Return to Transcripts main page
CNN NewsNight with Abby Phillip
Trump Deploys More Troops to D.C. Streets Tonight; Trump Suggests Political Litmus Test for Arts; Trump Says, I'll Host Kennedy Honors Show After Woke Past. "NewsNight" Tackles Trump War On Data; Democrats Now Are Fighting Fire With Fire. Aired 10-11p ET
Aired August 13, 2025 - 22:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[22:00:00]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ABBY PHILLIP, CNN ANCHOR (voice over): Tonight, after comparing Washington to Iraq --
STEPHEN MILLER, WHITE HOUSE DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF FOR POLICY: It's more violent than Baghdad.
PHILLIP: -- the administration makes it look like a war zone, as Donald Trump flirts with the law to keep control.
DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: Well, if it's a national emergency, we can do it without Congress.
PHILLIP: Plus, the president casts himself as the producer, director, and star of a political litmus test for art.
TRUMP: I would say I was about 98 percent involved. No, they all went through me.
PHILLIP: And from mocking in all caps to gold shaming slaps.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The last time I was in a room that got in ugly was Saddam Hussein's toilet.
PHILLIP: The Democrats are taking a sharper tone against Trump.
GOV. J.B. PRITZKER (D-IL): So, it's time to stop apologizing when we're not wrong.
PHILLIP: Live at the table, Scott Jennings, Jillian Michaels, Congressman Ritchie Torres, Julie Roginsky and Elie Honig.
Americans with different perspectives aren't talking to each other, but here, they do.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP (on camera): Good evening. I'm Abby Phillip in New York. Let's get right to what America's talking about, a police state. Tonight, more National Guard troops are on the streets of Washington, D.C., as a White House official tells CNN to expect a significantly higher presence there. And now the Guardsmen won't just be around at night. The official says that they are expanding their enforcement activities to 24/7.
Now remember, under federal law, Trump's takeover of the D.C. Police force is supposed to last no longer than 30 days, but Trump already appears to be pushing the limits of his presidential power.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REPORTER: Are you talking to Congress about extending it or do you believe 30 days is sufficient?
TRUMP: Well, if it's a national emergency, we can do it without Congress, but we expect to be -- to Congress -- before Congress very quickly.
But we're going to want extensions. I don't want to call national emergency. If I have to, I will.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: So, where does that power end in reality? Well, according to Trump's border czar, apparently, it doesn't end at all.
REPORTER: Do you fear though that if a timeframe is set that after 30 days, hey, our authority's over, that then the criminals who took themselves off the streets might come right back?
TOM HOMAN, BORDER CZAR: The president's authority is never over. The president's going to do what he has to do to make this country safe again in every city in this nation. We're the greatest nation on Earth.
REPORTER: Do you think 30 days is enough for that or do you think it would need --
HOMAN: President Trump doesn't have a limitation on his authority to make this country safe again. There's no limitation on that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: That's a pretty bold statement there from an official over at the Department of Homeland Security who's supposed to be dealing with the border, by the way, but is commenting on what's happening on the streets of a major U.S. city.
Elie, first of all, Trump says he can do it without Congress just by declaring an emergency. Is that true? And to Tom Homan's point. Is there a limit to his power in this area?
ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Well, I'll take the easy part of that first. Of course, there's a limit to the president's power. Now, what Donald Trump has done so far is lawful. It's within the Constitution, right? He is the commander-in-chief of the National Guard in D.C., not in the States, but, yes, in D.C. And there's a law in D.C. that allows him to take over the police force for up to 30 days in case of an emergency.
I do find it interesting. I actually thought the mayor was going to sue and say this is not an emergency. That's certainly been her rhetoric. She has not sued. And so the president's declaration stands.
Now, the law says for up to 30 days unless Congress extends it. The question is, is Trump going to try to play sort of tricky with that and say, okay, 30 days, now that's over, now we'll do another 30 days? I mean, I don't think that's how the law is intended.
PHILLIP: Or here's a different emergency. Like, I mean, would he have to declare a different emergency?
HONIG: Right. I think that -- yes, I think he'd have to show a wholly different emergency.
Now, I don't quite know what he means when he says, I'm going to declare a national emergency. He could be referring to the Insurrection Act. But that wouldn't allow him to take over a police force. That would allow him to deploy other states, National Guards and military.
So, it's a little unclear what he means by that. But, look, Trump has declared a lot of emergencies when it comes to tariffs, when it comes to deportations, and he's been challenged in court.
[22:05:01]
And he's, most of the time, prevailed in the courts.
PHILLIP: But here, I think that what you -- that point you just made is really critical. Trump keeps declaring emergencies. He keeps saying that everything is an emergency, giving him extraordinary powers, powers that are supposed to be temporary in many cases, but he's using them in ways that have never been used before.
Where does this end, Scott?
SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, I guess in the case of safety for Washington, D.C., it'll end when it's safe again. I mean, that's -- and Congress may need to get involved here at some point.
PHILLIP: What do you define as safe again?
JENNINGS: Well, what do you define as an acceptable rate of violence in the city?
PHILLIP: No, I mean --
JENNINGS: I mean, the expectation the citizens is they don't want to die or get shot at.
PHILLIP: It's a truly -- I think that's a -- becomes a very important question. How do we define what's safe again means in an American city?
JENNINGS: Well, I think in Washington, D.C., you're going to have to have substantial reductions in violence, substantial reductions in murder, substantial reductions in carjackings. And people are generally going to have to feel like they can walk around and not be under threat all the time.
Now, some of this could be statistical, some of it could just be what the local residents are telling him about their quality of life. Will it be solved in 30 days? Probably not, but they're already making substantial progress. They've had over a hundred arrests since August the 7th when he first brought this up. 43 people were arrested last night. Bad people are being taken off the streets. Illegal weapons are being taken off the streets. So, they're already having some success.
