Return to Transcripts main page
CNN NewsNight with Abby Phillip
New York Times Reports, Trump Admin Probed Left-Leaning Groups After Pretti Shooting; ICE Detentions Set Trump-Era Record Last Month Amid Crackdown; Vance Warns GOP Socialism Will Surge If We Can't Fix Economy. New Attorney General Todd Blanche Addressed for the First Time, Promised to Contradict DOJ's Actions; Kennedy Center Board Voted to Restore Donald Trump's Name in the Building, Undergo Two-Year Renovations. Aired 10-11p ET
Aired August 13, 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 VIDEOTAPE)
ELIE HONIG, CNN ANCHOR (voice over): Tonight, after Alex Pretti was killed on an American street in Minneapolis, we're now learning the Trump administration rushed to investigate liberal advocacy groups instead of the federal agent who pulled the trigger.
Plus, as Donald Trump insists the economy is in its golden age, his number two suggests it's not.
J.D. VANCE, U.S. VICE PRESIDENT: If we don't get this right, don't blame young people for being sympathetic to socialism.
HONIG: Also, Todd Blanche said all the right things in his first formal address as attorney general.
TODD BLANCHE, ATTORNEY GENERAL: We're going to uphold the law without fear or favor.
HONIG: But his promises contradict what the feds have actually done.
And --
SARAH MATTHEWS, FORMER WHITE HOUSE DEPUTY SECRETARY, FIRST TRUMP ADMINISTRATION: Trump missed his true calling, which was to be first lady or first gentleman.
HONIG: -- despite a presidency facing international and domestic crises, a new report gives a window into what's really on Donald Trump's mind.
DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: So, we're building a ballroom that everybody -- it's going to be the most beautiful --
HONIG: A 45,000-word window.
Live at the table, Alyssa Farah Griffin, Noah Rothman, Yemisi Egbewole, Shermichael Singleton, and Michael Moynihan.
Americans with different perspectives aren't talking to each other, but here they do.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
HONIG (on camera): Good evening everybody, and welcome to NewsNight. I'm Elie Honig here in New York, filling in for Abby, who is on a well-deserved vacation.
We've got a fantastic table of experts and a lot of news to discuss, so let's get right to what America is talking about.
As the Department of Homeland Security already faces a mountain of scrutiny, tonight there are new allegations that are raising serious questions about the agency's investigative tactics.
Now, you'll remember back in January that Alex Pretti was fatally shot by ICE officers as he protested the Trump administration's immigration operation in Minnesota. Now, a new lawsuit alleges that shortly after Pretti's death, DHS used invasive tactics to investigate left-leaning political groups and individuals who were never ultimately accused of crimes. And that includes things like undercover agents posing as protesters to infiltrate community meetings, and covert surveillance of electronic messages.
Now, it's worth noting all of this happened before the Trump administration even bothered to open a fully coordinated criminal investigation into the agent who actually pulled the trigger.
Before we open it up to the table here, we invite you to join the debate from home. Head over to cnn.com/abby and weigh in, and we will get to some of your comments throughout the show.
All right, Shermichael.
SHERMICHAEL SINGLETON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yes.
HONIG: First things first, in those key moments days and weeks after the fatal shooting of Alex Pretti, we now know DHS launches this very invasive investigation of political groups, of labor unions. At the same time, in those first few weeks, no full-blown criminal investigation. Is that just and fair?
SINGLETON: I think it is just. I mean, look, government has to have a demonstrable criminal nexus for any organization it investigates. I strongly believe that. I think in this particular case, when you have what appears to be an organized network of individuals who are protesting, who are interfering with federal officers, I do think it is within the federal government's right to at a minimum investigate. Sometimes that means going undercover. Sometimes that means forensic accounting of bank accounts to figure out who's organizing this, who's paying for this. And sometimes at the conclusion of said investigation, you may determine no laws are broken, and then you move on. We've seen administrations do this. I can go all the way back to George W. Bush in 2001 and 2006 after September, 9/11. You could look at the Obama administration with the Occupy Wall Street protesters. They classified them as domestic terrorists. I can go on and on. I'm just saying.
HONIG: What should be higher investigation? Looking at labor unions or looking at the police officer, the ICE officer, who pulled the trigger and fatally killed Alex Pretti.
SINGLETON: I think you can do two things at the same time.
ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: But they didn't.
HONIG: But they didn't.
SINGLETON: But I think you can, though.
NOAH ROTHMAN, SENIOR WRITER, NATIONAL REVIEW: Well, hang on, Elie. There were a ton of red flags in this story. I'm very skeptical of any story that tells you how to feel about it before they tell you the facts, which is exactly what this story did. You go a couple of paragraphs down and you find out, well, 15 people were indicted as a result of this investigation into this effort to disrupt law enforcement, and you click through to that, and you read that story.
[22:05:05]
And you find out, well, they did have ties to the organizations they were investigating, and they did use implements to obstruct law enforcement. And then for good measure, the Times describes protesters as though they were protesters attacking an ICE facility last year. That was not a protest. That was a coordinated terrorist attacks using sophisticated ambush tactics, opening up an overlapping fields of fire. You have to wonder what The New York Times is getting so defensive about.
HONIG: Should there have been, that's all lovely, should there have been a criminal investigation of the fatal shooting of Alex Pretti?
ROTHMAN: Sure. Should there have been an investigation, but you have these people who are assaulting law enforcement officers.
