Return to Transcripts main page
The Source with Kaitlan Collins
Trump Loses Supreme Court Battle To End Birthright Citizenship; 2025 Financial Disclosure Reveals Trump Made Billions From Crypto Holdings, Royalties & Property Investments; CNN Projects Sen. Hickenlooper Will Defeat Progressive Challenger. Aired 9-10p ET
Aired June 30, 2026 - 21:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[21:00:00]
GLORIA PAZMINO, CNN CORRESPONDENT: So this stretch of New York City is likely to be a very busy place, even more than usual--
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST, ANDERSON COOPER 360: Yes.
PAZMINO: --over the next few days.
Anderson.
COOPER: Well Friday night, Andy Cohen and I are doing the ball drop in Times Square, counting down to July 4th, from like 08:00 to 12:30 at night. So, we'll be covering whatever is going on in Madison Square Garden, as well as probably on Saturday as well, when we celebrate July 4th, all day and all night on CNN.
Gloria Pazmino, thanks so much.
The news continues. "THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS" starts now.
KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, CNN HOST, THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS: Could tonight be another test when it comes to the future of the Democratic Party, as progressives are once again targeting a House veteran in another election. We'll talk to a potential 2028 presidential candidate about it all.
I'm Kaitlan Collins. And this is THE SOURCE.
And as we come on the air tonight, polls have just closed across Colorado, in key primaries, testing whether the progressive movement can replicate its wins outside of New York City.
In the most closely-watched race tonight, a 29-year-old Democratic Socialist is on the ballot. Melat Kiros, a lawyer, is one of two challengers who is trying to oust 15-term Congresswoman Diana DeGette, arguing that she has been in Washington for far too long.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MELAT KIROS, (D) COLORADO CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATE: Experience only matters if you actually do something with it. And we're finding now, with a lot of incumbent Democrats, that they're not actually able to deliver meaningfully on the things that working families need right now.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Another moderate versus progressive battle is also playing out in the Senate primary in Colorado. The incumbent Senator, John Hickenlooper, is facing a challenge from the left by the State Senator, Julie Gonzales.
And in the primary for governor, which we're watching closely, the Democratic senator, Michael Bennet there, who has been a fixture of state politics, is facing an unexpectedly tough challenge from the state's Attorney General. Phil Weiser ran on an aggressively anti- Trump platform and has tried to portray Bennet as beholden to out-of- state billionaires and corporations.
Now, as we watch for the first results in those key races tonight, which we likely will get in this hour, we're also following some breaking news out of Washington, where sources say President Trump is not giving up on his decade-long push to end birthright citizenship, despite that major loss this morning from the Supreme Court.
The justices struck down the President's executive order and upheld the century-old guarantee that is enshrined in the Constitution, that nearly all children who are born on U.S. soil are American citizens.
It's an issue that is so important to the President that he actually became the first sitting president to ever go to oral arguments before the Supreme Court, and it's also been a centerpiece of his immigration agenda for more than a decade.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Birthright citizenship, it's over. Not going to happen.
Somebody comes over, walks across a line, has a baby. Now we take care of the baby for the next 85 years.
We will end, finally, birthright citizenship. It's costing us so many billions of dollars.
If somebody sets a foot, just a foot, one foot, you don't need to -- on our land -- congratulations, you are now a citizen of the United States of America. Yes, we're going to end that.
We're the only country in the world that does this with birthright, as you know, and it's just absolutely ridiculous.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: But now that the Supreme Court has rejected his executive order, the President argues it's up to Congress. He now claims that lawmakers can easily end birthright citizenship through legislation, and that they should start working on that today.
Now, there are a lot of legal experts who disagree. But House Speaker Mike Johnson made clear, he'll try his best.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MANU RAJU, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: The President posted that it's time for Congress to move to end birthright citizenship, and that a constitutional amendment is not necessary. Do you agree with him? And will this be your top priority?
REP. MIKE JOHNSON (R-LA): It certainly is time for us to do everything that's possible.
I think it's clearly an issue that merits the attention of Congress. I don't know what the remedy is, how to define it, or the timeline. It would be premature for me to project that. But I will tell you that it's a big concern for the American people because, it's been abused.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: And tonight, the Vice President, JD Vance, is also previewing the fight.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JD VANCE (R), U.S. VICE PRESIDENT: This is a very disappointing ruling from the Supreme Court. Of course, we respect it, but we also think that it was a major, major mistake.
We have to keep fighting, Laura. Because, we actually have an opportunity to reverse this decision, just as we reversed so many bad decisions throughout the generations.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[21:05:00]
COLLINS: My lead source tonight on all of this and more is the Democratic Governor of Illinois, JB Pritzker.
And Governor JB Pritzker, welcome to THE SOURCE. Thank you for being here.
When the President signed his executive order on birthright citizenship, as he was trying to end it, that was 18 months ago. And you said then, that you would not follow what you said was an unconstitutional executive order. What did you make of the Supreme Court's ruling today?
