Return to Transcripts main page
Laura Coates Live
Trump Gets Another Revenge Win As Massie Loses GOP Primary; IRS Blocked From Pursuing Past Probes Of Trump And Family; Acting A.G. Pressed On DOJ's New $1.7B Weaponization Fund; Democrats Urge Athlete Boycott Of SEC Schools. Aired 11p-12a ET
Aired May 19, 2026 - 23:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[23:00:00]
SARA SIDNER, CNN ANCHOR AND SENIOR NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: If elected in November, Lance Bottoms will be the first woman and first African- American ever to lead the state.
Thank you so much for watching "NewsNight" tonight. You can stream the show any time with an "All Access" subscription in the CNN app or at CNN.com/watch. "Laura Coates Live" starts right now.
LAURA COATES, CNN HOST AND SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Good evening, everyone. I'm Laura Coates on this busy election night that proved yet again the president is still powerful enough to end political careers of those who dare cross him. Just look at the state holding the marquee race in tonight's primaries, Kentucky. GOP Congressman Thomas Massie lost in his Trump-backed opponent Ed Gallrein. It is the price for going against Trump on multiple issues, including the Epstein files, the president's signature tax bill, and the Iran war. And Trump isn't exactly hiding how he feels about tonight's result.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: We won the Massie thing. He was a bad guy. He deserves to lose.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: With Massie going down, of course, Trump is on what you could call a political revenge hot streak because Republicans who have crossed him are now losing their seats one race after another.
GOP Senator Bill Cassidy knocked out in Louisiana. Five Indiana Republicans who defied him on redistricting picked off politically. And now, he's rolling the dice in another contested race, this time Texas. I'm talking about the Senate seat held by John Cornyn, a four- term Republican incumbent, but Trump is siding with the challenger, MAGA loyalist Ken Paxton, the state's combative and scandal-plagued attorney general. The president is going all in with the runoff just one week away and, of course, early voting already underway.
Democrats think a Paxton victory will give Democratic nominee James Talarico a real opening in November and for that matter so do some Republicans. Lindsey Graham says Paxton has a path, but it's more uphill and also more costly. Susan Collins says she doesn't understand it, calling Paxton an ethically-challenged individual. And Lisa Murkowski says she is supremely disappointed.
I want to talk about it with my political experts who are here for the hour. I'm glad to have them. T.W. Arrighi who is a former senior aide to Senator Lindsey Graham, Xochitl Hinojosa, CNN political commentator and former DNC communications director, her sister is actually running for governor in Texas, Shermichael Singleton, CNN political commentator and Republican strategist and, of course, Lulu Garcia- Navarro, CNN contributor and New York Times journalist and podcast host and a fabulous tie, I have to tell you.
(LAUGHTER)
I'm going to look at it all night and be like, OK, here we go. All right, guys, I don't know if you predicted it was going to happen or not. People thought Massie was going to lose something. Some thought he was going to win. T.W., you've got the White House communications director posting on X tonight, saying -- quote -- "Do not ever doubt President Trump and his political power. 'F' around, find out." OK. Obviously, it's blurred for a reason. All right? Is that the right political message?
T.W. ARRIGHI, VICE PRESIDENT OF PUSH DIGITAL GROUP, FORMER COMMUNICATIONS AIDE TO LINDSEY GRAHAM AND MIKE POMPEO: It's the political message that Donald Trump has been pushing for a long time. Look --
COATES: Is it accurate?
ARRIGHI: Of course. Political party is like a snake, the body follows the head. Donald Trump has an outsized impact on the base of his party. He has grown the base of the party, and he has a very strong grip on it.
Look, I think Thomas Massie, it shouldn't just be that he has gone against Trump a couple of times. Thomas Massie has found himself as a thorn in the side to the last three Republican speakers of the House. He has always been an outlier in the party. He's always had this niche, but never really built a wave of influence large enough in the party to sustain someone like him. And when he voted against the one big beautiful bill and continued to jab President Trump, he fought back, and he showed that in Kentucky, in rural Kentucky. They like Donald Trump. It adds up to me.
COATES: Some liked him, too, though. You're talking about the party. Many looked at the way he was conservatively fiscal. Shermichael, I'm talking to you.
SHERMICHAEL SINGLETON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: OK. That is me, Lulu.
(LAUGHTER)
COATES: I'm looking at her tie, but I'm looking you right now. Massie, many thought, was truly a Republican based on his conservative viewpoints and fiscal viewpoints on the budget and the debt, etcetera. Why do you think the fact that he had crossed Donald Trump was enough to overcome that for many voters?
SINGLETON: Sure. I mean, philosophically speaking, he's more of a Michael Oakeshott-type of conservative, which for people who don't know, he's more of the libertarian intellectual wing of conservatism, if you were to expand what all of this stuff means. That said, though --
COATES: Still a Republican.
