Return to Transcripts main page
Laura Coates Live
Trump Tells GOP Not to Hold House Hostage After He Held Bill Hostage; Supreme Court Conservatives Expand Trump's Immigration Power; Democratic Socialists Look to Expand Wins After New York Sweep. Aired 11p-12a ET
Aired June 25, 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: -- expertise tainted by politics.
PATRICK MCENROE, FORMER TENNIS PLAYER: Oh, my goodness! Thank you so much for bringing that up. I have been wondering that all night. Why the hell am I here?
(LAUGHTER)
But I had a great time. I love being here.
PHILLIP: Because viewers are trying to protect you from --
MCENROE: I appreciate that.
PHILLIP: -- all the bad stuff at our politics.
MCENROE: Listen. I appreciate the effort. OK? But I'm here, and I can take the blows.
PHILLIP: Yes. He's a voter just like you.
UNKNOWN: Yes.
PHILLIP: All right, be sure to join the debate tomorrow night at CNN.com/abby. We will be live from the Food Network's test kitchen.
Thank you very much for watching "NewsNight." "Laura Coates Live" starts right now.
VICTOR BLACKWELL, CNN HOST: Tonight, President Trump is confronted with the chaos that he instigated in his own party as he now tries to stop the rebellion that he inspired. Plus, the Supreme Court expands Trump's power over immigration and clears the way for his push to deport Haitian migrants, but the justices clash on a key question, is there racial bias at play? And Democrats reckon with the surge from the left and whether current leadership is equipped for the moment. Congressman Seth Moulton weighs in tonight on "Laura Coates Live."
Good evening. I'm Victor Blackwell, in for Laura. President Trump, you know, he's used to muscling his own party in giving him what he wants. But tonight, he's running into something he cannot bully, math. And now, it's looking like he's trying to end the legislative hostage situation that, remember, he created.
And take this from House Speaker Mike Johnson, who spent more than three hours at the White House tonight. This meeting is after Trump upended a bipartisan housing bill that would have been a clear win, a layup for Republicans. But instead, the president demanded the Senate first pass his controversial voting legislation, the Save America Act. The Senate votes just were not there. So, conservatives in the House, stay with me here, started staging their own rebellion to force the issue.
Johnson eventually came out of the White House meeting and said this: We are on exactly the same page. We are transmitting the Housing bill to the White House. Now, he did not say whether the president intends to sign it. But this is still a big shift.
And Trump is telling his conservative allies in the House to stop grinding business to a halt. He wrote this: House Republicans should unify, and no more grandstanding pleas, which is rich coming from the president because, again, this was his drama. Remember, this is what he walked away from, a signing ceremony that was set up but did not happen for a bill that would have addressed affordability when cost is the top issue Americans say they're facing. Instead, Trump put that on ICE in favor of a bill to fix something that some Republicans even say is a nonissue.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. THOMAS MASSIE (R), KENTUCKY: The problem is not the elections. We won the damn elections. The problem is we're wasting our opportunity that the voters gave us. And the Republicans are going to pay for that in November. It will be an absolute shellacking if they don't wake up.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLACKWELL: Let's bring in now a former Republican congressman from Illinois and CNN senior political commentator, Adam Kinzinger. Congressman, good to see you again. So, Speaker Johnson says we're on the same page now. He sent the housing bill over to the White House, and they're getting back to work on Monday. So, you got Friday, Saturday, Sunday. Three days is a long time in the Trump White House to keep him on side. Do you think the speaker can do it?
ADAM KINZINGER, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, FORMER ILLINOIS REPRESENTATIVE: Yes. I mean, look, it really is. I've got to imagine that initially, when he derailed everything, maybe somebody whispered in his ear, you know, oh, this is bipartisan, it doesn't matter, we should use this, this is important to them. And my guess is in the intervening time, probably cooler heads have prevailed and said, basically, look, you need a win here, and this is a win you can claim. Sure, Democrats can claim part of it, too.
So, I would be surprised if this thing continues to be derailed. I think the president with this post is saying let's all get together. But it is richly ironic because -- I mean, this was a significant amount of the time I was in Congress, too, but especially lately. Almost like 80 percent of the stories out of Washington, D.C. are not really Republicans against Democrats or, you know, a fight about tax rates.
It's Republican infighting. And they have been taking a real opportunity in their mind to govern and have just spent it on trying to score points on, you know, Twitter and other posts So, it's -- I'm sure there's going to be lot of ticked off members of the GOP when this -- when this is done.
BLACKWELL: Yes. And the closer that we get to the midterms, we're four months, a little more than four months away from the start of November, we may see more of that. And the president and really the president's base, they don't see this disorder as a problem. Does the president seem to care?
[23:05:00]
Do they see that this is just business as usual?
