Return to Transcripts main page
CNN NewsNight with Abby Phillip
Trump In Five Red States This Week To Defend GOP Candidates; Democrat Says, Looming Probes May Deter Grads From Joining Trump Admin; Trump And Vance Link France Riots To Immigration, Midterms; Trump Sided With Russia But Blasts Ukraine; Matthew McConaughey Appeals To Vote Independent At The Midterms. Aired 10-11p ET
Aired October 19, 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)
ABBY PHILLIP, CNN HOST (voice over): Tonight, with two weeks to go, the president's to-do list is focused on his extreme makeovers and renaming states.
Plus, as chaos erupts in France over education and rising costs, America's right warns the turmoil will come here if Democrats are elected.
Also, deciding the fate of a war without one side of it.
DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: Russia, frankly, has been fine on Ukraine. They haven't been doing much.
PHILLIP: Why Trump is considering a Xi and Putin summit on Ukraine.
And --
MATTHEW MCCONAUGHEY, ACTOR: A fair fight is not just two fighters throwing the same punches at each other for 50 years.
PHILLIP: Matthew McConaughey sparks a debate after calling on Americans to vote independent.
Live at the table, Adam Mockler, Jason Rantz, Neera Tanden, Peter Meijer, and Reena Ninan. Americans with different perspectives aren't talking to each other, but here they, do.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
PHILLIP (on camera): Good evening. I'm Abby Phillip in New York.
In this final stretch to the midterms, you would think that President Trump would be laser-focused on Election Day, but instead, he's got a lot of other things on his mind. In a slew of social media posts, Trump, yet again, called for renaming the state of New Mexico to New America. He ranted about the Reflecting Pool, which he still claims was targeted by vandals. He doubled down on his plan to close and renovate a golf course,
despite a judge's order giving three days notice before any construction. And then he called that judge a crazed lunatic and suggested that she might be insane. And he's also reigniting his feud with Fox News over its coverage of Democratic candidates.
Trump's distractions haven't been sitting too well with Republicans, as the party's midterm anxieties continue to swell. A new CNN poll finds that the president's approval stands at just 34 percent right now, and Democrats lead the GOP by nine points in the generic ballot.
Tonight, Trump kicked off yet another week of red state rallies with a stop in Kansas. Before he left, he had this message for concerned members of his own party.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I'm the one that got him there. I'm the one that's winning. I'm the one that's doing the rallies, that's taking people into a winning position. When you look at what's happened, if you take a look at what's happened since I've been doing these massive, totally sold-out rallies, nobody's ever seen anything like it.
My rallies are having a huge impact and a positive impact on the Republican Party.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
Before we open it up to the table here, we invite you at home to join the debate. Go to cnn.com/abby. Weigh in there. We'll get to some of your comments throughout the show.
Jason, I wonder what you make of the president's many distractions right now. He was, you know, pictured with an image of the golf course on the Oval Office desk the day that he named a press sec- a new press secretary, who lasted for a few days. He has been fixated on everything but the thing that is the number one issue in this campaign. And, yes, he's selling out rallies of his faithful, but I'm not sure he's convincing anyone to give Republicans another try at this.
JASON RANTZ, SEATTLE RED RADIO HOST: He's not trying to do that. He's trying to speak specifically to the base because, as we know historically, when you are the party in power, you do not have a great midterm. That has happened every single time except for twice.
And so he's doing what literally every other president does during the midterms, going into safe areas where you're getting a lot of coverage that gets shared on social media, it gets spread by the base, and you're encouraging them to vote because they're the ones who traditionally don't vote.
President Obama was out at 17 rallies. Every single one of them during the midterms were in deeply blue cities. He didn't go to Mukilteo, Washington. He went to Seattle. He didn't go to Bend, Oregon. He went to Portland. He went to the places because he knew he was going to get positive coverage that could help generate interest in the base.
It doesn't always work, but also I do think that this is a different president and a different type of voter who traditionally has not voted as much in the past. And I do think, in cases where you are looking at like a one or two-point race, that one or two points can come directly from this base turnout.
ADAM MOCKLER, HOST, THE ADAM MOCKLER SHOW ON YOUTUBE: It's fascinating to hear you say that this is what every president does ahead of the midterms, because it's not what every president does. I don't remember Obama being obsessed with the Reflecting Pool or the Kennedy Center or attacking our allies or John Husted's ass when he's on stage in Ohio every single time.
[22:05:07]
I would be willing to bet every single Republic consultant in Washington is on their hands and knees begging Donald Trump to focus on affordability or healthcare or the economy.
RANTZ: Sure.
MOCKLER: But he just can't do it. He is incapable of doing this. Did you check his Truth Social today? It was crazy.
RANTZ: No. I agree that if he was more on message, that would probably benefit, but also I'm not, you know -- you know, I don't live in a vacuum where this is a president who do -- this is what he does. This is what he has always done, and that's not going to change. If it's a bad strategy, okay, well, then cheer it on. You should be supporting it then.
NEERA TANDEN, FORMER DOMESTIC POLICY ADVISER, BIDEN ADMINISTRATION: I do every day.
MOCKLER: It's bad for the country. But is there a single Republican in a swing state who's actually running on Trump's Iran war? I don't think so. Is there actually a single competitive Republican who's running on the tariffs?
