Return to Transcripts main page

CNN NewsNight with Abby Phillip

Trump Says, Biden A Worthy Debater, Don't Want To Underestimate; Appeals Court Won't Delay July 1 Start Of Bannon Sentence; A Second Trump Term And The Second Coming Of Christian Nataionalism; "NewsNight" Tackles Louisiana Requiring Ten Commandments; Ambassador Bolton Weighs In On The Recent Putin-Kim Meeting. Aired 10-11p ET

Aired June 20, 2024 - 22:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[22:00:00]

ELLISTON BERRY, TEEN VICTIM OF A.I. DEEPFAKE NUDE IMAGES: It's still so scary as these images are off Snapchat, but that does not mean that they are not on students phones. And every day I've had to live with the fear of these photos getting brought up or resurfacing. And by this bill getting passed, I will no longer have to live in fear knowing that whoever does bring these images up will be punished.

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN HOST: Elliston Berry, Anna McAdams, thank you for coming on and for sharing such an important story that can affect so many.

ANNA MCADAMS, MOTHER OF A.I. DEEPFAKE PORN VICTIM: Yes, thank you for getting it out there. The more people to know, the bigger the support can be for this bill.

COLLINS: Thank you both. Thank you so much for joining us. CNN NewsNight with Abby Phillip starts now.

ABBY PHILLIP, CNN HOST: Donald Trump tries to set expectations for both debate possibilities. That's tonight on NewsNight.

Good evening. I'm Abby Phillip in Washington.

Great expectations or not so great expectations. Tonight, new sound from Donald Trump shows that the care that he's putting into a soft landing. Should Joe Biden put him on the canvas at next week's CNN presidential debate? Trump thinks that he will do well and that Biden is in cognitive decline. There's no evidence for that, of course, but Trump also says that Biden is a worthy debater. Just listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP (R), FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT, 2024 PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: All I can say is this. I watched him with Paul Ryan and he destroyed Paul Ryan. Paul Ryan with the water, he was chugging water at a left and right. I didn't think a human being would be able to drink so much water at one time, and he beat Paul Ryan. So, I'm not underestimating him. I'm not underestimating him. It is what it is. We'll see what happens. I assume he's going to be somebody that will be a worthy debater. Yes, I would say so. I don't want to underestimate him.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIP: What's also clear tonight is what the Super Bowl of the political calendar is going to look like. Thanks to a coin flip the stage for next week's showdown that's been set, Joe Biden will appear on screen right. That's what his campaign wanted after winning the toss. Donald Trump will appear on screen left, and he will also go last, delivering the second closing arguments to voters.

Joining me now is Philippe Reines. He is a former spokesperson for Hillary Clinton. He also played Donald Trump in her debate prep. Also with us, Bryan Lanza, former Deputy Communications Director for Donald Trump's 2016 campaign.

Trump is taking this seriously. He's preparing. He's getting briefings. He's in debate prep and it sounds like he's trying to lower expectations.

BRYAN LANZA, FORMER DEPUTY COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR, TRUMP 2016 CAMPAIGN: Listen, I think the challenge he has is really hard to lower expectations with sort of seeing the video of Joe Biden for the last three and a half years. You know, that's what everybody has. It feels like a little bar. I think the challenge that Biden has and the bar that Biden has to meet is defending his economic record.

I think if Trump focuses and puts his target on there, it's a hard bar to defend. But if we get other conversations that have nothing to do with inflation, have nothing to do that affect the middle class, Biden will have a good debate.

PHILLIP: And, look, this is the big thing with Trump is can he stay on message? But the other thing that is going to be a huge part of this debate is what happens with the mics. They're going to be turned off. And both campaigns, I guess, somewhat surprisingly, are okay with that. I'm not surprised Biden loves it, but Trump is okay with it. How will that affect the dynamic on the stage? I mean, you anticipated Trump trying to bulldoze over Hillary Clinton.

PHILIPPE REINES, FORMER HILLARY CLINTON SPOKESMAN: Well, for one, those of us who are trying to watch and actually hear, we'll be able to actually hear what they're saying. Trump might be a little frustrated that while he's yelling at Joe Biden, no one else is going to hear him. I'm sure at some point Trump will --

PHILLIP: Yes. I mean, it's not going to be --

REINES: Yes. Only 1 of the 90 million of us will hear what Donald Trump is muttering.

It's good. It's sad that it has to be that way. It's good that it is that way. If you look back at the first debate in 2020, it's clear that it has to be that way. Otherwise, they're just going to talk each other. I mean, these, these two guys don't like each other. They don't like each other. And it showed they were getting pretty nasty with each other.