KINZINGER: Yes. I mean, I think there's going to be a bit of a different reality when the actual election hits. Right now, you can have this theory of, OK, we're going to get beaten in the House, we could lose the Senate, but you still have the power. And so, that is just kind of an academic exercise. Once you actually get to the point where you lose power and you understand what that means, I think that could be a very different feeling.
But keep in mind, Victor, there's only four months until the election. But of all the governing time, there's only really a month left, maybe a month and a half, because they go out for August. They'll be out for September or at least October. Actually, just maybe in for just a couple weeks of September. So, they're really out of an opportunity to do anything.
And so, the die is starting to get cast here. And I think as we get closer to the election, they're going to panic more. They're just used to fighting each other. Again, MAGA was kind of born of this, you know, idea of fighting the establishment. They just haven't learned how to actually become the establishment themselves.
BLACKWELL: Let's talk about fighting the establishment. Let's talk about Senator Bill Cassidy. So, first, he voted to curb the president's powers in this war with Iran and got into a shouting match yesterday with the president in his closed-door meeting. But hours after that, got a briefing from the White House, changed his vote on the war powers resolution. Cassidy explained why.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. BILL CASSIDY (R), LOUISIANA: As it turns out, I got a briefing afterwards. In one sense, I actually accomplished the mission of what I needed to do.
MARGARET BRENNAN, CHIEF FOREIGN AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT, CBS NEWS: But you had also said the American people need that information.
CASSIDY: So --
BRENNAN: The American people aren't getting those public hearings and briefings.
CASSIDY: So, last night, when I asked about that in my briefing, they said, right now, the negotiations are delicate, and they could collapse if they're not nursed along in the appropriate way. I can accept that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLACKWELL: He accepts that. I mean -- I see you shaking your head there. I mean, what do you make of Cassidy's reversal here?
KINZINGER: Well, first off, I want to say this. So, they're saying they want -- we've now changed our mind, we want to have the military option on the table for the negotiation. This is the same administration, by the way, that stopped the bombing before they started negotiating with Iran, even when Iran refused to open the strait.
Actually, the smartest thing that Trump could have done after he engaged in this war is to keep attacking during the negotiations because you use pressure. They obviously don't want to.
But Cassidy, look, I mean, this is such a heartbreak for me because, you know, he voted to remove Donald Trump, he and I were close, and then went completely all in on trying to win reelection. And Trump turned his back on him.
And so, when I heard this story about him getting in a shouting match with Trump, I was kind of proud of him, like, OK, he's starting to get his feathers up.
But, clearly, he went to the White House proximity to power. They said something to them because I -- you know, look, I don't know what was said in that meeting, but I am pretty sure there was no top-secret information that changed Bill Cassidy's mind. He just now came under a lot of pressure and did what he did. It's sad. I mean, like he's got like five months, six months left in the Senate. Just do the right thing for the next six months. You can look yourself in the mirror. Just my thought, just my opinion.
BLACKWELL: Well, I appreciate your opinion. Congressman Adam Kinzinger, thanks so much for starting the show with us.
Let's turn now to former senior communications aide to Senator Lindsey Graham, T.W. Arrighi, and former senior spokesperson for the Harris- Walz campaign, Adrienne Elrod. Welcome to you both.
T.W., let me start with you. Again, we're about four months out from the midterm election. Republicans want to focus on affordability and paint progressives, especially considering the nominees we're seeing out of New York and across the country, as out of touch. If they can't get the bipartisan housing bill off with all the pomp and circumstance, how do you make that case to voters?
T.W. ARRIGHI, VICE PRESIDENT OF PUSH DIGITAL GROUP, FORMER COMMUNICATIONS AIDE TO LINDSEY GRAHAM AND MIKE POMPEO: Yes, it's tough. It was bad on goal.
BLACKWELL: Yes.
ARRIGHI: This was a golden opportunity that I hope is rectified in the White House for another signing ceremony. God bless Mike Johnson, calm, cool and collected at all times, was able to get through to the president, and make it clear the votes do not exist in the Senate to nuke the filibuster to get this across the finish line. There seems to be no appetite for a watered-down version or some sort of haggling with the Republican caucus and try to bring on Democrats to get some sort of voter security measure. That doesn't seem to be in the cards.
But to get this massive win, hitting on a number of things Donald Trump ran on housing, getting private equity out of the housing market, et cetera, et cetera, making houses more affordable, that's a massive win that he should be touting, along with the tax advantages in the one big, beautiful bill, the successes he's had in other areas. Those are the things we should be running on in a positive thing and not getting bogged down in the controversy of the day in Washington.
BLACKWELL: Yes. Do Democrats have a message that breaks through this? Because, of course, you want to focus on Iran and you want to focus on affordability as well. But with so much of the disorder, how do you get that message through in the next four months?
