Return to Transcripts main page

Don Lemon Tonight

President Trump Sides With Saudis As Outrage Grows Over Jamal Khashoggi's Disappearance; President Trump Goes On Fox For Second Time In A Week; How Fox Influences Trump; CNN Forecasts Dems Gaining Majority in House, Republicans Maintaining Majority in Senate; "Proud Boys" and the Republican Party. Aired 11-12a ET

Aired October 16, 2018 - 23:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[23:00:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DON LEMON, CNN HOST: This is CNN TONIGHT. I am Don Lemon. President Trump, well, ignoring world outrage. In sighting with the present regime in Saudi Arabia or what happen to Jamal Khashoggi. The President is trying to claim that the Saudis are being judged guilty until proven innocence. Well, here is some of the evidence. OK?

Two weeks after Khashoggi entered the Saudi consulate in Istanbul and never to be been seen again. The inside of the consulate was clean and freshly painted before investigators got inside last night. Turkish officials tells CNN, Khashoggi's body was cut in pieces after he was killed. Turkey has provided CNN with passports scans of seven men they suspect were part of the alleged Saudi hit squad.

The scans made on the day Khashoggi disappeared. The New York Times reports one of the suspects was a frequent companion of the crown prince and three others linked to his security details. President Trump has responded so far by dispatching his Secretary of State to meet with the Saudis royal smiling side by side. While the world waits and waits for the truth about Jamal Khashoggi.

Let's bring in now former Congressman Charlie Dent, also Juliette Kayyem, and Ryan Lizza. Good evening to all.

Juliette, new and really disturbing graphic details are coming in quickly tonight and they do not support the president side that maybe that this could had been some rouge killers. What is your assessment in what we are hearing from Saudi Arabia and the president?

JULIETTE KAYYEM, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: So I want to say something radical here which is essentially that Trump does not believe that the Saudis are innocent. And this is -- all we are seeing is the results of Trump transactional approach to Saudi Arabia and to all issues related to money. Which is no feelings and no ideal of human rights matter. I don't think Trump is an idiot. I don't think he buys the story. He knows it is not true, but he is essentially trying to sell all of us, right?

Some narrative that possibly we or he can buy so that he can move forward with his transactional national security. What is that? That is the -- according to him, he wants to keep the arms deal going. According to many others, it had something to do with the amount of money that the Saudis are spending supporting both the Trump and Kushner's empire. And so, you know, I don't believe that Trump believes it. I mean, I think he actually -- it is just playing all of us. I just honestly do.

LEMON: Yes. Ryan, so gain, here is what the President is saying to the Associated Press. He said, here we go again with you know, you are guilty until proven innocent, I don't like that. We just went through this with Justice Kavanaugh and he was innocent all the way as far as I am concerned. I mean, this is not a he said she said scenario here. Yet that is what he is trying to turn it into.

RYAN LIZZA, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, leave it to Trump to take an important principle innocent until proven guilty and apply it to a case that just has absolutely nothing to do with that important principle in American jurisprudence. I find it completely perplexing and bizarre that Trump is defending the Saudis here and they're basically, you know, three main explanations for what he is doing.

And one is what he said right, that this is just the ultra-realist foreign policy and we need the Saudis to, you know, implement his Middle East policy and to sell weapons to and Trump has -- we already know he has no interests in championing human rights and democracy abroad, right. The leaders he respects are all autocrats and this is just the latest example of his genuine view on foreign policy. That would be bad enough if it was the explanation.

Another explanation that people have raised is there are some kinds of financial links to the Saudis that causes him to be overly differential to them and of course, he did not liquidate all of his assets to whoever Presidents do, there is always going to be that question when he, you know, fronts for someone who has financial relationships with now or in the past.

The third thing is that I think has not gotten enough attention is did the United States and including the President know anything about this either ahead of time or immediately after it happened?

[23:05:03] And I think that is, you know, a question that needs to be asked and then we are talking about a scandal that is far, far worse than what is in front of us right now.

LEMON: Well, let's talk a little bit more about that, because Charlie, David Ignatius over "The Washington Post" has some new reporting tonight and here is what he writes, he said, Jared Kushner, President Trump's son in law and adviser, urged MBS last week to organize an investigation that could identify the culprit responsible for Khashoggi's death. Two sources told me, the next day, after speaking with the Saudi King, the president said, he thought rouge killers within Saudi Arabia's government may have been responsible seemingly telegraphing a fall guy strategy. How significant is this new detail about Jared Kushner?

