Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Interview with Zach Lahn, (R) Gubernatorial Candidate: Trump to Rally in Iowa as Tariffs, High Fuel Costs Squeeze Farmers; DOJ Investigating GOP Operative Corey Lewandowski Over Alleged Contract Misconduct at Department of Homeland Security; Airbnb is Eliminating Rules Ordering Guests to Wash Dishes, Dump Trash. Aired 3:30-4p ET

Aired October 22, 2026 - 15:30   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[15:30:00]

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: Turning back now to one of our top stories. Today President Trump will head to Iowa to try to boost Republicans in competitive midterm races and that includes the race for governor. The Republican gubernatorial candidate Zach Lahn joins us now.

He's going head-to-head with Democrat Rob Sand in that race. Sir, thank you so much for being with us. I first want to ask you about something that's been featured in your opponents ads and something that has come up in your debates and that is where you spend your time.

Local news organizations have reported that you voted in both Iowa and Kansas the past few cycles that you fly to Wichita frequently. You've said you've had -- you have a blended family and a custody agreement that takes you to Kansas often, but you've been accused of spending more time outside of Iowa than in the state that you're running to govern. Something that you've called a lie.

I just wonder if you could reassure voters in Iowa about where you plan to spend your time.

ZACH LAHN, (R) IOWA GOVERNOR CANDIDATE: Well first off, it's a complete lie about what my opponent's pushing. I have a blended family, my kids split time, I'm a pilot myself but the plane goes to pick up the kids. That's it.

Now what you're reporting on is actually $15 million in attack ads spent by a Democratic candidate to make you report on this just like you are. It's disappointing that that's happening, but we've addressed this over and over. Matter of fact, yesterday some of his supporters, some of the more deranged ones, were actually tracking my plane of which only had my minor children on it.

Something that I think in many cases would warrant a restraining order but, in this case, it's actually warranting a question from CNN. This is what he wanted to do. He wanted you to ask this question and so we've addressed it many times.

Many families have blended families. I live in Iowa. I'm full-time in Iowa. I have been. I'm a sixth-generation Iowan. I graduated from high school in the city I'm in right now where Donald Trump is coming to. And you know, I started college here and I moved away like many kids, but I came back in 2013 and spent some time in Kansas starting a school and then came back home in 2023.

[15:35:00]

So we've addressed it but the whole point of this is to get you to ask me that question.

SANCHEZ: I think I'm asking the question in part because voters that CNN spoke to in your state had questions about it. I actually haven't --

LAHN: Yes, that's exactly because he spent 15 million dollars on TV ads because my opponent is a billionaire. He's the wealthiest person that's ever ran for office in the state of Iowa, and if he spent $15 million saying somebody lives on the moon, people are going to ask about it.

SANCHEZ: I just want to be clear. I have had no contact with your opponent's campaign. I wasn't fed this information.

I'm going off of what voters told CNN. For the sake of transparency to put it to rest, would you release the flight logs from your plane from the day you launched your campaign until now?

LAHN: The flight logs are all public. They've already been publicized. The question is who's in the plane?

And so most of the time he's tracking my minor children. This is what's happening. This is what I've been trying to say.

They already have flight logs. They don't know who's in the plane and I'm a private citizen. As a private citizen, I travel.

I travel for business and for family. But ultimately what this comes down to, again and you're re-questioning of this, is about my situation as a father with a blended family and my kids. And so these are minor children.

And even this questioning right here is putting more scrutiny to my minor children. Something, I'll just be very frank --

SANCHEZ: I'm not asking about your family, sir. I'm not asking about your family at all.

(CROSSTALK)

LAHN: (INAUDIBLE) in asking me this question --

SANCHEZ: This is more about the idea.

LAHN: -- (INAUDIBLE) your asking about. SANCHEZ: This is more about the accusation from your opponent that you're somehow less invested in Iowa than he is. And so I wanted to give you an opportunity to respond, which I have.

LAHN: My opponent, let me just say, if you go to noshowrob.com, my opponent's office in the past two years has been closed 252 working days. He does not come to work. He does not do his job.

He's a part-time auditor. He would be a part-time governor.

SANCHEZ: We will be happy to ask him those questions.

(CROSSTALK)

SANCHEZ: He has the opportunity to come on CNN. I do want to ask you about policy while we have you.

Iowa has the second --

LAHN: Great, this is what I'm hoping my campaign can be about.

