Return to Transcripts main page
Laura Coates Live
Harris And Trump Hold Dueling Rallies Miles Apart In Wisconsin; "Mr. Wonderful" And "The Mooch" Debate On 2024 Economic Proposals; Harry Enten Reports The Likeliest Paths To 270; Jury Convicts Ex-Cop Of Excessive Force In Breonna Taylor's Death; John Grisham Joins "Laura Coates Live." Aired 11p-12a ET
Aired November 01, 2024 - 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)
LAURA COATES, CNN HOST AND SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Welcome to "Laura Coates Live" on this Friday night. We're just four days out from the election. And this evening, both campaigns are making a huge push in battleground state Wisconsin. Kamala Harris and Donald Trump appearing just seven miles apart from one another in the Milwaukee area, of all places. Harris wrapping her rally just a few moments ago. Meanwhile, Trump, he is still speaking.
Now, Harris once again leaning into star power. This time, Cardi B revving up the crowd. She wasn't even going to vote this year. That is until Harris became the nominee. And yes, Cardi B had some words for Donald Trump.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CARDI B, RAPPER, SONGWRITER: Donald Trump talks about how he has a concept of a plan. But America, the only concept of a plan he has is a plan to hustle you.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Now, both candidates were seasoning every possible controversy from the other side. And, by the way, today, it was no exception. And once again, you know what it's about? It's about rhetoric. This time, it's what Trump told Tucker Carlson just last night about his Republican rival, Liz Cheney, the one who's backing Harris. We'll play the full clip for you now.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: She's a radical war hawk. Let's put her with a rifle standing there with nine barrels shooting at her, okay? Let's see how she feels about it. You know, when the guns are trained on her face. You know, they're all war hawks when they're sitting in Washington in a nice building saying, oh, gee, well, let's send -- let's send 10,000 troops right into the mouth of the enemy. But she's a stupid person.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Remember all those calls from weeks ago to tone down the rhetoric? The one that did not one, but two assassination attempts against former President Trump? It's all gone out the window now, it seems. In response, Cheney says, "This is how dictators destroy free nations. They threaten those who speak against them with death." Arizona's attorney general is now investigating whether Trump's remark qualifies as a death threat under state law. Harris says it should bar him from the White House.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KAMALA HARRIS, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, U.S. PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: This must be disqualifying. Anyone who wants to be president of the United States, who uses that kind of violent rhetoric, is clearly disqualified and unqualified to be president.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: We've heard that a lot, haven't we? Now, the Trump campaign says he is being misrepresented here. Now, you heard what he said. The full context was there. So, I ask you to be the judge about what you fully heard. But when Trump addressed it today, let me tell you, he made no walk back.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I think that Liz Cheney is a disaster. All she wants to do is blow people up. She's a war hawk and a dumb one to that. And if you ever put her into the field of battle, she'd be the first one to chicken out. She wouldn't fight. She would chicken out so fast. And that's all I say.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Now, look, it's Friday night, and if you're trying to make sense of everything that happened this week, you'd be forgiven if you can't remember all, and I mean all of the controversies.
Today, it was the fallout from Trump's Liz Cheney comment. Yesterday, it was Harris surrogate Mark Cuban saying that strong, intelligent women are never around Trump. See, Wednesday, Trump saying he'd protect women whether they like it or not. Tuesday, President Biden calling Trump supporters "garbage," only to clarify that's not what he meant. Which takes us all the way back to Monday, the day after a comedian called Puerto Rico "garbage" at Trump's Madison Square Garden rally. That was all that in five days. By the way, we've got still four left.
CNN is following both campaigns on the ground in Wisconsin. MJ Lee is with Harris in the Milwaukee suburb of West Allis, and Kristen Holmes is with Trump in Milwaukee. MJ Lee, let's start with you here.
[23:04:58]
The Harris campaign is digging in on all of these offensive Trump comments, but do they think it's going to get through to voters who are still on that fence?
MJ LEE, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, they actually do think this kind of rhetoric coming from Donald Trump and his campaign is making a difference. Now, to be clear, they very much believe that this is going to be a really close race that likely will come down to the margins in just a number of states that are so critical in these battleground areas. That is why we are seeing the vice president come back to campaign in Wisconsin, even though she was last here on Wednesday night.
But what's been interesting, Laura, is hearing the Harris campaign talk a little bullishly about what they have been seeing in the early voting data and particularly the people they say only made up their minds on who to vote for in about the last week or so. And one of the things that they are pointing to again is the range of offensive and incendiary rhetoric that we've heard in recent days from the former president and some of his surrogates.
Now, at this rally, I got the chance to talk to a number of the voters here. of course, yes, this was a Kamala Harris rally, so it's no surprise that you would expect most of the people here to be at least interested in her, if not, have already voted for her. But a number of them, I noticed, actually pointed specifically to things that they read in the news and saw in the news coming from that Madison Square Garden rally that you referenced, including that comedian's comments about people in Puerto Rico.
