Return to Transcripts main page

CNN This Morning

Netflix-Warner Bros. Deal; Trump Hosts Kennedy Center Honors; Rep. Johnny Olszewski (D-MD) is Interviewed about Trump's Pardons, Boat Strikes, and Marjorie Taylor Greene. Aired 6:30-7a ET

Aired December 08, 2025 - 06:30   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[06:31:35]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Is there any truth to the allegations that after an initial strike on a drug smuggling boat, you ordered a second strike to kill the survivors?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: First of all, that kind of cruel, heartless act has no place in operation kill everybody.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AUDIE CORNISH, CNN ANCHOR: "Saturday Night Live" taking on the Trump administration's Venezuelan boat strikes. This morning, top bipartisan lawmakers want the full video of that strike released for the whole world to see.

Good morning, everybody. I'm Audie Cornish. I want to thank you for joining me on CNN This Morning. It's half past the hour. And here's what's happening right now.

Can the president fire independent agency officials? That is the question before the Supreme Court today. In just a few hours, the justices will hear arguments over the firing of the FTC commissioner, Rebecca Slaughter. But the ruling will be far beyond just Slaughter and her job. The decision will put presidential powers to the test.

And another stabbing on a train in Charlotte. It was on the same route that that Ukrainian refugee was killed a few months ago. This one happened Friday. It started as a verbal fight. One person was injured. The suspect is an undocumented immigrant and is now facing attempted first-degree murder charges. That suspect is due in court today.

And the president's immigration crackdown, billed as targeting the worst of the worst. New numbers show the scope of who is really being caught up in this. Nearly 70,000 people without criminal records have been detained by ICE since the president took office. That of the roughly 220,000 that have been arrested. And that's according to the Deportation Data Project.

President Trump proceeding cautiously on Netflix's $72 billion deal to buy Warner Brothers and HBO.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Well, that's got to go through a process. And we'll see what happens. It's a -- Netflix, a great company. And they've done a phenomenal job. Ted is a fantastic man. I have a lot of respect for him. But it's a -- it's a lot of market share. So, we'll have to see what happens.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CORNISH: The president did say the deal could be a, quote, "problem" because of the market share of the company would have if the deal goes through. Warner Bros. Discovery, of course, is CNN's parent company.

And the group chat is back.

Sara, I want to go to you because the first thing everyone thought about this conversation was that Paramount and the Ellison family, and they had close ties to Trump, and therefore they were going to be the people who could win over regulators. What do you make of Trump talking kindly about Netflix?

SARA FISCHER, CNN SENIOR MEDIA ANALYST: So any of the three suitors for this asset would have gone through an investigation on the regulatory side, no question.

CORNISH: Because all of them would have led to massive holding.

FISCHER: Consolidation where they would have had more market share, sure.

The key differentiator is, would Trump's DOJ sue to block one deal over another? And it was perceived that because of Ellison's relationship with Trump, they'd be more likely to sue to block the other bidders, which would be Netflix and Comcast.

The challenge, though, Audie, is that even if you sue to block a deal, an independent judge is ultimately the one that's going to make the final call. So, all three of these bids would have regulatory scrutiny.

Why Netflix was chosen, ultimately, my sources have told me, is because their deal had clean cash and that the Warner Brothers Discovery folks thought they could actually close it. They had the money.

[06:35:01]

They don't have to worry about raising from sovereign wealth funds or private equity firms. And so they felt that this particular bid was the one most likely to close.

CORNISH: Yes.

FISCHER: And if you are a board, you need to have your shareholders' best interests. Closing the deal financially is very important, especially when all of the bids would have had regulatory scrutiny on them.

CORNISH: Yes. And just to be clear, because of the way this deal is structured, it would make it so that CNN and other cable networks would spin off into their own company. Netflix would sort of absorb HBO and Warner Brothers and its big library.

I bring this up because Hollywood is not happy. You hear people really upset. Actress Jane Fonda was writing, "consolidation at this scale would be catastrophic for an industry built on free expression, for the creative workers who power it."

It's sort of an interesting response here from the different communities.

JEFF ZELENY, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: For sure. And I mean the whole idea is -- or one of the ideas is, are movies going to be released in movie theaters, or is that going to be a thing of the past? I mean is this going to become the Netflix -- is Netflix watching things at home and the release going to be how it is now.