[23:10:03]
ADRIENNE ELROD, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST, FORMER SENIOR SPOKESPERSON FOR THE HARRIS-WALZ PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN: I mean, look, to an extent, we sort of don't have to because Trump and the Republicans are, as Adam Kinzinger very aptly put -- I mean, they're -- the infighting is what is causing things to not move forward. That is making the lack of progress. There is no lack -- there is lack of progress because Republicans are infighting.
I mean, here's a rare moment where Democrats and Republicans came together to pass a bipartisan housing bill that millions of Americans desperately need. This is something that Trump could have taken out in the midterms when he's campaigning for the candidates, candidates wanting to campaign for them. This is something that he could have championed.
But he stopped it from happening after it passed in both chambers. So, he vetoed something that -- again, it's a rare thing where a president of the United States vetoed something that Democrats and Republicans both passed. So, it doesn't make a lot of sense.
I mean, maybe we'll get -- I think Kinzinger put it very aptly. I think we might even maybe get this over the finish line now. Maybe he was just using it as a moment to try to be pouty and really emphasize that he wants to get this voting out pass which also, again, will disenfranchise some of his very voters who voted for him because it affects rural voters. Different story for a different time.
At the end of the day, the bottom line is this: Democrats have a plan moving forward. We have a forward-looking agenda. Affordability is everything that we look at, everything that we are focusing on passing legislatively when Hakeem Jeffries becomes -- figure is through the lens of affordability.
BLACKWELL: Yes.
ELROD: And that's the message, I think, Democrats have to keep.
BLACKWELL: The president has it vetoed, the bill. He hasn't signed it. We'll see what he does. And again, if he stays on side. T.W., let me ask you about this. Republicans are begging the president to just drop this Save America Act. The votes are not there. I mean, we've heard this from members on the Hill and from Republicans. Conservative commentator Erick Erickson warned that Georgians stayed home back in 2021 because they -- quote -- "believe election lies." And he asked, how many will stay home this November? Does Trump care?
ARRIGHI: Well, I think he cares. I don't think he wants a repeat of the second two years of his first term again. I think he wants everyone to get out. I also think he does care deeply about the voter I.D. issue. Harry Enten had that great segment pointing out how broad of support in the country voter I.D. laws have.
BLACKWELL: But the bill doesn't have the support in the Senate. ARRIGHI: No, it doesn't. He needs to get to 60. It needs buy in from the other side. And we're not going to nuke the --
BLACKWELL: He may not even have 50.
ARRIGHI: Right. But here's the thing. Well, it's a little tenuous because some of the excuses by the senators who voted no vary. Susan Collins was an original co-sponsor on the Save America Act. So, we can't forget that the support is there for the premise. Even John Fetterman on the Democratic side has said, yes, I think voter I.D. laws are commonsensical. I think the American people think that. But we're so hooked on this one bill. We're driving a wedge away.
So, I think because we don't have the time to be flexible enough to take into consideration Lisa Murkowski's concerns about mail-in voting restrictions, because we don't have enough time to talk about the concerns about ballot harvesting, we're not going to get to that point yet.
But as Mike Johnson probably pointed out to Donald Trump, if you can tell Anna Paulina Luna and some of the hardliners in the House right now to drop their voting against the rules and let legislation go through, we are likely to check off more boxes of your agenda before election day, and that's just good news for you that you can run on.
BLACKWELL: All right. T.W., Adrienne, thank you both. They'll be back with us later this hour to answer your questions and comments. Send us in. Just text them to us at 818-972-7272. Make sure to include your first name and your city or your state so we know where you're joining us from.
Up next, the Supreme Court delivers Trump major wins on immigration, including a case that featured Trump's infamous attack on Haitians in Springfield, Ohio. Why even some Republicans are calling the ruling a mistake.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:15:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BLACKWELL: Tonight, the Supreme Court's conservative majority seems to be sending a clear message in two major rulings when it comes to immigration. The court, they're stepping out of the way. One ruling allows the Trump administration to end temporary protected status for hundreds of thousands of Haitian and Syrian immigrants. They were allowed to live and work legally in the U.S. after natural disasters or wars in their home countries. Justice Samuel Alito rejected the suggestion that the administration's decision is motivated by anti- Black prejudice. He concluded none of the president's statements cited by challengers was overtly racial.
But we all remember the president's very public disparaging false comments about Haitian migrants during the 2024 campaign.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: In Springfield, they're eating the dogs, the people that came in. They're eating the cats. They're eating -- they're eating the pets of the people that live there. And this is what's happening in our country.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLACKWELL: In response to the majority, Justice Elena Kagan wrote, the statements fairly shout, in their racial undertones and overtones alike, that race entered into the president's resolve to remove Haitians from this country.
With me now, writer for "The Bulwark," Jonathan Cohn, and founder of Securing America's Promise, Andrea Flores. She worked on immigration policy in the Obama administration. Welcome to you both.
Soon after, Andrea, that ruling came down, Katie Miller, who is the wife of Stephen Miller, top aide to the president, she posted on social media, great news for the dogs and cats of Springfield.