My advice on this as a punditry matter would be, let's see where we are at the end of 30 days, how much progress has have they made, and then Congress, Congressman, can make an assessment at that point about whether this is working and maybe it would help to extend it a little bit.
JULIE ROGINSKY, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: I guess I'm old enough, Scott, to remember when you were appalled, as the rest of us were on January 6th, when he wouldn't --
JENNINGS: Because January 6th happened. Should we not enforce law today?
ROGINSKY: Excuse me.
JENNINGS: Do you want murders to --
ROGINSKY: Let me finish.
(CROSSTALKS)
JENNINGS: The January 6th people now enforcement of --
(CROSSTALKS)
JENNINGS: This is a silly argument.
ROGINSKY: No, let me finish before you make a point about a silly argument.
JENNINGS: Well, it'll be silly, but go ahead.
ROGINSKY: What's -- no. What's silly is you sitting down with Mitch McConnell over Chick-fil-A and lamenting how Donald Trump was putting all of you, including Mitch McConnell, in harm's way. But I guess now you're --
JENNINGS: I wasn't in harm's way. I was in Louisville.
ROGINSKY: No. Your then boss, your friend, Mitch McConnell, certainly was. But, you know, now --
JENNINGS: January 6th was a bad day.
ROGINSKY: Can I finish?
JENNINGS: Murders are also bad.
ROGINSKY: Can I finish?
PHILLIP: Scott, just let her finish.
JENNINGS: Well, if she wants to come out here and take pot shots at me, I'm not going to allow it. It's a stupid argument and I'm not going to allow it.
PHILLIP: Scott, just let her finish. I don't even know that we've even heard the argument.
(CROSSTALKS)
ROGINSKY: Scott, I know you're thirsty for that Senate seat, but let me finish. What I'm going to say --
JENNINGS: Again, I mean, you allow this every night.
PHILLIP: Scott, just give me one second here. Let's just let her finish, please.
ROGINSKY: Okay.
PHILLIP: Just one second.
ROGINSKY: Listen, I know you've got the picking thing going on. But here's what I'm going to say.
JENNINGS: What are you thirsty for? Some kind of relevance out here?
ROGINSKY: No. Well, no, actually, Scott.
JENNINGS: I mean, I don't know what you do for a living.
ROGINSKY: Really, I elect a lot of Democrats. Let me finish my thought here, please. Can I just finish what I was about to say, which is that on January 6th, he could have deployed the National Guard. He chose not to. Now, today, because somebody named Big Balls got beat up, allegedly, he wants to deploy the National Guard to a place that has had a 30-year low in violence.
And we all know that he's doing this because it's a power grab. He could have done this when this district was actually in danger on January 6th, but he didn't. And I think that's what's so offensive. He talks about backing the blue. He talks about law enforcement. He didn't give a damn, Scott. And you agreed back in January 6th, he didn't give a damn about those police officers and about the safety of people in Washington D.C. Today, because he wants a power grab, he's doing this despite the fact that every statistics shows that Washington, D.C., has not been safer in the last 30 years. That's the point.
PHILLIP: How's that going to fly? I mean, when you -- I don't know if this will ever go to a court. Maybe it will if he tries to get some kind of long-term extension, but how do you go from, you know, 2023, which was not even a high, honestly, historically not a high for D.C. but a high in recent history, to now a 30-year low to a few months ago, Donald Trump was saying crime in D.C. is so much better because of my people? He was saying that, and then go to Congress and say, we need indefinite authority over D.C.'s local police force, how is that going to work?
REP. RITCHIE TORRES (D-NY): Well, the answer is no for me. You know, he's reassigning hundreds of members of the U.S. military, hundreds of FBI agents, and I'm curious to know what responsibilities, what federal law enforcement responsibilities are those agents neglecting in order to perform local police functions in D.C.
And I just want to echo my agreement. You know, Donald Trump is probably the greatest champion of lawlessness and disorder in our nation's capital. On the very first day of his presidency, he issued a blanket, pardon for 1,500 people who were connected to a violent invasion of the U.S. Capitol, a violent invasion in which law enforcement officers were assaulted with dangerous weapons, like fire extinguishers and pepper spray. And so he has no credibility on the subject of public safety at all.
[22:10:00]
PHILLIP: Jillian?
JILLIAN MICHAELS, PODCAST HOST, KEEING IT REAL: Well, I didn't know we were litigating January 6th. I thought we were litigating --
TORRES: I think his credibility is relevant here.
MICHAELS: Well -- but as a --
JENNINGS: Is his authority -- is he a legitimate president or not?
MICHAELS: Yes.
JENNINGS: Is he the legitimate president of the United States?
MICHAELS: Yes.
JENNINGS: And he has --
TORRES: Unlike the Republicans, we accepted the --
JENNINGS: So, then he has the authority to act, yes?
TORRES: He has the authority within 30 days and then not beyond 30 days.
JENNINGS: So, he's the president --
(CROSSTALKS)
JENNINGS: You're saying because something happened on January the 6th that therefore negates his credibility to act now. I do not understand --
TORRES: I'm just pointing out why he's a champion of lawlessness and disorder.
JENNINGS: -- why that terrible day would stop someone from today saying, maybe we should clean up the murders, maybe we should clean up the --
TORRES: Instead of condemning violent criminals on January 6th, he literally released a video saying, I love you, you're very special, he referred to the January 6th violent criminals as hostages, like he is not a friend of law enforcement.
PHILLIP: He did, in fact, release violent people back onto the streets. So that is also a fact. But go ahead.