And I just thought I'd leave you, Laura, with this one anecdote. I spoke with one man, a 44-year-old man named Eric, who says he has a big Irish Catholic family. He himself is a lifelong Democrat. And he said, look, I have a number of uncles who are Donald Trump supporters, but a number of them have actually told him that this time around, they simply can't support Donald Trump. He says he doesn't know exactly the reason why. He assumes that a part of the reason has to do with some of this divisive rhetoric that we're hearing from the Donald Trump campaign.
The thing about next week is we're going to see whether this is just the story of one family or whether there are going to be many other families that actually are encountering this kind of a shift and who they actually want to support because of some of these headlines coming out of the Donald Trump campaign.
COATES: Well, MJ, we're less than a month away from Thanksgiving as well. Those tables where that might happen are going to be interesting. But before I let you go, MJ, how did that crowd respond to Cardi B's comments and her speech?
LEE: They were absolutely fired up, and I think particularly because she's not somebody we are used to in this kind of a setting in a political campaign rally delivering a speech.
And I should also note, she actually handled, I think, what was a teleprompter malfunction quite gracefully. She waited until somebody brought her a phone that actually had the remarks on them. She acknowledged, as she took sips of water, she was nervous. But it was very clear that the crowd in this room absolutely loved it.
What was remarkable was hearing party be say she actually probably wouldn't have voted in the 2024 election until Vice President Kamala Harris became the nominee, the clear suggestion there being that she probably would not have been a Joe Biden supporter.
COATES:
LEE: Now, she is trying to get everyone out to support the vice president.
COATES: MJ Lee, thank you so much. I want to go now to Kristen Holmes. She is in Milwaukee. Kristen, Trump is defending his violent comments against Liz Cheney. Is the campaign worried that this will hurt him?
KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, it's obviously a big question, Laura. I mean, we almost never see Donald Trump try to clarify comments that he made. He'll say something, and then he'll leave it to the campaign, leave it to his surrogates to get out there and get on the stage and try to clean up after him.
Donald Trump himself, even before he started talking about those Liz Cheney comments posted on True Social, trying to clarify that this was all about Liz Cheney wanting to go to war, saying that she would never fight in a war. And then he spent a lot of the day repeating those kind of comments as he tried to clarify. Here you go. Take a listen to what he said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: Kamala is campaigning with warmongers like Liz Cheney. How do you think that is? They want to get the -- they want to get the Arab- American vote. They want to get the Muslim votes. So, she picks Liz Cheney, whose father virtually destroyed the Middle East. Right? I don't think that's -- I don't think it's working out too well.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
LEE: And these are just some of the comments that he said. He had multiple stops today. He talked about it at multiple times. Now, here in Wisconsin, he actually has not mentioned it at all. He is trying to stick to his messaging around immigration and the economy.
[23:10:01]
But it has been kind of a weird rollout here. He has a mic that has had issues. And knowing Donald Trump, it has been a profane rant about how he has to hold the -- how he has to hold the microphone, how people have failed him because no one can hear him. So, a lot of focus on that.
But one thing to keep in mind, I know MJ was talking about this, Wisconsin is a pivotal state. Donald Trump was also here on Thursday. He is spending an enormous amount of time here. When I talk to both campaigns, there's not a ton of transparency as to what exactly is going to happen on the ground in Wisconsin. Talk to a number of voters who say they also don't know.
Now, everyone here, obviously, I'm at a Trump rally, they're here to support him, they were cheering for RFK Jr., they are very excited to get out and vote, they all say they're going to cast their ballots.
But there are still a lot of questions as to how exactly this is going to turn out on Tuesday. Just a reminder of how close this race was in 2020. Donald Trump's team is fearful that it could go the other way, but they are also hopeful that they can drive people out for early voting. That's why they're holding so many events today, this week, trying to get people to the polls early. Laura?
COATES: Kristen Holmes, thank you so much. With me now, Alencia Johnson, a Democratic strategist, Olivia Troye, former adviser to Vice President Mike Pence, she has endorsed Harris, and Lance Trover, Republican strategist and former spokesman for Doug Burgum's presidential campaign. Thank you all for joining us.
I want to begin with you here, Lance, because, look, Trump is standing by his comments. There are a lot of Americans, though, who have said that they are over the divisive rhetoric. I wonder if this is going to come back to haunt the Trump campaign, this sustained level of rhetoric.
LANCE TROVER, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: It's hard for me to imagine that to be the case. The voters know who Donald Trump is. This is nothing --
(LAUGHTER)
They are very -- I say this all the time, they are very clear-eyed about who he is, and he's still tied or leading in the polls or just within the margin of error. But I'm really glad you played that montage earlier, but it has been quite a week, and I think for most voters at this juncture of a campaign, it is what they consider to be the silly season where both campaigns, and I think you summed it up very well, latching on to what something else that the other campaign has said or done.