TANDEN: They're taking him out of their --
MOCKLER: No, they're distancing themselves from him.
RANTZ: You're looking at this just in that vacuum where -- when I say other presidents have done this, that's the same with, again, Biden. It was the same with -- did everyone run towards Biden towards the end there? No, they didn't because he was seen as unpopular, except in places where he wasn't. And then you run towards him.
PHILLIP: As we're kind of talking about two slightly different things, I think Adam's talking about when Trump is out there, what is he talking about? You're talking about where Trump is going. And I do think the what he's talking about is part of the story here. Here's Trump on Friday at an event in Georgia talking about whatever this is.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I called up Google and I said, let me ask just one question. But then I said to him, we need an ocean. How do you feel about the Trump Ocean for the Atlantic or the Pacific?
They said, sir, look, okay, this one we can't do. Oceans are different. Oceans cover many, many countries. We can't do it. I said, I was only kidding.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: I mean, it's a comedy routine, for sure, but it's coming at a time when Americans are really pissed off. They're not just ambivalent about what he's been up to and what Republicans have been up to. They are angry and they don't think that Trump has been focused on the right things.
FMR. REP. PETER MEIJER (R-MI): No, but get enough folks out with your borscht belt shtick and, you know, you can help tilt the odds in some races, right?
TANDEN: I mean, really?
MEIJER: I mean, look, look at the places with competitive Senate races right now, right? And these states with competitive Senate races also have a number of competitive House seats, Ohio, Texas, those states that the Republicans need to win. And if Donald Trump brings out enough of his faithful, who traditionally were low propensity voters, weren't necessarily coming out at midterms, came out for Donald Trump, he just needs to get some of those folks to come out.
So, you know, in West Michigan, would I like him to come out if I were on the ballot? Probably not. If I'm in Southeast Michigan, hell, yes, I want him coming out there, I want him campaigning because the people that I need, or the people that if I'm Mike Rogers I want to have come out to the polls in November, are his people, are his folks, are the people he needs to convince to come out.
PHILLIP: I mean, are there enough of those people, Neera, do you think, you know, just the Trump faithful, just the Trump faithful, though? Trump didn't win Michigan with just his faithful.
TANDEN: I think the real problem is -- and you can tell this is a real problem because it's not like, you know, moderates are just running away from him. He went to Texas and Greg Abbott wouldn't appear with him. That's a sign that he is a lead balloon around Republicans.
The real problem for Republicans is, you're right, he can bring out the like, very base of the Republican Party. And I guess if you are worried about a cataclysmic defeat, then maybe that's important to you. But the real problem is, you know, he's at a 65 percent hard, like, disapproval, 52 percent strong disapproval. He has more people disapproving of him than any president in modern history.
And so the real challenge for these Republicans is you can't live with him and you can't live without him. That's why if he goes to Michigan, I doubt very much Mike Rogers will be with him. And if he goes to -- when he goes to Texas, Greg Abbott finds something else to do.
That's an indication that he is toxic, precisely because when he talks about the economy, he says how great it is at a time where every single American thinks the economy is bad for them because he's raised their prices on the war and on tariffs, on so many other things.
PHILLIP: So, it's the economy, and also increasingly we're seeing concerns about corruption. And CNN has a great story this weekend about GOP operatives conducting focus groups in red parts of the country, where voters are telling them that they think that corrupt politicians and billionaires are to blame for the issues that they're facing. And it's become a top issue for many Republican voters.
That lines up with 59 percent of Americans saying Trump is too focused on his own projects in D.C. and another 50 -- 66 percent of Americans saying that Trump has used the presidency to enrich himself.
[22:10:11]
This has all led Michigan Senate Candidate Elissa Slotkin to say that the answer for Democrats ought to be pretty aggressive investigations if they take power. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. ELISSA SLOTKIN (D-MI): I want to look at these signature cases and not just focus on the president, but on the people who enabled him. I want young people coming out of school to say, should I go work for the Trump administration? Like that sounds fun. I might get an opportunity. I want them to be like, Lord, that might be buying myself a ton of problems that I don't want, and so let me avoid participating in that. I want that deterrence message sent.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Kind of a bit of a Rorschach test right now what she said there, but it seems like the American people think there's a problem with this administration in terms of corruption and bad behavior.
RANTZ: Well, I think Senator Slotkin thinks there's a problem with young conservatives who might want to work in government, whether it's directly under --
TANDEN: No, that's not what she said.
RANTZ: That's exactly what she said in that clip.
TANDEN: No, that's not what she said. She was talking about illegal activity.
RANTZ: Which is why there's an actual pushback and people are calling this out. If you want to argue that it was sloppy in how she made that -- okay, fine, we can --
TANDEN: If you actually look at the words she said, the question she was asked about was -- RANTZ: I want young people coming out of school to say, should I go work for the Trump administration? Like that sounds fine. I might get an opportunity. I want them to be like, that might be buying myself a ton of problems.
TANDEN: Yes, because the question was about illegal activity by the president.
RANTZ: So, you're going to target people who might want to work under the Trump administration.
TANDEN: No, when they do something --
RANTZ: That's what you're saying?