MICHAELS: I want to do a give me on that one. So, I'm just going to -- I don't even want to litigate it. You both win. Here's the thing, D.C. is not safe. That's untrue. It's three times more dangerous than the national average for all big cities. I think the homicide rate is six times what it is here in New York. Coming from Los Angeles, I've had my home broken into. I've had my car recently stolen when I went to go visit my mom. All of my friends have been assaulted or robbed, everybody I know, and it's worse in D.C., at least three times worse.
ROGINSKY: It's actually safer than Louisville, Kentucky, but --
MICHAELS: Where is the outrage over the fact that we have an unchecked safety crisis in the country? That is alarming to me. And it's alarming to people on the other side.
PHILLIP: I don't know that anybody is saying D.C. is the safest city in America.
JENNINGS: She's arguing it is a utopia of safety.
ROGINSKY: No. I'm saying it's --
JENNINGS: You're out here arguing it's necessary.
ROGINSKY: Why are you putting words in my mouth? That's not what I said. I said it's in a 30-year low. I know, Scott, you guys don't like facts. I know Republicans don't like facts.
(CROSSTALKS)
JENNINGS: See? So, she's arguing it's safe.
(CROSSTALKS)
ROGINSKY: I walk around New York at night, believe it or not.
(CROSSTALKS)
PHILLIP: Elie wanted to have a word.
HONIG: So, I've worked extensively with police. And I don't have a problem tactically with what Donald Trump is doing here. It doesn't have to be the most dangerous place on Earth. Something can be improving, but still really bad. If your house is on fire and then a third of the fire goes out, it's less bad, but it could still be an emergency.
I work in D.C. It is dangerous there. You cannot deny that. And a common police tactic is to surge resources. I've been part -- we call them task forces. They're applauded across the board, across the political board. I've done it in New Jersey. I've done it in New York. You take the FBI, you team them up with the Newark P.D., what have you. You make a visible presence.
Now, is some of it for appearance and show? Yes, because what it does is, A, it assures people. It gives people a bit of confidence and security. And, B, it deters people from committing crimes. So, it's not going to hurt, and this is a situation that needs to be improved.
I don't see why there's a -- and I also rejected January 6th. Look, I've been 100 percent unambiguous critic of everything Donald Trump did on January 6th. I believe he should have been charged criminally. I believe the pardons were a disgrace. But why does that mean he can't do anything now to enforce the law, to promote public safety?
TORRES: I think it raises questions about the --
HONIG: Sure, he's a hypocrite. Fine. He's a hypocrite.
TORRES: But this is all political theater. None of this is fundamentally address a crime problem in D.C.
HONIG: Would you rather have national security out in D.C. where you work?
TORRES: how about both the local police and instead, Congressional Republicans cut the D.C. budget by a billion.
(CROSSTALKS)
JENNINGS: The police union says he is right. Are you saying the union is wrong?
TORRES: Right on what?
JENNINGS: The police union came out on this action by the president and said, we wholeheartedly support the president, we need the support. Are they right or wrong?
TORRES: Then bolster local police. It's not function of the FBI. The FBI has to deal with counterterrorism, counterintelligence.
JENNINGS: So, you're against the police union?
HONIG: That's not true. That's not true. I've heard that said a lot by the -- the FBI does street operations. People say the FBI, they're chasing terrorists.
TORRES: Removing --
HONIG: Some are. Hold on. I work --
TORRES: Sanitation.
HONIG: Hang on. I worked with the FBI. The FBI does street rips, they do drug buys, they do gun buys. It's part of what they do. It's not a misuse of the FBI.
PHILLIP: No, but I think to his point, he's asking what we're seeing in D.C. is FBI, Border Patrol, they're doing traffic stops. They are they clearing homeless encampments, I mean, those types of things.
TORRES: But also what costs. We don't know the cost. Where are they being --
HONIG: No, I mean that's a fair argument, but these are just --
TORRES: I mean, that's an essential question to ask.
HONIG: Yes. I'm saying look, it's a fair question. But the decision- makers get to make this decision. I mean, where's the chief of the Metro P.D.? Where's the mayor? If they disagree with this, if they thought this was so illegal, unwarranted, inappropriate, why have they not challenged it? Why have they not? They've challenged it rhetorically, but they haven't gone to the board on it.
PHILLIP: Well, I mean, they have all -- I mean, to your point they have said we will take more resources. And actually, despite Trump's -- you know, Trump's rhetoric on this, as always, is going to be on a whole other level, but there is a level of collaboration that is happening between locals and the feds.
[22:15:07]
The question is, how long is this going to go on and what is Trump going to use it as a passport to do perhaps at other places, as he has promised? Maybe that's just an empty threat. Sometimes with Trump, it is, but I think that's the question that's facing a lot of parts of the country right now.
We have to leave this conversation there, but next for us, if they're good, it's real. If they're bad, it's fake. Trump escalates his war on the numbers.
Plus the president makes his pick for the Kennedy Center Honors and reveals a political litmus test for the arts.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:20:00]
PHILLIP: Tonight, Donald Trump is casting himself as producer, director, and star of a political litmus test for art. Trump announced his pick for the years Kennedy Center Honors today. He made it quite clear that he personally green-lit these honorees based on their politics.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I would say I was about 98 percent involved. No, they all went through me. They came over, Ric, Sergio and everybody. They said, I turned down plenty. There were too woke. I turned, I had a couple of wokesters. No, we have great people. This is very different than it used to be.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Much to everyone's surprise, Trump also announced that he'll be hosting this year's ceremony so that it rates well.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: It's going to be a big evening. I've been asked to host.