GRIFFIN: But this is what it gets down to is the priorities of law enforcement. And law enforcement should in any capable environment be able to walk and chew gum, to your point.
But the first and foremost should be looking into the death at the hands of law enforcement of an American citizen. That's where things should have started. The lack of coordination at the federal and the local level was unlike something I've seen in years that we have witnessed with something like this.
I do think that there is a time for the Department of Justice, for federal law enforcement to get involved in these kind of investigations. There's also civil liberties. There's also the Fourth Amendment. There's also certain rights that people who organize have. And it is interesting when conservatives think, in this case, it's totally okay, but January 6th might've had some feds in there, and we are losing our minds that there might have been some plants in there trying to see if there were bad actors or if there were agitators.
I think we could all kind of take a step back. There is a role for law enforcement. There also has to be limits to what they're going to see.
YEMISI EGBEWOLE, FORMER CHIEF OF STAFF AND ADVISER, BIDEN WHITE HOUSE PRESS OFFICE: And when we talk about the organized group of people, I think we can look at protests that have happened at ICE facilities in different states. We saw the one that happened over an elongated period of time in New Jersey.
When I think about Minnesota specifically, though, that to me seemed a lot like moms and dads, neighbors that were very, very tired of the way ICE was operating in their neighborhoods. And I think sometimes the conversation gets conflated, on immigration totally with this administration of illegal immigrant and violent criminal, but also in community member and neighbor and organized member/Antifa too.
HONIG: Michael, what do you think?
MICHAEL MOYNIHAN, PODCAST CO-HOST, THE FIFTH COLUMN: Yes, look, I mean, I think the starting point for this is the Alex Pretti shooting. It's the fact that we don't even know who pulled the trigger. We know the name of two officers. We don't know which one did it. And what has happened with that? Nothing. We don't know that anything has happened with that.
So -- but when you look at -- look, I'm effectively a civil libertarian on these issues. It worries me that there is some echoes, to go into history of COINTELPRO, of the very beginnings of COINTELPRO, that actually what happened with COINTELPRO was that they were going and disrupting things much later, and they were attacking groups and, you know, disinformation.
But these early stages of these broad things, you know, there's an environmental group in this, but to the point that you made, is that there was an attack on an ICE facility. And it was people with Kevlar vests on. And there was an ICE officer shot during this. This stuff is real.
HONIG: Separate from Minnesota.
MOYNIHAN: Separate from Minnesota. That was in Texas.
HONIG: For sure, yes.
MOYNIHAN: But that kind of stuff is very real.
Do I think from this -- and let's be critical of The New York Times here, this was the beginning of a story without the specifics to understand where did they overstep, to Noah's point. There was a lot of suggestive stuff in this, but you can't really tell from that story on its own. HONIG: Yes. I think the key point is we could, we don't know whether there was investigative overstep. I can say that as a prosecutor. What we do know is they weren't doing anything on the actual shooting of Alex Pretti, and it's not clear, as somebody said, that that's even happening now.
I want to turn to you, Alyssa. Now, Donald Trump was elected in 2024, and one of his main campaign priorities was, of course, immigration enforcement. Does there come a point where that political support erodes given the public reaction to some of these ICE tactics in Minneapolis and elsewhere?
GRIFFIN: 100 percent. I don't understand why Donald Trump doesn't -- every time he's on the stump, every time he's traveling, say, I closed the border on day one, I did in one day what Joe Biden couldn't do in four years, most Americans agreed with that. They believed we needed to secure the border. It's the next steps of immigration enforcement that are a lot more convoluted. About 90 percent of Americans think if you came here undocumented and you committed a crime, you should be deported. Those people should be prioritized.
Why this administration isn't taking this time and going through to prioritize those people rather than the shock and awe approach that they've had. And we've seen it, whether it's Tom Homan, whether it's Stephen Miller, saying they want to get the numbers up of deportations. They care more about beating Obama's 3 million deportations than they do about prioritizing who 90 percent of the country thinks get out.
That is where it gets a lot more complicated. People care when nannies, when people who've grown up in their communities for 20 years are suddenly yanked off.
HONIG: Shermichael, are you worried about losing support over ICE's conduct?
SINGLETON: I mean, look, I was very excited when we received around 44 percent of Hispanic men and women in states like Texas and across the country in 2024. I thought we had an opportunity to crystallize and submit that vote, make them highly competitive going into 2028.
As a strategist, I have to be honest, it worries me a little bit that we may have indeed lost some of them because the optics for the average person doesn't look great.
[22:10:01]
I have to agree with Alyssa on this. Get the president out there and say, look, I did what Biden and Kamala Harris couldn't do and Democrats couldn't do in four years. I did it in a couple of months, and let's move on to the next item.
MOYNIHAN: You shouldn't worry about it. It has collapsed.
SINGLETON: Oh, there's no doubt about that.
MOYNIHAN: (INAUDIBLE) support has collapsed.
SINGLETON: Absolutely.
EGBEWOLE: I think it's so interesting that an issue that I left the Biden White House feeling like, Why did we not see it? Why did we not understand voters? It is so simple to say that you have to have a -- even Bernie Sanders says, I believe in borders. It's an 80/20 issue. And to look at them take this golden football and absolutely just toss it out of the stadium has been just incredible.
I'm from Georgia. Laken Riley was a heartbreaking situation. Most anybody you talk to would say that was a tragedy, and they would think about their own daughters. I thought about my girlfriends that were going to UGA at the time. That is something that you can take, and you can turn it into humane policy that is longstanding and gets everybody on board with you.
