Return to Transcripts main page
Laura Coates Live
CNN Tracks Live Results From Primaries In Wisconsin, Minnesota, And South Carolina; Trump's Endorsements Face Test In Key GOP Primaries; DOJ Says Trump Can Assert Executive Privilege To Outside Advisers. Aired 11p-12a ET
Aired August 11, 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]
LAURA COATES, CNN HOST AND SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Another nail-biter of an election night in America, this time in Wisconsin. The results on your screen right now tell the story, a neck-and-neck race that has the Democratic Party on the edge of their seats.
Good evening, everyone. I'm Laura Coates with you for the next hour, watching this dramatic primary for governor unfold in Wisconsin. It is a tight race between Democratic socialist Francesca Hong and the establishment choice, Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley. Hong has drawn heat for past positions that she has backed away from, now calling them bad takes. Crowley has the backing of outgoing Governor Tony Evers along with other moderate Democrats who fear Hong would lose in a general election.
We're also watching a tight race in the Democratic primary for Minnesota Senate. Lieutenant Governor Peggy Flanagan is the progressive with an early lead over the more moderate, Congresswoman Angie Craig. Both are trying to convince voters the other comes with baggage that could cost Democrats in November.
We are covering every aspect of tonight's primaries at CNN from our teams on the ground to our analysts here with me in the studio. I want to start with John King, of course, at the magic wall. John, another nail-biter, this time it's in Wisconsin. What are you seeing in the results there so far?
JOHN KING, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Of course, what we are seeing is they're close, Laura, and then there's this, 40.1 to 40.0, 600 votes at the moment lead for the Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley. He was 366 just a few minutes ago, so I guess that's progress.
I say that half as a joke just in the sense that if we talk about this, you mentioned this was Michigan and Abdul El-Sayed versus Haley Stevens on another primary night in a Senate race, pretty evenly split. Another Democratic socialist versus the establishment candidate, pretty evenly split as we try to figure this out. We're up to 78 percent of the vote in.
So, the question you're asking now is, A, what's left and where is it as you watch this play out? A quick footnote first. This is Francesca Hong's base, Dane County, Madison, University of Wisconsin, the most liberal county in the state right here, and she has a healthy lead in her home base with 92 percent of the vote in.
Then you come over here, of course, this is David Crowley's base. It's Milwaukee. It is the number one populous county in Milwaukee County, and there's Milwaukee City here in the state. He has a smaller lead here, which as we get later into the night could become part of the conversation, but a smaller lead there.
Then you pull it out and you see. So, my question at the moment, Laura, what's left out there? So, you use every tool you have at your disposal. The circles here tell you there are outstanding votes. The size of the circle tells you how many outstanding votes. So, you see a lot of votes still out in Milwaukee, a lot of votes still out in Madison, a lot of votes still out in Oshkosh, more modest number in Eau Claire, more modest number up in Green Bay. So, there are urban areas where you have more voters, but we still have votes to count.
If you're just using your eyes to look at this, you see more light blue circles, so you might say advantage to Crowley, but I would caution you a little bit about that. Just to give you an example, one of the biggest circles, as I said, is down here in Milwaukee, and we know in Milwaukee, yes, he is winning. There are a lot of votes still to be counted. There's no guarantee the percentages will stay like this. But that one has been very close, right? David Crowley needs to change the percentages a little bit to pull some math out of there.
On the flip side of that, you see the big circle here in Madison, and you come over here. It's only eight percent of the vote left, but Francesca Hong has throughout the night been winning by a bigger margin there. So, you're trying to figure out what's left, and what's left tells you that if we're 886 votes now, is your lead right now. We're going to keep counting for a long time.
COATES: Really striking to think of that. Crowley was somebody, of course, who had dropped out of the race, came back in the race. This has been a real nail-biter for so many reasons.
The Democrats are also battling it out, though, in my home state of Minnesota for their Senate primary. What's an update on where the race stands there?
KING: Let's come over to the Senate race here. Let me drop it out first just so you see the main vote. This one is a bigger lead. We have not projected this race, but we're up to 35 percent now. The lieutenant governor, the more progressive candidate, is Peggy Flanagan, running against the moderate centrist congresswoman, Angie Craig. Again, this is for the Senate Democratic primary to represent the Democrats in this Senate race.
This is a healthy lead percentage-wise. Peggy Flanagan has held for quite some time. But you're waiting for votes to come in. You see her winning these rural areas across the northern state. More of a competition as you come down in here. But, again, the two largest population centers. Hennepin County is Minneapolis. It's a 20-point lead. Just shy of a 20-point lead there. That's healthy. You move over here. Ramsey County is St. Paul, the second most populous county in the state, and a much bigger lead here.
So, where the most votes are, Peggy Flanagan, the lieutenant governor, doing quite well in this race right now. Again, we're waiting to get higher to get more comfortable with the margin.
[23:05:00]
But a very, very tight race in Wisconsin. A bit more space here with the progressive on top in your home state there, Minnesota.
