Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Tonight

Judge Rules To Suspend Approval Of Abortion Pill, DOJ Can Appeal; Justice Thomas Defends Not Disclosing Gifts Of Luxury Travel; New Images Show Bob Lee After Stabbing Attack; Biden Announces Candidacy To Allies, Formal Announcement To Follow In Summer; Early Stages Of New House Republican Majority Raise Anxiety Over High Stakes Fights Expected. Aired 10-11p ET

Aired April 07, 2023 - 22:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[22:00:00]

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: A Trump-appointed federal judge in Texas just suspended the FDA's two-decade-old approval of a widely used abortion drug. That means this drug that's been on the market for more than 20 years could soon be banned across the country, even in states where abortion remains legal. Vice President Harris responding tonight.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KAMALA HARRIS, U.S. VICE PRESIDENT: There is no question that the president and I are going to stand with the women of America and do everything we can to ensure that women have the ability to make decisions about their health care, their reproductive health care in the manner that is what they need and they decide that, not their government. It is contrary to what makes for good public health policy to allow courts and politicians to tell the FDA what it should do.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: I want to bring in CNN's Rosa Flores. She is in Houston for us tonight. So, Rosa, obviously, this could have huge consequences across the country. Can you just walk us through this judge's ruling?

ROSA FLORES, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes. So, Judge Matthew Kacsmayrk was one who issued this ruling. And in a nutshell, what it does is it suspends the FDA approval of mifepristone. But the order is paused for seven days, according to the judge, so that the U.S. DOJ can appeal.

Now, about mifepristone, and mifepristone is is an abortion drug that was approved by the FDA back in 2000. It is the most common way to terminate a pregnancy in the United States. It has been used more than 5 million times since its approval. It's considered safe and effective. And medical groups say that the risk of death is, quote, non-existent.

Now, the hearing, the preliminary injunction hearing happened last month. It was about four hours long. And what's really fascinating, Alisyn, is that there is no question during this hearing that this judge was sympathetic towards the plaintiffs.

Now, the plaintiffs are coalition of anti-abortion groups. There's no question that he was sympathetic towards the plaintiffs, but there was nuance there, the judge asked questions that appeared that the judge was skeptical to going as far as the plaintiffs wanted him to go or to be as aggressive as what the plaintiffs were asking them to do, which, in this case, they were asking him to yank this medication off the shelves.

The judge even asks the plaintiffs point to another case in which the judge did exactly what you're asking me to do, and the plaintiffs couldn't point to a case. And, Alisyn, that's what makes this case so unprecedented because it's the first of its kind.

CAMEROTA: That's really interesting, Rosa. Also these anti-abortion plaintiffs, as you're saying, wanted this case before this specific judge. So, why?

FLORES: You know, this is fascinating, because if you ask abortion advocacy groups, they will say that there was judge shopping here. So, here's the background. This judge, Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, was appointed by President Donald Trump. And before this judge rose to the federal bench, he worked for a religious right law firm on anti- abortion advocacy. And who are the plaintiffs in this case? They are anti-abortion groups.

And so abortion advocates have said, and they maintain, that the there was judge shopping in this case, not just pointing back to the background of this judge, but also saying that the plaintiffs didn't incorporate in Amarillo, Texas, until a few months before filing this particular case. And just by the way that the state of Texas assigns these federal cases, there was going to be one judge that was going to be assigned to this case and that that judge was going to be judge Matthew Kacsmaryk.

Now, the plaintiffs argue that that was not the case, that they have the right to sue wherever the public is injured, and that one of those plaintiffs is a doctor from Amarillo.

[22:05;09]

Now, Alisyn, what's fascinating is that during this hearing, the plaintiffs admitted that this one doctor from Amarillo that's part of the plaintiff groups does not at all prescribe mifepristone, the abortion pill in question.

But back to this federal judge, look, this judge is known as taking Texas or making Texas the graveyard of a lot of the Biden administration priorities and policies, whether it be immigration or the expansion of LGBTQ rights, things like that. And that's why advocacy groups, abortion advocacy groups maintain that there is definitely judge shopping because they knew what they were going to get, the plaintiffs knew what they were going to get. Alisyn?

CAMEROTA: Okay. Rosa Flores, thank you for all of that background. I want to bring in my panel. We have former Democratic Congressman Mondaire Jones, Republican Strategist Evan Siegfried is also back, we have Jessica Washington, Senior Reporter for The Root and Jay Michaelson, who is a member of the Supreme Court bar. He clerked for Merrick Garland, and he wrote about the high court for several years, so we'll start with you, Jay.