TANDEN: No, when they do something illegal --
RANTZ: These are people who are completely separated. No one here -- you're talking -- no one she's talking about broke any laws. You're talking about young people who want to work for the White House. That's the difference.
TANDEN: People in the administration doing illegal things, whether they're young or middle-aged or old, they should all be held accountable.
RANTZ: That's not what she said.
TANDEN: That is simply what she's saying.
RANTZ: So, young people going -- coming out of college -- young people coming out of college --
TANDEN: If you go back to the tape, the question she was asked was, should we impeach the president? And what she said is -- she was basically saying, we should actually focus on wrongdoing throughout the administration.
RANTZ: I want young conservatives to be warned that might be buying myself a ton of problems that I don't want.
TANDEN: Yes. Because if you --
RANTZ: That's different from what you're saying.
TANDEN: No, if you're a young conservative and you go into the administration and someone asks you to do something illegal, where we know activities are rampant throughout the question she was asked about --
RANTZ: You are revising the clip.
TANDEN: I am not.
RANTZ: You are revising --
TANDEN: Did you actually see what she was asked was about if --
PHILLIP: So, your position is that she was --
TANDEN: She was asked about illegal activity.
PHILLIP: Your position is that she was making a blanket statement about young conservatives going into government.
RANTZ: Or people going into government --
PHILLIP: But she was very specific that she was talking about the Trump administration.
RANTZ: But you're, you're -- I think ignoring the context, the greater context. The Democrats have said for a very long time that anyone who works for this president, not this term, but last term, should be harassed, should not be able to go out into the public, should not be able to have normal lives. That's what they said.
TANDEN: That's not true.
PHILLIP: Jason, you just went from --
RANTZ: Maxine Waters didn't say that?
PHILLIP: Jason, just went from saying that's what she was saying, but that's actually not what she said. She said the Trump administration specifically. Now, that's based on her premise that there's corruption, there is bad behavior, maybe illegal behavior, although they would have to prove that, in this administration. And, I mean, that's --
RANTZ: Should everyone resign? Should everyone resign in government?
PHILLIP: I'm just asking you --
TANDEN: People who do illegal things --
RANTZ: Well, listen, is that you -- I mean --
PHILLIP: I'm just asking you, is it wrong to say maybe people should be deterred from going into a system that either emboldens or encourages that kind of bad behavior?
RANTZ: Then she should have said that specifically.
PHILLIP: That is what she said.
RANTZ: But it isn't what she said. It's not what she's saying.
MEIJER: Can I just say, saying, nobody is above the law, is very different from saying, I want folks to think twice if they're from a different party. If the presumption on the Republican side was that this administration is corrupt, Joe Biden is corrupt, oh my God, he's in bed here, he's in bed there, I swear to God, anybody who goes to work for them, they better think twice, you would recognize it's a deterrent.
You would not be making excuses. She could have been more clear. And I'm not going to presume the worst, but by God, this is not something you double and triple down and defend.
MOCKLER: I'm very glad my Republican friends on the panel are finally concerned about disrespecting the federal workforce. Because wasn't it Trump and Elon Musk who sent out a bunch of messages saying, hey, in seven days, if you don't respond to this, you will be pushed out?
Secondly, I can imagine a scenario where somebody goes into this administration -- it's a civil service issue -- Trump goes into this administration, and what Trump ends up doing is, you know, having a early access to Truth Social, you know, selling. He's selling that for $100,000 a month. If he has people working around him in his staff and he's posting this insider information and selling it, and there are investigations into that insider information, I could imagine a young person my age being unintentionally caught up in these sweeping investigations.
Can you guys imagine a scenario like that where you --
MEIJER: I think that's an entirely appropriate issue for House Oversight to look into.
MOCKLER: Do you think that should be investigated, the early access to Truth Social?
[22:15:01]
RANTZ: It's going to be. I mean, it'll all be --
MOCKLER: Do you think it should, personally?
TANDEN: It'll only be investigated if you have a Democratic House or a Democratic Senate because the Republicans have refused to investigate.
MOCKLER: So, you're just okay with the corruption?
MEIJER: And there's going to be inspectors generals. I'm -- that's not the point that's --
MOCKLER: Wait, didn't he cut all the inspectors general?
MEIJER: Look, can we focus on where this is all headed?
MOCKLER: Didn't he cut all of the --
PHILLIP: Well, I actually don't even think you guys are even disagreeing. I mean, it sounds like you think there's plenty to investigate. But whether it's inside -- whether it's I don't know if you want to call it insider trading, but we've seen on the betting markets people inside the administration being investigated for trades.
RANTZ: I'm fine with oversight in a general sense, absolutely. MEIJER: The president teleprompter guy --
PHILLIP: I mean, it seems like that is what she is talking about --
MEIJER: -- was fired and investigated.
PHILLIP: I mean, it seems like that's what she's talking about. It seems like neither of you have a problem with it.
MEIJER: But where are we heading?
RANTZ: She went -- come on. You have to acknowledge she went way further than what you're suggesting there. The context of her comment --
PHILLIP: I'm looking at the words here. I'm looking at the words.
RANTZ: Okay. Read -- but read the words, what she said.
MOCKLER: Trump can say anything.
