Return to Transcripts main page
CNN NewsNight with Abby Phillip
FBI Seeks Interviews With Democrats In Video Warning To Troops; Bloomberg Reports, Witkoff Advised Russia On How To Deal With Trump; Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) Says, Ukraine, Venezuela Could Dissolve MAGA Movement; No Healthcare Plan From Trump White House; Ben Shapiro Claims Republican Party Is Sending A Message Of Victimhood To Gen Z. Aired 10-11p ET
Aired November 25, 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 HOST (voice over): Tonight, a federal escalation. The FBI wants to talk to the six who told the military to disobey illegal orders.
SEN. MARK KELLY (D-AZ): The statements that Donald Trump made is inciteful, incites others.
PHILLIP: Plus, elite chat reveals America's deal making between Russia and Ukraine with a war and a MAGA base in the balance.
Also, it's a plan the president's promised for ten years.
DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: We are going to have a healthcare plan that's going to be second to none. It's going to be great.
PHILLIP: But is the long awaited plan just an extension of Obamacare?
And Ben Shapiro says, the right teaches young men to be victims and is pushing them toward extremism.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You should actually pick your ass up and go out and do something useful.
PHILLIP: Live at the table, Scott Jennings, Bakari Sellers, Xochitl Hinojosa and Ken Cuccinelli.
Americans with different perspectives aren't talking to each other, but here, they do.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP (voice over): Good evening. I'm Abby Philip in Washington.
Let's get right to what America's talking about. President Trump's quest for a vengeance has six new targets, the Democratic lawmakers who are behind this video urging U.S. troops to defy illegal orders. A source tells CNN that the FBI is now getting involved and wants to interview each of them.
The president has called the Democrat traitors and he said that they could be executed for seditious behavior. And just yesterday, the Pentagon announced an in investigation into Senator Mark Kelly for his role in that video, and he threatened to court martial him.
Now, in a joint statement, the Democrats said today that the president is using the FBI to intimidate, to harass them, but that will not stop them from doing their job to honor the Constitution.
So, while all of this is happening predictably, there are threats, many of them. They're receiving bomb threats. There are some audio files of people calling into Senator or Congressman Jason Crow's office and let me just play those for you.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You deserve to die. I hope you all get murdered. I hope you all get (BLEEP) throat slashed.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You disgraced American and I pray you die today, but not before your family does. I pray they die a painful death. Hurry up and die, you worthless (BLEEP) traitor.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: You know, we've talked a lot about, you know, the prudence of this video. But whether you like it or not, Trump's putting on the table the death penalty seems to have unleashed things like that.
KEN CUCCINELLI, SENIOR FELLOW, CENTER FOR RENEWING AMERICA: Well, I don't know if that's what unleashed it, but, you know, we --
PHILLIP: You don't?
CUCCINELLI: No, we just saw the intro on the healthcare and it started with Trump's hyperbole branding of whatever he is talking about. It fits right in that vein. I reject all of that language. I mean, we just went through an election in Virginia where we actually elected an attorney general who threatened some of those things, and, you know, that's what we're electing now today.
So, you know, both sides have got to ratchet it down, presidents included there, but, look, the fact of the matter is, you know, you zeroed in on Mark Kelly, he's in a unique position. He is covered by the UCMJ, Uniform Code of Military Justice. I used to do these cases many years ago. And he is -- we will give you an analogy. If six generals put out a video today about something Trump did yesterday, just say he sent troops to fill in the blank city to help ICE, and these six generals happened to put a video out the next day saying, hey, you don't have to follow illegal orders by the president, they'd be subject to uniform -- to justice under the UCMJ.
PHILLIP: So, are you saying -- but hold on. Are you saying that these senators, by simply reiterating what is in the oath for military officers, are subject now to court martial? Is that really what you're arguing?
CUCCINELLI: So, only one of them, and that would be Mark Kelly.
PHILLIP: Sure. But like let's say any person who is a former military officer, their repetition of what -- nobody disputes that this is actually the code of conduct for the military. So, their repetition of that code of conduct, you think, is enough to court martial them?
CUCCINELLI: So, the UCMJ doesn't work like civilian justice systems, and I hear in your question sort of a presumption that it does.
PHILLIP: No, my question is --
CUCCINELLI: You don't the kinds of intent in the military --
(CROSSTALKS)
PHILLIP: But it's a basic factual question about do you think that this is something that would actually warrant -- so it's not like you're saying they're lying.
[22:05:05]
They didn't say you must disobey the president. They didn't say this particular order is illegal and you should disobey it. It just -- they just said that you know that your code of conduct says this and you should remember to not obey illegal orders. And you're telling me today that you believe that that is enough for someone to be court- martialed?
CUCCINELLI: It could be, yes. I'm not saying that I would vote guilty here. I'm saying that there is a legitimate --
PHILLIP: It sounds like you're --
(CROSSTALKS)
BAKARI SELLERS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: The UCMJ would actually protect Mark Kelly because of the rules -- does it give them the right to court martial somebody for doing something illegal that they find with, and it's two vastly different systems. You can be charged for DUI under a regular, you know, Virginia or D.C., Maryland court of law and still have to be subjected to the use UCMJ, right?