GOV. JB PRITZKER (D-IL): Well, surprisingly, they made the right ruling, although when you look at the plain language in the Constitution, in the 14th Amendment, it's kind of a wonder that the thing had to even be adjudicated because, it says in plain language that birthright is the law of the land.
So, we've seen a lot of this from Donald Trump, as you know, issuing executive orders or making pronouncements that he thinks he can change the law on his own and do things that are illegal because he just says them. And so, this is just another example. Over 18 months, how many times has he been overturned? Not enough, but a whole lot because, he just doesn't follow the Constitution or the law.
COLLINS: He's now suggesting that Congress will take this matter into its own hands. He's urging them to do something, as he posted in a very long post today, saying that they should start today to work on ending birthright citizenship. House Speaker Mike Johnson said that he's 100 percent behind that.
Do you think that Republicans on Capitol Hill would actually vote on something like that?
PRITZKER: Well, it'd be hyper unpopular for them to do it. I think they should -- you know, if they want to try to do it, they're going to have to pass a constitutional amendment to make that possible. I just don't see that happening. So, it's something, it's one of those, you know, yelling into the wind has absolutely no effect. And the reality is that it's very unpopular. So, if they go after it, I think it's a good political sign for Democrats of things to come.
COLLINS: Yes, you'd like for them to go on the record for that.
PRITZKER: Listen, there are -- so many of the positions that they've taken are positions that are really based in racism, and I believe that this was one of them. They believed that they could accomplish something through an executive order, through now legislation, that will diminish the population of people that they don't believe would be part of their party or should be in this country. And so, that is something that I think a majority of Americans would reject.
COLLINS: The Supreme Court also today allowed states to ban transgender athletes from joining women's and girls' teams. Do you think the court was right on that, or do you think they were wrong?
PRITZKER: Well, look, we believe that people have a right to live the life that they're born to, the life that they want to. And in Illinois, anyway, we protect LGBTQ+ rights, we protect trans kids.
Remember, in Illinois, trans athletes -- we literally, in high school, have three trans athletes. We have a 133,000 athletes in total in our high schools, and three of them are trans.
Why is the Republican Party focusing on this issue? Why have they passed laws in, I think, 27 states that have restricted or banned, outright, trans kids being athletes in schools? It seems to me like they're just, again, they're trying to foment on an issue that, frankly, I think we ought to be talking about bigger things.
I know in the State of Illinois, we have much bigger challenges, as they do all across the country, with things like they've cut SNAP benefits, they've cut Medicaid, they've made life harder for people, raised prices. These are all things that we're having to deal with in our states, and they're trying to distract with something that has very little impact.
COLLINS: But Republicans are using it, in political campaigns, political messaging.
On the issue itself, do you think the court was right?
PRITZKER: I think that we ought to be protecting trans kids. That's what I think.
COLLINS: So you think they were wrong?
PRITZKER: I can tell you this, that those trans kids, you know, the -- I'm sure you've seen the statistics that depression and other mental health challenges are following these kids because of the way they're being treated in some communities. We ought to be sympathizing with the parents, we ought to be trying to help them help their children, and not putting barriers in the way of children just being kids.
COLLINS: Yes, and Justice Kavanaugh was writing that he doesn't think that transgender athletes should be vilified or ostracized.
When you look at the numbers, though, there was a Reuters/Ipsos poll that found that 67 percent of Americans agree with the transgender athlete ban. Do you find yourself in agreement with those 67 percent of Americans?
PRITZKER: I think that -- first of all, this is a decision that gets made by a family, that's a decision that's been handled by schools and school districts for a number of years now. I think we ought to let it happen at the local level, as it has been. The three in Illinois have been just fine.
[21:10:00]
COLLINS: Your party is in a bit of a moment right now, following some elections here in New York. Three candidates who identify as Democratic Socialists won their primary campaigns, several of them to oust the more moderate establishment members of Congress in their races.
Do you think that's good? Are their victories good for your party?
PRITZKER: I think what's good is that there are Democrats who are standing up and fighting, that there are Democrats who are standing up and talking about and doing something about addressing the high cost of things.
Affordability is an issue that everybody is feeling all across the country, and any Democrat that is standing up and speaking out about that, coming up with solutions for that, and importantly doing it in a manner that is focused on fighting what Donald Trump is trying to do to raise prices on people, I think those are the people who are winning.
So, I'm not suggesting that I had one candidate or another in any of these races. I'm just suggesting that that is the recipe for winning in 2026 and, I think, beyond. That is, Are you someone who is a fighter? Are you someone who really believes that we've got to lower prices for working families and for middle class families? And guess what? Those candidates that won? They were talking about those things.
COLLINS: The three candidates who won were also backed by the New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani. Do you consider him to be a leader in your party?
PRITZKER: Look, he's the mayor of a major city in the United States, so it's hard to say that he doesn't belong in that leadership role.
But I think people should pay attention to the fact that what I was saying earlier about being a fighter, about talking about and doing something about lowering costs.
