Return to Transcripts main page
Table For Five
Trump's Brazen Presidency Tests Limits In Unprecedented Ways; GOP Mutiny Over Trump's $1.8B Fund, Ballroom Also In Danger; Bezos Defends Billionaires Against "Villain" Attacks; Harvard Votes To Cap A's In Effort To Stop Grade Inflation. Aired 7-8a ET
Aired May 23, 2026 - 07:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[07:00:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
JESSICA DEAN, CNN ANCHOR (voice-over): Today, the no limits presidency is testing that theory from a ballroom to a "Payout for punks." Why Donald Trump may be crossing the line.
HARRY DUNN, MARYLAND DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATE: It's a slap in the face. It's salt in the wound.
DEAN (voice-over): Plus, a Republican revolt against the Republican president.
SEN. THOM TILLIS (R-NC): This is just stupid on stilts.
DEAN (voice-over): Is Trump losing control of the U.S. Senate? Also, a new twist in the tax the rich debate.
JEFF BEZOS, FOUNDER, AMAZON: You could double the taxes I pay, and it's not going to help that teacher in Queens. I promise you.
DEAN (voice-over): Why Jeff Bezos says the bottom half of America's earners shouldn't pay taxes at all. And it's a different kind of inflation. Why Harvard is capping the number of As that students get, and whether that's fair.
Here in studio, Alyssa Farah Griffin, Josh Rogin, Isaiah Martin, and Emily Austin. It's the weekend. Join the conversation at a TABLE FOR FIVE.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
DEAN (on camera): Hi, everyone. I'm Jessica Dean, in for Abby Phillip today. And we're still three months from the dog days of summer. But for Donald Trump's political standing. It's hot as hell already.
For the past three months, the president launched a war that's still going without an obvious end at this moment, sending gas prices through the roof. No state has had less than four bucks a gallon 48 hours ago. Inflation is rising. Mortgage rates rose to the highest they've been in nine months.
Bond yields are the highest since before the financial crisis. And his poll numbers keep crashing. But all the president can seem to talk about over and over are the things like his arch, the reflecting pool, his marble walkway, and the ballroom, which he gave a tour of this week.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: This is a gift to the United States of America. And more than a gift, it's going to be one of the most beautiful buildings that's ever been built in the country or in Washington, D.C. This is not for me. This is my gift to the United States of America.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
DEAN: When it comes to those gas prices mentioned, he doesn't think much of them.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: This is peanuts. And I appreciate everybody putting up with it for a little while. It won't be much longer.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
DEAN: And this week introduced a new twist to the outrage. Trump defended a $1.8 billion slush fund with taxpayer money to compensate his allies that he claims were wronged. And that includes January 6, rioters.
And if that's not enough, part of that deal forbids the IRS from forever investigating him or his family's taxes. Even conservative columnist Jonah Goldberg raised the idea of impeachment, saying, by their definition, the founding fathers would have gotten rid of Trump long ago.
I want to welcome everyone to the table. Thanks so much for being here, guys. It's interesting. We heard from Trump on Truth Social, where he was kind of congratulating himself.
EMILY AUSTIN, PODCAST HOST, THE EMILY AUSTIN SHOW: Yes.
DEAN: He said that he gave up a lot of money and allowing the just announced anti-weaponization fund to go forward. I could have settled my case, including the illegal release of my tax returns and the illegal break-in of Mar-a-Lago, for an absolute fortune. Instead, I am helping others who were so badly abused by an evil, corrupt, and weaponized Biden administration receive, at long last, justice.
Alyssa, I'll start first with you. The president not backing down from this. And it seems like he's living in this reality right now. Whereas there's the other reality for millions of Americans who are looking at this weekend with really high gas prices, a really high grocery prices, the list can go on. ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, and let's just look back to what started this. The president's tax returns were leaked. That shouldn't have happened. That was wrong. That was unethical.
The gentleman who did that is serving five years in jail. It's not like there weren't consequences for those actions. But now, this is money that was congressionally appropriated to the Internal Revenue Service that is going to be used for this -- what I would say amounts to a slush fund to go out to people who feel like they were victims of political weaponization. And that could include people who may have assaulted police officers, destroyed property at the -- at the Capitol.
And I'd also remind you. Those people -- most of them already received blanket pardons from the president or commutations of their sentences. So, many of these also went on to create -- to commit other crimes down the road.
So, this just comes at a moment when there are so many glaring signs of things the president should be focusing on, that the American people want him to focus on, and it feels deeply out of touch. I'm still incredibly bullish that this is never actually going to come to fruition.
DEAN: The fund you --
GRIFFIN: There's just -- the fund itself. Between Congress, this is just blatantly illegal. This has to go through a congressional appropriation.
And if Congress doesn't find a way to block it, then I do think the courts will step in. We've seen him do it with DOGE, with other times that funds were appropriated for something different and then redirected. So, we'll see if it ever comes to life.
DEAN: Yes.
[07:05:05]
AUSTIN: I mean, I would push back on that a little bit, what you call the slush fund. I find it to call the anti-weaponization fund. And I'm sure on both sides of the aisle, we all have friends whose lives have been absolutely ruined, whether they were innocent.
And you said that this is going to people who assaulted police officers on January 6th.
GRIFFIN: It could.
AUSTIN: It could. But the truth is, we don't know where this money is going yet. And I feel like we're always prematurely just very negative when it comes to anything that President Trump wants to do.
ISAIAH MARTIN, FORMER TEXAS DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATE: Well, there lies the root of the problem. AUSTIN: But I actually -- I view this as something very altruistic. Trump did not take the money and put it in his pocket like he could have. And like most people probably would have done. And instead, he wants to help those people who were absolutely destroyed by the weaponization of the government.