ROTHMAN: Well, there are still plenty of voters who are very grateful for the efforts to control the border that this president has engaged in. The YouGov poll last month found that eight out of ten people really don't like ICE's tactics, which includes a lot of Republicans, and yet you have a majority of all voters, including a majority of independents, who say the border being closed is good, and we appreciate the president's efforts there.
So, Republicans can really message this if they address voters' concerns.
(CROSSTALKS)
HONIG: I'm going to throw one out there. This is going to be potluck. Whoever wants to take this can take this. How does one reconcile the rhetoric from the administration about we are going after the worst of the worst with the fact that there are daily quotas for immigration arrests and deportations? Does anyone believe that that is reconcilable? Shermichael, go.
SINGLETON: I'm not taking that one.
(CROSSTALKS)
GRIFFIN: And, by the way, the social media posts, the wanting to have people in chains and have the most flash and awe value, that works with a small corner of the base. That 30 percent is already with Donald Trump. They're not going anywhere. They need to cater to the mainstream of the country, which doesn't want to see people ripped out of communities who've been here for 20 years, have never done -- committed any offenses other than being here and that.
MOYNIHAN: I mean, that's the basic point. As Noah said, I mean, I saw the same YouGov poll. There's -- it's replicated a million times over, is that people -- and polls that say that people want immigration enforcement. It was his most popular issue. And then he was underwater on it. How on earth does that happen? Well, it's how it's deployed and how ICE is deployed.
And look at what independents think about ICE. 20 percent approval rating about, with independents? That's --
HONIG: Yemisi, real quick, we have heard various Democratic lawmakers call for the abolition of ICE. I want to play a clip for you real quick.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PEGGY FLANAGAN (D), MINNESOTA SENATE CANDIDATE: We need to rip ICE apart and stop them from terrorizing our communities.
REP. AYANNA PRESSLEY (D-MA): We have to abolish ICE.
Rep. CHELLIE PINGREE (D-ME): I'm one of those people who think we should abolish ICE.
ABDUL EL-SAYED (D), MICHIGAN SENATE CANDIDATE: I said that we need to abolish ICE.
REP. NYDIA VELAZQUEZ (D-NY): You cannot put a bandage on a system that is fundamentally broken. We must abolish ICE, period.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HONIG: Too far?
EGBEWOLE: I feel the way I feel about abolish ICE is the same way I felt about defund the police. It is a slogan, and there's nothing else under it. You can reform ICE, but you have to have some kind of law enforcement for our border.
I mean -- and some of the lawmakers that are running, look, we live in an attention economy. Abolish ICE is a lot catchier than let's have a full nuanced conversation about what we can do.
GRIFFIN: It becomes a litmus test is the problem. And I asked Mamdani this on The View a couple months back and I said, does ICE have any legitimate law enforcement role? And he declined to say that it did. And that gets to your point where there is -- most of this country wants some sort of immigration enforcement.
So, beyond the pithy headline and the flashy slogan of it, you have to have an answer in how you enforce the law.
SINGLETON: But to your point of what's reconcilable in terms of how far my party's gone as it pertains to immigration, when you contrast that to people who are saying, get rid of ICE, when you look at places like Chicago, New York, where you have predominantly African American communities, saying, wait a minute here, there are resource limitations because there are too many people in our communities now, I think Republicans can win on that message every single time because abolish it and replace it with what?
HONIG: Yes.
SINGLETON: That's the question.
HONIG: All right, good discussion. You're all invited back for the next block.
Next up, J.D. Vance warns Republicans that it's their fault if socialism continues to surge, and his message sounds a bit different than the president's.
Plus, Todd Blanche's words to his DOJ employees don't quite match his actions. We'll discuss.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:15:00]
HONIG: Tonight, the golden age or a work in progress? President Trump and his own vice president appear to disagree about the strength of the economy. In a new interview today, JD Vance suggested the state of the economy is at least partly responsible for the rise of socialism on the left, but that's very different than what Donald Trump has said recently.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: You know, when I see polls on the economy, I should have 150 percent, not 100 percent, because we have the greatest -- this is the golden age of America. What's being built now in this country has never, ever been built. And we're really -- we are literally in the golden age of America.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HONIG: Now, here is what J.D. Vance said earlier today.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VANCE: Our response to that can't be just to ignore the economic concerns that I think are feeding this rising interest in socialism.
We want people to be able to afford the good things about this wonderful country that we all live in, and my warning to my fellow Republicans, Will, would be if we don't get this right, don't blame young people for being sympathetic to socialism.
[22:20:05]
We've got to blame ourselves.
Rebuilding our industrial base, rebuilding the heartland, making our streets safer, making it possible for young people to afford to buy a home, this is how you stop socialism. You don't stop socialism by throwing slogans at people about the free market. As much as I love the free market, you stop socialism by making people's lives better.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HONIG: Alyssa Farah Griffin, we turn to you.
GRIFFIN: All right. First style, then substance. This is niche for me, but I worked for Mike Pence when he was vice president. I'm still stunned by how often J.D. Vance contradicts and is on a different messaging sheet than the president. That's just something we would have heard from the West Wing on. But J.D. Vance is also absolutely right. Calling affordability a hoax, saying that the economy's on fire, we're the hottest country in the world, that's not how anyone feels right now, and ahead of the midterms, you need Republicans acknowledging the pain.