[23:20:00]
When you have something like that from the chief architect of the immigration policy of this administration, how does the Supreme Court defend saying there's no racial animosity?
ANDREA FLORES, FOUNDER, SECURING AMERICA'S PROMISE: Well, they don't really seem to be trying to defend it. I mean, Justice Alito looked at the same statements that we just heard and looked at the record, and seemed to find a race neutral reason that accompanied those statements. I mean, any ordinary person would call that racism. Right? But he looked beyond that and seemed to find his own justification for why these terminations were reasonable.
And that is just stunning. But it's very consistent with the way the Supreme Court and this court in particular treats race.
BLACKWELL: Yes.
FLORES: Right? We've seen it with voting rights where they have whisked away racism to be gone. We've seen it in immigration where they have enlarged the president's power. I mean, they claim that you can still make a constitutional case to preserve TPS. But if you're saying these statements don't even meet the definition of racism, I don't know how a plaintiff will succeed in future challenges.
BLACKWELL: Yes. Alito said that none of the cited statements by either the president or the secretary was overtly racial and in substance all expressed policy views that could rest on race neutral justification. Jonathan, I mean, to call Haiti a shithole country and claim that people eating house cats, where's the policy view there?
JONATHAN COHN, WRITER, THE BULWARK: Yes, you know, when I read that in the opinion, I was genuinely stunned that he could look at these statements and say there was no racism there. And the tell there, the real revealing tell is that he would not quote the statements.
And Kagan called him on that. If you read her dissent, she says, look, these statements are so bad. Justice Alito, he won't even quote them. Well, here, I will quote them for you. And then, of course, she lists them and says, of course, these are racist, of course, these are racial stereotypes. What are we doing here?
So, I mean, you know, the idea that there's no racism here, I think, is laughable on its face. I mean, they want to make the argument that it's fine for him to be racist, you know, whatever. That's a different argument. But to pretend to kind of whitewash, I guess that's the right word here, that this isn't some kind of racial animus at work here is just -- we all see it.
BLACKWELL: But more than a win, Jonathan, how do you think the White House reads this ruling from the majority?
COHN: I mean, I think this is what they have wanted all along. Trump has wanted to get rid of the Haitian population in particular since going back to his first term. This has been on his mind.
And, you know, this -- you know, in the build up to this, there was a lot of pushback not just from Democrats but from Republicans in places like Miami and, you know, in the House, in New York and Ohio, who said, wait a minute. The governor of Ohio, who said, you know, these people are doing really important work for us, especially in South Florida, for example, in the care -- I mean, they're the backbone of the nursing home workforce, the home care where we have elderly patients at home who depend on these people. And now, those relationships are going to be shattered. And these -- you know, they're going to have a labor shortage of caregivers. And, you know, the White House has shown zero signs that they care.
BLACKWELL: Yes. Andrea, 1.3 million TPS recipients in the U.S. And as I said at the top, the court appears to say we're going back away from this and let the administration handle it as they choose. Who's next? What's next?
FLORES: So, coming up next is the administration is supposed to review TPS for El Salvador. Now, this population has lived in the United States since the 1990s, right? It's a very established, longtime population. Most TPS holders are.
And so, if the president wants to go forward and use the same type of treatment that he used in Haiti, Syria, Afghanistan, Sudan, right, he is trying to target every country where there are Black and brown immigrants. Let's just be very clear about what this is. It sounds like he has a free pass to ultimately end TPS for up to the 1.3 million. I mean, I don't know if we'll end it for Ukraine, right, because he has shown a lot of racial bias in the immigration policies that he has put forward.
But I think it's a devastating human decision. I mean, if you're a TPS holder today, what today meant is that you have to wait and check. Are you up next? Will you lose your work permit? Will your employer have to fire you? Will you have to stop caring for the family that you're caring for?
I mean, 1.3 million people don't just get removed easily from our communities. I mean, you have populations 90s because every president of both parties had used TPS since George H.W. Bush, created this protection in the 1990s, signed a bill by Congress. And he did it because of what happened.
Just 24 hours ago, an earthquake in Venezuela.
BLACKWELL: Yes.
FLORES: We have 400,000 Venezuelans in this country who have TPS. Is the United States going to send them back? And that's what this decision means. It has huge human economic consequences. I think Americans will start to see the effects soon.
BLACKWELL: Yes. And Jonathan, we're actually going to get the latest from Caracas after those massive earthquakes. The number of people killed rising tonight.
[23:25:00]
And that begs an important question. The U.S. says they're going to send their search and rescue crews and send their equipment. Do you send back the people to Venezuela when we see what they might be returning to?
COHN: I mean, the whole principle of TPS, right, is that if you're here and your country is too dangerous to go back to, you can stay here, you can work. It's not -- by the way, it's not a guarantee you can stay here forever. There's no path to citizenship from it. You know, you can apply for citizenship if you would normally apply. But it's saying, look, for now, you can stay here and you can work. And these people are so -- they're productive. They pay taxes. They contribute to our society.