COATES: John King, thank you. We'll keep checking back with you as this nail-biter continues.
I want to get to Jeff Zeleny in Madison, Wisconsin who's at Francesca Hong's headquarters. What's the mood in the room there?
JEFF ZELENY, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Well, Laura, we are in a very crowded music hall here and you'll hear the screaming momentarily when we come up on the screen behind them. But Francesca Hong's supporters came here for what they thought would be a victory party. They came here for what they thought would be effectively an early night. It has turned into anything but that.
As John was just saying, this is a nail-biter to say the least. But Madison and Dane County truly is the center of it all. That's where we are. That is the area that Francesca Hong represents in the general assembly.
But the closeness of these results, Laura, really reflect our conversations with voters all day long. Even some of the most self- described liberal-leaning progressive voters expressed some concern and caution about Francesca Hong. Yes, they said they like her, yes, they said they enjoyed her policies, but they were worried about electability.
So, there's no doubt in the end of this race, the undecided voters and even some of the ones on the fence were clearly being persuaded by this argument of electability that Governor Tony Evers was really delivering from the rafters. As he was supporting David Crowley, he really urged Democratic voters to consider the fall campaign.
So, look, as we watch the party atmosphere, the music is playing, the bar is open, but this is not the result that they expected. Now there, of course, is still very much a path for either of the candidates here. But this is -- Francesca Hong has not had a lead yet at all tonight and that is not what her supporters here were expecting. Laura?
COATES: Jeff Zeleny, we'll stick with you on this as well. Look at the percentages, 39.9 flat for both of them. The votes are still coming in.
I want to bring in our panel of top experts this hour to break down what these numbers actually mean. I've got the former vice chair of the DNC, David Hogg, CNN contributor Lulu Garcia-Navarro, Republican strategist Leslie Shedd, and Democratic strategist Antjuan Seawright. Glad to have all of you guys here.
I mean, look, David, these numbers, Francesca Hong had a massive progressive momentum coming into this. It is now tied. She has not taken a lead yet. When you look at this, are the past social media comments that people were talking so much about, Thanksgiving and beyond, bad takes, as she called them, is that what you think is impacting the race tonight?
DAVID HOGG, CO-FOUNDER OF LEADERS WE DESERVE, FORMER VICE CHAIRMAN OF DNC: I think what's impacting the race far more, you know, if dumb tweets decided Wisconsin, Donald Trump would not be president right now. Voters are thinking about the issues. They're not so much thinking about what she said about Thanksgiving as much as they're thinking about whether or not they're going to be able to afford this Thanksgiving.
COATES: So, what about her issue platform makes her not being able to take a lead, having been in the race longer than Crowley?
HOGG: Well, I think there's obviously things here, too, that voters think about. In states like Wisconsin, to the electability part, where when you do have the governor going out there and saying, oh, this person is more electable, that's obviously going to sway some voters. And also, we have to talk about how off the polling is between Wisconsin and Michigan. Clearly, there is a lot more enthusiasm --
LULU GARCIA-NAVARRO, CNN CONTRIBUTOR, JOURNALIST FOR THE NEW YORK TIMES, PODCAST HOST: I was about to say --
COATES: Let's talk about that because --
GARCIA-NAVARRO: I think --
COATES: -- that's the story of all this right now.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: The polling is off. They've been giving a lot of momentum to progressives. You know, if you think about Abdul El-Sayed and his election, they were thinking that it was going to be a blowout. It was very tight. This is neck-and-neck.
What is this telling us? This is telling us that, first of all, the Democratic base is very divided, that progressives don't have the momentum that they have been billing themselves as having, and it also tells us -- I don't know who these people are talking to when they're polling.
(LAUGHTER)
LESLIE SHEDD, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: And it's not just Democrats. Don't forget, we saw this in the Texas Senate race, too.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: True.
SHEDD: They said Paxton -- most of them showed Paxton up maybe five points, 10 points. He won by something like 28, 29 points. So, we're seeing this across the board. ANTJUAN SEAWRIGHT, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Let me take a different approach. What polling has consistently indicated is that they cannot measure the power of the Black vote. What Michigan and Wisconsin have proven is that Black voters and working-class voters and rural voters are very central to the Democratic coalition if you want to win a primary and a general election.
I don't think you can measure that in Poland. In the same way, Poland could not measure how Donald Trump supporters were not being picked up on some of the Republican data points. That's like thing number one. Number two, I do think what folks have said or posted can and have been used against them in the court of public opinion. That has nothing to do with who has endorsed who because my dear friend, Haley Stevens, had a lot of key endorsements, but that did not give her what she needed to get across the finish line.
[23:10:00]
I think what people don't realize is that, as a party on the whole, and I believe this as a country, we are center left or center right seven days a week, twice on Sundays, particularly when it comes to the strong tenets of the winning coalition for Democrats, Black voters, working-class voters, non-college educated, and rural voters. I think that's an important note going forward. Winning a primary --
COATES: One point on that because you mentioned the idea of endorsements. Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Senator Bernie Sanders did not touch with really a 10-foot pole in the Wisconsin race in the same way that they did in Michigan. What do you think the impact of that is and their decision to do so? Is that impacting this, what we're seeing now? I mean, look, 39.9 percent across the board. Is that telling you the power of these endorsements even more than the problems of the polls?
