Return to Transcripts main page
The Source with Kaitlan Collins
Judge Dismisses DOJ Cases Against James Comey & Letitia James; WH: Trump Remains "Hopeful & Optimistic" For Ukraine Peace Deal; TV Producer Shonda Rhimes Makes Major Donation To Preserve Mississippi Site Of Emmett Till's 1955 Murder. Aired 9-10p ET
Aired November 24, 2025 - 21:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[21:00:00]
DONIE O'SULLIVAN, CNN SENIOR CORRESPONDENT: People are claiming that this new labeling showed that the DHS account was actually based in Israel. That got a lot of people online. There were, believe it or not, a lot of people on X who don't like Israel, and don't like Jews, so they got very excited about that. It turned out that that was false. It was either -- we think possibly a fake screenshot. DHS came out today with a statement saying that is false.
JOHN BERMAN, CNN HOST, ANDERSON COOPER 360: Yes.
O'SULLIVAN: Again, just don't trust what you see on the internet, John.
BERMAN: A collision of conspiracies.
Donie O'Sullivan, great to see you tonight. Thank you very much.
O'SULLIVAN: Sure.
BERMAN: The news continues. "THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS" starts now.
KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, CNN HOST, THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS: Tonight, President Trump's revenge tour takes a turn, as two of the cases that he ordered are thrown out, while he targets another, using the U.S. military.
I'm Kaitlan Collins. And this is THE SOURCE.
As we come on the air tonight, President Trump's retribution tour and his use of his powers, as President, to target those who challenge him, have taken a pair of diverging turns.
After days of rage from the President, directed at those Democratic lawmakers, the Pentagon has now opened an investigation into one of them. Senator Mark Kelly, of Arizona, for what they say are, quote, Serious allegations of misconduct.
Now, this comes less than a week since Senator Kelly, who served his country as a Navy captain and later as an astronaut, joined with those five other military and intelligence veterans in Congress, in a message that was directed at current U.S. service members, telling them to refuse any illegal orders.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Let me be very clear. Not a single order this president or administration has given to our military has ever been illegal, nor will it ever be. This administration respects and abides by the law. And these officials know it.
They are trying to sow chaos and distrust -- distrust, which is a very dangerous thing to do within the military's ranks. The sanctity of our military respects and relies on law and order and the chain of command. And that's what this administration is trying to say. And that's why the Department of War opened up this investigation against former -- or against Senator Mark Kelly today.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Now, Kelly is among those whom the President has accused of seditious conspiracy for that video, noting that it is punishable by death, as he did multiple times on social media. And Kelly is now facing the possibility of being returned to active duty, so he can be court-martialed.
He responded to the accusation this way, and said, If this is meant to intimidate me and other members of Congress from doing our jobs and holding this administration accountable, it won't work. He says, I've given too much to this country to be silenced by bullies who care more about their own power than protecting the Constitution.
His fellow senator from Arizona put it this way.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. RUBEN GALLEGO (D-AZ): Hey, this is Ruben Gallego. I'm traveling through Arizona right now, and I just received the news that the Department of Defense is starting an investigation against my seatmate, Mark Kelly. This is (bleep) insane. We should all just point out how (bleep) insane this is
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Now, on another front, the President's revenge tour also faced a pair of setbacks today. That's because a federal judge tossed out the cases, both against the former FBI Director James Comey, and the New York Attorney General, Letitia James, cases that the President himself, directly and publicly demanded.
The judge also tossed out the appointment of Trump's handpicked U.S. Attorney, Lindsey Halligan, ruling that Attorney General Pam Bondi's attempt to install Ms. Halligan as Interim U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia was invalid, adding that, quote, "All actions flowing from Ms. Halligan's defective appointment... constitute unlawful exercises of executive power and must be set aside." Now, Halligan, of course, was the only prosecutor who signed those indictments of James Comey and Letitia James, in what we now know was a fatal flaw in both of those cases.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JAMES COMEY, LAWYER AND FORMER DIRECTOR OF THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION: This case mattered to me, personally, obviously. But it matters most, because a message has to be sent that the President of the United States cannot use the Department of Justice to target his political enemies. I don't care what your politics are. You have to see that as fundamentally un-American and a threat to the rule of law that keeps all of us free.
I know that Donald Trump will probably come after me again, and my attitude is going to be the same. I'm innocent. I am not afraid. And I believe in an independent federal judiciary.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Comey does seem to have already been proven right on that front, about the President continuing to come after him.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: What was President Trump's reaction to those indictments against Comey and James being thrown out?
[21:05:00]
LEAVITT: His reaction was, we've seen this before, we have seen partisan judges take unprecedented steps to try to intervene in, in accountability before. But we're not going to give up. And I know that the Department of Justice intends to appeal these rulings very soon, if they haven't already.