And just the irony of this, on our 250th anniversary with the Statue of Liberty sitting out there with our huddled masses, and we're just going to send people back, I mean, it's just -- it's really remarkable.
BLACKWELL: Jonathan Cohn, Andrea Flores, thank you both.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ (D), NEW YORK: There was so much fear around that when I was elected, and none of it bore out to be true.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLACKWELL: AOC is trying to calm the party down as some Democrats are panicking over the rise of Democratic socialists. Is this time different? I'll ask Congressman Seth Moulton, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:30:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BLACKWELL: Forty-eight hours after Democratic socialists won in two New York congressional districts, the implications are still being felt, and this really could just be the start.
Next up is Colorado in the state's bluest district in Metro Denver. The Democratic primary pits Congresswoman Diana DeGette against another Democratic socialist, Melat Kiros. That election happens next week. And in August, the closely-watched Michigan Democratic Senate primary pits progressive Abdul El-Sayed against Congresswoman Haley Stevens and State Senator Mallory McMorrow.
Some Democrats are not rolling out the welcome mat for this new crop of far-left politicians. Just listen to what James Carville said about Darializa Avila Chevalier, the Democratic socialist who won her primary over New York Congressman Adriano Espaillat.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JAMES CARVILLE, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: This Chevalier lady, I don't think -- they should not seat her in the caucus. All of these people hate Democrats. Why do you want to run as a Democrat? Start your own movement. If it's such a powerful, sweeping movement that's got momentum everywhere, then go ahead and be at the head of it. Don't use the Democratic Party to advance it.
(END VIDEO CLIP) BLACKWELL: With me now is a member of the House Democratic Caucus, Congressman Seth Moulton, from Massachusetts. He's also running for Senate. Congressman, good to see you again. What's your thought on what you heard there from --
REP. SETH MOULTON (D-MA), MEMBER OF HOUSE DEMOCRATIC CAUCUS: Good to see you, Victor.
BLACKWELL: -- James Carville that these are not Democrats? Is the tent big enough for Darializa Avila Chevalier?
MOULTON: I mean, look, we've got to have a big tent if we want a majority. And the reality is that while the media and a lot of talking heads like to try to point out all the differences here, there are a lot of things that we're united on, you know, like let's make sure that we stop ICE from terrorizing our cities. I've said ICE not only needs to be abolished, they need to be prosecuted. I think there's a lot of Democrats who would agree on that.
There's a lot is made in the media about, you know, the divisions in the Democratic Party over exactly how we want to deliver health care. But Democrats are united that everybody in America deserves health care. And meanwhile, we're trying to oppose a party that's trying to take away health care from millions of Americans, maybe 25 million of Americans under Trump and MAGA's plan.
So, there's a lot more that unites us than divides us.
BLACKWELL: Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro, he seemed to welcome these newcomers. He offered some advice, though. Show your work. Let's watch.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GOV. JOSH SHAPIRO (D), PENNSYLVANIA: I think what is important are the people who are making a lot of noise, who are engaging in these performative politics have to now figure out how to deliver results. It's one thing to speak in platitudes during a campaign. It's a whole other thing to actually deliver for people who are genuinely hurting.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLACKWELL: He calls it performative politics. Do you have advice for these nominees now if they're elected in November?
MOULTON: Roll up your sleeves, get to work, and get to know people who even disagree with you. You know, reach out to some of the people who have been critical of you, not just the people who are your friends, and find where you can work together.
I mean, one of my best legislative accomplishments was 988, the National Mental Health Hotline. I had to work with a Republican on that. He was a great partner. But there are a lot of issues that we disagree on. That's OK. We got something done that's saving thousands of American lives every month. That's the work that the American people are looking for in Congress today. BLACKWELL: Yes. We've talked about how this could change the landscape for a congressional leadership if these DSA members make it into the chambers. Your Senate colleague, Elissa Slotkin, says that this left-wing revolt, as many describe it, is partially fueled by a call for generational change. Here's part of a recent conversation.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
STEPHEN A. SMITH, TELEVISION PERSONALITY, RADIO HOST, SPORTS ANALYST, POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, ACTOR: You talk about new leadership. Well, Hakeem Jeffries is the Democratic leader in the House and Chuck Schumer is the Democratic leader in the Senate. You talk about new leadership. That would mean they're out in favor of somebody else. Is that what you're saying?
REP. ELISSA SLOTKIN (D), MICHIGAN: I'm saying, if people can't understand that the game has changed, I mean, this is you, this is -- you're the sports guy, if people can't understand that the game has fundamentally changed and they can't adapt, then they need to let others lead.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[23:35:04]
BLACKWELL: Your opponent, Senator Ed Markey, 79 years old, you made his age an issue in your campaign announcement. He has rejected the call for generational change. Voters backed him in 2020 over a much younger Joe Kennedy. What makes you think now is different?
