Return to Transcripts main page
Laura Coates Live
DOJ Goes After E. Jean Carroll; Trump Says He Doesn't Care About Midterms; Data Centers Became a Political Flashpoint; FL Democrats Slam Wasserman Schultz's Run in Historically-Black District. Aired 11p-12a ET
Aired May 27, 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]
ABBY PHILLIP, CNN ANCHOR AND SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: No exception.
KMELE FOSTER, PODCAST HOST: Oh, wow.
PHILLIP: OK. Keith?
FOSTER: I rebuke that.
(LAUGHTER)
KEITH BOYKIN, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST, FORMER CLINTON WHITE HOUSE AIDE, AUTHOR: It must be Beyonce. That's it.
PHILLIP: That's true.
PETE SEAT, FORMER WHITE HOUSE SPOKESMAN FOR FORMER PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: A little something for boomers and the Beach Boys, and a little something for millennials with John Stamos joining them.
(LAUGHTER)
UNKNOWN: Why not? He tours with them. You know, Uncle Jesse tours --
PHILLIP: Guys, this list was absolutely wild tonight. Wild selections from the panel. Everyone, thank you very much. Thanks for watching "NewsNight." You can stream the show any time with 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: Breaking tonight, Trump's DOJ goes after E. Jean Carroll with a new criminal investigation. We have the exclusive CNN reporting. Plus, how are they going to make lemonade out of this one? The president tells his party he doesn't care about the midterms. And later, A.I. data centers becoming a new political flashpoint all across the country. A special debate tonight on "Laura Coates Live."
All right, breaking tonight, it looks like Trump's revenge tour may have found a new target or newish, E. Jean Carroll. CNN was first to report that the Justice Department has launched a criminal investigation into whether she committed perjury, and this is all tied to her successful civil lawsuits against Donald Trump back in '23 and '24. Now, remember, it was Carroll who accused Trump of sexual abuse and defamation, and two separate juries sided with her and awarded her about $88 million. Now, she hasn't gotten a penny yet because Trump is appealing it.
Now, you fast forward to today, and prosecutors are now focused on a deposition she gave that's tied to those cases, one where she reportedly said she didn't get any outside money for her lawsuit. Later, though, it was revealed that billionaire Reid Hoffman had paid some legal expenses. So that appears to be the crux of what they're looking into for this criminal investigation. Now, Carroll's team has declined to comment.
So, why now? Well, we don't know for sure, but the DOJ's recent track record of going after Trump's enemies is frankly inescapable. And in the long list of people he doesn't like, E. Jean Carroll, well, she stands in the category all her own.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: I never met the woman other than this picture, which could have been A.I.- generated. I don't know. I never met her. I never touched her. She made up a story. It's fabricated, a hundred percent. It couldn't have happened. It didn't happen. And she would not have been the chosen one.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Now, I know what you're asking. Wasn't Todd Blanche on Trump's legal team? Well, yes, he was. In fact, he appeals in the Carroll case. Now, he is, of course, the acting attorney general. But a source tells us that he has recused himself from this matter and has not been involved in any talks related to it.
Joining me now is someone who was targeted, who has been targeted by the administration, and he knows firsthand what that's like. National Security Attorney Mark Zaid represents several Trump critics who has been singled out by this administration.
Mark, I want to begin. First of all, look, set the stage here. How is it possible that a civil lawsuit that does not involve federal prosecutors would now be investigated for perjury as if you lied to the government? This is very rare. I haven't heard of this before.
MARK ZAID, NATIONAL SECURITY ATTORNEY: It is incredibly rare. But everyone who sits in a deposition, civil depositions I've taken, God knows how many dozens, hundreds of them, there's an oath that is administered at the beginning, and it is the same type of oath that if you testified in court, whether a civil case or a criminal case, but it is incredibly rare that someone would be prosecuted by the federal government for lying in a deposition.
There are examples. Hey, we're talking about some sex-related cases here. Bill Clinton back in the 1990s with Monica Lewinsky, the independent counsel investigated him -- I'm sorry, with Paula Jones --
COATES: Paula Jones.
ZAID: -- investigated him as to whether or not he had lied under oath. And now, that was the independent counsel, federal government against federal government, but it was from a civil deposition.
And at that time, people were asking the same type of questions. When is the last time this ever happened? I've been practicing 35 years almost. Never seen this happen. But they came up with there's a handful cases here, handful there.
Usually, when someone is paid to lie or there's a systemic threat to the justice system, not like this type of case, that just reeks of retribution given who the players are.