PAM BONDI, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL: We have made Lindsey Halligan a special U.S. Attorney, so she is in court, she can fight in court, just like she was. And we believe we will be successful on appeal.
And I'll tell you, Lindsey Halligan, I talked to all of our U.S. attorneys, the majority of them, around the country, and Lindsey Halligan is an excellent U.S. attorney. And shame on them for not wanting her in office.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: My lead source is here to break it all down with us. CNN Senior Legal Analyst, Elie Honig.
And Elie, obviously you heard Pam Bondi saying the Justice Department will be appealing this. Given what the judge said, though, I mean, what would that route look like? What are their options here? ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST, FORMER ASST. U.S. ATTORNEY, SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NY: So they do have the right to appeal up to the Fourth Circuit. But I don't like their odds. Because if you look at this ruling, I will tell you, as a Justice Department alum, Kaitlan, it's painful.
The way this broke. I was 10 minutes into teaching a class of college students, in a class about DOJ and the need to be independent of politics. And so, we stopped. We did breaking news is what happens if you take my class. Put it up on the screen, and started sort of reading the highlights. And at some point, I just turned to them and said, Guys, if you become prosecutors, don't ever do any of this.
Because what this decision does is it calls out the two fundamental flaws with both of these prosecutions, the Comey and the Letitia James prosecutions.
One, malice. The only reason Lindsey Halligan was there as the prosecutor in the first place is because the real prosecutors refused to charge it and got pushed out.
And then second, on top of that, just incompetence, the inability to return a grand jury indictment and to follow the basic rules.
So, it's a dark day for the Justice Department. Sure they can appeal. But I don't love their chances.
COLLINS: So you're saying, if this was you, it would be pretty embarrassing, basically?
HONIG: My God. I mean, thankfully I never had a case dismissed. Not that I believe -- I was far from perfect as a prosecutor. But to lose not just one, but two? Your two biggest cases? Again, on such a basic defect that you couldn't follow the basic law of just installing somebody who was technically qualified?
And when I say qualified? I don't mean resume. I don't mean how good a lawyer.
COLLINS: Yes.
HONIG: I just mean, met the basic requirements of law. That's humiliating.
COLLINS: Yes. I mean, Gene Rossi has been saying this, basically every night when we've had him on--
HONIG: Right.
COLLINS: --that this is going to be illegal, that she was not going to be able to stay in that role.
But I think the question is. I've been talking to people the White House and around the President. Maybe they'll refile Tish James.
Do you think the Comey case is dead, though? Because, to remind everyone, it was running up against the statute of limitations--
HONIG: Right.
COLLINS: --when they actually came and filed it. That's why there was so much pressure on Lindsey Halligan to do it, her -- what her, second week on the job, first week on the job?
HONIG: Right. So, four days in, on Comey.
COLLINS: Yes.
HONIG: So, two problems with sort of -- they can try to re-indict these cases. They can find a real prosecutor to go in and do it. But a couple problems.
One, I'm not so sure a grand jury would approve these indictments. Let's remember, the Comey indictment just squeaked by. Remember, they went in there with three counts. The grand jury actually rejected one count, and only barely approved the other two. That tells you that there's a weakness in that case. That's number one.
Number two, as you know, there could be a statute of limitations problem, because you have five years to indict a case like that, right? Comey gave his allegedly false testimony, September 30th, 2020. They indicted him, September 25th, 2025, five days before. But now we're after. So there could be a problem with that as well.
COLLINS: But can we just talk about what it's like inside that office?
HONIG: Yes.
COLLINS: So if you're working in that office -- I mean, Katelyn Polantz was reporting earlier, it's basically chaos, because people were saying, Can I still file the other cases that we're working on and have Lindsey Halligan's name on it? I mean, if you were working in that office, how would you be looking at what came down today?
HONIG: I would be worried that every indictment I had obtained, from September 22nd, when Lindsey Halligan took office, until today, two months later, might be invalidated. That would be concern number one.
Concern number two would be, Now, what do we do? Whose name -- I mean, the U.S. Attorney's name is at the bottom of every indictment, it's at the bottom of every major filing that you put in. Who's going to sign tomorrow for me, would be the question on my mind.
So not at all surprised to hear that reporting from Polantz. It's to be just surreal and bizarre and chaotic in there.
COLLINS: And those that could be invalidated, just to be clear, it's not just people that Trump's gone after that he wanted indicted. This could be anyone else that they've indicted--
HONIG: Normal--
COLLINS: --for totally legitimate reasons. HONIG: --drug cases, gun cases, violence cases, extortion. The difference, though, is, at least in those other cases, you had Lindsey Halligan's signature, and then a real prosecutor, so there's a fall back.
COLLINS: Lawful orders.
HONIG: Comey and James, you only had Lindsey Halligan. The judge said, When you take out the one person who signed, you're out of luck.
COLLINS: Yes.
Elie Honig, as always, great to have you, and your analysis here.
HONIG: Thank you.