HOGG: I mean, I think there's one thing that's telling, too. Regardless, this is a really close race that we're seeing right now and it's only getting closer. The fact that you had the sitting governor going out there and campaigning actively for a guy that had dropped out and got back in the race and it still is this close despite all those comments and everything shows us, while there is a big coalition in the Democratic Party, there is a big hunger for changing the status quo.
SEAWRIGHT: And I don't disagree that we as a party are going to have to do some real assessments. And as we say in yoga, we're going to have to make some adjustments after this primary season. Like, obviously, there are going to be some serious alterations made to our appearance as we get to November because --
GARCIA-NAVARRO: What do those alterations look like? Because this is -- this is what I think is facing the Democratic Party right now when I look at this and I see what has been happening across the board in these races, which is, you know, there is absolutely a hunger for change. You talk to any voter, and this I'll say Republican or Democrat --
SEAWRIGHT: Democrat and Republican.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: -- everyone.
COATES: Change, you mean the incumbents?
GARCIA-NAVARRO: Yes, yes. They're just fed up with the status quo. They feel like, you know, the economy doesn't work for them, politics doesn't work for them. So, there's a real antipathy towards what's happening.
The question is, what does that look like? And this division of moderates versus Republicans is problematic for Democrats because where the "moderates" -- quote, unquote -- what is their message going to be if they went on the other side of this? Where are the big ideas that are going to capture some of this momentum?
SEAWRIGHT: Well, I frame it as a style versus substance conversation. It's not that Zohran Mamdani did not agree with Abigail Spanberger and Mikie Sherrill that we have an affordability crisis brought to you and sponsored by Donald Trump and your neighborhood Republican Party. I think how they talked about these things in their various states turned out to be different. But the through line was they all talked about affordability.
I think that we have to learn how to yell in the places we agree and whisper in the places we disagree. We all agree we need to defeat Republicans in November. We also agree that this affordability crisis, America is too expensive, they've done nothing to fix it.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: That would be beautiful if that worked out like that. But I'm just telling you --
SEAWRIGHT: I think you underestimate us as a party. I think you underestimate --
GARCIA-NAVARRO: I mean, I'm just a reporter, so I don't know if I'm underestimating the Democratic Party. I very much overestimate the voters. And what I hear over and over and over again from the voters is that they feel like the energy and the messaging is coming from the progressives. They have the big ideas. I don't think Zohran Mamdani and Spanberger have the same message. I don't --
SEAWRIGHT: They both talk about affordability.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: Yes. They can talk --
SEAWRIGHT: They both campaigned on affordability.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: They don't mean --
COATES: Well, David, you have talked about a lot of these candidates that have been in the race across the nation.
HOGG: We were the largest funder of Zohran.
COATES: So, tell me your reaction to this conversation. SEAWRIGHT: So, you're saying he didn't talk about affordability?
HOGG: Let me -- no, no, no.
SEAWRIGHT: OK.
HOGG: He obviously did talk about affordability. Here's the deal, too. He didn't just go out there and say, I'm going to make your life more affordable. It seems like time and time again, one of the things that Democrats get wrong in their messaging, a lot of these moderates think, that if they just go out there and say, well, I'm going to make your life more affordable, that's not why Zohran won.
The reason why he won is because he had specific policies and was coming to people and saying, this is what I want to do. When he looked at his website, there were dozens and dozens and dozens of pages of policy ideas that he wanted to roll out and is acting on it every single day. As part of --
COATES: -- particular.
HOGG: As part of what you're talking about, as part of what you're talking about --
COATES: Child care.
HOGG: -- in terms of the coalitions, one group that you did not bring up that is essential to the Democratic Party and part of why we lost in 2024, young people. They are coming back to us, thankfully, and we do have to build that coalition. That's part of why I'm excited about what's happening.
SEAWRIGHT: But understand this, every race is different. Zohran Mamdani couldn't win in Virginia and probably couldn't win in New Jersey statewide. Let's be very clear about what we're talking about.
COATES: Wait. Why are you nodding your head, Leslie? I want to hear your follow-up point on that.
SHEDD: Absolutely. The point you were making is, yes, I mean, he was running on this agenda that is incredibly liberal and a very liberal blue --
SEAWRIGHT: To New York.
SHEDD: -- ultra-blue city. So, of course --
HOGG: But he does not agree.
SHEDD: -- he can do that. I think the point you're trying to make, and tell me if you disagree here, is that I think that on both sides, you're seeing people identify a similar problem, affordability. The fact that the political class is like not out to help them.
[23:15:00]
You know, the fact that we're losing jobs and all of that, but the solutions that are being offered are very, very different.