The idea -- I mean, this is a debate. The idea that Donald Trump kind of practices, kind of preps, not really, a debate is an argument, it's a disagreement. Donald Trump has been preparing for debates for 78 years. I mean, this is what he does.

LANZA: He games them out. He sets up his own talk.

REINES: He is a human debater. He walks around. He's a moving debate stage.

PHILLIP: But it's the discipline or lack thereof that could be a real problem for him. I mean, you kind of hit the nail on the head. If he focuses on an economic message, you can see victory for him. But Donald Trump, you get him talking for 90 seconds, and he'll probably hit like six or seven topics that are totally unrelated, maybe, to what he's supposed to be talking about.

LANZA: Listen, that becomes a challenge. But I think at the end of the day, you know, if President Trump sort of focused on the contrasting record of the two, you know, because there's a lot.

[22:05:03]

In 2000, you didn't have two presidential records to compare. In 2020, we didn't have those records. In 2024, Joe Biden has a presidential record. He has an economic record as president. He has an economic record on the world stage, and President Trump has an economic record as president. He has an economic record on the world stage.

So, there is plenty of ammunition that President Trump can do to compare the two records to say you are better off four years ago than you are today. Just look at inflation. Just look at the wars that are taking place. That didn't exist four years ago.

So, there is more ammunition. Trump was on the defensive with COVID. People were criticizing COVID. They weren't criticizing his governorship before COVID. They're criticizing the response. Now, everybody's criticizing Joe Biden's shepherdship of this of this economy, of inflation, and he's failed it. So, Trump has a lot of ammunition. If he hits it, he's going to hit it hard.

REINES: I think it's important to remember, Donald Trump doesn't come in with a strategy. He comes in with a list. He comes in with a list of things that are pent up that he wants to say. He does that daily, but particularly to Joe Biden, who he hasn't seen in person in nearly 1,400 days. He's going to come in and he wants to talk about immigration. He wants to pound on his trials, on DOJ hunting him, on all the things that he's aggrieved about.

Now, the question is, and the list that Bryan said, the question is the order. Does he come out and does he immediately start saying, your Department of Justice is coming after me, Jack Smith is a moron, everyone knows that it's illegal, what's going on in New York, this judge, or does he come out and say, twice as many people are coming through the border than when I was president? PHILLIP: But what does Biden do? I mean, you have prepped Hillary Clinton. How should he tactically approach Trump next week?

REINES: Well, it really depends. First of all, it depends on what the question is. I mean, there's a responsibility with the moderator to start. If the question is, sir, X question about immigration, and Donald Trump starts talking about Russia and Mueller and porn stars, then it's, sir, I asked you about immigration.

But to answer your question more specifically, if he starts ranting about something else, you want to find your home base. So, if Donald Trump starts talking about his various legal issues, you know, there's a through line there. This is someone who is breaking the law, who has been found guilty of felonies, who says that nearly a thousand people who were found guilty of insurrection and other related crimes on January 6th should go free and that his trials are bogus, you've got someone there who's basically saying, I don't believe justice and law applies to me. And that's a topic that Joe Biden feels very strongly about. So, if you're Joe Biden, you bring it back there.

LANZA: Well, if you're Joe Biden, you cannot talk about the economy and you can't talk about immigration.

PHILLIP: That's not true.

LANZA: It's 100 percent true.

PHILLIP: I mean, I'm just saying, just in terms of --

LANZA: How do you defend your inflation record? You're 0 for 36 in bringing down inflation numbers to your own goal. Joe Biden set a goal of 2 percent of hitting inflation. He's not hit a single month that he is president. How does he defend that? How does he defend that against Trump? Or Trump said, I didn't have this inflation issue --

PHILLIP: Here's what I'm saying is that --

REINES: And has President Trump defend not creating jobs of 15 million? Oh, Bryan is going to say I had COVID. But then Donald Trump's going to say COVID didn't really exist. COVID wasn't real, but somehow COVID prevented him from the economy. I mean, it's going to spiral out of control.

LANZA: And I think with COVID, what Donald Trump says, listen, the reason COVID, the reason the economy restarted again, it's because COVID concluded and COVID concluded because a vaccine came.

REINES: So everything that happened on my watch, Donald Trump watch, is because of other things that I can't control, everything good that happens on Joe Biden is Donald Trump.

LANZA: Do you blame Donald Trump for COVID?

REINES: I blame him for the way he handled COVID, for what he's saying that COVID is going to go away.

PHILLIP: It will be interesting to see whether he tests the vaccine.

REINES: You and I were on T.V. last weekend and you said the vaccine didn't work.

LANZA: I said it did work. I said we should thank Donald Trump for the vaccine.