Remember, Zohran Mamdani won his election on the same night that Mikie Sherrill won her election as governor of New Jersey, and Abigail Spanberger won her election as governor of Virginia. You wouldn't say that they have much in common, those three. And yet, here's what they had in common: they were out there talking about the very same issues, and that's the issues of the high cost of -- and the challenges that people are facing, just raising their families on the incomes that they have, with prices rising through the roof.
COLLINS: You talked about what these candidates ran on, and a lot of them did have that affordability message.
PRITZKER: Yes.
COLLINS: In terms of accomplishing what they have campaigned on. We've heard some different things from people in your party, including a fellow governor of yours, Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania.
I want you to listen to what he said about these figures in your party, and how the former Progressive Chair of the Caucus, Pramila Jayapal, responded to us.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GOV. JOSH SHAPIRO (D-PA): 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.
REP. PRAMILA JAYAPAL (D-WA): I think he was wrong. And I think that there are a lot of very disrespectful comments that are coming from some parts of the Democratic Party that are dismissing the voters who elected these individuals.
Why is it that every time a moderate wins an election, people are like, That's the new blueprint for the Democratic Party. But if a progressive or a Democratic Socialist wins, Oh, the whole party is falling to hell in a handbasket.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Which one do you find yourself agreeing with more there?
PRITZKER: Well, I think that the point that -- that I think both of them would want to make is, yes, you do have to deliver for voters. I can say, as a governor, and I'm sure that that's what Josh Shapiro is trying to say, we have to deliver. You know, it's one thing when you're voting on something in the legislature -- and I'm not suggesting they're not trying to get something done. But let's face it, you can vote on something, you can go -- and not get it accomplished, and go back to your district and say, I voted that way, and I'm going to continue to fight for that. When you're a governor, you actually have to get it done and deliver for people as best you can.
And that word, deliver, deliver, that is true, like that is what government is all about, that is what I think is the reason that Democrats are going to win in 2028, in the presidential election. I think we've got a whole bunch of people who actually have delivered for the people that they represent, and that's why I'm kind of optimistic about the 2026 and 2028 elections for Democrats because, Democrats do deliver because, we really do understand.
And again, I think on the issues that really matter right now, which are the issues about, Do you have enough money in your pocket to pay the bills? Are you able to pay your electric bill, and pay for the groceries, and pay your rent? Those are things Democrats really believe in and are fighting for and trying to get done. And certainly, governors have been doing that. And that's what it means to deliver for people.
I'm not denigrating any of the people who ran and won. They haven't gotten there yet. So, they should go and do the job that they're assigned to do. But in the end, the voters are going to react positively only if we're delivering.
[21:15:00]
COLLINS: The President says that Democratic Socialist -- which he says is a nice term for communist, as he's been labeling these Democrats since they won last week. He says, they're the greatest threat to the country since its founding and, he said, that includes World War I, World War II, Pearl Harbor and 9/11.
PRITZKER: Look, the man is continually suffering from dementia, I don't think he really understands what he's saying.
The truth is that -- I mean, this is a man who's threatened to jail the Mayor of Chicago, the Governor of Illinois. He regularly threatens to go after people, and indeed has used the Department of Justice to go after people. So, you know, that -- he just -- I think he has these concepts in his head, and he blurts them out without really thinking.
And the truth is that these are folks, like I said, who are talking about -- look, I -- it is going to be hard to deliver on some things when you're saying, I'm going to offer free, I don't know, people want to ban rent, for example. And I'd love it if we could offer some people free rent that don't have free rent now. But there is also the practical reality of we've got to pay the bills and make sure that we're balancing budgets and so on. I say all that, but you know what? When you're talking about and then doing the things like making electric bills lower, or like lowering homeowners' insurance, or health insurance, or auto insurance rates, like we're doing in the State of Illinois, I think it really does matter, and the voters show up for you when you do.
COLLINS: And do you think what these Democratic Socialist candidates are promising is practical?
PRITZKER: Some of those things are I think that -- again, as between Zohran Mamdani, and Mikie Sherrill, and Abigail Spanberger, just to give you the example, there are things they all agreed on, and actually some of those things, all three have delivered on. So, everybody's got a different way of getting there and a different way of advocating. But in the end, if you're lowering costs for people, that's what matters.
COLLINS: Do you really think the President has dementia?
PRITZKER: I do. I do. I think if you look at any of the videos from 2015 or 2016 and look at how he responded to questions and how he was at press conferences, and then you fast forward and look at him now, I really think that there's something genuinely wrong with him.
I'm not a doctor, I haven't diagnosed anything. I'm just suggesting to you that just look at the way he puts words and sentences together and thoughts, and they're almost divergent in the same sentences.
COLLINS: You mentioned 2028. You were a billionaire whose net worth Forbes puts at $4.3 billion. What do you make of Democrats in your party as we lead up to 2026 and the midterm elections, and 2028, who rail against the billionaire class in your party? Do you think billionaires belong in politics, since you are a billionaire who is in politics?
