I don't know that for a fact. I want to make that blatantly clear. I've spoken to Ghislaine not that long ago. First of all, people get moved within the system all the time. They just moved Keith Raniere, who's doing 120 years to a less restrictive --

PHILLIP: But you basically said -- I mean, let's -- you know, I believe you --

AIDALA: There was no reason for Todd to said that.

PHILLIP: I believe you when you say maybe you don't know firsthand exactly what transpired in that conversation, but you basically said that no one would avail their client in a situation like that unless they were getting something out of it. And that the move from, you know, a high security prison to a low security prison would be, I'll use your words, a common sense outcome.

(CROSSTALKS)

AIDALA: Let me just be very clear, I did not represent Ghislaine on the conversations with Todd. We did her appeal. But, yes, I'm not going to bring any client in to see any prosecutor unless I know there's some benefit for my client.

PHILLIP: So, I mean, is that ethical?

AIDALA: Of course it's ethical. It's the way the system works. (CROSSTALKS)

PHILLIP: Is that ethical in the context of the crimes that she was convicted of?

ASHLEY ALLISON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: And that's what I was going to say, is that --

PHILLIP: That's the real question.

AIDALA: You move her from one prison for 20 years to another prison for 20 years --

PHILLIP: To a low security prison --

AIDALA: Yes, it's ethical.

PHILLIP: -- that she is actually not supposed to be in.

AIDALA: It's ethical.

ALLISON: Well, let me just say this.

PHILLIP: Yes.

ALLISON: Todd Blanche probably does know the law really well, but his application of the law is, I think, what is in question right now. And we all know there are different types of lawyers out here, just like there are different types of salespeople out there. Some sell snake oil, and some sell actually real goods that are going to be help --

AIDALA: Like coconut oil.

ALLISON: Coconut oil. We were talking about that.

[22:10:00]

Very funny, Arthur.

But I think the, a couple of things. One, you know, Pam Bondi making this omission, or this basically confession that Todd Blanche was over the Epstein files, one, clearly a woman scorned. She's pissed, right? And so she's like, I'm telling -- I'm letting everybody know where the bodies are buried. And, actually, I believe that because if you've ever worked with the DOJ in an administration, you do know the A.G. and the DAG actually do have separate portfolios. And while they do confer, a lot of times they move policy separately.

So, the strong likelihood that the DAG probably act -- meaning the deputy attorney general, Todd Blanche, actually was leading on the Epstein files and covered up, which makes, though, the point about his character as the attorney general even more questionable.

And this has now transcended party. You have people who are MAGA, you have people who are Democrats, you have independents, who are really concerned at the handling not just of the Trump administration, but many his administration's handling of the Epstein files. But because Trump ran on this as being sp- so, so transparent, and there is now a law that is passed about transparency and they still aren't being completely transparent, it raises questions, on top of Todd Blanche in every act while he was acting doing as many things possible to accommodate Donald Trump's promises of retribution, especially with the backdrop of Pam Bondi getting fired because Donald Trump didn't think she did it well enough.

So, when that fact pattern happens --

PHILLIP: That part is going to be a problem for him on Capitol Hill. John Cornyn says, being attorney general is probably one of the hardest jobs in the cabinet because you're working for the president, but you're also supposed to be able to tell the president no.

ALLISON: Yes.

PHILLIP: As the lead lawyer for the country, I'm going to let the process work. And Thom Tillis also says, he probably wants to see something on the actual dissolution of the slush fund before he would consider it.

So, yes, Todd Blanche is probably going to have to answer, is he willing to tell President Trump no, or does he just think that President Trump is still his client like he was in the private sector?

CAROLINE SUNSHINE, DEPUTY COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR, TRUMP'S 2024 CAMPAIGN: Well, I think there's a couple things going on here. One, I think Pam Bondi has absolutely laid the groundwork for Todd Blanche to have a difficult confirmation. And I think she used her time in that closed-door session, where she was under -- sworn under oath in front of Congress as the former attorney general and as Todd Blanche's former boss to say, he ran the whole process, and he was in charge of the whole release, and the Dow's at 50,000, right?