COLLINS: I also have veteran political commentator, speech writer, and staff writer at The Atlantic, whose pieces are always must-read, for me at least, David Frum here.
DAVID FRUM, STAFF WRITER, THE ATLANTIC: Thank you.
COLLINS: And David, I was talking about this retribution campaign. The President made very clear what he wanted to happen. I mean, he named a lot of these people specifically, in that Truth Social post that was actually meant to be a private message.
FRUM: Yes.
COLLINS: I wonder what you make of today's ruling, and how you think the President is reading something like that.
[21:10:00]
FRUM: I think the President and his team are in kind of disarray. I'm going -- I'm struck by the threats against Secretary -- sorry -- Senator Kelly, where Secretary Hegseth has issued these tweets, in which he said the Department of War is going to prosecute Secretary -- sorry -- Senator Kelly.
And then you had a clip at the top of your show, from the White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, saying the Secretary of War, the Department of War would never issue an illegal order.
Well, calling it the Department of War is an illegal order. Congress arranged the Department of Defense in 1940 -- in 1947. It gave a -- it passed a law in 1949, titling the Department of Defense, the Department of Defense.
It did so because in a few years before that, the United States had hanged a bunch of Japanese generals for the crime of waging an offensive war, and wanted to make clear that the United States would fight only in self-defense, according to the rules of international law that the United States had imposed on Japan and Nazi Germany.
Every time that in violation of act of Congress, the Secretary makes up these titles for himself? Secretary of Partying, Secretary of War, whatever he calls himself. Those are illegal orders too. And so, we -- they're not the most morally offensive illegal orders, but they are illegal. And every time he gives himself his title, he's proving he is willing to issue illegal orders, because the department was organized and named by act of Congress. The President unilaterally cannot change that.
COLLINS: Well, and this is something that Hegseth was questioned about, I believe, by Elissa Slotkin during his confirmation hearing.
But on just the front overall, I think some people may not like the video. I mean, we've asked every Democrat that we've had on who was in the video, why they felt the need to make that video, given, as you know, that is already what troops are trained to do--
FRUM: Yes.
COLLINS: --not to follow illegal orders.
But I mean, I wonder what you make of the outsized reaction from the White House, where, I mean, for the first time, people around Trump have actually struggled to try to defend what he -- what he said.
FRUM: In his first term, President Trump mused aloud, about asking the military, in the streets of the United States, on U.S. soil, to use lethal, or near-lethal force against protesters.
Right now, the United States is conducting, without any kind of authorization by Congress, without any regional allies, a campaign of blowing up boats, on the Caribbean Sea, international waters. Some two dozen boats have been destroyed that we know of, nearly a 100 people have been killed. Maybe they're bad actors, maybe not. But drug dealers, the sentence -- the punishment for people who carry drugs, is not summary execution without trial. So the orders to those boats are at least plausibly illegal.
So the administration is conscious that it is doing things that may be in violation of law. It's dismissed much of the Officer Corps of the military's legal -- many of the legal officers in the military's Officer Corps. It is denuding itself of the ability even to assess what is legal and what is not. So yes, it's a pain point because they know they're up to no good.
COLLINS: Yes, they've argued it's legal, of course. That's been a pressing point with lawmakers.
But on what we're seeing tonight, that's different, and I think this is important to point out, and to clarify, is that with Tish James, with James Comey, they're using the Justice Department to go after these people. The President is directly calling out to the Attorney General for those matters.
This is the first time we're seeing them use the Pentagon, or try to use the Pentagon and the Uniform Code of Military Justice--
FRUM: Yes. COLLINS: --in potentially bringing Senator Kelly back, so they can court martial him.
We have not seen that yet since Trump retook office in this avenue. I wonder what you make of that.
FRUM: Well, there is a kind of militarization of the administration's policy.
We have troops, federal troops in American cities, acting in quasi law enforcement roles, which, again, is something that was -- has been for, through the life of the country, something quite forbidden.
Summoning up the National Guard to use to -- in law enforcement roles, over the objection of local and state governments. Again, something the last time that the National Guard was called up, over the objection of the state governor, was during the Civil Rights era. It hasn't happened in modern times.
Normally, when the President federalizes the National Guard, he does so with the enthusiastic consent of the state. There's an emergency of some kind, a natural disaster, a riot, something where the local authorities want help from the federal government.
Trump and his administration are using the National Guard in -- as an offensive army, in places where it's not welcome, where it hasn't been asked for, where there's no reasonable basis for it. So, they are contemplating, all the time, using the military, illegally.
Again, there's a lot of questions about the Caribbean. So, it's a pain point for them. They can't simply say, Don't be ridiculous. Obviously, we would never do that.
It's not obvious. A lot of people think they're not doing it. And so when senators say, what is the plain fact of the matter? Troops are not required, and, in fact, are forbidden, to obey illegal orders. The administration reacts, because it's sort of thinking about it.
