Return to Transcripts main page
CNN's The Arena with Kasie Hunt
Trump Uses U.N. Speech To Make False Claims & Assail Nations; Harris Revisits Infamous Campaign Moment On "The View"; Tonight: Kimmel Returns To Air After Disney Lifts Suspension; GOP Senator ON Trump Linking Autism & Tylenol: "Not The Case". Aired 4-5p ET
Aired September 23, 2025 - 16:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[16:00:00]
PAUL SUTTER, ASTROPHYSICIST: Exactly. No matter what, we will learn something about the composition of asteroids. We will learn about what asteroids are made of, how this all works, which is all great.
DANNY FREEMAN, CNN HOST: Paul Sutter, thank you so much for sharing this terrifying story and the idea of blowing up an asteroid. Really appreciate your time today.
SUTTER: Sleep tight tonight.
FREEMAN: Thanks.
All right. THE ARENA WITH KASIE HUNT starts right now.
(MUSIC)
KASIE HUNT, CNN HOST: Hi, everyone. I'm Kasie Hunt. Welcome to THE ARENA. It is wonderful to have you with us on this Tuesday.
When it is Donald Trump versus -- well, just about everybody. The president took the world stage today addressing the United Nations General Assembly in New York.
The speech he gave was, shall we say, light on diplomacy.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: What is the purpose of the United Nations for now, all they seem to do is write a really strongly worded letter and then never follow that letter up.
You're destroying your countries. They're being destroyed. Both the immigration and their suicidal energy ideas will be the death of Western Europe. I'm really good at this stuff. Your countries are going to hell.
It's climate change because if it goes higher or lower, whatever the hell happens, there's climate change. It's the greatest con job ever perpetrated on the world, in my opinion.
Bestselling hat. Trump was right about everything, and I don't say that in a braggadocious way, but it's true. I've been right about everything.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: I don't say that to braggadocious way, I'm just right about everything.
Let's get off the sidelines and head into THE ARENA. Our panel is here, along with CNN chief international anchor Christiane Amanpour.
Christiane, so much to dig through. Which one of these doors would you like to open?
CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: Well, Kasie, look, it is the most incredibly important moment right now. It's 80 years since the U.N. was created in the ashes of what happened in World War II. And since then, America has led the world.
And what Trump is actually basically saying is world, I don't need you if you want to help, fine. But we can do it ourselves. And more to the point, we're retreating anyway. And as we retreat, we're also going to be doing quite a lot of destruction in the fact that they have cut so much to the really good things the U.N. does in terms of all the humanitarian arms, and with its USAID cuts, has amplified all of that sort of retreat of un, U.S. soft power.
So that's one thing at a time when it's really, really necessary for the United States to add its weight to where it can really make a difference. People are actually dying because of these cuts, wars and other crises are going on unimpeded because of a lot of these cuts. That was obviously the beginning of the administration. And the Elon Musk taking the ax to USAID, but transmitted also into the U.N.
On the other issue, of course, war in our time is at a terrible, terrible height. He said that he solved about seven. You know, there's a lot of dispute about that. The real wars are that are really taking a huge amount of U.S., European, NATO, Middle East attention are Israel's continued war on Gaza and Russia's continued invasion of Ukraine.
Up until now, President Trump has essentially elected to say a few things about Putin, or sometimes, you know, Netanyahu, but never to put the weight of the presidency behind, you know, leveraging that weight to stopping these wars and to getting those leaders to actually listen to the U.S. who has the unique leverage.
Today, he did say things to President Zelenskyy and to the assembled press about what he would be willing to do. He said that, yes, given Putin's provocations, escalations, testing NATO, he did think NATO countries were perfectly entitled to shoot down flying objects, including Russian planes, if they strayed into NATO.
HUNT: Christiane, can I actually stop you there? Because I do -- we have that sound bite.
AMANPOUR: OK.
HUNT: I'd like to play it for everybody. And then, please, we'll pick it up on the other side. Let's watch.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: The biggest disappointment. But I think that will happen eventually is the Ukraine and Russia situation. But we've settled -- I thought that was going to be the easiest one because of my relationship with Putin. But unfortunately, that's relationship didn't mean anything unfortunately.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: So there you have it. What do you take away from that?
AMANPOUR: Well, it's a -- it's a construction. He said a few other things when he was with President Zelenskyy. You know, he kept giving Putin yet another deadline. But also acknowledged that Zelenskyy had really been fighting like his people. The Ukrainians had fought really, really valiantly to not collapse under the consensus that Ukraine was going to collapse or have to capitulate. When Russia invaded.
The question really is what happens next? Words are one thing. It's good that he had a good meeting with Zelenskyy, unlike the one in the White House many months ago.
