Return to Transcripts main page
CNN NewsNight with Abby Phillip
Turning Point Event Shows Deep Divide Within MAGA; Erika Kirk Endorses J.D. Vance For 2028; Vance Says, Not Doing Self-Defeating Purity Tests; Epstein Survivors And Victims' Advocates Furious With The DOJ's File Handlings; Trump Administration Halts Federal Leases For Five Offshore Wind Projects Under Construction. Aired 10-11p ET
Aired December 22, 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, grifters, charlatans, moral imbecility.
TUCKER CARLSON, CONSERVATIVE POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I watched it. I laughed.
PHILLIP: But as this MAGA feud a sign of bigger problems ahead?
Plus the vice president spoke at Turning Point USA and didn't denounce any of it.
J.D. VANCE, U.S. VICE PRESIDENT: And when I say that I'm going to fight alongside of you, I mean all of you, each and every one.
PHILLIP: And his own speech opened up some big questions.
VANCE: We always will be a Christian nation.
PHILLIP: And the Epstein files, the DOJ, taking back some of what was released. Survivors are furious over the redactions and Democrats say Pam Bondi could be in contempt.
Also, a new strike in the president's war against windmills.
DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: That windmills are driving the whales crazy, obviously.
PHILLIP: The energy president taking the wind out of an entire industry, stopping funding, citing national security concerns.
Live at the table, Scott Jennings, Tim Parrish, Nina Turner, and Adam Mockler.
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 turning point for MAGA. Tonight, we are getting a fresh glimpse into the deep divisions that are splintering President Trump's MAGA coalition. There is bitter infighting that exploded at that Turning Point USA annual convention over the weekend, and it exposed some serious rifts over things like conspiracy theories, bigotry, anti-Semitism, and extremist views.
Some of MAGA's biggest stars threw jabs at each other, including Ben Shapiro, who called out his fellow right wing podcaster Tucker Carlson over his interview with outspoken white nationalist and Holocaust denier Nick Fuentes.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BEN SHAPIRO, CONSERVATIVE POLITICAL COMMENTATOR AND MEDIA HOST: The conservative movement is also in danger from charlatans who claim to speak in the name of principle but actually traffic in conspiracies and dishonesty.
And the people who refuse to condemn Candace's truly vicious attacks, and some of them are speaking here, are guilty of cowardice.
He knew that Nick Fuentes is an evil troll, and that building him up is an act of moral imbecility, and that is precisely what Tucker Carlson did.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Carlson wasn't too happy with that, while other MAGA heavyweights were quick to take sides.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: To hear calls for like de-platforming and denouncing people at a Charlie Kirk event, I'm like, what? This is hilarious.
STEVE BANNON, FORMER WHITE HOUSE CHIEF STRATEGIST: Let's face it, Ben Shapiro is the farthest thing from MAGA.
Ben Shapiro is like a cancer, and that cancer spreads.
MEGYN KELLY, HOST, THE MEGYN KELLY SHOW: Well, I found it kind of funny that Ben thinks he has the power to decide who gets excommunicated from the conservative movement.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Vice President J.D. Vance also took the stage on the final day of the conference and he addressed this friction head on.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VANCE: I didn't bring a list of conservatives to denounce or to de- platform. I know some of you are discouraged by the infighting over any number of issues. Don't be discouraged. Wouldn't you rather lead a movement of free thinkers who sometimes disagree than a bunch of drones who take their orders from George Soros?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: So, fundamentally, this is about whether or not there should be boundaries to the conservative movement, Scott. And, you know, I mean, there are all kinds of other issues, and I will get to some of them, including the rift over Israel, which is a part of this. But, really, what Megyn Kelly is saying, what Tucker Carlson is saying, what Steve Bannon is saying is that no one should say who's in or out. Is that really what some people believe in the conservative movement right now?
SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, it depends on who they're talking about. I mean, they obviously have a disagreement with Ben Shapiro about certain things. I think it goes to the Israel issue when it comes to Ben. Ultimately, it'll be up to the nominee of the party in '28 to sort of build his own coalition, which is why J.D. Vance's positioning here is important.
I will just note that, you know, for all the talk of rift, if you look at the straw poll results that they took among the 30,000 people who were there, 87 percent of them said that Israel was either our top ally or an ally of the United States. Only 13 percent said no. And the number one issue facing the United States, according to the respondents, was radical Islam.
And so there seemed to be actually not that much of a rift when it came to the audience. There may have been some fighting among personalities on stage, but there was pretty clear-eyed view of being able to tell the difference between who our friends and our enemies are among the attendees.
[22:05:03]
PHILLIP: But, I mean, should there be boundaries? Should someone be able to go up on that stage and say, if you believe these things, you are not part of our movement?
JENNINGS: Well, look, my personal view is that this was an event -- it's the first big rally since Charlie got murdered, and specifically what Candace has been doing, terrorizing a grieving widow for the last several months with conspiracy theories, some of them wrapped up in this whole Israel nonsense is nothing short of despicable. And I think Ben was right to call that out.
I didn't hear Ben calling for the excommunication or the de- platforming of anyone, but I do think it's more than reasonable to say what kind of a movement allows someone in whose job is to monetize the grief of a widow after she had to witness her husband and the leader of this organization get murdered. I think that's more than inbounds for him to talk about.