SINGLETON: Still a Republican. Absolutely.
[23:04:56]
That said, though, I remember when Nancy Pelosi called members of "The Squad" to her office, where there had been a thorn in her side, when they were obstructing everything. And she said, let me make it clear, this is not the process, I'm the speaker of the House, and if you don't get your butts in order, then there's going to be some real problems with repercussions. And sure enough, they did. I view this in the same vein.
That said, you know, I had an opportunity to talk with a lot of gun rights groups and folks in the firearms community today about Massie, where he has a lot of support. And a lot of those folks were not very happy about this. They viewed Massie as being a stalwart, strong conservative on the Second Amendment, a reliable vote consistently. And so, that's one aspect of this that I think people should sort of be somewhat mindful of.
But to T.W.'s point, this is the party of Donald Trump. He is the leader, and I'm not surprised by the ultimate results here.
COATES: I do want to, you know, put a pin for a second in what you said about "The Squad." One thing I remember "The Squad" having a lot of pushback to Pelosi was because they were disruptive of what she perceived as what should be the order and the idea of waiting one's turn or following how things should be done. And there are people who voted them into office because they were rejecting this idea that what was the status quo in Washington, D.C. and among Democrats and Republicans somehow was not working any longer.
Lulu, when you hear that and the idea of somebody who is crossing the president, not necessarily just the speaker of the House, who had not been that vocal as Trump had been about Massie, what do you hear?
LULU GARCIA-NAVARRO, CNN CONTRIBUTOR, JOURNALIST FOR THE NEW YORK TIMES, PODCAST HOST: What I hear is this: Let us not forget that it was almost unprecedented for a leader of the party, for president to get involved in local races and try to primary people in your own party at this scale. This was something that was never really done before Donald Trump started attacking members of his own party that crossed him.
Why is he doing this? Well, one could look at this and say, all authoritarians want more than anything else for the people in their party to give them blind loyalty. What we have heard Donald Trump say over and over again is, loyalty is the most important quality to me personally, it does not matter if you represent the people of your state, it does not matter if you're representing your values, what matters is loyalty to me.
COATES: And you know what? The voters said yes overwhelmingly for Massie. We've called this race. But I want to play for you what Massie had to say tonight because he sounded like he was still ready to be kind of a happy warrior.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. THOMAS MASSIE (R-KY): Today is the six-month anniversary of the Epstein Files Transparency Act. We've taken out two dozen CEOs, an ambassador --
(APPLAUSE)
-- a prince, a prime minister, a minister of culture. And that was just six months. I got seven months left in Congress.
(APPLAUSE)
We stirred up something. There is a yearning in this country for somebody who will vote for principles over party.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Seven months is a long time. When you hear him say that, I was Democrat after thinking, will this person be one of our allies more than he'll just be a thorn?
XOCHITL HINOJOSA, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, FORMER COMMUNICATION DIRECTOR FOR DNC: Well, if you listen to him, he's talking about the Epstein files. Donald Trump campaigned on the Epstein files. Donald Trump also campaigned on not starting another war. Donald Trump also campaigned on bringing down the deficit. These are all things that Massie was championing. And so, the irony about it is the fact that, like, Donald Trump went against some of these campaign promises and Massie was holding him to it, I don't think is a bad thing.
The interesting part about what is happening with Massie is that it's also the most expensive House primary in history. If you're a Republican, do you really want your money and the money of the Republican Party to be spent on these primaries? You just saw the Cornyn-Paxton primary. Primary after primary, these are expensive races that can be -- that money can be used in purple areas in order to be Democrats or in order to hold tough seats. But instead, they're being used in Republican strongholds or in primary elections.
And so, if you have to look at the Republican Party and think, is that really a smart idea given the fact that you're likely going to lose the House of Representatives and potentially the Senate and state legislators and governors races and all of those things across the country this year? Should you be using that money to fight Democrats instead of actually fighting yourself?
COATES: Take me to Texas, though, because, obviously, the president endorsed Ken Paxton in the Senate race, a very consequential one. We've been following very closely, even the Democratic primary with Talarico and Jasmine Crockett as well. People were wondering and projecting beyond that race who would be the most viable and formidable foe for whoever ultimately was in that seat.
The idea that Trump is saying that Cornyn wasn't loyal enough, didn't support him quick enough when he ran in 2024, he was still seen as a safer bet for the GOP in Texas. Do you share that view?
ARRIGHI: I do. I share --
COATES: So, now, what?
[23:09:59]
ARRIGHI: I share the view of my boss and it sort of builds a surge point. It's going to cost a lot more. Lindsey Graham says it's probably going to cost three times more. That's not good when we have to defend Maine. We're trying to flip New Hampshire. We have Michigan. We have North Carolina, Georgia, et cetera, et cetera. We need that money for those races.