Do you believe what I have to do? And I didn't want to do it, okay? They're going to say he insisted. I did not insist, but I think it will be quite successful, actually.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: CNN Media Analyst Sara Fischer joins us in our fifth seat. Donald Trump, as we all know, Sara has an insatiable appetite to be at the center of attention, but the way that he has inserted himself in the arts, and, I mean, we were just talking about lo local law enforcement, but particularly in this area of the Kennedy Center, the arts, the Smithsonian, he is inserting himself right in the heart of things that people typically don't think about the president when they think of the Kennedy Center Honors, to be honest.
SARA FISCHER, CNN MEDIA ANALYST: Yes. But that's why Donald Trump really always hits the cultural zeitgeist. He knows really well how to get people talking, how to get people interested, how to get people looking. I mean, that's what Donald Trump does.
PHILLIP: And get people aggravated as well.
FISCHER: Yes, he does.
PHILLIP: So, he does some of this stuff just to like get a rise out of people.
FISCHER: For sure. But I actually agree with Donald Trump that him hosting this thing is probably going to get good ratings just because anytime you have something that's novel, people are going to tune in. And I think that this is what, in his mind, I'm not saying that I necessarily agree with it, but in his mind, this is what he thinks needs to get done to bring this thing up, to get the, you know, attention that people, his followers want.
If you take a look at his argument about the wokeism, typically, candidates in their honors has been pretty bipartisan split. I attended in 2022 where you had George Cooney, huge Democratic booster, and Amy Grant, a Christian rock star. So, typically, it has been bipartisan. I look at what happened in 2025 of who he's nominated now. You have George Strait, you have Gloria Gaynor.
So, to me, this doesn't feel like the most MAGA ceremony ever. It feels like the most Trumpian ceremony, however, in the fact that he's hosting it.
PHILLIP: I don't know that -- I mean, my point about the Kennedy Center Honors is that I really just don't think of politics when I think about the Kennedy Center Honors. But to your point --
FISCHER: Everything's politics with Donald Trump. That's the thing.
PHILLIP: Well, now everything is politics with Donald Trump.
MICHAELS: There's a precedent for this. A longstanding one, Clinton was involved, Bush was involved, Obama was involved.
PHILLIP: But in what respect --
MICHAELS: In every single --
TORRES: Did they appoint themselves as the chair people of Kennedy Center?
MICHAELS: They did actually appoint the chair people. They did.
TORRES: But not themselves.
PHILLIP: Hold on a second. Let me just clarify one thing just to that point.
MICHAELS: They were involved.
PHILLIP: Presidents are involved in the selection process for the honorees, but what, when I say I don't think about politics when I think of the Kennedy Center Honors, it's because, usually, when the honorees are announced, you don't see the president doing a press conference at the Kennedy Center. He's not on the stage hosting the thing. He's sitting in a box and he's waving and laughing and clapping. And George Bush did it. Donald Trump did not do it. Barack Obama did it. Joe Biden did it. Presidents have done it and it has come and gone, and people don't think of this as a political thing. They think of this as a celebration of American art.
MICHAELS: But there are people in there that can't stand him and reject his endorsement. It's not partisan at all, actually. I mean, you said yourself. You've got country singers and Gloria Gaynor, who's associated with the gay community. I mean, there is absolutely --
PHILLIP: We don't know what Gloria Gaynor's politics are just to be --
MICHAELS: Okay. But the Rolling Stones hate him. Elton John hates him. They've come out and said, we hate them, we reject his endorsement.
JENNINGS: And in this case, I don't know the politics of all of them. Stallone, I think, has been a Republican and a supporter. But Gene Simmons of Kiss has been highly critical of Donald Trump.
MICHAELS: That's exactly my point. Many are.
JENNINGS: I seem to recall he was somewhat supportive of President Bush back in the day, but he's been very critical of Trump and made public statements about it.
So, the fact that Trump was 98 percent involved in choosing it, but decided to overlook Gene Simmons' critical statements, I think, you know, it was something to be noted.
FISCHER: Well, he said that it was Ric and Sergio who were the people who brought him these candidates and that he reviewed them. I don't know to what extent he was intimately involved in vetting every single one. But to your point, Abby, this is not typically something where the president comes out, appoints himself to -- well, he's now been appointed the chair of the Kennedy Center. He's trying to take ownership of it. I think they're trying to rename parts of it after Melania.
[22:25:00]
So, he's clearly trying to take over this culturally.
TORRES: There's a bill in Congress to rename the center after Donald Trump himself.
PHILLIP: Yes. And Ric Grenell, so Ric Grenell earlier this week, he said let's, be clear, the real Donald Trump saved the Kennedy Center, a building literally falling apart. Their neglect seemed criminal. Donald J. Trump absolute absolutely saved the Kennedy Center from being demolished.
TORRES: Quite the opposite. Well, he's driving down revenues for the Kennedy Center. I think subscription revenues are down by 36 percent. Theater specific revenues are down by more than 80 percent. You know, it was one set of Oprah Winfrey that everything she touches turns into gold. The Trump effect is the opposite of the Oprah effect. He's poisoning what is an iconic and historically bipartisan institution.
PHILLIP: There is an ideological bent to how they have tried to manage this place. I mean, first of all, putting Ric Grenell in charge is -- you couldn't be more partisan than that. And I think it will be a question of what does happen to this place. I mean, is this an attempt of Trump to kind of reshape the Kennedy Center, to strip the Kennedy legacy from the place he jokingly, I assume, referred to it as the Trump Kennedy Center in one of his social media posts this week?
ROGINSKY: Well, I don't think it was a joke because there is a bill in Congress to change it to the Trump Center. So, I don't think he was -- first of all, I don't think Donald Trump jokes. I think Donald Trump signals what he's going to do.