Look, we're a political party and a political movement. We're not a sponge. You don't have to absorb everything that oozes in under the door. I think that was Ben's point. And, look, everybody's going to have a right to say whatever they want. It's not about free speech. It's about what sort of speech you want to be identified with. I, for one, don't really want to be identified with someone who is terrorizing a grieving widow.
PHILLIP: Yes. And we will get to the -- how Vance plays into this, because you mentioned it, but, you know, The New York Times wrote this, in the depths of these Republican divisions has been obscured by two things, shared affection for Trump and a shared revulsion at the left. But Trump is no longer on the ballot and there's increased alarm over the new right. These two factors are working together to shrink the Republican tent.
ADAM MOCKLER, COMMENTATOR, MEIDASTOUCH NETWORK: Yes. You said J.D. Vance is important -- his opinion is important. He has had no moral clarity about any of this division whatsoever. He refused to condemn the young Republican group chat when it came out a few months ago, they were talking about gas chambers. He's refused to condemn Paul Ingrassia. He's refused to directly combat the Groyper movement growing. I just think it's like -- my entire life, Republicans have been targeting minority group after minority group. Conservatives have been getting rich and gaining power off of this, targeting immigrants, targeting LGBTQ people, women, it's been Somalis, Haitians.
But the second that certain MAGA commentators are now the subject of this exact type of bigotry, they have a stunning amount of moral clarity about it. Vivek Ramaswamy only had moral clarity when anti- Indian American hatred was being spread. Republican Representative Randy Fine has a lot of moral clarity about bigotry when it's against him, but the way that he talks about Zohran Mamdani, the way that he talks about Ilhan Omar, is incredibly contradictory. You can't just stop bigotry from entering your movements when it's hitting you. You have to stop it at the door. This is not courageous for people to speak out. It is self-preservation at this point.
JENNINGS: You brought up Mamdani. Do you believe that Mamdani has shown any moral clarity when it comes to Israel and the attacks on Jews?
MOCKLER: The day after he was elected, there was a swastika -- let me finish. There was a swastika drawn on a window and he immediately tweeted out and condemned it. There is no equivocation between the way -- there was no equivalent between the way Zohran and J.D. Vance have conducted themselves.
JENNINGS: So, today --
MOCKLER: Do you think J.D. Vance should condemn the Fuentes? Should J.D. Vance condemn the Groypers?
JENNINGS: He has. He told him he could eat, S-H-I-T.
MOCKLER: Not on stage. He didn't do it on stage in front of the Groypers.
JENNINGS: Number two, today, Mamdani got asked, you know, there are people on your transition team who have said it's okay to kill Jews after October the 7th, and he said, oh, well, you know, we have a diversity of political opinion. I think to throw Mamdani in with J.D. Vance is a huge reach. Mamdani has been the opposite but morally clear on any of this.
(CROSSTALKS)
PHILLIP: Scott, let me ask you this, because I think this is actually to Adam's point. If you are willing to condemn -- let's say, you know, if you're willing to condemn Mamdani for what you just described, again, why would you not condemn conservatives for doing effectively the same thing when you have people like, you know, Nick Fuentes who are out here?
JENNINGS: Are you questioning me about what I've had to say about anti-Semitism and who should be --
MOCKLER: You need clarity about people like Paul Ingrassia.
PHILLIP: I'm questioning you about whether you're willing to apply the same principle to Mamdani that you would apply to people in your own party. Are you willing to do that?
JENNINGS: I have repeatedly on this show said anti-Semitism has no place in our political discourse and we don't need to be associated with them.
PHILLIP: So, for the people, like J.D. Vance who say, oh, well, you know, we have a lot of different viewpoints in the Republican tent, and who am I to say who is in and who is not, he just mentioned the Republican group chat. And that was effectively J.D. Vance's point was, which is that these are just boys. Boys will be boys. They're just young men. We're not going to denounce them. We're not going to denounce them over little mistakes. Are you okay with that?
JENNINGS: J.D. Vance is going to have ample opportunity to lead this coalition.
PHILLIP: No, but I'm asking about you --
(CROSSTALKS)
MOCKLER: J.D. Vance should condemn it.
PHILLIP: I'm asking about you. Are you okay with that, just in the same way that --
JENNINGS: Well, continue the beating and then I'll answer it.
PHILLIP: That's what I'm asking. I get that J.D. Vance is J.D. Vance. But I'm wondering about you. What's the principle that you apply to J.D. Vance and is it the same that as what you're applying to Mamdani?
JENNINGS: Well, I don't put them anywhere near in the same universe, A. B, look, it is up to us as conservatives to decide who we want to be associated with. I can assure you, we do not want to be associated in any way, shape, or form with Nick Fuentes or anybody approximating what he has to say, period, full stop. [22:10:07]
It will destroy us if we do it.
MOCKLER: I wish J.D. Vance would say the same thing.
PHILLIP: Tim?
TIM PARRISH, CONSERVATIVE STRATEGIST: I was going to say, I completely agree. There's been several leaders in the conservative movement who've pushed back on all these talking points about anti-Semitism. And I will completely agree with Scott. There is no place in the conservative movement or in the Republican Party for that matter, for anti-Semitism or any of those things.