COLLINS: David Frum, thank you for joining.
FRUM: Thank you. Bye-bye.
[21:15:00]
COLLINS: The President today also said, Don't believe it until you see it, but something good might be happening. He is talking about the new ultimatum that we're seeing from the United States, when it comes to Russia's war in Ukraine. I'm going to speak to the Republican member of Congress, though, up next, who says he believes that it's a plan to surrender to Dictator Putin.
This also comes as the legendary political strategist, who coined the phrase, It's the economy, stupid. Well, he's back with a new message for Democrats, and he's my source tonight.
And also, that message from the Transportation Secretary about what to do, as you're traveling, ahead of the holiday rush.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEAN DUFFY, TRANSPORTATION SECRETARY: I would encourage people to maybe dress a little better, which encourage us -- encourages us to maybe behave all a little better. Let's try not to wear slippers and pajamas as we come to the airport.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[21:20:00]
COLLINS: Tonight, the Ukrainian Air Force says that Kyiv is under attack from ballistic missiles, as Russian cruise missiles and attack drones have been taking aim at Ukraine's capital.
An assault, that is coming just after the Ukrainian president Zelenskyy publicly appealed for the attacks to stop, amid renewed peace talks that are underway right now. Those talks have largely been centered around a 28-point plan from President Trump, that has been widely seen as favoring Russia, but also has been facing some intense pushback, here at home, in Congress, and also from European leaders abroad.
These efforts have spurred Zelenskyy into a thank-you tour, online, where we saw in the span of about an hour today, he thanked 13 different world leaders, on social media. That includes President Trump, personally, as he did on Sunday, after the President said that Ukraine's leaders have expressed zero gratitude for the U.S.-led peace efforts.
Of course, by my colleague Daniel Dale's count, he says, President Zelenskyy has actually thanked the United States, including Trump directly, at least 78 times, since Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022.
Still, the White House says, they believe the President's statement is what has led to progress.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LEAVITT: The President put that statement out over the weekend. And since then, there have been very productive conversations, between the President's national security team and the Ukrainian delegation.
In fact, yesterday, Secretary Rubio, Special Envoy Witkoff, were in Geneva, and they were able to thoroughly go through this 28-point peace plan that the United States offered, with input from both the Russian side and the Ukrainian side, and they were really able to finetune the points.
And so, now there are just a couple points of disagreement that our teams continue to work through. So, the President remains hopeful and optimistic that a deal can be struck.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Ukraine's European allies have been pushing a counterproposal that is more in line with what Ukraine wants to see happen here.
This is the reaction from a Republican House member, who says the European counterplan is 10 times better than the Witkoff Ukrainian Surrender Plan. That's a reference to the President's senior advisor, Steve Witkoff. This Congressman says that the European plan should be the plan and not go backwards, because Ukraine is a sovereign state and should not be forced to live on its knees to Dictator Putin.
I want to go straight to the source of that statement tonight. Congressman Don Bacon of Nebraska joins me now.
And Congressman, obviously you feel very strongly about these two dynamics that are at play here. Can I first ask you, do you think it's fair to say that President Zelenskyy has not said thank you to the United States enough?
REP. DON BACON (R-NE): No, it's not true. Unfortunately. What the President has said and the Vice President, they've both made these claims. President Zelenskyy has thanked United States, and President Trump, and President Biden, before him, many times. And so, it's just not being honest. I don't know why the President says this. And I guess, they claim it leads to negotiating. I don't see how it does.
What I've seen, since the President came in, he uses, like, punching boxing gloves on Zelenskyy, and uses velvet gloves on Putin. And you just see the contrast. One's the invader, though. And one's the victim. One wants democracy. And one is the, you know, has murdered his rivals.
I don't understand why the President keeps abusing and talking down to Zelenskyy, who wants to be on our side. And Putin hates us. This doesn't make sense. I'm an old Ronald Reagan guy. I believe in peace through strength. Reagan stood up to the -- to the Soviet Union, or the Russians at the time. Eisenhower did. I don't know why this President can't have moral clarity on what's going on.
COLLINS: What do you think is going to happen with these -- with these talks that are playing out?
BACON: What happened Thursday, was one of the most embarrassing things I've seen while in office. I put it in the same tier of the botched withdrawal out of Afghanistan, which I thought was an embarrassment. As someone who's deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan multiple times, it really bothered me. And then seeing our president, like handing over the leadership of the Free World and just giving it away, and not standing by a country that's being invaded that is a pro-democracy.
But if you look at those 28 points that came out, last Thursday? They were a surrender. They were basically telling Ukraine to surrender to Russia and be vulnerable to Russian attack for decades to come. It was no way that any American president should have ever signed off on this package. Now, I think since then, the Europeans have weighed in. I think Secretary Rubio, who I respect, has weighed in. And the Ukrainians have weighed in. And I suspect, these 28 points have been modified significantly.