I'm interested in what the president's involvement is in this. He confirmed last night that he met with the head of Netflix, which we did not know before, in the Oval Office last week, presumably before the deal was announced or right around that time. He is very interested in all of these subjects.

CORNISH: He is.

ZELENY: From movies, to media, to other things. So, a lot of regulatory things, the White House is not all that focused on. This is not a very strict regulation kind of ethos in the White House. But I think he is going to --

CORNISH: Yes, but the backdrop to this is the Supreme Court case over this Federal Trade Commission chair, which is literally about, can you put a loyalist in?

ZELENY: A huge case today.

CORNISH: Can you fire someone at will who's at an independent agency?

FISCHER: Yes. OK. So, let's separate two things. On the Netflix side, President Trump can try to put his finger on the pulse all he wants. At the end of the day, if his DOJ is even directed to sue to block this for political reasons or to not block this for political reasons, it all comes down to an independent judge in court.

The FTC situation is a little bit different. Basically, the supreme court is going to decide, does the executive branch have the power to fire the heads of what are supposed to be independent agencies? If they say he does, that is a massive shakeup for the media and technology, regulatory world writ large, because what essentially it would indicate is that these agencies that are supposed to regulate, our utilities and our companies, are not actually independent. It would have far reaching repercussions, not just for the FTC, but for other heads of departments that Trump has tried to get rid of. I think about the copyright office, et cetera.

CORNISH: OK. That's why we're bringing this up, because also you can go online and probably hear those supreme arguments -- Supreme Court arguments today, because as you can hear, the case has a lot of implications.

I want to talk about something else. President Trump has made himself the center of the Kennedy Center Honors. So, last night was the first major gala there since the president took control earlier this year, ousted the leadership, names himself chair.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Very exciting being chairman, but maybe more importantly, saving this incredible structure and building and concept. And it's done so well. You know, we've raised a tremendous amount of money tonight for the building itself and for the -- for charities overall. And we're really happy.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CORNISH: Now, he actually secured more than $250 million from Congress for renovations at the center. He's even floated a new name, the Trump Kennedy Center. The president said he was 98 percent involved in picking the honorees, including Gloria Gaynor, George Strait, Sylvester Stallone and the rock band KISS. He said he personally rejected some options that were, quote, "too woke."

And the group chat is back.

Francesca, I want to start with you because Trump has made no sort of -- it's not hidden that he feels like he was locked out of pop culture in a way by the elites and that the Kennedy Center came to be a kind of symbol of that.

So, what was it like to see him MC it, right? Not sitting up in the box, but really saying, I'm in control of this.

FRANCESCA CHAMBERS, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, "USA TODAY": Especially since he skipped it his entire first term to then see him be so involved. He did an opening. There was a part after intermission, I believe, where he was involved as well. He did the long red carpet and he took questions from reporters. And he -- he was very present.

CORNISH: Yes. And never had to worry about some artist saying, this is why I think Trump is bad.

CHAMBERS: He was very -- he was very present throughout the whole entire thing. You mentioned the Trump Kennedy Center. He had joked earlier in the week, kind of nudged Marco Rubio while he was at the U.S. Institute of Peace, which was recently renamed after him. Hey, we should do the Kennedy Center next. He brought it up again last night as well. He said it would be up to the board. But he is currently chairman of the board and he has stacked that board with loyal -- his Trump supporters.

CORNISH: Yes.

CHAMBERS: They include high-ranking officials like Susie Wiles, Dan Scavino, Sergio Gore, who's now his ambassador to India.

[06:40:04]

Certainly there are other friends (ph) on the board too.

CORNISH: Though before, this thing was sort of off to the side in the city. Like, it wasn't something the White House was, like, had its fingerprints al over.

CHAMBERS: It was -- it was -- it was bipartisan before.

CORNISH: Yes.

CHAMBERS: Presidents have typically appointed people, both -- presidents of both parties.

CORNISH: Yes.

CHAMBERS: But it was split evenly down the middle between Republicans and Democrats. What Donald Trump did was come in. He got rid of the leadership of the existing Kennedy Center. And now there's a lot of Trump supporters on it.