I do find it ironic, though, that you compare the vice president who has, in fact, you -- your litmus test was that he went on Twitter and you just said the vice president didn't condemn something from the stage. The vice president condemned the group chat. We've talked about this on this show, and you guys are completely --
MOCKLER: He called this --
(CROSSTALKS)
PARRISH: Let me finish.
MOCKLER: Okay.
PARRISH: You said that the vice president --
PHILLIP: And we've talked about this on this show.
PARRISH: We did you guys are mischaracterizing the statements that the vice president made. He absolutely came out and condemned and said that there is no place for any comments like that in their Republican Party.
MOCKLER: J.D. Vance said he's going to warn his kids, so some, quote/unquote, scumbag doesn't leak a group chat in a similar way. He was implying the person who leaked the group chat was a scumbag. J.D. Vance has had the farthest thing from moral clarity this entire time.
And, listen, do you know who Paul Ingrassia is?
PARRISH: Sure.
MOCKLER: Do you know who Paul Ingrassi is?
JENNINGS: Yes, we've debated it.
MOCKLER: Do you know what -- okay. So., do you know what Paul Ingrassia said?
JENNINGS: Yes. We've debated it.
MOCKLER: That he has a Nazi streak. Oh, you've debated it, but has Trump fired him or is he still a part of the administration?
JENNINGS: I don't know where he is right now.
MOCKLER: He's a part of the administration and you know that. You're lying right now. You know that he's a part of the administration. He's still there, and he said he, quote, has a Nazi streak. So, you can sit there and play coy but you are not having the clarity that you are talking about right now. Do you condemn Paul Ingrassia?
JENNINGS: I certainly condemn anything, anybody --
MOCKLER: Should Trump fire Paul Ingrassia?
JENNINGS: -- approximating who had a Nazi streak.
FMR. STATE SEN. NINA TURNER (D-OH): The Republicans just have a problem. I would say the Democratic Party has a problem as well. Whenever you coddle bigots, it's going to come back to haunt you.
And so Republicans do definitely have a decision to make, whether or not, you know, having free speech is one thing, but coddling people who would cradle bigotry, nurse bigotry, stand up and clap for bigotry, that is a problem.
And so now, because the fractions within the Republican Party, which there are some in the Democratic Party too, are having this fight because the promise was that President Donald J. Trump was going to change the material conditions of working class people in the United States of America. And that heretofore has not happened in a way that gives people the relief that they need. And so now you have these people fighting, but bigots are going to bigot.
And so leaders have a responsibility. Is Vice President J.D. Vance going to be the vice president for everybody or for certain people?
PHILLIP: You know, and I think that -- let me just make one point, you know, because I think what Nina is saying is correct. You know, you and many other Republicans, you know, lambasted Democrats for years over allowing actually some anti-Semitism into their party.
And now you have Republicans seemingly making the same mistake. Megyn Kelly responded to Ben Shapiro and his criticism of anti-Semites who are associated with Republicans, and she said, Ben is Israel first. She said she understands that Shapiro would consider such a charge anti-Semitic. And she says, and I'm sorry, but his behavior has proven that charge to be correct. Why would you divide the American conservative movement, which was gelling, which was becoming much more cohesive for a moment after Charlie died over Israel?
JENNINGS: Well, she --
PHILLIP: So, she's basically saying, let's let them all in because we were just starting to get a groove together as opposed to saying it's not okay for that to be --
JENNINGS: Well, Ben didn't actually bring up Israel in his speech. It wasn't really about --
PHILLIP: She brought it up.
JENNINGS: It wasn't really about Israel. So, that's number one. Number two, you're very interested in Ingrassia, who I'm only vaguely familiar with him, have never met.
MOCKLER: He said he's got a Nazi streak.
JENNINGS: But we're all familiar with Mamdani. So, I'll ask you a similar question, do you agree with the phrase globalize the intifada?
MOCKLER: No.
JENNINGS: Okay. So, do you condemn Zohran Mamdani for his failure to condemn people who go around chanting this at his rallies and events?
MOCKLER: It's a false equivalence.
JENNINGS: Oh, is it?
MOCKLER: So, you want -- wait a minute. Paul Ingrassia saying he had a Nazi streak?
JENNINGS: (INAUDIBLE) but not for Mamdani?
MOCKLER: Quote/unquote, I was on a Nazi streak.
(CROSSTALKS)
PHILLIP: Let me just hit pause because we have more on the other side of this. Next for us, J.D. Vance and his time in the spotlight at TPUSA showed what he will stand up for and what he will ignore. But will his dream of building a big tent become a nightmare for the Republicans?
Plus, it is no secret that the president does not like windmills, and now he is pulling the plug on funding for more of them on the East Coast. What some of the unintended consequences of that move might be, that's next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:15:00]
PHILLIP: Tonight, Charlie Kirk's widow is throwing her support behind J.D. Vance in 2028.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ERIKA KIRK, CEO, TURNING POINT USA: We are going to get my husband's friend, J.D. Vance, elected for 48 in the most resounding way possible.