I have friends who declared bankruptcy over proving their innocence, that spent hundreds of thousands of dollars, some millions, to avoid spending time in jail. And they don't get that money back. Why can't we help those people?
MARTIN: Well, there lies the root of the problem. You just said the very simple fact that we're not going to know exactly who gets this money. I know that there was this testimony inside of the United States Congress in which they said that there's really no rules behind what's going to happen.
So, I think that it's absolutely absurd that there's going to be a fund that's $1.8 billion. We don't know where the money is going to go through.
AUSTIN: Yes.
MARTIN: And honestly, we don't know if we'll ever know who the money is going to go to. You don't think that that's absurd --
AUSTIN: I think they've got a lot of questions --
MARTIN: -- that the president of the United States can create a fund and divvy payments to people, and we don't know who the money goes to?
AUSTIN: I mean, we know that it's going to people who have been weaponized by the government. Now, whether that goes to --
MARTIN: But we don't know who.
AUSTIN: -- like you said, January 6 protesters or people like James Comey, who I find is guilty, we don't know yet. So, why don't we wait? And see before we are outrageous.
MARTIN: But we will never know --
JOSH ROGIN, LEAD GLOBAL SECURITY ANALYST, WASHINGTON POST INTELLIGENCE: The Trump Justice to give James Comey a payout for wrongful prosecution --
GRIFFIN: Exactly. We don't know.
ROGIN: -- as they're trying to prosecute him. That doesn't seem likely.
MARTIN: But that is the root of the --
AUSTIN: Well, it doesn't mean he's innocent.
GRIFFIN: But he keep quite. MARTIN: And that's the root of the issue.
ROGIN: Yes. But --
AUSTIN: Anyone --
MARTIN: The root of the issue is that we will never know.
ROGIN: People who have wrong -- people in this country who are -- have been wronged by the law have already have --
AUSTIN: Well, that's what they said.
ROGIN:-- have legal pathways to seek justice for that. And you know, the -- what you said, Trump could have just taken the money. No, he can't just take the money because we live in a --
AUSTIN: In a settlement.
ROGIN: Yes. Because I mean, for a lot --
DEAN: I want to ask -- hang on. hang on.
(CROSSTALK)
DEAN: I want to ask this question.
ROGIN: Yes.
DEAN: Because, Emily, you were saying Trump didn't benefit. What about this piece -- this other piece of this.
ROGIN: A settlement with himself.
DEAN: About the -- well --
ROGIN: That he negotiated with himself.
DEAN: Settle -- that's --
MARTIN: He is the government.
(CROSSTALK)
DEAN: But I want to ask him about the IRS not being able to prosecute him or his family over taxes forever. What do you think about that?
AUSTIN: Obviously, optically, it looks horrendous. I think anybody can --
MARTIN: Because it is horrendous.
AUSTIN: I can commit that. But there's also an unprecedented amount of persecution when it comes to the Trump and the Trump family. There has never been a president that has been persecuted as much as Donald Trump, whether it's -- ROGIN: I mean, the president who did what he did.
AUSTIN: -- illegally releasing his IRS, which I'm happy he's sitting five years in jail because that would never be tolerated under anyone else. But it's just -- the target on President Trump personally. It's outrageous.
MARTIN: Jeff Bezos -- Jeff Bezos also had his tax returns illegally released.
AUSTIN: And that's also --
MARTIN: Should he be entitled to two billion? Where does this stop?
AUSTIN: He should -- if he wants --
MARTIN: Are we going to be saying --
AUSTIN: -- he absolutely has the right to.
MARTIN: So, are we going to say that for every single person that they should all be entitled to two billion dollars?
AUSTIN: They have the right to sue.
DEAN: Why --
AUSTIN: But I also think --
MARTIN: But none of them are the president of the United States can negotiate with themselves.
AUSTIN: With them and the president, to me, have equal treatment. If Bezos wants to sue --
MARTIN: Equal treatment?
AUSTIN: If Bezos wants to sue, and the president wants to sue. They have been wronged.
MARTIN: It's the president of the United States does negotiating his own settlement.
AUSTIN: Well, if there's a case, he's getting the money.
GRIFFIN: Let's keep in mind, guys.
DEAN: Go ahead, Alyssa.
GRIFFIN: There is a -- in this moment in the country, people are struggling. There is real financial and economic hardship right now. Peoples health care costs are going up. Inflation, gas prices are between five and six dollars a gallon.
Is this the best use of government resources? I don't know any conservative who could argue that this is how we should be using this money.
AUSTIN: I mean, either --
(CROSSTALK)
ROGIN: And here's the -- and here's the -- and here's the context. This is a pattern of the president of the United States pilfering from the national coffers to serve his own political and personal ends. We have the board of peace, billions of dollars of taxpayer money without any congressional authorization or oversight.
You know, you've got all of the stock trades that he's made, $750 million worth of stock trades on issues that he's adjudicating. This is a level of self-dealing and corruption that no one has seen before. And you have to view this slush fund in that context because --
MARTIN: If there was ever --
ROGIN: -- it's obvious that he's doing it for political reasons and that the lawsuit against the IRS --
GRIFFIN: Well, and by the way --
ROGIN: -- was a sham lawsuit that was never moving forward, anyway.
MARTIN: I'm just -- I'm just going to say this --
ROGIN: -- just a thinly veiled excuse to pay off his own political benefactors.
MARTIN: If President Obama sued his own department or his own IRS and settled with himself, I guarantee you that you and every conservative on Fox would be running around screaming for impeachment. You guys would be trying to throw him in Alligator Alcatraz. That's what you are doing.
AUSTIN: Actually, one thing I will pat myself on the back for is, I know bipartisanly when something is wrong or not. I'm not the person that's like, oh, every Democrat's wrong and every Republican's right. That's something that you cannot generalize.