[23:04:59]
COATES: Let's talk about the idea of payment that has come up in this particular matter. I mean, it was Reid Hoffman who we mentioned as somebody who helped to pay legal expenses. And here's what he said when he addressed this issue in the past.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REID HOFFMAN, CO-FOUNDER, LINKEDIN: It is a standard practice that happens a lot where there's outside filing of lawsuit. We didn't encourage the lawsuit to happen. We only got on board after she had already filed it and was down on the road.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Now, why that's important is based on what you just said, the idea of somebody being paid to lie. It appears that might be the connection they're trying to look at here. It's unclear. But does the fact that he funded the suit after it was already in the universe going to impact how they see this case?
ZAID: No. I don't -- I don't think so. And paid to lie would be literally someone was paid to lie in the case as, for example, an expert witness. In this case, what she knows, when she knew it, is going to be key. Did she know that there was funding coming in? At what level? Did she know all the details?
As a lawyer, we do crowd funding at times to raise cases, especially when I want to represent people pro bono against the U.S. government. I don't want them to pay a dime for having been fired by this administration. So, we do some crowd sourcing. I don't necessarily give all the details to the clients that they would know.
COATES: And that's important because if it's a perjury investigation, you have to prove that she knew what her statement at the time she made it was false.
ZAID: And usually, the remedy would be you take it to the court, and you tell the judge, and maybe that testimony would be thrown out, or there would be some other type of penalty. Bill Clinton got fined, and he had to give up his law license for a period of time or whenever it was.
COATES: I want to get to, talking about this, the issue of this $1.8 billion anti-weaponization fund because there's now a new legal effort to have the judge reopen the case that was settled between Trump and the IRS, which could negate the ultimate settlement. Is it viable?
ZAID: So, right, $1.776, $1.776 billion.
COATES: Oh, yes. Nearly $1.8 billion.
ZAID: Right. So, there are several lawsuits already underway, including one by one of my clients, Harry Dunn, former U.S. Capitol police officer, although I am not in the case as a lawyer at all. And these are challenges that will try and set, be able to block the funding.
The case today was brought by 35 former judges, Republican and Democrat-appointed, to tell the court, if case was filed in Florida, to tell the court that the court was defrauded because, remember, who was the actual parties? Donald Trump is suing himself, the U.S. government, represented by his former lawyer or current lawyer, depending on how one wants to look at it, Todd Blanche. Was this a proper settlement?
And it will be very interesting. It's called like a friend of the court, amicus brief, to try and get the judge to reopen the settlement because the case was settled and taken out of the jurisdiction --
COATES: Right.
ZAID: -- of the court. I think, ultimately, this is going to be a political matter for Congress. We're seeing more members of Congress on the Republican side say that they're not going to fund this. Where is that $1.776 billion coming from? Is it coming from the treasury because the Congress obviously controls the purse?
COATES: Mark Zaid, so important to hear your perspective. Thank you so much. My political panel is about to join me. We want to hear from all of you. As you listen to our conversation, send us your questions or your comments, and we'll take them and try to answer them a little bit later on. You can send them in to us at cnn.com/asklaura or you know what? Just text us, 818-972-7272. You got your phone, anyway. Remember, include your first name and your city or your state. Remember, to text is 818-972-7272.
Well, if you're a Republican trying to win in November, this is probably something you don't want to hear your president say.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: They thought they were going to outweigh me. You know, we'll outweigh him. He's got the midterms. I don't care about the midterms. Look, what happened last night, that was the prelude to the midterms.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: I don't care about the midterms. Yes, he was talking about the war, claiming Iranian leaders think the political calendar may pressure him into a weaker deal. And Trump can lean on what happened in Texas last night all he wants because no matter how you slice it, it doesn't change the fact that his actions show he does not seem to care about the midterms. Exhibit A, telling Americans that he's not even thinking about their economic pain.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNKNOWN (voice-over): How much longer will Americans continue to see these high gas prices:
TRUMP: Well, they're not very high.
UNKNOWN (voice-over): To what extent are American financial situations motivating you to make a deal?
TRUMP: Not even a little bit.
[23:09:59]
I don't think about American's financial situation. I don't think about anybody. I think about one thing. We cannot let Iran have a nuclear weapon.
You want to see the world exploded? You want to see a problem? And this is peanuts. And I appreciate everybody putting up with it for a little while.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Trump is also showing he doesn't care what elected GOP lawmakers think. How? By endorsing candidates they say will make it harder to win in November. Case in point, Ken Paxton, the new GOP nominee for Senate in Texas. Republicans have openly admitted that he could put a safe seat into play. I mean, just look at what they said when Trump endorsed him just last week.