[16:05:04]
That's good. It's good that he says that U.S. and NATO should challenge the repeated tests that Russia is making to their, you know, to the NATO alliance.
On the other hand, on other big issues, he basically said, as you played, you're all going, you know, your nations are going to hell because of untrammeled immigration. And then he went on about this gigantic green energy hoax and peddled a lot of conspiracy theories from that very important international platform and said that all those nations were going to fail by trying to ameliorate what is actually climate change. That's having a destructive effect on our planet.
And he was denying the science and bringing up those conspiracy theories. So that was on the negative side.
HUNT: All right. Christiane Amanpour really appreciate your reporting today from New York. Thank you so much for being with us.
AMANPOUR: Thank you.
HUNT: All right. Our panel is here. CNN senior White House correspondent Kristen Holmes, the political reporter and author Molly Ball, former deputy special assistant to President Biden, Dan Koh oats, here, along with former Republican congressman from Michigan, Peter Meijer.
Welcome to all of you. Thank you so much for being here. Congressman, I would like to start with you just in terms of this
United Nations speech, and we should also mention for those of you who, in the last week or so have debuted our text chain here, there's going to be additional analysis reporters in there. We're going to let them do their thing. If you're watching on mute, it will be great for you. If somebody says something that jumps off our screen, well read it here. But otherwise, we're going to let them do their thing.
But, Congressman, the things that we heard from the president in this speech, I mean, was, you know, I feel like we say a lot like its Donald Trump unleashed, but this is a new version of this president for this second term. I mean, what was your reaction to how he conducted himself there?
PETER MEIJER (R), FORMER MICHIGAN CONGRESSMAN: There are plenty of elements that wouldn't be at all. You know, out of character for a campaign speech where you hear one of his rallies, you know, the regurgitation of the greatest hits. But he said two things that I thought were important to note. One, the difference between, you know, empty words. And that's not how to solve wars. It's going to be action. And number two, a pretty stinging criticism of the degrowth mentality that I think has taken over Europe.
And the two are very much linked. He talks about the energy sanctions against Russia, but at the same time, how much the European union continues to buy their oil, and you have Germany continuing to shut down nuclear power plants, funded, thanks to green groups that are funded by Putin. On the one hand, that degrowth mentality is terrible for western democracy. It's terrible for western economies, it is fantastic for China, who has they are embracing growth left, right and center.
So enough of those empty words that in those cases lead to actions that are detrimental to the West and on the other hand, willing to take action. He talks about the wars that he solved. And is there some hyperbole? Is there some exaggeration as Donald Trump --
HUNT: The wars are still being fought?
MEIJER: They are. But he's -- what he's trying to do. And I think this doesn't get covered, is looking for a tangible, articulable American interest in those conflicts, right? The mineral deal in Ukraine, the mineral deal between Armenia and Azerbaijan. If you have something tangible that can actually last across administrations versus rhetoric and high-minded thoughts that easily get swept out with a changing of the guard.
HUNT: Do you -- how do you see it, Dan?
DAN KOH, FORMER DEPUTY & SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO PRESIDENT BIDEN: I mean, look, I think this was a microcosm of one of the signatures of Donald Trump, which is when he's on the big stages, he can't help himself but to air grievances and lie, right? He started by criticizing the decor of the U.N., saying that he could have done a better job, criticized the escalator that he was going off of. And then he just spouted off four lies in a row. He said grocery prices were down. They're up year over year. He said inflation was defeated. The goal of the Fed, it's still 30 percent above that goal. He said D.C. was the crime capital of America. Crime is at a 30 year low in D.C.
He even talked about going out to dinner and how many more people are going down to dinner when reservations are down in D.C.
So, this is just an example of what Trump does when he has the big stage. I think as a reality TV star, he likes the imagery of going after countries while they're sitting there. But my question is, what kind of impression of the United States does this leave on the world? I think it's a pretty poor one.
HUNT: Molly Ball, I mean, look to play -- to kind of pick up on one of the points that congressman was making. I'm not sure there are a lot of Americans who necessarily believe that the United Nations is terribly effective. And to a certain extent, Donald Trump was channeling that when he was standing on that stage.
Now he was focused on very Trumpian things. And, Kristen, you can weigh in on this as well. I think he was also upset his teleprompter wasn't working, right? Like, you know, doesn't -- doesn't meet his standards. But I guess my sort of big picture question is, does it matter?
MOLLY BALL, POLITICAL REPORTER & AUTHOR: Well, look, on the one hand, plenty of presidents have advocated for reforming the U.N. and the sort of physical decrepitude of the U.N. building is a very -- is a vivid metaphor for an institution that a lot of people do see as not succeeding and keeping pace with the needs of the world in this moment.