And I think really what Ken Paxton did when he said about the filibuster, if John Cornyn gets rid of the filibuster, I'll drop out, I thought that was a stroke of political genius.
COATES: Why?
ARRIGHI: Because it flipped the pressure off of him.
SINGLETON: Yes.
ARRIGHI: So, Donald Trump, according to all reports, was very close to endorsing Senator Cornyn. I would have supported that. Once he made that (INAUDIBLE) that claim, the whole narrative changed in Trump's way. I want to see how this plays out.
Now, what I'm concerned about, given the money and that John Cornyn hasn't dropped out yet, is what does Tim Scott and the NRSC do? What does (INAUDIBLE) do? What does the money people -- where does the money go in this? I don't think Ken Paxton goes to the underdog in this race. I still think he's favored. But we've just made this again when it didn't have to be.
COATES: You know, Cornyn actually spoke tonight and try to find some humor in the snub. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. JOHN CORNYN (R), TEXAS: I was fortunate in 2020 to win by 10 points. And President Trump won Texas by six. He has never quite forgiven me for that.
(LAUGHTER)
But all jokes aside, the fact of the matter is if Ken Paxton is our nominee, he may well end up losing this Senate seat. We haven't elected a Democrat since 1994 in Texas, and he puts all of that at risk. He's going to be an albatross on down ballot races.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Will he be?
GARCIA-NAVARRO: I mean, maybe and maybe not. But, you know, I keep on looking at Cornyn, and I look at what happened with all of these sitting senators and representatives who Trump has tried to, you know, kick out and who now are going to be sitting there for those seven months and are going to go, you know what? I don't care anymore what Donald Trump thinks.
So, if he wants to pass something in the Senate with such slim margins or he wants to pass something in the House, I'm just going to twiddle my thumbs or go against it because now, I can just vote my conscience. And so, what I think is this is just incredibly short-sighted. Donald Trump didn't actually have to weigh in.
At the end of the day, he could have let the voters decide. But he chose Ken Paxton, who is a really damaged candidate. I won't predict what happens in Texas. I think it is uphill battle for Democrats. I mean, I don't think it's going to be easy for Talarico to win. But I do think -- I think everyone is an agreement here that Republicans and Donald Trump -- this is really a Donald Trump --
SINGLETON: Yes.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: -- made it a lot harder.
HINOJOSA: Yes. And I think that if there is a time that Democrats are going to win, this is the best time since Ann Richards. There is no better time. Things in Texas are bad when it comes to the economy. Children don't have health care. There are data centers that are impacting people. Trump's approval rating is down. Paxton's approval rating is down. He was indicted by a Republican House. The Latino vote is something that is growing in Texas, and you've seen this is why they were doing redistricting and other things to try to silence Latino voters.
And so, to me, it is interesting because Republicans have known that the demographics in Texas are not favoring them as it becomes more diverse. And now, this issue with Paxton, I agree that it does help racist up and down the ballot in Texas. And I actually do think Talarico will end up pulling it out. Also, Paxton doesn't have any money. Cornyn has outspent Paxton. And Paxton has had a very hard time raising money. So, to your point, who comes to his rescue is going to be a big question for him.
COATES: Well, I wonder if the fact that he has been endorsed by Trump will give some money to the pot. I want to come back in just a moment. Stand by, everyone. This group is with me all night. And we also want to hear from you. Agree with something? Disagree? You had a question about the election and what's happening in our politics right now? Send us an email at cnn.com/asklaura. You know what? It's easier for me. Why don't you just text us at 818-972-7272? Yes, you can really actually text the show. Just make sure you include a first name, your city or your state. Again, that number, 818-972-7272.
Next, reaction from someone who knows Massie very well and knows personally very well what it is like to get on the president's bad side. Former Republican Congressman Ken Buck will join us.
And later, what if I told you the IRS could never investigate the president or his family for anything dated prior to this week? Well, DOJ just made that official, and you know I'm going to talk about it next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:15:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: Well, the takeaway from tonight's elections, according to Republican Congressman Tim Burchett, is this: Donald Trump is still kingmaker in Republican politics and Thomas Massie found out the hard way. My next guest often found himself on the receiving end of President Trump's ire after turning into one of his most outspoken critics. Former Republican congressman from Colorado, Ken Buck, joins me now. He is also the founder of Americans for Good Government.
Congressman, welcome. The president's revenge tour caught up with Massie. Trump came out on top. I know you're not surprised. Why aren't you?
KEN BUCK, FOUNDER OF AMERICANS FOR GOOD GOVERNMENT, FORMER COLORADO REPRESENTATIVE: No, I'm not surprised. You know, Thomas is a strong defender of the Constitution, and the president has a different view of executive power, an expanded view of executive power. Thomas fought very strong for legislative power, and the two collided.