Exhibit B, Lindsey Graham said it's going to be more uphill. Susan Collins called Paxton an ethically challenged individual. Lisa Murkowski was supremely disappointed. The Republican who Paxton just beat is warning he will bring down the whole GOP ticket.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. JOHN CORNYN (R), TEXAS: Ken Paxton will be an albatross. He could well lose. But even if he doesn't lose, he will win by such a razor-thin margin that is likely to have a negative drag on the down- ballot races in Texas.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: And then there's all the material Trump is practically handing Democrats to use against him. An argument to say he is distracted from the war, the economy, and the cost of living.
Exhibit C, his Washington makeover. You got the White House ballroom. You got the Trump arch. You got the UFC arena on the White House South Lawn. Yes, you heard me. The octagon being built for events around America's 250th anniversary. And I should add, a fight set for Trump's 80th birthday.
But wait, there's more. The president went on for more than seven minutes at today's Cabinet meeting about his renovation of the Lincoln Memorial reflecting pool.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: It always leaked. And it was a problem about things. Hundreds of millions were spent. I said, let's take that long thing where we're going to fix it with concrete, which leaks concrete, all sorts of other materials that all leak, and don't look good. They're gray. It will last for 50 years, maybe a hundred years if they didn't even know. They said, sir, for little more money, we could get industrial strength. I said, that sounds good to me. It was filthy dirty. It was Biden. It's going to be unbelievable.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: With me now, White House correspondent for Bloomberg, Jeff Mason, Democratic strategist Sawyer Hackett, and former senior communications aide for Senator Lindsey Graham, T.W. Arrighi. Glad to have all of you guys here.
I'll begin with you, T.W., because here's the phrase he keeps saying. He doesn't think about America's financial situation. He doesn't care about the midterms. Now, there are many who say, no, no, this is contextually out of order here, he doesn't really mean that. That's a hard sell if you're voter hearing these statements, even in a vacuum.
T.W. ARRIGHI, VICE PRESIDENT OF PUSH DIGITAL GROUP, FORMER COMMUNICATIONS AIDE TO LINDSEY GRAHAM AND MIKE POMPEO: I think the Cabinet meeting line, he was clearly referencing how the Iranians are trying to hold out until the election, thinking he's going to bow to political pressure in that situation. I don't particularly think that's true.
COATES: Which part? That they're waiting or he doesn't believe that?
ARRIGHI: No. I believe that the Iranians do think that he's going to fold under the pressure of an election and give them a sweetheart deal. I'm not so sure the president will do that.
And I don't particularly think he doesn't care about the midterms because I think he remembers the last time the Democrats took over the House and the Senate in the levers of Congress and what that meant for his administration. It meant it died.
Now, saying it out loud was probably a mistake because the problem is -- you saw this in Texas, what happened the second he endorsed Ken Paxton -- you had all the Cornyn people stay home, and so it made his numbers look far bigger.
Well, in Texas, when you have a challenged candidate, one that, as my old boss said, is going to cost a lot more money to get him over the finish line, you want everyone rowing in the same direction, you want everyone showing up. And the fact of the matter is, at the bottom line, Donald Trump still has a large control over this party. Texas is a red state, and it is definitely doable, but he's going to have to be all in on it.
COATES: I mean, Democrats have a lot of ammunition, essentially, politically, to attack the stances of the president of the United States, not the least of which is -- I mean, everyone wants a multitasker in politics, right? Walking and chewing gum at the same time. But he is really concerned with other projects like the reflecting pool as an example in the middle of a war, in the middle of the economic situations, in the middle of people having uphill battles in Texas. How will that play for the Democrats?
SAWYER HACKETT, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST, CONTENT CREATOR: Yes, I think every once in a while, Donald Trump just decides to speak his mind, and I think that's what you heard with that midterm comment. I think it's probably the case that he has.
And I said this on this show last week, that I don't think he cares about whether Republicans lose the midterms.
[23:15:00]
He doesn't have another election to run. I think his legislative priorities have completely run out. So, he's focused on memorializing his legacy, and his legacy isn't really one of policy or any sort of major achievements that people can speak of. He wants to immortalize himself in these vanity projects, this, you know, the ballroom, the reflecting pool, you know, this massive arch that he wants to build in D.C. This is his way of kind of cementing himself in the minds of Americans.
COATES: But square that with the Iranian war then. I mean, that's not a -- I mean, surely, vanity at all vanity project. So, how do you reconcile that vision with that?
