Return to Transcripts main page
CNN NewsNight with Abby Phillip
Trump Touts Another Pet Projects Amid War and Record Debt; U.S. Debt Hits $40 Trillion, More Than Doubling in a Decade; 13 Incumbents Lose Seats So Far, Breaking 78-Year-Record. Darlene Graham Not Informed on National Security Issues Prior to her Full Term in Senate; Ossoff Gets Backlash from MAGA over Natalie Harp and Trump. Aired 10- 11p ET
Aired August 19, 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, as America's debt hits $40 trillion, Donald Trump announces another pet project.
DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: I love construction.
It's a very strong stone.
It's called a flawless granite.
You know, grass has a life like humans have a life.
PHILLIP: Plus, mad as hell. As the number of incumbent losers hits a record, are Americans turning to the extremes for change?
Also, despite preaching about meritocracy, the right is pushing this candidate for a full Senate term I'm just going to be honest here. I'm not that informed on national security.
And while the left cheers Jon Ossoff for ticking off MAGA, Barack Obama's former adviser says he went too far.
Live at the table, Scott Jennings, Keith Boykin, Lydia Moynihan, Congressman Jared Moskowitz, and Dan Abrams.
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 United States has dug itself into a deep financial hole, and Donald Trump is insisting on keeping on digging. The national debt hit a record of $40 trillion. That is a milestone that we will have -- that will have significant consequences for us, for Americans, for decades to come. And while the nation has carried a significant amount of debt for a very long time, recent trends have economists sounding the alarm.
The size of the debt has grown considerably over the last decade. Interest payments are ballooning. The federal government spending is continuing to outpace the revenue that it collects to pay for its obligations, which now include a war in Iran, sweeping tax cuts enacted by Republicans in 2025. Just this year, the United States is now on track to borrow more than $2 trillion, with over a trillion in the last five months alone.
Now, remember back in 2016 when Donald Trump promised to eliminate the U.S. debt by the end of his second term? Well, today, his priorities appear elsewhere. Trump spent more than half an hour giving members of the press an impromptu tour of his construction projects over at the White House.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: Every stone is two degrees rounded.
It's called a flawless granite.
It's rated a million-year plus.
That means it has a million-year life.
It's a slope for the rain, but I felt it was too much slope.
The grass was in terrible shape.
Do you know grass has a life like humans have a life?
We put topsoil, brand-new earth on top.
That's a tapered pole, great. I'm very good at flagpoles. All of these letters are hand-carved and put into the black stone. The ballroom is so much a military component with the drones and the bomb shelters.
That goes down five storeys. Here, it goes down almost 65 feet.
This is a helipad at the highest level.
You look at the lettering, and you look at the joints, they're like flawless.
You look how fine that's cut. When you see it, you won't even believe it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: And before we open it up to the table here, I want to invite you, as always, at home, to join our debate. Go to cnn.com/abby. Weigh in there. We'll get to your comments throughout the show.
The president has been obsessed with his construction projects, Dan, and it is almost comical at this point, but the contrast between that focus and the real reality of this ballooning debt and the abandoned promise, not just to eliminate the debt, which nobody thought would ever happen, but even just a year ago, they were talking about cutting government spending. Nobody's talking about that anymore.
DAN ABRAMS, FOUNDER, MEDIAITE YOUTUBE: Right. Look, it is true that his obsession with these pet projects is ridiculous, right? I mean, you watch what we were just watching there, and it's almost laughable. But now let's bring it back to the debt, right?
The amount we're talking about there is not substantial enough to be directly connected to the debt. You can say message-wise, right, it's the wrong message to send. But when you're talking about the debt, we really got to talk about the Iran war, right? That's a huge, huge number that continues. You could even talk to some degree about the tariffs, right, the fact that we had to give back $166 billion.
Still --
PHILLIP: Well, I mean, that was money that wasn't -- didn't belong to the government in the first place.
ABRAMS: Well, look, you --
PHILLIP: But, I mean -- but, yes, it is about focus. It's also about -- it's not about message. It's also about focus. It's also about what is -- what are his priorities --
ABRAMS: This is clearly not -- it's not a priority for him.
[22:05:00]
There's no doubt it's not a priority for him.
But let's also recognize that it's true that whoever the party is who's not in power ends up focusing on the debt, right? I mean, when a president and an administration is in power, they don't want to talk about the debt as much, they want to borrow. The people on the outside want to talk about the debt. That happens with both sides.
With that said, you're right. He said in 2016 that they were going to be able to end the debt. It hasn't happened. Think about what happened with DOGE, right? That was supposed to save us, you know, trillions of dollars, right? And maybe it saved 200 billion, and the cuts were not very smart.
So, there's a lot of criticism to be had, but let's just make sure that we're focusing it on the right place when it comes to what are the actual and most important causes of the ballooning debt.
PHILLIP: Yes. Look, I totally agree. I mean, I just remember a year ago many people, including you and others at this table, would argue to me that what DOGE was doing was so important, that they were finding, you know, government contracts for $30 million and it was chipping away at our national debt. That wasn't true. But now we're on a spending spree for the president's vanity projects? SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I never said they were chipping away at the national debt. I've consistently said out here and everywhere else that the national debt will only be solved when both parties get serious about entitlement reform. That's number one.
Number two, DOGE did important work, which is shine light on things that were patently ridiculous. Number three, the federal government is smaller today than it has been since the 1960s, and as a portion of GDP, it's smaller probably since the turn of the last century.