(END VIDEO CLIP) PHILLIP: And Vance, when he took center stage at the TPUSA annual conference last night, he made an appeal to young conservatives to come together even as those cracks we've been discussing have begun to show in MAGA world.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VANCE: And when I say that I'm going to fight alongside of you, I mean all of you, each and every one. President Trump did not build the greatest coalition in politics by running his supporters through endless, self-defeating purity tests. He says, make America great again because every American is invited.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[22:20:02]
PHILLIP: He was referring to a lot of the comments that we've been discussing, and I think actually he was also referring in part to a speech that you brought up from Vivek Ramaswamy, where he laid out all the things that maybe he would consider it to be purity test. Let's just play a little bit of that.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VIVEK RAMASWAMY, (R) OHIO GUBERNATORIAL CANDIDATE, FORMER 2024 PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: If you believe that Hitler was pretty (BLEEP) cool, you have no place in the future of the conservative movement. If you call Usha Vance, the second lady of the United States of America, a (BLEEP), you have no place in the future of the conservative movement.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: It's quite the tonal contrast, Nina. I mean, you know, Vance had a mission last night when he came out. He was basically going to say, I don't want anybody to think that they're not part of this movement because he thinks that's how Trump built it. Is he right?
TURNER: I mean, yes, the president definitely benefited from stirring up bigotry, the latent bigotry that is already there. President Donald J. Trump did not create anti-blackness or any other type of bigotry, but he certainly plays the tune to rattle up his base.
I'm glad to see Vivek say something about it. You know, in 2023 when he was before the Iowa -- he spoke in Iowa in 2023 and he said the following. He said, I'm not sure the boogeyman white supremacist exists somewhere in America. I've just never met one in my life, right. Maybe I'll meet a unicorn sooner and maybe those exist.
So, I'm glad that Vivek, who's running for governor of the great state of Ohio, my home state, is finally seeing the light because he wrote that op-ed, he talked about the rise of anti-Indian hate, but when black Americans talk about anti-blackness, all of a sudden it's the unicorn and it's those people who are woke. So, I'm hoping that he is having a transition. The words that he said, I would have to agree with it. You can have a big tent but you got to be able to call people out when they're wrong. And so if you are anti- Semitic, if you're anti -- you know, Islamophobic, if you are anti- black, if you are anti-woman, if you want to hurt people, if you think that there's a superior race over another or superior group of human beings over another, then you are wrong. And so you need leaders to be able to call that out.
Vivek seems to only be willing now to call it out because of now of the rise of anti-Indian --
PHILLIP: It's directed at him. But I'm glad to see it though.
JENNINGS: You know, the issue with Israel in the Republican party, we haven't talked much about him tonight, but Trump has been unapologetically pro-Israel and he's very popular there. And the Jewish people in Israel appreciate him very much. And so as it relates to his leadership, he's been unequivocal.
You know, this connection between Vance and Charlie Kirk is interesting. Charlie Kirk very much supported J.D. Vance, helped him get elected to the Senate. His wife has come out and endorsed him for president. If I may just read a couple of comments, Charlie Kirk said he would, quote, never build a big tent with Nick Fuentes. I don't align with Jew haters. Sorry, I'm not going to put up with Jew hatred in the conservative movement in America. And Erica Kirk said, what healing factor comes out of hating Jewish people? Nothing. Charlie always would say very clearly, Jew hate was brain rot. He would always say it.
And so if you believe what is true, which is that Vance has a very strong connection to Erika and the Kirk family, they are long on the record of opposing aligning with anti-Semitic speech.
PHILLIP: He is not taking that message, okay? Here's what he said. This is what J.D. Vance said today to a conservative outlet. He said, let's say you believe, as I do, that racism is bad, that we should judge people according to their deeds and not their ethnicity, is Nick Fuentes really the problem in this country? He's a podcaster. He has a dedicated group of young fans. Some of them have been shitty to my friends and family, not least Mrs. Vance.
Does that annoy me? Of course. But let's keep some perspective. For the last ten years, I've watched half of our political leadership go all-in on the idea that discriminating against whites and college admissions and jobs is not just okay but affirmatively good. If you believe racism is bad, Fuentes should occupy one second of your focus, and the people with actual political power who worked so hard to discriminate against white men should occupy many hours of it.
Tim, I'm curious, do you think that is -- I mean, he's basically saying affirmative action is worse. DEI is worse than a Jew-hating, Nazi-sympathizing bigot?
PARRISH: Abby, I'm going to go back to the point that we made earlier that I just want stated very clearly. There is no place for any of these people who hate anyone for the color of their skin or who they choose to love or who they choose to worship in the Republican Party or in the conservative movement. That's very clear.
I want to go to a point that Nina said earlier, the fact of the matter is that we're not --
PHILLIP: But what about J.D. Vance and his leadership?
[22:25:01]
I mean, if he is going to be taking the mantle of President Trump and leading the party, taking the mantle of Charlie Kirk, is this -- is that -- is this the brand of leadership, what I just described there? Those were his words.
PARRISH: J.D. Vance -- to your point, J.D. Vance has not only lived a life but has led in a career that condemns these things. You're talking about someone --
MOCKLER: Did you not hear the quote?
PARRISH: Wait a second, let me finish. You're talking about someone who's a United States Marine, who served with people from all walks of life across the country and served in combat in this country. So, this idea that the vice president all of a sudden doesn't believe these words, you're talking about someone who comes from nothing and built themselves up to be the vice president of the United States.