PRITZKER: You know, I completely understand when people feel like looking at Elon Musk, and what he's done to this country, and with DOGE and all the things that he blurts out on his own platform on X, when people look at what the other kind of oligarch Big Tech types have done, right? Those are the examples that people have now of billionaires. Look at Donald Trump and the way he has treated working class and middle class people. The fact is that I understand why people feel as they do.
But I think it's much more about the values that you carry and then carry out. And as somebody who has stood up for a workers' rights amendment and got it passed in the State of Illinois, who's stood up for LGBTQ and reproductive rights, somebody who's legalized cannabis, somebody who's raised the minimum wage in my state for people from $8.25 to $15. You know, I think it's about what do you stand for and what do you actually accomplish for people, not how much money you have.
COLLINS: So, you think you're a billionaire who can be different for voters? PRITZKER: That's a funny way to say it. I mean, I'm somebody who has a bunch of views on issues, and then has -- I promised things when I ran, and I actually accomplished those things, and I continue to fight for working class and middle class families, and for the most vulnerable. I think that's who we are as Democrats. So, whatever your income level is, the question is, are you going to deliver for people? And I think I've proven I have.
COLLINS: It's widely speculated that you're going to run for president in 2028. Obviously, I don't expect you to announce that tonight.
But I do have a question. If you were to run and to win. The President has made a lot of changes to the White House and to Washington. Would you reverse those changes? Would you take back what Trump has done to the Oval Office, to the East Room, the arch that he's building in Washington?
PRITZKER: Absolutely. It's disgraceful what he has done, literally tearing down traditions of Washington, D.C., of the White House, the arch that he's building, all of those things.
The reality is that we need to restore not only the traditions of Washington, but most importantly, the values that belong in the Oval Office itself. And I think that's why we need a new president, whoever that is. We're going to need somebody who actually carries with them honesty, integrity, and importantly, kindness and empathy into the job.
[21:20:00]
COLLINS: Governor Pritzker, thank you for your time.
PRITZKER: Good to see you.
COLLINS: And I should note, the White House responded to Governor Pritzker accusing President Trump of having dementia with this statement, saying, quote, "Jay is a certifiable loser who has done a terrible job running his state. Everybody sees it clearly, except for him. He must have dementia."
Up next for us here on THE SOURCE. The staggering amount of money that President Trump has apparently made in his first year in office. His mandatory disclosure just got out, and we are taking a look at it next.
Also, we're keeping a close eye on the State of Colorado, where moderate Democrats are waiting to see, will the establishment candidates hold off progressive challengers, or will we see a repeat of what happened in New York.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[21:25:00]
COLLINS: We're just now getting our hands on the President's latest mandatory financial disclosure, and it actually reveals something pretty stunning: that the President made more than a billion dollars his first year back in office, and that more than billion dollars came from his family's cryptocurrency businesses alone.
It's a remarkable windfall for a sitting president, and this is just what he made from cryptocurrency. Not what he made from real estate ventures, from the products that he sells: Trump shoes, Trump watches, Trump Bibles.
What we're learning here at this -- that President made, as we're looking at this, more than $526 million from selling cryptocurrency tokens alone that are tied to World Liberty Financial. That's that firm that is managed by his sons, Eric and Donald Trump Jr. in part.
And it also shows in these financial disclosures that the President got an array of income from his properties, lavish gifts from CEOs and foreign leaders, and also royalty and licensing fees for what are known as Celebration Coins, and the Trump watches, more than $200,000 alone from the Trump Bibles.
The White House has denied that the President is conflicted by his financial interests. They say he doesn't control it. Though, when it comes to cryptocurrency, obviously he's a stakeholder here, he's also the top policymaker.
My legal source tonight is CNN's Senior Legal Analyst, Elie Honig.
Elie, I mean, it's a far cry from Jimmy Carter, I think, to see that the sitting president has made -- you know, even putting aside all the other stuff, the real estate, the Trump watches, the Trump Bibles, making more than a billion dollars from cryptocurrency alone is pretty jaw-dropping.
ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST, FORMER ASST. U.S. ATTORNEY, SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NY, FORMER STATE & FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: These numbers are different in kind fundamentally from anything we've seen with any president.
Now, if you talk to anyone who's worked in a prior White House, and I know you have, they will tell you that going through the ethics and conflicts check is agonizing. Because, they go through all of your holdings, all of your relatives' holdings.
And typically, what you have to do, especially if you're the president, is either divest, meaning give up your interest, or put it in a blind trust, have someone handle it separate from you. Here, we see Donald Trump maintaining direct control.
And just to give you a sense of scale. You're talking about over a billion dollars.
When Barack Obama was President, he won the Nobel Peace Prize, and it came with a $1.4 million cash prize. He consulted with his ethics experts, and they said, You can accept it if you choose to. He did accept it, broke it into 10 pieces, and gave it to charity.
Similarly, when Ronald Reagan became president, he had a question about whether he could continue to receive his California state pension from when he was governor, 30 grand or so a year.
So, that's the difference in scale of what we're talking about between history and what's happening now.