The $40 trillion debt is a bipartisan disgrace, but Dan is exactly right. To connect it to the helipad, which is being paid for by Sikorsky, not by tax dollars, is patently ridiculous.
PHILLIP: Well, you know it's not just the helipad. It's also the ballroom.
JENNINGS: But it could be solved but it will take both parties.
PHILLIP: You know that it's also the ballroom, which he asked up for a billion dollars from taxpayers for.
JENNINGS: Yes, so?
PHILLIP: And it's also, to Dan's point, the war. There's a war in Iran that is costing a lot of money.
KEITH BOYKIN, FORMER CLINTON WHITE HOUSE AIDE: The one big beautiful bill that blew a hole in the deficit and created more debt for the federal government. The federal debt has increased $4 trillion since Donald Trump came in office. That's an enormous amount in a very short amount of time.
I hope if anything else, if nothing else, that this debacle proves once and for all, or debunks the myth, that Republicans are good for the economy. If you look at Donald Trump's record, he shows exactly the opposite. The debt is up. Inflation is up. Gas prices are up. Unemployment --
JENNINGS: Inflation's down, actually.
BOYKIN: No, inflation is up. Gas prices are --
JENNINGS: Inflation is down.
BOYKIN: Inflation is up. It was 3 percent when Joe Biden took office.
PHILLIP: Inflation is higher today than it was when Trump took office.
BOYKIN: That's higher than when he took office.
JENNINGS: To hear you two ignore the inflation rate during Biden versus --
BOYKIN: You just made a factual mistake.
JENNINGS: What was the highest rate during Biden?
BOYKIN: Inflation was 3 percent.
JENNINGS: What was the highest rate during Biden?
BOYKIN: I'm asking -- I'm speaking right now. I said, and I'm correct. Inflation was 3 percent when --
PHILLIP: I mean, listen.
JENNINGS: There was no inflation during Biden.
(CROSSTALKS)
BOYKIN: This is how Scott loves to deflect.
PHILLIP: Hold on, Keith. Hold on, Keith. Let me just settle this once and for all. We don't need to argue over things that are just facts.
BOYKIN: Factually wrong.
PHILLIP: Okay? Inflation was very high under Biden. But when Donald Trump came into office, it was lower than it is today.
JENNINGS: It was 3 percent. That's the end of that.
JENNINGS: So, you admit that it was -- it went up under Biden and it's lower now.
PHILLIP: Why are you arguing over things that don't need to be argued about? If the inflation rate when -- when Donald Trump took office was lower than what it was -- what it is today, that is what Keith is talking about. That's not something to argue about.
JENNINGS: For you guys to argue that inflation wasn't a problem --
(CROSSTALKS)
PHILLIP: Let's move on. Let's move on.
Congressman, you're in Congress. Republicans have blamed Democrats for never wanting to address spending. Is that true?
REP. JARED MOSKOWITZ (D-FL): So, let me say this. I agree that the debt is a bipartisan problem. We both did it. We both have added to the debt. And both of us don't want to fix it. And the only way it's going to get fixed, and I've put forward a bill and a resolution to form a joint committee that would put a bill on the floor, because you have to put a bill on the floor for an up or down vote, studies don't matter, which would raise revenue and do cuts.
Both sides are going to have to do both. We're not getting out of this problem just by cuts, and we're not getting out of this problem just by raising revenue. It has to be both. And until someone decides that we're going to do both, it's not going to happen.
Look, I'm a former emergency management director. We do proactive things. Congress doesn't do that. Congress does reactive things. And I'm really worried that as the de-dollarization continues and inflation gets worse, that it's going to take an emergency to get both parties to do it.
And this is something that regular people in their regular day life, as they can't afford groceries and they can't afford their rent, aren't thinking about the debt. But this is something that is going to dramatically change Americans' lives if we wake up one day and have rapid inflation. And then we -- and we teeter on a recession depression as China tries to push more de-dollarization, and then we can't borrow anymore.
[22:10:06]
PHILLIP: So, President Trump earlier today had some comments about the economy, and he lamented that interest rates were too high because the economy is doing well, in his view. Just listen to what he had to say.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: When our country does well, interest rates should go down. I mean, every time I hear our country's doing well, I say, oh, that's too bad, because they lift up interest rates. They should drop interest rates because it means we have a strong country, and it's all based on credit, meaning good credit, and we have the best credit. And we'd pay off the debt very easily and very quickly.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Sometimes I wonder if the president understands how economics work, and if he understands why interest rates are higher, which is not because, you know, they're trying to punish the American people for the economy doing well. It's in part to keep a lid on inflation.
LYDIA MOYNIHAN, CORRESPONDENT, NEW YORK POST: Yes. Well, just to clarify his comments, when he's saying he wants things to go bad, that's kind of a, a reference to a phrase on Wall Street, bad news is good news, and good news is bad news, because when there's slowing GDP growth, or whatnot, typically, that means you'll lower interest rates. So, sometimes the market can have funny reactions to various reports. So, obviously, he's been very clear from the get-go that he would like to see interest rates decline rapidly.
Look, you know, I'm just reminded of the last person to run on any sort of fiscal austerity or entitlement reform, which when you look at the federal budget, about 70 percent is the interest on the debt and entitlements. The only person to acknowledge that was Mitt Romney, and he got crucified because he said essentially 47 percent of people wouldn't vote for him because they were getting more from the government than they were contributing. He obviously lost dramatically, and after that it became clear that you simply can't run and win a federal election on reforming the budget.