CHARLIE DENT (R), FORMER U.S. REPRESENTATIVE, PENNSYLVANIA: Well, I can't speak to how significant that point is. Well, I will tell you this, the Saudis had made various missteps in foreign policies in recent years. Does anybody remember the arrest of the Lebanese Prime Minister Hariri in Saudi Arabia? You know, this feud with Carter, the adventure in Yemen, and now the Khashoggi apparent murder. So they have made some very serious missteps. I have to think these were not just rogue operator, but this were directed actions.

Look, let's face it. The relationship between the United States and Saudi Arabia, is transactional and it is not based on share values, we certainly don't share their values on women's rights or religious liberty as an example. There has always been a deal, you know, we kept oil lanes, the sea lanes open and they provided the oil and there is not a lot of good alternatives. This relationship is going to be rebalanced once again. Remember under President Obama, the Zunis of that region and the gulf felt that Obama turned his back on them and that we are turning towards Iran.

Trump comes in and he tries to correct the situation, but he over corrects. Now here we are, we have to rebalance once again based on this very serious situation that we are confronting. But there is not going to be a divorce between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia in my view.

LEMON: Juliette, do you think that Jared's involvement here is problematic?

KAYYEM: Yes, that is because it is always had been problematic. I mean, look, we don't have ambassadors in Saudi Arabia, we don't have one. He is always been the point person for the crown prince. The king has been the point person with Donald Trump. And you know, it is sort of strategy out of Jared Kushner you know, ideals of the Middle East which sort of favor Saudi Arabia and Israel, of course, and disfavor Iran.

So, if you think he is an expert on real politics in the Middle East then it is fine. Most of us think he is in over his head. And what the problem is with Jared Kushner and I think it is true if Donald Trump is. They never think about tomorrow. So I agree with Charlie that this is as transactional relationship. You know, after 9/11, very, very difficult times between the two countries. And we sort of, you know, we -- if they helped us with counter terrorism, we are not going to say anything much about their human rights abuses. That was sort of the deal that was struck.

Now Saudi Arabia knowing that we have sort of changed the rules of engagement under Donald Trump keeps pushing the envelope. Right? So what are we getting out of it? It is hard to know at this stage. But what I do know, and just for everyone to remember, all across the world, law enforcement and intelligence agents are telling people who comes in and knows secrets of their country, who are generals in their country, they are giving us information. And for that information, we are telling them they will be safe from their country.

And now I am telling you not a single law enforcement intelligence agencies can say that the White House and the United States will protect you because what happened to essentially our own citizens. You can play games with what Khashoggi's immigration status was. He was ours, he was not Saudi Arabia, and he was ours. And that is going to have a long-term impact on our intelligence gathering capabilities throughout the world.

LEMON: Ryan, I want to put up these images and get your response. And I want the audience at home to see it. This images of Secretary of State Mike Pompeo shaking hands and smiling with King Salman and the crown prince in Riyadh. What do you think of that?

LIZZA: I mean, it is the exact opposite of what you would expect of the administration to do in a case like this. They sent Pompeo over there for a photo op, putting him on the same stage here with the King and the Crown Prince. Instead of a discreet, no picture mission where he actually gets to the bottom of what happened. I mean, he was used for Saudi's propaganda in these pictures whether he knew that is going to happen or not.

I assumed he knew there is going to be cameras in the room. But that sends the exact opposite message at a time when the world should be condemning this and isolating Saudis and having them pay some price. We are smiling and you know, one of our most important leaders is there shaking hands and smiling. So, it sends a wrong message in my view. Look, we are being put in a position now, the United States is helping the Saudis cover up a murder.

LEMON: Congressman Dent. I just want to play this. This is Senator Lindsey Graham making a point that nothing happened in Saudi Arabia without MBS knowing about it. He also said this, watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM, (R), SOUTH CAROLINA: They are going to sanction the hell out of us, Saudi Arabia. You know, we deal with bad people all the time, but this is in our face. I feel personally offended. They have nothing but contempt for us. Why would you put a guy like me and the President in this box where after all the President has done? This guy got to go. Saudi Arabia, if you are listening, there are a lot of good people you can choose. But MBS has tainted your country and tainted himself.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: So, Charlie, could Congress ultimately force the President's hand?