MOULTON: I mean, tell me a Democrat who is satisfied with the status quo. I mean, show me a Democrat who thinks that, you know, we're just killing it in Washington, that is great, that we're in the minority, that Trump is elected for a second term and that's really helping Americans. No. I mean, more than seven out of every 10 Democratic voters in Massachusetts says that we need new leadership.
And one of the first things I said in my campaign is I am not voting for Chuck Schumer. That's a big difference between myself and Senator Markey. He supports the Democratic establishment.
I think we do need generational change. I think we need new leaders. I think we need leaders who are going to take us forward into a brave new world. And you know what? I say that with respect to the leaders who have gotten here -- gotten this year, including Senator Markey.
You know, he served in Congress for half a century. He was elected before I was even born, and we should thank him for that service. But there comes a time to pass the torch. And I'm with Senator Slotkin. I think that time is now.
BLACKWELL: Let's talk about the TPS ruling from the Supreme Court. The court rejected temporary protected status for Haitian and Syrian immigrants sided with the Trump administration. You've talked about reform for the court. Should Democrats make Supreme Court reform a campaign priority going forward? MOULTON: Absolutely. I mean, we have to. This is a completely partisan, essentially Trump-controlled Supreme Court. And what they are doing is cruel and inhumane. I mean, this TPS ruling, they're basically saying that 350,000 people here should go back to a country that the State Department under Marco Rubio has said Americans can't travel there because it's so unsafe.
And, of course, for some of them, it's going back for a lot of young kids who were born here in America with Haitian parents. They've never even been to this country before, a country that's deemed too unsafe, too dangerous for Americans to travel to. It will tear apart families. It will upend communities. I mean, American citizens will see their classmates just ripped out of their schools.
And on top of this, it's going to take away a lot of health care workers. And how many Americans today, Victor, are saying, wow, you know, those emergency room lines are just too short? You know, there's just too many slots in nursing homes for my 80-year-old parent who needs to go into a nursing home right now.
BLACKWELL: Well, what --
MOULTON: You know, there are just too many appointments available if you want to get a health care appointment. That's not the case at all. We need more people working in health care, which is what so many of these Haitians do. They're a critical part of America.
BLACKWELL: Yes.
MOULTON: Haiti is not safe to go back to. And this is just a travesty with the Supreme Court rule.
BLACKWELL: Congressman, what is Supreme Court reform look like? Is that expanding the court? Is that term limits?
MOULTON: First of all, let's put everything on the table because we saw what Mitch McConnell did to just throw out the rules, throw out the norms, and just do everything they could to get a Republican majority on the Supreme Court to make it a partisan Supreme Court. So, I think everything should be on the table. But, certainly, term limits, yes, absolutely, we could probably use term limits in Congress. Let's have that discussion as well.
And what about ethics reform? I mean, the fact that Clarence Thomas and Alito can just go on all these junkets with wealthy MAGA donors, I mean, this is absurd. That's got to be -- that's got to be a necessary reform.
But on top of that, let's talk about packing the court. Let's talk about expanding it. Let's talk about what we need to do to push back against the MAGA Republicans. This is not a time to step back. This is a time to stand up and fight.
BLACKWELL: One more for you before you go tonight. You and many others want to know why a four-star general who commanded the Delta Force is now retiring. And it appears that General Christopher Donahue is stepping down from commanding U.S. Army, Europe and Africa, after he was not nominated for a job consistent with his rank.
Republican Senator Thom Tillis blasted the defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, over this. He said that he's more interested in purging people he perceives as insufficiently loyal than empowering proven patriots who can actually lead.
What more than just a shift in personnel is the import of this? Create the national security nexus here of these dismissals or retirements.
MOULTON: Yes, that's a great question, Victor. I mean, you know anything about General Donahue? There's almost no one in the U.S. Military today who is more qualified or more respected.
[23:40:00]
And that's fundamentally exactly why Hegseth is firing him. That's exactly why he's being hired -- fired by a secretary of defense who is the most unqualified and the least respected secretary of defense in American history. I mean, he just sees people like General Donahue as competition because they are so much more respected, qualified, capable leaders than he is as secretary of defense.
So, that's exactly what's going on. It's dangerous for our troops. It's dangerous for our national security. The only people that helps are Trump and Hegseth.
BLACKWELL: Congressman Seth Moulton, thanks so much.
MOULTON: Good to see you, Victor.
BLACKWELL: Up next, your turn to drive the conversation. Text your questions at 818-972-7272. T.W. and Adrienne are back with me to take those questions on. And later, the major new backlash against the WNBA over missed calls against Caitlin Clark and as pundits and politicians warning the league.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNKNOWN: Some European league is going to pull her in, and they'll pay her, and she'll pull out, and they'll all be back blind.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:45:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BLACKWELL: All right, we got a lot of questions from viewers tonight, and we've got just the people to answer them. And remember, if you want to participate, just text us at 818-972-7272. Include your first name and your city or state.