PHILLIP: What is Donald Trump going to say about the vaccine given that so many of his supporters think it's basically evil?

REINES: Well, he even admitted he took it.

LANZA: You can't deny it. He actually took it.

REINES: Let's just be thankful he showed up (INAUDIBLE). The last time he showed up, he had COVID.

LANZA: If he's talking about COVID, it's a lost discussion. He needs to be talking about immigration. He needs to be talking about the economy. He needs to be talking about inflation. He needs to be talking about Joe Biden's policies, where he reversed all the executive orders along the border, which President Trump had, which restricted a significant amount of people coming.

If he's talking about COVID, if he's talking about his grievances with Russia, if he's talking about Mueller, it is a lost debate. There is plenty of ammunition for Donald Trump to have this conversation and make the case that Joe Biden has failed the American people on an array of issues that matter. Let's talk about that.

PHILLIP: Okay. I got one last thing for you guys. There's a lot of campaign finance stuff happening this week. But to me, the one important thing, Trump is ahead in terms of how much money he raised after the verdict in New York. But one thing that they won't say in the Trump campaign is how much cash they have on hand, and the Biden campaign has noticed that.

[22:10:05]

Do you think it's because they've been spending a lot of money on Trump's legal fees?

LANZA: They're spending a lot of money on everything, and they're going to continue to spend a lot of money on everything. But I would say this, one of the results of the trial that took place is Joe Biden had a financial advantage, a fundraising advantage before the trial. After the trial, the financial advantage is wiped out.

So, it's positive and negative for Trump. You remember the Democrats are talking about how if Trump was found guilty, he's going to lose 20 percent of the Republican vote. This is going to be our election. He's now -- Emerson poll just came out today that shows him winning, you know, seven swing states. So, I think the dream scenario that we predicted that would take place, at least the Democrats were ready to take place, is not happening. And the fundraising, the money is coming in, and that's a good thing. REINES: I'm going to end on a bipartisan agreement with Bryan by saying Joe Biden has an absolute advantage by not being found guilty of 34 felonies and therefore not have to spend a hundred million dollars of his country contributors money to defend himself. That is why he has more money. He has more support among small donors.

And if you remember in 2020, Donald Trump had a very, very high burn rate at the time. It took a lot of money for him to raise money from small donors. Now, in this case, luckily, as we saw tonight, he has several very large donors, which both campaigns do. I don't think money is going to be the dispositive difference between these candidates. They're both going to be well-funded.

PHILLIP: Plenty to go around. Philippe Reines, Bryan Lanza, thank you both very much.

And breaking moments ago, Steve Bannon is going to prison in ten days, an appeals court tonight refusing to delay the start of his sentence for contempt of Congress. Meanwhile, he is casually promising to use the power of the government to settle personal scores if Trump is elected.

Bannon isn't just satisfied with generally suggesting revenge, he is naming names.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

STEVE BANNON, FORMER WHITE HOUSE CHIEF STRATEGIST, TRUMP ADMINISTRATION: Why is Andrew McCabe, Mr. Tough Guy, Mr. FBI Tough Guy, why is he wetting himself on national T.V.? He's damn scared because he understands the end is near.

Get your passport, get the hell out of the country, because, hey, we're coming, we're going to grab the long arm of the law, going to grab you back, bro.

We will hunt you down and bring you back and you will stand accountable before the American people.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIP: Earlier tonight, for the first time, Andrew McCabe responded to that.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANDREW MCCABE, CNN SENIOR LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST: I know what to expect. It's not about me. I'll be fine. It's about people who will be experiencing this for the first time, and more importantly, their families.

Like I talk to former officials, and everyone is in the same place. Like we are still committed to this country and seeing this through. We still have faith in the systems that are that are built to protect the rights of every American. But that's a hard thing to explain to your family when they're thinking, you know, basically, they don't want to have to live in this kind of fear and terror for another four years.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIP: Joining me now to discuss this is CNN Anchor Jim Acosta. Jim, I mean, Steve Bannon is sort of a -- he's kind of a cosplayer of something, but what he's talking about seems very real. And I think it sounds like Andrew McCabe and many others around him, people who were involved in investigations that Trump wants payback for, they are taking this seriously.

JIM ACOSTA, CNN ANCHOR: Yes. And I wonder if some of this has to do with what you just read a few moments ago that Bannon has lost another opportunity to appeal his case. It looks like he's going to be going to prison in ten days on July 1st, unless the Supreme Court intervenes, and he's been slowly ratcheting up his rhetoric. He's been calling Election Day this year accountability day. He's been talking about going after enemies or perceived enemies and opponents of former President Donald Trump on his podcast, which, you know, for some reason, is still going. He still has this war room podcast going.