DENT: Well, I think Lindsey Graham and other members of Congress are serious about imposing some kind of consequence on Saudi Arabia for it appears to be this very flagrant murder of a U.S. person, a green card holder, a journalist. So, I think there will likely be congressional action. Now could it be like Magnitsky like sanctions or maybe some in position of restraints on the weapon sales, I don't know. But we also have to remember that the end of the day, the Saudis need us. At the same time, we need a stable Saudi Arabia. We don't ever want to see radicals take over that country, because let us face it.

There are Wahhabi influences in that country that if they ever seize control would make the current regime, the Saudi royal family, look like progressives. So, we want to maintain some stability in that part of the world, but at the same time, we got to rebalance relationships and I believe Congress is going to probably step up because enough of the (inaudible) said, it is not just Lindsey Graham, it is Marco Rubio and there are others who believe that our values should be at the forefront of our foreign policy initiatives.

LEMON: Thank you all, I appreciate your time.

President Trump is sitting down for an interview with his favorite media outlet tonight. And if you think they ask him tough questions about Russia? You are going to be disappointed.

[23:15:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: All right, so President Trump on Fox network tonight, on the Fox Network tonight for the second time in a week. This time with Fox Business host Trish Regan. So what's behind the President's recent media blitz?

Let's discuss now. Brian Stelter is here, Douglas Brinkley and Eric Bolling, Eric is former Fox News host who now host America with Eric Bolling on "CRTV." Good to have all of you on. This is Eric's maiden voyage. So everyone, don't go easy on him. So let us --

ERIC BOLLING, HOST, AMERICA WITH ERIC BOLLING ON CRTV: Bring it.

LEMON: So Brian, I am going to start with you, because the President has given more interviews to Fox and "Fox Business," I mean, that is not news, anyone, right? Than any other media outlet. It is like a megaphone for him, correct?

BRIAN STELTER, CNN SENIOR MEDIA CORRESPONDENT: There is definitely a feedback loop between the White House -- Trump White House and Fox News. Today was interview number 36 this the President has given to Fox or Fox News or Fox Business or Fox radio. All of them together provides a really important platform for him. You compare that to other networks, he is given to a few to CBS, a few to ABC and of course none on CNN. Before we know Fox is his favorite. It is because, that is where he's audiences, he is not trying to communicate to the entire population, most of the time he is trying to communicate with his base.

LEMON: I am going to debate whether that is smart enough or maybe it is good strategy in his part, but before we continue, I just want to play a clip from his interview, and this is on "Fox Business," he is asked about Russians meddling in 2016. Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do you think that in some ways, Vladimir Putin is kind of getting what he may have wanted and I say this because it did not matter to the Russians who won, but it certainly matters that they wanted to create this division.

TRUMP: The answer is yes, because our Justice Department and FBI play right into the hands of the stupid investigation. Or whatever you call it. People say I am not under investigation.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: So it is tough, because you don't want to sort of scrutinize other journalists. I mean, Vladimir Putin said before himself. He wanted Trump to win and it allow Trump to pivot to attacking Mueller.

STELTER: I think what is interesting when we see these Fox interviews or when Trump calls in on the phone or like this on-camera sit down interview, there is a lot of news that comes out of these interviews than when he goes on 60 Minutes or when he speaks to "The New York Times," because it has been press on issues, he is being challenge in ways that all Presidents need to be challenged.

The Fox interviews are interesting because they provide a sort of sense of what his base is thinking and you can hear Trump unfiltered rambling and that is sometimes revealing. But look at how many headlines came out of "60-minute." We learned a lot about the president from that interview, because he was being challenged. And by the way, I think he enjoys the challenge. I think he enjoys the adversarial interviews. He likes it and it makes him better. So I wish he would do more.

LEMON: So, Eric, then you should know this. Because Fox is arguably one of the biggest forces and conservative media. You don't disagree with that I am sure. How important is it for the President that he has the support of Fox and other outlets on the right?

BOLLING: Of course it is important and it is also not unique to President Trump. I mean, I was at Fox for 11 years, all eight years of the Obama presidency and I probably made 200 calls to the Obama administration to get one interview with the President. I did not get it, I made calls to the Hillary Clinton administration and I didn't get it. So, it is not unique to Donald Trump to look at where he is going to get his best opportunity to bring out his message and of course he goes to a Fox News and that is smart.

LEMON: Eric, do you recall President Obama sitting down with Bret Baier and also sitting down with Bill O'Reilly?