It's also part of a larger thing here. He's trying to change culture generally. He's gone into the Smithsonian and he's effectively now has some random person deciding what is appropriate for the Smithsonian to teach in terms of American history, things that don't offend parts of the MAGA based, right? So, we're now literally reviewing parts of American history and parts of American culture to make sure it comports with dear leader and what the MAGA --
MICHAELS: Can you address some of those things that are in there? Have you looked at some of the things that are being reviewed?
ROGINSKY: Yes, slavery was a bad thing that we should talk about.
MICHAELS: He is not whitewashing slavery.
ROGINSKY: So, he's not?
MICHAELS: He's not. No.
ROGINSKY: Okay.
MICHAELS: He's not. And you cannot tie imperialism and racism and slavery to just one race, which is pretty much what every single exhibit does. But let's talk about the fact that when you -- let's talk about the fact --
TORRES: I mean, slavery in America was white supremacy.
MICHAELS: Do you know that only less than 2 percent of white Americans owned slaves.
TORRES: But it was a system of white supremacy. You know, African Americans were slaves and white people were --
MICHAELS: Do you know what the first race to try to end slavery?
(CROSSTALKS)
PHILLIP: I'm really surprised --
MICHAELS: Do you realize that --
PHILLIP: Jillian, I'm surprised that you're trying to litigate who was the beneficiary of slavery and who was not.
MICHAELS: I'm not, what I'm trying to tell you is that --
PHILLIP: I mean, in the context of American history --
MICHAELS: Okay. PHILLIP: In the context of American history, what are you saying is incorrect by saying that it was white people oppressing black people.
MICHAELS: Every single thing is like, oh, no, no, no, this is all because white people bad. And that's just not the truth. Like for example, every single exhibit, I have a list of every single one, like people migrated from Cuba because white people bad. Not because of past -- yes. No, it's in there. That's what I'm saying. You don't actually know what's in there.
Do you know that when you walk in the front door, the first thing you see is the gay fly?
PHILLIP: Jillian, you have a lot of stuff in front of you.
MICHAELS: Yes, I do because I don't -- because here's the thing.
PHILLIP: What exactly are you talking about?
MICHAELS: Okay. I'll give you an example.
PHILLIP: Yes, please.
MICHAELS: There's one called Change Your Game, right? This has been an installation there. Is gender testing fair in sports? Does that -- and then it goes on to talk about how it's complex to do gender testing in sports. It's not complex. It's basic science. That's untrue. It's XX chromosome XY chromosome. That's sports. Is it fair to have biological men competing against biological women in sports? No. But why is this in the Smithsonian? So, it's been completely captured and it's totally partisan.
PHILLIP: First of all, we don't have time to litigate all of this.
MICHAELS: Of course, we don't because then you're going to lose the argument. And if everything is racialized, just like you're trying to do to me now.
PHILLIP: Excuse me?
MICHAELS: It's like, oh, I can't believe you're trying to suggest --
PHILLIP: Just to be clear, you brought up race.
MICHAELS: No.
PHILLIP: This was a conversation about the arts and you brought up race.
MICHAELS: It isn't though.
PHILLIP: You brought up --
MICHAELS: But the whole point of this is that the issue --
PHILLIP: You brought up slavery and you brought up the question of whether -- hold on.
MICHAELS: I actually didn't. You did.
PHILLIP: You brought up question of whether or not slavery in the United States is about race. The answer is yes.
MICHAELS: No, I didn't.
PHILLIP: Slavery to the United States is all about race.
MICHAELS: No, don't straw man my argument because that's not what I said.
PHILLIP: So, what are you talking about?
MICHAELS: Shame on white slavery, and what I was talking about is that this isn't really about that. When you make every single exhibit about white imperialism, when it isn't relevant at all, that is a problem. So, when you're talking about Cubans leaving Cuba and you make it about white people bad, that's not accurate. That's my point.
PHILLIP: All right. We're going to move on to that.
FISCHER: I would to say on the arts thing, I think why this is hitting such a chord right now is because Donald Trump has mandated all these changes to places like the Smithsonian, pulling out pictures from various government agencies.
[22:30:03]
But what's different is with the Kennedy Center, he's taking a much more proactive role. I think that's why we are looking at this issue today thinking, wow, it's hit a different point than it ever has been before.
SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Do you think the honorees, though, are generally acceptable to most Americans?
FISCHER: Yeah. Yeah.
JENNINGS: I mean, these are huge stars.
FISCHER: Yeah, they are, because just the ratings have been good. They are. And like I said before, giving you the example of Amy Grant and George Clooney, the board has been bipartisan and has tried to get people that walk all crux of life, including politics. I just think that I was expecting, quite frankly, if Donald Trump was going to name honorees, I was expecting this to go a much more further right direction than it actually did.
ABBY PHILLIP, CNN ANCHOR: Which kind of begs the question, what exactly was the problem he was trying to solve? Because I mean, to your point, the board --
(CROSSTALK)
FISCHER: Manufacturing a problem for the sake of, yeah --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Yeah, I think the board has been, actually is bipartisan because Republican and Democratic presidents get, to a point, people to that board. And it's really not, again, it's not really a political thing. It has not been until now.
REP. RITCHIE TORRES (D) NEW YORK: He doesn't need a problem. He just wants control. He wants to be the center of every institution, the center of everyone's attention. You know, he's not a conservative because he's not interested in conserving institutions. It's all about his narcissism. It's all about Trump. That's the common threat.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Donald Trump show rolls on. We will see --
(CROSSTALK)
FISCHER: And it tends to get good ratings. I will say that.