And so she's now laid the groundwork for that to be a confirmation where Democrats can essentially have a layup and say, there's no way I can vote for this guy. I can't. This is about women. This is about protecting, because like you said, other people have noticed this has been a politically toxic issue for the president.

I'm sure there's a lot we're going to disagree on, but on the topic of the slush fund and answering to the president, I think we should agree on the facts. And what the facts are is that the creation of this fund, it's not a slush fund, it's an anti-weaponization fund, why do we have the fund? Why do we have the fund?

MORAN: Because Donald Trump wants --

SUNSHINE: Because Charles Littlejohn --

MORAN: -- to reward the rioters who attacked our election.

SUNSHINE: Let's go through some yes or no questions. IRS contractor Charles Littlejohn pled guilty to leaking President Trump's tax returns. Yes or no? BOYKIN: Yes.

SUNSHINE: Yes.

BOYKIN: Before we go to --

SUNSHINE: He also pled guilty --

MORAN: And 400,000 other Americans, 400,000 other Americans.

SUNSHINE: So, we know then we also have 400,000 cases --

PHILLIP: But hold on. What does that have to do with the $1.8 billion fund that Trump explicitly said this week was to compensate January 6th rioters who he pardoned?

SUNSHINE: I think because there are a number of people who have felt the full weight of the weaponization of government.

PHILLIP: He said this week when he was asked about the fund, he said, I'm proud I pardoned these people, and they deserve money from the government.

SUNSHINE: Yes.

PHILLIP: That's what he wants the fund to be about.

SUNSHINE: Because we had grandmas who were in jail for two years. We had people who did not commit violent crimes while we watched people --

PHILLIP: Well, there are many people who did commit violent crimes.

SUNSHINE: -- in Minnesota, and (INAUDIBLE) put up signs saying, donate your --

PHILLIP: There are many people who did commit violent crimes, and the president himself has said that he wants them to be compensated.

BOYKIN: This is a joke.

SUNSHINE: I'm not just talking about --

BOYKIN: And I'm really embarrassed for you that you have to defend this, because even Republican senators on the Hill are saying that this is ridiculous. And Donald Trump isn't doing any -- doing himself any favors by pushing this.

SUNSHINE: Did the Justice Department have to apologize to Donald Trump, yes or no?

BOYKIN: You know what? I let you speak the whole time.

MORAN: No.

SUNSHINE: Yes or no? BOYKIN: No. I let you speak. I didn't interrupt you, okay? So, thank you. Donald Trump is even in trouble now because you've got Thom Tillis, you've got Cassidy, you've got Cornyn, all these people who are raising questions about Trump's decision-making here.

And I think the big problem is this used to be something, this principle in the Justice Department called avoiding the appearance of impropriety. I don't think they care about avoiding the appearance of impropriety.

Let me just -- let me speak. Let me just speak. No, let me just speak. They don't care. Every step they make is just -- is creating more distrust among the American people about the ability of the justice system to operate fairly and impartially. And that's not good -- not just bad for democracy.

[22:15:00]

It's not just bad for Democrats. It's bad for the entire country. That's not a good state for us to be in.

SUNSHINE: What about when --

PHILLIP: Arthur?

AIDALA: But I agree with what you're saying. And I think, ultimately, Todd Blanche agreed with what you're saying, and, ultimately, that's why he said, it's dead. The fund is dead.

BOYKIN: He did not say that, though. He did not say that.

AIDALA: they're dissolving the fund. It's not going forward.

BOYKIN: The fund said that -- I read that document. It says, it can only be changed by written agreement of the parties. That means Donald Trump and Todd Blanche have to sign an agreement to dissolve it. He did not do that. He refused to put it in writing.

AIDALA: I believe I saw the cover of the New York Times said Todd Blanche --

BOYKIN: I don't care.

MORAN: Who cares?

BOYKIN: I saw the testimony.

AIDALA: I give The New York Times some credit that they got a fact- check before they --

PHILLIP: Okay. But, Arthur --

ALLISON: After Todd Blanche was in testifying and saying, we're not going to do it, we're not going to do it, literally hours, in the same 24 hours, Donald Trump from the Resolute Desk says, well, I don't know if it's dead. I'm not sure if it's dead, so the inconsistency. I also think, you know, this slush fund, if it actually goes through, Donald Trump won't be president forever and there will be a lot of people that Todd Blanche actually goes after probably that actually might benefit from this slush fund because --

SUNSHINE: But what about the 400,000 Americans, as you said, who had their tax returns leaked? Would you like any of your tax returns leaked?