HACKETT: I think he was convinced to get into this war by people who know how to convince him to do things. And he jumped in and didn't really have an exit strategy. And now, he's stuck, and he has found an adversary that he can't threaten or cajole into bending to his will. And so, he's, you know, pivoting to different things, and he's trying to focus on the things that he wants to focus on --
COATES: Yes.
HACKETT: -- whether it's the reflecting pool or the arch and not focusing on the end of this war. He wants Americans to just forget about this and forget that it ever happened.
COATES: Let's talk about that, Jeff, because the U.S. is carrying out new strikes in Iran tonight, including hitting a site near the Strait of Hormuz, a very big issue. Attacks have been slowly ticking up in recent days. And I'm curious, with all the talk that Trump is eager to make a deal, do these strikes, to his point, suggest that he's willing to stay in this?
JEFF MASON, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, BLOOMBERG: Sure, they do. I mean --
COATES: Why?
MASON: -- I think his comments today reflected that, too. And it's just -- it has been sort of a Groundhog Day situation with President Trump, with all of his descriptions or his comments about the war almost since day one. He said it wasn't going to last very long. He said on Saturday, which you were just referring to, that the deal was more or less agreed and that details would come out shortly. And then the next day, he said he was waiting for a better deal. And then today, indicated that he would wait as long as needed and won't let Iran essentially wait him out. And then there are more strikes.
So, I don't have the answer to what he's thinking, but I do think it's clear that he does -- certainly, he doesn't have a deal on the table right now that he's happy with. And how that changed in the 24-hour period between those two social media posts over the weekend, I don't have any insight into, but I do know, based on precedence over the last three months, that that has been pretty much standard for his -- the way that he has run this war.
COATES: So, how do you see it, to T.W.'s point, the idea that he may be trying to shut down this assumption that Iranians have, that he's going to wait at the midterms? Any insight into whether he is playing essentially one way in front of the cameras and another way strategically?
MASON: Well, his people are worried about the midterms. I mean, he was supposed to -- and by that, I mean, his advisors and certainly other Republicans. The plan for this spring had been for him to do a tour of a bunch of states and talk about his economic agenda and talk about his economic record. And that has barely happened. He has done a little bit of travel, but that has been almost entirely overcome by having to oversee this war.
COATES: Well, his endorsement traveled. It traveled down to Texas. Of course, Ken Paxton, the recipient of that advantage. And his campaign just released a new attack ad against Talarico who he will face in November. Watch this, guys.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNKNOWN (voice-over): This is Texas. This is not.
UNKNOWN: Something that you love that's not family or friends.
REP. JAMES TALARICO (D), TEXAS: I love, and I say this because it's on my mind, the trans children.
UNKNOWN (voice-over): This is Texas. This is not. TALARICO: Our southern border should be like our front porch. There should be a giant welcome mat out front.
UNKNOWN (voice-over): This is Texas. This is not.
TALARICO: It is now existential that we try to reduce our meat consumption. I am proud to say that our campaign has officially become a non-meat campaign.
UNKNOWN (voice-over): This is Texas.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: All right. So, obviously, some culture war is involved there. A lot of issues about meat industry, I'm just saying. But T.W., is this the focus that should be happening if you're talking about attack ads at Talarico? Is that going to be effective for Republican voters?
ARRIGHI: He needs to define his opponent. And one of the things we're getting here is, you know, heard that Ken Paxton is ethically challenged. But you look up in Maine and someone with Nazi tattoo, he seems to be fine.
Talarico is a fresh face, a kind face. But you have to think. What is his base? The Democrats have been called woke and weak by folks like Rahm Emanuel and other people in the party. Is Talarico a move away from that to get a broader base? And see that corporate friendly Democrat, you'd say like Mark Kelly or somebody else, the answer is no.
And Ken Paxton is trying to get out ahead of this in a red state that hasn't voted Democrat since 1994 and make the case that he is not one of us. I have my challenges. My opponent has his challenges. And do you want to vote for that person over me who is standing with the president and standing with Republicans and thinks that he doesn't -- that Talarico will not be able to make inroads with other communities, whether they're face-based communities, minority communities, enough to make up the gap with Republicans?
[23:20:03]
COATES: I mean, the vote is -- judge them by their alternative as well. I mean, everything is laid out. I mean, challenged candidate is a gracious way of saying and describing Paxton in his own state where he has been impeached by Republicans. And you mentioned Cornyn voters staying home when the choice was made. How should Democrats be playing this?
