Return to Transcripts main page
CNN NewsNight with Abby Phillip
Trump To Deliver State Of Union Amid Low Polls, Divisions; Trump's Popularity Erodes Ahead Of Annual Speech; MAGA Calls Newsom's I'm Like You Remarks Racist; Trump Denies Reports Of A Top General On Warying Iran Strikes; Kash Patel Defends Hanging Out With The U.S. Men's Ice Hockey Team Amid Criticism. Aired 10-11p ET
Aired February 23, 2026 - 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)
KASIE HUNT, CNN ANCHOR (voice over): Tonight, on the eve of his big speech, Donald Trump reels after his supreme tariff loss, as new polls show he's becoming more and more unpopular.
DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: It just amazes me that there's not more support out there.
HUNT: Plus --
GOV. GAVIN NEWSOM (D-CA): Bob, I'm like you. I'm no better than you. I'm a 960 SAT guy.
HUNT: -- MAGA calls Gavin Newsom's comments racist, as the governor says, spare him the fake outrage.
Also, the president pushes back on reports his generals are wary of attacking Iran as a decision hangs in the balance.
And pompous or patriotic? The FBI director's Olympic party becomes a Rorschach test in American politics.
Live at the table, Congressman Josh Gottheimer, Congressman Mike Lawler, Congresswoman Marilyn Strickland, and David Urban.
Americans with different perspectives aren't talking to each other, but here, they do.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT (on camera): Good evening. I'm Kasie Hunt in Washington, D.C., in for Abby Philip.
Let's get right to what America is talking about, President Trump is not pleased. In less than 24 hours, Trump will face Americans to deliver his big State of the Union speech, but his primetime address comes at a particularly troublesome moment for the president. First, there's new polling that shows more and more people are turning against Trump. His approval rating sits at just 36 percent in support among key voting groups, including independents, is plunging. But the president says there's nothing to see here.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: And I had to go through, and I still do, fake stories, fake polls, and I had polls for the election that showed I was going to get swamped and I won in a landslide. They were fake polls because polls are tough. You know, when you get a fake poll, I get them today. I saw one today that I'm at 40 percent, 40 percent. I'm not at 40 percent. I'm at much higher than that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: Fake polls, he says. The president is also still reeling from his massive Supreme Court loss last week when the justices said his emergency tariffs are illegal.
So, now, he seems to be taking his anger out on just about everybody. He warned today that his global tariff rate will jump even higher from 10 to 15 percent across the board, even though most people don't think he's had his priorities straight.
So, how likely is it that Trump will change minds tomorrow night? Not even he seems so sure.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: If I came up with a cure for cancer, they would say he should have done it years ago. There is not a thing I can do where these people are going to give me credit.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: So, not a thing, David Urban, he could do that anyone would give them credit for.
DAVID URBAN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I think if he cured cancer, we probably give him credit for that.
HUNT: Maybe. I mean, listen, this is a tough reality for him. He clearly doesn't want to believe it, but he seems to be running into the same issue that President Biden did when he tried to convince people that the numbers are so good, no, really, everything is fine, and people won't buy it.
URBAN: Listen, I think, you know, the first six months, seven months, first year, the Trump administration did swimmingly well, and then they unfortunately ran into the, you know, deportation of migrants, which went terribly well -- terribly wrong, excuse me. You know, we had two American citizens killed, played out on T.V. every night. And so that really pulled down the president's numbers, I think to what you're saying here.
We talked about this before. 82 percent of Republicans still stand strongly behind the president. His numbers dropped a little bit there, but they're still firmly with him. And so I think, you know, overall, you get a pretty good grade up until this point. But for immigration, which was, you know, seal the border, but the deportations went terribly wrong, people want him to focus more on when they put their hand in their pocket, if they pull out a $20 bill, or they pull out two $20 bills, right, when they're filling up their tank at night, or want to know how they're going to feed their kids when they go home.
[22:05:03]
I think that's the way they want to hear a lot of tomorrow night. And if the president doesn't focus on that, I think he's not going to change more minds. I think kitchen table issues rules. They normally do.
HUNT: So, look, I take your point, but here's the president today, okay, praising his immigration team, Tom Homan and Kristi Noem. Watch.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: And we've done a great job. Tom Homan, Kristi Noem, our people have been incredible, the job they've done. And they take nothing but abuse. It just amazes me that there's not more support out there.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: Well, have they done a great job?
REP. MIKE LAWLER (R-NY): Well, first of all, you've effectively closed the border. This was one of the biggest issues during the Biden years because Joe Biden allowed over 10.5 million migrants to come into our country, most of them --
HUNT: Does Kristi Noem deserve credit?
LAWLER: Kasie, let me finish. Most of them came into the country illegally, okay? And so when Donald Trump ran, he said, I'm going to secure the border, we've had nine straight months of net zero illegal immigration into the country. That is a major win. So, yes, the Department of Homeland Security is responsible for that, for securing the border, the deportation of 600 --
HUNT: Do you think Kristi Noem is responsible for that, not Donald Trump?