MARTIN: And a president negotiated with himself?
AUSTIN: If that happened to Obama, by the way, anyone who's wronged, the law is the same. Whether you're the president or not.
MARTIN: But he is someone that's negotiating the settlement.
AUSTIN: If somebody did leak Obama's tax returns, he should sue.
DEAN: Why can't we --
MARTIN: He's negotiating with himself. No one else has that ability.
AUSTIN: If we could simply --
MARTIN: You cannot compare him to other billionaires, to other people, to other people on Earth --
AUSTIN: In other presidents who have not been (INAUDIBLE) -- Donald Trump.
MARTIN: -- because he's the one that dictates the terms of his own.
AUSTIN: You're right. This never happened.
GRIFFIN: If we could just get a commitment from the administration that not a single dollar would go to somebody who assaulted a police officer --
DEAN: I agree with you.
[07:10:04]
GRIFFIN: We could begin a conversation. Maybe I still wouldn't support it, but some Republicans in the Senate might. But we couldn't even get that from the deputy attorney general.
DEAN: Yes. He did not --
GRIFFIN: A commitment that leaders of the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers might not get million-dollar settlements, to then, what fund domestic terrorism? Like --
MARTIN: And then -- and then, Alyssa, we also won't get the names of the people at all.
GRIFFIN: Correct.
MARTIN: So, we'll never be able to verify anything.
GRIFFIN: There's not a lot of transparency.
DEAN: There's a lot of questions around this. And we're going to talk about, as we come back, from the ballroom to the slush fund. Is Trump losing control of the Republican Senate? The rare backlash that's growing there. This is a piece of it.
Plus, a new twist in the wealth debate as Jeff Bezos defends billionaires and says the bottom half of earners in America should pay no taxes at all.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[07:15:30]
DEAN: Welcome back. On this day, May 23, 2026, more than ten years after Donald Trump's unprecedented political rise, has his behavior finally gone too far for Republicans? We've asked this question many times in the last ten years. In Trump's eyes, the week started well. He exacted revenge on some of his Republican critics.
Senator Bill Cassidy lost his primary contest. Senator John Cornyn did not get his endorsement. And Congressman Thomas Massie lost his primary. But then a revolt. Senators rejected any taxpayer funding for his ballroom. They also became furious about his slush fund to compensate allies.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. SUSAN COLLINS (R-ME): I do not support the weaponization fund, as it has been described.
SEN. JOHN KENNEDY (R-LA): I just don't know how this puppy dog will work. I'm not sure where the money's coming from. I'm not sure who's going to decide. I don't know anything about anything.
SEN. JOHN HOEVEN (R-ND): We need more information on it. I mean, we discussed it yesterday. But that's why it's coming back, because we need more information.
TILLIS: These people don't deserve restitution. They -- many of them deserve to be in prison. But this is -- I mean, this is just stupid on stilts.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do you think you have colleagues that share the same concerns that you're expressing?
TILLIS: They do. They need to speak up. I mean, this is beyond the pale. This is not good for my colleagues.
There's no one positive thing that could be spun out of this between now and November. This is bad policy. It's bad timing. And its bad politics.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
DEAN: So, the question is, is Trump's grip on the party still firm or getting looser? We're back now at the table. And I think there's two comport -- important components to this, which is he still has incredible strength among the party base. Look at his record with these Republican primaries and what he's been able to do.
But then, there's the politics that we're seeing play out on Capitol Hill with those sitting senators who he's now fighting against openly, primarying. And that's where you have, I think, the push and the pull. Emily, what do you think?
AUSTIN: Before we go on, can we please talk about this ballroom? Because I'm yet to understand the outrage. Because I know -- and I know because I'm fascinated by it -- that Truman, for example, brought the bowling alley and Roosevelt brought a swimming pool. And now Trump is contributing a ballroom that's privately funded, I'm going to add, not taxpayer funded. And I just don't see --
DEAN: Well, he just asked for those --
GRIFFIN: Why they are so --
MARTIN: Did they not see what was on the bill -- the reconciliation or for the billion dollars? DEAN: For the billion dollars. That's the one thing that they're mad about. Right.
AUSTIN: Ever saw a president is bringing something to the White House?
MARTIN: The very dollars the taxpayer funded?
AUSTIN: And when Trump does it, it's orange man bad.
MARTIN: A billion-dollar of taxpayer funds --
GRIFFIN: When it was originally going --
AUSTIN: -- billion dollars, we know it's not going to pass.
MARTIN: That's what he asked for.
AUSTIN: A billion -- I know. Well, he did something --
GRIFFIN: Originally, he did say it was going to be corporate sponsors --
AUSTIN: Right.
GRIFFIN: -- which I had enough of an issue with, because it makes it seem like the White House is for sale. But at least, it wouldn't be taxpayer dollars.
AUSTIN: Why was it OK when other presidents built in the White House?
MARTIN: This is taxpayer's dollar.
GRIFFIN: Well, they went through a congressional appropriation. So, you request from Congress. We want the funding to do this. Congress votes, and then they build it.
I would -- if Congress wants to vote on it, and they do, that's fine. I'm -- could actually argue the case for a ballroom. Oftentimes, state dinners are done on the South Lawn, if you want to increase security. But go through Congress. You can't just build it yourself.
MARTIN: I have -- I have a question. Where did the $400 million of donor money go? What made this president go and ask Congress for a billion dollar? I thought he raised $400 million for it. Where did it go?
AUSTIN: That's a great question. However, I'm not personally responsible for Trump's fundraising money.
MARTIN: I'm just curious.
GRIFFIN: If --
AUSTIN: That would be a great job if --
GRIFFIN: If I can get in on this issue in the Senate. So, this is fascinating right now. Senators are obviously upset over this, what I'm going to call slush fund. But what they're really mad about is the fact that Donald Trump endorsed against John Cornyn.