[16:10:12]
Although, as Christiane pointed out, much of that is because of things that America has done.
I think at the same time, you know, you mentioned, Congressman, the distinction between words and actions. And I think that that is something that world leaders are accustomed to at this point of seeing Trump's actions as far more significant than anything he said and to that end, nobody needed this speech to know that America was pulling out of or radically reconfiguring the liberal world order, right? That is something that has been demonstrated to all of the leaders in that room in so many ways since the start of President Trump's second term.
So, for him to get up there and say it just sort of puts an exclamation point on something that I think all leaders in that room have already felt on a very visceral level.
HUNT: Well, and, Kristen, this is a much different crowd right than he met when he spoke there in 2018 during his first term. Let's watch. Let's flash back to 2018 and see what the response from the crowd was like then. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: My administration has accomplished more than almost any administration in the history of our country. Americas -- so true. Didn't expect that reaction, but that's okay.
(LAUGHTER)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: It was literally laughed at. No one's laughing now.
KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: No one's laughing now. And I think to your point, which I -- you know, would play off of what does this mean on the world stage? What does the impressionists leave? The answer is that Donald Trump does not care. I mean, you can say that his teleprompter broke, that he was off script, that he got lost in what he was saying.
But that was the sentiment of the speech. I mean, not every word he said was ad-libbed. He knew what he was going in there to say. And we did previews on it. We talked to White House officials. It was just a grander version of the speech that he planned on saying. He fundamentally believes and his White House fundamentally believes that they don't need the United Nations.
They don't need to show who they are on the world stage or issue some level of decorum that used to exist. They know who they need to work with, and they've made that clear on the foreign trips that he has gone on and who he courts. But they don't think that they need to engage with the United Nations.
And honestly, that's part of why you're seeing these leaders not laughing, because they know that he doesn't care, and they know that he's going to do what he thinks is best, that he wants to do. And again, that's not just because he's ad-libbing and mad about the teleprompter. That is his worldview.
HUNT: Yeah. Fair enough.
All right. Coming up next here, the stand up after the standoff, new details on what to expect from Jimmy Kimmel's return to late night now just hours away.
But first, call it deja vu. Kamala Harris returning to the scene of one of the most memorable moments from the 2024 campaign. Forced to confront it head on.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SUNNY HOSTIN, CO-HOST, "THE VIEW": Do you think that moment tipped the election?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) [16:17:39]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HOSTIN: Since Trump has taken office, everything that you warned about has happened. Do you sometimes just want to scream, "I told y'all so"? And feel free to do it right now. I mean --
KAMALA HARRIS, FORMER U.S. VICE PRESIDENT: Sunny nothing comes to mind.
(LAUGHTER)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: Sound familiar, anyone?
Former Vice President Kamala Harris with a quip this morning about one of the defining and most consequential moments of her presidential campaign. That, of course, took place on that very set.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HOSTIN: Would you have done something differently than President Biden during the past four years?
HARRIS: There is not a thing that comes to mind.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: Ten months and one failed presidential campaign later, Harris, now on book tour, offered this response when she was asked about that infamous moment.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HARRIS: That day and that interview for me, really was symbolic of the issue, which is that I -- I'm a loyal person and I didn't fully appreciate how much people wanted to know there was a difference between me and President Biden. I thought it was obvious and I didn't want to offer a difference in a way that would be received or suggested to be a criticism. I realize now that I didn't fully appreciate that how much of an issue it was.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: Didn't fully appreciate how much of an issue it was, just the entire ballgame.
Joining our panel now is Rahm Emanuel, CNN commentator, former White House chief of staff under President Obama. He also has many other titles -- mayor, ambassador, father, we've been talking about them.
Mr. Mayor, you watched her reflect there and try to explain what she thought and why she said what she said during the campaign. What are you left thinking about her political future based on that? RAHM EMANUEL, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL & GLOBAL AFFAIRS COMMENTATOR: Well,
I -- look, I mean, you know, some people think being president is purely a management you have to get -- you have to all good presidents, all great presidents have a deep appreciation for politics to not appreciate that the question of -- given that the people thought at that time that the country was headed, 70 percent thought it was headed in the wrong direction.
[16:20:02]
They wanted to see a change is to totally misread where the American people were, and that -- I'm a little shocked at, to be honest. And that was not a trick question. That wasn't a pop quiz. That was the question.