PHILLIP: Let me ask Arthur one last question.

SUNSHINE: Those Americans deserve justice, and they will with this fund.

MORAN: That's not who he's talking about. He's talking about the people who attacked the Capitol.

SUNSHINE: That's absolutely who he's talking about, and that's who the fund was created for.

MORAN: That's who he's -- he's talking about the people that attacked the Capitol.

(CROSSTALKS)

SUNSHINE: It was created as a result of a settlement between Donald Trump and the IRS.

BOYKIN: It was not a settlement. That's the reason why he did it.

PHILLIP: All right. We're not -- hold on a second. Hold on a second, everyone. We're not -- we don't have to guess about this. We know why the fund was created, because the president told us. It was to compensate January 6th rioters.

Arthur, one last question for you. Pam Bondi claims that she had no idea that Todd Blanche went down to Florida to talk to Ghislaine Maxwell. Do you think that there's any chance that that's true?

AIDALA: That's a huge stretch. I mean, that's really just --

PHILLIP: She said she read it in the newspaper, like the rest of us.

AIDALA: You know, look, I'm not going to challenge the former attorney general's credibility, but that seems like a bridge too far, so to speak.

I mean, first of all, they usually kind of know where they are, like physically. They know where -- the attorney general knows where the DAG is and the DAG knows where the A.G. is almost 24/7, 365. So, that doesn't really make -- doesn't have the ring of truth to it.

But, Terry, it is not unethical for a -- just because I do this, brother, for me to bring in a guy who's doing time and say, look, he may have some information on a case, but he's got 20 years in. He's only going to do it if you give him some sort of benefit. Well, what do you have in mind, Mr. Aidala? Like, look, where he is a hell hole. Just put him over here. I'm not asking you to take any time off his sentence, just move him. That's not -- and then, so a lot of times my client gives him very valuable evidence.

MORAN: She's one of the worst child abusers in American history.

AIDALA: So, was Jeffrey Epstein.

MORAN: Yes.

PHILLIP: Yes, all right.

AIDALA: Okay.

PHILLIP: Let's leave it there.

AIDALA: So, it's interesting --

PHILLIP: Next for us -- we do have to leave it there, Arthur.

Next for us, Donald Trump reveals why he's putting someone with zero experience in charge of the nation's intelligence agencies, and surprise, surprise, it involves elections.

Plus, breaking news tonight, new allegations against Graham Platner from his ex-girlfriends, including abusive behavior. How will Democrats respond to this now?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[22:20:00]

PHILLIP: Tonight, Donald Trump says that his controversial pick for the director of National Intelligence is only temporary, but that any concerns about his pick's qualifications are overblown. Earlier this week, Trump announced that Bill Pulte, who has never served in an intelligence, defense, or even national security role, would be taking up the mantle for the outgoing DNI, Tulsi Gabbard.

Appearing before to justify the appoint-point the appointment, while tempering expectations, Trump suggested that Pulte doesn't really want the job in the long-term.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: He's not going to be permanent because, you know, I don't think he'd want to be permanent. But he's a very smart guy, and he may find out some things about the rigged elections, et cetera, et cetera. I think he'd like to do it. I'd like to -- I think he wants to do it very much, got a lot of energy.

REPORTER: But in your view, Mr. President, the necessary national security experience to take on that position?

TRUMP: Well, I do, and I think he does actually because he's smart. Because a lot of national security -- look, I wasn't greatly experienced in national security, and I think I've done a really great job with it.

Bill is a guy that will be able to figure it out very quickly. Again, it's short-term, but he may be very effective for a short period of time.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIP: Pulte currently leads the Federal Housing Finance Agency, and in that role, he's pressed for investigations into Trump's political enemies. That has obviously pleased the president, but now it looks like apparently he's turning the DNI office into an election investigation office. Why?