[23:19:54]
This president is all about making America broke again, and Thomas Massie is a fiscal conservative who wants to make sure that we don't overspend and that we make sure we live within our means, and that is something that has caused a lot of friction with this president dating back to the first term that the president had.
COATES: It seems that the friction, when it comes to Trump, it's a long memory he has. There's also a surprising twist when President Trump endorsed Texas A.G. Ken Paxton over the incumbent, the four-time incumbent senator I should mention, Senator John Cornyn. Did he just give Texas Democrats a shot at winning a statewide election for the first time, what, since '94?
BUCK: I think Ken Paxton, as one of your previous guests mentioned, is a flawed candidate and is much more vulnerable than Senator Cornyn in Texas. I don't know the politics well enough in Texas to know whether a Democrat can catch up at this point in time. But if anybody could do it, it will be against Ken Paxton.
COATES: You know, he's had a lot of scandals, as you well know. I mean, flawed is one way to describe it. He has still come out on top in a variety of ways and sort of beat the system multiple times. But he's loyal. He is so loyal to President Trump. The former governor, Chris Christie, wrote, tens of millions of dollars will be diverted from competitive races to prop up Ken Paxton. If we lose the Senate in November, there will be one person to blame, President Trump.
OK. Consider what it takes to be a successful candidate in today's political world and the idea of all the flaws that you have already articulated. Is the president prioritizing loyalty at the literal expense and figure at the expense of winning?
BUCK: I think he has time and time again, when you're spending money on state Senate races, when you're spending money to take out a Republican who voted against you on some major pieces of legislation. But for the most part, the Democrats will run commercials against Thomas Massie or have ran them in the past saying that he supported Trump 97 percent of the time. But that's not good enough. It's 100 percent that's required with this president.
But, you know, when your wife files for divorce and says that it was based on biblical reasons and you're running in a deeply Christian and faith-based state like Texas, that's something that's hard to overcome.
COATES: A lot of intimation of what that very well may mean in the gossip circles. I have a look at this picture Senator John Cornyn posted on social media last year where he is promoting the art of the deal. He's literally saying "recommended" at the end of it. I just wonder, at what point will Republicans stop going to these lengths to appease Trump knowing that, as you've articulated, 97 percent is not going to be good enough when the three percent offended him?
BUCK: Well, I think in two and a half years, they'll stop supporting President Trump. And I think the country will be the determining factor in what this president's two terms look like. But right now, nobody is going to be willing to stick their head up. The president has been very successful in taking Republicans out.
COATES: And yet you've got, after having lost his primary, Senator Bill Cassidy becoming now today the fourth Republican senator to back the Iran war powers measure to end the war, right? People are frustrated many times about what appears to be the inability to vote one's conscience out of fear of being disloyal to Trump until after they've already lost. Why is this trend persisting?
BUCK: Well, there is a lot of self interest in politics. But what's happening with Senator Cassidy and what's happening with other senators, in the very near future, I'm not sure that John Thune is going to have a majority in the Senate to try to pass legislation. If a Supreme Court justice steps down in the near future, that Senate is going to be very difficult place to get a Trump nominee confirmed.
COATES: The Supreme Court, are they very important these days? I'm just being facetious. Congressman Ken Buck, thank you so much for joining.
BUCK: Thank you.
COATES: Next, it may be the settlement of the century. Not only will the DOJ make a billion-dollar weaponization fund, but it turns out Trump's settlement also means the IRS can't ever look back to investigate him or his family. The panel is back on that, next.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. CHRIS COONS (D), DELAWARE: Has it ever happened that a sitting president sued his own government for $10 billion, and then directed the settlement of the case and the establishment of a payout fund?
TODD BLANCHE, UNITED STATES DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL: Not that I'm aware of, but there's a lot of things that President Trump is the first of.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[23:25:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: There is a plot twist in the settlement between President Trump and the IRS that created the nearly $1.8 billion anti- weaponization fund. A one-page pledge quietly posted on the DHA website just this morning, it makes a huge promise.
Here's the fine print, everyone. The United States releases, waives, acquits, and forever discharges each of the plaintiffs from, and is hereby forever barred and precluded from prosecuting or pursuing. any and all claims as of the effective date of the settlement agreement.
Now, I want you to let that sink in. The IRS cannot pursue any claims against President Trump, his family, and his businesses for past tax audits.
[23:30:03]
Meanwhile, split screen on Capitol Hill, the acting A.G., Todd Blanche, defending what critics are calling a slush fund.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BLANCHE: It's not limited to Republicans. It's not limited -- it's not limited to the Biden weaponization. It's not limited to, in any way, scope or form to January 6 or to Jack Smith. There's no limitation on the -- on the claims.