However, asking someone to defy what they believe to be legal court orders not only is protected under the United States Constitution but it's also protected under UCMJ, and Mark Kelly knows that. But that's -- I don't think that was the root of your question. What people are mad about when they see this is it's just an abuse of power. It's a waste of resources. Why is our FBI when we're concerned about X, Y, and Z going trying to get with the sergeant of arms to hunt down six United States senators? They're not treasonous.
And the other thing is the irresponsibility of the president of the United States. We can bring up whatever candidate, whatever person we want to bring up. There is a higher bar for language for the president of the United States. And for him to utilize the language of being treasonous, to bring a sedition -- what's the word?
CUCCINELLI: Seditionist.
SELLERS: Seditionist, thank you, to all of these things is a fundamental problem that you talked about adding gasoline to the fire, and that's what the president of the United States did.
PHILLIP: What about the FBI investigating the actual threats against these lawmakers? I mean, listen to what Kash Patel, the FBI director said about that, when he was asked whether they're going to get involved in the bomb threats and all the other threats that are coming in.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KASH PATEL, FBI DIRECTOR: What goes through my head is the same thing that goes through my head in any case. Is there a lawful predicate to open up an inquiry and investigation, or is there not? And that decision will be made by the career agents and analysts here at the FBI.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Is the FBI getting involved?
PATEL: Based on the fact that is an ongoing matter, there's not much I can say.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: You know, I mean, I think that the idea that the FBI would investigate -- we know who wrote, made the video.
XOCHITL HINOJOSA, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yes, that's right.
PHILLIP: I thought that this was the party of free speech. But then now that there are threats, I don't hear Kash Patel saying, hey, we're going to try to find these people who are threatening sitting lawmakers.
HINOJOSA: That's right. If the FBI is talking to lawmakers, it should only be to talk about the threats that they're receiving and so that they can go and investigate those threats. What's interesting here is that the FBI were to -- if the Justice Department were to bring cases against these lawmakers, these would be thrown out.
The only reason that the FBI is even looking into this is to chill speech. That's exactly what it is. He wants these people to stop. He wants other members of Congress to potentially -- he wants to silence Democratic members of Congress and other elected leaders on speaking out against Trump.
When it comes to --
SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Wait, can I ask you a question? Stop what? You said they want them to stop. Stop what?
HINOJOSA: They want them to stop speaking out. JENNINGS: So, you said speaking out against Trump. So, you're saying that you believe that inherent in the video is that Donald Trump said has given any illegal orders?
HINOJOSA: No. Actually, what I will say about --
JENNINGS: Because what Abby argues is that they're just stating a fact. But you're saying they stating a fact. But you're saying it's speaking against Trump.
HINOJOSA: Because they speak out against Trump.
JENNINGS: If it's speaking against Trump and you took the message the way they intended it, you took it the way they intended it, which is that Trump has given illegal orders and you can't name one and nobody else can.
HINOJOSA: Hold on. Let me just say that Congress has a role in ensuring that there are whistleblower protections when people come out --
JENNINGS: So, you believe there are illegal orders?
HINOJOSA: I'm not saying there is. I'm saying in the Biden administration. I'm saying in the Biden administrations. There were whistleblowers. In other administrations, there have been whistleblowers. And what happens is it's Congress' responsibility to ensure that these people have protections wherever you are in the federal government and whether you're in our military. This has happened throughout administration. And if they believe, if they have reason to believe that there is something --
(CROSSTALKS)
JENNINGS: I hear you. Just to put a bow on it, you believe that it is -- that you took the message. Democrats are encouraging the military to defy the commander-in-chief over some current orders that you can't name but you're pretty sure that there is.
HINOJOSA: Here's what I believe. I believe that regardless of the president, no one should, or no one in our military should actually follow through with unconstitutional orders.
JENNINGS: What are they?
HINOJOSA: That's what I believe. I'm saying regardless --
(CROSSTALKS)
PHILLIP: I'm not understanding what Scott's point is, honestly.
(CROSSTALKS)
SELLERS: Scott believes they're not.
[22:10:00] No. His whole point is that the root of the matter is what is the illegal order?
JENNINGS: That is a great question. And I know you and I have a disagreement about it.
SELLERS: Correct. Because I believe the illegal orders are bombing people or using drone strikes illegally in the Caribbean Sea to deter what they're using as the war on drugs. And I think there are many people in this country who believe that that is an illegal order. That's violative of the Constitution. But, to Scott's point is, if that's a gray area, and I don't have to -- it's like playing devil's advocate. I don't have to make your point. But if there is a gray area, should the military follow it or not?
The only point that I have is that you're correct, you're correct, because this is not a good use of time, a good use of resources. It is only being used to chill speech. And not only that, but United States senators, whether or not it's UCMJ or whether or not it's the First Amendment, they actually have protections for the things they say because they're United States Senators and members of Congress.
CUCCINELLI: Sorry, Scott.
JENNINGS: Yes, sure.
CUCCINELLI: The future debate clause only protects them when they're performing legislative functions, not when they're out making videos and getting on acts that there is no coverage --
SELLERS: How is that not a legislative function?
CUCCINELLI: I'm sorry. D.C. Circuit's the toughest circuit in the country on this and they won't give that protection.
SELLERS: How do you know? It hasn't been litigated.
CUCCINELLI: Because I've been in that court.
SELLERS: But it hasn't been litigated. You're making that up.
CUCCINELLI: No, I'm not making up having litigated this future debate clause.