[23:20:03] BOLLING: With Bill O'Reilly, absolutely. But that was two and eight years or maybe a third in eight years. Donald Trump as Brian points out had gone to CBS several times. He had gone to ABC several times. He has not gone here. And by the way, he was on with (inaudible) at MSNBC, several times before they had a falling out. So, he'll go where he thinks he gets an absolute fair shape where he is getting the message out. I don't think it is unique to a Republican, Democrat, Donald Trump, even Bill Clinton and George Bus, they all did the same thing.

LEMON: He has been on and he was on MSNBC after the election? I don't recall that.

BOLLING: No, prior --

STELTER: It is a much cozier relationship, it is OK to admit that. (Inaudible) Fox and Trump, that is OK --

(CROSSTALK)

BOLLING: -- actually I am precedent in our history to have kind of murder Donald Trump never had a problem going into adversary interviews. As Don points it out and I think he is right that he enjoys that to a certain extent.

LEMON: Eric, I think that is probably true.

BOLLING: He does have a problem with this though.

LEMON: I think that is partially true, Eric, because he won't do interviews with this network, he won't do interviews with other networks. He does appreciate a good challenging interview, but he also wants that interview to be favorable to him. And I do know that from experience.

BOLLING: No doubt about that. But also, so Lesley Stahl saying she does not have the gravitas that CNN does, of course she does. And Trump was not afraid to go back in to the Belly of the Beast with Lesley. And frankly, I thought Lesley Stahl was tough on him and failed to bring out some of the things that I though she should acknowledge.

There is a whole lot of -- we are so hung up on the left leaning media, let us call it the left leaning media with Donald Trump, the guy, the person, what he says and what he tweets and not really giving much deference to the fact that, yes the economy is ripping, 4.2 percent GDP growth and well over the 3.7 percent unemployment. But we are getting the respect on global stage again for the first time and not eight years, probably 32 years.

STELTER: All right. We all know that. You know, there is talking points, people see threw ought it.

BOLLING: It is not talking point, it is reality. When was the last time you saw 4.2 percent GP and 3.7 percent. Not in your life time.

STELTER: You don't have to read those lines anymore. You are not at Fox anymore, Eric.

BOLLING: What?

STELTER: You are not at Fox anymore, you don't have to read that stuff anymore.

BOLLING: It had nothing to do with Fox. I am not on Fox anymore. I am a supporter of a President that finally put America first for the first time in 32 years. Not aid under President Obama, under Bush, under Clinton. We are stepping for let us say, America first -- and guess what is happening, our economy is roaring.

LEMON: Let me ask you this Eric --

BOLLING: And Don, (inaudible) now or never. Brian, more women are working now more than ever. LEMON: Eric, please. I just want to ask questions so that we'll have

time to respond. So, Douglas, I promise I will get you in. All those things, we have reported on all of those things, we do it all the time, because the President talks about it and we talk about his tweets and every time the job numbers come out, we talk about that, every time economic numbers, we talk about that.

We are a 24 news organization. You work for one and we can walk in two (inaudible) at the same time and talk about many different issues and different subjects, but when the President repeats all of that, he does not give credit to the former President who number one, just honestly dug us out one of the deepest holes, deepest recessions we have ever been in, in history and also brought the economy closer to place that it is now.

This President is keeping it on track, but comes in in the fourth quarter in the last and maybe five minutes, look, I won the game. You don't believe that that is true?

BOLLING: No, I don't, Don. Here is why. I will use President Obama's words right now. President Obama said the new norm for GDP going forward will be, as a historian, 1.5 percent. If I am wrong, I will walk out of the set right now. He called the new norm for U.S. GDP at 1.5 percent. They say Donald Trump could never get to 3 percent. It was a joke. He was out win.

LEMON: Did you think that the President built more on the economy that he built that he may revise that?

BOLLING: Well, I think most of the swing on the economy and the reason why we are almost two years into his presidency and we are still continuing to climb on consumer confidence and business environment it is because he lowered -- the first thing he did before he even took his office, before he even mentioned the drapes, he started rolling back regulations. That freed up businesses. Don, I talked to so many people in the business world who says I can plan for three or five years, 10 years out now, because I know my cost of doing business in America are longing.

LEMON: Eric, I get your point. I had a dinner with a Trump supporter, he is actually a friend of mine and he says for him it is really all about the economy. He is a business owner. He hates everything about else this President and he hates everything the way he talks about women, the way he talks about, the way he tweets, he hates -- he tunes all of it out, but for him it is all about his bottom line.

[23:25:08] BOLLING: And guess what, in 2020, Don, that'll be the same thing for voters. They are going to feel the same way.