And let's not forget, he was the one who was ratcheting things up right before January 6th. And you and I both know, because we covered the White House together, Bannon was a very important strategist to Donald Trump when he was president of the United States. I mean, I wrote about this in my book, came out five years ago. This is how long we've been dealing with all this, that Bannon and Trump sat together and came up with the idea of using the term enemy of the people to go after the press.

And so Trump and Bannon have been sort of partners in crime in this sort of intimidation game that's been going on for six or seven years. If you're in the press, if you're an opponent, perceived enemy of the president, former president, they're going to come after you and they know the stakes in all of this, Abby. We know this all too well. Back in 2018, there was a pipe bomber named Cesar Sayoc sending pipe bombs to CNN and other folks that the president at that time was targeting out in the press. And a lot of this gets ratcheted up because of the rhetoric that Trump and Bannon uses.

PHILLIP: You know well that there are plenty of countries in this world where people who are afraid of political prosecutions have to leave.

[22:15:01]

ACOSTA: Yes.

PHILLIP: They have to pick up their families and they have to leave. In this country, we've never been at that brink before. But what Andy McCabe is saying, what Liz Cheney is saying and others, is that we're there, people.

ACOSTA: Yes.

PHILLIP: Do you think that that's an exaggeration or is it real? ACOSTA: I mean, you do hear people in the press talk about this. I mean, I dealt with threats. There are other folks in the press who were covering Donald Trump when he was in the White House, dealt with threats. Abby, you probably have heard some of this when you've talked to people around D.C. and in politics and in media, you do run into people from time to time. I've talked to former Trump officials who have said, I'm thinking about moving out of the country if he gets back into the White House, because I've been outspoken in talking about Donald Trump.

So, I mean, the threat is real.

PHILLIP: And the next time around, I think people fear there's not going to be a recourse.

ACOSTA: That's right. And part of that is because, and Andy McCabe was saying, well, our institutions will hold and so on, and we all hope that that's the case. But Trump has talked about this. His aides and allies have been talking about this. It's been reported that they plan on stalking the federal government, in particular the Department of Justice, with people that Donald Trump can count on to exact this campaign of retribution that he's been campaigning on out on the trail this entire year.

PHILLIP: Yes, all right. Jim Acosta, great to see you. Thank you very much.

ACOSTA: Good to see you.

PHILLIP: And Jim will be in the chair for Laura Coates at the top of the hour. Stick with us for that.

And breaking tonight, the revelation that Trump's favorite judge refused pleas from two federal judges to step aside from the documents case due to her inexperience.

Plus, two Louisiana lawmakers join me to debate the state now requiring the Ten Commandments in classrooms.

And a tense situation is developing in space. Why NASA astronauts are stuck there, and how Boeing is involved.

This is NewsNight.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[22:21:22]

PHILLIP: Tonight, the second coming of Christian nationalism and what it means for every American institution. The latest flashpoint is in Louisiana. That state's governor, Jeff Landry, signed a law requiring the Ten Commandments to be prominently billed in every public classroom. He did it to cheers.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) GOV. JEFF LANDRY (R-LA): This bill mandates the display of the Ten Commandments in every classroom, in public, elementary, secondary, and post-education schools in the state of Louisiana, because if you want to respect the rule of law, you got to start from the original law giver, which was Moses.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIP: Landry has laid down an open invitation to sue him. And he wants this to land in the Supreme Court, obviously, a forum where Christian groups have found green grass and welcome mats for their causes.

What we're watching in Louisiana is part of a broader crusade to dissolve that line between church and state. The crusaders are Christian nationalists. First, here is what Christian nationalism actually is. Two prominent sociologists described it this way. A cultural framework that blurs distinctions between Christian identity and American identity, viewing the two as closely related and seeking to enhance and preserve their union.

Now, Donald Trump uses this as almost a throwaway line when he talks about religious groups.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: The radical left is coming after all of us because they know that our allegiance is not to them, our allegiance is to our country and our allegiance is to our creator.

We have to bring back our religion. We have to bring back Christianity in this country.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIP: His ultra Christian nationalist allies want you to see secularism as wrong and God's will as the mandate of the government. For proof, just look at some of the writings from these groups, documents like the Statement of Principles from something called National Conservatism, quote, where a Christian majority exists, public life should be rooted in Christianity and its moral vision, which should be honored by the state and other institutions, both public and private.