SANCHEZ: Well, Iowa has the second highest cancer rate in the country, according to an annual report by the Iowa Cancer Registry. Researchers are studying possible links between farm chemicals and fertilizer runoff in the drinking water, though to this point, no single cause has been established. Do you think there should be limits on fertilizer runoff from farms that are mandatory?

LAHN: Well, I would say first that we have to address the problem, which is what you said, and I've addressed it very head-on. You know, I have been the leading voice in the entire state, I would say, in this race especially, about this issue. Many people said I couldn't win the Republican Party primary talking about water quality and cancer rates, but we do.

We have the fastest rate of new cancer in the country, and high nitrate load in water is one of the top causes of colon cancer, bladder cancer, ovarian cancer, thyroid cancer. And so what we need to do, if you understand the situation that's going on in Iowa, is that we have farmers operating on razor-thin margins, have been for decades because of agricultural consolidation in the input markets. And so what we need to do is have real incentives that allow them to adopt practices that will help to reduce the runoff that's coming from the field, because it is having a dramatic effect, no doubt about it.

So I've already made a plan for that, passed the IWill funding in the state, and used those for targeted incentives to farmers to adopt saturated buffers, wetlands, rotationally grazed animals, and we've approved it in the most affected tributary, which is the Raccoon River.

SANCHEZ: You've been talking about breaking up Big Ag, as you put it, and I wonder, given that twice in the last year that the Trump administration has scrambled to help farmers because of his policies, first tariffs and then the war with Iran driving up energy prices, we've spoken with farmers who do not believe that these aid packages go far enough to keep their farms profitable. I am curious as to whether you think the administration has risked fumbling what is a reliable constituency for Republicans.

LAHN: Well, I'd say first, I farm my own ground. My family's been in agriculture for 130 years in the state, and my dad's worked in it his entire life and every generation before that. I'd say that if you want to understand the nonpolitical answer to what's going on in agriculture, because what the political answer is, is it's all somebody else's fault and the other party.

The real answer is we have seen consolidation in the agriculture industry over decades, which is now extorting our farmers on prices and treating them as price takers. That's what's happening. So in 2025, the price of soybeans was higher with the tariffs than 2024.

The difference was the cost of growing went up because these big agricultural conglomerates continue to raise prices on farmers. We have to break them up. And that's what I'm calling to do with antitrust suits.

And we will lead the country on that.

[15:40:00]

SANCHEZ: So are you concerned that the criteria to receive these billions of dollars in aid, the fact that it's based on how many acres of farmer plants means that most of that money is going to wind up going to the largest operators, the folks that you're talking about that have consolidated, that it's not going to get to generational farmers like yourself?

LAHN: Well, when I talk about consolidation, mostly talk about the large agricultural companies, but per your question, we have another issue in the state is farmland consolidation, no doubt about it. And when you're looking at how to administer these programs, I mean, it's a complex situation, but one of the ways they've always done it is just by acres planted. And so but that goes to a bigger issue we have in the state, which is that our state is being treated like an annuity.

We are being extracted from, and out-of-state investors are buying land. The bigger concern, even more than what you stated, is that a lot of these payments are going out of state to people who don't even live in the state because we're being treated as an asset class rather than the inheritance of the sons and daughters of our state. And so I've put forward plans on that as well.

And I think that we can really help to bring down that percentage that's owned by out-of-state investors. But, you know, farmers are hurting right now where razor thin margins have been for quite a while. And President Trump is trying to do everything he can to help.

SANCHEZ: To that point, you've taken credit for President Trump's move to temporarily waive restrictions on red dye diesel. The executive order only defers payment on federal taxes, though, right? Aren't farmers and truckers going to wind up being on the hook for back pay? LAHN: Well, you know, when you look at the actual proposal, it was initially put forward that I talked to Vice President J.D. Vance about my proposal was very, very clear that we need to waive enforcement of that and how the defer the deference of that goes, whether it's deferred or waived, I will get to be seen as we get closer to the expiration of the executive order. I think it'd be actually pretty difficult to actually track a lot of those things. The point was that we wanted to find a way to give relief to farmers that are hauling their grain to market, which is happening right now.

And in Iowa, that's a 57 cent a gallon decrease. And so I think credit has to be given where credit's due. You know, this all can't just be a partisan, you know, volleyball game here where we're just attacking the other side all the time.

We're trying to do things that will help. And that was the entire point of my conversation with Vice President Vance.

SANCHEZ: Zach Lahn, we very much appreciate your time and you sharing your perspective just for the record. So, you know, we requested Democrat Rob Sand. He was not immediately available, but we're going to keep trying.