So, explain how this one judge federal judge can be -- have such an effect on the country.

JAY MICHAELSON, COLUMNIST, ROLLING STONE: Well, this is a federal judge, and this, of course, is judge shopping. Liberal groups judge shop. Conservative groups judge shop. That's not that's not controversial. What's shocking -- so, I've been writing about Matthew Kacsmayrk for many years. He has said outrageous things over the years, and there're outrageous things in this opinion. This is a garbage opinion from open to shut. The way it finds standing is garbage. The way it addresses the harm is garbage. He calls mifepristone chemical abortion. That's sort of that sort of a dog whistle. He says that this allows a woman to abort her unborn child at 49 days. So, I bought a visual aid the so called unborn child's the size of a grape at 49 days. This is not at a judicial opinion. This is a theological opinion.

So, Matthew Kacsmaryk has certainly entitled his religious view about when life begins and what constitutes an unborn child. As a rabbi, I have my own views, which are quite different about when life begins. But the idea that this is now being legislated from the bench for the entire country is absolutely unconscionable.

CAMEROTA: Jessica?

JESSICA WASHINGTON, SENIOR REPORTER, THE ROOT: Yes, I mean just looking at this ruling, it is very hard to find, and especially, you know, physicians have reached out to me immediately talking about this ruling, and what they're saying is there's no way to see this as anything other than attack on bodily autonomy, because this isn't about safety.

This is a drug that has proven to be safe. It's been FDA-approved for 22 years. This is something that is safer than a lot of other drugs on the market. And, actually, what we're doing here is we're making, you know, having a medication abortion more dangerous, not any safer because people will still be able to use misopristol, which is the other medication used when you're trying to have self-medicated abortion. And so this is just going to make it slightly less safe and increased side effects. This has nothing to do with safety.

CAMEROTA: Congressman, what's the recourse here?

MONDAIRE JONES, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, the recourse is for the higher courts to overturn this ruling. Just taking a step back, I dealt with this issue of mifepristone last year when there was a concern among advocates and legal scholars that the FDA's preemptive authority, like its ability to say we approve of this drug, and so you, the 50 states in America, cannot then ban that, that was the concern. So, I authored this resolution, and we passed it through the House saying that, you know, Congress reaffirms its intention to allow the FDA to preempt any state laws that would be in conflict with what the FDA decides to do in this space.

But even, then we never imagined that a judge, a Trump judge in this case, would go back 23 years and say, we don't even agree with the original approval of this widely used, safe medication abortion pill. This is how extreme the federal judiciary has become under Donald Trump because of his activist judges that he has appointed. I mean, there's nothing conservative about this decision for the reasons that we just heard described to us, including issues like standing. And, of course, there was a federal court in Washington State had a contrary ruling this.

CAMEROTA: The -- right. So, now, where does that -- I'm confused at this federal judge in Washington State, then said the opposite of what this judge said, and I'm not sure where that leaves us. Evan, your thoughts.

EVAN SIEGFRIED, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: Well, first, the ruling that came out just after the Texas ruling was because several liberal states banded together and sued the HHS and the FDA saying we want you to ensure access to mifepristone. And the judge came out and said, yes, I don't think the HHS or FDA really opposed this as defendants in the case, and this is where we're going.

So, we have these two dueling rulings. But the Washington State ruling only applies to the states that sue. It doesn't apply to, say, Alabama or Texas.

[22:10:00]

But the Texas ruling -- look, I come from a conservative background and I think the Texas ruling is garbage. I think that, A, the judge shopping was despicable. I think that all judge shopping, no matter who does, it despicable. There was 100 percent chance in this court that this judge was going to get it because he's the only judge in this particular courthouse. And then what did he do? He did the exact same thing that we Republicans have moaned about for years, if not decades. He legislated from the bench.

And, lastly, what did the judge also do, he said, I know better than the FDA and the medical professionals. We've had this drug on the market for 23 years. You know what drugs are more likely to hurt you and kill you? Penicillin, Viagra, Tylenol. The instances of death and harm of this drug are so miniscule. So, if these plaintiffs were so concerned about the health and safety, why aren't they suing to get Viagra yanked or Tylenol or Penicillin ? No, it's all political.