HACKETT: I think Democrats couldn't be more excited about what happened over the last 24 hours. I mean, Donald Trump just essentially nominated himself a notoriously corrupt, criminally-indicted, Republican-impeached extremist, a mini-me Trump without the charisma or political talent. I mean, I think Democrats are pretty excited about this matchup between someone like Talarico and Paxton because the contrast couldn't be clearer. COATES: Thank you, guys, so much. Everyone, stand by because they're about to take your questions. Just text them to us, 818-972-7272. Include your first name and where you're from. Again, the number is on the screen.
And later, the sleeper issue of 2026 and potentially 2028, bore into life as town after town fights back against A.I. data centers. Is either party handling this the correct way? We're going to debate it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ (D), NEW YORK: The only difference between the clean water and this was that data center.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:25:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: We've been getting so many questions tonight from all of you, so we're going to get right to them. How about that? And a reminder for those of you who do want to participate, you can always send us your questions by going to cnn.com/asklaura. If you have your phone with you, just text us, 818-972-7272, but you got to include your first name and your city or state in your question.
I got Sawyer Hackett and T.W. Arrighi back with me. We've got John from the ATL. He asks, for years, Republicans warned voters to fear Democrats weaponizing the government. And under this administration, it is Republicans who have openly and clearly weaponized government power for political advantage. The standard should be the same for everyone. If it's wrong when one side does it, it's wrong when the other side does it, too. How about you, T.W.?
ARRIGHI: Hi, John. How I would phrase this is this. I agree two wrongs almost never make a right. We can talk about a lot of things that the government does, whether it's the pardon power, whether it's how DOJ acts, whether it be a whole slew of things. There is one really core answer that people don't like talking about because it seems like such a far-flung thing. But Congress needs to get off its butt and do something. They have the power to change a lot of these things. They ought to utilize it.
COATES: All right. Let's go to South Carolina. I got Dennis from Columbia who says, can you guys explain the criminal jurisdiction the DOJ has over a state of New York civil case deposition? I'm not understanding the connection. It's a good question. A lot of people are wondering this.
The case was actually tried in the federal court in New York. A federal jury did find Trump liable. It was not tried in a state court. But I will say that the connection appears to be that the oath that was taken when she did a deposition, they believe there was a perjury. That's why there is an investigation, not an indictment. We're not there at all. And they want to have a hook that's rarely used. It has been used in the past. But it's very rare to do so, to have that sort of oversight function. Don't get ahead of your skis. I don't know if there's actually a viable investigation or not.
Let's go to Jordan from Philadelphia who asks, could E. Jean Carroll sue for malicious prosecution because she was improperly targeted by Trump's DOJ? Yes, she's probably going to try, right? Others have. Shouldn't she?
Kelly from Virginia Beach asked this question. I consider myself an independent. I voted for Trump the first time around, not this time around. Why is there not one person in the Republican or Democratic parties strong enough to stand up and challenge or take on Trump? Sawyer?
HACKETT: I think there's plenty of Democrats who are strong enough to take on Trump. Clearly, the Republican Party has not been able to put up someone who can take the bashing and keep going. But I think in 2028, you'll see -- you'll see a host of 20 to 25 candidates who all think that they can take on Trump. And I think they're going to use some pretty strong language. I think you shouldn't -- you shouldn't fear that there's going to be strong Democrats fighting back against Trump.
COATES: Twenty or 25. Wow, that's OK. We'll see about that. One viewer from Fort -- you want to (INAUDIBLE).
(LAUGHTER)
Don't distract me. One from Fort Myers, Florida. They ask, when it comes to the fund that Trump signed to disperse funds to his allies who are widely known as insurrectionists, how could it get past the 14th Amendment, Section 4 which states this is no way possible?
Well, I'll take it. The 14th Amendment does say neither the United States nor any state shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States.
This is actually an argument that the officers who defended the Capitol on January 6, Harry Dunn and Daniel Hodges, they make in a lawsuit they filed to block the actual fund. We interviewed one last week. Now, the DOJ is going to likely argue that they don't have any standing to sue, but it remains to be seen how a judge will actually see this.
I think that's it for today. Oh my God. Wow. Thank you for asking me all these questions, guys. Sawyer, T.W., I'm glad you both were here as well.
Look, ahead, we're talking artificial intelligence. It needs more juice. But many Americans don't want that juice, that data center next door. Now, New Jersey is trying to regulate them. Is it a common sense or a threat to America's A.I. race? We've got a special "Laura Coates Live" debate with Mr. Wonderful AKA Kevin O'Leary and Bayly Winder, a New Jersey Democrat running against the data center boom.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:30:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: A.I. data centers suddenly turning into public enemy number one as Americans in town after town start to push back against these projects. More than 4,300 data centers are popping up all across the country and the rush to build them is now sparking a national debate on who should shoulder the cost, whether it's even worth it, and whether it will hurt communities. Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio- Cortez warns it already is.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
OCASIO-CORTEZ: I have a jar right here. This is the current drinking water in Morgan County, Georgia right after a data center was constructed, the Meta data center was constructed.