(END VIDEO CLIP) COATES: My panel is back with me. So, that is the problem. There's no limitation. There's no exclusion, as we know, etcetera. There is the concern about who might be eligible and, therefore, could actually collect actually tax funded money through a slush fund. This seems to me such a political misstep, given that it would not only include people who are January 6 rioters, but also include people who are like Letitia James or James Comey who would say, I've been wrong, do I get paid? Why do this?
SINGLETON: Maybe Hunter Biden, too, right? I don't know. First of all, I think you've got to have some preclusion there. You cannot allow people who attack law enforcement to access these funds. I think most Republicans would probably agree.
COATES: But he didn't say that. Why not?
SINGLETON: I know the attorney general didn't say that. I think his response was he's going to nominate five people, and then they will determine the rules and structures by which people can request these funds.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: This is completely invented.
SINGLETON: But that said, though --
GARCIA-NAVARRO: This is completely invented. This is --
SINGLETON: I wasn't done. Hold on a minute. But that said -- I'll be quick here so my friend, Lulu, can jump in.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: No, no, no.
SINGLETON: Just really quickly. From a conservative perspective, this sounds a lot like a reparation. And traditionally, conservatives aren't in support of utilizing taxpayer dollars to just give to people. Now, there is a grievance process by which they could sue the federal government if they wanted to for a redress of said grievances. But to utilize taxpayer dollars for, again, effectively a reparation, I'm just not in support of that at all.
COATES: Why you're saying it's totally --
SINGLETON: Go ahead, Lulu.
(LAUGHTER)
GARCIA-NAVARRO: OK. I know -- I know we all have the memory of goldfish in this moment, but let us -- let us recall --
(LAUGHTER)
-- that this was a secret because, basically, it was exposed by my paper, "The New York Times," sort of lawsuit against -- from Donald Trump to his own Department of Justice for $10 billion, with a B, that wasn't public until the press made it public. So, he was trying to line his pockets with taxpayer money for his own grievances. When that was going to go to court and clearly was going to be questioned, all of a sudden, there is this settlement that is $1.7 billion, again, of our money, taxpayer money, that goes to whomever Todd Blanche, the president's former personal attorney, decides. Just to -- just to give you the sequence of events here.
SINGLETON: Well, it's not Todd deciding directly himself. Again, I just want to make it clear.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: Oh, no. He's appointing the people.
HINOJOSA: Todd Blanche -- working at the Justice Department, Todd Blanche should not even be involved in this settlement. The fact that his former client is the president, CNN had a story last week about how career officials had told Todd Blanche and Emil Bove, who is now a judge, that they should recuse themselves from certain matters. Now, Todd Blanche --
SINGLETON: He said he has done that.
HINOJOSA: He has done that.
SINGLETON: He did.
HINOJOSA: He is on Capitol Hill, not saying that he has been recused from this settlement. He should absolutely be recused because this involves his former client. To be honest with you, in the matter, in the tax matter --
SINGLETON: The client who isn't getting anything directly from this.
HINOJOSA: But he's the one --
SINGLETON: Just to be clear.
HINOJOSA: But the client is the one who dictated what the settlement is.
COATES: Hold on --
HINOJOSA: At the end of the day, he is the one who is implementing it.
COATES: You don't think that Donald Trump gets even a political benefit from having essentially said, I'm going to make sure that my platform of weaponization now has a dollar attached to it?
SINGLETON: Political, no, because I think --
COATES: I don't think --
SINGLETON: No, no, no. Because I think most independent swing voters, who I think really will determine a lot of these close races, look at this and say, yes, absolutely not. I'm probably not going to vote a Republican.
COATES: But not independent voters. SINGLETON: So, politically, I don't see a benefit at all for Republicans.
COATES: Well, I'm talking about Republican -- but when I talk about political benefit, that encompasses also Republicans who want to continue their support for him or those who say he didn't do what did when it came to the Iran war or other matters or domestic policy. But here in weaponization, he's doing this. And there are people who said, I think that he is going to essentially repay me for what it took to actually fight against these cases. I think there is a political benefit he will receive even without having his pocket line.
ARRIGHI: I'm not so sure I see it that way. And I think there's a lot of incumbent House members running for reelection who really do not want to talk about this or don't want to answer.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: Oh, I'm sure.
ARRIGHI: So, I'm not sure how that -- but to a broader point, I understand President Trump is mad at the DOJ, the IRS, the IRS for leaking his tax returns --
(CROSSTALK)
Hold on. I know.
[23:35:00]
But I know he has always felt like he is constantly under attack. But when this sort of thing comes forward, it's a massive head-scratcher. Just ask basic questions. I understand 1776, blah, blah, blah. But, like, where did that number come from? What's the basis of that? We talk about a five-person panel. Why is that the best way to administer it? What are the sorts of the backing ends of this, the sort of the qualifications of it?