But I will say, I mean, I think what Republicans are pushing and offering is sort of the Reaganomics and a pro-growth agenda, and at least unleashing capitalism, deregulating tax cuts that hopefully will grow the economy, and you juxtapose that with the DSA.
PHILLIP: But how has that worked in the last -- I mean, the president's been president for 18 months. They passed the tax cuts. They did that, right? GDP growth has slowed, debt has increased. I'm not seeing the economics working.
MOYNIHAN: I mean, I know you don't like it when I say the stock market is doing well, but there are certainly indicators that you can point to.
But I just want -- what I want -- the point I want to make though is when you actually --
PHILLIP: The stock market actually arguably did better in the last year of the Biden administration than it did in the first year of Trump's.
MOYNIHAN: Okay. Well, I guess it depends on how you look at the data. But I think if you look at the --
PHILLIP: I'm just seriously asking --
MOYNIHAN: When you look at the DSA, the alternative is the DSA basically -- Cato Institute just came out with a study that said if you implement all their policies, it's $200 trillion over the next ten years. So, you're looking at potentially a lot worse if you embrace the other side.
PHILLIP: Trump's economic policy has been effectively tax cuts, which Republicans love, a war, tariffs, which were largely ruled to be unconstitutional; and he has ignored and dismissed the idea that costs are going up for the American people.
So, at what point is he going to address any of this, whether it is the debt or the rising costs, just the kind of fiscal instability that we are in as a country? It just seems like nobody -- he doesn't really care. He's on the White House lawn talking about his helipad.
ABRAMS: Well, look, I think he certainly -- this goes back to image versus reality, right? I think he continues to make -- there's a reason he's unpopular right now, right? He's wildly unpopular, despite the fact that the president is claiming that, you know, he's very popular. We all know what the polls show. He's got a 30 -- low 30s percent now approval rating, and that's because of the things we're talking about. It's because he's not focusing on the issues that most Americans care about.
He still has an opportunity to change that, right? It's not that hard a pivot. Because if the president decides, I'm going to start focusing on these things, I'm going to start focusing on, you know, kitchen table issues, grocery prices, gas prices, and I'm going to seem like I really care about it, that could help. But I don't know that he's capable of doing that.
JENNINGS: Can I just -- I think that focus on things that are going right is a great idea for a midterm. Case in point, on Friday, numerous outlets reported that government data shows prescription drugs prices are falling faster than they have in 60 years. That's the kind of thing --
BOYKIN: That's in part to the Biden administration.
JENNINGS: That's the kind of thing that if you were running for office and you were in office and you were getting the credit and the blame for everything that's happening, you would actually be talking about nonstop. That's an example of where in a world that feels expensive, that's actually coming down.
[22:15:02]
That's a good thing.
BOYKIN: You can't take credit for that. When the Joe Biden policies --
JENNINGS: Sure we can. I just did.
BOYKIN: Joe Biden's policies -- yes, you can, but you'd be lying, because Joe Biden's policies contributed to the --
JENNINGS: Who's the president? You blame him for everything. You can't get him all the credit?
BOYKIN: Joe Biden's Inflation Reduction Act allowed Medicare to negotiate lower drug prices.
JENNINGS: I thought we were memory holing Biden.
BOYKIN: No.
JENNINGS: You just did on inflation.
BOYKIN: You choose selectively when you want to interrupt me because you don't want to like -- you don't want to like to hear what I have to say because you know I'm right.
JENNINGS: I don't actually. You're actually wrong.
BOYKIN: Because you know I'm right.
MOSKOWITZ: Yes. But here's what I'll say. I'm astounded at the strategy of the Trump administration and Republicans right now. Because what they're doing, we tried. We tried to tell people the economy was great, everything's fine, Bidenomics, right? But people felt the economy was not doing well, and we lost, okay? Republicans are not addressing it. What they're trying to do is they're trying to say, this is great. That is great, right? Affordability is a hoax, okay? He still says that. You can't tell people how to feel when they go home and they pay their bills and they feel they have no money to live, to be an American. And, look, we're waiting. He's got ten weeks before the midterm. We're waiting for him to do this.
Some people are visual learners, okay? I do these committees, okay? And I see people say things, and then some people bring visual props. Half of America is a visual learner. They see the ballroom, and they see the arch, and they see these things, and they maybe they like the project a little bit, Scott, but they see the visuals as he's just not focused on me, okay?
And that's where the president has missed -- again, what I think the mistake of the Democrats, don't tell people that it's -- everything's fine when it isn't fine. They know better.
PHILLIP: All right. A quick reminder for you at home, right after the show tonight, you can join me for an exclusive subscriber-only conversation. We're going to answer your questions directly from you live. All you have to do is sign in to your CNN All Access account, and, yes, if you've got a cable subscription, you are eligible to do that. Again, that's right after the show tonight, 11:00 P.M. Eastern.
But next for us right now, incumbents are losing at a record pace in these primaries, and socialists are winning at a stunning pace. What's behind all of that?
Plus, is Darline Graham's gaffe during her debate disqualifying, especially for a party that preaches meritocracy? We'll debate.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:20:00]
PHILLIP: Tonight, a changing of the guard perhaps? Americans' disappointment in Congress has been on full display in this primary season, and that outrage has been bipartisan. Now, so far, at least 13 incumbent lawmakers have been ousted. 11 of them are in the House, which is the most in a non-redistricting year since 1948.
And while Democrats make up the majority of those losses, President Trump isn't faring well either. Voters have rejected at least ten of the candidates that he's endorsed for Congress or for statewide office, and that's already more than 2018, 2020, and 2024 combined.
