Return to Transcripts main page
Laura Coates Live
Payout Fund to GOP Revolt; DNC Tried to Keep 2024 "Autopsy" Private; Applications Open; Colbert Signs Off; Aired 11p-12a ET
Aired May 21, 2026 - 23:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[23:00:00]
BEN FERGUSON, RADIO HOST, PODCAST CO-HOST: -- which is a big deal. But it was like they got engaged. I'm like when is the date? They're like we're going to do it. I think it's like eight or nine days. I was like we are on spring break, we'll figure this out. I did go, but the rest of the family didn't. Like it was the quick hurry up.
CHARLES BLOW, LANGSTON HUGHES FELLOW, HARVARD UNIVERSITY: You can't even answer the question.
FERRECHIO: No. That's like --
(LAUGHTER)
FERRECHIO: The family sure notice. But I was like you take the whole family fast. It's pretty hard to do.
JESSICA DEAN, CNN ANCHOR AND FIELD CORRESPONDENT: All right, for anyone out there looking for excuses, there are some options. Thank you to all of you. We appreciate it. And thank you for watching "NewsNight." You can stream the show any time with an All Access subscription in the CNN app or at cnn.com/watch. "Laura Coates Live" starts right now.
VICTOR BLACKWELL, CNN HOST: Tonight, from a payout fund to a GOP revolt. Now, the fallout from President Trump's IRS settlement is stalling his own agenda. Plus, more January sixers, Trump allies, they look to tap into that fund. The latest showing interest, former congressman George Santos. And Stephen Colbert signs off from "The Late Show." The man taking his place is my guest tonight on "Laura Coates Live."
Good evening. I'm Victor Blackwell, in for Laura. Now, President Trump may be used to Republicans' grumbling, a representative here, a senator there. But this, what we're seeing today, this is something different. That $1.8 billion anti-weaponization fund created by his own Justice Department is fueling a GOP mutiny so broad that it's derailing plans for the president's policy agenda.
Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche even ditched a planned trip to Minnesota to go to the Capitol to try to bring Republicans onside, but it sounds like he walked into a hornet's nest.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) SEN. SUSAN COLLINS (R), MAINE: I do not support the weaponization fund as it has been described.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. JOHN KENNEDY (R), LOUISIANA: I just don't know how this puppy dog will work. I'm not sure where the money is coming from. I'm not sure who is going to decide. I don't know anything about anything. This is why the attorney general is coming.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. JOHN HOEVEN (R), NORTH DAKOTA: We need more information on it. I mean, we discussed it yesterday, but that's why he's coming back, because we need more information.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What do you want to hear from Todd Blanche?
SEN. THOM TILLIS (R), NORTH CAROLINA: About the payout pot for punks?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes.
TILLIS: Not a lot. These people don't deserve restitution. Many of them deserve to be in prison. Some of them deserve the pardon because they were over-prosecuted. But this is -- I mean, this is just stupid on stilts.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLACKWELL: Stupid on stilts. If Blanche was there to calm Republicans down, it did not work. Senators are now skipping town for Memorial Day weekend. They abandoned plans to take up a bill to fund Trump's immigration crackdown. And that public pushback may only be part of the revolt.
The most vocal Republican has been retiring senator, as you heard there, Thom Tillis. He doesn't have much to lose by speaking out so forcefully, but he says others are just as upset, and he is telling them to say it, say it out loud.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do you have colleagues that share the same concerns that you're experiencing?
TILLIS: They need to speak up. I mean, this is beyond the pale. This is not good for my colleagues. There's not one positive thing that could be spun out of this between now and November. (END VIDEO CLIP)
BLACKWELL: And see, that's the political problem for the president. It's not just Democrats on the attack calling it a slush fund for its MAGA allies and January 6 rioters. This is Republicans warning the president, do not make us defend this, especially with the midterms around the corner. And today, in the Oval Office, the president was asked the question that's really hanging over all of these.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Are you losing control of the Senate, Senate Republicans?
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: I don't know. I really don't know. I can tell you, I only do what's right.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLACKWELL: And that's revealing because when is the last time you heard the president answer a question about his own power with I don't know?
My first guest has the scoop of what happened during that meeting between Senate Republicans and the acting attorney general, Todd Blanche. Senior congressional reporter for Punchbowl News, Andrew Desiderio, he joins me now. Andrew, good to have you in.
ANDREW DESIDERIO, SENIOR CONGRESSIONAL REPORTER, PUNCHBOWL NEWS: Good evening.
BLACKWELL: So, you're reporting that meeting has been described as hostile. What do you know?