LEMON: Ok, I got to run. I got to take a break, Douglas, the next block will be all about you.

DOUGLAS BRINKLEY, CNN PRESIDENTIAL HISTORIAN: Thanks.

LEMON: OK, we'll be right back. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: So we are back now, we are having a fascinating conversation. Donald Trump is back on Fox News tonight by one count, it is the 36th times he had appear on a Fox outlet since becoming president. So, what does he get from going on Fox News so often and what does Fox gain from all that access.

Back with me now. Brian Stelter, Douglas Brinkley and Eric Bolling, OK. So Brian and Eric, just sit tight, because we need to let Douglas talk. So, Doug, there is an op-ed from Fox News contributor Marc Thiessen in Washington Post and it is titled, Trump could be the most honest President in modern history. This is how he explained it on Fox News this morning.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MARC THIESSEN, AMERICAN ENTERPRISING SCHOLAR AND FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: When you look at the real barometer of Presidential truthfulness, which is promise keeping, he is probably the most honest President in American history for better or worse. Whether you agree with his policies or disagree with his policies. He has done exactly what he said he would do as President.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: OK, so Thiessen is suggesting that it does not matter if Trump lies to the American people. What matters is that he allegedly keeps his promises.

BRINKLEY: Well, you know that's a lot of bunk. We all know Donald Trump lies regularly. He systematically lies from morning until night. On the issue of Fox News, Don, the big thing was I got to talk to Donald Trump at Mar-a-Lago once and he said to me, do you know who Rupert Murdoch is? He said he's a press lord. He loves that word. That's what Murdoch is.

And so he sees the rest of the media, CNN, NBC, CBS, TV media as the enemy, the mainstream media, and only Fox News is willing to be his megaphone. When we say Fox, that doesn't mean Chris Wallace or Bret Baier or Shepard Smith. These are great interviewers and great journalists.

But there is a feeling in the corporation, the Murdoch Fox News, that they are willing to do the bidding for Donald Trump to get great ratings.

I mean, Bill Shine is in the White House doing communications right now. Forever (INAUDIBLE) Fox News. Sean Hannity has become almost a minister to Donald Trump on how to behave in the political theater. You know, it was Hannity who warned Trump do not follow -- fire Rod Rosenstein this fall.

If Trump had done that, we will be tonight talking about Mueller and Russia. But by not doing that and inviting Rod Rosenstein to Rhode Island and putting that behind him, Hannity played a major advising role to the president of the United States.

I don't think it is unique in American history. FDR used Will Rogers. John F. Kennedy used Ben Bradlee of Washington Post. But there is no doubt someday the history of Fox and Trump is a big part of our media age. They're almost inseparable at this point.

STELTER: I think what's unique is the 24/7 propaganda aspect of it. And yes, you're right, there are certain hosts on Fox that don't tell a lie, but so many of them do with pro-Trump talk shows, either supporting the president's agenda or just avoiding the bad news about him.

One of the most powerful effects of Fox is the earmuffs, just pretending the bad news isn't there. So, ignoring all the lies and scandals and just talking about the evil Democrats instead. That repetition is incredibly powerful.

I don't think Obama or Bush or Clinton or anybody had that kind of constant re-enforcement. I mean, it makes you wonder what would President Trump do if he did not have those defenders on Fox all the time?

LEMON: And to Brian's point, the president often praises Fox News personalities on Twitter or in public. I want you to listen on something he said in a rally just last week.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: The Dems! Who says that? Lou Dobbs. The great Lou Dobbs. He says that, right? Sean Hannity says that. The Dims.

(APPLAUSE)

TRUMP: Jeanine says that, doesn't she? Laura. Laura. How good has Laura been, right?

(APPLAUSE)

TRUMP: We got a lot of good people. Do we like -- do we like Tucker? I like Tucker. He says that.

(APPLAUSE)

TRUMP: How about Steve Doocy? How about Ainsley? Brian? We got a lot of great friends.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: I wonder if they're thinking oh my god, I got a mention.

STELTER: Who is not mentioned?

LEMON: They did get a mention. Oh, my gosh, the president did mention me. Eric, you can hear that, be honest here. BOLLING: It is not just Fox News though. Yes, those were just Fox News hosts that he mentioned there. But he -- listen, he absolutely takes phone calls. There is no question -- he takes my phone call and he calls me as well.

LEMON: OK, can he take my phone call?

BOLLING: He probably won't take yours because he doesn't want to hear what you have to say.