DEAN: Yes.
GRIFFIN: -- one of the most beloved Republican senators, a monster fundraiser, the number two in the Senate in favor of Ken Paxton, who is somebody who could arguably lose to James Talarico. Like, one of the only people who could turn Texas blue is Ken Paxton. So, senators are outraged.
If you're -- if you're Susan Collins, as we saw in Maine, that's money that's going to go from your must-win seat to have to fight in Texas, a place that you shouldn't. Donald Trump is rock solid with the base. There's never been a more popular figure with the Republican base in 50 years. But he has a terrible track record when it comes to picking people who then go on to win the general election.
I could go on, but I mean, the Herschel Walkers of it, the Blake Masters, the Kari Lakes. He finds these people who are great with the base.
ROGIN: (INAUDIBLE)
GRIFFIN: Yes, exactly. He lost the Georgia Senate seat. So, that's what it comes down to. He also does not perform as well in midterms when he's not at the top of the ticket to lift up other candidates. And senators are rightly upset about it.
ROGIN: Yes.
AUSTIN: I mean, I think historically, midterms never favor the president. And that's beyond the Trump problem. But when it comes to who Trump's endorsing or not endorsing, yes, in the primaries, it's like, yes, Trump is king. He has the final word there.
But when it comes to the actual election, that's where you appreciate the individualism. And when the state speaks for itself, whether I like the result or not, that's democracy, you know. You're going to win on ideas.
ROGIN: Right.
AUSTIN: I think a lot of the reasons Republicans are winning is because Democrats lately have horrific ideas.
MARTIN: Republicans --
(CROSSTALK)
[07:20:13]
ROGIN: For that -- Republicans have lost 14 straight state elections.
MARTIN: Yes.
ROGIN: And they're heading toward a bloodbath. And Donald Trump.
ROGIN: I was talking -- I was talking about the primaries.
ROGIN: And, well -- yes, they're winning their own primaries because those are just between Republicans.
MARTIN: Yes.
ROGIN: They tend to win primaries.
(CROSSTALK)
ROGIN: But yes, the Trump people are winning. But that's not -- that's not -- and they're not all the same. You know.
AUSTIN: In Miami, they had no Republican representation. But --
(CROSSTALK)
DEAN: Hang on. One at a time. One at a time. Let's separate --
DEAN: Josh, finish your thought.
ROGIN: Let's separate out the Thomas Massie thing because that wasn't just Trump. $25 million of Republican donor money from outside of Kentucky flew into that small district. And that was Trump, plus a huge faction of the Republican Party that wanted Massie. So, put that one to the side.
Alyssa is saying about Cornyn and Cassidy is that Trump is at war with the leadership of the Senate Republicans. And he's hurt -- the party is eating itself right at the worst possible time. And he's creating more scandals that they either have to defend or disavow, which is a sophies choice for them --
GRIFFIN: Yes.
ROGIN: -- in the middle of their most vulnerable position. Now, during the primaries, they have to care how they look. They have to care about the scandals more than any time else. And Trump is ramping up the scandals to 11, because he knows that the window for the grift might close if Democrats take over both chambers. So, he's got a --
DEAN: You also got to remember --
ROGIN: -- have a super grift until that time. And that makes the Republican situation even worse.
DEAN: Yes. You have to remember that --
ROGIN: -- and humiliating them in the process.
DEAN: -- the reconciliation, which is just a fancy word for, you know, they only need Republicans to pass it through the Senate --
GRIFFIN: Yes. DEAN: -- that you need them all on board.
GRIFFIN: Yes.
DEAN: He can't afford to lose them. And, Isaiah, that's where this is a little bit different than what we've seen before.
MARTIN: Ultimately, 100 percent. He knows that. But ultimately, every single Senate Republican that is currently de facto -- you know, leaving from his side are people that he's endorsed against.
But at the end of the day, when you look at it from across the spectrum, the reason why a lot of these Republicans are turning on Trump or questioning Trump, like the $1.8 billion slush fund, because they're doing this for their own political survival. They know the AtlasIntel poll that came out, that was Trumps' pollster, the most accurate pollster of the last election, that showed that the Republicans are down by more than 12 points.
They know that they're losing these special elections. They know they're losing all across this country. And so, the only thing that they can do is to try to go and question whether or not this president is doing the right thing.
DEAN: I do want to look -- you mentioned polling. We can pull up. This is a new Fox News poll that came out. But I -- this is an interesting data point, which is the president's handling of his job as president among Republican voters.
And again, as Alyssa has said, he's very solid with Republicans. That's not what we're saying. But just look the -- but look at the change there. That is a meaningful shift.
DEAN: Well, listen, it's --
GRIFFIN: Wow. It's a large amount.
AUSTIN: It's where --
DEAN: It is.
AUSTIN: You're right. But it's a shift.
GRIFFIN: He needs to be focusing on the issues he got elected on. Pocketbook issues, the economy, the cost of living. And that seems to be always in the rearview mirror for him.
We're talking about ballrooms. We're talking about the arch to Trump. Like, these are not things that are helping people make ends meet.
And I'm a little bit stunned because he -- I was in the White House for midterms 2018 when he lost the House and he lost the Senate. He knows that that is followed by investigations and oversight, something he's had the benefit of not facing for the last two years. If he puts the Senate into play, that puts a lot of things into play, including impeachment. And I would think you'd be focused on winning. ROGIN: Well, I -- he --
MARTIN: Plus, Trump has not delivered on any of the things he promised. He said we wouldn't be paying income taxes. And I think we all pay income taxes.
ROGIN: We -- he said we wouldn't have any Middle East war.