And really at this moment, if you're undecided, and I think there are a few, maybe three to 5% of people out there, if you're undecided in this race, you're really -- it's really a gut check time for them. And to me, it's more about what is the future, what does the future look like for my family, do I like what has been going on the last four years.
And I think that's the overriding problem for the Harris campaign that consistently, in polling, it shows that 70% of the country thinks we're on the wrong track, and then the two top issues, the economy and cost of living along with immigration, Donald Trump leads typically by double digits in those polling.
COATES: Well, here's another set of two "E" words. One is exhaustion and the other one is encouragement. And I wonder how the candidates will encourage or exhaust by their rhetoric and how the voters really feel about that. Olivia, let me ask you, because you have said that Trump's comments, they're meant to silence, they're meant to intimidate anyone who dares to oppose him. And another Republican who has endorsed Harris, Joe Walsh, he thinks that Trump's comments have been taken out of context, that he was actually making a point about Cheney's war stance.
Walsh said on X, and I'm quoting here about Trump's quote, saying, "The stuff he says is bad enough that we don't have to lie about it." What are your thoughts on that?
OLIVIA TROYE, FORMER HOMELAND SECURITY AND COVID TASK FORCE ADVISER TO VICE PRESIDENT PENCE: Well, you know, I have a different take than Joe Walsh, having worked for Donald Trump. I know that when Donald Trump says things, he's very calculated, and he says what he means. And so, you don't make a flipping comment like that. If you want to call someone a war hawk, there are definitely different ways that you can word that and stress your point. You don't have to go to the extent of saying you're going to point nine barrels at someone and shoot at them.
And I think, to me, when you say things like that, I think, one, it's un-presidential, two, I want to be very clear about this, Donald Trump has sat in the Oval Office where he has had national security people tell him that his words matter and that when he says things, they're -- they actually sometimes incite violence and that actually leads to real-world consequences in our communities.
So, I don't take Donald Trump's statements lightly at any point because he knows that what he's doing will eventually lead to putting targets on the people's backs that he calls enemies. And look, he has been calling for military tribunals on to Liz Cheney. So, none of this, to me, is hyperbole, and I think we need to take this very seriously.
COATES: You know, that's a fascinating point as well. That's the point, Alencia, that the Harris campaign is trying to make, the to-do list versus the enemies list. But tonight, speaking of Liz Cheney, Liz Cheney is urging former President George W. Bush to actually endorse Harris and come out and endorse her. Listen to this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LIZ CHENEY, FORMER WYOMING REPRESENTATIVE (voice-over): I can't explain why George W. Bush hasn't spoken out, but I think it's time. And I wish that he would.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[23:15:00]
COATES: Another former Bush official, Nicolle Wallace, urging them to do the same. How could that possibly help?
ALENCIA JOHNSON, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Listen, it is -- I think if we're looking at the bigger coalition, it might be a tricky situation to bolster some of these Republicans when we also are trying to make sure progressives feel comfortable showing up to the polls on Election Day.
But what I do see is happening is this permission structure being built for independents and Republicans, particularly like a lot of Republican women who are tired of Trump's rhetoric, who are tired of the divisiveness, and who are tired of his positions on some policies that are actually really concerning for them, particularly Dobbs.
And so, it is interesting to see this. I think it could help some of the maybe independents or Nikki Haley voters that folks are trying to figure out how they're going to vote. Maybe they would get up from the couch and actually show up and secretly cast a ballot for Vice President Harris.
COATES: Do you think that the Nikki Haley supporters are offended that she has not been enveloped into this campaign? I mean, after she dropped out of the race, she still got votes.
JOHNSON: Uh-hmm.
COATES: The fact that he has not used her, she has offered dates and beyond, that there are comments about women, that she has told the campaign, what you're saying could be very alienating, this whole hyper-grow mentality problematic, is that going to make undecided voters who are saying, I didn't want you in the first place, now say, I'm going to stay home or all right, Harris, you get my vote?
JOHNSON: Listen, I think Nikki Haley voters saw in her -- it was more than her, right? It was a departure from Donald Trump. And so, whether she was involved or not, I think some of them were what I've gathered, some of them were actually disappointed when she showed up and supported him, right? Because as we've known with Donald Trump, no matter how much people try to engulf him with actually, you know, strategy and what he should focus on, he doesn't listen, he doesn't pay attention.
And so, I think for those voters who might be independent and, you know, less far-right conservatives, they're trying to figure out, do I stay at home or do I show up for Vice President Harris? And I think that's who Liz Cheney is trying to appeal to with the hopefully a George Bush endorsement that she's hoping for.
COATES: Olivia, when you think about Lance's earlier comment about the idea of people being exhausted, thinking, or that they also know him and, therefore, they're not going to necessarily look at every single detail of the statements and hold it against him, the senior Harris campaign official really feels as though the comments, specifically about Puerto Rico, that those are the ones that are breaking through, that in this final week, people are finally leaning in, if that's what people are looking at, then this week has been horrible for the Trump campaign, do you see that as, within the campaign, a kind of course correction moment? Will he take the time to try to change perception or is he just going to say, here I am, that's what they said, forget it?