And not to have an answer. And even if you wanted to say, look, there are plenty of places we disagreed. But out of both loyalty and out of the character, I'm not going to do that and hear that publicly. It's not the right thing to do. At least then that becomes a character thing, not the answer, but to say you didn't appreciate that people were looking for a change, the irony is, if you look and do an autopsy of the election, she -- Biden-Harris is eight points down. She gets the baton. She runs all the way up to three points up. Thats 11-point swing from that interview. And the debate forward. She goes back from change to continuity, and she loses the election by a point and a half.
It was actually the continuity of Biden, which is the trip point. And to say that you don't get it, you don't appreciate it means you didn't understand where the election was or one of the major fault lines of the election was. People wanted a change, and you could have been that.
HUNT: Yeah, it's a really -- it's actually very straightforward, especially when you when you lay it out that way.
EMANUEL: It's not --
HUNT: Yeah, go ahead.
EMANUEL: Yeah, Kasie, this was not a trick question. As I said, this was not a trick question. It wasn't a pop quiz. It wasn't one of those -- this was a -- you know, there was an affordability piece and there was a change versus continuity piece. And she gave up the mantle of change that she had occupied. And moving from eight to three -- eight down to three up.
And the moment she started running on democracy and basically Joe Biden's message, she lost that advantage. And I don't understand how you don't understand. That's the part I don't get.
HUNT: Really, it's so interesting.
And look, Mr. Mayor, I want to also play. She did another interview with Rachel Maddow as part of this book tour last night, and she talked about one of the things in her book that's been getting the most attention, especially among Democrats, and that was her thinking about who to pick for vice president and who not to pick.
And specifically, she said that she didn't pick Pete Buttigieg because she didn't think that America was -- well, let's let me let her explain it, because Rachel Maddow pressed her on it. Let's watch.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HARRIS: To be a black woman running for president of the United States, and as a vice presidential running mate, a gay man with the stakes being so high, it made me very sad. But I also realized it would be a real risk. Maybe I was being too cautious.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: What is your estimation of why she's putting this out there and then now how she's explaining it?
EMANUEL: Well, look, I a little colored by my experience working for both President Clinton and President Obama. I have what I call the cabinet room test. You're going to be in a meeting. It's going to last an hour plus.
You're going to -- it's a 49.9 to 50.0. Your policy and political people are in separate worlds. You can't square the circle. You're going to be really angry, frustrated. You're going to walk back to the Oval Office.
Who's the one person you're going to -- when you want to be left alone? You're going to want to get back into the Oval Office to keep the conversation going that you just left angry because you can't figure out how to resolve the politics and policy. And whoever that person is, that you have enough trust in your gut, that's your running mate.
Because all the people you look at, I've run this process for President Clinton. I was close to President Obama, Senator Obama, when he was picking this. They all have pluses. They all have minuses. If it was 100 percent here and everybody else was 80, you don't need -- that's a computer.
This is a judgment call. This is a call about who are you comfortable when you are having. And there are going to be plenty of those cabinet meetings, plenty of those Oval Office meetings, plenty of those situation room meetings. Who's the one person who you can totally trust is copilot? And even though you're angry and frustrated, you respect their opinion enough and their judgment enough to keep talking at you and to you and to me.
And to me, she was right about the political pieces, but she was wrong about the biggest question that comes to picking a vice president. And that is what I call the cabinet room test. You're going to walk from the cabinet 50 feet, 25 feet into the Oval Office, and you want to be alone, but you trust the judgment of your copilot enough that you let them talk to you and talk with you and keep a conversation going that you really want it to end and throw things at the wall about.
Now, I do want to say one other thing, Kasie.
HUNT: Yeah.
EMANUEL: Enough about 2024 because we got a real problem in 2025 that's going on right now. I have no problem. I'm a junkie like you looking at this book, but I don't want to look through the rearview mirror.
We got some real stuff in the future as it relates to affordability of housing and what's happening to this country economically. How middle class are struggling.
HUNT: Yeah.
EMANUEL: We can look backwards. She has a book out. It's totally legitimate, but it's not what's most pressing going to be around the kitchen tables, dining tables and the office to where families are today, not where they were back then.
HUNT: So, I want to bring in we have our text chain, which is this new feature we've been debuting on the show. So, we're going to invite them. It's a slightly different crew.
Xochitl Hinojosa, I believe, Jamal Simmons I'm sorry.
EMANUEL: It's what we call the Greek chorus.
HUNT: And Xochitl -- exactly, exactly. It's -- you know, it's how the kids do it these days, right? We're putting the second screen on the actual screen. It's a whole new thing.
But I want to play for you and for them -- Harris was asked on "The View" today if she was going to run in 2028. Right? So, let's look to the future and see how she answered that question. Take a look.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOY BEHAR, CO-HOST, THE VIEW: You'd like to run again?