DESIDERIO: Well, he walked into the hornet's nest, as you said, to Republican senators who were not only angry at being forced to have to deal with this so close to the election, but also just wanting basic information about it, right? And they proposed using this reconciliation bill to actually restrict it. In other words, make sure that it can only be eligible to certain groups of people, that it cannot be eligible to, for example, January 6th rioters who are convicted of assaulting police officers on that day
And Todd Blanche just kept responding by defending the fund and the creation of it, and that didn't cut it for Republican senators. And what this is really about right now for them, this is about political survival. For too long now, they've really chosen what Donald Trump wants over what is best for their party.
[23:05:00]
And I think Republican leadership and the rank and file now are getting more aligned on this notion that in order for our sort of vulnerable members in November to win their races, we have to flash some independence from President Trump. So, that's why Republicans made the decision that they did to basically hold up this reconciliation bill, which is on immigration, an issue they love to talk about, so that they can try to impose restrictions on this fund because, as Senator Tillis said there, they know it's so bad for them politically.
BLACKWELL: Yes. Another retiring Senator, Mitch McConnell, his statement: So, the nation's top law enforcement official is asking for a slush fund to pay people who assault cops. Utterly stupid. Morally wrong. Take your pick. Who do they blame? Do they blame the president? Do they blame Blanche?
DESIDERIO: I mean, look, I think, number one, they blame the president, right? Because this has been a long running fixation obsession of his just like the ballroom, for example, right? Senate Republicans had actually decided to take that ballroom funding out of this reconciliation bill because, again, they wanted to keep it narrowly focused on funding ICE and Border Patrol.
So, yes, they do blame the president, but they also blame people like Todd Blanche for, you know, in their view, really having the nerve to come to the Senate today. And I was -- I was -- I was staking out that meeting. It lasted almost two hours, right? Those meetings don't usually last that long. And half of the Republican conference, around 25 members, I was told, stood up and raised their objections.
BLACKWELL: And that's where you don't --
DESIDERIO: You don't see that during these meetings. I mean, during the Senate Republican lunches, you'll see like maybe six to eight members talk. And a lot of the time, it's just like they're giving an overview of what they're working on. Sometimes, it's griping, complaining, things like that. But this was uniform opposition, and 25 members is around half of the Republican conference. And so, it was just stunning. I mean, I was getting texts from people inside the room who were just saying how stunned they were to be witnessing it.
BLACKWELL: You know, it's interesting to hear this degree, this breath of condemnation. The political narrative inside the conference for the last couple weeks has been the strength and the potency of the president's revenge tour. And those who spoke out against him went down in primaries. Indiana State lawmakers, Cassidy in Louisiana, you got Massie in Kentucky. Are they concerned about backlash from coming out questioning this settlement or even coming out right and condemning it?
DESIDERIO: Absolutely. They are. That's why you saw, for example, after the president endorsed Ken Paxton in the Texas Senate race, you know, all we really heard from Senate Republicans was sadness for John Cornyn, their colleague.
The only ones who really spoke up and condemned the decision to endorse Ken Paxton over John Cornyn were those who either -- it's like Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski, that's their brand, sort of trying to be independent, and those who were either victims of the retribution themselves, so they no longer have anything to lose politically, or people like Senator Tillis, for example, who has already announced he's not running for reelection. They feel more comfortable condemning it.
But they were speaking. They really were speaking for pretty much every Senate Republican in condemning a move like that, which they think actively undermines their chances in the election because with Ken Paxton being the nominee -- I mean, even Lindsey Graham, who was defending the president's decision to do this, even he admitted that this is going to cause Republicans to have to spend tens of millions in additional dollars just to defend a red seat in Texas. Now, what does that do? That diverts those resources from other states.
And Senate Republicans are now grappling with the very real possibility that they could lose control of the Senate, which a year ago was absolutely inconceivable given how good the map is and the fact that they're starting off with 53 seats, which is a pretty good cushion to start off with.
BLACKWELL: You were talking earlier before we came on air about how you expected to be covering a vote-a-rama tonight --
DESIDERIO: Yes.
BLACKWELL: -- in the Senate. But that has been derailed.
DESIDERIO: Yes.
BLACKWELL: Talk to me about how the residue of this fund is now impacting the rest of the agenda.
DESIDERIO: Well, that's what Republicans are so angry about, too, is that the president is focusing on things that he views as being in his self-interest, but that are hurting the party writ large, hurting the most vulnerable members this November, and now starting to derail his own agenda.
I mean, Senator Lisa Murkowski said it to me earlier. She said, you know, I don't understand why the president is doing things that he knows will have the intended effect of preventing a top agenda item of his from getting through Congress. I mean, this is ICE funding, immigration enforcement funding, border patrol. I mean, like he ran on this, right? And now, he is the one essentially who is causing it to be derailed. And Republicans are frustrated that that those ripple effects are going to extend through to November and start to impact them in their own races.