LAWLER: Kristi Noem is the secretary of Homeland Security. She is working at the direction of the president.
HUNT: Okay.
LAWLER: And the fact is this administration has done what it said it would do and end illegal immigration into the country. That's a good thing, you know?
Secondarily, 675,000 people were deported last year, many of them having committed crimes. When you look at the fact that --
HUNT: But two Americans were killed, I think, is the point that David was making. LAWLER: Well, you asked me about have they done a good job? They did secure the border. They did deport criminal aliens.
As I've said repeatedly, the issue of immigration in our country is one that hasn't been fixed in 40 years. Both parties have used this issue as a bludgeon against the other, and it has failed, and it has failed the American people.
Those two deaths in Minneapolis were entirely preventable. That never should have happened. And part of the reason it happened is because you have a situation in Minneapolis where local law enforcement was prohibited from cooperating with federal immigration -- wait a minute -- with federal immigration officials --
HUNT: You've made your point.
LAWLER: No.
HUNT: You have actually made your point.
LAWLER: Wait a minute, for the purpose of crowd control and traffic control because of the sanctuary policies. And so you had a surge in Minneapolis and they got over 4,000 criminals off the streets, murderers, rapists. That's a good thing.
HUNT: Let's --
LAWLER: The deaths were tragic --
HUNT: I'm not trying to argue with you on that. Let's put up the list from our poll of what Americans want to hear from the president here, okay? Because while, yes, I take your point about the immigration issue and the way people use it, it is far and away, way, way, way below the economy and cost of living, Congressman, in terms of what people actually want to hear this president talk about.
So, as much as, you know --
REP. JOSH GOTTHEIMER (D-NJ): And I agree. The bottom line is what people want to hear about tomorrow is how are we going to make their lives more affordable? How are they going to -- as you said, whether it's their healthcare premiums through the roof for lots of Americans in nearly every city and town in the country, people struggling with their energy bills, utility bills, they're dealing with childcare costs. The question is, what are you going to do to make my life more affordable so I can wait -- listen, I can pay the bills?
And if the president succeeds in figuring out some way to talk about that and how he's going to address his agenda toward that, that could be a good night for him. But right now he's done nothing, in my opinion, to really take on those issues. And, yes, you could distract to other issues, and which is he's been trying to do and talk about everything else but that, but I think that's going to be the bar tomorrow. Can he actually communicate with people? Can he bring the temperature down or is it just going to be a slug fest for screaming and everyone? And I think -- HUNT: Does he want to bring the temperature down?
GOTTHEIMER: Well, he's -- so far, I would -- that's what I'm hoping. But so far, he hasn't shown an interest in doing that.
And listen the challenge is, as Mike talked about, you know, it's one thing to say we're going to make the borders more secure, which I think is important as well, you want to make sure criminals aren't here and gang members aren't here, but how you approach things matter.
And people saw what you talked about, right? You've got two dead Americans going to people's home, Americans' homes and busting into their -- busting down the doors. You know, you've got ICE agents who aren't trained in their enforcement. They have seven, eight weeks of training instead of where cops in Jersey have a year's worth of training. So, it's how you do these things really matters, and that's where the leadership's going to come in and we're going to see what -- and that I'm really curious to see how he's going to talk about how we should approach these issues differently.
HUNT: Congresswoman?
REP. MARILYN STRICKLAND (D-WA): Yes. I would also add too that people are concerned about the way ICE has gone about its business. And I don't think anyone disagrees with us wanting secure borders. No one disagrees with people who commit crime being deported. That should happen. But you can't create your own personal militia go into blue cities, occupy them to terrorize people, going into workplaces and schools and places that are supposed to be safe without a warrant from a judge.
[22:10:03]
You have these guys who are not very well-trained. They're randles (ph) off the street. Some of them used to have actually have criminal records.
And so the conversation here is really about, this is ICE, this is what they're doing. And it often feels like another distraction from the fact that the economy is in bad shape. Not a single promise that Trump made has been fulfilled. The cost of housing, the cost of food, the cost of gas, the cost of energy, kicking millions of people off of healthcare and doing this, saying, oh, things are going great.
A State of the Union address is supposed to be an address to the entire country saying, here's who we are as Americans. Here's what matters to all of us. It's supposed to be a pep rally for the entire country. And Trump will get up there, like he always does during his speech. He will try to re-litigate the 2020 election because he can't help himself. And he'll start going off on these weird tangents that have nothing to do with what the American people want.
LAWLER: Well, first of all, it's hard to unify the country when many Democrats refuse to come tomorrow and stage protests in the middle of the speech. Second of all --
HUNT: You're not planning to go for it, right?
LAWLER: -- with respect to --
STRICKLAND: I'm not going because this president --
LAWLER: Well, case in point.
STRICKLAND: Because this president is divisive. You don't go into U.S. cities and terrorize people. You don't tell lies and you do not become anti-black president come after African-Americans. That's divisive. That's why I'm not going.