HARRIS: That's not in my immediate focus. I'm doing my book tour.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: That's not my immediate focus. She really had to like -- I mean, clearly, it's a focus somewhere. What are her future prospects, do you think?
EMANUEL: I think it's too early to talk about for anybody's future prospects. Look, I think she's given up on the obviously the governorship of California. That's a significant call. Theres a lot of time before now.
Then I happen to think this is my view that the party rank and file are also done with 2024. They're going to close the book on it, put a nail in it, shut it down, put it in a box, put it in the attic. And I think that may be -- for anybody that was in and around and associated with that. I think there's an appreciation that's where the Democratic Party is.
I'm not so sure that's not also where the country is. I think the country is prospective, not retrospective.
HUNT: Yeah. No. Well, you've answered -- you've answered my question in that way that you do to avoid those awkward cabinet room confrontations while still -- while still actually.
EMANUEL: You don't need -- you don't need a degree in hermeneutics to interpret what I just said.
HUNT: Fair enough.
Let me bring Congressman Peter Meijer into this conversation. Congressman, you're someone who, you know, you are a relatively moderate Republican. Obviously, it's part of why you're no longer in congress. If were, you know, putting all our cards out on the table. But you understand what it is that swing voters are looking for the kinds of questions they ask, what makes them decide they're going to switch parties in a given election cycle?
I'm interested to know what you think of what Kamala Harris is doing here on the book tour, and whether or not you think Democrats would be wise to have her continue to be the face of the party.
MEIJER: Well, I don't understand fundamentally how you lash yourself to the mast of a sinking ship, right? I mean, that was why Joe Biden said, listen, I get it -- you know, bad debate performance that's not going into good direction. Great hand off the baton and the baton wasn't handed off. She just made sure that he was still continuing to hold that it, okay.
I don't know why they're so bad at this. That was my biggest political misjudgment, was assuming that the Democratic Party, you know, had their finger on the pulse, had their eye on the ball.
You look at Kamala Harris and Donald Trump. Trump believes in things. He believes in himself. He is probably the most self-assured person, definitely in the political moment, if not in the entire span of human history.
And if you're in a moment of indecision, you want to look to somebody as a political leader. And folks were more than happy to look past all of Donald Trump's flaws because he actually was somebody who believed in himself.
And this entire tour that Kamala Harris did was her doubting herself, doubting the voters, doubting every potential running mate. The book is not a rationale for why her vision for leadership wasn't what the American people wanted. It was a litany of explanations for the failure of a campaign.
Trump isn't looking in the rear view.
HUNT: Yeah, no, Rahm, jump in, please. EMANUEL: Yeah, well, let me do because I think there's a part of the
question, which is about, independent swing voters, et cetera. And this kind of captures where I think the Democratic primary would be, but also going into the general, which is, look, the Democratic primary voters are very angry at this moment. You can see that based on high turnout in these special elections, swing independent voters that go between parties are not in the angry, but they don't want an untethered, unhinged Donald Trump.
That is a different emotional, psychological state than -- we are Democratic primary voters and a candidate that is running in either a swing district, swing state, or in a national election has to appreciate both the anger/rage and the uncomfortability. And they're not the same emotion, but can speak to both of them in a unified way.
And that's -- I think, you know, one of the things that I would say that Donald Trump was, I disagree with what he's doing, but he does convey, you know, the three qualities you have to do with for president or for mayor or for governor -- strength, confidence and optimism.
[16:30:02]
Those are the qualities you've got to communicate. And he does that. But it's now paying a price as president because he's his own worst enemy in those areas.
HUNT: In many ways. In many ways. Rahm Emanuel, always grateful to have you on the show. Come back soon, please.
And our thanks to our text chain as well. Thank you all for playing.
Coming up, new pushback today to the president's announcement about autism and Tylenol. What a top Republican senator is now urging the administration to do.
But first, what the head of the FCC is signaling today is Jimmy Kimmel prepares to return to late night.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
STEPHEN COLBERT, LATE NIGHT HOST: Our long national late nightmare is over.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:35:03]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
COLBERT: Our long national late nightmare is over, because Disney announced that "Jimmy Kimmel Live!" will return to air. Once more, I am the only martyr in late night. JON STEWART, COMEDIAN: That campaign that you all launched, pretending
that you were going to cancel Hulu, while secretly racing through four seasons of "Only Murders in the Building", it really worked.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: It's a great show, honestly, "Only Murders in the Building".
Late night hosts and their audience is very excited by the news that Jimmy Kimmel will be back on TV screens tonight, following a nearly weeklong standoff over the comedian's comments about the Trump administration's response to Charlie Kirk's assassination. Soon, Kimmel will start taping his first show since he was pulled from ABC's airwaves.