SINGLETON: There are questions.
ARRIGHI: People want to know that. Those are real questions. And no, I don't think most Americans, like 80-something percent, want to see people who did harm the police officers get money. I think we've all been in an agreement of that. So, when this thing is just rolled out there and said, well, deal with it, that's not good -- anything. It's not good politics. It's not good policy. It's not good P.R.
COATES: I don't see a total disconnect from the person who nominates those who make decisions about the criteria and the people who actually ultimately will make the decisions about the criteria. I was looking for Todd Blanche today during his testimony to at least discuss what his criteria in nominating somebody might be. When we have nominations for a Supreme Court, right, presidents are looking to figure out, or their cabinet members, or anyone who's a political appointee, they're looking to figure out who has the criteria.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: Because they pulled this out of their --
COATES: You can say butt in prime time. There you go.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: They pulled it out of their butt. This wasn't, you know, the plan. They pulled this plan out of their butt. And now, they are, you know, pretending that this is all sort of formal and that this is like, obviously, there's going to be a panel and blah, blah, blah. But this is what is called self-dealing. I mean, this is government corruption. This is taking taxpayers' money and actually using it for your own political benefit.
COATES: Well, I want to hear from taxpayers who are viewers of this show as well. We've got questions from the audience. Of course, you can always tune in at 818-972-7272. We text now.
OK, this is from John from New York City. He asks, if some January 6 supporters were truly wronged by the government, why can't they bring a lawsuit in the federal courts? Why would they need a special fund for restitution?
Well, they can. There's the Federal Tort Claims Act. You could do this. It's an administrative process first. There is usually criteria and the deadline for when you can file. I think it's like two years. There are certain deadlines that have to be met. And then there's an administrative body that chooses whether you should go forward. If they say you can, then you can. Imagine the cost, the length of time, and the subjective nature of all of it. So, this would possibly fast track this in a way that wouldn't have the same daylight.
I want to go to the next question. We've got Gracie from Kentucky who asks, couldn't James Comey apply for the 1776 fund? Lulu?
GARCIA-NAVARRO: Yes. I mean -- I mean -- I mean -- I guess if James -- James Comey feels wronged, obviously, and feels like he's -- but, again, I don't know. Do you know? I mean, where are this -- where's this stuff written down? Who knows who's eligible? Who's going to be deciding that? If they're all partisans, they're going to look at James Comey. I think no. The president says that you're, you know, absolutely culpable for this, you don't get any money back.
So, you know, again, this is all invented. This didn't go through the normal processes where, you know, our funds get actually, in government, get taken care of and there's, you know, all these systems built to protect this money. That's not how this happened.
COATES: The other question, Leroy M. asked this question. I don't think the Republicans are realizing the impact immigration and ICE will have on the Hispanic votes in southern states and Texas. All gains will be lost. Xochitl, would you have a response?
HINOJOSA: Absolutely. We're already seeing it in races down there and in the polling that is down there. In 2024, Republicans -- Latinos swung to the Republican Party, and it was a big shock to Democrats in the state. And now, what we're seeing is that they are swinging back. And so, absolutely, the raids and the ICE raids will have an impact.
I will say, even more than that, probably the economy. The economy is hurting the Latino community and the Black community more than any other community right now in Texas. Gas prices, all of these things. Donald Trump made a lot of promises to them, that he would deliver for them, and he hasn't, and they feel that.
COATES: T.W., a question for you. This is John from New York. Actually, Colin B. from North Carolina asked this question. We continue to be told that the effects of this war will only cause short-term pain. How deep into this hole do we have to go before it is no longer considered short-term?
ARRIGHI: Well, I guess that's in the eye of the beholder. I think the broader question is, how quick can we get prices down? Do we ensure that the largest state sponsor of terrorism with the blood of hundreds, if not thousands of Americans on their hands, doesn't have a nuclear weapon and able to project strength across over their borders and have a kill switch on the Strait of Hormuz? If we can achieve those goals quickly and effectively, it'll be a win. If this drags on and on and on, it will progressively get worse. But God bless our troops.
COATES: Shermichael, a question for you. Ian from Illinois asked this question. What will 2028 look like? Is there a pathway out of the divisiveness that exists in U.S. politics?
[23:40:02]
Who or how can the system be healed?
SINGLETON: Man, Ian, if I had an answer to that question, I'd be the richest guy sitting at this table.