CAMEROTA: Let's talk about another judge in the news tonight, Justice Clarence Thomas. So, it came out through this ProPublica investigative report that he has been being bankrolled basically on very fancy, extravagant vacations for the better part of, I think, two decades to go on this Republican mega donor's private plane, his super yacht. They have been, you know, jetting off together. He and his wife, Ginni Thomas, have been treated to all sorts of high end vacations, and he's never declared it.

And so today, Justice Thomas responded, which is unusual, and he said, the Crows are among our dearest friends. These are the mega donors. And we have been friends for over 25 years. Early in my tenure of the court, I sought guidance from my colleagues and others in the judiciary and was advised that this sort of personal hospitality from close personal friends who did not have a business -- who did not have business before the court was not reportable. Your thoughts on this, Congressman?

JONES: I've been talking about the justices and the need for ethics reform in particular for many years now. And when as a congressman, we had hearings on this very subject because it turns out this is not the first instance of ethical compromise on the court. And in this case, the response is not credible, right?

I mean, there is of the very few rules that exist, and, unfortunately, there is no binding code of ethics at the Supreme Court, which will come as a shock to many people in this country, but there are there is a law requiring financial disclosure. And there is no way under any circumstance that he could have thought that taking a private jet for personal use for his own personal errands, which was one of the several ways in which he used the private jet of this billionaire mega -- Republican mega donor would qualify as personal hospitality.

And by the way, these are people he only met once he got on the bench, which is a whole separate issue, as you consider whether someone is a real friend or someone is, you know, trying to sort of exert influence over you.

MICHAELSON: Yes. You know, I mean, this is not the first time where Justice Thomas in particular just seems to feel like he's not accountable to anybody. And part of the shame is on all of us because there are no binding rules governing Supreme Court ethics. And, you know, I think this -- if I had to compare this compared with, you know, his still sitting in cases where Ginni Thomas had a personal interest, that feels even more egregious. I mean, this guy has committed so many impeachable offenses that looks like makes Donald Trump look like Malala or, you know, Mother Teresa or something. I mean, he just seems to have no sense of responsibility.

And, you know, again, this is the first time we've seen this happen. Again, we remember with Justice Scalia and Dick Cheney going hunting together, but there, that was actually disclosed, as I recall from my dim memory of when that happened, and this was actually not disclosed, it was revealed. So, if it's totally allowed, and there's no problem, there's no ethics violation, then disclose it. Let people know that this is happening, hanging out with these mega donors, going on -- you know, using the private jet to go to stop and shop and that's fine.

JONES: And, in fact, he has a history, you know, decades ago of disclosing at least one or two gifts from the same individual. So, he knows --

CAMEROTA: And then did he got in trouble, and then he stopped disclosing? Is that the story. JONES: Well, The New York Times wrote an article about, when, 2011 or about a decade or so ago, in which it talked about some of the gifts and generous things that he had received, and then, you know, radio silence on apparently 20 years worth of $500,000-plus trips a piece on super yachts. I didn't know super yachts exist. I know I knew about yachts. I didn't know there was such thing as a super yacht.

MICHAELSON: This is like buying somebody a cocktail at the country club, right? I mean, these are half million dollar gifts, right, the super yacht, private jet. I mean, this is like another world, right, and another level of --

CAMEROTA: There was also a private chef and all sorts of attendance, like butlers to take care of you on the yacht.

[22:15:01]

I don't know who you've been hanging out with, but you need to check out the super yacht.

JONES: Really.

SIEGFRIED: I spent a great deal of time working in the federal judiciary and several of my mentors in my teenage and early 20s were federal judges, and they taught me about integrity of the law and how this -- any sort of impropriety or even the appearance of it, you can't be anywhere near it. So, Justice Thomas clearly has stepped away from at least the internal code of ethics that judges themselves hold them to.

WASHINGTON: Sorry. It's -- no, it's definitely -- I mean, it's concerning. And, look, I just am someone who's had family members in the local D.C. government and this would be unacceptable in that situation. I mean, obviously, as a journalist, I'm looking at all of this that's been uncovered, and I'm impressed by the amount that we now know. I think we do need to know.

And I also think there is no appetite to impeach, you know, Clarence Thomas or anyone on the bench. I mean, there are definitely people who are pushing for it, but I don't see it as anything that will happen anytime soon. So, it is kind of like we have all this information. He's able to give this answer, and we kind of have to sit here with it.

CAMEROTA: Thank you all very much for all of that background.