COATES: Let me ask you, Leslie. When you think about this, if people are saying similar platforms in more general terms, do you think -- given how the race is panning out in other places, do you think that Republicans' approach to casting all Democrats and painting them with the same brush on the Democratic socialism side is effective? Because, obviously, there is so much division in terms of how they identify themselves.
SHEDD: I think it's very effective because I think most Americans are not socialists. They don't want to open our borders. They don't want to, you know, get rid of immigration enforcement or defund the police. They don't support a hundred and fifty trillion-dollar tax increase to pay for socialist policies.
So, the more that we are able to make sure that people understand, if you are voting for, you know, El-Sayed, even if he claims he's not a socialist, he at hundred percent backs all of the same things that the DSA supports.
COATES: He does not.
SEAWRIGHT: He does not. That's not true.
SHEDD: He says that. But, look, a rose --
SEAWRIGHT: That's not true. That's not true.
COATES: Well, hold on.
SEAWRIGHT: That's not true.
COATES: In your statement, and I think that speaks to a larger issue, about the skepticism that actually haunted Hong at one point during this campaign because people believed that her distancing of bad tasks or bad tweets was somehow politically convenient. Is that the approach Republicans will take even when somebody has an evolution or a distinction from the party that it's all feigned?
SHEDD: I mean, I don't know. I guess potentially. I think, in general, it's really hard to look at a socialist candidate who has running on every single socialist ideal, identifies herself as a socialist, and then has tweets that would comport and line up with socialist beliefs.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: Kamala Harris tried to do that, obviously, in 2024. And there were many reasons why she lost. But one of them was a very effective attack against her that -- you know, the very famous ad. She's for they, them, and Donald Trump is for you.
And so, what I would say about this is that, certainly, the Republican Party wants to run on this. They don't want to run on their record. They don't want to run on the economy. They don't want to run on Donald Trump's ballroom. They want to run on the problems that they see the Democrats could bring. COATES: I want to hear from all of you when we come back, so stand by. Everyone's insight is very helpful for us to understand what's happening here tonight.
We want to hear from all of you out there as well on this election night. Text us your questions, your comments, 818-972-7272. Include your first name and your city or state. The panel is going to answer them later in the hour.
We've got much more election night coverage ahead as we check on the races, testing Trump's endorsements, including his backing of the election-denying MyPillow guy, Mike Lindell, in Minnesota's Republican race for governor, who tonight appears to be in trouble.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:20:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: Primary contest, they're also a test of President Trump's endorsement power. And so far, it looks like a split result. In Minnesota, Trump ally Mike Lindell is far behind in the Republican primary for governor.
Meanwhile, South Carolina's Republican Senate race is headed to a runoff. Trump-endorsed Senator Darline Graham, the sister of the late Senator Lindsey Graham, she will face Congressman Ralph Norman in a runoff in just two weeks.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. DARLINE GRAHAM (R), SOUTH CAROLINA: This is a very emotional night because I'm usually standing here celebrating with Lindsey. So, I know he's looking down right now, smiling.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: My panel is back with me. I mean, Leslie, President Trump went to bat for Mike Lindell. He urged Minnesota Republicans to show up to back him. He's one of the president's top allies. People know this about him. What would a rejection of Mike Lindell mean for Trump's endorsement power?
SHEDD: I think, in general, nobody backs a thousand. As of July 10th or July 11th, I think it is -- the president has gone 220 for 227 endorsements. Two hundred and twenty of them have won. That's a 97 percent success rate. So, anybody who thinks that the president's endorsement somehow doesn't matter is just not paying attention. And I guarantee, if you ask Bill Cassidy or you ask Thomas Massie, they'll tell you it matters.
SEAWRIGHT: I think it matters in some places. He's 0-2 in South Carolina so far. His redistricting effort was defeated. His candidate, his preferred candidate in the gubernatorial race lost, ended up losing in the second round. He put together this co-endorsement. He could lose a third time in our home state depending on what happens in two weeks. He lost in Georgia redistricting in one of the statewide races.
So, we're starting to see. I think it was the Iowa gubernatorial race. So, we're starting to see a pattern and a practice being implemented. There are people who are independent thinkers outside of what the MAGA movement may consider themselves to be in terms of cachet within the Republican Party.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: I think Lindell is a particular figure also. I mean, I don't think we can extrapolate too much. He is very publicly known. He is seen by a lot of people as a kind of kooky figure, if you will.
SEAWRIGHT: An election denier like the -- like the winner?
GARCIA-NAVARRO: But there are many election deniers in the Republican Party. So, it's not the election denier part of it as much. It's just within the state, he has a particular role. Democrats wanted to run against him. Let's be honest. So, I think --
COATES: Well, now that it's not him, how will that impact the race in terms of Democrat strategy? Because --
GARCIA-NAVARRO: I mean, I think --
COATES: -- they wanted to have somebody like Mike Lindell to be able to go against. They're not going to, it looks like.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: I mean, don't you think?