MARTIN: He said we have a dollar or something. Yes.
ROGIN: He said gas would be down.
MARTIN: He said he'd cut our energy bills in half within the first year of him being in office.
ROGIN: Yes.
MARTIN: None of that stuff happened. So --
ROGIN: You know, 80 percent of Republicans is not a majority of people in this country that are going to vote. And all those independents and all those states are facing increased gas prices, increased cost of living, inflation, can't buy a house, and --
MARTIN: Healthcare --
ROGIN: And healthcare. And the economy is getting worse as the Iran war goes on. So, that's going to look pretty bad in November. And Trump doesn't seem to care. He doesn't seem to want to --
AUSTIN: I think he have -- I think we have time between now and November.
ROGIN: -- do anything except to tell everybody that he's always right all the time.
MARTIN: How do you think he's going to be a bit better?
ROGIN: He's not going to wash the candidate?
AUSTIN: Honestly, maybe I'm being overly optimistic here. I really feel that we are nearing the end of this Iran war because everyone's exasperated. The Middle East -- they're begging Trump not to go in again. I -- you know, everybody wants this war to end.
GRIFFIN: I would agree he wants it --
AUSTIN: Yes, I'm not going to be like, oh my gosh. No, gas prices are fine. Yes. Everyone, including myself, I get -- I'm saying I want to end that. Everyone's paying the price.
ROGIN: That's the nature of -- the nature of a quagmire is that you want it to end, but you can't get out. The war is really easy to start but hard to end. And --
GRIFFIN: He's looking for an off-ramp. AUSTIN: We're nearing the end. We're nearing the end. We see that the negotiations are picking up again. And I think between now and November, they will prioritize the exact issues that you were speaking about.
ROGIN: They -- that's what they said two months into the --
MARTIN: How are they going to fix that?
AUSTIN: By the way, if we don't, it's our loss.
ROGIN: That's what they said two months into Afghanistan. That's what they said two months into Iraq. They're like, oh, it's going to be a wrap up pretty quick.
AUSTIN: But to your point --
MARTIN: They also said it was going to be like a couple of weeks, right?
AUSTIN: If we do not --
ROGIN: Right.
MARTIN: And then we're in a couple of months later.
ROGIN: They said six weeks -- six months at the -- at the least. And Trump said for three to four weeks. And now, we're into month three of this thing. And there's no end in sight.
MARTIN: Every single day, it's --
ROGIN: And the blockade is not going away. And our blockade of their blockade is not going away. We're at a state of war.
GRIFFIN: The wild part is when we end up with the JCPOA at the end of this. That's going to be done for a while.
DEAN: That's a circle that is --
ROGIN: I don't think Iran's going to go for that.
DEAN: OK.
ROGIN: I don't think we're going to get a deal that good this time.
DEAN: All right.
AUSTIN: That good?
ROGIN: Yes.
AUSTIN: Oh, we should talk about that.
ROGIN: Yes. How about that?
AUSTIN: We should talk about that.
DEAN: Save that for another segment.
ROGIN: Yes. It's another segment.
[07:25:08]
DEAN: Billionaire Jeff Bezos says lower-income working-class workers should pay no income tax at all. We're going to debate that idea. That's next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DEAN: Billionaire Jeff Bezos has some thoughts on taxes that even the likes of Elizabeth Warren and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez could get behind.
[07:30:00]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BEZOS: A nurse in Queens who makes $75,000 a year pays 12 -- more than $12,000 a year in taxes. Does that really make sense? Some people talk about, you know, making the tax system more progressive. How about we start by having the nurse in Queens not pay taxes?
We already have the most progressive tax system in the world. The top one percent of taxpayers pay 40 percent of all the tax revenue. The bottom half pay only three percent. We have already -- and I think it should be zero. I don't think it should be three percent.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right.
BEZOS: I think it should be zero. So, we would make it more progressive that way.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
DEAN: This made a lot of ways. A lot of people talking about this.
Isaiah, do you think Jeff Bezos has a point here? What's his motivation in saying this? That's the question.
MARTIN: Look, I think that Bezos has a variety of things that he's looking at. Maybe he wants to run for office. Who knows? You never really know.
At the end of the day, I do think that it's rather interesting that Jeff has talked about whether or not the one percent is paying effectively too much in taxes. I think, that's a pretty absurd argument to make, because Amazon only paid about 1.4 percent of corporate taxes, and they got $17 billion worth of tax breaks.
DEAN: And that we talk about -- we talked about this issue when he had -- when he did this interview, and it also comes down to about how the American tax code is written, and you have wage earners, and then you have people like Jeff Bezos, who are paid in a very, very different way, and that is taxed in a very different way.
GRIFFIN: Yes, right. And I think that there is -- I think, some people would probably be surprised to realize that the bottom 50 percent is roughly people making $55,000 a year as individual earners, and below that, I think there is a lot of Americans who feel like, well, I'm among those who are struggling.
But especially in major cities, you're making a little more than that, you're making closer to six figures, and you may think that you're struggling to get ahead in the state of this inflationary economy, and you need relief. This would not give you relief.
I mean, I'm for completely revamping the entire tax code, and I think the one percent is way too broadly defined, but there is way too many carve outs for the very top, and I think that this is an animating issue. I think, in this populist moment on the right, there is a moment that you could have future politicians.
If the J.D. Vance ends up running, that lean a little more into the taxing the billionaires, which has never been a Republican position previously, but I think there is an appetite for the wealthiest to contribute more.
DEAN: I want to play a clip, another clip from Bezos that he was -- he was making the case that he pays billions of dollars in taxes, and that it's raising those wouldn't necessarily help a teacher in Queens. This is what he said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: For example.