LAWLER: When you have cities, like Minneapolis, like New York, like Portland, Oregon, that refuse to honor detainer agreements, that refuse to say, we will turn over a criminal to federal authorities, what happens is in a city like New York, they release them back on the street to commit more crimes. And so you get ICE agents coming in to actually take them off the street.
A controlled handoff of a criminal alien at a county or city or municipal jail is far safer than having ICE agents have to go into the community to get them. That should have been happening. These blue states refuse to cooperate people. That's why you have this surge.
GOTTHEIMER: But you agree we need some reforms, right?
LAWLER: Of course. But this is what I've been arguing for years. You have to secure the border. We have done that.
STRICKLAND: We agree with that.
LAWLER: You have to deport the criminal aliens. We are doing that.
GOTTHEIMER: Agreed.
LAWLER: You need immigration reform. It's why I've been a co-lead on the Dignity Act, last Congress and this Congress, so that people who have been in this country for more than five years who are not committing crimes, who are participating in the workforce, who pay their taxes, who pay a fine, can have a legal status, not a pathway to citizenship, but a legal status to stay in this country. And many of them are --
GOTTHEIMER: But if you bust into someone's house, an American's house, you need a warrant, right? And we should have better training.
LAWLER: Of course, if for an American's house, no question. But here's the fundamental problem. Democrats will say, we need a federal judicial warrant in order to cooperate. But when you have these detainers being issued for somebody who committed a state crime, and most crimes committed are in state -- under state law, why won't Democratic cities and mayors cooperate with ICE on that issue?
URBAN: Well, even that, so I was on the show with Kasie, where you're talking to the mayor of Minneapolis. During the Obama administration, they had ICE agents in the prison, right? We -- HUNT: In jails.
URBAN: In jails, in the county jail, right? Not allowed in the Trump administration. Geez, I wonder why. I wonder why they cooperated during the Obama administration, not cooperating, what, now.
And so there's got to be an end to sanctuary city, sanctuary states. You can't -- if you're a municipality, you can't just say, we like these laws and we don't like these laws. But how about if you're in the next Democratic administration, we're going to say, we don't like the EPA, we're not going to follow any of the laws that EPA promulgate? We're just not going to do it.
GOTTHEIMER: Well, that's happened.
URBAN: We're not going to do -- we're just, well, no, it doesn't actually happen. We're going to pick and choose --
(CROSSTALKS)
HUNT: Let's pull the lens out a little bit, take all the points, all the weeds on the immigration, but tomorrow night, the president is going to give a speech. Historically, the State of the Union is for everybody.
STRICKLAND: Yes.
HUNT: Some Democrats are going, some are not. Are you going?
GOTTHEIMER: I'll be there.
HUNT: Okay. So, you two are on different pages.
STRICKLAND: I'm not going.
HUNT: You are not going. Why are you -- why do you think it's the right thing to go?
GOTTHEIMER: Because I want to hear what the president's about the country and I want to hear what the president has to say and what is he going to do to actually make life more affordable for folks, hoping he is actually going to bring the gateway train tunnel back and fund it between New York and Jersey, you know?
But I want to hear what the president's going to do to get people like their health insurance more affordable, what they're going to do about food, what are they going to do about the tariffs, because, by the way, those tariffs are big tax on a lot of my families. And so we got to --
HUNT: And what do you say to those in your party who are not going?
GOTTHEIMER: That's, of course, Marilyn's choice, and like I respect them, but that's --
HUNT: And why wouldn't you? GOTTHEIMER: And that's everyone. By the way, people, there were Republicans under Biden who didn't show up for Biden, if you remember, right? And, listen, that's everyone's individual choice.
HUNT: I want to play for you Stephen A. Smith, who has been actually talked about as a potential presidential contender, but he had a message.
STRICKLAND: Who?
HUNT: Stephen A. Smith, the host. He had a message for --
URBAN: Kind of a popular guy.
HUNT: For Democrats for not attending, I want to ask you to respond to it. Watch this.
[22:15:00]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
STEPHEN A. SMITH, SPORTS ANALYST AND RADIO HOST: Some are talking about walking out in the middle of his speech. Others are talking about boycotting it all together and essentially finding something else to do. I'm here to tell you that neither is acceptable.
At some point in time, ladies and gentlemen, there's got to be an adult in the room. If you are going to act as juvenile, as petulant, as petty as you accused the president of the United States to be, how are you ever going to hold a high moral ground, at least high enough to judge him accordingly?
This is the kind of stuff that ticks me off.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: Why is he wrong, Congresswoman?
STRICKLAND: Stephen A. Smith is entitled to his opinion, and as Josh said earlier, I respect any decision that any of my colleagues make on either side of the aisle to attend or to not attend a State of the Union address. But for him to go off about petulance and disrespect, it's kind of rich coming from him.