RANTZ: If you're someone who's just coming out of college and you're thinking about working in not just the White House, but working under the Trump administration in the federal government, you might get a slightly different take from that Slotkin quote. Come on.
PHILLIP: So, look, listen, she absolutely was clear she doesn't -- she wants people to think twice before going into the Trump administration. That is true. But the that she doesn't want people --
RANTZ: Should people who are currently working there --
PHILLIP: The idea that she doesn't want Republicans to go work for the government is not actually what she said.
MEIJER: Just not the current administration.
RANTZ: Just the current government.
PHILLIP: Yes. I mean, maybe if you ask her about George Bush's administration, she'd be fine with it. But yes.
TANDEN: People should be discouraged -- all people should be discouraged going into an administration and engaging in illegal activity. And, unfortunately, for America, there has been a lot of activity that seems corrupt or illegal, and it is rampant through this administration.
I know Republicans don't want to admit that, but that is the premise, that actually in this administration you could be caught up with a lot of illegal activity because it's happening all over the place. That is what she's talking about.
MEIJER: Well, we're speed running towards is it's just going to be pardons all around because that's a presumption, and we should not get there. We should help -- PHILLIP: Well, I think that was on -- that was probably on the table to begin with before Elissa Slotkin opened her mouth. So, I think that's a valid question and a valid issue that we're probably going to be facing.
Next for us, the president is trying to blame immigration for the turmoil unfolding in France, not the high cost of living, and now his number two says to expect these riots to come to America if Democrats are elected.
Plus, Donald Trump sounds more and more like he's taking Russia's side in the war against Ukraine. He's been ripping Volodymyr Zelenskyy and insisting that Vladimir Putin, who started the war, has been fine. Another special guest joins us at the table.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:20:00]
PHILLIP: Tonight, as riots and turmoil rock France, President Trump and JD Vance are playing a game of fear factor, calling it a preview of what's to come if America, in, in America, if Democrats win the midterm elections.
Emmanuel Macron says rioters and looters will be punished as crowds continue protesting education and the cost of living. There's even a curfew now set across several French cities tonight. Macron describes the violence as the word -- the work of seditious elements from far- left factions and other delinquents.
Back in the U.S., though, just 15 days before the midterms, the White House is seizing on these riots. They posted a video of the burning of the town hall in Limoges, and J.D. Vance blamed the unrest on failed immigration policy, warning, this is the future Congressional Democrats seek for your country.
At a rally in Kansas tonight, Donald Trump warned that migrants had taken over France. Listen to this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: If you want to see what is at stake in this election, just look at what's happening in France, a once great nation that is being conquered, looted, and burned to the ground by migrants, jihadists, and communists who hate Christianity, and they hate, frankly, the western civilization itself.
And as we're seeing in Europe, globalist left-wing politicians have treasonously imported millions and millions of third world migrants who are totally incompatible with the west, and they are incompatible with western values. They despise everything about France, and they're destroying that country, and we're not going to let that happen to this country.
(END VIDEO CLIP) PHILLIP: Reena Ninan is with us at the table. Reena, there's a lot that, that's going on in France, but I just have to say, I mean, it seems like violent revolution is like one of the most French things ever. I'm not so sure that's an import from other parts of the world, but it is very convenient for the far-right here and the far-right in France to use migration and immigration as the reason for just about everything.
REENA NINAN, FOREIGN AFFAIRS ANALYST: I think the key was, in your open, was 15 days before elections here in the U.S., and I think people have forgotten why this uprising even began. 30 percent of the education budget in France goes to paying pensions in that country.
Students got fed up of not having teachers, of not having schools that work, and they took to the streets. In fact, if you look at the figures from the Ministry of Justice in France, almost 90 percent of the people arrested were minors. They are fed up.
And if you're wondering, a war in the Middle East, the implications that it can now have, you're seeing it on the streets of Paris, it's an affordability issue. It's has nothing to do with immigration.
[22:25:00]
This is the issue at hand, is that people can't pay for fuel. 30 percent of French people say that they can't afford, if there was an expense that they couldn't afford that shows up in their bills, they can't pay for that right now. So, this isn't about immigration, it's about affordability.
RANTZ: There's nothing about immigration? Not even a little bit about immigration? Just like to completely dismiss it as an issue is ridiculous.
NINAN: Immigration is an issue. I think integration is an issue, and I think terrorism are also issues.
RANTZ: But what are the issues then? Because I get the point, like weeks ago, I agree with you. I mean, it seemed on the surface that it was clearly about students and France did end up responding and giving in some concessions to students.
NINAN: But to say that this is about, you know, immigrants --
RANTZ: Now, I think it's about migration to a degree. What degree, we can have that debate, right?
PHILLIP: Well --
NINAN: I think it's about -- I don't think it's about migration at all.
PHILLIP: Yes, what is the --
MOCKLER: What's the evidence here?
PHILLIP: What is the -- yes, what is the proof that this is about migration?
RANTZ: Well, where these rallies start, or where these protests started were in neighborhoods in France that were dealing with heavy increase in migration. And when you're saying that this is about how much spending is going in --
PHILLIP: So, just to clarify, are you saying that French people are protesting migration or that the violence is being carried out by migrants? Because I think those are two --
RANTZ: I think the latter --
PHILLIP: Because that's the -- those are two separate things. The Trump/Vance view is that the violence is being driven by, and the protests are being driven by migrants. You're suggesting that this is a pushback against migrants.