And so the president --
PHILLIP: Hold on a second. I don't want us to get distracted --
PARRISH: The vice president doesn't believe these words. He's lived them on those words.
So, don't give me this idea that the vice president doesn't believe that we shouldn't have a country that -- where everybody's welcome. You heard him say it on there. Don't give me this drama about Twitter.
The point I'll make is you talked about, you know, how we weren't applying this properly across the board when it was dead silent, you, dead silent, when Jay Jones, who was going to be the attorney general in Virginia, who's going to be the attorney general of Virginia said that he wants to watch a woman's kids die, get shot so he can urinate on their grave.
MOCKLER: You think I didn't condemn that?
PARRISH: And you were silent, your party.
MOCKLER: Me? What are you talking about?
PARRISH: So, don't talk to me now, don't try to lecture us and lecture the American people about equality and what's fair and who should be allowed in the party after your party sat silent after those words and someone is now going to be the chief law enforcement officer --
MOCKLER: We just listened to Vivek Ramaswamy.
PARRISH: It's actually sickening and it's angering because it doesn't make sense.
MOCKLER: Okay. We just listen to Vivek Ramaswamy with a lot of moral clarity. Scott just read off Charlie Kirk and Erika Kirk quotes with a lot of moral clarity. I don't know if you were trying to convince us or J.D. Vance that there's no anti-Semitism. But there's a lot of moral clarity coming from these people, not from J.D. Vance, like I'm going to say, he did not condemn the young Republican group chat, you can lie and say he did. He didn't. J.D. Vance has played fast and loose with this movement the entire time because he doesn't want to alienate the political movement.
Right now, Scott played coy about Paul Ingrassia and then took the moral high ground saying that we need clarity about these types of things. You are not providing the type of moral clarity. Can you say that Paul Ingrassia shouldn't belong in --
JENNINGS: I don't know. Paul Ingrassia. We've debated it. We've debated it.
MOCKLER: If he said that, can you say that --
JENNINGS: My recollection is when we debated it, I said I wouldn't waste any political capital on someone saying things this stupid.
PHILLIP: Well, he didn't get that appointed job, but he did get appointed to a --
JENNINGS: Yes. I mean, I personally wouldn't waste any capital on someone who says stupid things.
PHILLIP: It's not any capital. It's a job offer being offered and accepted. He works in the administration now. That's -- it's as simple as that.
JENNINGS: But on Fuentes, look, there's no future in this. I'm sorry, like there's no future in Fuentes.
PHILLIP: What's your advice to J.D. Vance? I mean, he is basically trying to argue that even the -- using his breath to condemn Nick Fuentes is not worth it because there are other things more important, like --
JENNINGS: Well, he's trying to minimize one thing. And he's trying to say this is -- you know, you're allowing people to build this person up into something bigger than they are. And maybe that's right from his station.
From my station, I have no trouble condemning it. I think it is crazy for anybody to be dealing with Nick Fuentes in any way, shape or form.
TURNER: You play on both sides -- JENNINGS: But I'm just a commentator.
TURNER: -- for electoral purposes.
JENNINGS: Yes.
PHILLIP: Well, we'll see how well that works out as this Republican primary apparently has already begun.
Next for us though, with the partial release of the Epstein files, Donald Trump is complaining about something entirely different.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: A lot of people are very angry that pictures are being released of other people that really had nothing to do with Epstein, but they're in a picture with him because he was in a party. And you're --
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:30:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PHILLIP: Tonight, the Trump administration promised transparency, but there appear to be some major exceptions to that when it comes to the Epstein files. Survivors and victims advocates are furious with the DOJ's handlings of the files after Friday's partial release. And in a statement today, they slammed the DOJ's extreme redactions with no explanation.
The fact that some victims' identities were left unredacted caused real and immediate harm, the lack of financial documents related to the Epstein files, and the absence of guidance and communication from the Justice Department. Tonight, Donald Trump had a different concern.
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A lot of people are very angry that pictures are being released of other people that really had nothing to do with Epstein, but they're in a picture with him because he was in a party, and you ruin a reputation of somebody. So a lot of people are very angry that this continues. A lot of Republicans are angry because of the fact that it's just used to deflect against a tremendous success.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Is that really the thing to be angry about when it comes to the Epstein files today?
ADAM MOCKLER, MEIDASTOUCH NETWORK COMMENTATOR: It's -- the FBI back in July releases memo that I was reading where they made a few claims that were just blown out by the Trump administration. First of first of all, they said that -- or blown up by the DOJ -- they said that releasing any more files would require releasing child pornography. Then they said there was no evidence linking anyone else to the scheme
other than Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. After Congress forced the release of tens of thousands of files, we now know the FBI was lying. Pam Bondi also lied on Fox News. She said she had the files on her desk. She was going to release them.
So, the entire priority of this administration has been off. The DOJ had a few goals. They said they have to release all of the files with reasonable redactions. They did neither of those things. They didn't really solve the files. They're drip feeding them. And the redactions weren't reasonable. It was over redacted in some parts. And as we just saw, under redacted in other parts. And victims were exposed.