CORNISH: "The Washington Post" take was, "it's showier, emptier and more political."

ZELENY: I mean, they've done a pretty deep analysis of the sales of tickets and of fundraising and other things.

CORNISH: Oh, yes.

ZELENY: And it just simply hasn't been as busy.

But last night, I think, we're going to be able to watch this broadcast a couple days before Christmas, I believe, it's always aired. So, it will be interesting to see --

CORNISH: And where will it air?

ZELENY: The president on CBS, we believe.

CORNISH: Yes.

ZELENY: Owned by Paramount, of course.

CHAMBERS: (INAUDIBLE).

CORNISH: Of which the implications are --

ZELENY: Yes.

CORNISH: I mean, he's finally, I guess, feeling more confident in CBS and Paramount.

FISCHER: Yes, because they settled a lawsuit with him and because the chairman and CEO of that company, David Ellison, has been making inroads with the president in order to try to get a deal done.

I think the broader take on this Kennedy Center thing is that President Trump likes to be putting his finger on the pulse of culture, media, soft power domestically. It's helped him with his agenda, trying to win people over. The challenge, though, to Jeff's point, is, is it going to work commercially? If you're selling less tickets, we've had a lot of artists who've refused to perform here. Does that help you long term in actually convincing people that you are the best arbiter of culture? I don't think so.

CORNISH: Yes, like you're in the front of a parade, but no one's there.

FISCHER: Yes.

CORNISH: So, then you're just walking.

FISCHER: Yes.

CORNISH: Yes, I think.

OK, you guys, if you missed any part of that conversation or any part of the show, know that we're a podcast. So, just scan the QR code now to find it. CNN THIS MORNING is available anywhere you get your podcast.

And next on CNN THIS MORNING, President Trump's puzzling pardon has some Democrats actually taking action. I have Congressman Johnny O. here about his new constitutional amendment. That's live after the break.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. MARJORIE TAYLOR GREEN (R-GA): It's the most toxic, political culture.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CORNISH: And a contentious interview. Marjorie Taylor Greene gets confronted about her toxic politics.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[06:46:42]

CORNISH: President Trump lashing out at a Democratic lawmaker that he had just pardoned. The president is now going after Congressman Henry Cuellar after wiping away his federal bribery charges. The Texas Democrat announced he would seek re-election as a Democrat, sending the president into a rage. Trump accused him of a "lack of loyalty," adding, "next time, no more Mr. Nice guy." Cuellar responded to this post this weekend. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MARIA BARTIROMO, FOX NEWS: What do you want to say about the president's Truth Social this morning?

HENRY CUELLAR (D-TX): Well, again, let me -- let me just say this. I was at church this morning with my wife. I prayed for the president. I prayed for his family. And I prayed for the presidency because if the president succeeds, the country succeeds. And again, as a -- probably the most bipartisan individual, I don't vote party, I vote for what's right for the country.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CORNISH: Joining us now to talk about this, Maryland Congressman Johnny Olszewski.

Thanks so much for being here.

REP. JOHNNY OLSZEWSKI (D-MD): Thanks for having me.

CORNISH: OK, so we wanted to talk to you because you've actually got some legislation around this issue of pardons.

OLSZEWSKI: Yes.

CORNISH: Before we get there, I want to talk about this one. This is one of your colleagues.

OLSZEWSKI: Yes.

CORNISH: He's planning to run again. Should he? And is he welcome back after all this?

OLSZEWSKI: Well, look, everyone is entitled to due process under the law. And I am sure that anyone who's been charged with a crime would want that. I think that any time the president jumps in front of a -- of a adjudication of justice, that's a perversion of our judicial system. And that's one of many reasons why I think my constitutional amendment that would give Congress the ability to review and overturn egregious pardons is appropriate.

CORNISH: How do you decide what's egregious?

OLSZEWSKI: Well, it would require five members of the Senate and 20 members of the House to petition for a review, and then it would require a supermajority of two-thirds of both houses to overturn it. So, it's a very high.

CORNISH: It's a very high threshold, I was about to say.