BEZOS: This people sometimes say that, that you know, I don't pay taxes. So true. I pay billions of dollars in taxes. And it's a permanent -- again, if people want me to pay more billions --
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right.
BEZOS: Then let's have that debate. But don't pretend, you know, that this -- that that's going to solve the problem. You could -- you could double the taxes I pay, and it's not going to help that teacher in Queens. I promise you. This is the -- so, you can't connect those two things, not logically.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
DEAN: New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani tweeted after that. He said, I know a few teachers in Queens who would beg to differ. Emily, what were you going to say?
AUSTIN: First of all, I'm surprised Mamdani wasn't patting him on the back. With his initial statement, I thought every single socialist or communist leaning person would applaud Jeff Bezos for what he was saying. But I'm just really, really sick of this, like bashing of the billionaires, because the billionaires actually are the ones contributing the most to society. Let's talk about how many --
(CROSSTALK)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE).
EMILY: Oh, yes. I feel so bad for them.
Let's talk about how many jobs Amazon has created. Let's talk about how many people are paying their bills because of Amazon. How many -- like, people have benefited from the creation of the jobs in that? So, I'm just really against this whole like, oh my god, the capitalists are the bad guys.
In terms of his motivation, I think that's the question. I wasn't even thinking about a political run without starting to make the most sense. And then, theoretically, he is not necessarily wrong.
If you are not taxing them, they are probably spending more money into the economy, and that wealth is spreading on its own organically. However, you are right, this is not the traditional Republican thinking, and the handouts and the free money does not solve the problem.
MARTIN: Ever since, corporate tax -- ever since the Republicans cut the top corporate tax rate, we know the private sector investment to build new manufacturing facilities has decreased. So, it hasn't spurred an increase in investment into the economy. We have seen that across the board, and that's from FRED data. But the point is --
(CROSSTALK)
AUSTIN: No, I'm talking more of like the lower 50 percent who, where if they had extra money, they would probably go to the grocery store and spend it. They would probably be spending that money because they needed it.
MARTIN: Well, let's -- well, let's do some math here. So, if you were to get rid of --
(CROSSTALK)
AUSTIN: Oh, I felt that.
MARTIN: If you -- if you -- if you were to get rid of Amazon, $17 billion worth of tax breaks, right? And you were to double it, as Bezos were to say, that would be enough to cover universal childcare for every single child in this country.
(CROSSTALK)
AUSTIN: But you know what's going to happen?
MARTIN: So, you are saying that for that grant or that person that lives in Queens, the universal child care, to that they don't have to pay the cost of rent per kid in America, would not help that person now?
AUSTIN: No. Can we talk about what's realistically going to happen? I don't know how Governor Hochul doesn't see this. When you tax the rich, the rich leave, they will go to Puerto Rico, they are going to --
(CROSSTALK)
MARTIN: We were talking about a nationwide policy.
AUSTIN: I understand. Nationwide or statewide, it doesn't make a difference. If the rich people are going to suffer for being rich, they are going to leave, and they will bring their money elsewhere.
(CROSSTALK)
[07:35:02]
GRIFFIN: And Bezos is very clearly talking about personal tax, not the corporate tax.
DEAN: Yes, not corporate taxes. Right. Right, right, right.
Alyssa, you talked about the populism that we see -- that we are seeing on the right. There is all -- and it like, it's kind of where the circle meets, right? With both -- with both sides of the aisle. Because you have somebody like Elizabeth Warren, and do you start to see J.D. Vance and others kind of come together on this issue? It is interesting,
ROGIN: I think the bigger issue here is that you have increased unease in society, especially amongst the lower middle classes, about the future of work and the future of their place in a society where technology is.
(CROSSTALK)
DEAN: And A.I.
ROGIN: Is changing so fast, and A.I., to the sense that what you hear from great industrialists of the time is, don't worry, you don't have to do anything, and we'll give you an income, or we'll cut your taxes and just sit back and let us handle this, and everything is going to be fine, because the technology is going to solve all your problems, and I think that sort of ignores the -- a lot of discontent, especially amongst young people on both the left and the right, about wanting to have a purpose in work that is not connected to just getting by. And wanting to have a place in a technologically A.I.- driven society where they can be creative and productive and rise in their careers and in their dignity, rather than just, you know, have billionaires tell them, don't worry, we're going to cut your taxes, and then maybe we'll give you some money, and you can just paint or whatever.
And that's the bigger societal issue, rather than how much three percent of this or that on any given day. DEAN: Yes, I mean, I think, there is -- look, this is going to -- this is already a political issue, but this just seems to get bigger and bigger and bigger. And as we look at the Midterms, and you look to 2028, you can't help but think somebody needs to come up with a plan.
GRIFFIN: I think you are going to see politicians in 2028 who are running, talking about tackling A.I., putting some kind of guardrails on it, some kind of pauses.
(CROSSTALK)
AUSTIN: We have seeing it already.
GRIFFIN: That polls extremely well, because to Josh's point, there are these headwinds economically that are bigger than any political party, any candidate, or current politician. The fact that the purchasing power of the U.S. dollar is three times less than it was in 1980, but the cost of everything is even higher, like, people are working harder than ever, and having a harder time getting ahead.
We -- people are going to be begging politicians to offer real big visionary plans, and I think there's a lane for people who are willing to do that. It's going to be -- have to be bigger than, like, we are tweaking the corporate tax rate here, and we are, you know, making a little easier to e-file, or whatever.
AUSTIN: Now, I think, we are seeing it already, because on both sides of the aisle, I see people are increasingly going against A.I., and people like, well, I don't want replacing my job. And then, I try to play devil's advocate, because I was speaking to somebody much older than me about this, and they are like, well, that's what they thought when cars came out, and that's what they thought when this innovation happened. But then, more jobs are created elsewhere, and I try to be optimistic about it.