Stick around, because up next, we have some new images of the Tech Executive Bob Lee, his final moments after he was stabbed. And we're learning more about him and his family life.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CAMEROTA: We're seeing some graphic surveillance video of the Cash App Founder Bob Lee's final moments.

[22:20:00] The video is very hard to watch. So, we're using two still photos -- two still images here. They show Bob Lee staggering on the right up to an apartment building. We assume, looking for help here, his hands are bloodied after being stabbed in the chest. The video shows him falling multiple times as he tries to get help. Lee later died from his injuries.

My panel is back with me. It's still mysterious what has happened to him? It's very mysterious. They don't have a suspect, as far as we can tell, but this -- we're showing you the images here, but there's still -- the video shows him staggering. It shows him right after that shot on the right he falls over. We know that he tried to approach a car for help, and the car drove away because it was 2:00 in the morning and they didn't know what -- we assume they didn't know what was happening here. But we also wanted to know more about him.

We know that he's the father, young father of two kids, his own father wrote this Facebook post. I just lost my best friend, my son, Bob Lee, when he lost his life on the street of San Francisco early Tuesday morning. I moved to Mill Valley, California, with Bob after his mother died in 2019, and we recently relocated to Miami in October of 2022. Life has been an adventure with two bachelors living together, and I'm so happy that we were able to become so close these last years. Bob will give you the shirt off his back. He would never look down on anyone and adhered to a strict no judgment philosophy. Bobby worked harder than anyone. He was the smartest person I have ever known. He will be missed by all those who knew him. Thank you to those who have reached out in support.

Jessica, it's just awful.

WASHINGTON: It's incredibly sad. I mean, I think parents shouldn't have to outlive their children and children shouldn't have to lose their parents this young. You know, I think what happened is obviously a tragedy and, you know, looking at that video footage, which I did look at before this, it is really, really hard to watch. And I think we don't want to rush to judgment about what the people who may not have stopped to help him might have been thinking or going through or they might have been scared themselves, but it is really difficult to watch.

CAMEROTA: Yes. I just wonder also police know more than they're telling us if there's other surveillance video that they've seen?

MICHAELSON: Well, there are a couple of strangely leading remarks from the police, you know, like we'll know more soon, things like that. This is when the police generally have some evidence that they can't yet released to the public. And I think it is important not to rush to judgment or to sort of theorize this. You know, already, Elon Musk was talking about. You know, this is about crime in the cities and so forth. But the statistics don't bear him out.

I've researched a bit the homicide rate in San Francisco, 6.9 per 100,000 people, but in cities that have so called red governments led by led by Republicans, Omaha, Nebraska, 7.3 per 100,000, Oklahoma City is 7.9. So, higher numbers, there's no correlation here between the party running the city government and this crime wave that seems to be affecting everybody. It's obviously a tragic story that it would be better if we didn't try to immediately kind of theorize this for political gain.

CAMEROTA: Yes. Elon Musk doesn't wait for -- he connects the dots before there're all sorts of information, generally.

What's your thought, Congressman?

JONES: Elon Musk also just like pushes propaganda at this point. He wants the takeaway from this to be that these Democratic-controlled cities are out of control and prominent people are dying as a result of it, and this is why we need to vote for Donald Trump, apparently, or Ron DeSantis, whoever his favorite candidate is.

But in this case, let's like at least hear from the police about what happened. I think that would be the appropriate course of action in this situation.

CAMEROTA: Yes. Evan?

SIEGFRIED: This is coming to a Republican stump speech and ads near you. Jay is right on the crime statistics and Republicans are also trying to take not just San Francisco and portray it as this hellhole where everybody is going to get murdered, left and right, but it's the same with New York City. And that is just not accurate.

I grew up in the 80s here. But what also is really shocking is I think we're seeing there is a quality of life issue where there are San Franciscans who feel that the homeless population and they haven't been able to tackle homelessness, and that is a problem. As I understand it, Bob Lee moved to Miami because he felt the quality of life in San Francisco was deteriorating, and it's just terribly sad situation and I hope they catch who got him.

MICHAELSON: I think for me, what was the relevant city here in a surprising story was Chicago actually, where it looked like fears of crime, we're going to lead the more conservative candidate to the Democratic nomination for mayor, and that's being the mayor. And there was a real surprise actually when that didn't happen. And I'm really curious. I think it's there are a lot of factors in play.

It's really -- it gives me some hope that just playing on the fear, which is real, and I totally agree, there is a reality and also perception around quality of life issues in major cities, but that that doesn't necessarily have to lead to a certain result.