He's also right that when you see this rise of interest in socialism with young people, it is because they feel economically displaced. And simply telling them, well, it's because of your $20 burrito or the avocado toast that you bought, that does not answer the question.
The only thing that makes it interesting to me is I think J.D. Vance is a little bit like socialist curious. I just finished reading his book and he has -- some of his economic policies are not traditional free market economic policies. If you compare him, it's vastly different in a --
ROTHMAN: You put your finger on it, though. He's feathering his own nest in a way that any White House should put the kibosh on pretty quickly. He's called himself a post-liberal. He believes in strong, effective government intervention into the private sector, very unconservative. He's made no bones about this. This is his political project he's talking up here.
And I thought this White House was a -- we elected a bunch of fighters, right? They're fighters. They're going to fight against left-wing narratives. What is that? Giving a whole lot of credence to the notion that socialism, which has failed 100 percent of the time it's tried, is a valid response to economic hardship. How dare you give oxygen to that?
HONIG: Real quick, back to Alyssa. Would you expect that J.D. Vance might get a talking to for contradicting the message like that?
GRIFFIN: I honestly have been stunned, because I've seen it quite a few times, and they seem to let him have a much longer leash than they did in the first term. And I don't know if it's because it's the Rubio versus Vance stakes and they're letting it play out, but he does undermine the White House's messaging.
HONIG: Yemisi, what about you?
EGBEWOLE: Yes. I mean, I found myself nodding along a little bit with him. And then I had to remind myself no, no, they run the White House, the Senate, the House. It is their economy, and they have to fix it. But it is in such a contrast.
I think back to President Trump, when he wouldn't sign Tim Scott and Elizabeth Warren's housing bill, and I thought, wow, here is the issue that you could win young people on. I mean, you have a whole generation that it feels like woke up and read Karl Marx and said, okay, this is what I believe. And if you want to bring people back to capitalism, you have to make capitalism feel like it is working for them. HONIG: Michael, as an unidentifiable political individual, what do you make of the rise of the Democratic socialists?
MOYNIHAN: Do we have -- how long do we have? You got two or three hours here?
HONIG: 33 seconds.
MOYNIHAN: Well I will say one thing, is that I live in New York City, and when J.D. Vance says, you know, people who are down on their luck are the people that support socialism, not here, my friend. It's Park Slope. It's people that have degrees in Danish puppet theater who live in Park Slope. Those are the people who support socialism here.
Look, I get where he's going. I'm not surprised by it. If you follow the trajectory of J.D. Vance's very odd ideological path from being a neo-con working for David Frum at one point to where he is now, I mean, he is a guy who wrote for Commentary magazine at one point. He's a guy now that is, you know, working for an administration that now has stakes in 30 private companies.
How conservative is that from the conservatism that I knew? I don't identify as a conservative. I'm much more libertarian, and this is a thing that offends libertarians because they're already doing it, and it's not good.
HONIG: Shermichael, all this said, the rise of the Democratic socialists is sort of a hanging curveball for your side, right? I mean, there is a lot of political hay to be made here.
SINGLETON: Yes, there is, but I will not cede any ground to the socialists. I think you're right. It's a bunch of highly educated whites. It's a lot of highly educated white students. The majority of Americans are simply saying, we want the same bargain that our parents and our grandparents made that worked for them to work for us.
They're not giving up on capitalism. They're not giving up on the idea of the free market. They may not be reading Hayek, but they still believe the system works. I think we as Republicans just have to do a little bit more to make sure that that translates into the tangible, but I am not going to cede ground to socialists that half of America is buying this crap. I will not believe it.
MOYNIHAN: One thing to add to this is the DSA understands this too. What happens when they win a primary, and it's not New York? When you win the primary, you win the election here. When it's somewhere else, what do they start backing off from? Hating Thanksgiving, right? And those types of things that are codified into the DSA's platform, they're running away from now because they understand that people don't like this stuff.
HONIG: But, Alyssa, to that point -- oh, Yemisi, go ahead.
EGBEWOLE: I was just saying that's why I don't lean so much into the DSA's taking over the Democratic Party because I think, okay, well, the DSA has to win in competitive places to be this legitimate faction that is like a threat or in some sense to the Democratic Party.
[22:25:04]
GRIFFIN: I'm not sure the DSA knows that, though, if you listen to them. They seem to have a few lessons in politics. But I think the rise of the DSA, some of this is, yes, economic in nature. I think a lot of it is overeducated younger, largely white voters who frankly are more motivated by cultural issues, by issues like Gaza, and they're kind of just putting all of their energy behind a progressive cause. But you don't see most of these candidates prioritizing, first and foremost, affordability and bringing down the cost of living. It is much more these third rail issues.
HONIG: So, let me ask the political strategists at the table. It's a fact that all Democratic candidates, no matter where you are, DSA, moderate, are going to be painted with a broad brush, right? They're going to be presented with those most extreme statements, abolish Thanksgiving, abolish the U.S. Senate.
MOYNIHAN: Yes.
HONIG: How should -- if you all -- and you guys can play Democratic strategists for a second. How should one respond to that?
ROTHMAN: How should one respond to the notion that, listen, I'm not a Democratic socialist, so that's probably --
HONIG: If you got hired to advise a Democratic candidate, moderate Democratic candidate, you knew he or she was going to get attacked with the most extreme statements of the DSA.