So thanks for the time.

LAHN: Thank you.

SANCHEZ: We are continuing to follow breaking news. Sources telling CNN that the Justice Department is investigating Republican operative Corey Lewandowski over alleged contract misconduct during his time at the Department of Homeland Security.

We have new details when we come back.

[15:45:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: Turning back now to our breaking news from last hour, the Department of Justice investigating Republican operative Corey Lewandowski over allegations of contract misconduct at the Department of Homeland Security.

SANCHEZ: He worked there as a de facto chief of staff to former Secretary Kristi Noem. This is according to multiple people familiar with the investigation. Ankush Khardori is a former federal prosecutor, also the author of the Open File Substack.

And Chris, thanks for being with us. Explain to us what it means to use contract misconduct. What does that suggest?

ANKUSH KHARDORI, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: So there are several different types of criminal charges that you could bring in a fact pattern where someone has been abusing their authority to give contracts out. There is traditional sort of bribery and extortion charges, but also a bunch of different federal anti-kickback statutes that specify that if you are have some authority over awarding contracts, you cannot take a piece of it or receive any sorts of monetary payments in connection with your discharge of those duties. So that would be sort of, I imagine, to the extent that this is a serious and earnestly pursued investigation, a core theory that the Justice Department would be looking at, the anti-kickback theory.

KEILAR: So the probe follows a criminal referral from the DHS IG, the inspector general. What does it mean for it to have gotten to that point? For those who don't know this process, what kind of evidence is necessary for that referral?

KHARDORI: Well, it could be a pretty low bar, right? The inspectors general are not themselves criminal investigators, nor are they trying to assess whether or not a crime has been committed. But when there is information that rises to a level where they think federal prosecutors may be interested, they can refer it over to the Justice Department.

There is no set of sort of specific standards that apply. Anyone can refer a crime to the Justice Department. But of course, when it comes from within the government, it comes from the inspector general's office and particularly comes from an inspector general sort of community that under this administration has really not done a whole lot of aggressive work.

You would expect it to be taken more seriously.

SANCHEZ: So what is the political significance of this then?

KHARDORI: Well, look, I mean, this is a Justice Department that I think has become incredibly politicized, right? They have basically backed off public corruption investigations unless they feel like they can tag a Democrat. So if this is a real serious investigation, it would seem to balance out that problem.

But of course, you know, I'm just sitting where we are here. It remains very unclear to me how aggressively the Justice Department will pursue this and where it might end. I mean, just recall that under President Trump's first term, he had people who pled guilty with his Justice Department.

He pardoned them anyway. And he's been very sort of vocal, according to news reports, about issuing pardons on his way out of the office. So this is one of those things where I would just advise everyone to take one step at a time, follow the reporting, but don't assume that we know the outcome.

KEILAR: Yes. Lewandowski's attorneys say he denies any wrongdoing and they say he hasn't been contacted by DOJ. Is there any significance to that?

KHARDORI: No, there is not. It's bad news, actually. If you're the target of the investigation, if that is the situation.

[15:50:00]

Again, I don't know what anything beyond what's been reported and you haven't been contacted, it can mean that the Justice Department is trying to build its case against you. And also if you are a central figure or the target, the justice might want to gather as much evidence as possible before even considering talking to you.

SANCHEZ: It's not clear right now which U.S. Attorney's Office is going to lead this investigation, so how much does that matter?

KHARDORI: Well, I think it goes to sort of the seriousness of this effort, right? I mean, it's one thing for IG to make a referral, for the Justice Department to say, we're looking at it, but there have to be bodies behind it. There needs to be an office, there needs to be real prosecutors.

And again, I have questions about this, because if we just look at the reporting over the last few weeks from places like the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal, there have been very serious questions about Alina Habba's conduct as well as Kimberly Guilfoyle's conduct concerning the same types of sort of public integrity-type issues. And there's no indication that the Justice Department is looking at any of that stuff. So as I said, I'll be very interested to see where this really goes.

KEILAR: Very good question. Ankush Khardori, thank you so much.

KHARDORI: Thank you.

KEILAR: Ahead, nobody wants to do chores on vacation, right, Boris?

SANCHEZ: Isn't that what a vacation's all about?

KEILAR: Yes.

SANCHEZ: Getting stuff done around the house?

KEILAR: Oh, you want to stake a chore-cation? No, thanks. Finally, Airbnb agrees.

[15:55:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KEILAR: Does this happen to you? You book an Airbnb, then at checkout, you kind of feel more like a cleaner than a customer. Yes?