[22:25:00]

So, I'm really curious to see what happens in Chicago over the next period of time. You know, bring it into this story because I think it's the same story, like how do we and how do Democrats talk about crime and how do we as a society come together to really kind of address the root causes.

CAMEROTA: Thank you all very much. Meanwhile President Biden has been building the suspense and we have news tonight on his 2024 plans. Is he running for another four years or not? That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CAMEROTA: We're just getting new information into our newsroom. The Justice Department is appealing that judge's order to halt the FDA's approval of that abortion drug that we have been discussing earlier in the program. And Danco, a manufacturer of the drug, also filed notices of appeal to the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. We will keep you posted on all of that.

Now to this story. President Biden is telling allies in private conversations that he is definitely running for reelection in 2024, but he's taking his time on making a public announcement. Sources tell CNN there is still no target date and he could potentially wait until the summer to launch his campaign.

[22:30:00]

My panel is back with me. Congressman is there any upside to him waiting until the summer?

JONES: I think so, you know, and I think we've all though a lot about this but on balance, what we see happening is that this is actually a smart decision because without even having declared, Republicans are defeating themselves, right?

I mean, just this week, the former president and the -- and the leading contender for the Republican nomination was indicted, and of course, is going to be, I think, indicted by other prosecuting authorities, whether in Fulton County or at the U.S. Department of Justice.

CAMEROTA: I'm not sure that's making him less politically viable.

JONES: Yeah. Well, in a general election, I think it does make him less politically viable, especially when these more serious charges get made against him. Not so much maybe that would happen in the Manhattan -- in Manhattan, which I think is important on it in its own right. I mean, we shouldn't minimize campaign finance violations in the manipulation of business records.

But everyone knows or a lot of people know that Joe Biden is seeking re-election and it's not like someone's going to defeat him in the primary. So, why suck all of the oxygen out of the room and put the media attention on your re-election when -- if you know that you're underwater in a lot of districts in this country, in a lot of places in this country, because of a variety of things, some of which are outside of his control.

Why not just allow the people who you're gonna be running against to reveal themselves or emphasize or -- to the American people how problematic it would be if they got the reins of government?

CAMEROTA: What do you think of that strategy?

EVAN SIEGFRIED, SOMM CONSULTING PRESIDENT: Well, I think staying above the fray is actually the best thing he can do because once you become a candidate for President Of United States, even if you're the incumbent, you have to comment on the Donald Trump stuff. You have to comment on when Ron DeSantis comes in and every little utterance. He can actually go out, and say, look, I'm focused on getting delivering results for the American people.

Yes, he has a Republican House and a Democratic Senate. But maybe he can get one or two bills passed before the August recess and then he announces in August with a little bit of wind at his back, and he says, this is why I'm running.

And we'll also have a clearer sense of what's gonna happen with Donald Trump legally. And if -- and every time Donald Trump is indicted, it makes them stronger with the GOP base. However, we've seen -- especially this past week, we've seen suburban voters just reject Republicans left and right, particularly the Wisconsin's Supreme Court race.

Think of it this way, there were suburban counties that went for Mitt Romney in 2012. There was one that went for Romney by 30 points. It went for the Republican judge, Kelly, by three points. That's a massive swing. And it's because of what the Republican Party brand is, the MAGA, the Trump.

And what was happening during this race and a lot of actual conservative activists were very upset, the RNC spent its time defending Donald Trump in attacking Alvin Bragg, not going out and doing the groundwork to try and get Kelly elected to the Wisconsin Supreme.

JAY MICHAELSON, ROLLING STONE COLUMNIST: Yeah, it feels like this is really smart gaming of the Republican Party in particular, right? So, they're from -- speaking from a progressive side, there's some scary Republicans out there, right? Scary because they could really win -- Governor Sununu, right, Asa Hutchinson, they're really good candidates who can really win the center and could really win the moderate. But because of the inter-party dynamics right now, it's a race of the hard right and who can be harder right and who can go? So, the longer that happens, the better from the Democratic perspective.

And this feels like a great way to sort of get all these folks to exactly, with the indictment and others, is to say things that work really well with the base in the primary but do not win a general election. Besides, these elections are too long. Americans are sick of these, like two-year long elections. The later this one starts, the better. And if Biden helps us do that, that seems for the best.