[22:35:00]
PHILLIP: And they had plenty of time to do this right.
MOCKLER: Yes.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: And I think that's one of the concerns and the complaints of the victims is that they never heard from DOJ about how to do this in a way that centered their needs for justice and all of this, which is purportedly what DOJ says that they were trying to protect. But it seems like Trump is also concerned about protecting, I don't know, other people who were palling around with Jeffrey Epstein, which seems to me to be a secondary concern.
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: Oh, go ahead.
NINA TURNER (D) FORMER OHIO STATE SENATOR: Yes. No, I think it is secondary. It doesn't -- more than one thing can be true. I mean, while people took pictures with Epstein may or may not have been to the island, may not have been buddy-buddy with him, that could be true. So, the President's point on that is true.
But Abby, your point, that is not the biggest priority. It shouldn't be the biggest point. The biggest point and priority should be about the victims and not always about the President's feelings on this. There was a list before there wasn't a list before there wasn't a list. Now, there's a list. Now, they're just thumbing their nose at the courts. I mean, there's a reason why we have a checks order. There should be a reason why we have a check -- checks and balance system in this --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: And Pam Bondi-- the two -- the Republican and the Democrat Tom Massie and Ro Khanna who are pushing this the hardest, they are now saying that they are going to bring up contempt charges against Bondi as DOJ has not really released what they are required to under the law. SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, they release something like 400,000 documents. They do need to comply with the law as quickly as they can. But I actually do think this issue of carefully redacting documents is a good one to discuss because it's possible to do too much and it's possible to do too little.
And doing too little is the real problem here because if you leave somebody's name in that is a victim or connected to a victim or could somehow put a victim in further harm's way or impact their life negatively in any way, you would not and should not do that. So, the utmost care has to be taken to protect the victims.
My assumption is that's going to be painstaking process to go through that many documents and do that. So, I guess on the redactions piece, I'd be okay initially with over redactions if they were erring on the side of protecting the victims and that they end up pulling some of that back because they talk to a victim who says oh it's okay, you can release this or you can release that. But to me, protecting the victims here even if it means over redacting, that's probably the correct possible -- I was specifically telling you --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Although they did fail, I mean, there's at least one Jane Doe who says her name has appeared multiple times in the documents that they have released so far. One other thing --
JENNINGS: And she was mad about that? Because I understand why she would be.
PHILLIP: Yes, she told CNN she was furious, and she tried to reach out to DOJ, and they did not resolve the issue. But I also want to play one more piece of what Trump said tonight about the Bill Clinton of it all, because you know, the White House officials were crowing about Bill Clinton in all these photos. Here's what Trump has said about that.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I don't like the pictures of Bill Clinton being shown. I don't like the pictures of other people being shown. I think it's a terrible thing. I think Bill Clinton's a big boy. He can handle it. But you probably have pictures being exposed of other people that innocently met Jeffrey Epstein years ago, many years ago.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: And so to Nina's point, he's not wrong that there are some people who are photographed there. Maybe they went to a concert, an event, weren't involved in the larger scheme. But Bill Clinton has been targeted by Trump officials in last few days. And his spokesperson said, we're not afraid of this being released. Please release it all. It seems that the only person who really doesn't want more released is President Trump.
TIM PARRISH, CONSERVATIVE STRATEGIST: Well, President Trump came out a few weeks back and was actually in support of releasing the files and having everything be out there. I think that what the President's point here is a presumption of innocence until guilt, right? To not jump to any conclusions. But I would say we got to extract the politics out of this whole thing and it's everyone at the table agrees on the main point of this is getting justice for the victims and ensuring that we do it correctly.
And Abby, I agree with your point -- I agree with your point that we've got to protect the victims keep their names redacted and even if that does mean over redacting until we are sure, you know, what we have and what we're releasing is there. But I'm not going to go down the road of injecting politics into something that shouldn't be political at all. It's about getting justice enclosure for these victims.
But also doing so out of respect for the courts like you said earlier and having that operating with that presumption of innocence until we have some evidence that someone is guilty through the process of the courts.
[22:40:00]
MOCKLER: It's uniquely very important that we're super careful about what photos we're releasing. I just find it really convenient that Donald Trump is now so worried about this.
PARRISH: Well, I go back to the point I made earlier. It is that you just tried to re-inject politics in this. You have to separate these two things. There are people whose lives are impacted here.
(CROSSTALK)
PARRISH: I'll do it when Trump does. I'll start to separate it when Trump separates it.
(CROSSTALK)
PARRISH: Well, be the leader and show him the way.
MOCKLER: I'm a 23-year-old. He's the president.
PARRISH: This is the -- this is the --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: You're telling Adam to -- wait, wait.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: But listen. He's not wrong. I mean, one of these two is the president.
MOCKLER: The President of the United States.
PARRISH: Maybe Adam will be the future president. Who knows? But the fact of the matter is that this is not about politics. (CROSSTALK)
UNKNOWN: No, it's not --
PARRISH: Extract the politics out of it, and you have to do whatever it takes to get justice for these victims while also protecting them.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: But I also think that there are -- people are, I think, rightfully concerned that DOJ is trying to protect one man.
UNKNOWN: Oh no.