SEAWRIGHT: I don't think it's tougher because guess what? The issues are still the same.
[23:24:58]
This affordability crisis that Donald Trump and Republicans created, that's still the case. The 18.2 million people who places that Donald Trump won, who are paying more for their premiums, copays and deductibles, that's still the case. This war of choice that has caused prices of gas, groceries, and goods to skyrocket in this country, that's still the case.
So, there are some core things that are still the case, that when voters show up in any given election, sometimes, they vote against something more so than they vote for something.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: But let's also remember what happened in that state, right? There's a lot that has happened in the last six months in this state that work in the favor of Democrats, which is obviously what happened with ICE, etcetera, etcetera, and also work in the favor of Republicans, which is, frankly, the mismanagement of some of these fraud cases.
COATES: I want to show that for a second because we actually have breaking news, everyone. CNN can now project Minnesota Lieutenant Governor Peggy Flanagan will defeat Congresswoman Angie Craig in Minnesota's Democratic Senate primary. Flanagan is running as the progressive with the backing of senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. Really important there.
You were just beginning to talk about some of the scandals that had rocked Minnesota, but not only scandals that had actually taken down this decision to cover Tim Walz to run again. Flanagan is the lieutenant governor. Why do you think she was able to escape that baggage?
HOGG: I think, ultimately, it's because Angie Craig was a close ally of ICE, for one. And I was just on the ground in Minnesota. I was with our candidate, Matt Little, who just won tonight to replace Angie Craig. He is a progressive that, despite over $3.5 million of AIPAC affiliate spending against him, won.
COATES: And that tells you what?
HOGG: And that tells me that people are sick and tired of not only the status quo that we've been talking about, but let's get specific, they're sick and tired of these members of Congress that are enabling the ICE agents that are terrorizing their communities.
I was outside of an ICE detention center in Minneapolis 72 hours ago with our candidate, Matt Little. They are literally sending people out when they're being discharged from there, out into negative 10 degrees, without a coat, without a phone. Sometimes, they're literally minors that they are sending out there. And there are Minnesotans that wait outside of that detention center for those children and innocent people to come out of there.
They told me a story about somebody who literally had to jump off a roof even though they were here legally because they were afraid of ICE. They broke both feet and both legs. And guess what? They had to heal inside of a detention center, and it healed improperly. They couldn't walk, and they've had to get multiple surgeries since.
The idea that any amount of ad spending is going to make Minnesotans forget about what happened to Alex Pretti and Renee Good and the people that enabled them is absurd.
SEAWRIGHT: I agree with you on ICE. I think ICE has been reckless. I think that's why you saw most House Democrats say, you know what, we're not going to rubber stamp giving them another $70-plus billion in terms of a slush fund when they're killing people in cold blood in the streets. And all the things you mentioned, I agree.
But I do think there's another layer to this that we have to be careful. We're not labeled by or for in November, that we're anti-law enforcement or we're for defunding the police, because that narrative defeated us in 2020 in many regards, and it has been a political liability. So, I think we have to separate those two things.
I think what you see in the result in the Minnesota senatorial race is all about local relationships. She's a sitting lieutenant governor. You can't underestimate the fact that every single day, she's in that state working to get something done. Respectfully, I love Andrew Craig, but she's in Washington.
People see a disconnect between Washington and the politicians who are at home working for them, and that's always an underlying factor sometimes when you have someone who's a local politician statewide versus someone who's Washington's view, the Washington Center.
HOGG: And I think this speaks to a broader theme that we're going to see continue throughout this election cycle, where the higher up on the ballot you go, at least in some of these states that, you know, you consider slightly more blue than, you know, Michigan necessarily, we see time and time again, even when there was a lot of money spent against a candidate, people are voting for the person who often doesn't get as much money but stands on their values and for what they really believe in.
COATES: Well, there's a lot more we're going to get to. It's a very close race. Look at the race in Wisconsin. The poll said this would not be the outcome, and yet here we are, tied. Eighty-three percent of the votes in, 39.9 percent tied. A hundred and seventy-eight votes separate these two. For the first time, we're seeing Francesca Hong, who is ahead. John King is going to come back after a quick break and break it all down.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:30:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: Breaking news, CNN can project Lisa DeMuth, the speaker of the Minnesota House, will defeat MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell and entrepreneur Kendall Qualls in the Republican primary for Minnesota governor. This is a big loss for President Trump, who strongly endorsed Mike Lindell. The MyPillow guy has been one of Trump's top allies, who has pushed his baseless 2020 election claims. Senator Amy Klobuchar will now face DeMuth in November.
We're also watching the nail-biter in Wisconsin. Democratic socialist Francesca Hong is neck-and-neck with David Crowley in the Democratic primary for governor.
[23:35:02]
I want to go back to John King, who's at the magic wall. What are you seeing?
KING: I'm seeing, Laura, a little bit of a seesaw back and forth in this incredibly competitive race for the Democratic nomination for governor. Just a few moments ago, you were talking, Francesca Hong was up by about 336 votes. Then David Crowley took the lead. Now, he's up to a thousand votes. It just moved as we're talking here. It's still 39.9 to 39.8. That tells you how close this race is. But a 1,000 vote and a little bit of change lead.