[23:35:03]
The only difference between the clean water and this was that data center.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Now, Meta has denied those claims. The tech giant says they commissioned an independent groundwater study that found the data center had no impact on the community's water supply.
Let's debate it with Shark Tank judge and chairman of O'Leary Ventures, Kevin O'Leary, he's one of the key backers of an upcoming mega A.I. data center in Utah, and Democratic congressional candidate in New Jersey, Bayly Winder. He has called for a national moratorium on data centers. Well, I'm intrigued. Well, Kevin, you see the new data center boom as a win-win for small communities and national security. Make your case why.
KEVIN O'LEARY, CHAIRMAN OF O'LEARY VENTURES, SHARK TANK JUDGE: You know, the narrative about data centers that were built in Virginia 20 years ago, they were old technology. They used a lot of water. They are very noisy. They created a lot of heat.
But like every other technology, it has advanced dramatically. Today, we don't use a lot of water in data centers because it's a closed loop system like your car. Your radiator stays inside a system. And then many turbines now don't use water at all. They're air cool. And so, this narrative about data centers destroying the environment is an old story and it's being used by those who don't want to see this advance.
But you have to ask yourself. As a country, do you want to cure cancer? Do you want to democratize education? Do you want productivity in the economy as we've seen data? And as a result, today, everybody is using A.I. on their phone already. It's not like people aren't using it.
We just need more capacity. We have to build it more responsibly. And that's exactly what's going on now. So, this narrative is basically is mostly on falsehood. I think I know who's spreading this falsehood, by the way. They're not our friends.
COATES: Hold on. Bayly, let me ask you. Do you believe the risks of developing A.I. data centers outweigh any benefits? You've got a visceral reaction by many. Not in my backyard. People believe that it does have a negative impact and there are concerns about A.I. more broadly.
BAYLY WINDER, NEW JERSEY U.S. HOUSE CANDIDATE: Well, the risks are huge. And when we started talking with people in Vineland in New Jersey about this issue in the fall, what we heard are families that don't know what's going to happen next, whether it's their utility bills, water access, threats to the environment, noise complaints.
So, this is such a huge level of development. You really need to make sure that there are guardrails in place first before it moves, and it's too late, and that's why I've called for this national moratorium and that's why working families across the country are coming together from the left and the right of the aisle to say, hold on a second.
There needs to be a pause here until we have independent reviews and make sure that the government is there to ensure that working families are not left holding the bag when utility bills are going through the roof.
COATES: And you trust Congress to be the one to do those moratoriums and assessments, Bayly?
WINDER: I think Congress has a key role to play in this when it comes to oversight and asking those tough questions. We know that this White House is working with the ultrawealthy and big corporations to make sweetheart deals happen. And Jeff Van Drew, the congressman for New Jersey's second district, he shrugged and said the federal role does not have a part to play in this.
But that's not true at all. This is actually something that is uniting people across the country. As you said, hundreds and hundreds of data centers going up. So, the Vineland Data Center is 45 football fields big. When something comes in, you need to ask the tough questions before it's up and running, and we're already behind the eight ball on that front.
COATES: So, Kevin, have people skipped step in terms of the messaging as to why communities should want these in their areas? I mean, there seems to be a lot of questions, a lot of discussion about what the benefits would be in terms of employment or construction, but then that goes away once they're already built.
O'LEARY: Let's talk about the benefits. Most new data center proposals in every state do not require power from the state at all. In fact, they have to build their own power. That's pretty well a federal mandate now. So, for example, the one I'm doing in Utah, we're not taking any power from Utah. We're actually adding to the Utah grid by building our own power generation.
Secondly, for the first 24 months, we'll create 4,000 jobs in construction and then ongoing 2,000 jobs that are going to be high- paying engineering and support jobs. It will pay millions in taxes and will provide a very important service for both the military there for defense. And all the other attributes I've talked about are the merits of A.I. to advance society, medicine, education, and everything else. And so, I think --
COATES: But Kevin, what safeguards would you support? But Kevin, what safeguards would you support?
[23:39:59]
O'LEARY: That's not the way we should measure it because I understand the concern about energy. No one is going to pay more in Utah when we build our data center.