OLSZEWSKI: But when you think about these pardons and what the president did with this president, who was a drug trafficker, one of the biggest drug kingpins in --

CORNISH: Yes. We should say that it was the president of Honduras, actually convicted -- that's a difference here -- convicted in the U.S. on drug trafficking charges, to give people a sense of this. He had a sentence of 45 years for trying to bring in 400 tons of cocaine into the U.S.

OLSZEWSKI: Yes. And this was a jury of his peers here in America. This is not unlike the people who stormed the Capitol in January. These are people who had assaulted and attacked police officers who were convicted of that. Fifteen hundred pardons on day one for President Trump.

CORNISH: But is that equal to -- so the actions of some of the people on January 6th, it -- not all of them rise to the situation of the president of Honduras. I mean --

OLSZEWSKI: Well, this is especially egregious, right?

CORNISH: Yes.

OLSZEWSKI: And look, I think Democrats, we have to own this, too. We certainly have seen presidents of our party, President Biden with his son, President Clinton, and his half-brother, who was convicted of drug charges as well. We have to own this, too.

But this pardon, one of the largest drug kingpins in the world. Not only is it not make it serious that President Trump is going after these strikes, which we can talk about, but it really just is egregious.

And with my colleague, it sounds like the president's disappointed that he didn't get an outright quid pro quo. It sounds like he's disappointed that --

CORNISH: Is that wrong, given how he handled the Eric Adams sort of conversation with the mayor?

[06:50:02]

OLSZEWSKI: I think it's wrong to want to quid pro quo or some sort of benefit for handing out official acts of office, which is why I think Democrats and Republicans alike will flock towards this proposal, which gives Congress, I think, the appropriate oversight to say, justice belongs to the people. We can't give it out to just the rich and the powerful, the well-connected, the people who are investing in the president's cryptocurrency schemes.

CORNISH: Yes.

OLSZEWSKI: You can go down the list, and there are any number of pardons that are just egregious and, in my mind, unconscionable. And I think we have a -- we should have a chance to review those.

CORNISH: I always have to ask, when someone has legislation, is it actually bipartisan? Do you have a single Republican interested in this?

OLSZEWSKI: I'm going to. CORNISH: OK.

OLSZEWSKI: Well, I --

CORNISH: It's the start of the week. I want that for you.

OLSZEWSKI: So, I'm one of those Democrats that actually, you know, people said it was novel, but a good friend of mine, Jeff Hurd from Colorado, we actually just sat down with our colleagues. We had pizza and beer and watched Monday night football a few weeks ago. And that's where we are in D.C. I've learned in my first year in Congress is that just talking to your colleagues seems like a big deal. We're going to keep doing that. I'm going to make sure that we have support for this really important piece of legislation to amend our Constitution and hold our president accountable.

CORNISH: I want to ask you about the Venezuelan boat strike that killed survivors. Do you want to see a full video? Do you think that's something that should be released to the public?

OLSZEWSKI: Absolutely. I join my colleagues in calling for the full release of the video. I think we, obviously, should be doing all that we can to prevent the drug flow into this country. If the president and his administration needs more support to intercept and hold accountable and put these individuals in jail for a very long time, sign me up. I'll be the first one to support that. But going after people who are suspected of issues, treating them as if they are enemy combatants and not seeking congressional authority, there's a way to do it.

CORNISH: Yes.

OLSZEWSKI: If the president wants to treat these folks as, you know, terrorists and individuals who we're at war with, come to Congress and ask for that authority and give us the reason to provide that authorization and make the case to the American people that these strikes are justified.

CORNISH: But are Democrats backed into a corner of basically saying, we need to protect the lives of drug runners?

OLSZEWSKI: I don't think we should support and condone what these individuals are doing. Clearly, the video is people running drugs in this country. And I -- my heart goes out to anyone who's been impacted by drug use.

But again, this president isn't serious about that. You look at the pardon we talked about at the top of the -- of the segment here. This is a president who wants to just do whatever he wants to do. And I think that we need to have transparency and accountability. We have laws for a reason. And we should hold these individuals accountable in that work.

CHAMBERS: Have you seen the video?

OLSZEWSKI: I have not seen, other than what's public. I'm on Foreign Affairs. We haven't even had a hearing on these strikes, let alone the opportunity to see the video in a classified setting. So, I think if I'm not seeing it, certainly there are questions that I have, I know my colleagues have, and I think the American people rightfully have questions about this, too.