PHILLIP: And that is Donald Trump. And that concern was heightened when there were photos that were put out and then they were removed from the website and then put back out once there was some outcry about it. So people -- that suspicion is there because -- not just because of the words that Trump said under duress, but because of the actions of the President and his administration when it came to this issue.
TURNER: That's right. And he was, the president was forced. You know, he signed it, but it was by force. When he was candidate Trump for the second time, he said, oh yes, if the list is there, we're going to release it. Then when he became president, Donald J. Trump, he hedged on that. But the outcry of the people of this country really pushed it.
And thank God for Congress members, Ro Khanna and Massie, for really pushing this. I understand what you mean when you say this shouldn't be about politics. I'm saying that sometimes politics can be used for the good. And in this case, all elected leaders, especially those in the Congress, should unite and say that the victims deserve better than what they are getting right now.
And the President should be willing. See, they're playing little games. The President can come out there and say, oh, former President Bill Clinton, this is not right. But meanwhile, release all those pictures.
PHILLIP: And you know what? We're focused on the pictures. But just to note, the victims are also talking about financial documents. They want grand jury minutes that are now supposed to be released and haven't been. So there's a lot of real practical stuff that they want out. It's not just the salacious stuff about the photos, stuff that leads to the money, which is what underlies all of this.
Now, coming up next for us, just in time for Santa's coal season, Donald Trump is escalating his war on windmills, citing national security concerns. We'll discuss next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:47:02] PHILLIP: Tonight, Donald Trump deals a blow to the U.S. offshore wind industry as the administration halted federal leases for five of the largest offshore wind projects under construction, citing unspecified national security concerns. Now, the move comes as electricity demand nationwide is soaring, along with energy costs for millions of Americans. But today's escalation is just the latest in Trump's long war against one of his biggest political enemies -- the wind.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I never understood wind -- you know I know windmills very much. I've studied it better than anybody. They're noisy. They kill the birds. You want to see a bird graveyard? You just go. Take a look. A bird graveyard? Go under a windmill someday. And they say the noise causes cancer. You tell me that one, okay?
The windmills are driving the whales crazy, obviously. We will not allow a windmill to be built in the United States. They're killing us. They're killing the beauty of our scenery, our valleys, our beautiful plains. And I'm not talking about airplanes. I'm talking about beautiful plains. Wind is the worst. It's a big, it's a big -- that's a scam.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: I thought this was the all of the above energy administration. $25 billion worth of projects suspended, 2.5 million homes that could have been powered won't be, 10,000 jobs -- all because Trump believes a conspiracy theory that the sound causes cancer?
JENNINGS: Well, you know what they say, Abby, "He that troubleth his own house shall inherit the wind," -- to the book of Proverbs. I, look, the President has a long standing, as we noted, aversion to windmills. He's campaigned on it. He has talked about it as much as anything. I do think if you -- and look, I know people in the conservative movement who like windmills and they would say something like, well, we need all the electrons we can get no matter how we can make them.
Now, the counter to that and what Doug Burgum would say is, if we're going to use federal resources, federal land or any kind of federal resources, we should focus on things that are far more efficient, like nuclear or a pipeline, which in this case, one pipeline I think would be the equivalent of all five of these projects. So, the policy argument here is there's better ways to get the energy --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Some of these projects have already been paid for. These, you know, maybe that's true. Maybe there are other more efficient things. There are lots of --
JENNINGS: Not maybe, there are.
PHILLIP: There are lots of forms of energy that are more efficient than others. That's true. But why would you say that you're just going to get rid of the whole thing? Because honestly, it's really because Trump doesn't like it. He doesn't like the way that it looks. And aesthetics is the most important thing to him.
MOCKLER: We call it windmill derangement syndrome. It's windmill derangement syndrome that he has. That's what you were describing. And he invoked national security concerns, which is just a weird trick to not have to exactly explain what you're doing when you're revoking these leases.
[22:50:01]
At the end of the day, there's a lot of economic problems, and I don't think this addresses the core of them. Like you pointed out, this hurts jobs. People in my generation are already facing unemployment, a higher unemployment rate than when Biden left office. It is now above 10 percent, even 11 percent in some stats. I mean, the economy is not doing well for people in my generation. I don't think windmills are what -- what we're focusing on right now. And when it comes to --
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: And you think the future for your generation is in the windmill business?
MOCKLER: No, I think that climate change is very real and I think that long term, we should try to focus on climate change.
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: They make the components --
(CROSSTALK)
MOCKLER: At the same time, I think that long term jobs are good. So --
TURNER: Part of, I mean, if the GOP, part of innovation, I mean, let's take in all the President's concerns. God bless the whales. I want the President to be just -- and the birds. God bless them. I want the President to be just as concerned.
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: Fine, I'll take up for the birds here. Fine.
TURNER: The people who are about to lose their health care, but I'm going to put that in the parking lot. Abby, I know what will make the President love the wind. We name them the Trump Windmills and we make them gold. And he will love the windmills.
PHILLIP: I'm sure if they were gold, he would like them a lot more.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: I mean, one of the other things is that red states have also embraced wind, especially states like Iowa, Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas. These are all states that are actually actively relying on wind. And they're not affected by this offshore because these are coastal states that are doing offshore projects.