Still, you're not going to necessarily be able to see it. It's not going to be broadcast everywhere that it once was because Sinclair and Nexstar, those are two of the country's largest owners of groups of local TV stations, said that their ABC affiliates are going to preempt Kimmel indefinitely, meaning that about a quarter of ABC stations in the U.S. will not be able to see Jimmy Kimmel live tonight or in the foreseeable future.
CNN entertainment reporter Lisa France joins us now live from Atlanta.
Lisa, thanks so much for being here. What do we know? You know, the reporting sort of indicated that there was a lot of back and forth between Kimmel and the network about what might be said in the wake of any of this. Do we know anything about that? And you know, what context do you think is important to draw our attention to here?
LISA RESPERS FRANCE, CNN ENTERTAINMENT REPORTER: Yeah, we don't know absolutely what Jimmy Kimmel is going to say tonight. We know what people want them -- want him to say. We know that the right wants him to apologize. And his fans and people who lean more to the left want him to stand his ground and maybe even poke some fun at it. Because as you showed the other late night hosts had plenty of fun with his return.
And so, I think people really want to see how he's going to balance this. You know, you don't want to run afoul of the administration again, or do you? Because Jimmy Kimmel has been, you know, very firm in taking, you know, his humor and using it to, you know, poke at the administration. And so people feel like if he comes out and he offers up an apology, will that feel like the Jimmy Kimmel that people have always known?
And so, I think its interesting that he has seemed to be very intentional about not saying anything until he has the show tonight. He posted on social media a picture of him and the late, great Norman Lear saying that he was really missing that guy. You know, missing this guy today. And I think that's important because here he's with someone who's a pioneer of TV and comedy.
And so even though he didn't say anything about tonight, it feels like maybe he's trying to send a message that he's going to lean into the comedy tonight. At least that's what social media wants to believe. So, for a lot of people, you just have to wait and see. Unless you live in one of those cities where you're not going to be able to see it live, then you'll just have to catch it on YouTube or on social media, because those clips always seem to go viral. And I think a lot of people are going to want to see what he has to say tonight.
HUNT: It does seem like there are a lot of other places to see television, except on television nowadays.
Lisa, briefly for ABC, how intense was the backlash in terms of potentially altering their decision making here.
FRANCE: Yeah. So, you know, it's interesting my colleague Elizabeth Wagmeister has had some great reporting on this about how, you know, Disney and ABC really just wanted to lower the temperature. They wanted to give some some time and kind of have this calm down.
But it seemed like the temperature actually kind of got ramped up because what you had is you had fans and people who just felt like this was a First Amendment issue, really raising the temperature on their own, saying, were going to cancel Disney Plus, we're going to cancel Hulu, we're going to cancel ESPN.
Like people got really, really serious. They felt a complete way about what they deemed to be the government coming in and saying, we don't like this humor. And people on the right are saying this was not about humor, this was about being disrespectful in the wake of an assassination.
So you have, you know, two very different points of view. But to me, that's very indicative of the fact that it feels like we live in two very different Americas right now.
So, you know, I think that ABC recognized what was going on. Disney recognized what was going on and the anger that people had. I mean, people felt very strongly, if you go on TikTok, they were flaming Disney and ABC. I mean, people were saying, we're going to cancel our Disney cruises, were going to cancel our park tickets.
And so, this is still a business. Television is a business. Hollywood is a business. So many people believe that that had to have factored in to this decision, even if they don't want to publicly say that that factored into the decision.
[16:40:06]
And especially in the wake of, you know, say, the Target boycott. People are starting to understand that their dollars mean something in corporate America, and that that is the power that people have. And so, they exercise their power, Kasie.
HUNT: All right. Lisa France, thank you very much for that.
Molly ball, the big picture here. Well, let's watch a little bit of Howard Stern who talked about canceling his own Disney plus, et cetera, subscription. I don't think he has little kids, any, like I -- you know, if you're -- if you're -- I'm the mom of little kids. Like, good luck to me if I want to. You know, I'm not in the business of making political statements, obviously, but couldn't make that one if I wanted to. Let's watch Howard Stern.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HOWARD STERN, RADIO HOST: Someone's got to step up and be (EXPLETIVE DELETED) saying, hey, enough. We're not going to bow. Now, it might sound stupid, but the thing I did this morning, I'm canceling my Disney plus. I'm trying to say with the pocketbook that I do not support what they're doing with Jimmy. Problem solved. All I had to do is mention I was canceling my subscription.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: All it took was your threat.