SUNSHINE: No offense, but you guys take the bait every time. I mean, I've worked for Donald Trump. Half the stuff he says is because he knows you're going to run it on T.V. and focus on that instead of what he doesn't want you to focus on, which is the fact that right now we have a war with Iran that isn't going well. But if he says he's going to go investigate the rigged elections, he knows you're going to run the clip, and you just did it.

So, let's talk about what's really important, which is that --

PHILLIP: Let me understand. Are you suggesting that he doesn't believe what he just said?

SUNSHINE: Oh, Donald Trump believes everything that he says, but I'm saying you took the bait.

PHILLIP: Well, it's only bait if it's not true. That's the first question. Does he believe what he said? Do you think he does?

SUNSHINE: I have no reason to believe Donald Trump doesn't believe that.

PHILLIP: My next question is, even if he doesn't believe that Bill Pulte is going to do what he said he wants him to do, do you think that there's really a justification for naming him as director of National Intelligence?

SUNSHINE: Absolutely. I think it's a fantastic choice.

BOYKIN: Why?

SUNSHINE: And you want to know how I know it's a fantastic choice? Because Mike Pence is hyperventilating about it.

Let's talk about the not an expert thing. First of all, we don't need any more experts. Under the Biden administration, you had Alejandro Mayorkas, who ran the border, what an epic failure that was, and he came out and said it himself. He was an expert in Homeland Security. How'd that go? An admission of his own failure.

Bill Pulte --

PHILLIP: Well, he had actually had experience. I mean, look, you can say he did --

SUNSHINE: He had experience, but he failed. He said it himself.

PHILLIP: You can say that he did a bad job, but he actually worked at the high levels of the Department of Homeland Security prior to having that job. So, what are Bill Pulte's qualifications for being director of National Intelligence?

SUNSHINE: The DNI role, this is where I think the president's instincts are kicking in. I like that he's making a change. He knows that this war isn't going very well, and he's making changes, and one of them has been that the DNI role has been sidelined under the current trajectory of the war, right?

PHILLIP: By Trump?

SUNSHINE: Despite the fact that the 18 U.S. intelligence agencies that serve under the DNI have all concluded that Iran never had a nuclear weapon and never wanted to make one. I hope that by -- I don't know if the president ever fully trusted Gabbard in the way that I think he trusts Pulte. Pulte has known the president outside of his time in the presidency.

BOYKIN: I have no idea what you're saying.

SUNSHINE: And I think him elevating the DNI to this position --

BOYKIN: I don't understand what you're saying.

SUNSHINE: -- is a good choice for the trajectory of the world.

BOYKIN: I don't understand what you're saying. It doesn't -- it seems to be illogical, doesn't make any sense to me.

But I'll tell you this. The one reason --

SUNSHINE: You need me to slow it down?

BOYKIN: No. I need you to -- I need you to read the law. The one reason why he's not qualified is because the law says he's not qualified. The law says the DNI must be a person with military experience, intelligence experience, or some sort of national security experience. He has none of that.

SUNSHINE: Every president serves at the pleasure of the president.

PHILLIP: The law uses the word extensive. I can't think of a lot of jobs in the government that have an actual qualification that's listed in the statute, and it qualifies it by saying it, they must have extensive experience.

But I don't want us to lose sight of the election piece of this because that's incredibly important.

ALLISON: Yes. PHILLIP: It's not as if Trump -- this isn't bait. Here's how we know it's not bait. Tulsi Gabbard, when she was the DNI, she testified to the House and the Senate, my presence in Florida at this raid of the Atlanta Fulton County election office, my presence was requested by the president and executed under my broad statutory authority to coordinate, integrate, and analyze intelligence related to election security, including counterintelligence. So, he sends her down there on a raid to grab ballots in Georgia.

ALLISON: And I think we just can't look at these things in isolation. We know Donald Trump called Georgia to try and find votes. It didn't work. We know January 6th happened because they didn't believe -- well, I don't know whether he believed that or not, but we know that some people did not believe he had actually lost the election, and he stormed the Capitol.

We know then when he got back, he actually pardoned those people who stormed the Capitol trying to overturn the election. We also know he just did a slush fund for those individuals to get basically reparations for trying to overthrow our election, and now he is appointing a DNI to take the bait, take the not bait, whatever.