(LAUGHTER)
I don't.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: You might the richest guy --
SINGLETON: But something that I do strongly believe in, Ian, and that's a very important question, is the government we have will be no more, no less than what we make it. And that means people like yourself, you have to get involved in your community, get engaged, talk to your friends who are Republicans, your friends who are Democrats. I try to do the same thing with my friend, Xochitl, here on the other side to try to figure out how we can build a system that we're all proud of, a system that we can pass on to the next generation.
It's not easy work, it's very difficult, it seems impossible living in the moment that we're in, but like you and so many other Americans, I still believe in this country and what's yet to come.
COATES: We've got so many more questions. Thank you to everyone who sent them. And we've got a lot more. We'll answer some more tomorrow and maybe social media as well. Up next --
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. HAKEEM JEFFRIES (D-NY), MINORITY LEADER OF THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES: This is a Bill Russell moment.
CROWD: That's right.
JEFFRIES: It's a Muhammad Ali moment.
CROWD: That's right.
JEFFRIES: And it's a Jackie Robinson moment.
CROWD: That's right.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: House Democrats backing the NAACP's formal push to have Black athletes boycott SEC schools in protest of gerrymandering. Former first round Draft pick out of Tennessee, Donte Stallworth, runs at the table, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:45:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: Tonight, Black leaders are turning up the pressure on states seeking to redraw their maps to eliminate majority Black districts. Only this time, it involves boycotts of college sports.
The NAACP just launched what they are calling the "Out of Bounds" campaign, and they're asking Black athletes and fans to withhold support from public universities in eight southern states, and that includes Black athletes looking to commit to teams in the all- important SEC.
Well, today, the top Democrat in the House, Hakeem Jeffries, joined by members of the Congressional Black Caucus, outside the Capitol, expressed support for this boycott.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JEFFRIES: We are here standing in solidarity with the NAACP and its call for athletes to boycott institutions within the SEC that belong to states that have unleashed these Jim Crow-like racially-oppressive tactics, which is unacceptable, unconscionable, and un-American.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: My panel is back along with former NFL wide receiver, Donte Stallworth, who played football at an SEC school for the Tennessee Volunteers. Hey Donte, I have to know where you stand on this issue given your unique personal journey and having been an athlete in the SEC and now.
DONTE STALLWORTH, FORMER WIDE RECEIVER, NFL: Yes. I think, first of all, we have to acknowledge the hypocrisy of these states that use Black bodies as economic engines on Saturdays and on Sundays. They're taking away votes of their (INAUDIBLE) or their big mamas, all their family members. So, that part of it is real and that part of it we cannot deny.
Also, at the same time, I think it's -- I think it's really rough to get to speak out to these 18-year-olds and ask them to make these decisions. When I was 18, I was 17 actually, to make the decision, I had studied so hard and so long to figure out what it was for me to get to Tennessee, and then not only that, but the main pipeline to get to the NFL. So, my main mission at that age was trying to get to the NFL.
I think it's really difficult. These are real issues that need to be addressed, but I think it's difficult for me to push on these 18-year- olds, these 19-year-olds to get them to make decision of this magnitude at such a young age.
COATES: Some who are not able to vote even yet on these issues and, frankly, this gerrymandering might not be able to in a way that is effective. But it's not just Black athletes. They're also calling on fans of these schools to stop purchasing tickets to games or also any merchandise, and for current athletes to use their platform to speak out on voting rights. Would that move the needle if it wasn't just the athletes?
STALLWORTH: I would like to see it. I mean, I think, you know, obviously, during the civil rights movement, there were a lot of movements where Dr. King and a lot of other leaders made it very important to hit the pockets of these institutions that were taking away the Black vote, that were ostracizing Black people in society. So, if we recognize that, I mean, to me, the best thing, as far as these kids go, I think the best thing is to educate them, so then whatever decision they make, they make it on their own volition. But also, once they get into these institutions, they can make moves like the kid from Mississippi State did. They take down that Confederate flag five years ago. I forgot his name, but football player.
So, players understand they have the power to make these moves, but I think it's really rich for me to try to push an 18-year-old to make that move on, not on their own volition.
COATES: You've been with the DNC. I mean, is this a politically smart move for Democrats? I mean, obviously, using whatever leverage you can to try to move an issue. All parties do this. But is this the right call for Democrats for this?
HINOJOSA: So, I think that this moment will take everyone speaking out. I do think that the Democratic Party and people in general try to look at institutions and other entities to save us. And the only thing that can save us is an election. The only thing that is going to stop maps from being redrawn in some of these states is going to be to elect new leaders in those states, to elect new governors, to elect people at the state legislature.
And so, I would really like to see Democrats spending their money in these places to try to elect those people. At the end of the day, that is where these decisions are being made. If you want to stop maps in Texas, you need to elect new leaders.
COATES: Could this backfire?
GARCIA-NAVARRO: Yes.
COATES: How?
GARCIA-NAVARRO: I think we just heard it there.