SELLERS: No, not that part. I know you've been around it.
HINOJOSA: They have a role to ensure that if someone comes forth with information, something that was done unconstitutional --
CUCCINELLI: Okay. So, this is a good example.
HINOJOSA: They have every right to ensure that that whistleblower has protections. And what they're telling the military it is something that is unconstitutional, then come forth and we will protect you.
CUCCINELLI: And if they're doing that in their capacity, let's say they're on the Armed Services Committee, for example, to stay with your example, then they very well could, in performing those functions, have the speech or debate correction.
HINOJOSA: Correct.
CUCCINELLI: They do not have it when they go out and make public announcements. You don't get it for that. You don't get it for dealing with your constituencies. You don't get it for dealing with federal agencies.
SELLERS: You don't get it at a town hall meeting?
CUCCINELLI: No.
SELLERS: Oh, wow. That's crazy.
CUCCINELLI: No, you don't.
SELLERS: That's crazy.
CUCCINELLI: Hey, look --
SELLERS: Tell Nancy Mace that. Tell Nancy Mace that. Hey --
CUCCINELLI: Well, that would be fun. I know, hometown, right?
But, look, that's just the case law. That's what the Supreme Court has said, not Ken Cuccinelli.
PHILLIP: Well, look I do think that whether that is true or not would need to be litigated. But I also think that separate from that, I mean, this comes back to the -- I think the basic question about speech. Is it okay for anybody in this country to say, whether there are senator or not, that, hey, if you're in the military, you shouldn't follow illegal orders? So, let's put aside their role for just a second. Is that an okay thing to say in this country or is that a seditious act?
CUCCINELLI: That is an okay thing to say, for you to say --
PHILLIP: So, then why is it okay for --
(CROSSTALKS)
PHILLIP: But hold on. But why is it that it's okay for me to say but the FBI is knocking on the door of five members of -- you know, five members of Congress who are in the House and the Senate, and one who is also a former member of the military? Why?
CUCCINELLI: And, of course, I zeroed in on the one that's the former member of the military because the coverage for him is entirely different for the others. And I agree with you that I think any -- we just watched Cash Patel explain the standard for an investigation. I think these questions are going to get asked and they're going to be ended.
(CROSSTALKS)
CUCCINELLI: That may not be true for Mark Kelly as it relates to the military.
PHILLIP: What is even the law that would be broken?
(CROSSTALKS)
SELLERS: What you're seeing is Pete Hegseth being out of his depth. That's what you're seeing. And you see it on Twitter. You see the back and forth. I guess it's called X now. And you see Pete Hegseth literally going at an American war hero. Democrat, Republican, you don't have to like any of his votes, Mark Kelly is a hero. And what he's doing right now is he's elevating Mark Kelly to another level politically. And I think Mark Kelly and everybody else is embracing that for a long period of time, the politics are, Gavin Newsom was the front runner for the Democratic nomination, but now people are learning about Mark Kelly because this is not fair.
Pete Hegseth does not have the intellectual capacity or the military record to debate somebody like Mark Kelly. He just does not.
PHILLIP: All right, we got to leave it there. Next for us, a call between Trump's envoy and the Russians gets leaked, including his advice for how best for Vladimir Putin to speak to President Trump.
Plus, is Trump's big healthcare plan just extending Obamacare for a couple of years? Well, that's exactly what the Democrats demanded. We'll debate that as well.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:15:00]
PHILLIP: There are some hopeful signs tonight of progress in an American-led peace deal between Russia and Ukraine, but still long way to go on that, and now a look inside of those talks. Bloomberg is reporting about calls from Trump's envoy, Steve Witkoff, to the Russians coaching them apparently on how to talk to Trump.
The White House is defending Witkoff and the conversations from backlash, including from some Republicans. Congressman Brian Fitzpatrick is one critic of this strategy, quote, this is a major problem and one of the many reasons why these ridiculous sideshows and secret meetings need to stop. Allow Marco Rubio to do his job in a fair manner. And Republican Senator Rand Paul went even further than that, predicting the end of MAGA if Trump were to do two things.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. RAND PAUL (R-KY): If he invades Venezuela or gives more money to Ukraine, his movement will dissolve.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: That is a pretty bold statement, Scott. I mean, he's suggesting that Trump is kind of on the verge of flip-flopping on some things, and Ukraine is probably a fair one.
[22:20:03]
I know you don't think that Venezuela is a problem for him, but Ukraine, he kind of ran on getting us out of being entangled in that conflict in addition to getting us out of this war in 24 hours, which he didn't do.
JENNINGS: Well, yes. And the way to get us out of it is to get a peace agreement, I mean, and get the Europeans more involved in it. I mean, that's the whole project here, that he's got his diplomats in Geneva, he's talking to the Russians, he's talking to the Ukrainians. They're trying to end the war. They're trying to stop the killing. They're trying to take off the table the prospect that we would have to give them anymore military assistance.
And so, look, I hope he succeeds, I pray every day for the killing to stop. He's had a great record of success on this around the world. This one has vexed him and it's vexed Europe and it's vexed the rest of the world. But if they can bring the killing to an end so that we're not having military conflict, that means we won't be sending military aid.