(CROSSTALK)
ROGIN: Yes, but managing those --
AUSTIN: But it's getting out of hand.
ROGIN: And managing those traditions can mean less suffering for millions of Americans. And we are not managing them right now.
(CROSSTALK)
DEAN: Yes.
ROGIN: Because the technology is outpacing the policy and the regulation.
Look what happened at the White House this week. They were about to roll out an executive order to have a voluntary review of A.I. models. So, because a huge national security threat to throw these A.I. models out into the wild, nobody knows what they -- much less export them. And they canceled it. It was supposed to be on Thursday, and they canceled at the last minute because the Silicon Valley tech titans said, no, thank you. You know?
So, this is where we are. We are failing to bring people along in this technological journey in a way that enables them to feel like they have a purpose in the -- in this brave new world.
DEAN: Yes. It is. As just going to say, it is a brave world indeed.
(CROSSTALK)
ROGIN: You should do it.
DEAN: All right, I know that was good.
Up next for us: is a cap on A's in Harvard classes a good idea. The faculty think so, but we'll debate it. That's next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[07:43:24]
DEAN: Apparently, in higher education, it's possible to have too much of a good thing. Harvard's faculty voting to cap the number of A's given to students, an effort to make the grades more meaningful. They will be capped at 20 percent but no limit on the number of A minuses awarded.
They call it grade inflation. Some students say it will cause more competition, others say it will leave them at a disadvantage applying to graduate programs.
It is a very interesting concept, to say the least, to kind of manipulate the grades this way. Josh.
ROGIN: Yes. I mean, I've never been of the belief that college grades mattered in the first place. But then again, I didn't go to Harvard, I went to the George Washington University, where the motto was C's get degrees, and you know, in the years since I have graduated, the grand number -- total number of people who asked me about my college grades is zero, to this day, never ever come up, not even one.
(CROSSTALK)
GRIFFIN: Correct.
AUSTIN: I certainly not --
DEAN: That is the one thing that we do want -- college graduates to know. Right, yes.
ROGIN: And so, you know, enjoy the four years of college kids, and I'm finding a lot hard to have a lot of sympathy for Harvard graduates with A minuses, because I think they are going to be fine. They are going to be -- they are going to be A OK. AUSTIN: I feel like DEI, except it's the opposite. It's just -- it's unnecessary, it's bizarre, and it's also obvious question, what about math and science and equations and physics? It's up to the professor, whether you excelled or you didn't.
(CROSSTALK)
DEAN: Right. (INAUDIBLE)
AUSTIN: So, and then, also, I feel like this also now -- this is showing that they must be having a professor problem, because, you know, whether -- someone's grade shouldn't be determined on the amount of other people getting it. It should just solely be based on merit.
[07:45:00]
So, the fact that this is even a conversation means that either they have a really, really big problem or they are just bored. I --
(CROSSTALK)
DEAN: OK. So, this is interesting. But I do want to get to you. I just want to add another piece of data to the conversation. So, the percentage of A grades awarded at Harvard has more than doubled in the last two decades. So, you see, in 2005 it was at 24 percent. Now, it's 60.2 percent. So, it has gone up.
MARTIN: Yes.
DEAN: Maybe, the students are smarter. I don't know.
ROGIN: I think it was COVID, right? Because everyone was like home and COVID, and felt really bad for people, like, you know, zooming into their college, so, everyone got A's, they are trying to keep them like --
(CROSSTALK)
GRIFFIN: Oh, not me. I felt (INAUDIBLE).
MARTIN: I just -- I just don't really -- I just don't really think that we should be in the business of penalizing smart kids, because to your point --
DEAN: Exactly.
AUSTIN: Yes.
MARTIN: Like, if you are in math, if you are in something that's very objective, you can't really, you know --
(CROSSTALK)
GRIFFIN: Well, and I like this better. There was this move at one point by some higher education to just do away with grades. And the kind of like vibe sort of grading or whatever, and that's a mistake. You need -- you need students to strive to do well, and you need to give them some kind of reward system.
But this, to me, to your point, it's probably a failing of the teachers. They are clearly giving them out too easily, and they should correct themselves rather than cap student excellence by saying, like, we are going to only give out this number.
AUSTIN: Wait. Do we all agree? I think, you doubt it.
DEAN: Have we -- have we found something?
AUSTIN: This is incredible. Thanks, Harvard.
DEAN: This is like a white whale, an incredible thing that we have found. It -- and it would seem that the Harvard undergraduates also agree with the table, because nearly 85 percent of Harvard undergraduates oppose a proposed cap on grades. So --
AUSTIN: This has to be pertaining to liberal arts, because clearly, if you are not -- if you are not doing something like a math or science, it's on the professor's basis, pretty much. So, I also feel like this now welcomes bias, you know, where it's like, well, maybe I thought you deserved an A, but now I'm going to look for a reason to not give you one, because I've capped it. It's just -- it's really discriminatory.
DEAN: Yes, you actually are (INAUDIBLE).
(CROSSTALK)
MARTIN: This university-wide policy, like, how would they do this for math? I have no idea.
DEAN: How -- like, how do you actually sort through all of that.
MARTIN: Yes. It's like, sorry, you got that right, but you know what? We are just (INAUDIBLE) for you.
AUSTIN: Your classmate deserves it more than you --
(CROSSTALK)
MARTIN: Yes.
ROGIN: Your fault is grading on the curve. It's not completely new idea.
(CROSSTALK)
DEAN: I mean, but -- and -- but --
ROGIN: You grade on the curve that you know who is slightly better than the other person for purposes of competition. I just don't think knowledge should be a competition.
GRIFFIN: Yes.
ROGIN: I think, it should be about discovery. Call me crazy.