All right, T.W. Arrighi and Adrienne Elrod back with me now. So, first question here. This is from Chris. He's in Port Arthur, Texas. Adrienne, for you. Why do the Democratic Party leaders refuse to accept that majority of America is sick of the status quo? Like Mamdani said, what is the Democratic Party, if not its voters?
ELROD: Well, I think -- it's a great question, first of all. I think that a lot of Democrats currently elected and those candidates who are especially running in contested primaries against incumbents do realize that voters, a lot of voters in America, are sick of the status quo, which is why you're seeing a lot of even -- not even just Democratic socialists but Democrats across the board who are challenging incumbents and they're winning.
I think a lot of the electorate on both sides of the aisle is just hungry for change. And especially when it comes to the Democrats. They want a change, and they want a fighter.
BLACKWELL: All right. T.W., for you. This is Dominic from Cheyenne, Wyoming, asked, does anything top affordability in messaging given the recent wins in New York?
ARRIGHI: Whenever I hear Cheyenne, Wyoming, I just think of George Strait.
(LAUGHTER)
But the answer -- "I Can Still Make Cheyenne." But the answer is no. Affordability is number one and will be to the end of time. That's why I think Donald Trump needs to sign that housing bill immediately, make a show of it at the White House like he should have done on Capitol Hill, and also push forward messaging on the accomplishments we've done with taxes and on deregulation.
BLACKWELL: All right. Kay from South Carolina. With more Americans identifying as independents and both major parties becoming more polarized, do you think a viable third-party candidate has a better chance of gaining traction in the future elections? This is something that we discuss every cycle.
ELROD: Yes.
BLACKWELL: Is this the time for an independent campaign?
ELROD: Well, look, I think if the Democrats elect somebody who's very progressive to be the nominee in 2028, then yes. I think -- and if it's Republicans, either Vance or Rubio, yes. I think that there could be a real viable chance for an independent to come through.
But look, Victor, the way the system is set up, it is a very much a two-party system. You have Democratic primaries, you have Republican primaries. It is really hard in a general election for an independent candidate to come in and surge.
BLACKWELL: You need the infrastructure.
ELROD: You need the infrastructure. And the independent party is not really a party. That's the infrastructure. It's not there.
BLACKWELL: Or a billion dollars.
ARRIGHI: You need --
ELROD: Or a billion dollars.
ARRIGHI: That's the point.
ELROD: Or like $10 billion.
ARRIGHI: You need money. Everyone said there was no more ripe opportunity than Biden versus Trump given their numbers. But no one could come up with the money, even though there were probably some tickets that could garner attention. You have -- and also ballot access. RFK Jr. ran into that problem.
The Libertarian Party is probably the only -- and the Green Party are the only two that are on a majority of states ballots. But even they are not on all 50. It is an uphill climb. And if you want that, to see that a reality, you better get started now for like eight years from now.
BLACKWELL: Ben from Alaska asked, how does Trump continue to maintain support among his base while clearly not holding up his campaign promises?
ARRIGHI: Well, I think he would probably quarrel with that.
BLACKWELL: Sure. Yes, he would.
ARRIGHI: And by all accounts, he still has a very strong control over the base. We've seen that in primary elections all over the country. But, again, it's about how he continues to message the wins he has. And that's why this housing bill was such a big deal. That's why, however, this Iran situation wraps up is also going to be a massive talking point. So, I think keeping the base engaged and on the same page and having them talking about wins and not some Washington, D.C. stuff about fountains --
BLACKWELL: Yes.
ARRIGHI: -- that's where we need to be headed.
BLACKWELL: All right. We have time for one more. Do we have time for one more? I'm going to take the time. All right. Joe from Las Vegas. Adrienne, this is for you. I believe the Democrats should copy Mamdani's strategy to win. It wasn't because he's a Democratic socialist. It's because he used an effective strategy. Isn't that the pathway forward?
ELROD: Yes. Absolutely. Look, I think there's a lot that Democrats running, not just in this cycle, but going into 2028, can take from Mamdani, which is he went out there and said, look, I'm going to take the issues that matter to you, and even if I can't get it -- get them done or accomplished, I'm going to show you that I'm trying, which is why he talked about, you know, things that sound crazy, right?
[23:50:03]
Like free rent or free grocery stores, which sounds absurd. But when affordability, which we've been talking about all night, is the overriding issue, at least he is showing voters he's trying, and I think that's attack that other Democrats can take.
BLACKWELL: There was the rent freeze that was approved today in New York City at a million rent stabilized units. Adrienne, T.W., thank you both.
ELROD: Thanks.