Regarding Venezuela, I'll just say it to you again, the American people strongly support the president of the United States taking a stronger hand against narco-terrorists in our hemisphere. And I know Senator Paul and the president have a difference of opinion on how to engage at the foreign policy level. But on doing the drug control in our own hemisphere, the president's got popular support there.
SELLERS: There are two points. The first is I think that I agree with Brian Fitzpatrick on this note because, Marco Rubio is by far the most talented person in Donald Trump's cabinet, okay? The bar may be in hell, but Marco Rubio is still extremely talented. And you can't neuter him. You have to allow him to do his job. You have to allow the secretary of state to go out and do the yeoman's work, and by sending people out to undercut him.
And the one of the major questions I have about the Trump administration is why are they leaked so much? I mean, even in the first Trump years, you had so many leaks coming out about confidential conversations, which --
PHILLIP: Well, this was definitely an inside job to try to --
SELLERS: We know that. And my last point is Venezuela is kind of the red herring that I hope more people pay -- more American public pay attention to. Because it's not just bombing drug runners or droning drug runners, you actually have warships that are just on the coastline. Why? That's the question.
PHILLIP: There's been a military buildup in the Caribbean, and that is the part that's not about drugs, despite what Scott's saying. It's about something that at least they're not --
JENNINGS: Wait. I disagree. PHILLIP: They're not telling us what it's really about.
JENNINGS: I disagree. It's about drugs. Maduro is a drug lord.
PHILLIP: You don't need warships in the Caribbean to use drones to take out fish boats full of whether they're full of drugs or not. So, there's something else going on here that they're not being transparent on.
But let's put that aside for just a second. On the Witkoff thing, what do you think about these conversations? I mean, some of these are, were basically saying -- let me read one excerpt where he says, Yuri, Yuri, here's what I would do. My recommendation. Yuri says, yes, please. I would make the call and reiterate that you congratulate the president on the Gaza achievement, that you supported it, that you respected that he's a man of peace, and that you are just -- you're really glad to see it happen. So I would say that I think. From that, it's going to be a really good call. And he says, okay, my friend. I think that very point our leaders could discuss. Hey, Steve, I agree with you that he will congratulate, he will say that Mr. Trump is a real peace man, and so, and so, that's what he will say.
So, do you think it's okay to give, to be coaching the Russians and how to deal with Trump to try to get some kind of outcome?
CUCCINELLI: I wouldn't. I would never say yes to coaching the Russians, but I think he's setting up a good call, just as he said in there. There was no strategic information in there. You know, it's not like this guy's a spy or something. And I'm a little surprised to hear Bakari's comment about the leaks. I actually think if you compare this year to the first year of the first Trump administration, this is a --
(CROSSTALKS)
SELLERS: But that blew the -- you're right. I got to a lot of that. There were 1,000,002 leaks in the first one. There were 900,000 in this one.
CUCCINELLI: I just don't -- by White House standards, I don't think that this Trump administration --
(CROSSTALKS)
CUCCINELLI: And Witkoff has been a target for a while and people know he has a relationship with Trump and he's been useful and effective. I say that from an American standpoint in the Middle East and, you know --
PHILLIP: Do you think it's a problem that he and Rubio are kind of supposedly doing the same job? I mean, they seem to be kind of on top of each other in this situation.
CUCCINELLI: So, I think this is just part of the Trump management style, and it isn't traditional and he uses other folks to do jobs. I can tell you when I was at DHS, when I was in the Oval Office, I'd end up in conversations on a lot of widely disparate subjects, and that's part of how he manages. It has strengths and it has weaknesses.
But I will say in the record of achieving peace, there, there isn't a human being on planet Earth who has gotten more peace agreements than Donald Trump.
[22:25:00]
And, you know, the number of course he needs to get the peace prize that he wants is one more than he ever gets. He's never going to get it.
But I do think --
SELLERS: Because there are big reasons why.
CUCCINELLI: I do think that --
SELLERS: You're threatening soldiers in Nigeria. You're threatening -- you mean you --
(CROSSTALKS)
CUCCINELLI: You know, well, let's talk about what Abby had talked about.
SELLERS: I mean, like there are reasons why.
CUCCINELLI: The warships in the Caribbean, that's a hell of a lot of leverage if you're a Maduro. And we can all talk about whether --
SELLERS: You have National Guardsmen in American cities. There are a lot of reasons you're not getting a peace agreement.
CUCCINELLI: Well, he's gotten more all around the world and you can't meet my challenge. You can't name anybody who's gotten more peace agreements signed around the world.
SELLERS: I mean, a peace agreement, you know this as attorney general. Sometimes when you wrote an attorney journal opinion, when you, or when the, you know, attorney general of Virginia, they meant nothing more than the paper they were written on. These peace agreements. We see peace agreements all the time. We just saw it in Israel and Gaza. And what happened the next day? You had accusations --
JENNINGS: The hostages came home. That's what happened.
SELLERS: You had accusations though that the peace agreement meant absolutely nothing and you still had bloodshed the next day.
And so, yes --
JENNINGS: The hostages came home, Bakari.
SELLERS: I am excited that the hostages came home. JENNINGS: You said, what happened? You said it's not worth the paper that's written on. We've got the living hostages back. Doesn't that mean anything to you?
SELLERS: No. But are they -- is there still bloodshed?
JENNINGS: Just give the man his due. Just give the man his due.
SELLERS: Thank you for the hostages coming home. Is there still bloodshed going on?