On the other side of the aisle, Democratic socialists notched another surprising victory in Florida. State lawmaker Angie Nixon, who joined the Democratic Socialists of America just a few weeks ago, won the Senate primary in that state. She beat the establishment candidate, despite being outspent 16 to 1.
Now, Congressman Moskowitz, you won your primary, so --
MOSKOWITZ: Yes, happy to see my face not on that screen.
PHILLIP: Congrats to you. You're not on that screen. But the -- I mean, I think the races in Florida were both sides of the aisle. We saw some of the Trump candidates lose. We also saw this Angie Nixon moment, and she actually was asked about your comments about her and her affiliation with the DSA tonight on CNN, and here's what she said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ANGIE NIXON (D), FLORIDA SENATE CANDIDATE: And don't get me wrong, every organization that I am a part of, I don't agree 100 percent with all the things that they do. I want to be clear, I have been a Democratic Party member my entire adult life, and I don't agree with all the things that the Democratic Party agrees with, particularly those that accept corporate PAC money.
Folks are trying to basically fear-monger a little bit, but we really need to be unifying, right?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: I mean, she's a state rep. She's a Democrat. The DSA thing is a fairly recent thing. She says she also joined, -- became a lifetime member of the NAACP, the Working Families Party. Is it an oversimplification that this is about socialists winning?
MOSKOWITZ: Well, look, let me first say I know Angie obviously, because she's currently serving in Tallahassee, and she outworked Vindman. She deserves credit. She's from Florida, Vindman is not. And she just flat out outworked him and built a coalition, by the way, not really a DSA coalition, right? She built a coalition with African Americans. She built a coalition from people from low income, so not like what you see the DSA doing in other states, and so she deserves credit for that.
That being said, look, my, my grandparents, okay, you know, escaped the Holocaust. My grandmother was part of the Kindertransport. America saved my family's life, took us in. Like this country gave us all we have. I got people in my district that escaped socialism, right, were part of the boat lift from Cuba.
And so when they see the DSA just the other day, right, embrace 100 years of Fidel Castro, okay, as a celebratory thing, and they see, you know, people like Hasan Piker talk about how Soviet Union should have won the Civil War, and that he's not patriotic, and that he dresses up as Mao, who, you know, killed 50 million people, we deserve 9/11.
[22:25:12]
Look, Democrats have a right to be angry. We lost the election. We lost every swing state, right? We lost the popular vote, and they don't like how what happened when Joe Biden, you know, got out of the race and Kamala came in. They blame us for that, and they're right.
But people just want normalcy. They look at Donald Trump yesterday or two days ago talking about, hey, we're going to stop the exercises with South Korea. We're going to be good friends with Kim Jong-un.
PHILLIP: Do they want normalcy, or do they want to throw the bums out? I think that's really the question. Because I guess I just -- you know, I mean, when you see this kind of anti-establishment moment that we seem to be in, it does seem like what they're not asking for is like let's go back to the way, the good old past, they're saying, let's do something completely different. I mean, that's what it seems like the DSA thing is all about.
MOSKOWITZ: Getting rid of the -- hold on. A platform with getting rid of the Senate is different. A platform with no jails is different.
PHILLIP: Listen, this is not an endorsement, just a description of what seems to be happening.
BOYKIN: I think you're overstating what the --
MOSKOWITZ: I'm just reading their platform.
BOYKIN: Well, no, but, I mean, there's a lot of things that in people's party platforms that people don't agree with.
I think you're overstating what the DSA candidates are representing and understating or maybe misrepresenting, even misreading the room, about what the party voters are demanding.
I'm not a member of Congress, but I'm in touch with Democrats all over the country, and, well, one thing I hear consistently is that they don't feel like you're doing enough. Not you in particular, Congressman, but they don't feel like the party is doing enough. They don't feel like the party is fighting enough against Donald Trump. They don't feel like the party is offering any change.
ABRAMS: But is the way to fight against Donald Trump to lose in the general election?
BOYKIN: No, and I'm --
ABRAMS: I mean, like --
BOYKIN: but, you know, this is the same -- the Democratic Party is going through the same sort of growing pains that the Republican Party went through ten years ago with Donald Trump. Because everybody thought, we're going to nominate Donald Trump, and we're going to lose, because he's such an outlandish candidate. And you know what happened? That there were so many people on the right who were aligned with Donald Trump all along in the Republican Party who were waiting for somebody to come and speak to them, and Donald Trump gave them their voice. Democrats on the left are feeling the same way. And that's why they that's why they're relating to Zohran Mamdani in New York City.
ABRAMS: It's about feelings, right?
BOYKIN: And, no, it's not just about feelings.
ABRAMS: You used the word feelings.
BOYKIN: Not just about feelings -- I used the word, but I didn't mean it for you I didn't mean for you to dismiss it in the way that I used it. I used it because I'm saying that the people, those feelings are real. People want -- they want change, Dan.
ABRAMS: They do.
BOYKIN: They don't want the same thing.
ABRAMS: But that doesn't mean they're but you're not going to get change if you lose the election.
BOYKIN: Yes, I know. But you're making an assumption that they're going to lose.
ABRAMS: It's true. I do not know.
BOYKIN: And we don't know that.
ABRAMS: I do not know.
BOYKIN: We don't know until --
ABRAMS: I do not know. I do not know.
BOYKIN: And lucky we're saying, you know, we've lost so many other races. Why not try something different?
PHILLIP: Dan --
ABRAMS: Yes.