BLACKWELL: Andrew Desiderio with Punchbowl News, thank you.
DESIDERIO: Thank you.
BLACKWELL: Let's talk to former Republican congressman Mo Brooks now. Congressman, good to have you on. I know that you do not think this fund is a good idea. Tell me why.
MO BROOKS, FORMER ALABAMA REPRESENTATIVE: Well, there are two aspects to it. One is public policy and the other is the impact on the fall elections.
[23:09:56]
From a public policy standpoint, think about what's going on here. You in effect got the president of the United States negotiating with the president of the United States to take $1.7 billion from the taxpayers at a time that we have $39 trillion debt, and then creating a group of people that is going to decide which of the political supporters of the president is going to get that part of the $1.7 billion that they claim. That's not the way we're supposed to operate with taxpayers' funds. This breaches our fiduciary duties to taxpayers.
The proper way to do it, if you've got people who've been wronged by the federal government, is to sue, go through the administrative system, go into federal court, whatever it takes, get an independent individual or a group of individuals, if it's a jury trial, to determine how much you're owed, and then you get paid. So, you've got an independent body that is evaluating whether someone has been injured by wrongful conduct of the federal government and is entitled to some kind of compensation and redress for that wrongful conduct.
That's not what's happening here, and that's what makes it so wrong, where the Republicans in effect are deciding which Republicans are going to get largesse from the taxpayers who are already under stress.
Then on the political side of it, you've got to evaluate where the public is on this. And the public understands a bad deal for them when they see it. And in this instance, this is a horrible deal for the taxpayers who are funneling the money to the federal government for this program.
And that's what's going to come back to bite Republicans in November, both in the House races and the Senate races, and perhaps a lot of other races around the country. That's probably why you're seeing so many Republican United States senators said, hold up here.
You know, it's one thing for it to be good or bad public policy, but it's a horrible thing in their eyes since they're on the ballot for it to adversely affect their ability to win their elections and keep the United States Senate carry that over to keeping the House of Representatives. So, it's bad all the way around and it ought to be killed.
BLACKWELL: Yes. And we just heard from Andrew's reporting that this comes right on the heels. He was talking about it. The narrative in the conference up to this point was the potency and effectiveness of the Trump endorsement. And now, Ken Paxton in this Senate runoff in Texas over sitting Senator John Cornyn.
How much do you think frustration with the president over that is impacting their support or lack of support for this? Is there some residual impact there where they've been frustrated with the president and now he comes to this and this may be the straw that goes too far?
BROOKS: Well, it may very well be the straw. At some point, people are going to have the courage to stand up to a wrongful conduct, wrongful policy, bad public policy. I don't think we're there yet. And here's the quandary that the Republicans in the House and the Senate face. Quite clearly, Donald Trump has shown tremendous influence in Republican primaries.
The problem is in the last few sets of elections where he's president of United States, the Democrats have been beating us like a drum. They won in 2017. They won in 2018. They took everything they could take in 2020. Last year in 2025's sporadic elections we have had in a number of states, the Democrats just cleaned the House. So, we're 0 for four in general elections when Donald Trump is president of United States.
And there's a legitimate concern that the gains that we have made with the Trump administration over the last two years with the Republicans having the House and the Senate, that those who evaporate like they did in 2018 (TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES) self-dealing is not helping matters (TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES) in the House and the Senate. And the rank and file problem of Republicans around the country who have a belief system, they're trying to advance it, and then being stymied in general elections.
BLACKWELL: Congressman, what did you make of the president's statement? I won't call it an acknowledgement, but a statement that he doesn't know if he's losing control of the Senate because we rarely hear him equivocate on his own influence or power.
BROOKS: (TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES) and lot of these things, which they don't on the Senate floor. A lot of the things that he's pushing, which are bad for the American people, would get killed. And, by the way, that's where Republicans (TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES).
BLACKWELL: All right, we've got a bit of an audio and video glitch there with Congressman Mo Brooks. Congressman, thank you so much for being with me. Enjoyed the conversation we were able to get on.
Up next, the Senate has canceled votes. They're going home. No votes in the House tomorrow either. What happens next? I'll ask one of the Democrats who is trying to stop this fun from happening. And ahead, the report the DNC did not want you to see. CNN has a look at the party's autopsy of its 2024 election laws.
[23:15:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BLACKWELL: Tonight, a Democrat and a Republican are teaming up to block the DOJ's anti-weaponization fund. The bill they filed is just a paragraph. It does not waste any time getting to the point. Here's a quote. "No federal funds may be used for the payment of any claim submitted to the anti-weaponization fund, established by the Department of Justice." Plain and simple. Republican Brian Fitzpatrick, Democrat Tom Suozzi are behind the legislation. But the question is now, can they get enough Republicans on board to pass it?