RANTZ: No, I'm not suggesting it's a pushback against migrants.
PHILLIP: Okay.
RANTZ: I'm suggesting what the Trump administration is saying is at least in part true. When you've got the images of people waving Palestinian flags, that's a little bit of a red flag that this is not about students.
TANDEN: White people do that in America every day, unfortunately.
RANTZ: You can downplay it and laugh at that, but it is a serious issue --
TANDEN: I'm not laughing. It is a very serious --
RANTZ: -- with the surge of anti-Semitism globally.
TANDEN: Hold on. I just want to be clear with you. I am not discounting the violence there. It is wrong. It is terrible that there's any violence. I believe --
RANTZ: And the targeting of Jewish businesses.
TANDEN: The targeting of Jewish businesses, immigrant businesses are also getting targeted. When you look at the videos, it is clear that these -- there are white people in these who are doing these activities. There are all kinds of people doing these activities. And I think it's important for all of us to say any form of violence is 100 percent wrong. Lawbreakers should go to jail -- for any kind of violence. I don't think that's a Democrat or Republican issue. I think it's absolutely clear that is what should happen.
What is wrong is to try to fan the flames of hatred in our country by saying when everyone can see these videos, that there are plenty of white people in France protesting and vandalizing locations. It's not just black people or Muslim people, it's a lot of people doing it, is to say it's only about one group or one religion, and that is wrong. MEIJER: But the opposite is true too. But I'm just going to say, I think there's -- we're used to seeing things in a left-right spectrum, right? And I'm not really sure who the far-right elements in the U.S. you're talking about. I mean, France, there's like definition of far- left and far-right.
PHILLIP: Yes. I mean, well, there are definitely plenty of far-right people who -- Laura Loomer. Let's give that as an example, okay, who are using this as a way to say migration bad, whatever. But the president's saying it, open borders, like it's a buzzword migration, immigration talking points.
MEIJER: You know, a much bigger issue at play in France is youth unemployment, which is very high. You know, they have a very rigid labor market. Migrants are going to be at a lower employment rate than native born French. But the biggest component here, again, is just this age dynamic.
And I think the generational issue -- France spends 57 percent of its GDP on public spending. That is insane. Macron was aware of the fiscal unsustainability of their pension and retirement system. He was moving towards doing something about that, some tepid reforms, got slapped back an additional -- yes, and now he lets that delay, their fiscal picture is worse, and now you're seeing the protests. This is something we're going to have to appreciate and solve in the U.S. --
TANDEN: I mean, the left is saying it's --
(CROSSTALKS)
MEIJER: I'm saying that's the origin.
PHILLIP: But isn't that actually is the true warning for America? It's not even so much this whole, like, oh, it's about the brown people coming in. It's actually about a country that is dealing with incredibly high debt, increasing bond rates, increasing unemployment, lower prospects for young people. I mean, these are serious economic issues.
And, okay, just from the left perspective --
MEIJER: Which open borders does not help. Having a very permissive migration system does not help.
PHILLIP: Listen. Hold on. Hold on. Give me just a second. Let me just -- look, we could litigate that. There's a lot to be said there, but let me just give you the view from the left.
Establishment politicians, this is Wajahat Ali, a left-leaning commentator.
"Establishment politicians and corporate shows should pay attention to these youth riots across Europe. You think it won't happen in America, but things erupt overnight.
[22:30:03] If Dems get power and don't flex with major economic reform, be prepared for an America first Nazi President in 2032."
NEERA TANDEN, PRESIDENT AND CEO, CENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS, AND FORMER DOMESTIC POLICY ADVISER UNDER THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION: I guess what I would say to that is that I think, I would say, saying things like that sounds like you're rationalizing violence, and I think it is wrong. It is absolutely the case that people are suffering in the United States, and they're suffering elsewhere.
And they're suffering, and they're not being violent. It is totally irresponsible to argue that violence is okay. The right way to deal with people's anger, and we have that in two weeks, is an election.
And we can throw the bums out. If you think what's going on in this country is bad, then you should vote.
PHILLIP: So, but the other question is, do Democrats need to put on the table major economic propositions?
ADAM MOCKLER, HOST OF "THE ADAM MOCKLER SHOW" ON YOUTUBE: Absolutely. I think it's all you guys have.
PETER MEIJER (R), FORMER U.S. REPRESENTATIVE, MICHIGAN, AND CO-FOUNDER AND HEAD OF STRATEGY, THE NEW INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION: There's Medicare for all.
MOCKLER: Because you guys don't have anything we have to.
MEIJER: Socializing.
TANDEN: Oh my god, it's not.
MOCKLER: I do it fascinating that Trump is trying to blame this solely on immigration, when he's enacting a lot of the policies that caused this. It was really education that was the catalyst for all of this. And then high gas prices, high diesel prices, high cost of living.
Trump is the one who wants to eliminate the Department of Education, defund it. He has put tariffs on countries, he's raised diesel prices. His policies have directly led to the outcomes that we're seeing there.
MEIJER: Sure, I'm going to lose you, but also you guys were the party of the Green New Deal. For Pete's sake, nothing about your agenda is affordable in the least.