CORNISH: Last one. I've heard this argument, foreign policy circles, where people say, you know, if the U.S. is just firing on boats left and right in their sphere of the world, what's to stop China from doing the same thing to saying, look, I think that drug boat is coming off of Taiwan, or whatever, and that we sort of through -- we're modeling the behavior that other people will take.

OLSZEWSKI: That's right. And I think it's just this larger issue that I've seen as I've traveled the world in my role, is that we are really lowering our standing in the world. We are withdrawing from supporting countries and development. We are not standing up Democratic institutions. We are taking these strikes. So, were losing credibility throughout the world. And in its place, we're seeing places like China both step into the void and we're creating a circumstance where I think China or other adversaries can take similar action, and we lose the moral authority to say, this is wrong here.

CORNISH: All right, I want to turn to something else. You're going to be very excited about it. Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene sits down for her first interview since announcing her resignation. She previously apologized for her role in toxic politics. In an interview with "60 Minutes," however, Greene pushed back when asked if she's the one who had added fuel to the fire.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. MARJORIE TAYLOR GREENE (R-GA): It's the most toxic, political culture and it's not helping the American people.

LESLEY STAHL, HOST, "60 MINUTES": But you contributed to that.

GREENE: You're accusatory, just like you did just then.

STAHL: I know you're accusing me, but I'm smiling.

GREENE: You're accusing me.

STAHL: I am accusing you.

GREENE: But we don't have to accuse one another.

STAHL: I want you to respond to what you have done in terms of insulting people, yelling at people and then saying --

GREENE: I'd like for you to respond for that.

STAHL: I don't --

GREENE: No, you can respond to that.

STAHL: I don't insult people. GREENE: You just -- you do in the way you question and you are --

you're accusing me right now.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CORNISH: OK, I want to give people some context for kind of a collection of greatest hits. Some of the things that Greene has said in the past.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. MARJORIE TAYLOR GREENE (R-GA): Anybody else?

REPORTER: Should the defense secretary --

GREENE: What country are you? Wait, what country are you from?

REPORTER: From the U.K.

GREENE: OK, we don't give a crap about your opinion and your reporting.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do you -- do you know what we're here for? You know we're here about A.G. --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: OH, just a --

GREENE: I don't think you know what you're here for.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Well, you're the one talking about -- (INAUDIBLE).

GREENE: I think you're fake eyelashes are messing up --

GREENE: A little communist from New York City.

[06:55:02]

That's right. Yes, lock her up, too. That's a good idea.

She better show up. If she chickens out, then she shows exactly who she really is, a scared little girl that is pretty stupid and doesn't know anything.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CORNISH: So, what's the gossip in lawmaker's circle about this rebrand?

OLSZEWSKI: Well, I'm really going to miss serving with Representative Taylor Greene.

Look, I think she's actually right, our politics are toxic here in D.C., and I think that we have to do something about acknowledging that it is what it is, that we're the ones that created it, and that we're the only ones who can change it. So, I actually think that we have a responsibility. And I'm -- I think in the minority of the conversation on The Hill with my colleagues on this, I think we have to accept Marjorie at a word and say, I hope that you have come to this place where you think that you've contributed and you think it's wrong. But I also believe, like, your actions have to follow your words now. Don't just say it and then be confrontational in an interview about it. Show me with your actions, both the rest of your time in Congress and then outside of Congress.

ZELENY: I was struck by, she was pushing back a little bit on the rebrand there, I mean, trying to deflect with the Lesley Stahl.

The reality is, I was in her district a couple weeks ago talking to people. She's still figuring it out. So, I think this whole idea of a rebrand, I think we're probably just going to have to wait and see what's next. She definitely wants to be part of the, you know, pretty small -- she said she's not MAGA, she's America first. I thought that was also interesting at the very end of that.

But look, I mean we could fill the whole hour with things that she has said in her very brief time in Congress.

CORNISH: I'm not going to do that, just so you know.

ZELENY: Thank you.

CORNISH: I will not do that.

ZELENY: Thank you very much.

CORNISH: It's Monday.

ZELENY: But the reality is, I think her rebrand is still kind of a work in progress.