[21:25:00]
And I really do think the European plan is something I could live with, I can embrace. I don't think the Russians want it, because they want to have Ukraine as the vassal state, and this does not -- we want Ukraine to be an independent sovereign state, and that's not what Russia wants.
COLLINS: Yes.
BACON: So, that's why we should be providing weapons to Ukraine, and putting tough sanctions on Russia, because we got to break the will of President Putin.
COLLINS: Well, and The New York Times kind of wrote tonight that basically it's a win-win for Putin, because either if they get this 28-point plan that favors them -- obviously, it favors them. But if not? I mean, he's happy to keep fighting it until he can -- he can grind down Zelenskyy and the Ukrainians.
Can I ask you, because you mentioned service. You're a 30-year Air Force veteran. What do you make of this threat by the White House and the Pentagon tonight, that they are investigating Senator Mark Kelly, after he put out that video, telling troops to refuse illegal orders. They're now saying he could be recalled to active duty, so he could be court-martialed, or face administrative punishment. Do you believe that that has merit?
BACON: Short answer, no.
I do believe the President, and the Secretary of Defense Hegseth, had the moral high ground before all of this.
Because, I think that video was ill-advised. When you ask them, they don't really -- can't point to anything that has been illegal orders. And it was -- it was provocative. When I first saw it, before any of this other stuff, I thought it was cringey. I just thought it's -- you know, it was meant to get headlines. And I just knew it was going to provoke folks in the wrong way.
But then when the President called, said, We should do sedition charges or charges for being traitors? That's going too far.
The fact, what they're doing is they're quoting the oath. And I don't know how you can prosecute someone for quoting the oath. The inference is that the military is giving them illegal orders. And I don't think this is a case that's winnable in the first place, and we don't need it at all. They should have just said, This video was ill-advised. It's dumb. We make sure we run everything through lawyers.
But to overreact takes away the moral high ground that I think the administration had, once this video was played.
COLLINS: David Frum was just saying that he thinks that, yes, that the reason they're so sensitive to that video, which maybe, I mean -- you just said you think it was ill-advised and cringey, as you put it. But he -- David Frum was arguing that it's because the White House is worried that maybe they are giving orders that are legally murky.
Is that how you see it? Or what would you say to that?
BACON: I think they see it as an attack on their authority, because it implies there are violations being done. But when you -- I listened to some of your interviews. I couldn't point to ones (ph) either in most cases anyway.
I do think though the administration is on weak ground when it comes to the operations in the Caribbean, and in the Pacific, going after these boats. I do think you can make a case -- I read the legal basis of these attacks. You can make a case for the first initial attacks. But if they're sustained attacks, or continued hostilities? They do have to come to Congress and get authorization.
Now, I think a lot of people in Congress would be supportive. But you got to make your case, the legal case.
COLLINS: Yes.
BACON: And they have tried to do that. I think they should come in Congress to actually do it.
But we also want to see the intelligence. How do we know these somehow 20 ships, all have had drugs on there? And they should do a better job making their case to us and the American people. Now, if they do? I've lost family members to drugs.
COLLINS: Yes.
BACON: I think most of us have. A 100,000 people have died a year. But I think if you want to make this legal and fool-proof, you need to come to Congress, make your case to get authorization.
COLLINS: Congressman Don Bacon. Great to have you. Thank you for joining us tonight.
BACON: Thank you.
COLLINS: And coming up here. James Carville has some pretty strong words for his own party tonight. What he says went wrong, but also how they can fix it. James Carville is my political source, right after this.
[21:30:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: Tonight, one of the Democrats' best-known strategists says that he has the winning message for his party, and it comes down to these six words: Out With Woke. In With Rage.
James Carville writes in a New York Times op-ed that, The era of performative woke politics from 2020 to 2024 has left a lasting stain on our brand, particularly with rural voters and male voters. He says, We can no longer be a party with a whiff of moral absolutism. We can correct this only by looking toward the future, always, in every situation possible, and pivoting to a form of economic rage as our response.
And James Carville is my source tonight.
And James, it's great to have you here.
Because the op-ed is really interesting, as it always is. And you say the Democrats have the greatest gift that you can get in American politics, which is a second chance. I think some people might want to know, what does a platform of pure economic rage look like to you?
JAMES CARVILLE, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Well, what it looks like is that you increase the minimum wage. It's still $7.50 an hour. I know a lot of people don't do. But it's a moral statement that a nation can make.
The tax code is just a study in immorality. I mean, how do you have carried interest, I have no idea. Everything that we do favors wealthy people. Is done to the detriment of young people, is done to the detriment of debtors, is done to the detriment of people who are aspirational. And I think the Democratic Party needs to ride to the rescue and tell people.
[21:35:00]
I just saw today the electricity cut-off's up 21 percent. And what there -- what I think and believe is an immoral tax code and the way we distribute up the fruits of this capital society we have, gone completely haywire.