ROTHMAN: The most effective strategy that was ever devised to do this is now anathema to the Democratic Party, and that's the Sister Souljah moment.
HONIG: Yes.
GRIFFIN: Yes.
ROTHMAN: You can't do that anymore.
HONIG: Can you just explain that just so it goes back a little bit?
ROTHMAN: It goes back to '92, '93, during, yes, the first campaign of Bill Clinton. And he was confronted with a lot of radical activism from African Americans and especially Jesse Jackson.
And he had this target of opportunity, which was this rapper, Sister Souljah, who had made a lot of incendiary comments about -- at white people. And so Bill Clinton, standing with Jesse Jackson right next to him at this conference, denounced this woman, and in doing so, symbolically threw that side, you know, threw that lead millstone off the side of the Democratic Party ship.
You can't do that anymore because of intersectionality. Intersectionality prescribes the notion that all causes are the same cause, that all activists are within the same universe of activism. And to get rid of one is to offend all and to sacrifice all. And so we don't have Sister Souljah moments anymore, and that construct is impossible to navigate. It is really foolish, unnecessary, and should be brought back.
HONIG: There are some candidates out there that --
GRIFFIN: You know, I would keep an eye on Crowley, who no one was expecting to win. And you see some of his interviews now. I'm like you guys were hiding one of your best candidates under a rock and almost nominating a lunatic there. But he's very eloquently answered this question. He's not going to entertain the Hasan Pikers of the world. He's not going to appear with people who have said some of the most outrageous things that you can say in politics, and he's going to stand by what he believes. And like confident candidates --
MOYNIHAN: He's also a very progressive candidate, too.
GRIFFIN: Yes. A confident candidate should be able to stand on their own two feet and not have to cater to all these different people.
SINGLETON: But I think Democrats have got to be willing to be more public-facing in terms of defending their moderate candidates. To me, it appears that they're afraid of the DSA folks, and the way I look at it, looking at the numbers, they're not as strong as we presume they are.
HONIG: Michael, you are a New York resident. I don't know if you're in AOC's district, if you live in there. But you're close. What do you make of the fact that she has already begun the distancing process, right? Yesterday sort of making a joke about Woke 1.
MOYNIHAN: Well, she also didn't go to bat for Francesca Hong and --
HONIG: Nor did Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders. What do you make of that?
MOYNIHAN: Bernie Sanders. I mean, look, that's -- I mean, the whole thing when she goes on the ABC show this week with Jonathan Karl, and says, well, you know, Woke 1.0 was a bit much. Yes, I think it was.
HONIG: Okay. What particularly?
MOYNIHAN: Well, she wasn't asked that follow-up question. She should have been. But why is she saying that? Because she was involved in Woke 1.0. And I love that it's like software now. This is -- it got an update to 2.0.
And now we don't want to defund the police, but no one is asking the follow-up questions, okay, do you believe in defunding the police, abolishing the Senate, you know, abolishing Thanksgiving, all these absurdities. But she is running away from that for a reason, because she has higher aspirations. Anybody that has higher aspirations has to walk away from this stuff.
What does that tell you about the American electorate? Something that's a bit reassuring, I have to say.
GRIFFIN: But can I say real quick?
HONIG: Yes, go ahead.
GRIFFIN: It's very interesting that AOC is pivoting away from Woke 1.0 while Kamala Harris also likely a contender, is pivoting right back to 2020 Kamala Harris. Like make that make sense to me. And it shows AOC -- I mean, it'd be a gift to her.
MOYNIHAN: She's came out again packing the Supreme Court.
GRIFFIN: Correct. It'd be a gift to Republicans if AOC was the nominee, but she is showing a much more nuanced approach than anything.
SINGLETON: But what's changed about her actual views in woke 2.0?
(CROSSTALKS)
HONIG: It's a great question. It's a great question.
SINGLETON: She's going to be asked that.
EGBEWOLE: Yes. And I would say that Woke 2.0 now is the Israel/Gaza litmus test. In the same way when you asked every single candidate, do you believe Black lives matter, do you believe that we should defund the police, in the same way, do you believe that Israel has a right to exist, is a question that everyone's getting asked or going to be asked.
HONIG: All right, guys, great lesson in '90s history, and '90s hip- hop, importantly, as well.
Next up, Todd Blanche gave his first big address as attorney general. His message is raising eyebrows. We'll discuss.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:30:00]
HONIG: Today, just days after he was confirmed as Attorney General of the United States, Todd Blanche addressed DOJ's rank and file. He delivered a 19-minute speech intended to signal his priorities within the department. Now, Blanche had been serving as acting A.G. since April, and today he said a lot of the right things, echoing the words of A.G.s who had come before him.
Despite his unprecedented efforts to reshape DOJ, to pursue Trump's political opponents, and despite Trump's anti-weaponization fund and the tax immunity deal that nearly derailed Blanche's nomination, the new A.G. only mentioned Donald Trump by name once. But in his prepared remarks, Blanche appeared to contradict the department's real pursuits under his leadership.
[22:35:08] (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TODD BLANCHE, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL: I promise you that I will lead this department with integrity. I promise you that I will focus on our core mission, which is to uphold the rule of law fairly and impartially, to keep this great country safe, and to protect the rights of every citizen in this country.
And I think about integrity and that as a word, but it's really, in my mind, keeping a promise to each other, to yourself, and to everybody that you interact with. And for what we do, it's a promise that we're going to uphold the law without fear or favor.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HONIG: Okay, I'm going to do the rundown here of recent DOJ prosecutions that have failed against political opponents of Donald Trump.