And here's the deal, I'm not going to Trump's State of the Union address he is anti-black. He has taken so many actions during this administration that show he does not care about black people. Firing public employees, many of whom are African American, wanting to redeem military bases after Confederate traders, trying to take down displays that show African American history, trying to do an executive order about the African American museum.
Pete Hegseth, as his secretary of Defense, who stood in a meeting and said that DEI is dead when 40 percent of the people who are in the military are people of color, 20 percent are African American. So, this overt anti-black agenda of this president does not work for me. So, Stephen Smith can have an opinion, but Stephen Smith doesn't vote for me.
URBAN: I would just push back on that a tad saying who saved HBCUs in the first administration?
STRICKLAND: So, let's talk about HBCU's for a second.
URBAN: It's Donald Trump.
STRICKLAND: Let's talk about this.
URBAN: Obama cut the funding. Donald Trump funded it.
STRICKLAND: So, I'm going to accept a lecture from you about HBCUs --
URBAN: I'm not lecturing. I'm just asking.
STRICKLAND: -- and I'm a graduate. I'm a graduate of Clark Atlanta University.
URBAN: I'm asking you. Did Donald Trump save it?
STRICKLAND: Here's the deal. HBCUs have been grossly underfunded for decades, for as long as I can remember. But when you are doing things, like taking healthcare away from the families of the students who are there --
URBAN: You don't answer the question.
STRICKLAND: And you're not listening to me. When you take away food assistance, when you do things like that that hurt the families, you're hurting the kids who are going to HBCUs. Most of the kids who go to HBCUs are first generation college people, and they come from families that are underserved. So --
URBAN: Will you just admit that Donald -- I mean, say, we agree that Donald Trump saved HBCUs?
STRICKLAND: I'm not going to say he saved them because that's not true. A lot of funding went to them.
URBAN: How about who signed the First Step Act putting more African American men out of jail than any other president in the history of this republic?
STRICKLAND: You know, here's the deal, Donald Trump in this term is anti-black. All of the actions that he has taken, the things he has done to hurt the African American community, that's what he's doing. That's what he's doing and that's why I'm not --
URBAN: No credit for the other stuff.
HUNT: All right. Coming up next here, MAGA accuses Gavin Newsom of making racist remarks at an event this weekend. But Newsom is calling it fake F-ing outrage. Plus, President Trump rejects multiple reports that a top general believes there are serious risks in attacking Iran, but are the concerns warranted? We'll debate.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:20:00]
HUNT: Tonight, MAGA outrage with Gavin Newsom at the center of the storm. Critics are calling a comment he made yesterday at an event in Atlanta racist. Watch. You decide.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
NEWSOM: I'm not trying to impress you. I'm just trying to impress upon you. I'm like you. I'm no better than you. You know, I'm a 960 SAT guy. And, you know, and I'm not trying to offend anyone, you know, trying to act all there if you got 940. But, literally, a 960 SAT guy, I cannot -- you've never seen me read a speech because I cannot read a speech.
My dyslexia -- I haven't overcome dyslexia. I'm living with it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: Sean Hannity writing that, quote, Newsom thinks a 960 SAT makes him like black Americans. Let that sink in.
Newsom fired back claiming Hannity didn't care about Trump reposting a video depicting the Obamas as apes and he added, quote, spare me your fake F-ing outrage, Sean. The Atlanta mayor, Andre Dixon, who hosted the event, weighed in saying Newsom's remark wasn't attack, but instead a moment of vulnerability. He added, quote, this is Atlanta. We don't need anyone to tell us when to be offended.
Congresswoman, how did that remark hit when you watched it?
STRICKLAND: So, I will admit I didn't watch it, but I heard about it. And --
HUNT: Well, we just watched it now.
STRICKLAND: Yes. Just -- I mean, I would say this, that if he's making the same comment when he meets with all college students and goes to other universities, it's fair game. So, you know, I don't think that sometimes people speak in front of black audiences and they think they want to find a way to relate. I've heard people say, I grew up in the projects thinking that was a way to relate. So, not exactly his finest hour, but, again, he's saying that same comment to other people and other audiences is fine.
HUNT: Here's what Bakari Sellers said. He, of course, is frequently on CNN here. He said, Dems must stop doing dumb S-H-I-T. I have my issues with Gavin Newsom, but he is the furthest thing from a racist. His story about overcoming dyslexia is powerful and endearing, one I wish he'd lean into more. His remarks show a blindness and were inartful, but leave it there. Donald Trump is a racist. Gavin is not. What say you?
GOTTHEIMER: I'm from Jersey. What's S-H-I-T? Congressman Lawler's from New York. And so I think, first of all, he was talking about his dyslexia. And I think we should -- I think that was -- that wasn't, I think, a big deal that he was talking about that.
[22:25:04]
And there are a lot of kids out there I know who also -- who will hopefully look at him and say, well, I also could be the governor of a state and maybe run for president one day.
I think he was totally right to bring up what was said about the Obamas and the apes, which was to say offensive is a huge understatement, right? And so, yes, I mean, I'll -- I think I'll defer to you on what you said but the bottom line is, you know, I think people try to manufacture a fight when there isn't one. And I think we shouldn't manufacture a fight here.