PHILLIP: To Keith's point, Dan a lot of people thought Zohran Mamdani was bound to lose, and then when you look at where his standing is --
ABRAMS: No. No one thought he was going to lose.
PHILLIP: I mean -- well, no. I'm saying as a candidate --
ABRAMS: You mean in the primary?
PHILLIP: They thought that Mamdani's politics would not work in the city because it was --
ABRAMS: We don't know if they're working in the city or --
PHILLIP: No. Listen, I'm just saying, he was the underdog candidate. He came out of nowhere.
ABRAMS: Right.
PHILLIP: He had what was considered to be extreme policies.
ABRAMS: But that's the point. You can win the primary.
PHILLIP: Now, his approval rating is at 69 percent in New York City. That is like -- that's a ridiculous number.
MOSKOWITZ: Okay. But hold on, that's fine. The DSA --
PHILLIP: So --
MOSKOWITZ: Hold on. The DSA targeted me in a red seat I took a bullet for the Democrats, moved seats to run in a Republican seat. In R3, Trump won it by nine, and the DSA spent a million dollars, put their whole apparatus to take me out. What was that about? Is that about winning the general? Is that about making Hakeem Jeffries the speaker of the House?
BOYKIN: The DSA is not focused on winning the general election for you.
MOSKOWITZ: Oh, that's right. They're not focused on winning.
BOYKIN: But I'm not arguing with you about this point.
MOSKOWITZ: We totally agree the DSA is not focused on winning.
BOYKIN: But wait. No, that's not what I want to say. The DSA is not focused on winning elections for the Democratic Party, I'll give you that. What they are focused on is changing the party and moving an agenda within the party, and sometimes that means taking out people --
JENNINGS: And specifically with Jared, what's the agenda?
BOYKIN: And sometimes that means taking out people who they disagree with. And that's the point.
JENNINGS: Let me ask a question. Specifically with Jared, specifically with Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who they did the same thing to, what is the agenda that they want to move?
BOYKIN: They're two different issues.
JENNINGS: Just admit it. Just admit what it is.
BOYKIN: No. With Jared the issue I think is Israel, and with Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the issue is that she represents, she's representing a black district, a historically black district, and there were four black candidates --
JENNINGS: So, let me get this right.
(CROSSTALKS)
BOYKIN: No, there were four black -- she won. She won the election.
MOSKOWITZ: Hold on. So, let me get this right. I prosecuted the case against Kristi Noem for her to be removed.
BOYKIN: Yes.
MOSKOWITZ: I prosecuted the case against Pam Bondi to be removed, okay?
BOYKIN: I get that.
MOSKOWITZ: Hold on. And yet my district will be one of those districts that decide whether Hakeem Jeffries, the first black speaker in American history, gets to be speaker. But because of Israel, they're willing to give up winning the House.
[22:30:02]
BOYKIN: Well, first of all, you're talking about a segment within the party. I don't represent the DSA.
MOSKOWITZ: I know you don't.
BOYKIN: I'm just telling you.
MOSKOWITZ: You seem to be their representative.
BOYKIN: I feel like somebody should be because I think that the fact that they keep winning elections across the country should tell us something about the fact that they're winning in certain places and we should start paying attention to certain stuff just because we're missing it.
PHILLIP: I agree with that for just a second because I also think that what we're talking about where you have these insurgent sort of ancillary groups in a political party, you know, back in the day it was the Tea Party, and you could argue even that Donald Trump himself was the personification of that.
That is a thing that happens. They challenge the party even in ways that might seem self-defeating. I mean, I remember when Donald Trump ran on a literal Muslim ban, okay, and that was viewed as extreme by most people.
When Donald Trump was running on all sorts of things that the Republican, even tariffs.
Tariffs were not a Republican platform. And so, and now Republicans are all in on those messages. So you can't really tell me that the parties are going to, or the voters inherently reject messages just because they are viewed as extreme.
Donald Trump has been president two times and he ran on pretty extreme platforms in both elections.
SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, FORMER AIDE TO PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH AND RADIO HOST, "THE SCOTT JENNINGS SHOW" ON SRN: I disagree. I think he ran on things that were a combination of normal Republican stuff and then co-opting what had been traditional Democratic positions.
Tariffs were traditionally Labor Democrats. That's what they wanted. And by the way, a bunch of people who voted for Bill Clinton wound up voting for Donald Trump and now they're Republicans.
PHILLIP: But they're not Republican positions. JENNINGS: They are. Well, they are.
PHILLIP: They are now. That is exactly my point.
JENNINGS: And he has changed.
PHILLIP: And then let's add to that. You were talking about fleeing oppression.
Donald Trump literally, a couple days ago, was praising Kim Jong-un. So where's the outrage on that?
MOSKOWITZ: Which, by the way, I got to be honest, it's tough to keep a list, of the things that I've seen in the last six months, that tweet about South Korea and Kim Jong-un, okay, that was the most outrageous thing. And if that had come from the DSA, the outrage would have been overwhelming.
PHILLIP: Listen, I'm not trying to suggest that all of that is great. I'm just, all I'm saying is, what are the American people going to accept? And it seems like they actually have the capacity to accept some things that they don't fully agree with if they're getting other things, especially on the economic front.
And that's what Donald Trump learned. That's what he ran on. That's why he succeeded in our politics.
JENNINGS: I think some of the people you put on, the incumbents that lost, they deserve to lose. Thomas Massie in Kentucky deserved to lose, Corey Mills in Florida deserved to lose, Andy Ogles in Tennessee, I think, was kind of lazy.