TROYE: You know, I don't see him course correcting at all. I mean, certainly, they're trying -- they would try to distance themselves from that. But this is who they are, and I want to be very clear about that. And so, I think what happened this week is that now it's finally in the open.
You know, the things that were said behind closed doors and the things that they did to withhold aid from Puerto Rico, which I live firsthand, now we're talking about it openly, and how they really truly feel about anyone who doesn't fit into their mold of what they think America should be. And so, I think people are paying attention.
And look, I have been traveling to battleground states. I was in North Carolina yesterday, and I was in Wisconsin today traveling to different parts of the state. And I'll say this, I'm talking to independent and Republican voters who are watching this, some of them who are actually in these last few days looking at everything and saying, you know what, I actually don't want to be a part of this, I don't want to be identified like this.
And I think, you know, I may not agree on everything that's going on here on the Harris campaign, you know, I may not agree with their policies, but enough is enough, and it's time for, you know, for us to have a president that actually behaves in a presidential way and wants to actually make a difference for the country instead of sitting there with this ignorant divisive rhetoric that continues to be espoused by Trump and his campaign.
COATES: We'll see what the voters think four days from now. Stand by, everyone. Still ahead, what the newest polling suggests about that potential pathway to 270 electoral college votes. Plus, who's making the better case about the economy? Our debate tonight between Anthony Scaramucci and Mr. Wonderful, AKA Kevin O'Leary, is next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:20:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: For voters, the economy is personal. Look at this latest national poll. Pocketbook issues remain the top concern. Voters are looking for financial relief. Here's a part of Vice President Harris's final pitch.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HARRIS: When I am elected, I will walk in with a to-do list.
(APPLAUSE)
On behalf of you. And at the top of my list is bringing down your cost of living. That will be my focus every single day as president.
(APPLAUSE)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: And Donald Trump's closing message? (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: We will bring back our economy and, very simply, I will make America affordable again. I will cut your energy prices in half within 12 months. We're going to cut it in half. We have liquid gold (ph).
(APPLAUSE)
And then everything else is going to come down.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: All right, we'll forget about Bidenomics. Joining me now for a spirited debate on Kamala-nomics and Trump-nomics, "Shark Tank" judge, Kevin O'Leary, AKA "Mr. Wonderful." He's also the chairman of O'Leary Ventures. And former Trump White House communications director, Anthony Scaramucci, AKA "The Mooch." He has endorsed Kamala Harris for president. Good to see both of you.
I'll begin with you, Kevin. Let's talk about tariffs, a hallmark of Trump's economic agenda. "The Washington Post" reporting a number of businesses are actually warning Americans are going to pay the price.
[23:25:00]
You've got a number of people talking about this very issue. AutoZone making comments, "If we get tariffs, we will pass those tariffs costs back to the consumer." Columbia Sportswear, "We're set to raise prices." Stanley Black & Decker, "We'll have to do some surgical price actions." Look, you've called for 400% tariffs on China. Won't Trump's plan make things more expensive?
KEVIN O'LEARY, CHAIRMAN, O'LEARY VENTURES: Actually, we have tariffs in place now. Biden-Harris administration did not remove any of them. They were in place when they took over the administration. And going through Congress, right now, in a bill that I approve, Reciprocal Tariff Act basically looking at each nation's tariff against us and matching it exactly the same. And that all works with the exception of China.
China came into the WTO in 1999 and has not played by the rules, not a single year. And I do business there along with millions of others. And I know how it works. They cheat, they steal. There's no IP protection. We can't buy land the same way. They use our courts. We can't do the same there. They litigate us here. We can't do that. They don't play that route by the rules and compliance in listing their companies. So that's a different narrative. All I want to do with China is to bring the Supreme Leader to Washington to negotiate a level playing field, like we have in the act.
Now, tariffs themselves have been called many different titles, including sales tax.
COATES: Uh-hmm.
O'LEARY: That's not true. Tariffs are there. They're generally used temporarily to level. For example, Germany puts a 10% tax on us on automotive. We do the same to them. Most of our trading partners understand why we do this to each other, but not China. There's nothing wrong with tariffs and they're used politically to tell people, oh, my goodness, it's just horrible. They're already there. And basically, I don't think they're going away, and they're going to be debated by whoever becomes president. But I want to say --
COATES: Anthony, what do you -- well, hold on a second. I want to hear Anthony's take on that.
O'LEARY: Sure.
COATES: Anthony?
ANTHONY SCARAMUCCI, PODCAST HOST, FORMER WHITE HOUSE COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR: Well, I mean, listen, I mean, you know, what Kevin is leaving out of it, of course, is that this is a form of regressive taxation. It eats up the disposable income of middle- and lower-income people. And it would help American corporations. It would obviously give CEOs around America a very big salary boost. I understand why the president or the former president wants to use it.