TANDEN: What are you talking about (inaudible)?
MEIJER: I know you're talking points.
TANDEN: You know the number one thing we do, that Democrats hopefully will do, is to eliminate the tariffs. So Trump's tariffs, you just eliminate the tariffs.
MEIJER: The ones Biden kept on as well, or? No. (CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Let's leave that conversation there.
Next for us. The President just praised Russia, while blasting Ukraine, and now accusations that his administration is holding back on help. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:35:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PHILLIP: Tonight, the American President sounds more and more like he is taking Vladimir Putin's side in the war that Russia started.
You may remember that Trump struck a diesel deal with Moscow, which could temporarily help fund their war effort against Ukraine. That deal received major backlash from both parties. And then, late on Friday night, when not many people were supposed to notice, Trump waived Russia-related sanctions that 86 senators voted to approve.
In an interview with Bloomberg, Ukraine's President, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, laid out what he said were unfriendly moves by the United States, including the deliberate slowdown of Starlink internet speeds, which the Ukrainians and their military depend on, and the delayed delivery of scarce Patriot interceptors. He says that he thinks that the U.S. is trying to convince Ukraine to capitulate.
He added that he doesn't want to think their American partners believe the war could be ended sooner at Ukraine's expense. But that's how it looks, he said.
President Trump responded to Zelenskyy today.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REPORTER: Zelenskyy says you're supporting Putin by waiving these sanctions.
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: I'm supporting stopping the war between Russia and Ukraine.
REPORTER: How does that help stop the war?
TRUMP: You know what? Why? Because that's what I do for a living. And frankly, Zelenskyy is not helping matters much.
I think he doesn't want to stop it. But I want to see people not die.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: A lot of people, including many Republicans, believe that the President is being naive here. Or maybe he is willfully taking Russia's side. Which one is it? MEIJER: I mean, I think the President, if you see the moments when he
has been most positive towards Zelenskyy, it's been when the Ukrainians have pulled off a significant feat. If you see the moments when he's been most frustrated, it's when, you know, noting the lack of Patriot interceptors, like, I'm sorry, we have some magazine issues on our side too.
PHILLIP: They're not coming from us.
MEIJER: No, but I'm saying, do you have a, as somebody who was a member of Congress during part and alive during the rest of it, of the Biden administration versus the Trump administration, there is this assumption that any small change is inherently going to be very negative.
I want to be very clear. I want Ukraine to win, I want Ukraine to beat Russia. And I think that Republican members of the House and Senate are rightfully frustrated by this administration's behalf.
PHILLIP: Why would they slow down the transfer of Patriot missiles from European countries that have already purchased them to Ukraine? I mean, how does that help us with our munitions issues? It doesn't.
MEIJER: The reality is that we have a lot of partners who maybe need to prepare for conflicts. No, I'm serious.
TANDEN: Is their decision to hand them over?
MEIJER: Can I ask a very sincere, public question?
PHILLIP: No, I really don't get it, Peter. I really don't understand. Why would already approved Patriot missile transfers be slowed down at this juncture when it's already there, it's already been paid for, it does not affect our stockpiles? The only reason to do that, it seems, is to prevent Ukraine from having them at a key juncture.
[22:40:00]
MEIJER: Why did the Director of Central Intelligence, John Ratcliffe, go to Moscow in August for the first time a DCI has been in Moscow since 2021?
TANDEN: I mean, what are you acting? Cut a deal to undercut a deal?
PHILLIP: I don't see how that answers my question.
TANDEN: Can't you just say this?
MEIJER: No, because there's a broader threat to Europe that's going on right now. And right now, the only folks who have intelligence about what Russia may actually be planning, the only people that it's possible to stand after is the White House.
TANDEN: This is like, why is the White House responsible for basically throwing down Stalin? Why is the President basically --
MEIJER: It's a great question.
TANDEN: Yes, why is he trying to undermine Ukraine? The thing that's fascinating is Ukraine is actually doing pretty well in this war. It's actually taking land back in the Donbas.
It's actually being able to actually push back against Russia. This is a point of Russian weakness in this war.
And who's swooping in to help the Russians? Donald Trump.
Now, you can believe that this is like some grand fortress strategy, but the truth is, according to Zelenskyy, according to every other democracy on the planet, what the Trump administration is doing is helping Russia, the aggressor in Ukraine, against Ukraine.
PHILLIP: And this is not about Ukraine.
(CROSSTALK)
TANDEN: It's ridiculous. I agree with that.
MEIJER: That's what the Biden administration said when we were talking --
PHILLIP: Or some kind of invasion. How does it help Europe when, right now, Ukraine is basically fighting a war on Europe's behalf? They don't have to fight Russia because Ukraine is doing it.
I'm not sure how that helps Europe to basically say to them, well, get ready to fight your own war because we're going to degrade Ukraine's capabilities at this particular moment.
REENA NINAN, FOREIGN AFFAIRS ANALYST: It doesn't help Europe, and it's a case of how you see European allies already trying to figure out how do we help Ukraine and have their back when the U.S. doesn't show up. It's another example of seeing this in the battlefield.