CAMEROTA: It's also possible. Biden is waiting for his own fortunes to turn around. Here is the latest CNN poll. This is about whether or not respondents feel that the economic conditions of the country are good. At the moment, only 29 percent of the country, thanks to economic conditions are good, that is up from September and October. It's up from June and July, but it's not great. JESSICA WASHINGTON, "THE ROOT" SENIOR REPORTER: Yeah. And I hate to

agree with every single person on the panel because that's no fun, but I have to agree. I mean, it does seem like waiting makes sense, and you're right especially for the economic situation, this country to improve. People are still feeling the hurt from inflation even though it's getting better. So, I think it does make a ton of sense.

And then also with Trump's trials and I think we talked about this recently. We also have the E. Jean Carroll trial. And so, we have something where Trump is going to have to speak out about, you know, alleged sexual assault and that is much more serious than what we're talking about with these financial crimes, potentially. So, I do think that that could potentially shift things, as well.

CAMEROTA: Let's talk about how Kevin McCarthy -- Speaker McCarthy is doing in terms of corralling his tent because there was all sorts of predictions that it would be very tough for him and that may be proving true. So, according to "The New York Times", "Today", Speaker McCarthy has told colleagues he has no confidence in Congressman Arrington, the man responsible for delivering a budget framework, laying out the spending cuts the Republicans have said they will demand in exchange for any move to increase the debt limit. Your thoughts, Congressman?

[22:35:03]

JONES: He has also criticized his number two, Majority Leader Steve Scalise, as someone who he can't trust and as someone who's not seriously interested in doing the work of Congress. That's extraordinary. Let me -- you know, for all of the sort of, tension that may existed -- rivalry that may exist between Nancy Pelosi and

Steny Hoyer, like that -- there were not stories like that, where she was sort of bashing him and that got out to the press, right?

This is someone who is imploding, I think. Increasingly, it would appear that he's not gonna make the kind of progress on what he wants to see happen with the budget, that the members of his caucus, especially the hard right members, of his caucus wanna see in terms of these cuts. The president has insisted that if Kevin McCarthy wants to keep this -- whether it's the budget or the debt ceiling from being lifted-that he should make a proposal as to what he wants to see happens and let the American people see what that looks like.

And, of course, you've got, I think, increasingly controversial figures taking on greater prominence like Marjorie Taylor Greene who was in New York City just a few days ago and Matt Gaetz and some newer faces who are making no apologies for some of the controversial stuff that they're doing.

CAMEROTA: Haven't -- has it all come to the predictions? Have they come home to roost about how challenging it would be for Kevin McCarthy?

SIEGFRIED: Oh, yeah. I mean, look, Kevin McCarthy, I don't think ever expected Marjorie Taylor Greene to be a prominent 60 minutes interview with softball questions, which only elevated her status within the Republican Party and her influence. I think -- and this is a woman who goes out and actually speaks at white nationalist conferences.

I mean, it's insane. And she has extraordinary power, particularly when it comes to the budget. And if we default on our debt, the economic consequences would be cataclysmic. And a lot of Republicans in that conference don't believe it. And when you have Kevin McCarthy undercutting Jodey Arrington and vice versa, that doesn't send any confidence to me just as an American about what the fiscal health of the nation is going be when we reach the debt ceiling.

MICHAELSON: Is there any end game on the debt ceiling? I mean, it feels like there could be a caucus of the rational -- you know, the rational Republicans, you know, rational Democrats like in the center, but that feels also completely impossible. I mean, is there no -- because it feels like it's fine for Kevin McCarthy to not accomplish anything except if it tanks the entire U.S. and world.

SIEGFRIED: The rational Republicans would get punished by the irrational Republicans. They'll go out and they'll try and primary challenge them. And then all of a sudden, the rational Republican finds themselves with the MAGA -- primary race and then they're out.

CAMEROTA: Friends, thank you very much. Now, we need to talk about this. Are you clueless when it comes to online slang? Well, if you know you know, that's one of them. Plus, we've got pulse of the people on the lingo, if Jay knows. Oh, Jay knows. We'll talk about the lingo of the modern era, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[22:40:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CAMEROTA: Never. I mean, you're great on air. It's off air. How many times have you gotten a text from your kid that says "TLTR" and thought, what the hell does that mean? We're about to reveal some Gen Z lingo and find out why the two letters "OK" are suddenly so fraught with peril. Here's our pulse of the people.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: Jack, if I were to text you "OK" to something you said, what would you -- how would you interpret that?