JENNINGS: I had to scream at you to get it.
SELLERS: No, you don't have to scream me to get it, right? That's bullshit. I mean, I know -- I understand when there are Jewish hostages that come home, Scott. I understand that. That's a good day. But if you can't recognize the bloodshed that's still going on, that's a problem.
PHILLIP: Yes. I mean we do know hundreds of people have still been killed in Gaza after that peace deal was signed, so there's a long way to go there as well.
Next for us, it's been ten years in the making, but Donald Trump apparently has a healthcare plan and he might be doing exactly what Democrats demanded in the government shutdown. We'll debate.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:31:29]
PHILLIP: Tonight, and 10 years after it was first promised, we still don't have a health care plan from the White House -- the Trump White House, that is. We were expecting one yesterday, but the President delayed it because Republicans are pushing back. And so, the clock is now ticking with the deadline to extend Obamacare subsidies just five weeks away now. And if they're not, millions of Americans could see their costs double. Like last month, Mike Johnson said that his party had a health care plan and it was ready to go. Listen to this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR: Is it the government reopened tonight? Would Republicans have a plan to address the Obamacare subsidies?
REP. MIKE JOHNSON (R) HOUSE SPEAKER: Yes. Yes.
(CROSSTALK)
COLLINS: You would have a plan tonight.
JOHNSON: Yes, we did. We have proposals to -- yes --
(CROSSTALK)
COLLINS: Okay, but proposal is different than a plan. JOHNSON: -- we could have that ready immediately.
(CROSSTALK)
JOHNSON: Yes.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Well, it has been more than a month since that interview, and still there is no plan. Remember this moment? Late John McCain and his famous thumbs down that killed the Republican replacement to Obamacare. That was eight years ago. That means Republicans had eight years to come up with an alternative, and still there's nothing.
So, after that McCain moment, Trump tweeted that lawmakers should let Obamacare implode, and then they'll be forced to create a new plan. And earlier this month, he posted that Obamacare, quote, "sucks." But it turns out that the centerpiece of the Trump plan is to extend the Obamacare subsidies? Well, that's something that Democrats had demanded during the shutdown. However, tonight, if you're following all of this, Trump actually denied that he wants to extend those subsidies. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: I like my plan the best. Don't give any money to the insurance companies. Give it to the people directly. Let them go out by their own health care plan.
SELLERS: - extend those subsidies -- those --
TRUMP: I'd rather not. Somebody said I want to extend it for two years. I don't want to extend it for two years. I'd rather not extend them at all. And maybe some kind of an extension may be necessary to get something else done because the unaffordable care act has been a disaster.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: If it's such a disaster, where is the alternative plan? Where is it?
HINOJOSA: There is no alternative plan. Donald Trump understands that costs are going up and that Americans are frustrated with this administration and Republicans. And now costs are about to go up again when it comes to health care.
And so, I think what happened here, and I would love to hear Scott's thoughts on this, but it sounds like Donald Trump, for the first time, is actually hearing the American people wanting to do something about it and potentially extend the ACA subsidies. But it sounds like Speaker Johnson was like this is not going to go well in the Republican Party. This is not -- this should not move forward. And so now --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: The Speaker -- so, Speaker Johnson, I mean, to your point -- look, he argued during the shutdown, oh, we're going to deal with it after. We're going to deal with it after. Now, he is cautioning the White House according to "The Wall Street Journal" that most Republicans don't have an appetite to extend those subsidies according to people familiar with it. It is a demonstration of, I don't know if it's actually a political difficulty or maybe a political lack of will on the part of Republicans.
JENNINGS: Well, look, a couple things. Number one, just to answer your question earlier, it's a debt. We live in a Democrat health care regime called Obamacare. It's not a Republican health care plan. It was a Democrat president who put this on the American people and we're now living with that. Plus, we're living with the cliff and the sunset they put in and the subsidies that we had to put in, I guess, to pay for the disaster that was Obamacare. All done by Democrats, not done by Republicans.
(CROSSTALK)
HINOJOSA: Although it's even more --
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: To your question, there's a very simple answer to this question.
[22:35:00]
The President has raised, and I think most people would agree, that why are we giving billions upon billions upon billions of dollars to health insurance companies when nobody feels like their insurance is getting any better, their benefits are getting any better. You've got millions of people whose insurance is so bad they never even try to use it.
It has failed. He has simply raised the point. Why don't we just give people money directly so they can go to the doctor and feel like they can get treated without dealing with some freaking insurance company that doesn't really allow them to use their benefits anyway? That's the President's plan. Now --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: That's actually not the President's --
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: It is. It is literally what he said out loud.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: That's not the entirely -- it's not entirely the President's plan. Here are the other details. They do plan to extend the Obamacare subsidies at least according to what they were going to release this week. They're going to add a new income cap. They would require all the employees to make minimum monthly payments and then they would have that health savings account option.
But the health savings account option -- that all sounds good and -- good and well in a system that we don't have right now in which those accounts, I don't care how much money is in them. It's not going to be enough to cover someone when they go to the emergency room because they got hit by a car, and then the bill that they get as a result of that is $30,000. So, where is the actual health care plan to address the actual health care system that we have in this country?
CUCCINELLI: Well, you're pointing to "Wall Street Journal" as if it's the Trump health care plan. We don't have a health care plan yet.