LEMON: Is that the point of this? Is that the point of this conversation, Eric? Hold on, I want you to finish, but isn't that the point of this conversation?

BOLLING: No, absolutely not. Did President Obama take phone calls from Sean Hannity?

LEMON: I don't know, he didn't take one from me.

BOLLING: But here is my point. Absolutely incorrect, Doug, you're a historian, but you're wrong that Sean Hannity makes a phone call and President Trump changes his mind with what he wants to do with Rod Rosenstein. What happens is he polls Sean Hannity and maybe Lou Dobbs and Eric Bolling --

LEMON: Right.

BOLLING: -- and guess what, Sharyl Attkisson, another conservative who is over in Sinclair, and he'll talk to these people. Trump is Trump. He makes his own decisions.

LEMON: What does he say when he calls you? What do you talk about?

BOLLING: I talk to him about -- I did "Morning Joe" a couple of days in a row about a month ago. He called me afterwards and talk about Charlie Sykes, believe it or not. He has called me about Bill Shine. Bill Shine is a friend of mine.

[23:35:00] He said, you know what we're doing here, I did -- I gave Shine a resounding endorsement saying the guy is wonderful for the country and for the administration.

LEMON: Before he got hired or after?

BOLLING: This was after.

LEMON: Let me ask you this. What would you have done, Eric --

BOLLING: -- to many, many voices, not just Fox News.

LEMON: Listen. People should know that you and I have conversations like this before.

BOLLING: Sure.

LEMON: Not on television. OK, so, what would you have done if the former president would not come on Fox News at all, and the former president had endorsed my book or Jake Tapper's book or Anderson's book or -- I don't know, Rachel Maddow's.

I am just throwing out people that he -- shows that he, you know, won't come on as president. What do you think you would have done and other Fox News hosts and conservative media? What do you think you would have done?

BOLLING: I think we did that. I think we did call President Obama after not coming on various shows in Fox News.

LEMON: If he had endorse books by journalists who you deemed to be left leaning.

BOLLING: Honestly, Brian, are we --

LEMON: Don. This is Don.

BOLLING: Don. So he tweets about a book. Is this where we are getting hung up now? The president --

LEMON: I just asked you a question. I am not getting hung up on it. I am just asking a question.

BOLLING: I don't find anything wrong with it. If the next president is Kamala Harris and she wants to talk about, you know, some -- your book, Don, I am not going to hold anything against President Kamala Harris for endorsing your book. Why would I?

LEMON: As president, I would certainly say that I would not want her to do that now after she left office and that's her business, but I just don't think it's appropriate as the president of the United States. Douglas --

BOLLING: I think presidents endorse different things, maybe not a book, sometimes they endorse businesses.

LEMON: I got to give Douglas the last word because I am really out of time. Sorry. Douglas, go on.

BRINKLEY: I think the problem is Donald Trump demonizes the press. He calls the press the enemy of the people. We have a journalist that was butchered in Saudi Arabia. We don't have a president standing up for real journalism, real reporting. He does news as entertainment but he doesn't like investigative reporters and he declares war on them all the time. And so he is one of our worst presidents for understanding the importance of freedom of the press.

LEMON: Yeah. Thank you all. I appreciate it. We'll be right back.

[23:40:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: Joining me now, Harry Enten and Mark Preston. Gentlemen, good evening to you. Harry, I am going to start with you. Twenty-one days out for the midterms. Your latest forecast for the House and Senate races? HARRY ENTEN, CNN POLITICS SENIOR WRITER AND ANALYST: So in the House of Representatives, we have Democrats, we believe they're going to gain the majority. We think that they are going to gain 229 seats, that is of course 11 more than they need.

And in the Senate, we have something entirely different. We have Republicans at 52 seats. That's a gain of the seat for them and of course you need 50 if you are the Republicans for the majority.

LEMON: All right. Mark, the Associated Press is reporting tonight that Trump says that he won't take the blame if Republicans lose control of the House. I am quoting here, he says, "I don't believe anybody has ever had this kind of impact."

So everything, Mark, is about Trump except this midterms.

MARK PRESTON, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Right, stop the press, stop the presses, it is not my fault, so says Donald Trump. But you know what, he is right about -- he is right about the fact that I don't think anyone has had an impact that he certainly has had on the presidency of the American electorate and a whole lot of other things.

But, he talks about all what he is doing on behalf of Republicans right now. We go back to the forecast right there. They're in trouble in the House of Representatives and Donald Trump does not want to take any responsibility for that.