COLLINS: I feel like I know the answer to this, since you just wrote an op-ed. But do you think Democrats are doing a good job with that message right now?
CARVILLE: Well, I don't think -- I don't think they can do a very good job, because they're an opposition party and they don't have any power.
I think that we're going to see some of that in 2026. I think we can -- you know, what I'm urging Democrat -- the Democratic Party to do is move toward the cultural center, and move toward the economic aggressiveness. I call it -- maybe you want to call it the economic left. I don't -- not crazy about these kind of terms. But we got to do something, where, to stop this horrific inequality that we experience in the country.
And it's a real generational thing. We talk about we need young men, and we do, and we lost them. But we got to -- we got to give them some reason to be Democrats, and we got to say that, We see you out there, and we see your struggles. And I think -- I think we can do that in 2026.
I'm almost sure that in 2028, any number of presidential campaign -- candidates will run on this, and the stench of the woke era, I think, we can get washed off here by the 2026 elections.
COLLINS: Are there any Democrats who you think are doing this effectively right now?
CARVILLE: I think there are any number of Democrats that potentially understand this, that don't quite have the forum. And I don't want to name names. I know everybody likes me too, and I choose not to do that. I would just say this, Kaitlan, that talent level in the Democratic Party right now is the highest level I've seen in any political party.
And I am certain that more than one presidential candidate will pick up some variants of this message. I don't know if it'll be exactly the same, but they'll say, We need to quit fighting the culture wars and start fighting the economic wars, and start siding on the side of families, start siding on the side of people that are trying to make it, and stop siding with people that already have it made.
And I think that's going to be a mantra for Democratic candidates, in 2028, and there are any number of people who are fully capable of delivering that, very effectively.
COLLINS: James Carville, we always love to read your op-eds.
CARVILLE: Yes.
COLLINS: Thanks for joining us tonight.
CARVILLE: Thank you, Kaitlan. Well, thank you for having me. Appreciate it.
COLLINS: Of course.
CARVILLE: Thank you.
COLLINS: And my Republican source who is joining me now is Congressman Mike Lawler of New York.
Congressman, obviously, we've been talking a lot about the New York City Mayor's race. You had said that Zohran Mamdani would be a disaster for New York, catastrophic for the country, a mass exodus of businesses if he won.
The President said he's confident Mamdani can do a good job, that he would feel comfortable living in Zohran Mamdani's New York, and that he found him to be rational.
Which of you is right?
REP. MIKE LAWLER (R-NY): Well, I think the President tries to be gracious when somebody comes into his house, to the Oval Office. But the fact is, the policies that Zohran Mamdani is advocating for, like raising taxes by $9 billion on New Yorkers, talking about wanting to freeze the rent and seize control of private property, seize the means of production? These are not policies New Yorkers support. In fact, nearly 50 percent of voters rejected them on November 4th.
And I think in a district like mine, which is impacted by New York City? I have a lot of cops, firefighters, financial service sector workers that live in my district. They don't support these policies.
And so, I think the proof will be in the pudding, when Zohran actually takes office. A meeting, two months out from him being sworn in, I don't really put much weight behind. I think the question will be the policies he actually starts to implement.
COLLINS: But you think he was just being gracious? I mean, Trump was way nicer to him than he's ever been to Thomas Massie, or half the people in your party.
LAWLER: Look, I think, in that moment, the President struck a tone of graciousness and kindness.
But the fact is that these policies Zohran is advocating for, the policies that he advocated for in the state legislature, like defunding the police, legalizing prostitution? These are not policies that will be supported roundly by New Yorkers.
The issue that Zohran raised, during the course of his campaign, about affordability, is one obviously the President ran on. They both have gregarious personalities. I think the President certainly found him intriguing. I said, last week, that I thought they would actually get along, knowing both of them as I do.
COLLINS: Did it change your views of Zohran Mamdani at all, the way the President -- how -- his takeaways from meeting with him?
[21:40:00]
LAWLER: Unlike many people, I actually know Zohran. So, I -- no, it didn't change my views on his policies. It didn't change my views on the things that he advocates for. I've had many conversations with him when we served together in the state legislature. But I understand why the President found him interesting. He's very charismatic. Him and I used to play poker together, up in Albany.
COLLINS: Yes. You told me that.
LAWLER: So, I get it.
COLLINS: But can I ask, because one thing the President was asked about in the Oval Office is something that Elise Stefanik has said. She has likened Zohran Mamdani to being a jihadist. Trump said no, that he found him to be very rational when they met.
You've been out campaigning on the trail with Elise Stefanik as she's running for governor. Do you think the President hurt her campaign talking points with his Oval Office showdown with him?
LAWLER: Look, I was out today in Rockland County. I endorsed Elise for governor. I think Kathy Hochul is an absolute disaster, and Elise will do a phenomenal job. The issue--
COLLINS: Yes, but did the President hurt?