But, you know, what I don't like about what Kevin is saying, and I love Kevin, we're very close friends, he's on the wrong side of this, and I would just say, Kevin, I've got nine years more of experience working with this guy than you, and he hurts everybody. So, get out of the way, Kevin. Don't wear one of the garbage can detector reflectors. Wear a bulletproof vest because you got to be very careful with this guy.
He's calling on shooting people, he acts nuts, he says the most ridiculous things that are very harmful to our citizens, he's cruel, and the stuff that he's talking about as an economic plan is going to be an economic disaster for the lower- and middle-income people. So, for all those reasons, I'm begging you as a friend, you can -- run, Kevin. Run for your life.
By the way, I hope you're a citizen now. I mean, he probably likes you today, but if he doesn't like you tomorrow, you're going to be out the door with me, million Cheneys. So, you got to be careful, Kev. I'm just telling you.
COATES: Kevin, what is your reaction?
O'LEARY: Listen, I love Mooch, too. We know each other very, very well. We are on different sides of this, as he said. Laura, I just want to commend you on doing something that no other network is doing right now, trying to drill down into policy. We have lost policy narrative completely this week. In the last few days before the election, nobody knows what anybody is policy is. It's just rhetoric both sides.
But, you know, what Mooch just did there is attack the candidate. I want to talk about the policies.
COATES: Can you separate the two for the voters, though? SCARAMUCCI: I did both, right? I attacked the candidate and the policy.
O'LEARY: Okay, but --
SCARAMUCCI: It was an ad-hominem and a factual attack on policy.
O'LEARY: I want to point something out. Forty-five percent of this country hated Trump last year. They hate Trump tonight. There's -- 45% of the country loves Trump. And they love him tonight. The last 10% will decide. And what I find so stressed about this cycle is both these candidates, no less than 200,000 people are going to decide who becomes president, why don't they tell them how they're going to make their lives better than call them Nazis or suggest gunfire or all the rest of this crap that is completely irrelevant? And I think it's a waste of time. I don't care what a rapper says about --
SCARAMUCCI: Not irrelevant because it -- it's not irrelevant because it is a hate speech. You're calling Puerto Ricans piles of garbage, and you're telling people you're going to use the American military against your political adversaries. And the Fox News guy says, you know, you don't really mean that. He said, oh, no, I really do mean that. That is too coarse of a discourse for American president.
O'LEARY: Okay, Mooch, I ask you to come back to policy. Let's talk --
SCARAMUCCI: The country that I got born in is United States. The first name is United. Trump wants to divide people. He's a very bad human being.
O'LEARY: Let's talk about another policy.
SCARAMUCCI: And we should not have him return to the White House.
COATES: Hold on. Don't -- wait. Don't talk on each other. Hold on a second.
[23:30:00]
I want to ask this question because I know you want to talk about policy, Kevin. I know you do as well, Anthony. But if these last 100,000 people are the ones who are deciding the issues, do you really think they're talking about the granular detail of the policy or they're talking about the person who would actually put that policy forth? Wouldn't character have a very big role?
O'LEARY: Now, my point is they've made their mind up about character. They've already decided. They know who they want to vote for. The majority of this country. In fact, 55 million have already voted. Let's talk policy. Let me throw another policy nugget out there for Mooch, okay? Let's talk corporate taxes at 28%.
SCARAMUCCI: We got to get to the deportations, though, right?
O'LEARY: Okay, wait, we'll get there, too.
SCARAMUCCI: We got to get there because that's economic policy.
O'LEARY: We'll get there, too.
SCARAMUCCI: Let's go. Yeah.
O'LEARY: Let's talk about 28% increase in corporate taxes. That would be the highest in the history of the United States ever penned ever. Right now, we're sitting in the middle of the G20 in competitiveness. That would take us to the bottom quartile overnight. Is that a good thing for America? And why can't she explain why that is a good thing if she's going to do it? And she says she is going to do it. She's going to raise taxes at 28%. That will drive jobs and companies back to Ireland, like they did last time. Taxes were 28%. It's a bad idea. Eight-eight percent of jobs.
COATES: Anthony, is it a bad idea?
O'LEARY: Hundred percent.
SCARAMUCCI: Well, you know, what Kevin is missing, I think the Clinton tax rates were roughly around there. I think he's talking about the OECD competitiveness. But we're running a $36 trillion deficit. Donald Trump's plan is going to balloon the deficit. He spent $2 trillion of deficit spending in eight years -- sorry, $8 trillion, you know, two a year. And it was George W. -- it was George Washington and George W. Bush, $7 trillion. Donald Trump in four years, $8 trillion. He's on his way to $9 to $10 trillion with his economic plan.