LEMON: Yeah. So Harry, let's talk about Ted Cruz and Beto O'Rourke because it shows that Ted Cruz is up big by seven-point lead, right?

ENTEN: Yeah.

LEMON: Over Beto. His Democratic challenger is Beto O'Rourke. It is a margin of 4.5 percent. So, has Ted Cruz pulled away from his challenger in the state of the race all along?

ENTEN: I think he has probably pulled a little bit more ahead as we sort of close in on election day. Republicans are coming home but this should not be a huge surprise, right? I mean, Texas is a state that has not elected a Democratic senator since Lloyd Bentsen in 1988. There is always going to be an uphill battle for Beto O'Rourke. Unfortunately for him, the polls seem to be showing that is in fact coming true.

LEMON: Mark, we have been surprised before. I mean, could it still turn Beto O'Rourke's way?

PRESTON: I just like to say, look, anything can happen in politics. Harry is right. The polling is certainly going in a different direction than what we have seen certainly from his ability to raise money. There is talk about enthusiasm on the ground. We don't know how that's going to translate into it.

But look, this is still a very much a red state. What Beto O'Rourke has done though I do thin has accelerated its transition to a blue state a lot quicker than we thought it was and of course that is going to be because of demographic changes within that state. But at this point, Harry is absolutely correct.

LEMON: Mark, President Trump is heading to Houston to campaign for Cruz next week. What does it say that Trump has to use his precious time showing up, a state like Texas instead of other close races?

PRESTON: Yeah, absolutely. They didn't think they're going to have to put any time or any money into we are seeing some time now putting in by the president. But you know what, it is not just Ted Cruz which would be a safe, easy win for them. We're also going to see the president next week go to Arizona which is a seat that was held by Republican Jeff Flake, that is very much in jeopardy.

And then down in Nevada as well. Another Republican seat, Dean Heller, if our viewers remember, that's the senator from Nevada that the president used to attack and criticize very much. Now, he's going in and try to save him. Don, you are talking about three Republican seats right now that the GOP would prefer and very likely should not have to try to defend so vigorously the way they are.

LEMON: Interesting. And Harry, when you did the forecast just a few weeks ago before Kavanaugh and everything else that happened, was it much different now?

[23:45:03] ENTEN: I would say the real difference is in the red states. Tennessee, Texas, North Dakota. The Republican Senate candidates in those states have started to show a little distance between them and their Democratic competitors. I think the Kavanaugh hearing really put partisans in their own camp.

And on the Senate map where you have so many Democrats, 26 states are currently controlled by Democrats, a lot of them in red states, that's bad news for Democrats. House is something very, very different.

LEMON: And Republicans always come home but they come home late.

ENTEN: Yeah, I think this is an instance where we are going to see partisans coming home late into their camps and because there are so many Republicans underperforming when they come home, it is better news for Republicans.

LEMON: Mark, Harry, thank you for your time. I appreciate it.

PRESTON: Thanks, Don.

ENTEN: Thank you.

LEMON: A far-right group calling themselves the "Proud Boys" facing assault charges after a brawl outside a Republican club here in New York City. The Southern Poverty Law Center calls them a hate group. We are going to tell you who they are, next.

[23:50:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: Police in New York City will pursue assault charges against members of a far-right group called the "Proud Boys." I want you to check out this NYPD videos of the group attacking masked anti-fascist protesters. The incident took place as the "Proud Boys" were leaving an event at the Metropolitan Republican Club. The GOP club is still standing by the group.

So who are the "Proud Boys?" Well, they describe themselves as a western chauvinist fraternal group looking to spread what they call an anti-political correctness and anti-white guilt agenda. But the Southern Poverty Law Center calls them a hate group.

They're anti-Muslim and misogynistic. The "Proud Boys" were founded by vice media co-founder Gavin McInnes. It was during the 2016 presidential campaign. He was suspended from Twitter in August along with the group's main account for violating its policy on violent extremist groups.

The "Proud Boys" appear to be growing. Some experts say that's because they're not seen as being as extreme as other far-right groups. But white supremacists say that's part of the PR move, a PR move by McInnes to gain mainstream acceptance. McInnes actually disavowed the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville even though it was organized by Jason Kessler, a former "Proud" boy.

Members were still at the rally. They were just encouraged not to wear "Proud Boy" shirts or chant the group's name. Across the country, we're seeing multiple violent incidents involving the "Proud Boys." There was a demonstration in Portland on Saturday and another in June that turned into a riot. Members wearing body armor and carrying weapons charged at anti-fascist protesters, beating them.