Sometimes incumbents lose, not because of larger forces, but because they suck. And they suck at campaigning, and they just are lazy. Whatever.
Some of these people deserve to lose. Some of them get thrown out by larger forces. I don't think you can generalize it to everybody.
But in an environment like this where there is volatility on that, we agree you cannot afford to take anything for granted. And that's some of these people did.
DAN ABRAMS FOUNDER, MEDIAITE YOUTUBE, AND HOST, SIRIUSXM'S "THE DAN ABRAMS SHOW, WHERE POLITICS MEETS THE LAW": But I think the most important point is that someone like Nixon is winning because she is campaigning about something, right? Specifically, here's how I'm going to change things, right?
PHILLIP: He's putting something on the table.
ABRAMS: Right. Vindman is basically campaigning against Donald Trump, right? He's the guy, he's the anti-Trump guy.
And I think one thing we are learning, particularly with Democrats, is just saying, I'm against Trump, isn't enough. And this goes to your point about you got to have something to say.
And that's why, in some of these cases, the far-left is winning because they definitely have something to say. And it's resonating with Democrats. That doesn't mean they're going to win elections, when it comes to the general elections, but it sure means they can win primaries.
MOSKOWITZ: Well, they have an economic message. Healthcare is too expensive, right? Groceries are too expensive. It is a populist movement.
PHILLIP: And I would argue, we can't say, sitting here today, that they're going to win the general election. We don't really know.
I'm not an expert in Florida politics, but all I'm saying is that when you're in an environment in which voters are infuriated about one thing, which is the economy, and you have candidates who are speaking about those things, you can't rule it out.
ABRAMS: But if Democrats lose Michigan, the Senate race, there has to be a reckoning. There has to be a looking back.
PHILLIP: And trust me, there will certainly be a reckoning.
BOYKIN: Let's not make assumptions about what's going to happen. I just say one thing.
I remember, I was on CNN, I think on Jake Tapper's show that you were hosting that day, or one of those shows, where we were talking about Darializa Avila Chevalier, the candidate who ran against Adriano Espaillat.
I had no idea she was going to win. I lived in Harlem, and she won. She pulled that race out, even though it was a primary.
[22:35:02]
It shows to me that you cannot predict what people will do, because we are in a throw-the-bums-out moment, and people are mad as hell.
PHILLIP: All right. Next for us, Senate candidate Darlene Graham had a moment on the debate stage last night, just not the kind that her campaign would have hoped for. So is her gaffe disqualifying? We'll debate that next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:40:02]
PHILLIP: Darlene Graham is facing questions about whether she's got the chops to fill the Senate seat of her late brother, Lindsey Graham, after she made this flub on the debate stage last night.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GRETA VAN SUSTEREN, NEWSMAX ANCHOR: Are Taiwan and the South China Sea national security issues for the United States, and if so, why or how?
SEN. DARLENE GRAHAM (R-SC), SENATORIAL CANDIDATE: I'm just going to be honest here.
I'm not that informed on national security, but I do support the military. My brother was in the Air Force for 33 years, so I will do everything I can to support the military. My dad was in the Army.
I'm not a polished politician up here. National security is not my thing, not my area of expertise, but I do support the military.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: President Trump appointed Graham to the role after her brother's death last month. Even though she hasn't held elected office before, she's now seeking a full six-year term and will face Congressman Ralph Norman in a special primary runoff next week. So here's how he responded to that gaffe.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. RALPH NORMAN (R-SC), SENATORIAL CANDIDATE: She's running for the United States Senate, it's a six-year term. You need to get fully versed in what issues you're going to be dealing with. This isn't a get trained on the job.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Lydia, what's up with that?
This is the United States Senate. It's not a nepo-baby-like or whatever place. It's supposed to be about meritocracy, it's supposed to be about your ability to actually do the job.
LYDIA MOYNIHAN, CORRESPONDENT, "NEW YORK POST": What I will say is that may be the most honest thing that anybody has ever said in politics. This isn't Hollywood, this isn't a monarchy. Being a nepo- baby or having a connection is not enough to get you into Congress, which is why I think it's good that there is a primary.
That's always the solution to let voters choose. It's definitely a little surprising that given she is Lindsey Graham's sister, I guess they never talked about these things. I don't know, it's a bit odd --
PHILLIP: I mean, she's right. She's a regular person, but that doesn't mean she needs to be at a Senate seat.
MOYNIHAN: I don't think most Republicans anticipated that she would be more than a placeholder. But I think the voters are obviously well informed about what they're signing up for at this point.
ABRAMS: When I first saw it, I thought there's something charming about the fact that she's being so honest about it. And then I thought to myself, okay, imagine if a DSA candidate had said the same thing in an answer. The media would be going crazy for it as well.
So all I think about is we just got to make sure we're applying the same standard to her that we would apply to somebody else.
PHILLIP: To that very point, I actually would argue that this answer from AOC, it started off extremely rough, but she ended up with some kind of answer. But here's how Trump responded to AOC flubbing an answer about Taiwan. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Her performance was horrible. I was surprised actually, I didn't know she was stupid. She had no idea, I don't think she knew what Taiwan was. That was the problem.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: He called her stupid. But Darlene Graham is his candidate for the Senate.
JENNINGS: Yes, it was a rough moment. Now, in fairness to Darlene Graham, she's been in politics for a month, AOC's been around for a few years.
But look, that's no excuse. You've been appointed and you decided to run for the full term. You've got to do your debate prep and be prepared for questions.
Now, interestingly, since we've been on the air, she's been doing some media tonight. And to Lydia's point, here's what her comment is.