But here's the key thing, Kaitlan: it's got to be self-executing. There's no person, really from the outside, who can come in and say, You're not abiding by conflicts rules, you're not abiding by ethics rules. Those cases have been tried before in the first Trump administration and largely failed. It's got to be up to the White House itself, and there doesn't seem to be much interest in that.
COLLINS: Yes, I mean, Jimmy Carter sold his peanut farm--
HONIG: Right.
COLLINS: --when he took the presidency.
HONIG: How much did he get for that? I don't even know.
COLLINS: I'm not sure. But I don't know what peanut farms--
HONIG: I'm sure peanuts. Sorry.
COLLINS: I mean, in Georgia, it was probably going for a lot, but who knows?
HONIG: Yes, but it's a good comparison. I mean, you have to give this stuff up. There have been presidents who've had that -- who had some wealth that they had to give up before. Donald Trump, not only hasn't given up anything, but he's profiting extra.
COLLINS: I think, and also, you know, talking about how other presidents have handled this. I think with cryptocurrency specifically, which is something that the President used to be really critical of and skeptical of, and say it was basically a big scam. He has totally embraced it this term, now that he's been in office.
But some people may say, If you're the one who's setting the rules on crypto, how can you also make this much money off of crypto?
HONIG: That's exactly the problem. And one of the things we've heard from the White House is, Well, there is no conflict of interest, right? You can't show that he's making moves specifically to profit himself. Maybe so, even if that's so.
But when it comes to conflicts of interest law, the appearance matters. You will see cases decided on the basis of even if there's not an, what we call, an actual conflict, even the appearance of a conflict. If a reasonable person could look at a situation and say, Gee, wouldn't his ownership of this crypto company at least give him an incentive to maybe not call it straight when it comes to policy, to maybe do things that would be self-serving? Again, though, there doesn't seem to be much concern with either an actual conflict or an appearance here.
COLLINS: Well, and also when it comes to World Liberty, I mean, the UAE bought half of it in a major investment. I mean, it's not just him making money. It's the idea of foreign entities, foreign governments who are making these huge stakes in this.
HONIG: OK, so I'm going to go deep on the Constitution here. Emoluments, OK? This is a word that rarely comes up, but what it means is that the president cannot receive gifts or salary or income from any foreign country or from any U.S. state. And typically, again, that's been self-executing and self-enforcing.
[21:30:00]
The problem is, there were Emoluments lawsuits brought in Trump's first administration to try to block him from doing this. And when he received -- remember, he received the jet as a gift from, I think, it was Qatar, or UAE, or something. But those lawsuits get thrown out on procedural grounds.
So, Emoluments is one of these things that the Constitution tells us, and it's a good idea. The problem is it doesn't give us an enforcement mechanism. And by the way, DOJ is not going to do anything about this. I mean, traditionally, DOJ might at least want to poke around. Not happening with this DOJ, not happening with Todd Blanche.
COLLINS: Also worth noting, that jet is getting used for the first time tomorrow.
HONIG: There we go.
COLLINS: So, we will see the President riding on it for the first time.
Elie Honig, thank you for joining us. As always.
We'll continue digging into that financial disclosure.
Also here tonight, despite a Republican rebellion and a stalled agenda, House Speaker Mike Johnson insists he has not lost control of his members. But he's sending them home early tonight.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOHNSON: People get very emotional about things, and sometimes they make irrational decisions.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[21:35:00]
COLLINS: As President Trump has refused to say whether or not he'll sign that major bipartisan housing bill into law. Tonight, the Vice President, JD Vance, argued this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) VANCE: Frankly, Laura, I would love it if Democrats were willing -- you know, not that they are going to agree with Republicans all the time -- but if they were willing to work with us on lowering housing prices, on lowering gas prices, on actually making the lives of American citizens better. You know, we could have some real bipartisan compromise.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: That's the Vice President making the case for bipartisanship on an issue as big as housing prices, as the President just described that bipartisan housing bill as a yawn.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JEFF MASON, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, BLOOMBERG: Will you sign that housing bill?
TRUMP: I have not -- it hasn't been sent to me yet. It's coming, I understand, and then I'll make -- then I'll make a--
REPORTER: Will you--
TRUMP: Here's what I would like to sign. Much more than a bill that -- big deal. It's a yawn. Some people say it's wonderful. To me, compared to the SAVE America Act, just about everything is a big yawn.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: All of this is coming as hardliners in Congress, led by the Florida Congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna, have frozen any movement of critical Republican priorities, as they want Republican leadership to come up with a plan to pass that election bill that the President has been pushing. Right now, Republican leadership can't deliver on that because they don't have the votes to pass what is being described as the SAVE America Act through the Senate.
House Speaker Mike Johnson has now been forced into one of the maybe most humiliating positions for a House Speaker, effectively losing control of the House floor, sending lawmakers home early for the second straight week.
He sounded frustrated earlier, as he was speaking to my colleague, Manu Raju.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RAJU: Have you lost control of the conference?