CORNISH: Yes, and, also, we may be making it into some sort of 4-D media chess, when really maybe she just got exhausted, got scared from the attack from the president. It could be a number of things.

FISCHER: Yes, I think she just wants to -- she claims that she wants to bring more decorum to this office. You know, be less partizan, be less critical. But then when you see, to your point, an interview like that, it comes to show that it's convenient to say that you want to be that thing, but when your back is pushed against the wall, she still gets extraordinarily defensive.

I honestly think she just needs a little media training work. If you want to come out and be that bigger person, you got to figure out how to not get defensive in an interview about it and give -- deliver a really strong answer that makes me believe that you're the person that you say you want to become.

CORNISH: OK, you guys, I want to talk about what's in your group chats.

Congressman, you are not absolved by being new here. What are you guys talking about? OLSZEWSKI: Well, we just finished turkey. And so., Thanksgiving is

over. I hope everyone had a wonderful Thanksgiving. It seems like we're already pushing towards the rest of the holidays.

A lot of Thanksgiving pictures in our group chat. Now it's really about what the week ahead looks like. And I'm hopeful that, because, again, Congress has to have our act together, too.

CORNISH: Yes.

OLSZEWSKI: I'm hopeful that it includes, which I'll be signing this week, a discharge petition for insider trading and stock trading by Members of Congress.

CORNISH: Is discharge petition the only way to get things done now?

OLSZEWSKI: It feels like it. And, look, MTG, she did a great job. She was right on the Epstein files. She was joined by a couple of courageous Republicans. I hope we see that with health care. I think we should see that, you know, affordability is a huge issue. So, if we have to do it by discharge petition, so be it.

CORNISH: OK. Francesca.

CHAMBERS: We've talked about it so much already this morning. Mine was the Hegseth.

CORNISH: Oh, it was.

CHAMBERS: That Colin Jost.

CORNISH: Oh.

CHAMBERS: Yes, it was Colin Jost as Pete Hegseth.

CORNISH: Who looks nothing like Pete Hegseth, doesn't do the voice of Pete Hegseth. I'm not totally sure I get it, but it works for you.

CHAMBERS: Well, you -- what you said before is true, that the comedy works because some of it's based in fact. Like, Hegseth had said during the cabinet meeting that the president backs me 100 percent. The president didn't say that. Pete Hegseth said that. So, I thought it was good.

CORNISH: Nice. Jeff.

ZELENY: College football. I mean, a huge weekend for college football. Who's in the playoffs? Who's not? Notre Dame gets the short end of the straw by not making it. But I'm struck by just how one more time or so many more examples of how college football is changing, Kansas State, Iowa State, saying, we're not going to bowl games. Notre Dame, not going to a bowl game. Players are now focused so much more on the draft and their own sort of things.

CORNISH: Image. Yes.

ZELENY: The NIL has changed college football forever. So, a lot of college football in my group chat over the weekend.

CORNISH: Well, I'm glad I didn't typecast you because I gave you all the sports sections and now I don't feel bad about it.

ZELENY: Yes, I'm reading it right there.

CORNISH: Sara, last word to you.

FISCHER: I mean, of course, I cover media, so it is this big Netflix- Warner Brothers-Discovery deal.

CORNISH: Yes, that's our group chats as well, frankly.

FISCHER: Everyone's been talking about.

I think the aspect of it that the media insiders are talking about is, you know, Netflix may have been selected from this bidding process, but, you know, folks are saying they may have won the battle and not the entire war. There's still a lot that could go down here. Will Paramount try to go hostile and go appeal directly to the Warner Brothers shareholders? What is the regulatory process going to mean? Hollywood is panicked. What does this mean for their next year ahead? So, there's a lot of unanswered questions that are keeping us on our toes.

CORNISH: All right, you guys, thanks so much. Thank you for being here. I'm good -- I'm happy to know about this discharge petition.

[07:00:00]

I feel like I've learned a little detail and happy to know you actually have pizza with other lawmakers on the other side of the aisle.

OLSZEWSKI: It's a low bar and we're trying to meet it.

CORNISH: Honestly, I didn't even know that happened anymore. So, congratulations, Congressman. Thank you for being here.

Thank you for waking up with us. I'm Audie Cornish. And the headlines are next.