So, that will absolutely kill the people I grew up with, the lower- and middle- income people, because they have to devalue the dollar, they have to create inflation. But let's go to the deportation because that's 75 to 80 basis points off the GDP. He's talking about deporting 15 million people. It's in Agenda 47. It's in Project 2025.
Let's just go over the math of that because he's an economist that I'm talking to. He knows you pull those people out of the country, you're going to crush the economy, you're going to reduce our tax revenues, and you're going to increase the burden on social security.
Let me just give Kevin this fact to ponder for Mr. Trump. One point eight million people deported in a year is $88 billion in that year the government has to spend to find them in the handmaid's tale cars and put them in concentration camps.
COATES: Wow.
SCARAMUCCI: These people are crazy. Okay? And the American people need to wake up to how absolutely crazy they are so that we can say the course. And Kevin knows stock market is good. We're doing better. Manufacturing is returning to the United States. Wages are up. We just have to work on the inflation. And Kevin knows this is systemic inflation. This is not born from --
COATES: Well --
SCARAMUCCI: -- Biden or Harris. This is global inflation. COATES: Kevin?
O'LEARY: Here's what --
COATES: Hold on. I'm sorry, Kevin. Hold on, gentlemen. I'm sorry, but Kevin, I'm going to give Anthony the final word because I called you "Mr. Wonderful," and that name gave you more weight just now. So, I'm going to be nice. Come back, both of you, about this thing.
SCARAMUCCI: Laura, you can --
COATES: Yeah, I'm good.
SCARAMUCCI: You can give him the final word. He is so wrong.
(LAUGHTER)
Hey, Laura, he's still wrong. Give him the final word so that people can actually see what he is saying is ridiculous.
O'LEARY: Let me have the final word.
COATES: I will give you the final word.
O'LEARY: Thank you. Thank you.
COATES: I will give you the final word.
SCARAMUCCI: Give him the final world.
O'LEARY: I will take the final word, and I will say this.
COATES: Am I talking? I'm saying, I will give you the final word, but I will give you the cliffhanger. I want you both to be back on. Is your word going to be a sentence, Kevin, or is it going to be longer? Because I know you.
O'LEARY: No, no, I'm going to give you a sentence.
COATES: All right.
O'LEARY: If she loses, it's because the Democratic Party circumvented democracy and they anointed her. The problems at play during '19 and then in 2020 are the same she has today. And obviously, nobody thought that through. And if she -- I was just saying, if she loses, they will never do this again, and they shouldn't have in the first place.
SCARAMUCCI: She's not going to lose.
COATES: And doesn't transform a sentence into like something less than a paragraph. I got to go, fellas.
O'LEARY: Thank you.
COATES: I'll have you back on soon. Thank you so much. Be sure to check out Anthony on CNN -- SCARAMUCCI: -- she's going to win.
COATES: Check out. They must have a hell of a group chat. I went in. Be sure to check out Anthony on CNN's all new episode of "Have I Got News for You." He joins comedian Sam Jay along with Roy Wood, Jr., Amber Ruffin, and Michael Ian Black, tomorrow at 9 p.m.
A flood of new polling in the last 24 hours leading both sides to think maybe they have the edge. Maybe they don't. Harry Enten is at the magic wall with the actual paths to 270 and what might happen if the polls are wrong next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:35:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: We are just now four days away from Election Day. And according to the most recent CNN average of national polling, there is no clear leader in this presidential race. So, I can't tell you who's going to win, but I can give you answers to some of your other burning questions, perhaps, like who better to call on that than CNN senior data reporter Harry Enten. Harry, the man of the hour.
HARRY ENTEN, CNN SENIOR DATA REPORTER: Laura, is that you? Is that you?
COATES: It's me. I haven't seen you, kid. How you doing?
ENTEN: I'm doing perfectly well, hoping to get a little bit of nap as we go from daylight saving time to standard time. Perfectly right in time, baby.
COATES: Well, what's election savings time? That's where we are right now because we don't even know who's going to win. Of course, that is how democracy works. But we can game out how Trump or Harris could win. What are their best paths to 270?
ENTEN: Yeah, let's start off with Kamala Harris's best path to 270 electoral votes, and you'll notice her best path gets her to exactly 270 electoral votes. How does this path work?
[23:39:58]
Well, let's simply put, she wins the great big blue wall and the Great Lakes states, she wins Wisconsin, she wins Michigan, she wins Pennsylvania. That even affords her to lose North Carolina, Georgia, Arizona, Nevada, and she still gets to exactly 270 electoral votes as long as, of course, she holds on Nebraska's second congressional district where the polling does, in fact, have her favorite. All right, so that's Kamala Harris's best path.
What is Donald Trump's best path to 270 electoral votes? It looks an awful bit like Kamala Harris's best path, but one state is flipped in this scenario, and that, of course, is the great Commonwealth of Pennsylvania where the polls right now are so razor tight.