URBAN: I mean, come on guys. Come on. I just listened to this for the first time. It's offensive. It may not be -- like it may not be racist, but let's acknowledge it was insensitive. It was stupid. It was, as Bakari said it, you know, S-H-I-T. It was dumb. It's racially insensitive to go there and say, hey, look, I'm dumb, just like you guys. It's stupid. Nobody should do that. Nobody. So, just condemn it. He's a Democrat. I condemned him if he was a Republican. When Trump posted, I said it was wrong. So, I'm not going to say Gavin Newsom is -- it's terrible. You shouldn't do it. Just come out and say it. Hey, I effed up, I shouldn't have done it.
LAWLER: Look, I was one of the first Republicans to condemn that post by the president and call for it to be taken down. I think oftentimes some of my Democratic colleagues in -- when running for office or when talking to audiences, people of color, but traditionally, black audiences, frankly, are patronizing and talked down to. And you know, Kathy Hochul was in the Bronx saying, you know, kids in the Bronx who are black don't know how to use a computer. What?
They often put their foot in their mouth and I think they get a free pass because they're a Democrat. But, frankly, I don't care what party you belong to. Wrong is wrong and --
URBAN: No twister here.
LAWLER: No matter what he's trying to say, I understand he has tried to overcome dyslexia, and power to him, but trying to somehow insinuate that he's like you because you're somehow less than or incapable of is a pretty stupid way to run for president.
HUNT: Here -- we did put together, Congresswoman, the point that you made as well, if he says this in front of all audiences, then it says less about perhaps what he was doing after the moment.
STRICKLAND: He just trying to relate to the people, yes.
HUNT: Here are a couple of other times when the governor used this line about his SAT score in the past. Watch.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
NEWSOM: I got a baseball coach that called me and allowed me to get to a four-year university. I was joking with you before we started 960 SAT.
The ugly truth about my challenges with reading, you know, I'm not shy or, you know, embarrassed about my 960 SAT score.
I thought this guy might run for president.
I have no idea the idea that a guy who got a 960 on his SAT, that still struggles to read scripts, that was always in the back of the classroom, the idea that you even throw that out is, in and of itself, extraordinary.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
LAWLER: That that's fine to talk about yourself and your own shortcomings. But to somehow insinuate when talking to a black audience --
GOTTHEIMER: I'm just like you.
LAWLER: -- I'm just like you, I can't read, I'm sorry, that's insulting.
URBAN: There's a difference.
LAWLER: And to somehow sweep it under the rug because he's a Democrat, if that -- if Donald Trump said that, oh my God, the outrage, and you all know it.
HUNT: Erick Erickson, who's, of course, a conservative commentator from the -- from Georgia, he did say this. Gavin Newsom was not telling a group of black voters he was like them and had a 980 SAT. He was trying to relate to white middle class people in a mostly middle class crowd. But the reality remains, of course, he's sitting across from a black moderator.
LAWLER: He was talking to the black moderator. Like I'm sorry, I just -- sometimes we all got to call out our own party when stuff happens and not try to sweep it under.
STRICKLAND: Yes. And I was going to say that, you know, I don't think -- I've heard racist things come from Republicans and Democrats too. And like people just put this --
URBAN: You remember Joe Biden's 7/11 comments?
GOTTHEIMER: Yes.
URBAN: I mean, come on.
GOTTHEIMER: Or you ain't black if you don't vote for me. URBAN: Yes, right?
HUNT: All right. I guess we're into the -- yes, let's keep rolling here. Breaking news tonight, the president and his generals are at odds. Trump denies warnings against striking Iran as tensions rise, even as talks with Tehran drag on. We'll have more on that next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:34:23]
HUNT: Tonight, Donald Trump is pushing back on reports that a top general is wary of striking Iran. As Trump's decision to strike hangs in the balance, the "Washington Post" reports Joint Chiefs Chairman General Dan Caine is cautioning that both a lack of munitions and support from allies could put U.S. troops in danger. On social media, President Trump called that reporting 100 percent incorrect.
Now, my understanding is we have a little bit more agreement than we often have at the table at an evening like this between the two of you. Congressman Lawler and Gottheimer put out this joint statement on Iran.
[22:35:00]
We know that Tehran is still pursuing a nuclear weapon, and since the June conflict has moved aggressively to rebuild its ballistic missile capabilities, you say we respect and defend Congress' constitutional role in matters of war, oversight, debate, vital. However, this resolution would restrict the flexibility needed to respond to real and evolving threats and risks signaling weakness at a dangerous moment.
So, Congressman, is this moment one that you think the President should seize to try to instigate regime change in Iran or not?
GOTTHEIMER: We know that the government of Iran has killed tens of thousands of their own people seeking freedom and democracy. We know that Iran's leading mantra, the government there, is death to America.