I'm not a politician, I don't speak politician, I was just honest and I think that's a foreign concept. So she's kind of using that, hey, I'm just being honest with you. And she's also pivoting back to economic issues and other things that people might care about.
That's all you can do when you have a moment like this in a campaign is try to pivot back into something better. In a Republican primary, there are foreign policy-focused voters at a higher proportion than you would have, I think, in the normal general electorate. So it'll sting.
PHILLIP: She's also trying to take the seat of one of the most outspoken foreign policy lawmakers in the last 30 years.
JENNINGS: Whether people are looking for a one-for-one replacement to a foreign policy senator or not, I don't know. But if I were in Ralph Norman's shoes, her opponent, I'd be all over.
BOYKIN: A month ago, that answer that you just read might have sailed. She's now a United States senator. She's not just running for Senate, she has been appointed as a United States senator.
She currently holds a job, one of only 100 people in the country who are able to vote on whether or not treaties get approved and members of the President's cabinet are approved as well. That is an important responsibility that comes with the due diligence that the Republicans should have done in order to nominate her in the first place. But to me, this is a reflection of the hypocrisy of their lie about
meritocracy, the idea that they actually cared about merit. We saw this going back to Sarah Palin to the President.
[22:45:05]
They continue to promote unqualified, incompetent candidates from the Republican Party, and they stuff them down our throats. And then they complain about black people and other women who happen to be progressive and say that we're not qualified. It's a lie, and they never cared about meritocracy in the first place from Donald Trump on down.
PHILLIP: That's the last word. Next for us, Jon Ossoff's comments about Trump's aide, Natalie Harp, are still making waves, but not all Democrats are thrilled about it.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:50:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PHILLIP: Georgia Senator Jon Ossoff is facing fresh backlash for a comment that he made that really got under MAGA's skin this week.
You remember, Ossoff said that President Trump would rather travel with his close personal aide, Natalie Harp, than execute his job as commander-in-chief. But some on the left cheer, and others think it was a step too far.
For example, Barack Obama's former adviser and our colleague here, David Axelrod, who said those two words with Natalie seemed gratuitous and unnecessary. He added that they distracted and detracted from the power of the message.
Keith, is Axelrod onto something?
BOYKIN: Of course not. I don't agree with him.
Yes, you could say that the words were gratuitous and unnecessary. I'll agree with him on that.
But did it distract? No, because we're talking now about Jon Ossoff's race, and it allows us to talk about the fact that Jon Ossoff was making the larger point that Donald Trump, as we mentioned before, is not focused on any of the issues that the American people are concerned about.
He's focused on everything else, including his personal comfort on Air Force One, or whatever the Air Force One happens to be on, rather than focusing on jobs and affordability and healthcare and things that the American people want.
ABRAMS: And look, if you're going to argue that it's sexist, which is the big argument, if you're going to take that position, you better also be criticizing the way Donald Trump talks about women's appearances and looks on a regular basis, right? So I'm happy for someone to say, look, I think it was inappropriate, I think it was sexist, but you better also be saying that about Donald Trump if I'm even going to take you seriously.
PHILLIP: Scott?
JENNINGS: I expect Ossoff to criticize Donald Trump. I expect every Democrat running for president to criticize Donald Trump. What I thought was appalling about this is that Harp is not a public figure.
She's not a household name, nobody knows who she is, and when he injected her into this, he knew what he was doing, which is punching down on someone who's effectively defenseless.
ABRAMS: Doesn't Donald Trump do that all the time?
MOSKOWITZ: He's doing it right now while we're here. There are no rules anymore.
Donald Trump broke all the rules. Rob Reiner dies, Donald Trump cheers his death. There are no rules anymore.
There are no rules anymore. You might not like it. Donald Trump is the king of trolls.
What I find amazing is that the best trolls can't take incoming. I don't care who they are.
JENNINGS: Is she a troll?
MOSKOWITZ: No, but Trump is. He didn't insult Trump. But the right female can't defend herself.
BOYKIN: She's a White House staff member.
JENNINGS: It's not the right, and it's not Trump. It's a single defenseless woman.
MOSKOWITZ: She's not defenseless.
BOYKIN: Wait a minute, shame on us.
MOSKOWITZ: Kaitlan Collins asks a real question, and Trump demeans her every single solitary day.
PHILLIP: Let me go ahead and just play it, because there's just such a long history of this. Trump punching down, insulting women. Let's just play it.
BOYKIN: God, never complaining about it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNKNOWN: You've called women you don't like fat pigs, dogs, slobs, and disgusting animals. Your Twitter account has several -- TRUMP: Only Rosie O'Donnell.
HILLARY CLINTON, THEN-VICE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: But what we want to do is to replenish the Social Security Trust Fund.
TRUMP: You are the worst reporter. CNN has no ratings because of people like you.
You know, she's a young woman, I don't think I've ever seen you smile. I've known you for 10 years.
I don't think I've ever seen a smile on your face.
KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, I'm asking you about survivors of Jeffrey Epstein.
REPORTER: If there's nothing incriminating the files, sir, why not--
TRUMP: Quiet, piggy.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Quiet, piggy. I mean, Scott. Dan's question was pretty straightforward. If you're going to be outraged over traveling on a plane with Natalie, are you going to be outraged over all those things?
JENNINGS: I do not believe in demeaning women in any way. Number one.
Number two. So was not --
PHILLIP: So did the President demean women, and was that unacceptable?
JENNINGS: The issue I have with this is --
BOYKIN: Are you outraged or not about that? Are you outraged?