COATES: Kevin, I want you to answer my question, though. I know -- I know you hear me. What safeguards would you support?
O'LEARY: What safeguards?
COATES: Yes. I mean, I'm thinking about that glass of water, right? Go ahead.
O'LEARY: Yes. Absolutely. I mean, the narrative about water in -- it doesn't make sense anymore because data centers don't use that much water because they have air-cooled turbines, which is a new advance in the last five years, and they have closed systems on cooling the chip.
So, the AOC dirty bottle of water, I think they should go investigate that. That's fair. But that's not what's going to happen in Utah. We're not tapping into the Great Salt Lake, which is, you know, a bunch of incorrect information.
I think what matters is you got to understand the permitting process. It's public. We have to get land permits, air permits, noise permits. We have to go through the EPA. Everybody sees those requests publicly.
I look forward to going to that because I'm going to build the most pristine data center on earth. I'm a graduate of environmental studies. Everybody should look at what I'm going to do. It will be the glowing example of how to do it right.
COATES: OK. Well, Bayly, if he is to be believed in the glowing example of a pristine data center, is that alleviating your concerns if everyone abided by the principles he's speaking of or do you have skepticism about whether that could actually work?
WINDER: Well, there needs to be scrutiny and transparency, and there needs to be independent reviews. A lot of the jobs for data centers are short term. They're non-union. And the roadmap for long-term employment is murky at best.
Of course, a corporation is going to say that this is good for the area, good for their bottom line, but they don't have the same priorities as working families who are concerned about the cost of their home going down, who are farmers that are not sure about getting water access. We have to look at this in a comprehensive way and have some government oversight because it's not the same thing.
And they're getting tax breaks on these projects. They're getting a lot of benefits. The red carpet rolled out. Why is that the case? These corporations do not need the tax breaks.
And working families are really, really worried. That's what we hear day in and day out in the community. People showing up at town halls holding their utility bill and wondering about if they'll ever be able to sell their home.
So, it's not good enough to your corporations to say, don't worry about it. That is not reassurance.
COATES: There's more to this conversation. Kevin O'Leary, Bayly Winder, thank you for tonight. Next, Democrats turning on a fellow Democrat for her decision to run in a district where more than half of the population is Black or Hispanic. One of her opponents calls her decision appalling. The former 2 Live Crew rapper turned candidate for Congress, Luther Campbell AKA "Uncle Luke," is here next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:45:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: The redistricting war has left many incumbents struggling with the same question. How do you hold on to your seat in Congress? Well, for Florida Democrat Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the choice was either run in a newly-drawn district that puts Democrats at a clear disadvantage or run for a completely separate seat that's a safer bet.
Well, she chose the latter option, and the move has sparked a ton of backlash mainly because the one she plans to run in, Florida 20, it is not her current district, has a large Black population, has been held by a Black representative for more than three decades.
Now, Florida redrew its maps following the Supreme Court decision, as you know, on the Voting Rights Act, which targeted several seats held by Black members of Congress. And as a result, several Black leaders and elected officials in Florida argue Florida's 20th should continue to be held by a Black representative.
You know what? My next guest agrees. Joining me now, rapper and community activist Luther "Uncle Luke" Campbell, who's running against Wasserman Schultz in the Florida Democratic primary. Good to see you again. You know, you have been very critical of Wasserman Schultz's decision to even run. You said -- quote --She is doing no different than the Republicans trying to take away Black representation." Tell me why you feel so strongly about this.
LUTHER "UNCLE LUKE" CAMPBELL, FLORIDA U.S. HOUSE CANDIDATE: Well, I feel strong about that. I mean -- number one, thank you for allowing me to come on your show. I really enjoyed watching it. You know, I just feel so strong about this because in this congressional district 20 (INAUDIBLE) Broward County, it is very important that somebody like -- somebody who understands the district should be running in the district, and that's me who understands, you know, the needs of the people.
You know, when you're talking about the issues when it comes to this district where, you know, housing, you're talking about -- the things that I'm talking about is to benefit the district. You know, expanding the port, bringing subsidies for high-cost insurance and things like that. And when Debbie hops in this race, she's coming from -- let's just call it for what it is.
[23:50:00]
She's coming from a rich district where she has been all of her life. Ron DeSantis gerrymandered the map, combined her district with Jared Moskowitz. She did -- she's choosing not to run in her district. She could easily run in her district, which merged with 2222.
Joe Biden won the seat by five percentage. Donald Trump won the seat by 10 points. And with his approval ratings down, she can go run in that district, take that district, flip a seat, but yet she chose to run in a district where the Florida Black Congressional Caucus said no. Every leader in the district -- I mean, you name it. Everybody has told her no, no, no, except the Black Caucus, which is really interesting.