STERN: What should we fix today, Robin? Global warming. I'm on a roll.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: What was the political arc of this for ABC? Because obviously, in the beginning, you know, the emotions around Charlie Kirk were extraordinarily raw. But the reaction to their decision about how to deal with Kim in the aftermath to Lisa's point, the temperature was getting hotter.
BALL: Well, and I think that what media companies and really every company has learned in this polarized era is its very hard not to pick a side. This administration is going to force you to pick a side and be with them. If you're a comedian in particular, the days when you could just sort of be an equal opportunity offender and not be seen as a member of either tribe, you know, you've got the president of the United States out there going. The problem is, he only makes fun of me.
And then you have, you know, other networks have shows where they only make fun of Democrats, and people want that sort of comfort food in their media. We may just be too polarized to society at this point for any company or any comedian to actually be in that space in the middle where people of different political tribes can want to patronize them, want to appreciate what they're saying, want to congregate in the same place and laugh at the same things.
HOLMES: I do think that they this statement that they put out was really well thought out, the way that they talked about the rawness, as you mentioned, after Charlie Kirk and where the country was and then talked about the thoughtful conversations and made it seem as though they were giving a window into the decision that they made beforehand. And now to put Jimmy back on TV. I think people actually appreciate that, regardless of I can't say what's true or not true behind closed doors, but I do think people appreciate when you are honest about, or at least seemingly honest about why things played out the way they did.
HUNT: Dan, how do you think ABC has handled this?
KOH: I think it is madness when we view people trying out there to try to justify this. To your point, this shouldn't be a red or blue issue. It should be very simple. Should you be able to speak your mind without retribution from the government? This is a government that is controlling law firms, media companies, educational institutions and silencing opposition at the end of the day.
And it's because of the money on the table from Nexstar with their billion dollar merger, and that Disney lost their $4 billion in market cap that is causing all of this action. They're afraid of the government. It's exactly what Donald Trump.
MEIJER: Who was silenced. Nobody silenced. We're not --
KOH: Jimmy Kimmel was taken off the air. You have universities afraid to speak their mind. You have research being completely defunded.
(CROSSTALK)
MEIJER: The blue and the red division, every single one of the reasons why the FCC has a role is because these are broadcast stations with a monopoly that was granted by the government.
KOH: You feel good about that?
MEIJER: No.
KOH: Do you feel --
MEIJER: I would hate it if the federal government came in and said, you may not say that. The reason why Jimmy Kimmel got himself into the first place is he was repeating a lie believed by 1 in 3 Democrats that the person who assassinated Charlie Kirk.
KOH: He did not say it right of center beliefs. He did not say that.
MEIJER: We can parse his verbiage all day long if he comes out and says, listen, that was not what I was trying to say. Thank you. Fantastic. I appreciate that, Mr. Kimmel.
The problem is, that is believed, and we have spent way more time treating Jimmy Kimmel as a victim than the person who was shot and killed in front of their wife and children.
KOH: Let me ask you a question. If Joe Biden took down a prominent right wing personality on TV for what he or she said, would you endorse that?
MEIJER: Your hypothetical if the Biden administration went and jawboned let's say social media platforms.
KOH: I'm talking about a similar category of someone on TV.
MEIJER: Hundreds of conservatives.
KOH: Would you answer my question?
MEIJER: No. That is literally what the administration you served did. Google just released --
KOH: A broadcast TV host taken down for words that they say or intimidated on. I will not approve the merger of --
[16:45:04]
MEIJER: In the history of the FCC, they have done that plenty of times on the right.
KOH: Was the FCC chair saying, we're going to do this the easy way or the hard way, like a mobster? Where they?
MEIJER: Your administration de-platformed and kicked off of social media. You want to talk about actually silencing, having any single public outlet that you have on allowed to broadcast something, right? Jimmy Kimmel could go on MSNBC tomorrow. He's going back on ABC tonight. This man has not been silenced.
Charlie Kirk been silenced because he's dead. A lot of conservatives were silenced on social media platforms because the government threatened those social media companies. Facebook, Google, Twitter. You can go down all the list. YouTube again, just acknowledged to Congress today that they did that at the behest of the Biden administration.
KOH: So, do you endorse what happened to Jimmy Kimmel?
MEIJER: No, I don't, but I don't care about Jimmy Kimmel.
HUNT: We are running out of time.
I mean, Congressman, just to put a fine point on it, it's often been conservatives who think that the FCC has too much power, is too involved in things. Are you there? I mean, do you think the FCC is abusing its power here?
MEIJER: I would love the FCC to go away.
HUNT: Okay. Fair enough. That is the old school conservative position. We're just, you know, living in this world that we're living in right now.
Lisa France, thank you again very much for being with us. I really appreciate it.