JOHNSON: No, sir. No, sir. We have full control of the conference. This is the same thing we've been doing the whole time. We have the smallest margin in U.S. history. We're nearing an election. People get very emotional about things, and sometimes they make irrational decisions. So, I don't -- I don't hold grudges against anybody. I just got to get all the team members back, working in the same direction, same song different verse, same job different-- RAJU: Is the President -- has the President been leading on these guys too? Has the President--
JOHNSON: No, the President is not involved, no.
RAJU: He's not involved?
JOHNSON: No.
RAJU: Does he need to get involved?
JOHNSON: I suspect he's going to be very frustrated by this.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: My political sources are here tonight, including:
The former Chief of Staff to Vice President Mike Pence, Marc Short.
And the former New York City Mayor, Bill de Blasio.
Marc Short, as someone who advised the Vice President before, the first term, I wonder what you made of Vance's argument tonight for the very thing that the President is refusing to sign right now.
MARC SHORT, FORMER CHIEF OF STAFF TO VP MIKE PENCE: Well, I mean, this was Elizabeth Warren's bill first. So, by its very nature it is bipartisan. I'm not sure it will have that much impact on housing prices, but--
COLLINS: The White House said it was historic.
SHORT: The White House initially was very supportive of this bill, and I think it's what led a lot of Republicans to go along with it, even though it was, again, Elizabeth Warren's initial legislation.
But I think, at the end of the day, we live in pretty partisan times. We have for quite some time. I'm not so sure that we're going to find a lot of bipartisanship, heading into the last four months of a midterm cycle.
And I think that Mike Johnson has actually done a pretty remarkable job in light of how tight his margins have been. But again, the President in the 30 percent approval ratings, heading four months out to election, it's unlikely you can get that much more done between now and November.
COLLINS: Yes, what did you make of what you heard from the Vice President?
BILL DE BLASIO, (D) FORMER NEW YORK CITY MAYOR: I think the Vice President is in a trap. I think he is trying to be MAGA and has lost all authenticity whatsoever, and doesn't even make sense anymore, honestly, and that's kind of strange for a guy who might be the frontrunner for 2028. He literally said, We need bipartisanship. Here's one of the first bipartisan things we've seen in quite a while, on the number one cost that people face, housing, in an age when people care deeply about affordability. So, that is just a comment that's out of touch with reality.
But the other thing he talked about was like gasoline prices. No one has done more to jack up gasoline prices than Donald Trump and JD Vance, by starting the war in Iran, and then they can't find their way out of it.
So, I think what's happening here is remarkable, that literally when the whole country is thinking about the kitchen table and how we just get by, just pay the bills, Donald Trump's talking about the SAVE Act, election reforms that Americans don't even think are necessary, and he's pushing away one of the only things that might help on affordability.
COLLINS: Well, in terms of what Mike or -- what Speaker Mike Johnson is dealing with is -- I mean, he said, This is not new. That's true. He's been facing this revolt repeatedly.
[21:40:00]
But in terms of what's happening. Five days ago, the President met with Mike Johnson. He came out and said that it was time for these hardliners, basically, to stop making things chaotic on the House floor.
I want you to listen to what Mike Johnson said today, as Anna Paulina Luna is digging in.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOHNSON: It makes no sense to punish the House and stop the great progress of the House because of what Senate Democrats are doing or not doing. To impede that progress would be a self-inflicted wound, and totally pointless.
REP. ANNA PAULINA LUNA (R-FL): But the fact that I'm being singled out because I know procedure. I'm not stupid. I'm going to fight on behalf of the American people. I will vote for the rule if you allow my amendment for voter ID, plus proof of citizenship, to be placed into the text of the NDAA. They're saying they won't, so now that -- you saw what happened on the floor.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Who do you think is right?
SHORT: Well, Kaitlan, I like the fact that after we had 9 percent inflation in the last administration, Democrats want to tell us how to address affordability.
But on this particular question, I think the reality is that the SAVE Act is something that I would support. I support voter ID. I support having proof of citizenship. But at the same time, you keep bringing this up at a time when you can't currently pass it, you're demoralizing your Republican voters.
Because Republican base, you need to turnout in midterm cycle. And if they feel like the people I'm electing aren't getting done these priorities? Then you're just going to continue to depress the base and the turnout for November. And so, not only is it counterproductive legislatively, I'd argue it's also counterproductive politically.
COLLINS: Well, I mean, if it depresses the base, it also could be used as an argument for the President to--
SHORT: Absolutely.
COLLINS: --try to dispute the outcome in 2026.
SHORT: Absolutely. If--
COLLINS: Something you are very well familiar with.
SHORT: There's a lot of people who believe that the President is using this in part, to be able to say when we lose in November, he can say, See, it wasn't me. I tried to get this bill passed, and Republican Congress couldn't do it. It was their fault.
COLLINS: But do you think he'll just say, this is a way to deflect blame for -- if Republicans lose the midterms, or do you think he'll try to actually dispute the outcome of this?
DE BLASIO: Deflecting blame has been his entire life's work, right? This is a guy who, his whole concept is when he is under attack, even if he's in the wrong, try and put the blame on someone else.