JACK HARKIN, GEN Z: I personally would be fine with it. But I know I've texted friends okay with only like one K and then they think that I'm mad at them, that there's a whole issue going on between us, and it's like I'm literally just saying okay. But it becomes an issue. So now sometimes I'll add a second "K" or sometimes you spell out the whole word now.

ERIC BERNT, GEN X: I have friends who are really busy at work, and it doesn't matter which generation they are because they're so pressed for time. If I get a single letter "K", meaning, "Okay, I get it." But when I know my kids or a friend is not busy, and they're hanging out, and they just say, "K", I will respond, "Don't you have the time to actually communicate with me? Maybe we should talk later." And then that brings up a whole other can of worms.

CAMEROTA: That -- there's so much to unpack there. First of all, writing "okay" is not that much more time consuming than typing "K". I just wanna get that out there.

BERNT: They -- no. It probably can be.

LEE PRICE, MILLENIAL: Well, I wanna say my dad only ever responds to me with "OK", the letters, and then a period, and I know I'm not dead to him. But when I get that, I have a visceral feeling of, "Oh God, what did I do?" I feel like we're in trouble. But as for what you're saying, Alisyn, yes. When someone types the whole word "okay" out, I will read a universe of meaning into that. I think they took all the time to type out "okay." There's so much unsaid. We have problems. There's volumes that we need to address between us.

DANNY NAVARRO, MILLENIAL: So, for example, to bring in some "Spanglish" into this, I'm from Miami and we use "dale" like for everything, right? And that's the famous catchphrase Pitbull, the rapper, says "dale". And so if you say, "dale", okay, okay if you say, "dale", "dale", "dale" -- that is like, go, go, go, go, go, like, hurry up.

KIMI KANESHINA, GEN Z: Yeah, I feel like it's definitely just knowing the audience. I know I educated my parents quite a bit on the different acronyms that I use in a day to day, like "TLDR". Even something as simple as, like "AKA", "BTU". Those are things that I have been using my vernacular when speaking with my GEN Z friends.

[22:45:03]

CAMEROTA: Okay, hold on a second. What is "TLDR"?

KANESHINA: Too long or too lazy --

CAMEROTA: Wait, what?

KANESHINA: Too long, didn't read.

CAMEROTA: Okay, thank you. What's "IFYKYK"?

KANESHINA: If you know, you know.

CAMEROTA: Oh, come on. That --

KANESHINA: If you know, you know.

CAMEROTA: If you know, you know, okay. If you know, you know. Fellow Gen Xers, did you guys know that?

BERNT: Only because my kids told me.

CAMEROTA: That's awesome. Lee, you were saying that listening to boomers use any type of slang is unbearable for you.

STEWART: It's pretty bad, yeah. Pretty, pretty, pretty cringe as you might say even.

CAMEROTA: And can you give us an example of a recent time you've heard a boomer say something.

PRICE: I live in a community where there are a lot of boomers around, so I see a lot of ladies out to lunch at the local coffee shop. And I heard a group of them. One of them was saying "slay" the other day, so I'm like, oh, this has just creeped up into like completely unacceptable level and I did -- I like -- I did physically cringe.

CAMEROTA: Do you feel that same way when Gen Xers employ these things?

LEE: No, I guess I've realized I just have total generosity of spirit towards Gen Xers. They just do not bother me as much.

BERNT: In defense of the poor boomers who are getting a bad rep here, I'm on the cusp to that. But it's a fine line between trying to sound -- I won't -- I wouldn't dare say hip but contemporary. And the best example I can think of is when I grew up we said, yo, yeah, I'm up for that. And when I've said that to my kids, they say, "no, you mean, down, dad." And I said, so "up" is "down". Okay, so now that's exactly where I'm at. And I am so uncool that my "down" is "up".

SARA STEWART, GEN X: I just like to pop in and try to know what's happening. The crying emoji, the laughing, crying emoji is apparently not cool anymore. I don't care because I'm not cool anymore, so I'm just gonna keep using it. I've checked in with my 16-year-old nephew. He's okay with me using it. So, we're just gonna stick with that. I'm probably uncool now.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: Good for Sarah. She's proudly uncool. All right, so what do you guys want to educate us about? What other acronyms do I need to know?

WASHINGTON: You take this one.

RACHEL JANFAZA, "THE UP AND UP" JOURNALIST AND FOUNDER: "FWIW" for what --

CAMEROTA: For what it's worth.