Well, joining me now is Democratic congressman from New Jersey, Herb Conaway, who just announced that he will cosponsor this bill to block the fund.
[23:20:00]
Congressman, good to have you in.
REP. HERB CONAWAY (D), NEW JERSEY: Nice to be with you.
BLACKWELL: So, let's start here. Are you surprised by the degree and the breadth of condemnation that we're seeing from the Senate Republicans on -- about this?
CONAWAY: I'm not surprised because they know there's an election coming, and they know that this plan flies in the face of the sensibilities of the American people. You tell me that you're going to take taxpayer dollars and potentially pay rioters who desecrated our Capitol, who injured and attacked the police, attacks that led to the death of one of the police officers, and they're going to be compensated for bringing this attack on the peaceful transfer of power, which is the hallmark of our democracy?
BLACKWELL: And many of those Republican members were there that day in 2020.
CONAWAY: Yes. They were under threat.
BLACKWELL: Yes.
CONAWAY: I mean, they were left under the threat of their life. And you're going to compensate these people, Proud Boys and other anarchists, extremists who wanted to take down the government? No way.
BLACKWELL: So, I mentioned Congressman Fitzpatrick, who is cosponsoring this legislation. What are you hearing from other Republicans who aren't public about their concerns yet? If they have them, what are you hearing?
CONAWAY: Well, this is ---
BLACKWELL: In the House.
CONAWAY: Quite frankly, we haven't heard from them yet. We do know that signals have been sent about their condemnation of this bill. We're not paying right now for this billion-dollar boondoggle to rebuild the East Wing of the White House. That is part of the plan. That has been put to one side.
And now, this next surprise that has been brought by the White House and the Republican Party in the Congress to fund this weaponization fund, this slush fund, that can be used to compensate these January 6 rioters is a bridge too far for a number of them.
BLACKWELL: So, you're not sure yet if you'll have enough Republicans to pass it?
CONAWAY: We're not sure yet. But, you know, we were able, with Republican help, to get the Epstein files, release of that on the president's desk.
BLACKWELL: Sure. CONAWAY: We were able to pass out of the House a bill to restore the premium tax credits that help people buy insurance. And we were able to do that because there were vulnerable Republicans in reasonably marginal districts winnable by Democrats. And they didn't want to go into a general election taking insurance and health care away from people or not releasing these Epstein files. I mean, everybody wants it. The president said he would do it.
BLACKWELL: OK. So, let's say you get enough Republicans in the House to pass it and there are enough seething Republicans in the Senate to pass it and get it to the president's desk. He has to sign this to put it into law. You think you'll get a signature from the president?
CONAWAY: Well, I mean, he put it forward, so he's going to sign the bill if it gets to a desk. But it should never get to his desk. You're asking taxpayers --
BLACKWELL: No, no, no. I'm saying the bill to block it. You think you got --
CONAWAY: Oh, the bill to block it. Well, you know, he signed the Epstein legislation, surprisingly. We haven't gotten the premium tax credits to his desk. But I think he will -- I think he may very well be forced to sign it. Now, we shall see.
The big thing in that agreement was to get protection for himself and his family from the IRS, from the audits they're conducting of his tax returns. He wants to be exempt from any kind of penalty for tax returns and issues with his taxes that could cost him and his family a hundred million dollars by reporting in "The New York Times."
BLACKWELL: That's a big assumption, that if you get this bill to kill this fund to the president's desk, that he'll sign it. But if he doesn't sign it, is there a scenario in which you would accept or support exclusions or limits on who can receive the money? If the fund exists but those who were convicted of violent crimes cannot receive any funds from them, can you accept controls on the funds instead of killing the fund altogether?
CONAWAY: Well, it has been reported that the Senate Republicans are looking to do just that. It's possible we could send them this bill which is, as you say, quite clear that no January 6 rioter should receive any of these funds.
You know, there are people who were convicted of crimes, seditious conspiracy, and other violent crimes against law enforcement and indeed vandalizing the Capitol. That is a crime. There are people there that perhaps were bystanders who got caught up and maybe didn't get convicted. He pardoned nearly -- what was it? Sixteen hundred people. So, there are a lot of people that are aggrieved. Perhaps there are some number of folks there who can say or make a claim that they should be compensated.
But the problem is that this fund will distribute money and nobody under the rules of this agreement going to see who gets this money, how decisions were made. BLACKWELL: Yes.
CONAWAY: The greatest and most transparent administration in history is nothing but. And so, that's going to be a huge problem. Can we even get after this money and see who gets it?
BLACKWELL: Let me ask you about this DNC draft autopsy of the 2024 election laws that CNN obtained today.