(CROSSTALK)
TORRES: The revenues are down, so --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Yeah, I mean look, it's popular because it is about art. And so, we'll see what happens when politics becomes much more intertwined into this show. Sara, thank you very much for being here. Everyone else, hang tight. Coming up next, if the numbers don't help your case, then discredit them. It's a key part of the Trump playbook and we'll tell you how he's using it now. Next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:36:16]
PHILLIP: Tonight, as Donald Trump builds his case for sending even more troops into the streets of the nation's capital, he wants you to believe the crime data coming from D.C. police is fake.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: You're going to see a big change in Washington crime stats very soon. Not the stats that they gave because they turned out to be a total fraud.
And the numbers are worse than they ever are. Don't let anyone tell you they're not. And the whole statistical charts that they made, the whole thing is a rigged deal.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: As CNN has reported, violent crime in D.C. is at a 30-year low, but these facts don't fit the narrative Trump is trying to sell, that the district is a hellscape. So, his solution is to pull from the pages of a familiar playbook by waging a war on the numbers. It's something that he has a very, very long history of doing.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: We're doing so well. I believe the numbers were phony. I want to address the fake job numbers on top of everything else, fellows -- fake jobs. We've never had numbers like this. They don't exist. Don't believe those phony numbers when you hear 4.9 and five percent unemployment. The unemployment number, as you know, is totally fiction.
The numbers they put out are phony as far as I'm concerned. Kamala's crime statistics are really as fake, essentially, as those job numbers. You're going to see a big change in Washington crime stats very soon. Not the stats that they gave, because they turned out to be a total fraud.
Remember the polls, the fake polls? I think it's a fake poll because why would they like me? The news and the polls are really fake. I have the real polls. People don't want anything to do with impeachment. You know, polls are fake just like everything else. The press never even talked about it because they're fake. I have 10 times, 20 times, 30 times the crowd size.
REP. MIKE JOHNSON, U.S. HOUSE SPEAKER: We're not buying the CBO's estimates.
TRUMP (on the phone): I think the 3.4 percent is really a false number. Personally, I would say the number is way under. We had a great election in 2020. We won the election by a lot. If you think Biden got 80 million votes, I don't believe it.
(CROSSTALK)
STEVEN INSKEEP, "NATIONAL PUBLIC RADIO" HOST: No, it's true. It's true.
TRUMP (on the phone): This was a corrupt election. The number of ballots doesn't mean anything.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Is there any number that Donald Trump believes?
TORRES: The war on truth is not about but a future of authoritarianism. You know, reminds me, in June of 2023, China's National Bureau of Statistics reported a youth unemployment rate of 21 percent. And Xi Jinping, who is the dictator of China, was so furious with the job numbers that he ordered the bureau to stop publishing the numbers, to stop telling the truth.
Donald Trump is playing the same game of censorship here in the United States. He's withholding the truth. What I find interesting is back in April, he was praising the BLS for producing great job numbers, and now he's condemning it when there's an inconvenient truth that flatly contradicts his narrative.
PHILLIP: Similarly with the crime numbers, he was praising the drop in crime a few months ago. Now, he's saying that you don't belong to believe the numbers. I mean, Jillian, at what point does this become just, I don't know, a trope to discount facts?
JILLIAN MICHAELS, "KEEPING IT REAL" PODCAST HOST: Okay, well, the numbers were inaccurate. I mean --
PHILLIP: Which ones?
MICHAELS: All right. So, let's --
PHILLIP: No, no, I'm just asking which ones you're talking about.
MICHAELS: All right, so I could do both. Actually, do we want to do D.C. or do we want to do the BLS? Pick it.
TORRES: BLS, how is it inaccurate?
MICHAELS: Okay. Well, back --
(CROSSTALK)
TORRES: Was it inaccurate back in April when Trump raised it?
MICHAELS: They had to -- yeah, but it's typically inaccurate up to about 40 to 50,000.
TORRES: Well, they're preliminary estimates, so they were --
(CROSSTALK)
MICHAELS: Exactly. And what's normal --
(CROSSTALK)
TORRES: But that's not manipulation.
MICHAELS: But hold on.
PHILLIP: All right.
MICHAELS: What's normal --
PHILLIP: Go ahead.
MICHAELS: -- is that there are roughly 40 to 50,000 jobs off. This is triple that. And it was similarly mistaken, gotten wrong during the Biden administration. So for example, the miscalculations that are typical are 500,000 in a year. The miscalculations over 2024 were 1.2 million.
[22:40:04]
TORRES: Do you believe there was manipulation? MICHAELS: No, I don't believe there was manipulation. Here's what I
think. I think the person in charge got it really wrong. I think the BLS is broken.
TORRES: So, you disagree with Trump's accusation that there was manipulation?
MICHAELS: I don't think there was manipulation. I think --
TORRES: He explicitly said there was manipulation.
MICHAELS: Okay --
TORRES: I'm happy you're rejecting that accusation.
MICHAELS: What I think is that the numbers are very far off. More far off than what's typically common or acceptable. And these numbers matter. Obviously, it's how the Fed determines what the interest rate should be.
(CROSSTALK)
TORRES: Although, to be clear, the methodology that produced the numbers that Trump praised back in April is the same methodology that produced the numbers he's --
(CROSSTALK)
MICHAELS: But why wouldn't Trump love that the numbers were high and then quietly brought down? Like, why wouldn't he love that? Like, these numbers were also wrong during Biden. They were --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: But to his point, why would Trump praise the numbers just a few months ago and now call them fake?
MICHAELS: Listen, if he's calling them fake, suggesting that they messed with the numbers, I don't think that's true. But I am telling you, clearly something's really wrong. Clearly changes need to be made.
PHILLIP: Elie.
ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Donald Trump has no credibility on this issue. I mean, we just saw the supercut there. It's not like that difficult of a scientific formula. If it's bad for him, it's fake. If it's good for him, it's real. That's it. It can't -- if only life was so great for all of us, right?