Letitia James, indicted. That case was dismissed by a judge. They tried to re-indict her two more times, two grand juries rejected it.
Jim Comey, indicted. Dismissed by a judge. They re-indicted him on a pathetic case, the Seashell case, that has no chance at all.
Senator Mark Kelly and other Democratic lawmakers, they tried to indict in D.C. That was rejected.
Jerome Powell in the Fed, subpoenaed. That subpoena was blocked by a federal judge. DOJ has now dropped that case.
We can go all the way through to last week and the failed reflecting pool indictment of David Hearn, which is now out the door. So now, and you see there's more here, we're going to go around the horn. And I want just, if we can, for starters, just a yes or no to this question.
Has this Justice Department prosecuted people for political reasons? Give me a yes or no, then we'll dig in. Noah.
NOAH ROTHMAN, SENIOR WRITER, "NATIONAL REVIEW": Yes.
YEMISI EGBEWOLE, FORMER CHIEF OF STAFF AND ADVISER BIDEN WHITE HOUSE AND SENIOR FELLOW, THIRD WAY: Yes.
HONIG: Yemisi?
EGBEWOLE: Yes.
MICHAEL MOYNIHAN, PODCAST CO-HOST, "THE FIFTH COLUMN": 100 percent yes.
ALYSSA FARAH-GRIFFIN, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR AND FORMER DIRECTOR FOR STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS UNDER FIRST TRUMP ADMINISTRATION: 100 percent.
HONIG: Sherm? SHERMICHAEL SINGLETON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I look, I think it's
way more--
I knew it. I think it's way more nuanced. I really believe that.
And look.
FARAH-GRIFFIN: Give us one with nuance.
SINGLETON: You've known Todd a long time.
HONIG: Yes.
SINGLETON: You've worked with Todd.
HONIG: 20 years.
SINGLETON: I know Todd personally.
I do believe he believes what he said in that speech. But I do. But I also understand that he has a very difficult job working for President Trump.
It is not easy trying to balance running this huge agency with a level of real independence that all Americans have come to expect, while you also have a President who wears his emotions on his sleeves. I would never want that job.
HONIG: Yes. I want to hear, because Noah shocked me, I want to hear yes. You said yes.
Yes, there have been political prosecutions in this administration.
ROTHMAN: Well, obviously. The prosecution of James Comey was political. The prosecution of Letitia James was political.
The prosecution of this one individual with the reflecting pool case, he was one of four people who were indicted. All those cases were tossed, and now we're hearing that the President wants to give it another go. Give it another shot.
Let's see if we can get this guy. Near as I can tell, those prosecutions were brought merely against civilians who weren't in the game, who were just in the wrong place at the wrong time, which is a really chilling thing. I can't see any exculpatory narrative there.
Maybe I'm just not missing the forest for the trees. I'm willing to give Todd Blanche the benefit of the doubt, but there's a trust deficit, and it really is the President's fault. It isn't his fault, but he's the inheritor of that.
HONIG: Okay, listen. I need you to get inside the President's head here for a second. Sorry, I know it's been a long time.
FARAH-GRIFFIN: It's a strange place to be.
HONIG: When does he get tired of all the losing? He doesn't like to lose, but all these cases are dead losers.
FARAH-GRIFFIN: That's what's interesting to me, is that he's even looking to revisit some of these that are clearly failing on their face, but something that's interesting to me, and I'd actually be curious, your perspective, when I've talked to a number of Republican lawmakers, particularly in the Senate, ahead of Todd Blanche's confirmation, there's this feeling of ease with Todd Blanche. They see him as a step up from Pam Bondi. They see him as a more serious person, somebody that they trust a little more, more in the style of an A.G. Barr, who I have my criticisms of.
So I was always confident he was going to get through. I wonder if at the DOJ, if even the rank and file, who may be uncomfortable with the tactics of this administration, do prefer him over a Bondi?
HONIG: Michael, what do you think?
MOYNIHAN: I mean, look, I agree with Noah on all these. I would add cases to this.
I mean, I sat down with John Bolton, and I asked him, you know, even if you did something wrong, had you not written that book, it would never have happened.
HONIG: I'm not sure about, I don't count Bolton in this list, because that investigation actually existed during the Biden administration.
ROTHMAN: But they didn't bring charges.
MOYNIHAN: But they didn't bring charges in the verve with which Donald Trump went after this. He loved it so much because he hated Bolton so much. I mean, these are clearly political.
Now, as you pointed out, the letter of this, I read it, I watched it, good speech, right?
HONIG: Absolutely.
MOYNIHAN: It's a good speech.
FARAH-GRIFFIN: You said the right words.
MOYNIHAN: Well, you have that tension all of a sudden of A.G.'s previous that have not pleased Donald Trump from Jeff Sessions on up, and what happens if he does believe it? Is he going to last very long?
I highly doubt it. He's going to have to be someone who's a very wily political operator to stay in that job if he does what he said today. And I doubt it's true.
[03:39:58]
EGBEWOLE: Yes. I mean, we also have a demoralizing problem at the DOJ, because I don't think Pam Bondi left it with many people feeling that they wanted to work for a cause, a cause that is, of course, independent and separate than the President. I was very surprised by the speech and his words on paper that we have not seen actions to, so I will not give it credence or credit.