A religious doctrine honored by the state sounds nothing like separation. It's marriage, a marriage that the founders would not have blessed, a marriage focused on tearing down the walls between God and governance. Christian nationalists feel that they are called to rule over all facets of society. Some, including Trump's spiritual adviser Paula White, believe in something called the Seven Mountain Mandate. It outlines the seven areas of life that should be forever and unbreakably linked to the Christian nationalist version of God's law, family, church, education, media, arts, business, government.

It's clear that they've started in the schools in Louisiana and elsewhere, like Phoenix. A new CNN investigation uncovered what religious billionaires see as a model to import religious education into public schools, using your tax dollars. Arizona has a voucher system for families, what the state labeled as education savings accounts. It redirects money that would have gone to public schools to wherever families choose to spend it. And they've disproportionately been spent on unregulated private schools.

Now, this is no accident.

[22:25:00]

It is the byproduct of decades of Christian nationalist lobbying. Nearly a dozen states have laws on the books that are similar and have similar policies. The group at the forefront of this is an organization called the American Federation for Children. They have a familiar face atop its perch. It's Betsy DeVos. She was Donald Trump's former education secretary. Internal documents showed that they funneled $250 million over the last 13 years to advance their causes. They also have a lot of cash to burn, and their plan is to spend it on elections, everywhere they can, on hundreds of races this November. That's what the group told CNN.

Joining me now are Louisiana State Representatives Lauren Ventrella. She is a Republican. She co-authored the Ten Commandments bill. Also with us, Kyle Green, he is a Democrat who voted against that bill. Lauren and Kyle, thank you both very much for joining us.

Lauren, I want to start with you. If your son or daughter had a Jewish or Muslim teacher who chose to hang one of their own religious texts on a poster in their classroom right next to the Ten Commandments, would you have a problem with that?

REP. LAUREN VENTRELLA (R-LA): Hey, thanks for having me tonight. It's a great night in Louisiana because I know tomorrow morning, the Ten Commandments are going to be proudly displayed in the classroom.

Look, this bill is not about a Muslim text or any other text. This bill is simply about the Ten Commandments. And that's what I don't have a problem with hanging in the classroom, and that's why I voted in favor of this bill.

PHILLIP: Well, I know that it's not about anything other than the religious text that you subscribe to, but I'm wondering if this word, done, for any other religious text, one that perhaps the teacher said was another historical document, you know, a Muslim text, a Hindu text, would you have a problem with that?

VENTRELLA: Thank you for your question. And, again, you know, we could pose a thousand hypotheticals, but the piece of legislation that was brought to the table to the state of Louisiana was specifically regarding the Ten Commandments. You're giving me a scenario that can't be specifically addressed without knowing more of the details. I can only speak to the details regarding this specific bill that we enacted that I am knowledgeable and educated about on this subject. This is the bill. This is the bill that the state of Louisiana wanted and we enacted with a resounding positive yes. PHILLIP: Well, look, I mean, it's, it's a hypothetical, I guess, to you, but it's not a hypothetical to many parents, you know, who are not Christian, who have kids go to public schools in your state. That's the law that you voted for. Don't you have a responsibility to think about that scenario if the legislature tomorrow decided to do the same thing for another faith, would you be okay with that?

VENTRELLA: So, look, if the legislature tomorrow if somebody brought a bill to try to enact one of these other religious texts that you're mentioning, I would take the same consideration that I took with this text to look at. In accordance with the Kennedy decision, as you know, the court recently overturned the Lemon decision which Justice Scalia called a ghoul in a horror show at one point in time. So, thank God we put that thing to bed. We're now looking at the Kennedy decision.

I would apply that same reasoning to make that decision. And the reasoning here under the Kennedy decision is we have to look at the historical context, the historical practices. And specifically speaking to the bill that we passed in the state of Louisiana, I am confident and secure in my decision that I voted in favor of this bill and co-authored this legislation, that this legislation is, in fact, constitutional and will be supported by the state of Louisiana.

PHILLIP: Kyle, the state of Louisiana. I mean, part of the reason this is happening is, it's true, the state is overwhelmingly Christian. Do you think that outside of your colleagues and some we've had a teacher on last night that there will be any blowback for all of this?

STATE REP. KYLE GREEN (D-LA): I think they will, Abby, and thank you for having me. So, I, I was just made aware that the ACLU has actually filed suit against House Bill 71. And so what this bill seeks to do is to overturn the Stone v. Graham case, which was decided by the Supreme Court in 1980, which basically overruled what the state of Kentucky attempted to do in having the Ten Commandments posted in their classroom. And the reason why they basically shut Kentucky down was because it said that it had no legislative secular purpose and it also was plainly religious in nature.