We know they've increased, as you mentioned, their ballistic missile capabilities. They're a huge threat to the United States of America, they've killed Americans, they've killed our servicemen and women, they've attacked our bases. And the bottom line is, I think, putting maximum pressure on the government there and the Ayatollah to get out of the way.
So his people--
HUNT: So is that a yes, you'd support strikes?
GOTTHEIMER: I would support the President continuing to push Iran, as he's doing right now. They have more talks this week, and to using all resources necessary to make sure we get the outcome that I think is critical. Remember, Iran is -- the government of Iran is our enemy. They align closely with our top adversaries, like China and Russia, and we know what they're doing to destabilize the region and kill Americans. So from my perspective, and I think Mike and I agree with this, you would not right now tie up any negotiation. You want to keep the pressure on.
You don't want to mess with the negotiations. And why would we do that preemptively?
It's different, of course, if there's a strike, and then go to the Congress to--
There's a notification process, and then the Congress can decide if there's further action necessary. But the bottom line right now is we're in a very tenuous moment, and we shouldn't do anything to undermine those negotiations.
LAWLER: The War Powers Act requires 48-hour notice after a strike. That is the requirement. Now, the administration can and has, in many instances in prior administrations, notified Congress in advance of a strike.
But when you look at, for instance, the strike on Iran's nuclear facilities, that was a top secret mission that needed to be kept under wraps. And that came after the President had given the Ayatollah and the regime 60 days to negotiate, and they refused to come to the table and come to an agreement. The President has given them further time to negotiate on their ballistic missiles program, on their sponsoring of terrorism.
This is the greatest state sponsor of terrorism. They have worked with China in the illicit oil trade that has funded their nuclear ambitions, funded Hamas and Hezbollah and the Houthis.
The President has the responsibility as commander-in-chief to protect our country, to protect our interests abroad and at home. For Congress to take action to try and restrict that and restrict his ability to protect this country against a known adversary, I think is dangerous. And I think it is contrary to what Democrats have had as a position when it comes to President Obama in Libya, for instance.
This is wrong to try and preemptively tie the hands of the administration.
URBAN: Look, I don't think, I mean, it is, in my opinion, I think it's not a if, it's a when in this case.
HUNT: And David, can I put it to you this way, because look, you know better than anyone else sitting at this table what the stakes are here, right? And when you see Dan Caine, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, reportedly warning behind the scenes that this could be a rough go for the United States.
URBAN: I guarantee you that all those generals are talking about this, right? It's what you do.
You talk about it.
LAWLER: That's their job.
URBAN: That's their job.
LAWLER: Shouldn't they do that?
URBAN: Their job is to put things at the table and the President has to make tough decisions. The President has to, you think, no President, Democrats, Republicans, nobody wants to go to Dover and do dignified, you know, transfer remains. No President ever wants to do that.
And so they think about these things in great detail. The men and women who are planning these missions doing with great, I mean, incredibly like detailed specificity. If you look, you don't have to even go to flightaware, but in, you know, look at all the military aircraft, every U.S. asset, joint rivet, C1, 17, everything's flying to the Middle East.
The, you know, ships that are in the region. I mean, it is apparent that something is going to happen. What scale is it to be determined? Is it going to be really big? It's going to be, you know, boots on the ground, big, is it going to be, you know, what kind of weapons systems used?
I mean, that is all what's being discussed at this point. I think is these gentlemen just pointed out the Ayatollah is not going to cooperate.
[22:40:00]
He's never cooperated. This regime, since the Beirut, you know, bombing that killed our Marines until today, right?
These people are pure evil and something needs to be changed. The Persian people, right, who live in this country are great, a great culture. They have corrupt leadership that needs to be gone.
STRICKLAND: I don't think anyone is disagreeing that the Islamic Republic Guard is the largest sponsor of terror in the entire world. Hamas, Houthis, Hezbollah, all those things.
But when we're talking about committing a large number of American troops, there has to be a debate, a case made to the American people about why this is important. And it's up to Congress to determine whether or not we're going to do this.
And so I think about the lack of trust that exists right now with the general public and government. I think about people's skepticism about having Donald Trump as commander-in-chief and having this kind of power. We had a debate going to war in Iraq.
And again, no one is debating that the IRG, they're a bunch of terrorists. They've done a lot of harm to people in Iran. People in Iran want to be free and they're a biggest threat to democracy around the world because of terrorism.
But this has to be a public conversation. Congress has to make the decision to do this because we need transparency. And we're talking about putting the lives of young men and women who wear the uniform.
The best thing we can always do is to keep our young people out of harm's way, but we don't want to do something and commit a lot of troops with all the other things happening around the world as well.
URBAN: Here's my concern about that, right? So the Congress, excuse me for the present company here--
STRICKLAND: We haven't a good--
URBAN: From 2001 until the end of Afghanistan, did not have the spine, take up the authorization use of military force and revisit it. We fought under the same authorization use of military force from not post-9/11 until 25 because the Congress didn't want to debate it.