You look at one poll, Harris is ahead. You look at another poll, Trump is ahead. You take an average of all the polls, and you basically go shrug emoji. You have no idea who's ahead, and that gets Trump to 287 electoral votes as long as he carries the Sun Belt, where he's polling stronger than he is in the Great Lakes right now, Laura.
COATES: Well, I mean, speaking of the polls, though, and you know they show right now this deadlock race, and your map shows something very, very interesting. But what happens if they're off like they were in 2020 and 2022?
ENTEN: Yeah, what happens if the polls miss? Well, if the polls are off like they were in 2020 and, of course, Donald Trump was underestimated, not just in 2020 but 2016 as well, but if they're off like they were in 2020, look at this, Donald Trump gets up to 312 electoral votes. Why? Because he wins in the southwest, he wins in the southeast battleground states, and he wins in the Great Lakes battleground states as well. He wins all seven battleground states, and he exceeds 300 electoral votes.
Now, a lot of my friends say, well, you know, the polls have underestimated Donald Trump twice. Why don't they underestimate him a third time as well? Well, keep in mind, just two years ago, what happened with the polls? Well, they underestimated the Democrats across the board, Laura. And so, if the polls are off like they were in 2022, what happens here? Well, then Kamala Harris sweeps all of the important battleground states. She wins in the Great Lakes, she wins in the southeast, she wins in the southwest, and get this, she gets up to 319 electoral votes.
And that's the thing I think is so important for the audience to understand. Yes, the polls are razor tight right now, but polls are not perfect. Do not be surprised if when all the votes are tallied, that one of the candidates actually scores a blowout in the electoral college. Anything is on the table at this point, Laura.
COATES: Well, I mean, given that, it took nearly a week to call the race in 2020, when you remember this, but what do you think we'll know and when will we know the winner, do you think, this time around?
ENTEN: Well, I wish I knew the answer, but I can give you a clue as to when it might happen. So, Pennsylvania, as we pointed out, is the all- important battleground state. And so, I think this gives you an idea of sort of the range of potential results.
So, when CNN projected Pennsylvania? Well, in 2020, it took until 11:24 a.m. on Saturday. All right? So, that was a long time after the election. That was four days after the election. But in 2022, in the Senate race in Pennsylvania, the race was actually projected on Wednesday, early morning, at 12 a.m. Now, what was the difference between the two of those years? Well, first off, the race for president in 2020 was considerably closer than the race for Senate. The margin was one point in 2020 for president for Senate in 2022. It was five points. But more than that, what took so long? It was the great amount of mail ballots and Pennsylvania wasn't used to counting all those mail ballots. The number of mail ballots will be lower this time around, most likely. And Pennsylvania has become a little bit better. But if it ends up like a one-point margin, don't be surprised if we have to wait a while.
COATES: This is going to go right to the end, right through the tape. If you look closely, a gray hair just popped out of my head.
ENTEN: I'm going to run right through that tape, Laura. I'm going to run right through that tape, right through the camera.
(LAUGHTER)
COATES: I'll cheer you on from the side and hand you a cup of water. How about that? Harry Enten --
ENTEN: Sounds perfect.
COATES: Thank you so much.
ENTEN: Shalom.
COATES: Well, my next guest is one of the most prolific authors in history, writing fictional legal thriller after thriller. But tonight, he's using his talents to highlight a very troubling reality in this country. Legendary writer John Grisham joins me from our Friday night conversation next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:45:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: Breaking tonight, some justice for Breonna Taylor. Former Louisville, Kentucky police detective, Brett Hankison, found guilty of violating Taylor's rights by using excessive force. Hankison fired 10 shots through her apartment's covered window and door during a botched raid that left Taylor dead. None of those shots hit Taylor. Hankison is one of four officers involved in the incident charged by the DOJ. He is now the first to be convicted. Taylor's mother speaking out inside the courthouse tonight.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TAMIKA PALMER, MOTHER OF BREONNA TAYLOR: I just want people to continue to say Breonna Taylor's name and that she deserves justice.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Members of the 12-person federal jury were in tears as the verdict was read. Breonna Taylor was only 26 years old when she was killed. On this show, we like to highlight the stories of people who have been wrongfully convicted. People like Rosa Jimenez, who served 18 years of a 99-year sentence behind bars for a crime she did not commit. Or Christopher Dunn, who was in jail for 34 years before his 1991 murder conviction was overturned. And it turns out we have this in common with bestselling author John Grisham. You might know him as the acclaimed author of "The Firm" or "The Client" or "Time to Kill," just a few.
But in his latest book, "Framed," Grisham focuses on people swallowed up by the legal system for crimes they did not commit.
[23:50:01]
I spoke to him earlier about the book and why this topic is such a passion for him. Here's our conversation.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
COATES: Thank you so much for joining me today. The world is your fan, and you are known for the most amazing thrillers and bestselling fiction and novels. This book, though, is a departure. It focuses on 10 true stories of wrongful convictions. I know you serve on the board of, I think, two organizations advocating to free those who are innocent. Why is this so important to you?