LAWLER: No. The issue that Elise has raised is one that was raised during the course of the campaign, which is that Zohran Mamdani went and campaigned with an unindicted co-conspirator from the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. That is what the issue she has raised, as well as, frankly, his refusal to condemn Hamas, and call for them to lay down their arms. I think it's a fair criticism, on her part, to ask questions.
COLLINS: Would you call him a jihadist though?
LAWLER: I have not.
But it's a fair criticism, on her part, to raise questions about why you would campaign with an unindicted co-conspirator, and why you would refuse to call on Hamas to lay down its arms.
COLLINS: Yes, the President didn't seem to be buying that.
But can I ask you, because on Capitol Hill, what we saw on Friday was remarkable, in terms of Trump welcoming Zohran Mamdani in like that. And then hours later, Marjorie Taylor Greene comes out and says she's resigning from Congress amid her falling out with the President. I mean, I don't think that anyone ever really predicted that would happen on Friday. But Punchbowl News was reporting--
LAWLER: I think they called it Freaky Friday.
COLLINS: I mean, it truly felt surreal, on Friday night, when we were on air, because it was like, Did this really happen, you know? Someone who's such an ally of Trump's, she's resigning from Congress.
LAWLER: Yes.
COLLINS: Punchbowl News is saying she's not going to be the last one.
Because, they're reporting that a senior House Republican said, This entire White House team has treated ALL members like garbage. ALL. And that, Mike Johnson has let it happen because he wanted it to happen. That is the sentiment of nearly all -- appropriators, authorizers, hawks, doves, rank and file... They don't even allow little wins like announcing small grants or even responding from agencies... Members know they are going into the minority after the midterms.
Do you think the White House should be treating Republicans better?
LAWLER: I don't agree with that sentiment, frankly.
I've had a very good relationship, in terms of dealing with issues. In my district, just last week, I was able to get a decision reversed and ensure all naturalization ceremonies can take place in New York again. I was able to get a decision reversed, when it came to Social Security hearing offices. I was able to deliver on SALT.
To me, it's a function of, Do your job. Don't just whine. Go do your job. All of us, as members of Congress, are duly elected to represent our districts. I'm constantly in touch with the White House, on things that matter to my district, and working through it. So, I don't agree with that sentiment. I also don't agree with going out and bitching to the press about it. The fact is, be an adult, get in the room, argue about the things we need to get done.
We have a lot to work on, from the affordability crisis, to housing, to health care, to immigration, to energy. We should be able to get permitting reform done. I want to get a health care plan across the finish line, to not only extend the ACA subsidies, but pass PBM reform, pass reforms with respect to HSAs. There is a lot we could do, in these final few weeks before Christmas, to actually get real legislative wins for the American people.
COLLINS: What--
LAWLER: That should be the focus.
COLLINS: What did it say to you that Marjorie Taylor Greene, though, felt the need to resign from Congress because of her falling out with the President?
LAWLER: She's been one of the most ineffective members of Congress during her nearly five years. Name one thing she's passed. Name one thing she's been able to get across the finish line. It's been nothing but show. And to me, this is just the latest example of that. Somebody who literally did nothing during her five years in Congress.
COLLINS: Were you surprised to see Trump turn on her, though? Because she's incredibly loyal. I mean, you can dislike her. But she's pretty loyal to Trump.
LAWLER: She can be loyal or not. She's ineffective. From my standpoint, this isn't about loyalty, and it's certainly not about likability. It's about doing the job.
I've been rated the number one most effective freshman legislator in the 118th Congress, the fourth most bipartisan, because I actually do the work. And so, to me, if she wants to leave? Leave. The voters elected her to serve two years. She's turning her backs on them. To me, the loyalty shouldn't be about her and the President.
COLLINS: And she says--
LAWLER: It should be to the people that sent her there.
COLLINS: --she doesn't want to deal with the primary, basically saying--
LAWLER: And she doesn't want to lose.
COLLINS: --the President is going to threaten to primary her.
LAWLER: She doesn't want to lose. That's -- that's the--
(CROSSTALK)
[21:45:00]
COLLINS: But can I -- you talk -- you talked about the reversals that you've secured for the White House. One thing you told me you were trying to get them reversed is that $18 billion hold for funding in New York.
Any update on that?
LAWLER: Still working through it. I think, again, that goes back to the fundamental problem that Chuck Schumer created, by shutting down the government for 43 days, and creating a funding crisis across our government.
We should be able to get that project back on track. The Gateway Tunnel is critical, not just to New York City, but to my district. And so, we're still working through that. But I feel confident we'll be able to get it done.
COLLINS: Congressman Mike Lawler, thanks for joining us on set tonight.
LAWLER: Thank you.