His former DNI went down to try and steal ballots. This new DNI is going to be in place to try and find whatever this rigged election he's talking about. And guess what? We are having elections in this country right now, and we have a midterm election that could actually take away some of Donald Trump's power right now.

So, when I, again, look at that fact pattern, a jury probably of 12 of my peers would say that Donald Trump is actually attempting to interfere in the election again. And that is a problem for the DNI. Not to mention we are at war. We also have a lot of enemies abroad, and I want a DNI that actually knows what he is doing.

I do actually prefer experts, and I thought this administration didn't like DEI hires, but this guy seems like he might be one.

MORAN: Nice. This isn't about intelligence, right? It is about elections. It's about dirt. Bill Pulte has already proved that he will abuse the power that he had in that Federal National Housing Association in order to get confidential information on prominent people so that he could pursue bogus mortgage cases, violating the law to hand over this information to members of Congress and others.

What do you think Trump wants to do with him? His consuming passion is to destroy his enemies, and now he's got the director of National Intelligence with the keys to the kingdom about every single secret every single person has, plus elections.

And he says he doesn't have to do it for a long time. No, he just has to burglarize the place, hand it over to Trump, and give it to somebody else.

PHILLIP: All right. We're going to leave it there with this conversation.

[22:30:00]

New troubling allegations against the Democratic Senate candidate in Maine, this time from a number of his ex-girlfriends. How Graham Partner is responding tonight, that's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

PHILLIP: Tonight, new allegations coming to light against Graham Platner, the Democratic Senate candidate for Maine. The "New York Times" interviewed six women who have dated Platner in the past.

[22:35:03]

And while some described him as a fun and caring partner and saying they felt safe with him, three others described a volatile and toxic relationship that were unsettling at that and at times emotionally wrenching. They said that while Platner could be charming and charismatic, he was also demeaning to women and in at least one case, even physically threatening. Platner responded to the allegations tonight. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GRAHAM PLATNER (D), MAINE SENATORIAL CANDIDATE: There are some allegations in this piece that I just want to be kind of unequivocal about are simply not true. Anything alleging physicality, anything alleging that I knew what my tattoo was, these are the statements of someone who's politically motivated.

In this piece, there's a lot about my struggling, not being a good boyfriend, certainly self-medicating with alcohol. And I've been very upfront since the beginning of this campaign that that was a pretty dark period of my life after I came back from my combat service. And that's what that kind of life looks like.

And so there are things in this that I absolutely will take responsibility for and have been speaking about openly for months now. But those serious allegations are just not true.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIP: A lot of disturbing specifics in the "New York Times" article that we're going to get to.

But I think the biggest question right now, politically, is how is this not disqualifying for him, given the standard that Democrats have established for believing women in situations like this?

KEITH BOYKIN, FORMER CLINTON WHITE HOUSE AIDE: You're asking me, huh?

PHILLIP: Sorry.

BOYKIN: I'm going to be the first person to answer this question. Well, I don't know that it isn't.

I think for people who have been saying that Democrats should be consistent and that they should believe women, it's hard to not look at this case and say, well, you have to apply a different standard to it. I think it's a very complicated problem for the Democratic Party, because the Democratic Party has set itself up to be the party that believes women.

And so when you have somebody who many people in the party have invested in, what do you do when there's an allegation that comes up? And so I think it's going to be a problem for the party to interfere.

ARTHUR AIDALA, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Because as a lawyer, and I know you're just following the script, how much against our criminal justice system it is to say believe anyone. Like we're blankantly (ph) believe bald guys. Whatever bald guys say, we're going to believe bald guys.

It's just the absolute opposite of how the system is supposed to work. It's supposed to be analyzed by law enforcement, then by a prosecutor, then by a grand jury, then cross-examination, and then--

BOYKIN: Criminal case. This is about the Democratic Party, how the Democratic Party should handle it.

AIDALA: Okay, but they're not supposed to just believe women.

BOYKIN: Well, believe doesn't mean, I'm sorry.

ASHLEY ALLISON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: No, go ahead.