[23:25:01]
It said things like Vice President Harris struggled to make her case beyond Trump, is unacceptable, the Biden administration didn't prepare for success, that they wrote off rural Americans, the transgender ad campaign from the former president was damaging. Did you see a path forward? What did you get out of this report that will be useful in 2028?
CONAWAY: Well, clearly, President's Biden decision to delay leaving the race and having the vice president have to stand up a presidential campaign in 90 days was a gargantuan task that anyone would have a very difficult time overcoming.
BLACKWELL: Which was not addressed in this autopsy report.
CONAWAY: Which was not addressed in the autopsy. You know, the Democratic Party, many of us, feel that we have lost the center and to the extent that we're not focused like a laser beam on middle class people and their desire in this country to be able -- as our leader, Jeffries, constantly points out, that people who work for a living --
BLACKWELL: Yes.
CONAWAY: -- who play by the rules, ought to be able to afford a house. They ought to be able to have health care. They ought to be able to put a little bit away for retirement. And anything, in my opinion, that deviates from that plan to restore the promise of the middle class, I think, is a mistake for the Democratic Party --
BLACKWELL: Well, let me you this. Let me ask you about this.
CONAWAY: -- with regular folk.
BLACKWELL: The DNC chair, Ken Martin, fumbled this, right? Acknowledges some of the mistakes made here, has been taking a lot of heat for it today. What's your degree of confidence in his leadership of the DNC heading into not just the midterms but the next presidential election?
CONAWAY: You know, I've met him in the run-up. We met with all the candidates that were running for chair of the DNC. I found him to be the most impressive person of the three who were running. They were all great people. But I campaigned with him during this last election. He came out to New Jersey and campaigned here. I find him to be very accessible. And he knows how to win in these red states, these red to blue states. And that kind of expertise, that kind of commitment, I think, is very important.
BLACKWELL: This episode doesn't shake that confidence.
CONAWAY: It does not. He'll learn from this past. Remember, he was just newly getting there, but he has a record of winning in very tough areas, and I think that should bode very well for the Democratic Party going forward.
BLACKWELL: Congressman Herb Conaway, thank you very much.
CONAWAY: Glad to be with you.
BLACKWELL: All right. Next, the array of people lining up to get some of that cash from that $1.8 billion fund, including a former member of the Proud Boys, convicted January 6 rioters, and Michael Cohen. Plus, it's Don, Jr.'s wedding day, so, of course, his father will be there, right?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: You know, this is not good timing for me. I have a thing called Iran and other things.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:30:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JAKE TAPPER, CNN LEAD WASHINGTON ANCHOR: Do you really think Donald Trump is going to want you to have any money?
MICHAEL COHEN, FORMER DONALD TRUMP'S ATTORNEY: Probably not.
TAPPER: OK.
COHEN: But wouldn't that be something if he actually decided to do it?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLACKWELL: Trump supporters and detractors are lining up to apply for some of that $1.8 billion anti-weaponization fund. People like former congressman George Santos, whose sentence for fraud and identity theft was commuted by Trump, former Illinois governor Rod Blagojevich, who Trump pardoned for trying to sell President Obama's vacant Senate seat, Mark McCloskey, who pleaded guilty to misdemeanor charges after pointing guns at people protesting racial injustice, and hundreds of January 6 rioters, they are being advised to apply as well. CNN has learned this whole idea came about in 2023 before President Trump even returned to the White House. Let's talk about it. I'm bringing now Republican strategist Noelle Nikpour and Democratic strategist Sawyer Hackett. Welcome to you both. Noelle, let me start with you. We have heard Republicans in the past and seen them delay votes, question the president's leanings, but eventually fall in line. Do you think this time is different or will the president have to back down? Will Todd Blanche have to back down?
NOELLE NIKPOUR, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST, AUTHOR: I think it's different, and the reason it's different is because in our DNA, as a Republican Party on our platform, we are known to be economically sound, we are known to be conservative when it comes to economics. So, having a fund like this for 1. -- I think it's 1.8 --
BLACKWELL: 1.776.
NIKPOUR: OK. There you go.
BLACKWELL: Yes.
NIKPOUR: There you got it. Well, you know, rounded it off to 1.8.
BLACKWELL: Yes.
NIKPOUR: But I think that that is not in -- it's hard for us to pull a trigger on something like that. So, you've got to realize that although they want to appease Trump, they want to go along with Trump, he's the president's -- Republicans -- Republicans are supposed to go with Republicans.
But the problem is this goes against our grain, this goes against our platform. In our platform, you know, low taxes, low regulation, you know, we don't look to waste money. If you remember, we don't like lot of pork in our bills either. So, this goes against who we are as a party. So, I think that you've got people that are torn in appeasing Trump and doing what he wants, and then doing something that they feel in their gut may not be the right thing.