The problem here is the American people are speaking very clearly. When have you seen a President with a 30 percent approval rating? And a guy who used to be respected on the economy by a lot of Americans, now they think it's a train wreck, and he literally doesn't understand what's happening to the average American person.
So, if he says, Oh, I lost this election because it was rigged, or whatever. It's going to fall on deaf ears. The election is going to be about how people pay their bills. Republicans have provided no real responses.
And the biggest thing that happened in 2026? United States started a war that the American people didn't even want, and it sent our prices shooting up. That's the story of 2026. Donald Trump can't get out of that. No one's going to believe it's a rigged election.
COLLINS: Well, speaking of 2026. I mean, the Vice President is looking ahead to 2028, who he thinks will be the Democratic nominee.
And also, that person is responding to what JD Vance said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MICHAEL KNOWLES, HOST, "THE MICHAEL KNOWLES SHOW," THE DAILY WIRE: The leading Democrat for 2028?
VANCE: I think it's got to be AOC. I know that's probably conventional wisdom, but--
KNOWLES: Well, no, I think the conventional wisdom right now is Newsom.
VANCE: No, no, I don't -- I don't buy that.
The AOC versus Ossoff thing. I guess the question would be, who do you think really has the power in the Democratic Party? And if you think the answer is like Wall Street and the left-of-center business community, then it would be Ossoff. And if you think it's the universities, it would be AOC.
REPORTER: JD Vance just said in an interview that he thinks you are going to be the leading Democratic candidate for President in 2028. What's your response to that?
REP. ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ (D-NY): I mean, you know, I hope he is. That's what I'll say.
REPORTER: That he's the Republican nominee?
OCASIO-CORTEZ: Yes.
REPORTER: Congresswoman--
(END VIDEO CLIP)
DE BLASIO: Good answer.
COLLINS: She came up with that pretty quick.
DE BLASIO: Good answer.
Look, the Democrats actually have a really strong field. We have some real options here. And, unfortunately, the history of our party is maybe people have not always been on message as much as they might. Now, thanks in part to Mamdani and other good examples around the country, Mikie Sherrill, others who talked about affordability, the Democratic Party is actually speaking more and more with one voice.
On the question of affordability, Republicans cannot find their way to that issue because they're blocked by Donald Trump.
So, I actually agree with her. I think JD Vance is -- he is Kamala Harris now. He is so linked to the previous administration--
COLLINS: And you don't mean that as a compliment, as a Democrat?
DE BLASIO: I'm saying it bluntly. Kamala Harris, whatever her strengths, was so linked to Joe Biden, and Joe Biden had become so unpopular, that she was weighed down by that.
JD Vance now is Donald Trump when it comes to the eyes of the electorate, and he cannot get out of the problem of a president who is now so far down in popularity and has no way back up.
COLLINS: Do you think it's conventional wisdom that AOC is the Dem nominee in 2028?
[21:45:00]
SHORT: Look, I think there's no doubt that the energy on the left is in the radical socialist side of their party, and I'm not sure that it's unified. I think if you look at what's happened here in New York, and you see some of the antisemitism that's been rising in the Democrat Party, I'm not sure they're on the same message, Kaitlan. But that's where the energy is in their party, undoubtedly.
But when we try to predict this, I think in 2016, there was Ted Cruz, Chris Christie, Jeb Bush, Scott Walker. People weren't expecting Donald Trump. In 2020, it was going to be Bernie, it was going to be other candidates, they weren't expecting it to be Joe Biden. And so, we're never right about these things. But there's no doubt that the energy is there on the AOC side of party.
COLLINS: But it's so fun to speculate and talk about it.
DE BLASIO: But I will say--
COLLINS: And we're going to do that for the next two years.
DE BLASIO: --JD Vance said one thing in that interview that was true. He said, if the Democrats could figure out to just stay focused on that economic populism, they're going to be in a strong position. He's trying to get to that lane. I don't think he'll get there. But he's right. Democrats need to make that their focus.
COLLINS: Bill de Blasio. Marc Short. We will see what happens, and continue to speculate.
Up next. We're actually getting real results when it comes to Colorado. We have a CNN projection in one of those key races, right after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[21:50:00]
(MUSIC)
COLLINS: You know what that sound means. It means we are getting the first results out of the State of Colorado tonight, as we can now project the incumbent Senator John Hickenlooper will win his Democratic primary, fending off a challenge from the left by Julie Gonzales, who is a 43-year-old state senator and former member of the Democratic Socialists of America.
CNN's Harry Enten is here with the latest results.
And Harry, obviously we're trying to read into all these races right now. HARRY ENTEN, CNN CHIEF DATA ANALYST: Yes.
COLLINS: What do you make of the results here?
ENTEN: Well, I'll make -- you know, in that Senate race, I mean, bottom line is this: yes, John Hickenlooper has been projected the winner. But who is even talking about that race five days ago? And now, all of a sudden he's under 60 percent.