[23:50:00]
I mean, asking young men who are coming to fulfill their dream, to have an opportunity that is granted to so few people, and telling them that actually they're the ones, after all their sacrifice, that they have to sacrifice even more and making that a sort of call that somehow taints you if you don't do it. To me, seems like it is something that could backfire on Democrats.
And just on the Black community, frankly, you know, I mean, you're asking communities that have already given so much. There is no stronger support of the Democratic Party than Black Americans, and this seems to me like something that could really imperil that relationship.
COATES: And we're talking -- I talked about this last week with LZ Granderson. We're talking about not just -- why just Black athletes? Why not just -- the fans as well. They're making it a larger issue there. But -- and this is men and this is women, by the way, who are also being impacted by this. We can talk about women and their imbalance in terms of the resources they have anyway in these schools. But the south loves their sports.
SINGLETON: Yes, they do.
COATES: They love the SEC. Does this work?
SINGLETON: I don't know. And my problem is you look at the discrepancies between Black men and Black women in terms of college degree attainment, bachelors, masters, PhDs. Black women are, quite frankly, crushing it. A lot of our young Black men are really falling behind. And so, if this is the call to action to say, hey, don't attend a certain school, but attend a school in a more favorable state, then who's going to fund that? What does that structurally look like? Are we pulling money together to make sure that those guys can afford to go to college for four years? Most of them are the first individuals in their families to ever even go to college.
So, I get the idea historically of putting economic pressures. Dr. King did this back in the 60s. It makes perfect sense. I just don't know structurally if this is going to lead to the results that many of the Democratic leaders are looking and hoping for.
COATES: The NFL just announced that Tennessee is going to be the place for the Super Bowl in -- what? Year 2030. That's one of the states we've just seen recently where they re-drew its maps, divided Memphis in all sorts of ways following the Supreme Court's decision. Do you see this becoming a major flashpoint in the future, knowing that Tennessee is one of those poster children for what went wrong with gerrymandering now?
STALLWORTH: Yes, I think it possibly could. I was speaking to someone earlier about this. I think it is enough time out now. I don't know if the NFL has ever pulled back from announcing a Super Bowl site because they put so much effort and money into doing that. But I think being able to, you know, get at that now, especially if things become much worse in Tennessee, which it seems like they are, then the ability to be able to push back on it and to stop them from having the Super Bowl in Tennessee, the moment to do it is now.
COATES: Yes. Thank you so much. Obviously, a very complex issue. Up next, how L.A.'s Spencer Pratt is pulling off one of the most viral political campaigns of all time.
(MUSIC PLAYING)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:55:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: It's almost midnight here on the East Coast. I want to go to my favorite West Coast anchor, Elex Michelson. Good to see you, my friend. Look, another day --
ELEX MICHAELSON, CNN ANCHOR AND CORRESPONDENT: The only West Coast anchor. Thank you.
COATES: No, no, there are -- No. You're my favorite. OK? Thank you very much. Don't take away my friendship and love for you. Another day, another viral campaign ad from Spencer Pratt. This time, he's trying to spin a TMZ report that said he's not really living in a trailer where his house burned down, but at the five-star hotel Bel- Air, and he channeled some Will Smith in the process. Watch.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
(MUSIC PLAYING)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Now, I mean, you would think this would be a big scandal for a candidate. And, obviously, he is having a lot of fun with this. But his marketing campaign should not be, you know, sneered at. Is it working?
MICHAELSON: We'll see. I mean, we don't have a lot of great polling so far. It's certainly working in terms of getting his name out there. I mean, the backstory here is he ran a campaign ad where he sorts of mocked where the mayor lives, mocked where her main opponent lives, and says, I live here, and showed an airstream in his burnt-out lot that I live here. And then TMZ pointed out he doesn't actually sleep in that airstream lot. He spends a lot of nights at the hotel Bel-Air, and then lives at his parents' home in Carpinteria outside of Los Angeles.
And he doesn't dispute that, but he says, look, I live in the Palisades. My home was burned down. This is where I live. And so, this is his response to that. But it is unbelievable, the amount of tension and attention that Spencer is getting.
COATES: Yes.
MICHAELSON: You know, tens of millions, potentially hundreds of millions of views for videos like this.
[23:59:59]
COATES: You actually sat down with Spencer Pratt. How did that conversation go?
MICHAELSON: It was really interesting. We talked for almost an hour. We're going to have a lot of that tomorrow on "The Story Is." But tonight on "The Story Is," we'll be talking to his main opponent, Mayor Karen Bass, who he blames her for the fires, and that's the reason that he got into this race, and it is one of the closest watched races in the entire country right now.
COATES: Well, so is your show. Have a great show, Elex.
MICHAELSON: Thanks, Laura. Great work tonight.