And coming up next, more on the president's announcement related to autism. What you need to know. We will talk to a doctor, an expert. See you soon.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:50:48]
HUNT: All right. Welcome back.
A top Republican senator now challenging President Trump's announcement yesterday linking autism to Tylenol use during pregnancy.
Senator Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, himself, a doctor, wrote this today on the platform X: quote, "HHS should release the new data that it has to support this claim. The preponderance of evidence shows that this is not the case. The concern is that women will be left with no options to manage pain in pregnancy. We must be compassionate to this problem."
And today, if you go to Tylenol's website, you receive this popup. It says this, quote, "We stand with science and we stand with you."
Joining us now is Dr. Edith Bracho-Sanchez. She is a pediatrician. She's assistant professor of pediatrics at Columbia University Medical Center.
Doctor, I want to let you share your own personal story. But for women out there, I've had -- I was pregnant twice. You know, with two babies. My two beautiful children. I read anything I could get my eyeballs on that would tell me what was safe and what was not safe during pregnancy. And there are millions of women out there who are trying to figure out who to listen to here, and what is true.
And really what they should be doing is calling their doctor. We're calling you. What should they do?
DR. EDITH BRACHO-SANCHEZ, COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IRVING MEDICAL CENTER: Thank you for having me.
First of all, there's so much confusion out there. We're already hearing from parents of children with autism. Did I cause this by taking Tylenol in my pregnancy? The answer is no. Just a loud, clear, resounding no. You did not cause this. If your child has autism and you took Tylenol in pregnancy, the evidence does not show that.
I have one child already. I have another one on the way. That is my news to share.
HUNT: Congratulations.
BRACHO-SANCHEZ: Listen, a few weeks ago, I was sick. Thank you. I was, I was sick a few weeks ago, Kasie. I felt my temperature rising. I knew I was about to get a fever, and I understand the risks of a fever in pregnancy, which is risk of miscarriage, risk of birth defects.
And I said, no way am I taking that risk. I am taking Tylenol, which is supported by science, to control my fever. And faced with the same choice today, Kasie. That is exactly what I would do.
HUNT: Yeah. So, I mean, just to dig into that a little bit more, I mean, for women who are just grappling with this question, this is not such a simple decision in every single case. Obviously, many women try not to take or ingest anything that you know, that they don't have to when they are pregnant. But in this case, you are literally doing a benefit risk analysis because a fever is dangerous in pregnancy. So, what would you say to a woman who hears on the news?
The president says I shouldn't take Tylenol. It's bad for my baby. But I'm sick. What should I do? What should they do?
BRACHO-SANCHEZ: I think the most important message any of us can give right now is talk to your doctor. I think the information coming from the White House has been coming fast and furious. Some of it is flat out misinformation. It is being labeled as such internationally. So, we have to be very clear that we unfortunately cannot just take everything coming out at face value right now. So more than ever, I think the message right now has to be speak with your doctor again. When it comes to a fever, the risk of not treating are serious and we have to weigh the benefits of taking Tylenol in that case.
And again, faced with the same choice, I would take Tylenol again, knowing what I know and knowing where the scientific evidence is today, Kasie.
HUNT: I want to play for our panel here. This was -- there's a mother and you mentioned moms who have kids with autism, and she's talking about the potential stigma. She may feel like she faces. Let's watch.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It's so scary to think that were now going to be creating a stigma against moms. What did you do when you were pregnant to cause -- to cause, and I can't even say it -- cause your child to have autism. Our main focus should be on the supports and the therapies and supporting our children of all needs and abilities.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: I mean, there is -- I want to bring Molly Ball, political reporter, to this conversation.
Molly, the elements, there are political elements layered on top of this. As far as, you know, judgment of moms. And, you know, Bill Cassidy spoke to that a little bit, saying, hey, like, we need to give -- we need to be compassionate here.
BALL: Bill Cassidy is clearly someone who understands that women have the right to vote in this country and don't love hearing a message from men who are not doctors that says, you just have to suffer because it doesn't affect us.
[16:55:12]
And even if the science doesn't support it, you just have to suffer for the sake of an imaginary potential harm to your baby.
HUNT: All right, dr. Edith Bracho-Sanchez, thank you very much for bringing your expertise to us. I really appreciate it.
Don't go anywhere. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HUNT: All right. Thanks to my panel. Thanks to all of you at home for joining. If you missed any of today's show, you can always catch up by listening to the podcast. You can scan the QR code below on your screen. Follow wherever you get your podcasts. You can also follow the show on X and Instagram. We are @TheArenaCNN.
Erica Hill is standing by. She is in for Jake Tapper.
Hi, Erica.