COLLINS: Up next here for us. You'll remember this story that we followed closely here on THE SOURCE. It is the barn where Emmett Till was lynched. It's been closed to the public for 70 years. But that is about to change, and has the help of a major Hollywood producer to thank for this. Wright Thompson is here after the break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[21:50:00]
COLLINS: Tonight, one of the most consequential sites in U.S. civil rights history is now set to become a public memorial. The Emmett Till Interpretive Center says that the legendary TV writer and producer, Shonda Rhimes, helped buy the Mississippi barn, where Emmett Till was tortured and killed, back in 1955.
The barn has never been treated as a historic place, as hard as that is to believe. Instead, it was just privately-owned. It was even used for storage, at one point. The structure itself is fragile. It's at risk of collapse.
But now, it's going to be maintained. That is because the Center says it plans to open the barn to the public, by the year, 2030. That would come 75 years after Emmett Till's lynching, and they say it will be, quote, "Part of a larger public memorial -- a place of truth, creativity, and conscience." My source on this story is Wright Thompson, who investigated the site of Emmett Till's lynching for his book, "The Barn: The Secret History of a Murder in Mississippi."
And Wright, when I saw that this was happening today, I immediately said I wanted to have you on, because we've talked about this so much with you, and how so many tried to basically erase this part of history. And you described it as the most important thing to happen to the Delta in generations.
How were you feeling when you found out about this tonight?
WRIGHT THOMPSON, AUTHOR, "THE BARN": Man, I was so thrilled for the people who've spent decades of their life trying to get this done.
It's a strange coalition of small-town Mississippi. You've got former sharecroppers, like the late Jerome Little. You've got big farm owners, like Walker and Sykes Sturdivant (ph), working together. And it's just representative, honestly, to me, of the best of Mississippi.
And I just was incredibly emotional for Reverend Willie Williams, and Patrick Weems, and Wheeler Parker, and all these people who I got to know writing this book about their fight to save this thing. And so, I don't know, I was oddly emotional about it.
COLLINS: I don't think that's odd at all, especially, as someone who's read the book. And you read about how it was kind of just pushed aside, or, you know, not even well-known to people who grew up there for so long.
How did Shonda Rhimes get involved in this?
THOMPSON: She read a story that I wrote in The Atlantic magazine, that became "The Barn," and was just moved to act, you know? I mean, she -- I think they cold-called the Interpretive Center, and said, We'd like to save this.
I mean, I've never met her. But, I mean, she has done more for Mississippi than a lot of people. And I'm just really, on behalf of all Mississippians, I'm just really grateful that she puts her money where her mouth is. It's really remarkable what she's done. And this, like, this is her. I mean, she did this. And so, this is, it's just incredible.
COLLINS: I think a lot of students of history would be shocked to know that it's -- that it has just been privately-owned or used for storage, and would say, There's this incredible piece of history, and as the point made about it being able to serve as a moment of conscience, I think. I think people would be stunned to know that it has just been there, and not been used to educate people, or have this historic landmark in this moment.
THOMPSON: There's so many places like this, Kaitlan. I mean, some of them associated with the Till murder. I mean the store where he whistled is still privately-owned. I imagine that's next on the list. And so, there's so many places that hold essential American memories, and they're just out there.
I mean, this -- the work of history is very much a present tense thing. I mean, that was shocking to me, reporting "The Barn," is how much this remains an ongoing wound, not a scar, if that makes any sense.
COLLINS: Yes. Yes. It makes a lot of sense.
And it's cool and powerful to see how your reporting has led to a moment, like this one. I got to imagine, it's cool for you too.
Wright Thompson, thank you for always joining us, but especially on a moment like this.
THOMPSON: No, it's a really great day for the State of Mississippi. And I guess, there's that great Myrlie Evers-Williams quote that I love that, Yes Mississippi was, but Mississippi is. And this is one of those days where Mississippi is. So, thank you very, very much for having somebody from our state on tonight.
COLLINS: Mississippi is. I love that.
Wright Thompson, thank you for joining tonight.
THOMPSON: Thanks, Kaitlan.
COLLINS: And we'll be back in a moment.
[21:55:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: The Trump administration is starting a new campaign to make flying civilized again. The Transportation Secretary, Sean Duffy, says the golden age of air travel starts with what you're wearing.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DUFFY: Things aren't what they used to be. Some would call it the golden age of travel. Let's bring civility and manners back. Ask yourself: Are you helping a pregnant woman put her bag in the overhead bin? Are you dressing with respect? Are you keeping control of your children?
[22:00:00]
Whether it's a pair of jeans and a decent shirt, I would encourage people to maybe dress a little better, which encourage us -- encourages us to maybe behave all a little better. Let's try not to wear slippers and pajamas as we come to the airport.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Now, this campaign comes, as the FAA says there has been a 400 percent increase in outbursts on planes, since 2019.
Thanks so much for joining us tonight.
"CNN NEWSNIGHT WITH ABBY PHILLIP" starts now.