[23:35:02]
BLACKWELL: Sawyer?
SAWYER HACKETT, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST, CONTENT CREATOR: I think Trump is confusing fear with loyalty with some of these people. I mean, I think Republicans are starting to come to terms with the fact that, I don't know, that he really cares whether they win or lose in the midterms. I think that he cares about looting as much money from the American people as possible and preventing accountability for himself after he leaves office.
You know, these Republicans, especially in the Senate, they are co- conspirators in a massive criminal enterprise, and it's going to roll over them if they're not careful. And I think you're starting to see them pipe up and speak up because their jobs are at risk here.
BLACKWELL: And so, is this the dollar amount? Is it the calendar? Is it the recipients? I asked earlier, is some of this the residue of the endorsement of Ken Paxton? Because we rarely see this breadth of rejection of something from the president.
HACKETT: I mean, it's coming at a time when the president's approval rating is lower than Joe Biden's was after the disastrous debate. And you have gas coming up on $5 a gallon. You know, you have people not able to afford groceries. The president is extremely unpopular right now. And so, Republicans are seeing the writing on the wall. They're headed for a massive blue wave in November. That's going to roll over all of them if they don't speak up and stand up.
And I think that's what you're seeing right now. I think it's not about principles. I think it's about they're seeing the political writing on the wall, and they know that they have to do something about it.
BLACKWELL: The president's current approval rating, 39 percent. Gas, regular, average, going triple A, $4.56 a gallon. And let's talk about this reflecting pool painting, which was supposed to be less than $2 million. Now, today, the president says it's going to be less than $20 million. And you've got the billion-dollar ballroom. You've got this arch. I don't know how much that's going to cost. Is the president's eye off the ball?
NIKPOUR: I think that the ballroom actually is a good idea. I think that the way that it was rolled out probably wasn't the best idea. I think everybody, whether you would be a Democrat or a Republican as president, you need security. I mean, you have a target on your back. I think that the ballroom, you know, in the parameters of where the White House is, I think it's fine. I think how this was rolled out --
BLACKWELL: It was rolled out as something that wasn't going to cost the American people a dime. And now, it's going to cost them a billion dollars.
NIKPOUR: That's what I mean.
BLACKWELL: Yes.
NIKPOUR: It was rolled out not in the best way because, first, he said, I'm going to handle it all. And now, it is turned over to -- half the reason why it was that is because of security. So, security is one of the main deals. And I feel like President Trump thinks that should be, you know, our government should pay for that. It's a billion dollars. It's a lot.
HACKETT: It seems like he's trying to build a bunker that he can stay in and stay in after his term is over. I mean, this is the kind of stuff you see from late-stage authoritarian governments. It's massive unchecked corruption. It is governments covering up massive crime rings. It's, you know, you know, huge billion-dollar spending on vanity projects.
I mean, this is a president who has time and time again shown that he doesn't have an interest in the everyday struggles of the American people. He has struggles in his own vanity. He struggles in his own compensation for keeping this job and for protecting himself after he leaves office legally. And so, clearly, his eye has never been on the ball. It has been on the ballroom.
BLACKWELL: What was the point of the arch? Again -- I mean, why is this something that the American people should pay for? Today, one of these arts committee that Trump picked the members of approved it.
NIKPOUR: I mean, look, this is a different type of a leader. This is someone -- to understand President Trump, you have to take -- think about a CEO of America because his approach to governing, in my opinion, is one of a CEO. I'm going to make decisions here. I'm going to look with the DOGE committee, with what he wanted to do with trimming the fat. It's much like looking at a company and a corporation. He came from private --
BLACKWELL: How is this trimming the fat? A project that was supposed to be $2 million is now under $20 million. If there's a CEO in America who said something would cost $2 million, and it will cost maybe $20, and decided to build a billion-dollar addition to a building --
NIKPOUR: I didn't say it was fantastic.
BLACKWELL: OK.
NIKPOUR: I just said it was like the mindset of where he's probably coming from. And if you look at his properties, first thing you're going to see is they're over the top. They're gold gilded. You know, go to Mar-a-Lago. You will walk in and you will see it is very flamboyant.
BLACKWELL: Yes.
NIKPOUR: It is very Trump.
BLACKWELL: But the taxpayers didn't pay for golden toys (ph).
NIKPOUR: No. No, they did not.
BLACKWELL: Yes. Let me ask you a story about this autopsy of the 2024 election. There were many things that were left out, as we talked about with the congressman here. Is there any practical lesson from this document, from the content of the document before we get to the handling of it?
HACKETT: I don't think there's anything in this, in the content of this document that's worthwhile at all. I mean, this was a massive failure top to bottom, from the DNC, from Ken Martin.