However, his confirmation hearing and the way that he conducted himself was markedly different from the way that Pam Bondi conducted hers and has returned to the Senate. So I'm actually interested to see what he will be like when he's called before the House for the first time or the Senate now that he has gone through the process.
HONIG: It helps to go in front of the Senate, not with a list of burns that you're going to throw at the Senate. But let me say to Yemisi's point, and you all have heard me say this before, I've known Todd for 20 years.
We had the same exact upbringing at the Southern District of New York. The speech he gave today was good. We've both heard that speech and variations of that speech many times. But his record, he's now been in office as deputy A.G., acting A.G., and basically the whole time completely contradicts that list.
FARAH-GRIFFIN: I just don't understand why he wanted it, to be honest. When has being Donald Trump's attorney general worked out well for anyone, honestly?
Like, I would argue it is actually the hardest role over DHS secretary because he is going to at some point ask you to do something that goes against your legal ethics, your personal integrity, and your future and what you would like to be able to do. I see it as a no-win for him. I do think he's a more serious actor than Pam Bondi, but he is going to have to navigate very carefully to even stay in Trump's court.
HONIG: Real quick, I want to throw one at you, Sherm. One of the things Blanche said today is this, we will not engage in or stand for any form of attacks that undermine the institutions that we are sworn to uphold.
Yet, two months ago, Todd Bland said in a TV interview, there is a, quote, "ton of evidence the 2020 election was rigged." That's a complete contradiction.
SINGLETON: I don't believe that.
HONIG: You don't believe what?
SINGLETON: That the election was rigged, but that's neither here nor there.
I think he has to understand and I think he does understand the weight of being the attorney general, not acting, not deputy attorney general. There is a morale problem that both of you all have recognized. A lot of individuals have left, have gone to the private sector.
The American people need a DOJ that works, that does go after hardened criminals. And I hope to God and I expect that Todd is going to do his darn best to increase that morale because I think there are a lot of people there who want to see the agency work as intended. HONIG: Amen.
SINGLETON: And sometimes that means you may have to disagree with the President and the best advice I would give to the President is to permit that level of disagreement. It will only benefit you politically.
EGBEWOLE: And you should have disagreement. If you fall step in step, who in your entire life do you agree with 100 percent of the time? So you obviously should have some areas of disagreement.
HONIG: You're speaking to my heart.
All right, folks, next up, Trump's handpicked board voted to put his name on the Kennedy Center. Yes. Again, as we learn what's really been on the President's mind this year.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:45:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HONIG: How much time exactly does President Trump spend talking about his recent construction projects? Reflecting pool, the ballroom, the arch. Well, PolitiFact actually crunched the numbers and they found that
Trump has mentioned at least one of those projects in more than a quarter of all his public appearances this year. And in those events where it came up, the Iran war was the only subject Trump spoke about more.
And here's the list coming in under construction projects. We have foreign policy, economy, and immigration.
And just to bring everyone up to speed on what's going on with the latest with the Kennedy Center. A couple months ago, Federal Court of Appeals said you cannot rename this center, the Donald Trump and John F. Kennedy Center, because there actually is an obscure federal law that says you cannot rename this place.
And so today, the Kennedy board voted that they're not going to rename it, but instead they're going to inscribe a quote, "Restored and Renovated by President Donald J. Trump.
Also, what is happening here?
FARAH-GRIFFIN: I mean, Sarah Matthews said it best. It seems like he wants to be first gentleman or something. He's more focused on his renovations, on leaving his mark on Washington, D.C.
I've talked to Maggie Haberman at length about this. I think that the first -- then the first term, he was just trying to do President in the second term. He wants to make sure he cannot be erased from the history books, that he is as institutionalized as part of the American fabric is George Washington and Barack Obama. He wants his arch to Trump, he wants his name on everything. And
that's truly where his focus is seeing economy as for that just like broke my heart like the American people are struggling right now and the President cares about renovation.
HONIG: Too much on the reflecting pool.
ROTHMAN: Those statistics were kind of goofy. I mean, if you really look at it, because if you look at the totality of what he's saying, the man has no inner monologue. He says whatever comes to his head.
And if you look at the totality of what he's talking about there, the vast majority, I mean, foreign policy is kind of a broad group, but then you have the Iraq war. Those combined for 100,000 wars and they are 100,000 words.
And then you have the economy and then you have other Presidential duties. All told, we're talking about maybe a third of his time is spent talking about these concerns.
HONIG: Yemisi?
EGBEWOLE: Yes, there are words, but they're also visuals. And I think every time he's in the Oval Office and people, the camera pans and people look around, it just feels like there's a lot more occupying his attention of leaving a marker. Look, being a lame duck and sitting at the White House while everybody is in Iowa, New Hampshire and looking at the shiny new penny and you are the forgotten one is very tough.
[22:50:02]
And I don't think that he has the personality or the ego to be in the background. So leave your mark on D.C. And what can we do about it? Like,
MOYNIHAN: I mean, this is the classic dog bites man story. Donald Trump is being psychotic and a narcissist in talking about things to distract from all the problems in his presidency.
Yes, we know that. It's not surprising to me at all. But I mean, everything that was said, I co-sign and there's nothing more to add.
HONIG: So too much focus on the problem.
SINGLETON: Absolutely. Look, I understand the innate nature of wanting to leave your mark on history. I don't think this is how we're in a real ideological, philosophical fight right now.