LAWLER: We tried to reform that last Congress, we tried to take that up as an issue and what started on the foreign affairs committee to go through that process, to reform the AUMFs because they're outdated and they need to be a reform. But under article two, President Trump has the authority and the fact here is that it is not right of Congress to try and restrict his ability in this moment in advance of any strike.
GOTTHEIMER: There's a huge, there's a huge difference. I just want to say like, there's a big difference between coming to Congress, which the President should if there's going to be boots on the ground and a longer term incursion. I totally agree with you.
We're talking about right now where there actually is negotiations going on, keeping maximum pressure on them as they continue to threaten the United States of America, our servicemen and women and our allies around the world.
This is the moment we're in right now. So to preemptively do that and to tell the world, oh, here's our roadmap when we, as you pointed out, and have this debate before we even do anything.
URBAN: The President's powers are at a peak right now.
LAWLER: He's the commander-in-chief. There's a difference between that and that.
STRICKLAND: We've already telegraphed that we plan on being there. We're moving people. We're moving equipment.
LAWLER: I just want to, I think it's important when you look at both the decision to strike Iran's nuclear facilities and the decision to remove Nicolas Maduro. In both instances, the administration gave the Ayatollah and Nicolas Maduro the ability to negotiate and to try and avoid the need for military action.
But in both instances, ultimately, the President made a difficult, but in my opinion, necessary decision to strike at Iran's nuclear facilities and eliminate that threat and to remove someone who was three times indicted in the United States for drug trafficking.
GOTTHEIMER: Hopefully he's scaring, hopefully the Ayatollah is scaring the pressure right now and realizing better back off and leave.
HUNT: All right. Well, let's leave it there.
I'm sure we do. We're going to find out, I think, David, to your point, rather imminently.
Kash Patel's latest jet-setting trip, meanwhile, has critics asking if he's celebrating on the taxpayer dime. We'll debate that.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:45:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HUNT: Tonight's video of Kash Patel partying with the U.S. men's hockey team is raising questions about his judgment inside the FBI. The U.S. beat Canada in overtime Sunday for its first Olympic gold since 1980. Post-game, Patel appeared to chug a beer and spray it as a player draped a gold medal around his neck.
David, I've talked to you about this today once already.
URBAN: I'm Team Kash. I'm just going to ask him, how many of you have been on a CODEL? Raise your hand.
GOTTHEIMER: I've been on a CODEL?
URBAN: CODEL, yes. Oh, CODEL, right?
GOTTHEIMER: Yes, of course.
URBAN: Oh, wait. Have you done anything other than work on a CODEL?
Oh, come on.
HUNT: Those are 14-hour games.
URBAN: Oh, yes, sure. I've been on plenty of CODELs. I know what you guys do, okay? So, Kash Patel takes the plane, which he's entitled to do as the director of the FBI, because otherwise he can't get on a United flight, because, you know, there's so many death threats against the poor guy.
And so he took a flight. He's going to have to reimburse just like you would do, first-class airfare if you flew privately. And he wasn't supportive of the Americans in a hockey game.
I mean, I don't see the--
So, I think people take umbrage that he was jumping around and got excited and had a beer. Great. I mean, so be it.
[23:50:00]
HUNT: I think the big-picture question I have here is the way people are talking about this. I mean, this was political immediately. Think about, like, 1980, right? The last time this happened, 46 years ago.
It's a movie, "Miracle on Ice."
GOTTHEIMER: Yes, it's cool.
HUNT: You know, it's kind of at the height of the-- not quite the height of the Cold War, but not that far from it, right? These are some old pictures of it.
The contrast between what America felt in the wake of that win and how we're feeling in the wake of this one, it just -- I feel like it says a lot about where we are.
GOTTHEIMER: What contrast? Are you kidding me? That was amazing.
HUNT: Yes, it was amazing.
GOTTHEIMER: I was watching it with my kids.
HUNT: I totally agree with you.
GOTTHEIMER: By the way, that was like the men winning the gold, the women winning the gold.
First of all, let's talk about how great that was. That was an unbelievable game.
HUNT: Let's talk about what a great Olympics--
GOTTHEIMER: How great pride the U.S. has had.
HUNT: Alright, great.
GOTTHEIMER: We're not all talking about Kash Patel. We're talking about that game. It was amazing.
LAWLER: I honestly think this is, like, not even worth--
The fact is, you had a tremendous Olympics for the United States. The most gold medals in history for the U.S. at the Winter Olympics. Remarkable performances, Alyssa Liu.
I mean, truly, that was probably the best gold medal winning figure skating performance ever. She was flawless. She was so enthusiastic.
You see both men's and women's hockey teams winning in overtime gold medals.
GOTTHEIMER: And the golds.
LAWLER: Truly, just a remarkable job. And honestly, that's what matters. I think we spend so much time focused on who we hate, what we disagree on.
This was a great moment in America. Let's celebrate the moment. And you know what? If Kash Patel was chugging a beer and celebrating alongside them, power to him.
If I was there, I'd be celebrating with him.