Now, what happened? One of the things that happened early on is we finally got a sizable amount of votes. We're still only up to 29 percent. But from Winnebago County, that's Oshkosh, the suburbs around it, Francesca Hong was leading when the tiny first percentage of votes, early votes, came in there. David Crowley has picked up now in two reports in a row where they got to 27 percent and now up to 29 percent. He has gained some votes there.
Earlier, when she moved into the lead, that was because more votes came in from here, her home base, Dane County, Madison, the University of Wisconsin, the most liberal, progressive part of the state. She picked up some votes here. They're at 91 percent now. So, still some more votes to come in there.
As you watch this play out, Mr. Crowley now up by 1,139 votes there. One of the things we're still waiting for is the rest. We're still missing about a quarter of the vote in Milwaukee County where he is leading narrowly, but he is leading. Now, that's his home base.
Does that mean he will continue to lead as the votes come in? That's not guaranteed. But if you're in the Crowley campaign headquarters, you're hoping you need to keep your lead there. They'd actually prefer to stretch it a little bit to help with your math as you go out.
So, two ways to look at this, Laura, before I throw it back. Number one, what's left out there, right? What's your live outstanding vote? It came out for me. I've got to grab it quick. Here we go. You watch the bubbles here. Let me move this up for you. The larger the bubble, the more votes we know are out. To the naked eye, this bodes well for Mr. Crowley because you see most of it is in Milwaukee. But remember, his lead there wasn't giant. A lot of it is still up here in Winnebago, the Oshkosh area where he is now leading.
But there's still some circles as well. When it's this close, now 1,400, it's moving a little bit even as we speak. Still close. Trending at the moment a bit in Mr. Crowley's direction.
One way to look at this, one other thing I just want to show you here as we come out here, not that one, we come down here, come here, I just want to show you one other factor in this race tonight. There were two candidates who dropped out of this race. But early ballots, mail-in ballots, had been sent out already. Those candidates are getting 20 percent of the vote.
In some states, if you cast a mail-in ballot and your candidate drops out, you can so-called spoil your vote. You can show up to election officials and cancel and spoil your vote and then cast a new ballot. Wisconsin does not allow that.
So, this is such a close race, Laura, that when we do the final math, that other 20 percent of the vote is going to be a factor. We don't know how those people would have voted and all of that, but there's 20 percent of the election in this primary election tonight who are voting for not the two candidates who right now are about as close a fight as you can get.
COATES: John King, thank you so much. I mean, Democrats in these races tonight, they've all pledged that should their party retake control of Congress in November, that they will investigate what they say is corruption and illegal behavior coming from right inside the White House.
But the latest move from the DOJ might make that more complicated than they thought because today, the DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel put out a memo essentially saying any communications the president has with advisers, even those who don't work for his administration, are protected by executive privilege. The DOJ says these would need to -- quote -- "relate to official presidential decision-making."
But this would mean that if a Democrat tried to subpoena records from anyone in contact with Trump from the private sector who was an adviser, they could argue in the administration that we don't need to turn those communications over because they are privileged somehow. It would create a major obstacle for any future congressional investigation.
My panel is back with me now along with CNN legal analyst and former federal prosecutor Elliot Williams. It's either trying to bend or expand executive privilege in a way that goes away from just the idea that you want a president to be able to get counsel from people. He's not supposed to know everything. You do want advisers to guide and help. But the way that they are trying to massage this is striking.
ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: Both things can be true. Certainly, you want the president to be able to have candid conversations with the people around him in a protected manner, but you also can't extend that indefinitely.
Now, I want to make clear, this is from a memorandum from the Office of Legal Counsel, the Justice Department, that has the effect of legal advice, but does not have the effect of law. Really, the decision comes down to what a court says about this.
Now, this is a vast stretching of the definition of executive privilege. It might work at some point, but I think what they've done more than anything else is create plenty of work for television legal analysts because of the fact that any time executive privilege would be exercised in this way, it's going to trigger a lawsuit from Congress. It's a fact.
[23:40:00]
You can book it here tonight, August 11th, right?
COATES: And yet, the president would own that privilege, so to speak, as the executive. He would be able to control it, much like a client and attorney-client privilege.
WILLIAMS: Sure.
COATES: And the courts have already been very favorable about the expansion of executive authority. Would that be a win for Trump to have -- to have it go to the courts?
WILLIAMS: Everything -- any time something ends up in the courts is, to some extent, a win for Trump, only because that delays the issue and it delays the point at which there's final resolution on it. But just because of the fact that, number one, this is not a ruling from a court, it is sound legal advice. Sometimes, people can rely on opinions from OLC and win. But it is not -- it doesn't have the same effect as a law passed by Congress or a ruling from a judgment.