COATES: Why do you think that is?
CAMPBELL: I just think there's a lot of political games that are being played, you know. Debbie is playing political games with us. I think because we've lost six Congressional Black seats, this will be the seventh, she's doing no different than the Republicans.
That's why I find it very hard to believe that here we are screaming, stop, you know, boycott the SEC, boycott these states that have gerrymandered and taken away African-American representation, you know. Meanwhile, we have a Democrat, a major Democrat with $15 million in her bank account, $3 million cash money. She could easily run in '22, which is her district, and make a statement there. But again, going back to the Congressional Black Caucus --
COATES: Hold on. One thing before you get there, she would say, and she has defended this decision, saying that she represents already part of Broward County. And she told our show in a statement -- "Lived experience absolutely matters. So does showing up and doing the hard, unseen work to deliver resources to communities who too often get ignored. No candidate in this race matches my experience, success and earned leadership positions in Washington." She also talked about her years of experience is what the community needs.
You believe that that is not enough to overcome why you think she should not be running in this particular seat, right? CAMPBELL: She doesn't represent this district. She doesn't represent the people here. She doesn't understand what an African American mother has go through on a daily basis. She has never represented those types of people.
She lives in a district -- she represents a district right close to us where this district is full of individuals that are facing TPS. She didn't champion a TPS bill. That bill was championed by a congressional lady up in Massachusetts.
She cares nothing about the individuals that live in this district because if she did, the things that she has accomplished, the money her and Jerry Moskowitz brought back to that district, it would trickle over to the district here. The people of this district do not want her to represent them.
COATES: Well, enough about her for a second. Why you? Why you? Enough about her. Why you?
CAMPBELL: Oh. OK. I can't you. I'm sorry.
COATES: It's OK.
CAMPBELL: Why me? Why me? Because I understand -- I understand this district. I understand the people in the district. I understand the kids in the park. I mean, I came up -- I came up in -- the things that I've done throughout my career, working with kids in the park, working with business leaders, being a businessman myself. I'm totally different. I'm not a politician. She's playing political games with this district.
I'm here to bring resources back to this district. When you look at the high cost of living, that is my job. My job -- I'm not -- I'm not going to Washington to fight Donald Trump. I'm not going -- I'm not going up there to have this shouting match with individuals. I am going to Washington to bring back resources back to this district for people who look like me, who I care about.
I do not have to run in this race right here. I've created millionaires. Debbie has not created millionaires whether it was through music, whether it was to entertainment, whether it was through sports. And this is what the good folks of Broward County is looking for me to bring in this district. I mean, I've created -- I've built parks, you name it.
COATES: OK.
CAMPBELL: Twenty-four million, 16 million here and there. She has not done that. Nobody in this race has done that. And the things that I'm capable of doing for this district is far better than what -- she wants Hakeem Jeffries's job, the bottom line. Let me just not even sugar coat it. That is what she's doing. She wants his job.
And if we lose this seat, that would create a pathway for Byron Donalds to win this governor's race. Why? Because Black men are already fragile when it comes to the Democratic Party. [23:55:00]
We're already -- we're already feeling some kind of way about the Democratic Party. I mean --
COATES: I hear -- I hear -- I hear what you're saying.
CAMPBELL: -- in this district.
COATES: Well, I hear what you're saying. I want more of this discussion. I got to call it for the night, though. Luther "Uncle Luke" Campbell, thank you for speaking with me this evening. Up next, is Ferrari having its new Coke moment? Why the legendary car brand just totaled itself online.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: It's almost midnight here in Washington, DC. Let's bring in my friend, Elex Michaelson, out in L.A. OK, Elex, all right, get this. Ferrari is showing off its first electric car. The internet is having a field day with it. They're comparing the $640,000 car to an Apple mouse, to a vacuum. Even some people talk about it being a toilet. That's too harsh or should Ferrari just say, bring back the gas?
[00:00:02]
(LAUGHTER)
ELEX MICHAELSON, CNN ANCHOR AND CORRESPONDENT: Well, you know, folks that can afford $640,000 car probably can pay for the gas.
(LAUGHTER)
I don't know. The gas prices are real big issue for them. But it's interesting, I think, to see it. I don't know. I don't know if that's worth the money. You think that's worth it?
COATES: No. I could -- you know, if I had that much money, I'd buy kit from Knight Rider. Have a great show, Elex.
(LAUGHTER)
MICHAELSON: Thanks, Laura. Have a great night.