The sheets, you know, you do all the things. You wash the dishes, strip the bed, take out the trash.

SANCHEZ: And then you get hit with a cleaning fee anyway?

KEILAR: Wait, what is that about?

SANCHEZ: Yes, I don't know. Now, Airbnb is eliminating those rules, though, telling property hosts they can no longer require guest chores of, quote, significant effort or time. The updated policy takes effect for bookings November 20th or later. Some other no-can-dos, no more host-imposed fees or separate contracts. Let's talk about this with Jack Crivici-Kramer, the co-host of The Best One Yet podcast. Jack, thanks for being with us.

So you are an Airbnb host. Are you making the folks that use your places do dishes?

JACK CRIVICI-KRAMER, CO-HOST, THE BEST ONE YET PODCAST: I'm a super host. I just want to make an initial statement. Absolutely not.

Would never make them do the dishes. And you know, nobody on vacation should ever, ever have to wrestle a fitted mattress sheet back onto that queen-sized mattress. So I actually agree wholeheartedly with this new policy announcement, which is basically, if an Airbnb checkout task could cause you to schvitz, then that task is forbidden.

No unreasonable task can be required of guests before checkout. No stripping of the mattress, no washing dishes, no doing laundry. But it is causing some major blowback because this shifts costs from guests to hosts.

But interestingly, this is not a zero-sum decision. Two groups are happy by this Airbnb call, and only one group is mad.

KEILAR: OK, and they are?

CRIVICI-KRAMER: Well, Brian Chesky told guests four years ago, we hear you loud and clear about these annoying chores that you have to do for checkout. He's finally honoring that pledge by changing the policies. So guests are obviously happy. But hosts vehemently disapprove.

There's already a Change.org petition with 6,400 host signatures and counting. And they're calling some hypocrisy here because what does Airbnb always said? Live like a local, but not the part where you have to do your dishes.

Now, the third group that's happy here is investors. The stock rose 2 percent today. It's actually having a McMansion of a year.

It's up 37 percent in the last 12 months. So this new chore policy, it's about making guests happy because in this economy, you need to show value.

SANCHEZ: So about that cleaning fee that you get charged even after doing some of this stuff, where does that cleaning fee go?

CRIVICI-KRAMER: So it's paid directly by the host, so I tag on a $250 cleaning fee when people stay at my chalet, and the guest pays that directly to me. And then I could clean myself and pocket that money for my time. But I pay directly to the cleaner who's wonderful.

Her name's Margaret. She's the absolute best. She's been cleaning the house for 30 years, apparently.

So that's the thing. Like people get really frustrated when they pay a fee for cleaning and then they still have to pay for cleaning. And it was a really bad thing for Airbnb's brand.

So that's finally being mitigated here.

KEILAR: OK, so what is this business calculation here? Because obviously, I mean, I'll have a debate, honestly, with my husband about do we rent a place or do we get the hotel? Because he does not -- he's like, I don't want to deal with sheets.

Is that is that the calculation that they're trying to kind of pull that clientele back?

CRIVICI-KRAMER: So Airbnb is not a startup anymore. They've been here for 18 years. They want the entire travel market.

They've actually become a travel super app this year, but they're targeting both sides of the K-shaped economy. So on the bottom side, this is a value play. They're eliminating chores because that's effectively lowering the cost to a traveler because your time is money.

And so is your sweat, I should point out. So they're shifting costs to the host to effectively cater to, you know, let's say the bottom leg of the K-shaped economy. But they also announced yesterday a new partnership with American Express Travel.

One million Airbnbs can now be booked on Amex Travel and are eligible for that six hundred dollar lodging credit that Amex Platinum holders get. So for the premium side of the K-shaped economy, the upper leg, they're joining Amex Travel, getting the platinum crowd to book Airbnb Luxes. So they're really trying to conquer the whole market here.

And you see with these two separate announcements made in 24 hours, there's a value play and there's a premium play.

SANCHEZ: Jack, really quick. Where's the chalet? Can we get a discount?

CRIVICI-KRAMER: It's at Sugarbush. And now that my kids are of skiing age, I'm renting it out less and less and less. I plan to go there every Friday after work and come back every Sunday after the football game.

KEILAR: All right, Jack.

SANCHEZ: Didn't hear anything about a discount, but that's all right. Jack Crivici-Kramer, thank you so much for being with us.

CRIVICI-KRAMER: Thank you.

KEILAR: "THE ARENA" with Kasie Hunt starts right now.

END