If only every piece of bad news was BS, fake, made up, and every piece of good news was absolutely true and maybe embellished a bit. His history speaks for itself here. This is something he does and I give him no credibility when he tries to dismiss these numbers.
PHILLIP: Julie. JULIE ROGINSKY, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: I mean, the problem here is going to be that if you don't have faith in these numbers and you don't have faith in statistics, with the government issues, whether it's the Fed numbers, which he's consistently denigrating now with respect to inflation, whether it's with respect to job numbers, whether it's with respect to any numbers, crime statistics for that matter, we're not going to have faith in government, which I guess is the whole point, right?
If you're out to destroy government and make yourself the arbiter of the truth and the only arbiter of the truth, and if you think that everything else is some conspiracy by the deep state, what's going to end up happening is that we're not going to have a functioning democracy anymore. We're going to have a propagandist who's essentially saying that the numbers that he wants to be out there are the numbers that we all have to believe and everything else, we don't have to believe our own lying eyes. And that's a problem.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Another aspect of this is, you know, it -- there's Trump's rhetoric, which of course is what we just played. But now he's in a position to actually appoint people who give him the numbers that he does want. I think that's kind of where the rubber meets the road for the country right now.
It was on the 2020 election. He only wanted people around him who would continue to lie to him about whether he won or lost. He-- when it comes to the job numbers, when it comes to crime statistics, he wants to put people in there that double down on his beliefs. And so, at what point, Scott, does that make everything suspect that Trump touches?
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: As it relates to the BLS, by definition, he's right. The numbers we do get every month are fake because the methodology is so warped that they get changed later. So, so, they're fake.
(CROSSTALK)
UNKNOWN: But that's exactly --
PHILLIP: Scott -- hold on a second. Hold on.
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: Because they get changed later. So, today's numbers --
TORRES: I don't remember you saying that back in April. I don't --
(CROSSTALK)
UNKNOWN: That's the point.
(CROSSTALK) PHILLIP: That's a crazy thing to say.
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: Every month they get changed.
(CROSSTALK)
TORRES: You did not say that back in April when Trump was praising these numbers.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Scott, that is an insane thing to say because you --
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: Did the numbers change or not?
PHILLIP: Hold on, Scott. You worked in --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: You worked in the Bush administration.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Hold on a second, Julie. Scott, you worked in the Bush administration. The numbers that the BLS put out, which get revised every single month in the Bush administration, were those fake?
JENNINGS: Well, I think the methodology back then worked better. I think it doesn't work very well now.
PHILLIP: Okay.
JENNINGS: And so my point is this. Whether you --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Hold on.
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: -- agree with the word fake or not, they're not accurate.
PHILLIP: You just made the claim that the fact that the numbers get revised mean that they're fake.
JENNINGS: Yeah.
PHILLIP: Were they fake when you worked in the government?
JENNINGS: Back in those days, I don't think the revisions were as substantial. Today, they're quite substantial.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: But there have always been revisions.
JENNINGS: I don't think they were as substantial as they are now.
PHILLIP: Scott, there have always been revisions.
JENNINGS: I don't think they're as substantial as they are now.
PHILLIP: The revisions vary. Sometimes they're small. Sometimes they're --
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: Are you okay with the level of revisions?
PHILLIP: Guess what?
JENNINGS: They're pretty off.
PHILLIP: When you actually look at the public data, the revisions in the public data are actually way smaller than the revisions in the private data.
JENNINGS: Here's - here's what I think.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: So, even though the Bureau of Labor Statistics transparently goes back and says we have more information, here's what we know, you're making a political claim and I know why you're doing it. But it's --
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: No, I'm not making a political claim. I'm making a factual claim.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: -- also one that I think is incredibly -- but it's very corrosive, I think, to the idea of whether or not there is -- there's anything real in the world, right?
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Just because there are corrections doesn't mean that it's fake.
JENNINGS: It's not.
PHILLIP: Just because
We're not in disagreement there are corrections, doesn't mean --
(CROSSTALK) JENNINGS: We're not in disagreement.
PHILLIP: We are in disagreement. You just called it all fake.
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: I'm saying that every month this agency gives you a number and you can bet that the number is wrong.
PHILLIP: And you said that because --
JENNINGS: Which by definition makes it fake. Now --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: You said --
TORRES: It is an estimate. It's not fake.
JENNINGS: So, so my point --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Scott, okay.
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: -- as it was last night is this. The goal of this agency and the next administrator and of this administration ought to be to update and modernize the methodology so that the numbers we get each month are far more accurate.
[22:45:06]
PHILLIP: So, when they update the methodology and they continue to revise them because they have more information, which will happen, you're going to continue to call those numbers fake, I presume.
(CROSSTALK)
TORRES: What exactly is the issue with the methodology?
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: Well, there is a belief that they're not able to do as much or as accurate data collection from private sector companies right now. They're not getting the response rates. Therefore, they're not --
(CROSSTALK)
TORRES: That was an issue back in April. And I don't remember these objections back in April --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Yeah. TORRES: - when Trump was praising these numbers.
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: Well, of course, of course, when he gets the numbers and they look good --
(CROSSTALK)
TORRES: Again --
JENNINGS: -- it's going to look good.
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: But it's probably highly agitating to find out later that you were handed fake numbers.
TORRES: If there were a vast --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Scott, I think it's -- listen. I -- it's --
(CROSSTALK)
MICHAELS: But this is a vast --
(CROSSTALK)
TORRES: If the Bureau of Labor --
PHILLIP: It is silly to continue -- I get the politics of it -- but it is silly to continue to call --
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: It's not political.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: -- things that you don't like fake.