[23:40:00]
I mean, he ran on putting together this autopsy and releasing it. He put one of his longtime friends in charge of writing it. His longtime friend completely dropped the ball on it. And then Ken Martin decided to lie about it, and then gaslight us for complaining that it wasn't released.
I mean, the Democratic Party leadership spent the better part of four years essentially lying to our rank and file voters about Joe Biden's fitness to serve as our Democratic nominee, and we're still paying the consequences for that failure.
And I think, you know, Ken Martin has to come to terms with the fact that, you know, if he wants to be the leader of the opposition party as we're facing, you know, an authoritarian threat, he's got to step up and do the work. He can't make excuses. He can't gaslight us again as democracy is crumbling beneath our feet.
BLACKWELL: Are these documents really worth much? I remember the growth and opportunity report after Romney's loss in 2012. And the big message was Republicans need to change their tone and reach out to Hispanics. And then Donald Trump comes down the escalator and dominates the party for a decade.
NIKPOUR: Yes. You know, there was -- I didn't think there was a need to do a report. You lost. It's pretty evident. It doesn't take a scientist to figure out that Biden should have pulled an LBJ, not ran. You should have had time to pick a candidate. The only reason they had Kamala Harris is because the funds were in place. So, you know, financially, it made sense for her to come in. She could only use the funds. It couldn't have been a random person. And there was only a couple of months to campaign.
BLACKWELL: Yes.
NIKPOUR: So, it was -- it was bad from the get-go.
BLACKWELL: Yes. Also, I mentioned, as we headed into this last break, the president potentially skipping his son's wedding. Here's what he said today in the Oval Office.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: He'd like me to go. But it's going to be just a small little private affair. I'm going to try and make it. I'm in the midst. I said, you know, this is not good timing for me. I have a thing called Iran and other things. That's one I can't win on. If I do attend, I get killed. If I don't attend, I get killed. By the fake news, of course, I'm talking about now. But he's got a very -- a person who I've known for a long time. Hopefully, they're going have a great marriage.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLACKWELL: It's his son, a person he has known for a long time. All right, Noelle, Sawyer, thank you very much for being with me. Up next, Stephen Colbert takes his last bow. So, we'll talk to the comedian and media mogul replacing him. Byron Allen is with me tonight.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:45:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
STEPHEN COLBERT, CBS HOST: Welcome, welcome, welcome, one and all, to "The Late Show." I'm your host, Stephen Colbert.
(APPLAUSE)
If you're just tuning in to "The Late Show," you missed a lot.
(LAUGHTER)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLACKWELL: Yes, it truly is the end of an era for late-night T.V. Stephen Colbert signs off for "Late Show" for the very last time. The show has been a mainstay on late night for 33 years, going all the way back, of course, to David Letterman's debut in the 90s. And it's set to be replaced by another comedy talk show called "Comics Unleashed" from producer and comedian Byron Allen. Allen's company just signed an agreement with CBS to buy Colbert's coveted 11:35 p.m. slot.
And who better to talk with me about that than the man himself, Byron Allen. Listen, I short changed you on your titles. You're much more than a producer and comedian. But for this conversation, that's what we'll be.
BYRON ALLEN, PRODUCER, COMEDIAN, TAKING OVER COLBERT'S TIME SLOT ON CBS: I cannot hear you.
BLACKWELL: Oh, you can't hear me. Oh, control room, can we --
ALLEN: Yes, I cannot hear you.
BLACKWELL: All right, we'll take a break, we'll figure this out, and we'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:50:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BLACKWELL: We're back with Byron Allen, the comedian set to take Stephen Colbert's time slot on CBS. Byron, you and Colbert actually go way back. So, what do you think his legacy will be?
ALLEN: Well, first of all, Victor, I want to say I like your haircut.
(LAUGHTER)
BLACKWELL: Listen, it chose me. It chose me.
ALLEN: Yes. did it choose you? OK. Good. Well, you stick with it.
BLACKWELL: Thank you.
ALLEN: His legacy, you know, Stephen Colbert is an American treasure. He's a phenomenal human being. He's truly a good person. And he's super talented. And he will always have a place in our hearts and in our homes if he chooses. So, I really appreciate him.
I sit on the board of the Motion Picture Television Fund. It's an organization, that's a terrific organization, that helps people in our industry that are, you know, dealing with difficult times. He's, you know, very supportive. He was kind enough to come to our event before the Emmys. We exchanged mobile numbers.
I woke up the next morning early and I texted him and I said, this was the night before the Emmys, I said, would you like to have breakfast? He said, yes. I said, what time works for you? He said, 10 a.m., come to my hotel. We sat down at 10 a.m. to have breakfast, and we continued all the way through lunch. And he had to go, so he put on his tux and go and win the Emmy that night.