BOYKIN: Believe doesn't mean that you automatically assume everything is true. But I think what it does mean is that you have to take this seriously. You have to look into it and investigate.

You can't just say, oh, well, it's not true because he's our guy. That's what that means.

AIDALA: Could someone explain to me the potential senator's views on that tattoo? I thought he acknowledged that it's a--

PHILLIP: Okay, that's a very good question. So he has acknowledged that now he knows that the tattoo was a Nazi symbol. He's kind of covered it up or partially covered it up.

He was asked tonight about the allegations in the story that one of his girlfriends said that she learned from him many years ago that this tattoo had an association with the Nazis. Here's what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHRIS HAYES, "ALL IN" HOST, MS NOW: Well the Times basically reported that they saw texts of hers, including a text in August, I believe August 3rd of last year. This would be before October of last year, in which she basically said that you had a, quote, "Nazi tattoo," and she joked about how she's going to go volunteer for Collins.

Now, again, this is a text that got sent, so we can place the time, right? This is in August. How does she know it's a Nazi tattoo in August of last year and you don't know it's a Nazi tattoo in August of last year?

PLATNER: Well, she certainly didn't send that text to me. So whoever she sent it to and was talking to, that's- I can't say why, but I will say that I certainly didn't know.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AIDALA: Yes, okay. So tonight before I came here, Abby, I was privileged to be with the Cuomo family at the premiere of "Mario, The Movie." It's a documentary about Mario Cuomo, and it highlights his speech in 1984 at the Democratic Convention about inclusiveness.

And if he knew that there was someone who was a real candidate in the Democratic Party, who has a chance to be a United States Senator, who has a Nazi tattoo, I'm sure Uncle Mario Cuomo was rolling over in his grave, because his whole message was inclusiveness of bringing us all together.

And anyone who's sporting a Nazi tattoo and is admitting, and I didn't know it was a Nazi tattoo, give me a break.

ALLISON: I guess that he's rolling in his grave for other reasons happening in this country as well.

AIDALA: Well, I'm not going to disagree with that.

PHILLIP: But what is the believability of that denial that we just heard?

[22:40:07]

He's claiming that his girlfriend back before all of this transpired, she knew it was a Nazi tattoo because she said he told her.

ALLISON: Yes, ultimately, the people of Maine will get to decide. That's actually who is going to get to decide this. Not even the Democratic Party, quite honestly.

All Mainers are going to get to decide. I do believe women. And when I say I believe women, I know it is hard to come forward when you have been sexually assaulted, when you have been sexually harassed, because you often are not believed by your boss, sometimes by your family, sometimes by people who know it's happening, but don't want to believe it's happening.

And so the theory of believing women, it is to create the space for if something has happened to you, you are able to say it. Now, if they want to file criminal charges or take you to court, I believe in the justice system, because I also know people who have been wrongly prosecuted.

And I believe a jury of your peers should be allowed to say, but believing women is removing the need for women to remain silent.

AIDALA: Like the jury of your peers acquitted Harvey Weinstein on one woman who said he forcibly raised her. ALLISON: But the other piece, though, is it's where we are in our

politics right now. And I don't like to live in a double standard. And so I don't know what's going to happen in the Maine race.

I probably think Democrats should have had a different candidate. But I also think America should have a different president.

PHILLIP: But shouldn't they speak at this point, Ashley? Shouldn't they speak out?

I mean, all over the Internet, a bunch of Democratic progressive voices, influencers and the like, are out there not just defending Graham Platner, but attacking these women.

ALLISON: And I don't think that's okay.

PHILLIP: Attacking the "New York Times" for running the story, calling them uncorroborated claims. "The New York Times" is basically campaigning for Collins at this point. Cancel your "New York Times" subscription.

Accusing this woman of not telling the truth because she once worked for the Heritage Foundation.

I think the question I have right now is that, yes, the people of Maine will decide.

ALLISON: Yes.

PHILLIP: But the Democratic Party can make a choice.

ALLISON: They can.

PHILLIP: And they're not making a choice right now.

ALLISON: They are not.

PHILLIP: They can make a choice about whether to say this is not appropriate. This guy needs to be out of the race. They can say that.