What does every side want? Putin wants leverage, Trump wants lower gas prices, and Zelenskyy wants security guarantees, Patriot missiles, defenses.
So they're going to have a summit with a man who really factors in on the ground, not there, and you have some sort of peace handshake. It's not what happens in that summit. It's what happens afterwards that really counts.
And this was supposed to be that denuclearization, and all of a sudden now we're going to talk about Ukraine?
PHILLIP: Let me play his exchange with Kristen Holmes about this proposed meeting between the President, Xi, and Putin. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Mr. President, have you agreed to a trilateral meeting with the President and Xi to talk about Ukraine?
TRUMP: No, but I would do it. Not so much for Ukraine, because Russia, frankly, has been fine on Ukraine. They haven't been doing much.
And the same thing with China. We would have it to talk about nuclear weapons and denuclearization. We would schedule a meeting based on the denuclearization, and that's a very positive thing for the world.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: First of all, Jason, what is he talking about? He says Russia has been fine on Ukraine. They're killing civilians every day. And then secondly, why reward Putin, even with the offer of another meeting, when he is behaving badly?
JASON RANTZ, SEATTLE RED RADIO HOST, AND AUTHOR, "WHAT'S KILLING AMERICA: INSIDE THE RADICAL-LEFT'S TRAGIC DESTRUCTION OF OUR CITIES": Yes, my guess is he thinks he's going to be able to, at this point, get them together to actually stop this. Now I think he is being naive.
PHILLIP: Get who together? Russia and China to stop Ukraine?
RANTZ: I think that's how he thinks. He views Zelenskyy as a problem in this. They don't particularly get along.
PHILLIP: You think that's going to work?
RANTZ: I don't think it's going to work. That's the problem here. I think ultimately this is just going to prolong it.
And I do say that with the caveat of, to Peter's point, there is intel that we just don't have access to, and we're not going to have access to, and there might be something else behind it.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Maybe there's intel that we don't know, but there's also a lot of stuff that we can see with our own eyes.
RANTZ: Sure.
PHILLIP: And we cannot unsee things that are actually happening in the real world. In the real world, Russia is slaughtering Ukrainians. In the real world, Russia wants to take over Ukraine and they don't want peace, they want land.
So that's the real world. I don't know what the intelligence says, but I do know that that's what's happening on the ground.
MOCKLER: I don't know what possible intelligence could make it okay for Trump to go full mask off, full pro-Putin, basically supporting Russia and cutting deals with them. If you broaden this out a little bit, Trump throughout this entire war has only been placing pressure on Zelenskyy. He screamed at him in the Oval Office, and then Zelenskyy still signed that mineral deal a few weeks later. He over and over has pressured Zelenskyy into dropping his arms for a
ceasefire. Guess which party doesn't abide by the ceasefire? Every single time, Vladimir Putin continues to strike, continues to bomb and abduct children, and Trump continues to give him more and more leeway.
[22:45:04]
So we're now at a point where he is desperate to claw back any of his midterm losses, and he's stabbing Ukrainians in the back to do this. Can we just be honest and say that our President is pro-Putin?
One more thing, when he's meeting with Xi in Russia, I'm pretty sure Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping will have a dozen psychologists from Moscow's best university to figure out how Trump works. He's a narcissist, he only thinks about himself.
No, I'm saying, what does Trump do to prepare? He thinks he can just negotiate.
NINAN: Trump wants a deal. Ultimately, he wants a deal with the electorate. It doesn't matter what the cost is.
TANDEN: He is acting, his behavior is acting as if he's putting the United States on the side of Russia. The issue here is that Ukraine has been making advances, and right now, when Russia is actually weak, he is coming in and making it harder for Ukraine to take its own land back.
What I find frankly shocking is that Republicans across this country find this acceptable, that you all find this acceptable.
RANTZ: We don't even say that at this table.
TANDEN: Do you think it's wrong? Do you think what the President is saying is wrong?
MEIJER: You hear slurs pushing back.
RANTZ: That's literally what I said. That is what I said only two minutes ago.
PHILLIP: I would say overwhelmingly on Capitol Hill, Republicans have pushed back. The people who are not pushing back are the President.
TANDEN: I just want to be clear. On the whole issue of Diesel, there were only six Republicans on the letter that went after him, and it was not John Thune, it was not 40 Republicans, it was only six Republicans.
So we are getting more pushback than we usually get, but this should be, frankly, just a line in the sand for every Republican.
MEIJER: Don't a lot of senators have the same intelligence that Trump has as well?
TANDEN: I mean, maybe six. MEIJER: We absolutely do not have that same intelligence, and the one thing that folks need to keep in mind is what happens if Russia loses, Putin falls, what happens to the thousands of nuclear weapons? There are a number of scenarios that we are not after.
TANDEN: I mean, maybe a democracy would actually help. Why are you acting like this is an Olympic game?
MEIJER: I'm rooting for the Ukrainian people. The Russians are assholes, and I want them to lose.
PHILLIP: All right.
TANDEN: Yes, well, we agree on that.
MOCKLER: Agreed.
MEIJER: But we need to think of what happens next.
PHILLIP: Reena Ninan, we thank you very much for joining us tonight.