And based upon what we know traditionally, as those late ballots that come in tend to lean a little bit younger, tend to be a bit more progressive, I go to myself, wow, even Hickenlooper, who's winning, he's not really winning by all that much. I think that really just speaks to the strength of -- within the Democratic Party at this point, of the Democratic Socialists who are running up against these incumbents.
COLLINS: So even if people will wake up and look at this and say, OK, well, the person who is the incumbent won in this race. You're saying, Actually look at the numbers to see what it says about where the voters are.
ENTEN: That's exactly right. I mean, I would expect in a normal year that John Hickenlooper, who has obviously been a senator now for six years, had previously been a governor, a popular governor in that state. Remember, he even ran for President of the United States. The fact that he's getting less than 60 percent of the vote.
And that just follows what we are seeing down the line. Right? You can go to Colorado's 1st District, right, where Diana DeGette, who has been a longtime progressive incumbent running in that 1st District, all of a sudden is in the fight for her political life against a young Democratic socialist.
I mean, what you're just seeing right now across the board is you are seeing that these longtime incumbents, who in usual years on the Democratic side wouldn't be in any trouble, are in major trouble, either in Hickenlooper's case, getting less than 60 percent of the vote, or in DeGette's place, actually trailing in the race right now.
COLLINS: You know, we were talking to Illinois Governor JB Pritzker earlier, and he was saying really what Democratic voters want to see is candidates who are vowing to fight Trump and taking that message. Obviously, one person in this race who's been doing that is the Colorado A.G., Phil Weiser, who's going up against Michael Bennet. People have seen him on this show many times.
And actually, as we've been following that race and getting these numbers in, I should note, right now, we actually just have another projection out of the State of Colorado.
(MUSIC)
COLLINS: There's been a major upset in the Democratic primary for governor. That's because Senator Michael Bennet, who was long viewed as a clear frontrunner in this race, CNN projects, will lose to the state Attorney General, Phil Weiser when it comes to that nomination.
Harry, as you're looking at that, when I was mentioning people who are vowing to fight Trump. Obviously no one will think that Senator Bennet is a friend of the Trump administration. But this was a big part of Phil Weiser's campaign here.
ENTEN: A huge part of Phil Weiser's campaign, he used the fact that Michael Bennet voted to confirm some of the nominees that Donald Trump put up, used that against him. Bottom line is, Phil Weiser has used his A.G. office to go after Donald Trump.
Again, this is another race that really wasn't on that many people's radars. Michael Bennet was ahead in this race early on by like 30 points. And then all of a sudden you just saw the margin, you saw what -- you saw Bennet going down, you saw Weiser going up.
And again, that Democratic brand in Washington, D.C., right now is absolutely toxic. And the best way you can see that is, although Weiser is not a Democratic Socialist, Democrats have a more favorable view of Democratic Socialists than they have in Dems in Congress. Michael Bennet, yet another casualty of that tonight, as those Dems in Congress, those tied to Chuck Schumer, a historically unpopular Democratic Senate leader, going down to defeat. We saw it in New York, last week, and now we're seeing in Colorado. This is not just a Northeast phenomenon anymore. It's making its way out west.
COLLINS: I also wonder if it was easier for Weiser to argue, As an A.G., I've been fighting Trump, we've been doing this. Obviously, as an A.G., you can sue the administration, you can take all these steps, you know? I do think it raises questions about how that went over with voters.
And also, we don't know yet, but the Tina Peters of all of this, and the outgoing Democratic Governor Jared Polis' decision to commute her sentence. She was actually in the Oval Office yesterday, I believe. In terms of what that looks like here.
ENTEN: Yes, I would just say this, which is Michael Bennet had the unfortunate distinction of being in Washington, D.C. It was the wrong place at the wrong time.
COLLINS: Harry Enten, we will be following all of this closely, and these results.
ENTEN: Thank you.
COLLINS: As the numbers continue to come in here on CNN. Don't go away.
Up next, it is time for Source Code. We give you the number at the center of a story in the news. But can you guess the story? Tonight's Source Code is just the number 2. We're back in a moment with that answer.
[21:55:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: And tonight's Source Code is 2. Because sources say Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce are expected to kick off their wedding celebration, at Madison Square Garden, two nights from now, across two different events.
The first is being described as a rehearsal set for 06:00 p.m. on Thursday with about a 100 guests. But a larger celebration with a 1,000 guests is expected to happen on Friday afternoon. It's being described by sources as a cocktail party that could last as late as 04:00 a.m. on Saturday.
Now, fans have been questioning whether or not Taylor Swift would really get married at MSG. But the New York City Mayor, Zohran Mamdani, hinted at it today as the City is preparing for a historic heat wave.
[22:00:00]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MAYOR ZOHRAN MAMDANI (D-NYC, NY): Stay inside and stay cool. And if you happen to be getting married at Madison Square Garden, you will be staying inside, and you will be staying cool, and I think it's a good example to set for the city at large.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Thanks so much for joining us here tonight on THE SOURCE.
"CNN NEWSNIGHT WITH ABBY PHILLIP" starts right now.