JENNINGS: The issue I have with this is Natalie Harp is not a public figure.
BOYKIN: Nor is Ruby Freeman or Shane Moss.
JENNINGS: She has no ability --
BOYKIN: You are not answering the question. You are avoiding the question again, Scott. You continuously distract --
Devoid, avoid.
JENNINGS: By the way, you have no idea how loud this is.
BOYKIN: You have no idea how dishonest you are.
PHILLIP: It has nothing to do with Natalie. She is being defenseless.
BOYKIN: You are being -- [22:55:01]
PHILLIP: First of all, just to be clear.
Hold on a second, Keith. Just to be clear.
Just to be clear, I think the idea of continually describing a 35- year-old woman as somebody who has no agency and is defenseless and is just a victim, that is kind of demeaning.
But the second thing is, Scott, you are so concerned about that. You have not expressed any concern over Trump's repeated demeaning of all kinds of other women who are just simply doing their jobs.
BOYKIN: Including our host. He attacked our host here.
JENNINGS: I'm disappointed you don't remember this, but during the President's first term, you actually got into it with him on the South Lawn, and we did a show together, and I said, I don't think that's good.
And you don't remember. The fact that you won't defend Harp here is crazy.
PHILLIP: Hold on a second. That's why I asked you this, Scott, because you easily could have --
JENNINGS: It's now in more decibels.
BOYKIN: I know you're playing to your audience here, but, Scott --
JENNINGS: Personal space?
PHILLIP: Hold on, Scott, you easily could have said in this very same way that I denounce what Jon Ossoff said, I also denounce all the things that Donald Trump has said. You didn't say that.
JENNINGS: I literally just said, I don't believe in demeaning women.
PHILLIP: I will just say that you are not holding him to the same standard that you hold Jon Ossoff. You have a lot to say about Jon Ossoff, and very little to say about Donald Trump.
He was treatment of women.
BOYKIN: What about Ruby Freeman?
JENNINGS: He deserves it.
PHILLIP: The President of the United States does that on a regular basis to women.
BOYKIN: Government workers, and Donald Trump attacked them. What did you say about that, Scott? What did you say about that, Scott?
PHILLIP: Nobody is saying, first of all, that she deserves anything. JENNINGS: You seem to be defending him.
PHILLIP: The only thing that we are saying is that if you're going to be mad at Jon Ossoff over saying the President likes to travel with her, you should be mad about the President calling a reporter doing her job picky.
BOYKIN: Be consistent, Scott.
PHILLIP: That's a pretty simple thing. Not controversial, it's pretty simple.
JENNINGS: It's what it takes to be a Democrat. Drag defenseless women through the mud.
BOYKIN: You are not the victim here. You are the perpetrator of Donald Trump's fraud on the American people.
PHILLIP: I don't know why we have to insist on -- I don't know why we have to insist on describing a 35-year-old woman. She's a government employee, as a defenseless woman.
BOYKIN: Nor did Ruby Freeman or Shane Moss. She, like everybody else, is doing their job. She doesn't deserve to be attacked.
JENNINGS: If I got a list, Jared, of every female who worked in your office and read their first names and said gee whiz, Jared, why are you spending so much time with that lady? You'd be pissed right now.
Hold on. You'd be pissed.
MOSKOWITZ: Do I think what happened with the Natalie thing is that how we should talk? No, I don't think that's how politics should be. But what you should understand is we talk like that now because of Trump.
BOYKIN: Donald Trump. Thank you. Case closed, end of story.
PHILLIP: Do you disagree with that?
JENNINGS: No. And the American people know it.
I believe you shouldn't demean women and I don't think defenseless women and politicians should be drugged to the moon.
BOYKIN: Unless Donald Trump does it. Be consistent, Scott Jennings. The American people see your inconsistency.
PHILLIP: President Trump, I think --
JENNINGS: Not a negative word to cross off. What do you think?
BOYKIN: Why are you trying to change the subject?
JENNINGS: I'm curious.
PHILLIP: Honestly, Scott, I think that if your position is that he was making it innuendo, I don't think it's good to make innuendo. But I also think it is worse to actually use insults to call women stupid, to call them piggy, to say that they are fat, whatever it is. Those things, actual, straight up, direct insults at professional women doing their jobs, I think most people think that's actually worse.
JENNINGS: I think it's -- I said I don't believe in demeaning women. I don't know what your problem is. Didn't you work for Bill Clinton? We know how Democrats treat women.
BOYKIN: Do I defend Bill Clinton? I have not defended him.
Scott Jennings is the master of deflection in the American people. He changed the subject here from Donald Trump to Bill Clinton because he doesn't want to talk about Donald Trump. He doesn't want to criticize his boss, Donald Trump.
JENNINGS: It's how Democrats think of women in politics.
BOYKIN: He's so good at changing the subject, but he will not criticize his good friend, Donald Trump.
PHILLIP: Jon Ossoff has really done a great job of getting a lot of attention this week and stirring things up at the White House and that's one of the --
[23:00:00]
Well, look, I mean, in Donald Trump's world, it kind of is a little bit of a disorder.
BOYKIN: He's right about Donald Trump then too.
PHILLIP: All right. A quick reminder for you.
In just a couple of minutes, you're going to join us for an exclusive subscriber-only conversation. We're going to be answering more questions from you directly. You have to sign into your CNN All Access account online and if you have a cable subscription, you are totally eligible to do that.
In the meantime, thank you for watching "NewsNight." "Laura Coates Live" starts right now.