COATES: And it's important. I mean, Lulu, you have reported a great deal on the issues involving the president where he has blurred lines when interacting with the people of the private sector, right? And the idea of who his counsel is. I mean, his Rolodex is both expansive and nontraditional, shall we say, in terms of how he goes about it.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: Shall we say.
COATES: Shall we say. This could potentially shield a lot of areas of review if the people that say, well, no, I advised him, it's a privilege, you can't get anything I've actually had to say or talk about with.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: I mean, what's extraordinary about President Trump is that at every turn, he is trying to hide as much as he can from the American people. He is trying to protect himself. If we just think about the last week's big brouhaha, which was, of course, about him protecting his taxes and being audited and his family not being audited, now he's trying to stretch this umbrella into all sorts of different avenues with people that wouldn't necessarily come under that umbrella.
And if you think about the fact that, you know, President Trump has been involved not only with getting advice from people, but people have financially contributed to certain things, we don't know -- the reason that this becomes problematic is because what Democrats, I'm assuming, are going to want to look at is, has there been any quid pro quo? Have, for example, shady people been buying crypto, the president's crypto, in order to influence him?
COATES: As an example.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: As an example. I don't know.
SHEDD: But if you read that memo, it doesn't cover that. So, the memo is very, very clear. And first of all, I also think it's important to note, this is not the first time that a president has done this. President George W. Bush, his DOJ said --
SEAWRIGHT: Oh, Republican president.
SHEDD: And Clinton, I was going to say. And under Bill Clinton, there was a big lawsuit, a case, and all the way up to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals that said that, you know, a president's conversations with private sector people should not necessarily be hindered and that there should be private communications allowed.
HOGG: So, you think it's OK, you think it's OK that if Donald Trump texts the CEO of Palantir and says, hey, I'm about to tweet out your stock ticker and it's going to make your stock --
SHEDD: That does not fall under what the memo says. So, I'll read it to you exactly. What the memo says is that presidential communication privilege can cover communications with a private sector advisor when three things are true. Number one, it concerns official presidential decision making. Number two, it involves or reflects communications with the president or his direct advisors. Or three, it was confidential. It has to --
HOGG: What if he says --
COATES: Hold on.
SHEDD: -- three of these things.
HOGG: What if he says to the head of Palantir, you are a direct advisor to me because you work for the CIA, the NSA, the FBI --
SHEDD: But it has to be about official presidential decision making.
HOGG: I just don't think it's normal that the president has made a billion dollars in his first year in the Trump administration.
COATES: Elliot?
WILLIAMS: I just -- I wouldn't extend how executive privileges work before. Typically, when we talk about third parties or outside parties that fall under that ambit, it's often government contractors or entities that are doing business with the government in some way. This is a pretty vast expansion of executive privilege.
Now, look, to just pick up on something Lulu had said, Congress will still try to access this information. And, quite frankly, they'll probably get access to it. It will just take longer. And Laura's point from a moment ago, it will just require lots of lawsuits.
Now, again, to some extent, that's a victory for the president because any time he can delay something being given to Congress, that's a small victory. But I still think if a lot of these questions go to the courts, the president probably does lose, but you're right, it's a question of --
COATES: It also eludes accountability.
SEAWRIGHT: If this were Joe Biden's administration, that memo would not be worth the piece of papers printed on, according to Republicans. We should be very honest about that, too. If you do not have anything to hide, then let the information ride. We know --
SHEDD: I agree with that. And Joe Biden --
SEAWRIGHT: Let me finish. We know that this is one of the most corrupt administrations we've seen in many of our lifetimes, according to most reasonable people. So, when people at home say Democrats don't have a message, part of what I know Democrats are going to do is hold these crooks accountable and get access to this type of information to make certain that we accomplish what they promise to be, and that's a very transparent administration and to drain the swamp.
[23:45:07]
But instead, you can smell the scent from the swamp because it's so strong, coming from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
SHEDD: Joe Biden's administration withheld information consistently from Congress. I worked in Congress. When I was there trying to investigate the Afghanistan debacle, it killed American citizens that were there. At every step of the way, the Biden administration refused to provide us people, to provide us documents. After threatening Secretary Blinken --
SEAWRIGHT: Are you --
SHEDD: -- after threatening Secretary Blinken, after threatening him with a subpoena --
HOGG: Are we going to get all that information on Iran?
SHEDD: -- after subpoenaing the documents, we literally had to schedule a meeting of Congress.
COATES: Hold on. Wait. Don't talk over me. There was a question that was raised. Will we get that from Iran?
SHEDD: I hope so. There should always be oversight.
COATES: OK. All right. So --
HOGG: What if he says it is covered by --
COATES: Hold on. There's agreement here. You have said that you want transparency, you want there to be daylight, and you think that it would be unreasonable for any administration to not provide to the American people clearly --
SHEDD: They were not withholding executive privilege.