What a component of the ideological left about what the future of America should look like, what it should be. And if the President can help win that argument, you want to talk about cementing your history.
A hundred years from now, people will be talking about Donald Trump who made capitalism cool again, Donald Trump who helped the American people elevate themselves again. Economically, they had certainty for their future.
Again, there was autonomy once again, where less people were relying upon the government. That, to me, would be my advice.
MOYNIHAN: There's no talk about ideology. Reagan was, I mean, there was a conversation that annoyed conservatives at a certain point in like the 2010, '11, '12, you'd go to CPAC and it'd be sign a petition to put Reagan on Mount Rushmore. It was Reagan, because Reagan had Reaganomics. Reagan had an ideology, had a Cold War ideology.
Donald Trump has none of that. He sells none of that. And that's a problem.
HONIG: Gerald Ford refused to have something named after him while he was still in office and still alive. Yemisi, you had something you wanted to jump in with.
EGBEWOLE: He's running out of time here. There's a lot about cementing his legacy. But I mean, how much real time is left?
I mean, if I am a Republican member of Congress, three months out to the midterms, I am begging him to please focus on jobs and the economy. The abysmal report that came out last week, I thought he would put up six more statues after that one.
ROTHMAN: No, I mean, to Michael's point, which is so important, and this has hounded the Republicans forever, is that ideology is replicable.
HONIG: It is.
ROTHMAN: It's something that you can actually do on your own. You don't have to take cues from the President, you don't have to maintain eye contact with him just to make sure you know what to say next. That is something Republicans have struggled with throughout the Trump presidency.
HONIG: All right, folks. Hang on. We're going to be back.
Next, panelists, we will react to your viewer feedback from cnn.com/abby. You can't wait to see it.
Quick programming note. In the '90s, sports scandals fueled the headlines and athletes became superstars. Michael Jordan, greatest of all time, built a dynasty that's going to be controversial while the Buffalo Bills showed how heartbreak can define a decade.
Catch a new episode of "Decades in Sports," Sunday at 9 p.m. on CNN, and then the next day on the CNN app.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:55:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HONIG: And now your feedback from cnn.com/abby. All right. Are we ready?
FARAH-GRIFFIN: Terrified.
HONIG: First up, one of our viewers writes, thank you, J.D. Vance, for the DNC commercial.
That's worried. They gave a little soundbite today. Yemisi?
EGBEWOLE: Well, I'm actually going to Austin tomorrow where the DNC is holding a meeting, so I'll just have to ask what the reception was for that. Very nice. We might have to just cut it and do it right there.
HONIG: Are you worried? They gave him a --
SINGLETON: I'm not worried. But I would say don't ever cede anything to the other side, especially on this topic.
HONIG: Okay, related to that, one of our viewers writes in. Sounds like J.D. Vance is already running for President.
Now, let me put, okay, truth serum. Everyone's in a truth serum.
Who would you rather have at the top of the ticket? Noah, J.D. Vance or Marco Rubio in 2028?
ROTHMAN: God, that's a hard one. I'm extremely sarcastic.
Marco Rubio, he's a more talented politician, he's a more conservative politician. And, you know, do we know that J.D. Vance is arguing against the other side? Is that the other side?
And he sees a much larger role for the state than I'm comfortable with. So maybe the sides are beginning to blur.
SINGLETON: I don't really like the blurring. I mean, look, I think Rubio has shown a significant amount of gravitas on foreign policy.
The world is becoming more aggressive. China's expanding all over the place. I think the next commander in chief has got to have an expertise in that part of the world.
You look at the two of them. I think that leans more towards Rubio.
HONIG: Is Trump going to endorse either of these guys or is he just going to play it out as kingmaker?
FARAH-GRIFFIN: I think play it out as long as he can. You made the point like one of you did, like he is not going to do well being a lame duck. It is just not in his being like his ego is going to be on the line.
So I think he's going to stretch it out or he might do the dual endorsement sort of thing. But Marco Rubio, I think, is ten times more electable in a general election than a J.D. Vance. I think he's hard for Democrats to beat.
HONIG: Michael, who would you prefer if you had to vote for a Republican? Who would you prefer?
MOYNIHAN: Why are you doing this?
HONIG: Come on.
MOYNIHAN: Can they both fail?
If I had to, gun to the head, I would say Rubio.
HONIG: Why?
MOYNIHAN: Because I loathe J.D. Vance when it comes to particularly on economic policy, that kind of post-liberalism, that kind of populism. It is anathema to everything that I believe in my bones. And I don't trust him.
HONIG: Okay, a few more. One of our viewers writes, Love you, Elie.
Thank you.
As a professional, please don't say different than. It's different from. Listen, that's correct.
FARAH-GRIFFIN: He's got some English teachers.
ROTHMAN: I mean, we should get some allowance for that.
HONIG: Somebody wrote something very nice. What a wonderful and refreshing surprise to see Elie hosting the show. Everyone beware of this great lawyer.
He knows his stuff. Bravo, Elie. That's my mom's partner.
[23:00:04]
And Noah --
MOYNIHAN: Those are the ones you read?
HONIG: They gamed me.
Noah, somebody doesn't want to ever hear you saying sister soldier ever again. I think you handle it all right.
ROTHMAN: I agree. If I never have to again, I would.
All right, everyone to our panel, thank you for all that. Everyone, thanks for being here.
Thank you for watching "NewsNight." "Laura Coates Live" starts right now.