There was also a 2017 incident outside NYU when the group was hosted by the university's Republican club. Police arrested 11 people in the brawl, including a "Proud" boy who attacked a journalist covering the event.

But how much influence do they really have? I want you to check this out. Check out this picture of Republican Congressman Devin Nunes posing with a known "Proud" boy member and another man making a hand gesture that is associated with white nationalism.

And there's this shot of Republican Congressman Mario Diaz-Balart and a man wearing a "Proud Boys" shirt with his Trump hat. And here's Fox News anchor Tucker Carlson posing with two "Proud Boys" and Roger Stone.

Sean Hannity says he has never heard of the "Proud Boys." But according to media matters, the group's founder, Gavin McInnes, has been on his show 24 times.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEAN HANNITY, HOST, FOX NEWS: Joining me now tonight's great American panel. Author, troublemaker Gavin McInnes.

Gavin McInnes.

Gavin McInnes.

Gavin McInnes, back in the house.

Gavin, you want to start any more trouble?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: He also had a "Proud" boy member on his radio show last year. The question is, are the "Proud Boys" finding a place for themselves in mainstream politics? Why are Republicans associating with this hate group? Are they emboldening them?

Kelly Weill joins me now. She wrote a piece in "The Daily Beast" titled "Republicans are Adopting the Proud Boys." This is a fascinating piece. Thank you for coming on tonight. So talk to me about the "Proud Boys." Who joins this group?

KELLY WEILL, REPORTER, THE DAILY BEAST: Well, not so proud boys join the "Proud Boys." The "Proud Boys" cater to a group of men, usually young white men, who feel disenfranchised, who feel as though social justice movements like feminism, anti-racism are losing them their place in the world.

The "Proud Boys" reach out to these groups and tell them that not only are they in the right to oppose social justice but that it's justified to take physical action against their opponents, often leftist protesters or feminists or Black Lives Matter, who they might encounter in the streets.

LEMON: They say it's them against Antifa.

WEILL: That's correct.

LEMON: Right. OK, so let's talk about your piece here, "The Daily Beast," Republicans are Adopting the Proud Boys. OK, so you write, fascist skinhead groups have wreaked havoc in the U.S. for decades, but scholars of fascism have noted that those groups pose limited political threats unless a mainstream political party embraces them.

Are you concerned about the relationship that we are seeing between Republicans and the "Proud Boys"? Is that what you're saying?

WEILL: Absolutely. And I think it's important to note that we've had violent racist groups in the country for decades. But those groups were somewhat isolated. You know, it would be uncommon to see a congressional candidate or a mainstream Republican pundit pose with a member of these groups.

The "Proud Boys" have made inroads with the broader Republican Party because they sort of sugarcoat their extremism. They say that they're not white supremacists even though if you track their members and you monitor what they're doing in the real world, those facts just don't hold up.

[23:55:05] So, what we're seeing is an unofficial alliance of sorts where mainstream Republicans can sort of outsource the political and physical violence that they'd like to enact against opponents.

LEMON: They call themselves -- I think people call them instead of alt-right, alt-light. Right?

WEILL: Right.

LEMON: You spoke to one. Quickly tell me what you found out.

WEILL: Well, I spoke to their lawyer, Jason Van Dyke, who told me that they do enjoy a bit of a -- a bit of a fandom (ph) among more mainstream Republicans. Not all of them. He said, you know, more neoconservatives, more traditional Republicans still don't align with them. But there's a certain populist trumpist segment of the party that really finds a kinship with these extreme groups.

LEMON: Listen, Kelly, the Tucker Carlson photo I showed earlier, the "Proud" boy member is black. So the group pushes a white agenda but it includes minorities?

WEILL: So that's another sort of sets the "Proud Boys" apart from other extremist groups. One thing that's important to note is their agenda isn't all white supremacist. It's also very anti-leftist.

LEMON: And chauvinist.

WEILL: And chauvinist. It's misogynist. It's anti-immigrant. It's anti-Muslim. And I think it's important to draw historical parallels when you look at classical fascism. They didn't just rally against religious minorities. They also rallied against political opponents. So we saw in Nazi Germany street fights between socialists and the Nazis.

LEMON: Yeah. Kelly Weill, thank you. It's in "The Daily Beast." "Republicans are Adopting the Proud Boys." We appreciate your time. Read it. It's a fascinating read.

Thanks for watching, everyone. Our coverage continues.

[24:00:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)