COATES: That wasn't what you just said. That's what I just said. Everyone, stand by. Up next, we'll continue to watch the results in Wisconsin, but it's your turn at home to drive the conversation. We'll be getting your texts and questions all hour long, and the panel will answer them right after this. Remember, you can send them to us just by texting 818-972-7272.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:50:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: It's time to answer all the burning election questions from all of you tonight, and there are a ton. If you haven't sent us one yet and you still want to, text me, 818-972-7272. Give me your first name and your city or state. I'd like to know who I'm talking to.
My panel is back with me along with John King. All right, we've got a question from Wisconsin. It's from Meghan, and she asks, should we expect a recount on tonight's Democratic gubernatorial primary results from Crowley or Hong with how close the race seems to be? John King, take that one for us.
KING: I'll tell you to expect, but I would tell you it's something you need to watch, Meghan, as this goes through. State law says if a candidate -- if the race is within one percentage point, the candidate has the right to ask for a recall if it's within one point. At the moment, right now, it's within a tiny. It's 40 to 39.6. So, if you round that up, it's 40 to 40.
So, as we stand right now at 86m percent, Laura, either candidate or the candidate who comes out of the bottom would have that right. That doesn't mean they will do that, but that will be something to watch as we get to the finish line if it stays this close.
COATES: All right. Ernest from California asked this question: Do you think the DSA is the latest catchphrase or trend or is it a legitimate threat to our democracy? Antjuan, why don't you take it?
SEAWRIGHT: Style versus substance. I think that there are progressives, there are moderates, and then there's DSA. We'll see what happens after these general elections of what sustained and what is not.
COATES: All right. Josh from Kenosha, Wisconsin asked this question: I used to be a Democrat but switched in 2020. Why should I support the Democratic Party that has told white men like me that all the world's problems are my fault? Who wants to take it? David?
HOGG: I guess it's the resident white guy. What is there? I mean, just look at what's going on. Ask yourself, has your life gotten easier in the past two years? Republicans have been in power controlling the House, the Senate, and the White House. Is your life easier right now? Because what I've seen is we've been dragged into a $40 billion war. We have seen the cost of everything continue to go up.
And despite the fact that Donald Trump ran on not only releasing the Epstein files but bringing those in them to justice, despite the fact he controls the entire government right now, nothing has been done about that.
SEAWRIGHT: And issues divide us. Our values unite us. I think that our values are pretty clear, what most everyday Americans think, when you think about the comparison to the other side.
COATES: All right. Adam from West New York, New Jersey asked this question. Zohran's ability to solve problems in NYC shows that democracy, socialism, can bring change. His question: Can he serve as a template for socialism and change in America? Lulu?
GARCIA-NAVARRO: I interviewed him. I think that's exactly what he's trying to do. He's trying to show a new type of politics. That is something that is very important to him. He came in with a very clear agenda. And what you see him doing every day in big and small ways is showing up, trying to show people that, you know, his type of politics can be responsive, and he wants it to be a template for other places. Whether or not it will be is difficult to know. He seems to be a very singular individual. He seems to be a generational talent, but he certainly wants to show that things can be different.
COATES: You think it can be as well, right, David?
HOGG: I don't just think it can be, it is different. Look at what he's doing in New York City right now. You have young people posting on TikTok about potholes that are then solved within 24 hours. You know, whether it's a Democratic socialist or somebody that's a moderate, people want government officials who get stuff done. And if we can continue doing that, if it's DSA that does that, they're going to continue winning over and over again.
COATES: All right. Laura from California, great name, she says, all the GOP has is culture wars. Culture wars won't help me pay my bills. Leslie?
SHEDD: Well, I would say, first of all, that Republicans have been passing all kinds of legislation to cut taxes, to lower regulations. You know, it is not just about culture wars. I know that gets a lot of coverage out there, Laura, when you're watching the news and watching media because it drives clicks, but I think that most Republicans are really working hard to help lower your bills and make things more affordable.
COATES: I will --
SEAWRIGHT: Just because you say it doesn't make --
(LAUGHTER)
Just because you say it doesn't make it true.
SHEDD: Biggest tax cut in history.
SEAWRIGHT: Yes, the largest wealth transfer in history, the largest cut to Medicaid and SNAP benefits in American history.
[23:54:59]
So, yes, you can -- I mean, the billionaire class is certainly benefiting from this Republican majority, but not lower costs for everyday Americans, and that's why you see, for the first time since 2010, Fox News polls indicate that Democrats trust -- people trust Democrats more on the economy than Republicans.
COATES: Real quick.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: Last word is just -- it's President Trump, actually, who's talking about the culture wars all the time. He's talking about communists. He's talking about socialists. He doesn't talk about the economy in the way that he should if he wants to help Republicans win this election. COATES: Maybe he'll listen to you. Thank you, everyone. A quick programming note, CNN will be having special coverage of the total solar eclipse tomorrow at 1 p.m. Eastern, hosted by Boris Sanchez and Brianna Keilar. Coverage will also be available on the CNN app.
Well, that's it for us tonight, but the elections are continuing, and guess who's up next? Elex Michaelson with "The Story Is."
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[00:00:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