BLACKWELL: All right, up next, the missed foul seen around the world that has Caitlin Clark's fans outraged. Some of them even demanding she leave the league altogether. The WNBA has a response tonight. Our next guest says it is not enough. Christine Brennan wrote the book about Caitlin Clark. She's with me next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:55:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BLACKWELL: The WNBA is taking a lot of heat tonight over this moment from last night's game between Indiana and Phoenix. Now, you see here, watch that. Caitlin Clark being hit in the neck by Phoenix player Alyssa Thomas. But when that happened, the refs did not call a foul. But the WNBA reviewed the incident. And today, Thomas was given a flagrant foul 2, which for non-basketball fans is the most severe type of foul. She was also suspended from her next game.
With me now, CNN sports analyst and columnist for USA Today, Christine Brennan. Good to see you here in person. Let's talk about the incident first, and then -- oh, the book. The author of "On Her Game: Caitlin Clark and the Revolution in Women's Sports." I want to rush to the conversation. Can't forget the book.
CHRISTINE BRENNAN, CNN SPORTS ANALYST: No problem.
BLACKWELL: So, the incident first, and then Clark more broadly. What do you think about how the WNBA handled it? Nothing last night, but that flagrant foul 2 after review today.
BRENNAN: Victor, the referees, the officials, where were they? You've got this happening. Now, granted, there's a lot going on, but they said they completely missed it. Then Stephanie White, the coach of the Indiana Fever, said that -- after the game, she said that she then told the officials about it when she found out at halftime.
BLACKWELL: Yes.
BRENNAN: So, a lot of what's going on, what's happening quickly. As you can see, you know, Caitlin is going for the ball. She's then falling on the floor. Alyssa Thomas, obviously, is then on top of her. And, you know, if you see this, if you see Alyssa Thomas actually kneeing, putting her knee into Caitlin Clark's groin, which was one of the injuries that Caitlin Clark had last year, the left groin, and then the fists on the throat.
And so, we see it now but, apparently, it was missed by a lot of people in real time. But when a coach, as Stephanie White did, alerts the referees, the officials to what happened, and then she said the disparity and fouls in the second half against her team, the Indiana team, was great. So, it does sound like there were missed opportunities all along. And, as you know, you know, once a player, now she's suspended. But she kept playing in a game that, of course, then Indiana lost when Caitlin Clark went out as well.
BLACKWELL: And so, what should have happened yesterday, especially after they were alerted at halftime by the coach? I mean, we have this strong statement from the WNBA today. But yesterday, when they -- last night, when they learned of it, what do you think should have happened there?
BRENNAN: I would love it if the WNBA would act immediately.
BLACKWELL: Yes.
BRENNAN: You know -- I mean, it would have been late at night. Even with the statement today, it seems to me there could be much stronger worded language from the commissioner, Cathy Engelbert. I also, Victor, disagree with the one game suspension and a one-thousand- dollar fine. Alyssa Thomas is making $1.2 million a year. Deservedly so. A great veteran, a great player. And so, a thousand dollars for someone making $1.2 million a year isn't very much. And a one game suspension, to me, is not very much, especially when you look at Alyssa Thomas's record of dirty play. Last year, Napheesa Collier, her ankle was injured very severely by a hard hit by Alyssa Thomas.
BLACKWELL: Speaking of strong words, you said their statement wasn't strong enough. Your op-ed, though, has some very strong words. Let me read this. For three seasons now, in ways big and small, the WNBA and its players have continued to show their unabashed jealousy, disdain and outright hatred for the greatest thing to happen to them. Strong emotions, I'm sure the league and players would deny. But if she's such a big draw, why would the WNBA, why would the league hate her?
BRENNAN: It's a question I've asked, a question I deal with in the book. You know, this is something as journalists, you know, you think and you want to talk about it. This is a 74 percent Black league. It's probably about a third gay. We don't have those numbers exactly, obviously. Caitlin Clark is a straight white woman from Iowa. And this is a league I covered, as I think, you know, in the 90s.
BLACKWELL: Yes.
BRENNAN: We would have -- I would have loved to see some of those great stars from the, you know, the very early days, someone like Sheryl Swoopes, Cheryl Miller, moving -- Taurasi, all the way moving up to the great Maya Moore. Have them become Caitlin Clark? She is famous that everyone on the street knows their name. But it didn't happen then. And I think Dr. Harry Edwards, the great civil rights leader, a good friend of mine, I quote him in my book on this topic about where he says the WNBA failed the players.
[00:00:02]
He loves Caitlin Clark. He said, when you've got a situation like this in the workplace where it's going to be unusual, why don't you have seminars, Zoom calls, work with the players, not because they're damsels in distress, but because this was such an unusual situation?
BLACKWELL: Christine Brennan, I wish we had another 10 minutes to talk about that last question. But I thank you for coming in. And the book again is "On Her Game."
Thank you for watching. "The Story Is with Elex Michaelson" is next.