(CROSSTALK)
SELLERS: We should clip that. We should clip that quote.
(CROSSTALK)
HINOJOSA: Well, I'm glad. We don't. That's why. We don't have -- they don't have one.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: That's not -- the question I was asking is why? Where is the plan?
(CROSSTALK)
CUCCINELLI: I think the President is exactly right. So, since I left the A.G.'s office over 10 years ago, my family's been working on cash basis using a Christian co-op, not Obamacare. It is the unaffordable care act and it works better working with cash. If he'll deliver dollars directly to people, like you just said in the clip you played, instead of insurance companies, then yes, there will be an adjustment period but it's going to work a whole lot better for ordinary Americans.
PHILLIP: Can I ask you a question because I'm not sure how that system that you're talking about works. What happens if there is a serious catastrophic illness in your family?
CUCCINELLI: That's what co-op back-up is for.
PHILLIP: So that --
CUCCINELLI: It actually looks like insurance. We don't get any help until 10 or $12,000 worth of cost. Something like that.
SELLERS: Oh, wow. But how do the working poor --
HINOJOSA: They're not going to be able to afford that.
SELLERS: How do the working poor do that?
(CROSSTALK)
CUCCINELLI: There are other options with a lower -- with a lower --
(CROSSTALK)
SELLERS: But I mean is --
CUCCINELLI: I think that the insurance is supposed to be -- you know, your car insurance doesn't pay for your oil change.
(CROSSTALK)
SELLERS: The car insurance and a heart attack is actually different. I mean --
(CROSSTALK)
HINOJOSA: Well, your kids get sick.
(CROSSTALK)
CUCCINELLI: But you're playing on the emotion.
SELLERS: I'm not.
CUCCINELLI: You're playing on the emotion. And you're playing on the emotion.
HINOJOSA: I'm not playing on the emotion.
CUCCINELLI: Yes, you are.
HINOJOSA: I'm playing on --
(CROSSTALK)
HINOJOSA: -- family issues.
(CROSSTALK)
CUCCINELLI: We don't have a system, Abby. You know why -- what that system we don't have is it's called a free market --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: But can I --but can just address what you just said?
CUCCINELLI: -- this is socialist healthcare and it doesn't work and it isn't fixable.
PHILLIP: There is a difference between your car breaking down and you needing an oil change and you having a heart attack and needing healthcare.
CUCCINELLI: Of course there is.
PHILLIP: Because one -- the difference between those two things is life and death. That's not emotions, that's actual, just real life.
CUCCINELLI: I'm talking about the financial side of it. One is insurance.
PHILLIP: But I do think this is important. What is healthcare, right? Healthcare is not just nice to have. It's the difference between life and death for people. And so, I think that's part of the issue here is a system that you're talking about, one in which if you just can't afford it, you're just on your own, you're screwed.
SELLERS: But that's not what it is.
CUCCINELLI: No.
SELLERS: That is not what health care --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: I know Bakari, can you just give me just a second for him to answer?
(CROSSTALK)
CUCCINELLI: And you want to focus on what health care is, and my comment was directed to what is insurance.
PHILLIP: Right.
CUCCINELLI: -- and we don't have insurance --
PHILLIP: But healthcare is in service of -- insurance is in service of providing health care. I mean they are not separable.
CUCCINELLI: I remember back, you know, when Obamacare was rolling around, the Virginia equivalent of the HHS secretary, a doctor, said health insurance is not health care. We see this in the Medicaid system all the time
PHILLIP: Yes.
CUCCINELLI: We have low prices in Medicaid but we don't have medical providers.
PHILLIP: Yes.
CUCCINELLI: So, you don't have access to care.
PHILLIP: Yes, which I understand that. I mean, obviously there's care, right? And then there is what happens when the unthinkable happens. And that's really what insurance is there for. But look, the bottom line is this is actually an interesting and a good conversation that we're having about what healthcare looks like in this country. That is not the conversation that is being had right now at the level of people who are making decisions about what healthcare should look like. I mean, if there ought to be a new conversation about healthcare, why
isn't that happening? Why is the White House just putting out a plan and then Republicans are saying we don't want to do anything about it?
SELLERS: The Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, it mirrors what happened in 2006 with the Heritage Foundation coming out to eliminate the free rider program and create this individual mandate that was pushed forward by Mitt Romney, right? So, this is not some democratic socialist, just creation first. By the way, it was pushed forward by the Heritage Foundation. So, if Scott and Ken want to disagree with that, that's fine.
(CROSSTALK)
SELLERS: Health care --
CUCCINELLI: But you're only --
JENNINGS: Strongly.
SELLERS: That's fine. You take that up with Heritage Foundation. But what I'm also saying is that health care is more than that which is why I was trying to jump in earlier.
[22:40:02]
Because people have this really weird, just fascination with it's just people who show up in your emergency rooms. We've heard that the whole -- this whole time. It's more than that. And what Obamacare did, which is what I like to call it, because he deserves credit for it. Whatever you want to say, he deserves credit for it.
He did something that nobody else was able to do. But it allowed people to stay on their insurance until they were 26 years old. It got rid of health insurance companies who were literally pushing people out of emergency rooms, not caring for them because they had pre- existing conditions.