And so in Louisiana, we know that this bill has no secular legislative purpose, and it is also plainly religious. And we know that because of what the debate that occurred both on the House floor and in committee, where the author indicated that this bill was brought on behalf of religious liberty.

[22:30:03]

And the purpose of the bill was that our children should look up and see what God says is right and what he says is wrong. There's no other basis other than religion and in the fact that we have, you know, my colleagues I serve with are attempting to basically infuse religious indoctrination into our private schools.

PHILLIP: How is this not religious indoctrination, Lauren?

VENTRELLA: I'm glad to see my friend Representative Green here with me. It's clearly not religious indoctrination and I have to disagree with my colleague. The reason being, again, like I previously stated and I did state in my debate on the House floor, look at the historical context of the document. The document itself is specifically written in its form that is maybe a bit confusing to some when they read it.

It's in one of the old forms that's one of the original interpretations of the text. And the reason for that is to preserve the fundamental, the classic interpretation of this document. It's based off of our moral fiber in this country.

PHILLIP: I'm sorry, I'm not understanding what you're saying. Are you saying that the Ten Commandments are the basis for the moral fiber of the country? What is -- on what basis are you saying that?

VENTRELLA: Yes, yes. So, you specifically asked me how would this not be religious indoctrination

PHILLIP: Right, yeah. I mean it's a religious, it's a religious text. So, what does that have to do with the founding of this country in terms of the moral, I mean I don't even know what that means, the moral founding of this country.

VENTRELLA: Yeah, and thank you for your question. In Louisiana we believe in faith, family, and freedom and we believe that this country was founded on that. You can look at the walls of the Supreme Court, they even have a picture of the Ten Commandments. This is not something that's so preposterous to say that this country, that its original laws, look, endowed by our Creator. I mean that is something that is historical. We know it is important to this nation. So, it's historical in nature. It's not religious.

PHILLIP: What does that have to do with it? I mean, to be honest -- to be honest, Lauren, I'm just trying to understand. You're trying to claim that this is secular. It's very clear that the Ten Commandments is religious. In fact, the governor, when he signed the bill, he made it about religion, about faith.

So, it is about faith at the end of the day and you're going to have to defend that in court. I mean, as your colleague just pointed out, the courts have already ruled on almost exactly this same issue. Are you confident that now, suddenly, they will completely change course?

VENTRELLA: Yes. So, actually the Fifth Circuit ruled on a case in conjunction with a Kennedy decision, because you have to remember, this is a new bench. This is a new precedent that the court has stated. So, when they made that decision, you have to look at -- look at --

PHILLIP: When you're saying a new bench, you're talking about the Supreme Court? Is that what you're referring to?

VENTRELLA: That's correct. That's correct. The Lemon decision was completely different. Now, it is a different bench. The Fifth Circuit actually ruled a court -- a court down in the South, was opening their courthouse in prayer. And the court -- Fifth Circuit looked and upheld that this is something that is historical in nature. We pray as a nation. Our legislature, in fact, still opens with prayer.

And so, again, if you look at the document with the Ten Commandments, and look, "In God, We Trust" is on the dollar bill. If I had one right now, I'd show you. "In God, We Trust", there are certain things that resonate with this country, certain things that resonate with this state.

PHILLIP: "In God, We Trust" was put on the dollar bill in the '50s -- the 1950s, not the 1850s or the 1750s -- the 1950s. So, it's not an original, you know, document of the United States government. That's not a great argument.

VENTRELLA: Well, it's still on our dollar bill, no matter how you want to look at it. It's still there every day. But again, I want to turn back to the purpose of this bill. The importance of this bill and what needs to be highlighted is that we are in no way trying to indoctrinate or force religion on students. We are merely putting it there as an option, as a choice.

There is so much doom and gloom in this country. There's an uptick in crime. What is so preposterous and terrible --

PHILLIP: Well, let me give --

VENTRELLA: -- that we're being sued for putting something that's merely a moral compass that all of us should live by?

PHILLIP: I'll give Kyle a quick last word. We are out of time. But your reaction to what you just heard your colleagues say.

[22:35:00]

GREEN: Well, Lauren's a dear friend and a law school classmate. We had class together. We served on committees together. But there's an area of disagreement for us. And so, you know, I think that as a parent, if I'm going to send my child to public school, I want them to be educated on everything but religion. If I wanted them to be educated on religion, I'd send them to a private school that teaches religion.

And so, I think this bill is blatantly unconstitutional. If it were to satisfy constitutional muster, then they should have included other documents such as the Code of Hammurabi or the Magna Carta, things of that nature to satisfy, you know, the Stone v. Graham case.