But Trump wants to kill this industry altogether. And that does mean jobs. That does mean that states that have started to supplement their energy grid with wind energy are going to lose that if he's successful.
PARRISH: Yes, Abby, I mean, I got to say that I don't quite understand this one because I know that, you know, the conservative position is supporting an all-the-above approach to energy. And this in particular is going to hurt the Commonwealth of Virginia, where one of these major projects is 80 percent of the world's internet traffic, runs through the Commonwealth of Virginia, particularly Northern Virginia. And so from the energy perspective, we need all of these things.
And so, I am happy that our friends on the left are joining us in saying that we should have the all of the above approach to energy, including like things like the Keystone XL pipeline and --
MOCKLER: You're not --
(CROSSTALK)
PARRISH: We should have all of the above approach to energy. I don't get this one, but I agree with Nina. We probably should make them gold and maybe they will -- this will go away.
JENNINGS: Let me just make sure I understand this. You hate birds. You hate whales. You want to mess up submarines.
UNKNOWN: No, no.
JENNINGS: You're a different person.
TURNER: We just didn't know that the President loves whales and birds so much.
JENNINGS: He does. He's always saying -- and by the way, they do mess up the birds.
TURNER: I mean, we should deal with it.
JENNINGS: Are you pro-nuclear? Are you guys pro-nuclear?
(CROSSTALK)
TURNER: The point about jobs, I mean --
(CROSSTALK)
TURNER: So let's have this conversation. I mean, the type of innovation that is needed to give working class people better jobs. I know my city of Cleveland, Ohio, because certainly --
(CROSSTALK) PHILLIP: All right --
MOCKLER: Wait, electricity prices are skyrocketing right now. This does not help electricity prices. It does not help the American people. It's another example of Trump following his weird vengeance ambitions rather than actually focusing on affordability.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: We got to go here. Next for us, the panel's going to give us their nightcaps, Christmas Jingle edition. Be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:57:39]
PHILLIP: It is the season for Christmas music, but since some of us have been listening since Halloween, like myself, there might be an overplayed song. So, for tonight's NewsNightcap, what is the most overplayed Christmas song for you? Adam, you're up.
MOCKLER: Listen, Rudolph has got to go. I feel bad for the guy. I feel bad that his friends bullied him. I'm glad that he figured out the red nose thing, but the song is a little bit overplayed at this point. Sorry, Rudolph.
PHILLIP: That one's not for you. It's 20 years younger than you --
MOCKLER: Yes, they shouldn't have bullied him.
PHILLIP: --as young as you are. Go ahead, Tim.
PARRISH: Yes, so, "Baby It's Cold Outside" got canceled by the left last year. I think we should keep that one canceled and we should play more of "Mary Did You Know," which is asking this amazing question to the Blessed Virgin Mary. Does she know her son would become the savior of the world? That's a good one.
PHILLIP: That is a very good Christmas song. And I also would agree with you that "Baby It's Cold Outside" has come and gone. I'm fine with it. We're done.
PARRISH: But it is cold outside.
PHILLIP: I'm done.
PARRISH: It is.
PHILLIP: Nina?
TURNER: You know, Abby, I reject the war on Christmas. I just do. There is no such thing as overplayed Christmas song. Played Christmas songs to you cannot overplay Christmas songs.
PHILLIP: The vast majority.
TURNER: The vast majority.
JENNINGS: I think we just have to say thank you, President Trump. It's okay to say Merry Christmas again.
TURNER: Oh my gosh.
JENNINGS: Thank you for acknowledging.
TURNER: We got to thank President Donald J. Trump for that.
JENNINGS: We can thank the President for bringing back Merry Christmas.
TURNER: Oh my Lordy.
JENNINGS: Now, I was tempted to say, for mine, Abby, that the theme song "To Die Hard" might be -- and that would open up the debate about whether die hard is a Christmas --
PHILLIP: That debate, how about overplayed debate?
JENNINGS: But the most overplayed Christmas song is actually this abomination from Paul McCartney called "Wonderful Christmas Time" --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Oh my gosh. No, Scott. That is a great song.
JENNINGS: Whatever. I don't even know what instrument that is.
PHILLIP: Scott, that's actually a great song.
JENNINGS: It's the worst, the literal worst most overplayed song within instrument that no one can name. I don't know what that is. It's terrible.
PHILLIP: That is what makes it so great.
JENNINGS: And Paul McCartney, I think he hadn't made a single in like a decade before he put that out and he should have left it on the shelf.
MOCKLER: Most important debate of the show just happened right here.
PHILLIP: Guys, I strongly --
JENNINGS: What's your favorite -- what's your favorite Christmas Carol?
PHILLIP: I -- I'm -- Mariah Carey.
[22:30:00]
TURNER: "This Christmas Is For Me."
PHILLIP: Yes. Oh, and "This Christmas" -- yes, I mean, I'm kind of with you. I could listen to all of them all the time.
PARRISH: Abby, can you hit the note?
PHILLIP: No, no, otherwise, I wouldn't be sitting here with you, obviously. I would have a completely different job. Everyone, thank you very much. Thank you for watching "NewsNight". You can catch me anytime on your favorite social media -- X, Instagram and on TikTok. "Laura Coates Live"-- it starts right now.