But health care is more than that. And I think Ken would agree with this as well, because in rural communities like you represented in Virginia, like I'm from in South Carolina, it is almost the epicenter of your economy because it props up your rural hospitals. If those hospitals shut down, if you don't expand Medicaid, what happens? Your entire economy closes down because what's around those rural healthcare facilities? Bakeries, little hotels, pharmacies, all of these things. It's your number one employer.
So, it is a part of most communities in this country, entire ecosystem and Republicans are so microscopic when it comes to it. So, that's why you have people like Nikki Haley when she was governor of South Carolina who didn't expand Medicaid and now they're looking back at it and it was a faux pas, or Mississippi, because Republicans fundamentally wanted to tie this to Barack Obama. They didn't want him to have the credit and now they don't have a fix or a solve for what should be a program that adapts with time. PHILLIP: All right, next for us, Ben Shapiro takes on his fellow
conservatives and then he blames them for making young men feel like they are the victims. Does he have a point? We'll debate.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:46:18]
PHILLIP: Tonight, is the right becoming the left? Ben Shapiro is claiming that the party that has long criticized Democrats for having a victimhood mentality is now sending that same message to Gen Z. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BEN SHAPIRO, CONSERVATIVE PODCAST HOST: I think that the right is actually weirdly feminizing young men by giving them a victimology to buy into. Listen, if you're failing in life, if you're failing in life, yes, we can get the obstacles out of your way, but kind of it's a little your fault. It's a little of your fault. You should actually pick your ass up and go out and do something useful. And this notion that you as a Gen Z male are facing these obstacles that no other human has faced for all of human history. Like, read a book for one day. Like, seriously. Like, go talk to your grandfather.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: What do you think?
CUCCINELLI: I do love listening to Ben Shapiro. Look, I think that he sees the problem he described popping its head up on the right, and he's going to have none of it. I agree with him. Victimhood is a path to more problems. It isn't a -- meaning, identifying oneself that way as your primary focus instead of trying to solve the problems that are out there.
And he said, you know, get yourself off your butt, start working on these problems. And I agree 100 percent. I mean, frankly, that attitude helped make America the greatest country in the history of the world.
PHILLIP: I guess I'm just surprised that now, this very moment is the first time that this thought has crossed his mind. Because I do think that actually the victimhood mentality is something that has helped power Trumpism. I mean, it's all been about what they are doing to us, how we are the victims, how the immigrants are taking our jobs, how other countries are taking our jobs. Everything is victimhood in Trump's world. So, this is not really all that new. I'm surprised --
JENNINGS: I disagree with your assessment. I mean, I think what drove a lot of President Trump's coalition is a whole bunch of people who felt like they were doing everything that they've been told to do. Get up every day, go to work, pay their taxes, take care of their families, play by the rules. And they were living under systems that were then forcing them to pay taxes and deal with other ideologies and cultural issues that were essentially harming their lives or causing them to not be able to life.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: I feel like you're just literally describing -- you're literally describing -- you were describing the victimhood mentality, Scott. You were literally doing that.
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: No, I'm describing people who get up and go to work. Well, if you want to describe working class America that follows the laws and pay their taxes as victims, go ahead, but that's how to serve --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Well, I'm just saying -- well, I'm just saying -- you're saying that --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: But hold on. But you're saying that, look, everybody is doing everything right, right? But other people are, you know, putting something on --
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: Yes, like illegal immigrants who come here and take up public resources. They're not doing things right, but you know --
PHILLIP: But look. I do want to be clear that--
JENNINGS: -- but then let -- and you would argue that it's okay to leave them here.
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: The working class of this country would say --
(CROSSTALK)
HINOJOSA: There are a lot of immigrants who do great things --
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: -- they broke the rules --
HINOJOSA: -- and service our families.
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: -- and I didn't, and yet they get more than I do.
PHILLIP: Yes, but hold on. But Scott, not all of the problems in this country are the responsibility of immigrants. Would you agree with that?
JENNINGS: Yes, some are, some aren't.
PHILLIP: Some are and some aren't. However --
JENNINGS: But that's an example of something that U.S. have a Trump coalition --
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: -- that's true.
PHILLIP: -- the overarching theme of Trumpism is a lot of what you're saying. That it's other countries screwing us over. It's immigrants screwing us over, and there's, where in the Trump mentality is it that, you know, I don't know, according to Ben Shapiro, that we need to pick ourselves up and do something about it.
(CROSSTALK)
SELLERS: But the fascinating part about this --
JENNINGS: You don't have to accept it. The Trump -- the Trump ethos would be, we don't have to accept it, we can fight back. And what Ben is saying I think is the same thing like, don't sit on your ass (ph) and just say well, well, it was me, I'm a victim and there's nothing i can do about.
(CROSSTALK)
SELLERS: The actual answer is you live in the greatest country in the world, of course there's --
(CROSSTALK)
SELLERS: The fascinating part about this argument and that the fascinating part about watching this argument play out just in being here is that we've been able to articulate these same arguments for a very long period of time. That you've had 300 years of slavery. That you've had 100 years of Jim Crow. That you've had redlining. You've had the remnants of it. You've had state sanctioned violence from Emmett Till all the way forward.
And as soon as somebody articulates those things, for any reason that you may be running behind in the race that we call America, then all of a sudden we're playing victim. But in you to his mind, it doesn't quite articulate it. It doesn't compute the same way --
PHILLIP: It was very notable that Scott used the word systems who -- that are --
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: Is it wrong? Is it wrong to expect people to enforce the laws?