But it does not. It's clear based on the testimony and committee and on the House floor that this bill, that the basis of it is for religious indoctrination. And as a result of that, I think that the Supreme Court, if it gets that far, will basically uphold their judicial precedent.

PHILLIP: All right. Louisiana State Representatives Lauren Ventrella and also Kyle Green, thank you both very much for joining us.

GREEN: Thank you for having me.

VENTRELLA: Thank you for having me. PHILLIP: She's the controversial judge who's overseeing Donald Trump's

documents case in Florida. But we are learning that almost wasn't the case. The surprising new revelations ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[22:40:43]

PHILLIP: Tonight, a pretty stunning revelation involving Donald Trump's favorite judge. "The New York Times" reports that Aileen Cannon rejected pleas from two federal judges to step aside from this documents case due to her inexperience. It turns out that they saw the future. Legal scholars, both liberal and conservatives, have criticized her decisions and rulings so far in this case. And now, there is a hearing in her courtroom tomorrow that my next guest says could backfire on Judge Cannon.

Judge LaDoris Hazzard Cordell, a former California Superior Court judge and author of "Her Honor: My Life on the Bench", joins me now. Judge, thank you for joining us. What was your reaction to hearing that these two senior judges took the extraordinary step of asking Judge Cannon to step aside?

LADORIS HAZZARD CORDELL, FORMER JUDGE, CALIFORNIA SUPERIOR COURT: Well, first, thank you for having me on, Abby. There's a quasi legal term that came to my mind when I heard about all this, and it's a hot mess. Judge Aileen Cannon has managed to take a straightforward classified documents case and turn it on its head with delay after delay, with bizarre rulings and a bizarre hearing that will take place tomorrow and probably take all day.

So, you know, what is extraordinary about this is that the conversation that the judges had among themselves is now public knowledge, because generally, conversations among judges in the courthouse, what's in the courthouse, stays in the courthouse.

And so, we now know, those of us who are thinking, well, she's inexperienced and what is she doing? We now know that her colleagues who are more experienced than she feel the same way. So, it is just to me, you know, appalling, one, that she did not take their advice and transfer the case. And in addition, the building to house the classified documents already existed in another jurisdiction in Florida, in Miami.

And so, that's another reason they said, get the case, we'll take it there. So, she used taxpayer dollars to build this structure to house these classified documents that cost taxpayers --

HAZZARD CORDELL: Go right ahead.

PHILLIP: Talk to us about this hearing tomorrow. I mean, what do you think could happen here? She's set this hearing about the disqualification of special counsel Jack Smith. Could it backfire on her? Well, you know, the argument that Trump is making is that the appointment of special counsel is unconstitutional. That motion, that argument is ridiculous. And yet she said a hearing.

It's going to go all day because she's invited third parties who have opinions about all this to weigh in and file tons of briefs and everything. So, the only way this backfires is if she finally makes a decision about something. You see, Jack Smith could appeal it. He could maybe go to the 11th Circuit once the judge makes a ruling.

But here's what she's done. I mean, she's basically stopped making decisions. She'll hold a hearing and yet not make decisions. So, if you don't have a decision, there's nothing to appeal. So, is she inexperienced or does she know exactly what she's doing?

And by the way, if she is removed some way, and I think the 11th Circuit could do that, they could just transfer the case. I think they could now that this information is out there. She may have accomplished what she wanted to do all along, which is delay this case so that it cannot be heard before the election.

PHILLIP: All right. Judge LaDoris Hazzard Cordell, thank you very much. Great to have you on the show.

HAZZARD CORDELL: Sure. Thank you.

PHILLIP: And up next for us, new U.S. fears of a full-blown war between Israel and Hezbollah. I'm going to speak with Trump's former national security advisor, John Bolton, to get his take on it.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[22:48:57]

PHILLIP: New sound tonight from Donald Trump on the war in Gaza, once again making this claim about the October 7th attack.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT (R) AND CURRENT PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE (R): But when you look at what happened now and you see what's going on, it's very -- very sad. That attack would have never happened in a million years. Iran didn't have the money for Hamas. They didn't have the money for Hezbollah.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIP: This comes at a truly perilous time. Tonight, Israel is now concerned about a full-blown war in the north with Hezbollah and that the Iron Dome may not hold up. Let's bring in his former National Security Advisor to discuss. Ambassador John Bolton is here with us. Ambassador, thank you for joining us.

JOHN BOLTON, FORMER AMBASSADOR TO THE UNITED NATIONS: Glad to be with you.

PHILLIP: Do you agree with Trump's assessment there? Do you think that the Israel war in the north with Hezbollah is inevitable?

BOLTON: Well, I think Trump is, again, making a statement that's neither verifiable nor disprovable because it's purely imaginative.