URBAN: And he was actually on some business in the air. He was doing-- Listen, we've got the Olympics coming.
LAWLER: We've got to come back at Kash Patel next lifetime. That's the bottom line. All over the world, we're at the Olympics.
STRICKLAND: He was celebrating. He was caught chasing. It was the Olympics.
He actually needs to worry more about keeping his job and doing his job. But you know what? It was the Olympics. So let him live.
HUNT: Well, right.
URBAN: Team Kash. Look at this. Everybody's Team Kash.
HUNT: So let's play the moment.
GOTTHEIMER: Let's bring that positivity to tomorrow night.
HUNT: I will not be there.
LAWLER: Marilyn won't be there.
GOTTHEIMER: I will be home with a beer.
STRICKLAND: I will not be there.
LAWLER: She'll be chugging a beer every time Donald Trump says.
HUNT: Let's play the moment, though.
Kash Patel gets Donald Trump on the phone. Or Donald Trump is talking to players in the locker room. Let's play that moment where he is on the phone.
And this is, again, in the wake of the men's team's victory. Take a look.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (on the phone): We'll do it at the White House.
What would really be cool, we'll do the White House the next day. We'll just have some fun.
We have medals for you guys.
And we have to... I must tell you, we're going to have to bring the women's team. You do know that, right?
I do believe I probably would be impeached, okay?
But anyway, if you could work that out, I would be honored to have you all introduced.
KASH PATEL, FBI DIRECTOR: I got it, boss. I got it.
TRUMP: Okay, you got it, Kash?
PATEL: I'm on it. Kash is doing it.
TRUMP: I'm happy.
PATEL: I'm fucking on it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
STRICKLAND: You know, the women's team has won more medals than the men's team.
GOTTHEIMER: Yes, they're great.
LAWLER: They're terrific. That's unbelievable.
And the goalie is from Chappaqua. And she did a terrific job.
HUNT: Wow, see, look at this.
URBAN: That's like four votes right there.
GOTTHEIMER: They're not going to vote for us.
HUNT: I turned this into kumbaya. I got a little confused.
LAWLER: The President is saying that these guys--
GOTTHEIMER: You're not going to be the only ones there.
LAWLER: You're not going to be the only ones. I didn't take it.
HUNT: No, I appreciate it. When I turned on the game on Sunday morning to watch it with my son, he said, wait, but mommy, the Americans already won the hockey.
And I said, yes, you are so right. The Americans did already win the hockey. And they won it again.
LAWLER: This is awesome.
HUNT: All right. Coming up next, the panel gives us their nightcap's prediction edition.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:55:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HUNT: All right, we're back. Time for the News Nightcap on the eve of President Trump's State of the Union address. What's your prediction for tomorrow night?
Congressman Gottheimer, you first.
GOTTHEIMER: In a strong show of bipartisanship, Donald Trump is not only going to attack Democrats tomorrow night, but he's going to also attack a bunch of Republicans in the room too.
HUNT: Well, Okay. Yes, I wouldn't take that.
LAWLER: Hold, Josh. Hold.
GOTTHEIMER: Watch it, Congressman.
URBAN: Okay, so listen. There's going to be a lot of drama, a lot of serious things taking place tomorrow night.
My prediction is that Jack Hughes will wear his teeth when he appears with the hockey team tomorrow.
HUNT: I hope so. I really hope so.
URBAN: For those who don't know Jack, for those people who don't know, for the uninitiated who don't know Jack Hughes, here's a picture right there.
HUNT: Oh, I can't look at it. I can't look at it.
URBAN: He will be wearing his teeth tomorrow.
LAWLER: Maybe he'll hold his teeth.
GOTTHEIMER: I don't know that he can.
HUNT: Congressman Lawler.
LAWLER: Look, I think President Trump is obviously going to be highlighting, you know, the positive big wins in the working families tax cut bill. Average New Yorker is going to see a $4,000 tax cut because he lifted the cap on salt.
[23:00:00]
HUNT: And he's running for re-election.
LAWLER: That's a big win.
GOTTHEIMER: That's your big prediction.
LAWLER: Very bold.
HUNT: Congresswoman. STRICKLAND: So somewhere in his speech tomorrow, Donald Trump is going to say that he is entitled to an Olympic gold medal. He won a Nobel Prize badly, didn't get it. FIFA actually manufactured a medal and gave it to him.
So somewhere in his speech he's going to say something about deserving a gold medal.
LAWLER: I'll make sure to text you if he says that.
GOTTHEIMER: And more tariff taxes on Americans we're going to hear about.
STRICKLAND: Exactly.
HUNT: All right. Thank you all.
Speaking of the President's first State of the Union address of his second term, do be sure to tune in to CNN for in-depth coverage and analysis. Tomorrow's CNN coverage starts at 8:00 p.m. right here. You can watch on CNN or on the CNN app.
Thanks to all of you for being here. Thanks to all of you for watching "NewsNight." "Laura Coates Live" starts right now.