JANFAZA: Yeah, you knew that.

CAMEROTA: I knew that one, for what it's worth.

JANFAZA: Maybe, well, there's some that have been around for a really long time, "BRB", "TTYL".

CAMEROTA: Hold on, hold on. Be right back.

JANFAZA: Yes.

CAMEROTA: Okay. "TTRL", you said. JANFAZA: "TTYL".

CAMEROTA: Talk To You Later.

JANFAZA: Yes.

CAMEROTA: Oh, I'm good, guys.

JONES: Listen, do you know what "YKTV" means?

UNKNOWN: "YKTV"?

JONES: You Know The Vibes.

CAMEROTA: No, I didn't know that. "YKTV".

JANFAZA: I didn't know that either.

JONES: I'm still hip. I'm still hip.

CAMEROTA: Oh, I can't wait to try this on my teenagers. Do you have any?

SIEGFRIED: No, but I did teach a baby boomer relative of mine, "Okay boomer", and I said it to him one day just because we were having a heated discussion and it ended with me saying, "Okay boomer". So, he took that to his Gen Z and younger millennial employees and started signing his emails, okay comma boomer. And they were very confused.

WASHINGTON: Did he think it was positive?

SIEGFRIED: He did.

CAMEROTA: Oh, that's "adorbs".

SIEGFRIED: Yeah.

CAMEROTA: Oh, all right.

JONES: That's easy to do. That's (inaudible).

CAMEROTA: Thank you, thank you. All right, I have to go. Have you all been paying attention to everything that has happened this week? We will quiz the panel on what they know about the news, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[22:50:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CAMEROTA: Okay, it's Friday night and you know what that means. It's news quiz night. Let's see how much you and my panelists know about this week's news stories.

Okay, guys. Get your paddles ready. Here is our first question. Former President Trump pleaded not guilty to this many felony criminal charges this week. Is it, A 29, B 17, or C 34? 1, 2, 3. Okay, you all got it. Excellent. You're off to a great start.

Okay, next question. Which GOP lawmaker did not protest in New York ahead of Donald Trump's arrangement? Is it, A Marjorie Taylor Greene, B Matt Gaetz or C George Santos? In 1, 2, 3. You all got it right. Yes, it was in fact, Matt Gaetz. Excellent job, guys and they're getting harder now.

Okay, prepare yourselves. A new "Barbie" movie trailer dropped this week. When did "Barbie" first make her debut? Was it A 1959, B 1960 or C 1963? Think about that, pondering, pondering. Okay, in 1, 2, 3. It was A. You got it right, Congressman. How did you know that? Well done.

Okay. We were just talking about this earlier on the program. Justice Clarence Thomas accepted an undisclosed luxury vacation to, A Paris, B Disney World or C Indonesia. In 1, 2, 3, reveal your answers. Oh, I didn't see this happening, Jessica.

[22:55:00]

JONES: You cheated.

WASHINGTON: I didn't mean to.

JONES: You just cheated. I can't believe you just cheated.

CAMEROTA: Okay. You all got it right mysteriously . All right, moving on. What animal was found this week in a pilot's shirt? Was it A, a mouse; B, a snake; C, a puppy? Okay, everybody, get your answers ready. In 1, 2, 3. It was B, a snake. But a mouse would make more sense, guys. That was -- did you see?

JONES: No, I didn't.

CAMEROTA: Oh, you had me. Okay. Got it.

JONES: I didn't. But I thought a mouse would be too easy an answer to a question, so it had to have been, you know, and obviously, like the third thing couldn't.

CAMEROTA: And also, I mean, snakes on a plane makes perfect sense.

JONES: I think - I think I'm winning, Alisyn.

CAMEROTA: I think you are. So far, you are. Okay, but we have -- oh, are we out of time?

JONES: Oh, gosh, thank you so much for --

CAMEROTA: Okay, one more quick one. They're giving us one more quick one. They're giving us one quick -- okay, here we go. Former teachers from Kanye West's school alleged that students were fed only, A sushi, B chicken fingers, C vegan food. In 1, 2, 3. It was, in fact, A sushi.

JONES: Wow.

CAMEROTA: Guys, that was great. Congressman, you won, well done.

JONES: Thank you. Thank you.

CAMEROTA: Well done.

JONES: Thank you.

CAMEROTA: Very well done, guys. Thank you so much. And thanks so much for watching, everyone. Have a great weekend. Our coverage continues now.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)