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: But I'm just saying -- but hold on, Scott. All I'm just saying is that when people talk about systemic racism,
SELLERS: No, but I just want --
PHILLIP: -- you guys think that -- you guys say that that is --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: -- describe the system as being --
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: I'm describing systems where people are encouraged to break the law --
(CROSSTALK)
SELLERS: This is where Scott and I agree and it frustrates the people on the left who I love and the people on the right who Scott loves, Because I just want the systems to be fair. Like I don't want the systems to pick winners and losers, but I want the systems to be fair. And I think Scott would agree with that, as well.
(CROSSTALK)
SELLERS: We just -- but you also have to realize that for 400 years -- they want, right? So we need to make sure that we do everything above and beyond. I don't want, I can't make you dance. i just want everybody to have an opportunity having equal dance floor.
CUCCINELLI: Well, goodness that is I can't make me dance. So, but that's --
(CROSSTALK)
CUCCINELLI: Bakari, kind of connecting your comment to Abby's, is the picking winners and losers. So, you don't have to look Republican versus Democrat. You can look right inside the GOP, after Chamber of Commerce wing of the GOP versus ordinary people. And the Chamber of Commerce wing has been winning for most of my lifetime until along came a guy named Donald Trump.
And he's very unorthodox, and he does things a very different way. But he is, within the GOP, he is changing that focus. It has -- the focus has shifted much more to regular people than it ever was for most of my lifetime.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: But Ken, the Chamber of Commerce is at the White House every single week. He is totally fine with the Chamber of Commerce -- Meta, Google, Apple, you know, you name it.
(CROSSTALK)
CUCCINELLI: Yes, but you can't call a Donald Trump -- you cannot call a Donald Trump agenda a Chamber of Commerce agenda. (CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: They were at the White House every single week. They call the President and ask for favors that he gives. They call him all the time and ask for carve outs. They ask for breaks. They ask for carve outs in tariffs. I'm just saying --
(CROSSTALK)
CUCCINELLI: Which is what they do, they're just lobbying organization.
PHILLIP: I'm just saying, the individual companies that comprise the Chamber of Commerce, they don't have to go through the Chamber anymore. They can just walk right in the front doors of the White House and get the things that they're asking for. You can't -- I take your point about the populism that Trump ran on, but the governance of the Trump administration has been that if, oh, you know, OpenAI needs something, if one of these other companies needs something, they call and then he says, you know what, we're going to exempt you from this policy.
How is that not a Chamber of Commerce mindset as opposed to what is he doing for the average American that is actually on the receiving end of his policy, specifically tariffs? The people who are going to the grocery store and buying a box of Folgers and they're paying a mark-up because of tariffs. What about those people?
CUCCINELLI: And what do you the Chamber thinks of those tariffs? I think we've heard that pretty clearly.
PHILLIP: I'm asking what do regular Americans think about those tariffs. We know that they don't like that.
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: Americans is the key word.
CUCCINELLI: Americans is the key word.
JENNINGS: Americans is the key word.
(CROSSTALK)
HINOJOSA: Well, it's also alienating young men right here with these comments.
PHILLIP: All right, okay. Nightcaps -- they are next. And it is, trust me, the happy edition. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:58:38]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNKNOWN: Someone told me that my hair looked really pretty today.
UNKNOWN: There was a new girl at school today and I think I made a new friend, so --
UNKNOWN: I finally got a girlfriend.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Oh man, that's cute. All right, schools in Ohio are going viral for setting up a microphone and a camera to allow students to share something positive that happened to them today. So, you each have a few seconds to tell us yours. Ken, you're up.
CUCCINELLI: I'm up first. So, I got work deadlines pushed back today and parents in town yesterday. So, where I live halfway to Richmond from here in D.C., we went -- we picked up a trolley and, and did a historic tour with my parents and got a family history day, Revolutionary War, Civil War, Civil Rights era. And of course, if you're in Fredericksburg, George Washington across the river.
PHILLIP: All right, I love it. Xochi.
HINOJOSA: I delivered homemade mac and cheese to 16 three-year-olds for my daughter's Thanksgiving potluck. And when I walked in with the mac and cheese, everyone's eyes lit up, so --
PHILLIP: Bakari.
SELLERS: So I was -- I wanted to go to Las Vegas to watch my Gamecock women play basketball in Las Vegas and my wife said definitely not because we're watching our daughter, our six-year-old twin daughter Sadie.
PHILLIP: Oh, Sadie.
SELLERS: Yes, Nutcracker baby. One performance down. Three more to go. I have four performances, eight hours.
[23:00:00]
PHILLIP: Scott?
JENNINGS: First of all, happy birthday to Abby.
PHILLIP: Thank you.
ALL: Happy birthday, Abby.
JENNINGS: Second, mine is I got to travel with Thatcher today. Thatcher, where are you, buddy? Thatcher, Come over here.
SELLERS: There you go. Thatcher, Thatcher.
JENNINGS: Thatcher is one of my children. He's out of school today and we traveled here from Kentucky, and we came here, he's been working at CNN all day. But anyways, best thing that happened to me today.
PHILLIP: All right. All right everyone, thank you. On that note, thank you very much. Thanks for watching "NewsNight". "Laura Coates Live" starts right now.