Next for us, Matthew McConaughey is taking some heat for telling Americans to vote independent in these upcoming midterms. We'll debate that.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:50:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PHILLIP: Tonight, actor Matthew McConaughey has a message ahead of the midterms. Consider voting independent.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MATTHEW MCCONAUGHEY, ACTOR: So they've been telling us for years that an independent vote is a wasted vote. Well, the great question for our times is, has that unwasted vote been working out for you? Yes.
The number one political identity in America today is not Republican, it is not Democrat. It is independent. More of us than either party.
So independents belong in the fight. Not as a protest, not as a spoiler, but as a real and potential winner on the ballot and considered seriously by us.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: All right, Adam, what do you think?
MOCKLER: I mean, sure, it's absolutely fair. Many voters in America are independents.
Many people watching this, I'm sure, are independents. I'd like to see a reality where people don't have to run in this binary.
Also, our primary system right now oftentimes leads to more extreme candidates coming out. But I think right now in this very moment, the biggest threat to America is the modern-day Republican Party. And I urge people to vote Democrat now and maybe independent later.
MEIJER: I mean, part of me wants to joke, you know, challenge Jack Donaghy that's Republican. We count those.
But I really love his message at the end of the day. I mean, he's absolutely right. I'm not going to turn it into a Flight 93 manifesto for the midterm elections.
I mean, part of this is a function of our politics. You know, Duverger's Law and Political Science, a first-past-the-post electoral system will tend towards two parties. Doesn't mean a third can't arise or just gets absorbed.
But at the end of the day, he also points out that independents are not moderates. And one of the wonderful things about being a candidate for office and going and knocking on doors is you meet a lot of independents and you try to pin down what they believe in.
Oh, boy. It is fun. It is enlightening.
PHILLIP: Alright, we're going to take a quick break and we'll be right back after the break to continue this conversation.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:55:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PHILLIP: Matthew McConaughey wants more Americans to identify as Independents and he is right. More are. 47 percent of the population identifies as independent.
Are they real? Do they really exist? Do they just not like labels?
TANDEN: I'm not sure. They definitely exist, but I guess what I'd say about this message, I thought this was a crucial message two weeks out for the country and I really hope the people of Montana believe this when Sid Bodner is running as an independent and the people of Nebraska hear this message for Dan Osborne and the people of South Dakota hear this message for Brian Banks all of whom are independents many of them are former military Achilles is running in Idaho, I believe.
And these are former military leaders as well as people outside of the political process and I think that's exactly what McConaughey is saying that people in those states should really look at those independents and embrace them.
RANTZ: But they're not actually independents, they're Democrats and that's kind of the issue. I mean when people call themselves Democrats they oftentimes are just, they're independents they're actually Democrats who don't feel like they could win with the Democrat label in their particular area.
(CROSSTALK)
What's his name in California? He's not an independent. He's a Republican.
[23:00:06]
MEIJER: He's an independent, Matthew McConaughey said to vote.
RANTZ: But I'm not even entirely sure he knows what he's talking about there. It seems like he was talking more about trying to appeal to more moderates versus literally voting for someone who's an independent. There's no --
TANDEN: No one heard negative and negative I got to hear it.
RANTZ: That was a version of Sahara when I wanted interstellar. How about that?
PHILLIP: What he was trying to say was like if enough of us come together and actually make being an independent lane a real thing it can be a real thing. I don't know. I just think Americans are addicted to partisanship.
TANDEN: We'll see in these elections.
RANTZ: The people who do identify either Democrat or Republican who are more moderate they get villainized all the time. Susan Collins is a good example of that. She gets villainized when she's not particularly conservative and so we say we want this but I don't think people actually want that.
To your point I think they kind of don't want it.
PHILLIP: One of the reasons they're mad at Susan Collins is she calls herself independent but then she votes with Trump.
RANTZ: She's more moderate.
MEIJER: She impeached him too. I feel like they're going to defend my picture.
TANDEN: 98 percent versus 95 percent of the time.
PHILLIP: You could also say the same of John Fetterman too. He is technically a Democrat and considers himself independent but he votes with the Democrats.
Alright, we've got some viewer feedback.
Trump looks more like a traveling vaudeville act than the President. I guess that's a nod to his comedy routine later on.
MOCKLER: Probably the comedy and the face full of makeup and the fake hair and the fact that he's constantly putting on a huge show.
MEIJER: I thought it was a little bit more silent. It was more expressive.
MOCKLER: He's expressive.
TANDEN: He's pretty expressive.
PHILLIP: Alright, let's ask Cassidy Hutchinson if she wishes she'd been warned to think twice about going into the Trump orbit.
TANDEN: Excellent point.
PHILLIP: That's an interesting point.
RANTZ: You can do the same thing with John Bolton except of course he actually committed a crime.
PHILLIP: Trump is the one trying to prosecute her.
RANTZ: I agree that if you commit crimes or suspect there should be an investigation then you should control it.
TANDEN: That's exactly what it looks like.
MEIJER: I agree.
TANDEN: I'm glad you agree.
RANTZ: Except that's not what she actually said.
PHILLIP: Before we go, you can stream the show live or watch on demand anytime with an all-access subscription. Scan the Q.R. code on your screen or go to cnn.com/watch to learn more.
Thank you for watching "NewsNight," "Laura Coates Live" starts right now.