ALLISON: Yes. But let me, I'm not justifying people saying it or not saying it.

What I am saying is I live in a reality where nobody is doing the right thing, it feels like. And when no one is doing the right thing and people, I'm not, I would, I am saying that I don't think it, I'm saying, I'm doing the thing that I think people should do.

AIDALA: He's got a SWAT sticker on him.

ALLISON: I am doing the thing that I think people should do. And I don't think I believe those women. And I think it should be investigated.

AIDALA: What about the SWAT sticker part?

ALLISON: I don't put-- I don't have any tattoos.

AIDALA: Anti-Semitism.

ALLISON: I would not, I think the swastika is terrible. I don't think people should put that on their body. I don't think anti-Semitism is right.

But what I am saying is the political backdrop that we are in this country, I think this is a bigger question about the morality of our political experiences and processes. And it feels like we have lost the plot on who our leaders should be on the Democratic side and the Republican side. And I think that's a bigger conversation that we just see play out maybe in Maine and sometimes maybe in a presidential election.

PHILLIP: Everyone hold your thoughts for a second. We're going to take a quick break and we'll come back on the other side and finish up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[22:45:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

PHILLIP: Welcome back. We're discussing Graham Platner and the new allegations against him in the "New York Times."

Caroline, what do you think should happen here with this candidate? I think he should stay in the race.

CAROLINE SUNSHINE, DEPUTY COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR, TRUMP'S 2024 CAMPAIGN: I was never bothered by any of the scandals with Donald Trump. I'm not bothered by Graham Platner's scandals at all. We have a two-tiered system of scandal in our country.

If you are the establishment political candidate of either party, all your scandals get to stay nice and tidy in the closet. But if you're the anti-establishment populist candidate of either party, Republican or Democrat, all of your scandals get dragged out into the light.

As long as Ted Cruz, who is a sitting U.S. Senator, was allowed to flee his people in the middle of a blizzard, go off to the Four Seasons Cancun, and then when he was caught, blame his teenage daughter, if that guy gets to keep his Senate seat, Graham Platner gets to stay in the race.

Absolutely, I can't. And by the way, are you not gluing into any of the timing here?

Isn't it interesting that the allegations against Eric Swalwell came out when they did, and now the allegations against Graham Platner came out when they did? Are you sensing a pattern here? Politics is a dirty game. I've worked in it, I know.

AIDALA: Anti-Semitism here, versus a father going to check, make sure his daughter is, or whatever, let's say he's totally wrong, Ted Cruz. Okay, you abandoned your state in the middle of a blizzard.

First of all, a senator doesn't have a lot to do with a blizzard, by the way.

SUNSHINE: He has everything to do with a blizzard. He represents the people of Texas.

AIDALA: A local official handles those things.

PHILLIP: Here's the theme that I'm hearing, actually, on both sides of the table, is that somehow everybody is getting judged against other people. Why can't we just judge the actual conduct for what it is?

[22:49:56]

Because the conduct here, we talked about the Nazi tattoo, the other allegation is that in an argument with this girlfriend, he twisted her arm behind her back, shoved her in a bedroom, held the door closed from the other side so she couldn't get out, telling her to remain there until she was calm. Eventually, she fell asleep and left the next morning.

In any other scenario, other than, I guess, Graham Platner, most Democrats would consider that to actually be sexual assault.

TERRY MORAN, VETERAN JOURNALIST, AND SUBSTACK AUTHOR, "REAL PATRIOTISM": And disqualifying the candidacy, he says that the stories are more complex. I think what's going on here is--

PHILLIP: Just to be clear, he denies that particular story explicitly, but her claim is her claim.

MORAN: Yes, her claim is her claim. We're a very different country than we used to be.

That's how we got Donald Trump. That's how Graham Platner came to prominence, which is that we live more chaotic lives. We're broken in so many different ways.

The things that used to disqualify candidates, Donald Trump is the lowest character politician, the lowest character American. He lies floridly. He's grotesque with women, always has been, a buddy for 15 years of Jeffrey Epstein.

You cannot deny. And he's enormously financially, fiscally corrupt. That said, people found deliverance in him, perhaps because their own lives are full of chaos and destruction, and they're blaming elites.