JOHN GRISHAM, AUTHOR: Well, it's a huge problem in this country, in the criminal justice system, that does not get a lot of attention until we have, you know, a big high-profile DNA exoneration of some guy who served 30 or 40 years in prison. We all say, God, that's awful, but it doesn't really affect me. But it affects a lot of people. There are a lot of innocent people in prison.
And, you know, we wrote the book to try to bring awareness to the issues and also try to explain how and why wrongful convictions happen. People ask me all the time, are these stories real? If so, how do they really happen? How can we screw up so badly in these cases? And the book explains that.
COATES: I mean, what did you find was the connective tissue? Because that question that people ask, how could this have happened, it's not rhetorical.
GRISHAM: We found a lot of stuff. I mean, I didn't discover anything. The causes have been there forever. It's bad police work. It's the police who are under a lot of pressure to solve a big crime. It's prosecutorial misconduct. And prosecutors and policemen are immune, basically, in our system, from liability if they get it wrong. It's the proliferation of bad forensics and junk science in courtrooms. It's allowing jailhouse snitches to testify, incentivized informants to testify. It's the false confessions.
It's a whole sad list of causes of wrongful convictions. And we cover all of them in the book. The 10 stories cover virtually every reason why we have wrongful convictions. COATES: I mean, just the gamut that you described. I myself have been a prosecutor. I am morally opposed to the death penalty, never intentionally ever prosecuted in jurisdiction that would have the death penalty. I can tell you, it was something that I never thought I would ever truly wrap my mind around. The idea of handing power over to someone and decide their fate, convince someone with your persuasive ability of something, and then the possibility that you could be getting it wrong. I mean, there is so much weight that goes into those moments.
And of course, you also have the racial element of it. Since 1989, since 1989, there have been 3,601 exonerations, more than half of those Black people. Talk about the role of racism in wrongful convictions.
GRISHAM: That's a long talk. It's a complicated issue. But it's just a fact that racism is a huge factor in every prosecution. From the crime scene to the suspicion of somebody, to rounding up suspects, to jailing, to interrogating, to indicting, to trying -- to jury selection, to jury deliberation to the guilty verdict, even to sentencing, even to paroling years later, race is always a factor.
COATES: How did you decide the cases that you are going to narrow down to, because, frankly and sadly, there is an abundance to choose from?
GRISHAM: Yeah. My co-author, Jim McCloskey, runs Centurion Ministries. Jim and Centurion have exonerated 71 people to date in the last 40 years. And so, Jim lived the stories. He was on the front lines with these people for years. Here, we are old buddies. We sat down and we discussed writing the book.
That was the first question. How are we going to choose 10 out of 100, out of 200, out of 300 great cases? And we have our favorites, and Jim had his favorites. And so, we finally whittled the list down to 10. He wrote five, I wrote five. And we didn't edit each other's work. We knew how to tell stories, so we did that. But it was not difficult. I changed halfway through. I had my first four cases, and number five was going to be a case that I'd been enjoyed reading about for many years. Terrible case.
And then we discovered this case in Chester, Pennsylvania. These three young Black men who were cleared by DNA evidence 25 years ago, and didn't matter. They served 25 years in prison for a crime committed by someone. They have his DNA.
[23:55:00]
There are all kinds of DNA at the crime scene. Blood, semen, everything. It all matches one person, who has never been identified. He's out there. Maybe he's dead now. We don't know. But the three suspects were not included. They were excluded by DNA. Clearly, we're not involved in the crime. And they're serving life without parole in Pennsylvania. And they've been there for 25 years. And we're trying to get them out.
COATES: I got to tell you, what I like about you, in addition to all that you have ever done and written, is that you choose to do and focus on highlighting what could actually change the trajectory of justice in this country. And I wonder if you ever have moments when you are kind of just want to go back to a kind of innocence, so to speak. Once this Band-Aid is off, it's hard not to feel the sting.
GRISHAM: The heavier books do become sort of a burden at times, but I keep telling myself, you know, maybe they're doing some good, maybe they're changing the way people think.
COATES: Well, you can take out the word "maybe" and just say the rest. I've got an idea for you, though. Here's one. It's called "The Anchor." It's about this former prosecutor-turned CNN anchor. I don't know. Just think about it, John. Just think about it. Don't answer it today. It might be about Laura Coates. I'm just saying. It's a thought.
GRISHAM: Well, there could be some dead bodies in there too, so be careful. Be careful.
COATES: You know what? Be careful. I wish for -- you're absolutely right. Never mind. Thank you so much, John Grisham. Nice to talk to you.
(LAUGHTER)
GRISHAM: Thank you. My pleasure. Thanks for having me.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
COATES: A thank you to John Grisham for that conversation. And hey, thank you all for watching. "Anderson Cooper 360" is next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