[22:50:00]

What is unfolding, what has been unfolding in the Middle East since October the 7th, though, is the Iranian ring of fire strategy. And it may not be going very well for them on the Gaza front. But this threat from Hezbollah has existed for a long time. They've got a massive stockpile of missiles that they've accumulated over a long period of time, including substantial amounts before Biden took office.

So, the capability that Hezbollah has to overwhelm Israel's air defenses has been known for some time. It's been a threat for some time. And while they look for ways to perhaps launch a preemptive strike against those arsenals, obviously, it's been on their minds since October the 7th that this might be the time when Israel does face what it has now, multiple fronts in a comprehensive strategy launched by Tehran.

PHILLIP: What do you think, given that we know that the Iron Dome may not be able to handle this, what do you think Israel should be doing right now? Should they be preparing for war or trying to find a way to de-escalate this?

BOLTON: Well, I think they're worried that it's, you know, you can always de-escalate if you surrender. The way that you overwhelm Iron Dome or any missile defense system is fire a lot more missiles than there are anti-missiles. That's the same problem the United States has now with its missile defense system, that it's just not fully where it should be, either protecting the homeland or protecting our deployed forces overseas or our allies.

So, Israel doesn't have a lot of good options. I think it's one reason why they wanted to finish Hamas off in the Gaza Strip and then deal with Hezbollah. They may be reading intelligence that says they're not going to have that option, because if Hezbollah were to launch, say, a massive missile attack on Tel Aviv or Haifa, major civilian locations, the casualties could be devastating.

PHILLIP: On top of all of this, there are these very serious and very public tensions between the White House and Benjamin Netanyahu. Just days after Netanyahu called out the Biden administration over weapons delays, I want you to listen to what the White House said today.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOHN KIRBY, NSC ADVISER FOR STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS (voice-over): Those comments were deeply disappointing and certainly vexing to us, given the amount of support that we have and will continue to provide Prime Minister Netanyahu.

PHILLIP: Is Netanyahu playing a political game here and in the process playing with fire?

BOLTON: Well, I don't think he's playing with fire. He'll be in Washington shortly to address a joint session of Congress. I think what Netanyahu is reflecting is resentment against the unbelievable pressure that the Biden White House has applied to his government on a number of fronts since October the 7th, and I think has led to the situation in Gaza now not being resolved. I don't think in American history we've seen an ally the subject of so much negative pressure by an American administration.

PHILLIP: But Ambassador Bolton, the weapons are not being withheld. So, Netanyahu says they are, but they're not.

BOLTON: Well, they were being withheld. Now, I have to say, I talk to a lot of people in the government here, in Israel. I've heard a lot of things about pressure being put on Israel, including withholding of export licenses of military commodities to Israel. And I think there was a lot more pressure put on in terms of threats and actual withholding or delays of a weapons system.

We'll see. Someday the facts here will come out. But I don't think you can underestimate how difficult the White House has made it for Israel to accomplish its objectives, which I think the White House probably believes are not the right objectives, just afraid to say that publicly.

PHILLIP: Ambassador Bolton, former President Trump said in an interview tonight, he once again praised Kim Jong-un, the North Korean leader. And this comes right after Vladimir Putin and Kim just struck this week a defense deal. I wonder, what does the alliance between, you know, Kim and Putin look like if Trump is elected again? And he seems to constantly want to butter up this dictator.

BOLTON: Well, the Putin-Kim meeting in Korea was really a get-together of two of the people in the world Donald Trump considers his best friends. Remember, he said of Kim Jong-un, we fell in love, and he was happy about that. So, when you see that military partnership, that relationship, the security relationship between Moscow and Pyongyang progressing, and you see the unity, the public display of unity behind Moscow's war against Ukraine, this is definitely something to be worried about.

[22:55:06]

I mean, you hear a lot of Trump advocates trying to reassure people saying the second term is not going to look like the first term, it's going to be a rational foreign policy. I think -- I think that they're deceiving people, perhaps unconsciously, perhaps hoping, but hope isn't the strategy when it comes to Trump. This is the look of American foreign policy, and it's not going to be pretty.

PHILLIP: We are now one week from a debate between former President Trump and President Biden. How are you expecting Trump to behave and perform on that debate stage?

BOLTON: You know, it's a very important question. I acknowledge that. I don't have any idea. Look, he's going to go out and wing it like he does pretty much on everything. His advisors can give him all the tips that he want, that they want to, but what his performance will be, he will decide minute by minute on stage.

ASHER: Ambassador John Bolton, you know him fairly well. Thank you very much for sharing that with us.

BOLTON: Glad to be with you.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)