And we laughed, we cried together, we shared our love of being, you know, comedians doing comedy, doing talk shows, our love of Johnny Carson. And when he found out that PBS was putting my show on, he sent me a lovely text and said, congratulations, wouldn't it be great if Johnny could see us right now?
BLACKWELL: Yes.
ALLEN: I said, yes. It was a great experience.
BLACKWELL: Let me ask you about that show, "Comics Unleashed."
[23:55:00]
It has been on for 20 years --
ALLEN: Yes.
BLACKWELL: -- about to find a whole new audience. What's the pitch? What can viewers expect when they tune in at 11.35?
ALLEN: Comedy. They can expect to laugh. You know, I think if you watch the show, you should definitely put on adult diapers. I think that's important. And you'll have a lot of fun. I mean, the show is really simple. We only have on comedians.
And, you know, I started the show 20 years ago because 20 years ago, there were a number of comedians really frustrated by the fact the late-night shows weren't putting them on, putting us on. And I said, listen, don't be bitter, be better, we'll do our own show. So, I said, we'll do a show with just comedians.
And it's simple. I have on four comedians. And I'm proud of the show because we've been doing it for 20 years now in syndication. We've had on over 1,000 comedians. Every shape, size, color, young, white, Black, Hispanic, Asian, Jewish, Muslim, gay, disabled, you name it. And these comedians are unique, brilliant, and they come and they share their point of view.
And all I've ever said 20 years ago, let's not do anything that's political, let's not do anything that's ruthless or sexist or homophobic or antisemitic. Just be funny and talk about your life. And, you know, share who you are and be inclusive and give people a sense of who you are.
BLACKWELL: Yes.
ALLEN: I love Norman Lear. Norman Lear, he used television to bring us together. He showed us all the various families throughout America. You know, white families, Black families, single moms. I want comedians to come through here and do what they do. Share yourselves so we get to understand we have more in common than we don't. Really, just use comedy to bring us together because comedy is so powerful. And we all need to laugh. This world would never have enough laughter.
BLACKWELL: So, let's talk about that -- let's talk about that decision. You said nothing political, and you say, you know, when people watch the show, this new audience at 11:35, they should not expect politics. In this social and political climate in the country and considering how successful Colbert was with politics at that time slot, are you sure that meets the mood of the country?
ALLEN: Absolutely. I've already seen the ratings. I know. Remember, I've been following Colbert for the last eight months at 12:35. And "Comics Unleashed" has been on in that time period. So, I've seen the numbers. We've been holding on to his audience.
Also, I've seen that, you know, when you do political humor like that, not just Colbert but the late-night talk shows, the repeats, the ratings are down as much as 52 percent because you're talking about events that occurred eight to 12 weeks ago. And my repeats are down 14 percent because it's evergreen. We're talking about our lives, our relationships, our kids.
So, I think there's a place for that, political humor. You can go get that from Jimmy Fallon and Jimmy Kimmel and Bill Maher and John Oliver and Seth Meyers. If you want political humor, go get it. That is not what we're doing here.
And I think, you know, there's a huge audience out there that appreciates the fact we're not doing political humor. We don't care. We don't care what you think or what's going on. We're just here to make you laugh.
And, you know, at the end of the day, we have plenty of chocolate ice cream. Sometimes, you might get a little plate of fruit. Get something a little different, right? Get something a little different. Everybody has to do it.
BLACKWELL: Byron Allen --
ALLEN: Last but not least, what I would say -- last but not least, what I would say is that, you know, it's time for us all to come together and laugh and just have a good time because it's just -- the world is a little crazy. So, let's just get together and laugh. And if you tune in tomorrow night, I guarantee you, Victor, you will laugh or I will give you your money back.
BLACKWELL: I will be busy at 11:35 for obvious reasons because I'm here. ALLEN: (INAUDIBLE).
BLACKWELL: I know. I know.
ALLEN: (INAUDIBLE). We are not asking --
BLACKWELL: I appreciate the conversation and congratulations on the new time slot. Good to have you on tonight. Hey, before we go tonight, a look at the new CNN film, "Why We Dream," premiering Memorial Day at 8 p.m. on CNN. Here's a look.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I came home from the war, never thinking I'd ever get married and meet the love of my life. Her name was Lola. Whatever Lola wanted, Lola got. I just loved her. We had two boys and a girl. I got nine grandchildren and 11 great grandchildren. My kids were raised quite differently than I was raised. My dad never picked us up and played with us.
[00:00:00]
He didn't know what love was. I never hesitated in telling my children. I love them.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We were so grateful to be alive. I guess we were all trying to make up for what happened during the war. More babies were born in the years right after the war than any other time in American history.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