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: It's not that I like it or I don't like it. I just like it to be more accurate.
PHILLIP: Your name is -- your name is not Donald Trump.
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: I just want it to be accurate. You don't want accurate data?
(CROSSTALK) PHILLIP: But you have the ability to approach this in a way that is not needlessly inflammatory.
JENNINGS: Yeah, so do you.
PHILLIP: It is not fake, okay?
JENNINGS: Abby --
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: Are the numbers -- are the numbers that you're --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: It is not fake.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: When presidents get bad job numbers, like Barack Obama did, when they get bad inflation numbers like Joe Biden did, they easily could have called it fake because they don't like the numbers. But it's a choice to do that. And it's a choice to say that revisions mean something that is --
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: I don't know why we're having a combative conversation. My point is the numbers we get at this moment in time seem to be less accurate than ever.
MICHAELS: Yes.
JENNINGS: If the government updates --
(CROSSTALK)
MICHAELS: They are roughly 300 percent --
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: -- and does a better job of methodology and data collection, then there'll be more accuracy. What is wrong with it?
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: I appreciate your revision of your comments.
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: I just literally said the same thing.
PHILLIP: Because what you just said is a fair thing to say.
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: It's been my point for two nights in row.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: It is a rational, reasonable thing to say. And you did not use the word faked in that last part that you just said. So I just want to note, that is a revision and I appreciate you doing it. Thank you, Scott Jennings.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Coming up next for us, all caps post and name-calling. Look who's talking tough now. Well, the Democrats are taking on a new tone. We'll talk about it next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:51:53]
PHILLIP: Democrats have a new strategy when it comes to taking on Donald Trump. They are fighting fire with fire. That includes California Governor Gavin Newsom, who's playing the part of the ultimate troll on social media as the Texas redistricting battle heats up. Newsom has been mimicking Trump's all-caps style, calling him names, hitting his poll numbers, and ending posts with Trump's signature phrase, "thank you for your attention to this matter". This is kind of theater. I'm not really sure it'll work. What do you think?
TORRES: Look, we have to take the vote to Donald Trump. And I mean, I would argue that we should focus like a laser on the issue of affordability, lower costs. And I saw polling from CNN recently indicating that Donald Trump's greatest vulnerability at the moment is inflation.
PHILLIP: Yeah.
TORRES: He's underwater by 25 points. Since 2024, there's been a 34- point swing against him. So, that's where our focus should be. And we should be adapting to the brave new world of alternative media. So I appreciate Gavin Newsom's strategy of taking the fight to Donald Trump. I support it.
PHILLIP: Let me play Beto O'Rourke -- also kind of addressed this redistricting bid and it's the way he did it that I think got a lot of people's attention.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BETO O'ROURKE (D) FORMER U.S. REPRESENTATIVE, TEXAS: We want California and New Jersey and Illinois and Maryland and every other state where the Democrats hold the governor's mansion, the assembly and the state senate to redraw their congressional districts now, not wait for Texas to move first, to maximize Democratic Party advantage.
Listen, you may say to yourself, well, those aren't the rules. There are no refs in this game, (EXPLICIT) the rules. We are going to win whatever it takes. (CHEERING)
O'ROURKE: We're going to take this to them in every way that we can.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Elie, I mean is he right about the lack of referees, I think is really what the point that he's making. Anything goes.
HONIG: So, I think, yeah, I think there's an interesting dilemma in the Democratic Party in what you both say. I mean, there's the attempt to out-Trump Trump, which we've seen from Gavin Newsom we saw right there, and then there's this sort of laser focus that Representative Torres just put on the economy and real issues. They're not necessarily mutually exclusive, but I'm not sure which one works better for Democrats. I'm not sure which one will actually move the needle with voters.
ROGINSKY: I have an answer to that. I think, the one that works better is the one that's authentic to the person delivering the message. And sometimes I watch people say this stuff and I cringe because it's just not who they are. They're not -- they're not that person. And then sometimes I watch people say exactly what Beto O'Rourke just said and I said, okay, well you know what? That sounds to me like a guy who says this in private so he probably can say this in public.
And I think a lot of times you have lot of politicians who are trying to be something that they're not. They're trying to troll Trump in a very "Trumpy" way. Well, they're not like Trump at all. And sometimes there are people who are very "Trumpy" or at least have the capacity to troll very well, Gavin Newsom being one of them, or at least on Twitter. And it comes across as being authentic.
And so I think, you know, look. J.B. Pritzker is doing it well because J.B. Pritzker I think is being true to himself in the way he's delivering it. Others whose names I don't really necessarily want to mention are not doing it as well. They're more about peace and love but sometimes try to pretend that they're all about being "Trumpy" and they're not. So, That's why --
PHILLIP: It's kind of interesting because I actually feel like Gavin Newsom kind of started this process trying to reach out to the other side.
[22:55:01]
And now he's gone in really the other direction where he's taking on Trump more directly in "Trumpism".
(CROSSTALK)
ROGINSKY: It wasn't working for him.
PHILLIP: And it wasn't working for him then. But it is kind of working for him now. ROGINSKY: Yeah.
PHILLIP: I mean, the reach of his podcast, of all of this stuff has been amplified by this strategy.
TORRES: He understands new media.
PHILLIP: Yeah.
TORRES: Like, I mean, we - sorry -- but we increasingly live in a world not of cable news and network news, but you know, vertical video, social media. And I feel like the message from Democrats from an earlier error is that you adapt to the brave new world of media or you become extinct.
PHILLIP: All right. We'll see how that goes for them. Everyone, thank you very much for being here. And thank you for watching "NewsNight". You can catch me anytime on your favorite social media -- X, Instagram, and TikTok. "Laura Coates Live" starts right after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