And Graham Platner comes from the same environment. The last thing I would say is, I think what he's asking is the sense of what Jesse Jackson asked the country when he was caught saying, hi-me-town about New York. He said, the Lord isn't finished with me yet. Maybe a little bit of that in our politics isn't a bad thing.

SUNSHINE: Okay. I hate to burst your bubble though, but you act as if everybody's under this illusion that American politics is somehow newly scandalous. I hate to break it to you, but it has always been scandalous.

MORAN: American character is lower today. It's lower today than it was.

SUNSHINE: Okay. JFK was looking up the skirt of every female in the West Wing that wasn't Jackie O. Bill Clinton didn't have sexual relations with that woman in the Oval, but you know what? Despite all of those men's personal faults, all of them did great things for this country. And so this illusion that somehow American politics is newly scandalous.

MORAN: No, I'm not saying American politics--

PHILLIP: I just want to point out that that may be true, what you're saying may be true, but the recent past history is that Democrats tried to deny a Supreme Court seat to Brett Kavanaugh over allegations against him when he was in high school and college.

So again, I'm not trying to say one thing or another. I'm just asking you, are we willing to hold the same standard for one person and the same standard for another person? That is the question.

ALLISON: I think it is important, I think it should be held. I also think that people are making political calculuses and some people are deciding in this moment that they would rather win a Maine seat, Senate seat to be able to hold Donald Trump accountable than apply the standard consistently. And I just think that we can just call it what it is.

PHILLIP: Is that good or is that bad?

ALLISON: I think it's every person's choice. I would prefer if like a woman is saying that she was sexually assaulted, I think that's a disqualifying factor and I think that the person should be able to defend themselves and then the people could decide.

I personally don't feel comfortable with that, but I also think Donald Trump needs checks and balances. So maybe Democrats could pick a different candidate at this point, but I do think that that's what's happening. I don't have to like it, but that's my assessment of the moment.

BOYKIN: Can I just say, I think that's why you're here, and I'm not saying this to be a sycophant, but I think that's why we need to have the media to ask these questions because the two parties care about one thing that they agree upon is the two-party system. Democrats are going to protect Democrats, Republicans are going to protect Republicans.

The one thing I actually really totally agree with you about is that you're willing to hold Donald Trump to the same standard as Graham Platner because you don't care about anybody's scandals. I respect you for being consistent about that.

SUNSHINE: As I said, you can be a flawed human being and do great things for the country. Welcome to American politics. I'm a realist. BOYKIN: I get that, but my point is that's why we can't allow the two parties to devolve the American political system to the point where nobody has any standards. The press, the media are supposed to hold them accountable, so I'm glad that you're doing that. Hold all of us accountable when we don't hold the press accountable.

PHILLIP: Don't worry. The media will do that.

ALLISON: The two parties have to be able to diagnose the problem of what is really happening and why it is happening. There is a political capitalist of why people are making these decisions, and it is about power. And until we acknowledge that, then we're not going to be able to get to the other side.

PHILLIP: Everyone, thank you very much for being here. We're going to be right back in just a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

PHILLIP: A new season of Variety's "Actors on Actors" is here with new episodes dropping daily on the CNN app. Here's a preview of today's episode with actors Keke Palmer and Sharon Stone.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KEKE PALMER, ACTRESS AND SINGER: It's a journey, the things we do, and it's usually some really small indie thing that we did for the love.

SHARON STONE, ACTRESS: Well, most of it is we do for the love. We never get paid for a photo shoot. We never get paid for all these clip ads we do, all the P.R. we do, all the stuff we do. We mostly work for free.

[23:00:06]

PALMER: We really do love it.

STONE: We work for free for the few jobs we get to get paid for.

PALMER: Yes, it's so true.

STONE: My poor kids as I try to explain this to them. Yes.

PALMER: Yes, the glitz and glam, it can be quite deceiving.

STONE: But we're good at it. Yes.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIP: You can catch the full episode of that interview streaming now on the CNN app.

Thank you very much for watching "NewsNight." You can stream the show anytime with an all-access subscription in the CNN app or at cnn.com/watch. "Laura Coates Live" starts right now.