AUSTIN: I think, trade schools are going to see an increasingly amount of applications now. I know a lot of people not even bothering going to college. You can't even get me started on that. For me, college was a woke incubator. I mean, it was a nightmare, and I always tell myself, you know, unless I want to go become an engineer, a doctor, or a lawyer, I'm just going to work.
MARTIN: Who is that (INAUDIBLE)?
ROGIN: If you don't need a degree, that get into journalism.
MARTIN: What does that means?
AUSTIN: It means that I had to memorize 73 genders, or I was going to fail.
(CROSSTALK)
ROGIN: You know, yes. Grades definitely don't matter for journalism.
(CROSSTALK)
MARTIN: What? Can you tell me what -- like, (INAUDIBLE)?
AUSTIN: OK. So, I wanted to graduate as a journalist in Hoff (PH) University, and my professor made me take LGBTQ plus studies. And one of them was like, there are 72 genders, name 16 of them. Or if you are straight, watch lesbian porn. And I was like, yes, I don't want to do any of that.
MARTIN: Give me a couple of this. I don't know any --
AUSTIN: Well, adding --
(CROSSTALK)
ROGIN: Yes. They didn't offer that -- I want to take --
(CROSSTALK)
DEAN: I got -- that was not offered when you know, there is such a way more -- ask my professor.
ROGIN: I -- that's sound like a better elected --
(CROSSTALK)
MARTIN: I mean -- I have never heard of that. But --
DEAN: But also, by the way this is -- yes.
GRIFFIN: This is well, the cost of higher education is just absolutely skyrocketing, not to keep bringing it back to the 1980s.
ROGIN: Yes. GRIFFIN: But the average state school costs about $800 a year to attend. Now, you are talking between $10,000 and $25,000 a year. So, students are, you know, burdening themselves with debt to go to school.
(CROSSTALK)
AUSTIN: Yes, a lot of debt.
GRIFFIN: And oftentimes, it doesn't then lead to degrees in the same way that hurt to jobs on the other side of their degrees.
(CROSSTALK)
AUSTIN: Correct.
DEAN: It is. It's a changing world. All right. Up next, the panel's --
(CROSSTALK)
ROGIN: It was a good time.
DEAN: Yes.
GRIFFIN: Yes.
DEAN: Unpopular opinions. What they are not afraid to say out loud.
But first, the final generation of World War II veterans returned to Normandy, France, for the 80th anniversary of D-Day.
And the powerful new CNN film, "Why We Dream", it premieres Memorial Day at 8:00 p.m. here on CNN, you can also watch on the CNN app.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[07:53:28]
DEAN: Back now, it is time for your "UNPOPULAR OPINIONS". And Josh, you get to start us off.
ROGIN: Thank you. You may have seen at Swatch stores all over the world this week, there were riots as watch nerds and scalpers rushed to acquire a new collaboration between Audemars Piguet and Swatch. It's the first time they have ever done it. It's the most hyped-up watch in the history of watch hype.
But here is my unpopular opinion, the. watches are no good. I'm sorry. I hate to be the one to say it. But look, doesn't have a strap. It's basically a plastic watch for $400.
DEAN: OK.
GRIFFIN: All right.
DEAN: Alyssa. GRIFFIN: I don't even know if this is unpopular, but I think that the president should attend his son's wedding, and the media should -- and the media shouldn't criticize him on the other side of it. The statement was basically like, there is --
(CROSSTALK)
ROGIN: (INAUDIBLE) criticized?
GRIFFIN: That's a fair question, but you know, I'm dealing with the Iran war. I don't know if it was bracing for some sort of backlash, you would potentially be getting. But I think you always attend your child's wedding, even if it's a first, second, third, you got to show up for it. And I think most sane people would lay off and have not criticized him.
DEAN: OK. Isaiah.
MARTIN: Well, in honor of us being in New York, I got to say, the New York Knicks are going to win the NBA championship.
(CROSSTALK)
DEAN: Wow!
AUSTIN: Popular opinion.
MARTIN: Got to do it. You know what? Look, the free throw merchant Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, who I like, by the way? But he is a free throw merchant.
We got to see Jalen Brunson win. I'm rooting for him. I think the Knicks are going to sweep tonight.
DEAN: OK. Wow. All right. OK.
AUSTIN: Any disputes we have is water under the bridge going forward.
MARTIN: There we go. Can say.
AUSTIN: Oh, he flopping cane --
(CROSSTALK)
DEAN: We can -- everyone can come together. All right, Emily.
AUSTIN: Sorry guys, you are going to hate me now. I just feel like breakfast is so overrated. I feel like the human body --
[07:55:02]
MARTIN: I feel with you.
AUSTIN: Oh, great.
ROGIN: 100 percent. MARTIN: I feel it.
AUSTIN: I feel like the human body is meant to wake up, you know, have your -- a hot water with lemon, take your vitamins on empty stomach, go work out on an empty stomach, it's so much more benefit.
(CROSSTALK)
DEAN: This is a very healthy lifestyle you are living. Yes.
ROGIN: Yes.
AUSTIN: And secondly, also the meal options, what is it basically like? Cottage cheese, eggs, and sausage? Like, I much rather have a pasta or a pizza.
(CROSSTALK)
MARTIN: Now, you go waffle house?
AUSTIN: Yes, I don't do carbs.
MARTIN: I like --
AUSTIN: Just kidding. I do like carbs. I don't eat them a lot, but I like them.
I'm more of like a protein dinner, lunch. I'd rather have a huge dinner and skip breakfast and lunch. That's my hot take.
DEAN: All right. Well, thank you to all of you. It's great to have you here at the table with us. And thank you for watching TABLE FOR FIVE. You can catch me later today at 5:00 p.m. Eastern, right here on CNN.
But in the meantime, CNN coverage continues right now.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
