Return to Transcripts main page
Laura Coates Live
Trump Rallies In NC as Dems Eye New Midterm Targets In The South; Ramaswamy Confronted Over Ad Featuring Rival's Estranged Mom; El-Sayed Leans Into His Faith In New Ad Amid GOP Attacks; WSJ: Elon Musk Played Role In Starlink Slowdown In Ukraine; Democrats Eye Major Upset In Arkansas House Race. Aired 11p-12a ET
Aired October 20, 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]
ABBY PHILLIP, CNN HOST: And now we've got some viewer feedback from cnn.com/abby.
This first one says, I think that for every dollar spent on political advertising by both parties, half should go to the deficit. We could solve some serious problems with some of this money.
LEIGH MCGOWAN, PODCAST HOST, AUTHOR: Would love it. I'd love to see public funding, personally. I agree with that person.
I would love to go to like a British model where, you know, our election season was six weeks long. We had public funding. Everyone got the same amount.
Three days before, you can't do advertisements on T.V., you can't be on the internet, you follow, like that would be great. I wouldn't agree.
It would be way less money than politics.
SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, FORMER SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH, SALEM RADIO HOST: So we would just be fully dependent upon the corporate media to tell us what to do?
MCGOWAN: No, I'm saying everyone has the same amount. I would love to see less billionaires putting their foot.
JASON RANTZ, PODCAST HOST: I see a lot of public dollars going to Vivek Ramaswamy.
MCGOWAN: Well, hopefully he wouldn't choose to spend his money on that.
PHILLIP: Okay, I've got a question here from a 10th grader. It says, stymies me that Trump suggests that the French riots will plague America when he himself launched the riot on January 6th and seems to have no issue inciting violence himself. Crazy age to grow up in, for sure.
ANA NAVARRO, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: That 10th grader has a hell of a domain of language.
RODERICKA APPLEWHAITE, RAPID RESPONSE DIRECTOR AT MAJORITY DEMOCRATS, FORMER DIRECTOR OF BLACK MEDIA UNDER BIDEN ADMINISTRATION: He also used the word stymies.
PHILLIP: He watches the show, so he must be learning something.
But it is an important point. I mean, when it comes to riots, there was one. And he didn't do much to stop it.
JENNINGS: There's been a lot of riots in America. And I think this current movement in Europe is an extension of the things that we have seen in this country on college campuses and big urban areas.
And it wears lots of costumes, but it's always the route is the exact same. People who want to tear down the West. Period.
PHILLIP: To be clear, it's a little bit of an ahistorical view of France. Where there are violent riots actually all the time.
JENNINGS: If you want to endorse it, go ahead. I don't want to endorse it.
PHILLIP: I'm just saying the idea that this is like some modern phenomenon.
NAVARRO: It's happening in several places around Europe. Last week it was Spain.
JENNINGS: 56 million migrants.
NAVARRO: The cost of living for these people who live in Europe has become unattainable.
PHILLIP: All right, before we go, you can stream the show live or watch on demand anytime with an all-access subscription, scan the Q.R. code on your screen or go to cnn.com/watch to learn more.
And thank you very much for watching "NewsNight." "Laura Coates Live" starts right now.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: I'm doing something different. I'm working like a dog.
CROWD: USA! USA!
UNKNOWN: Republicans continue to play defense.
UNKNOWN: One of the nation's top election forecasters moving 28 House races towards Democrats.
TRUMP: Please, pretend I'm on the ballot because, in a way, I am on the ballot.
AMY ACTON, OHIO GUBERNATORIAL CANDIDATE: My opponent has taken advantage of someone who is -- who is clearly not well.
VIVEK RAMASWAMY, OHIO GUBERNATORIAL CANDIDATE: You're going to leave this room --
UNKNOWN: She let her husband rape her as a child.
TRUMP: MAGA, Republicans, whatever you want to call them, if they get out to vote, we're winning a landslide.
ABDUL EL-SAYED, MICHIGAN SENATORIAL CANDIDATE: You can say whatever you want to say about my faith. At the end of the day, it's a distraction.
KEN PAXTON, TEXAS SENATORIAL CANDIDATE: Every poll in this race says we have a close race. It's going to come down to the wire.
JAMES STAVRIDIS, CNN SENIOR MILITARY ANALYST, VICE CHAIRMAN OF CARLYLE GROUP, FORMER SUPREME ALLIED COMMANDER OF NATO: I feel it in my bones, that we are going to win this election on November 3rd.
(APPLAUSE)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
LAURA COATES, CNN HOST AND SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Good evening, everyone. Welcome to this special edition of "Laura Coates Live." Countdown to election night. The countdown is on. Just 14 days to go.
And tonight, President Trump and Republicans are dealing with some southern discomfort because several races across the south aren't going according to plan. Trump is rallying in North Carolina tonight. He's trying to give Republican Senate candidate Michael Whatley a boost. And the president wants everyone to know how hard he's working.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I'm working like a dog. So, I've done, like, about 10 rallies in about eight days. And now, I'm scheduled to do -- I think I'm even scheduled to come back here in another week. I'll come back here with my men. So, we have, like, 15 days, and I'm doing about 18 rallies. That's work.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: But Trump might have to work even harder if he wants to turn things around for Whatley because he is trailing former Democratic governor, Roy Cooper, in the polls. Not by a little bit. We're talking a double-digit deficit, 13 points in one recent poll.
And now, Democrats are trying to expand the map even further down south. This time, they're heading to Mississippi. Yep, a state that Trump won by 23 points just two years ago and hasn't elected a Democrat to the Senate since 1982. Well, a top Democrat super PAC is launching an ad campaign to help Scott Colom, who is challenging GOP Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith.
[23:04:59]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNKNOWN (voice-over): He'll fight corruption in both parties that drives up costs. Cindy Hyde-Smith, a do-nothing in it for herself.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: There's another sign this race may be getting more competitive. The Cook Political Report is moving it from solid GOP to likely GOP. And there's a similar shift in another southern state, South Carolina. Cook is moving that Senate race between Darline Graham and Annie Andrews from likely GOP to lean GOP.
But it's not all good news for Democrats, especially if you go further north. The Minnesota Senate race is going in the opposite direction from likely Democrat to lean Democrat. A possible contributing factor? The state's fraud scandal, which Republican Michele Tafoya has been using to go after Democrat Peggy Flanagan.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MICHELE TAFOYA, MINNESOTA SENATORIAL CANDIDATE: Peggy, Donald Trump isn't on the ballot, you and I are on the ballot, and only one of us let $9 billion walk out the door to fraud. To suggest that she we -- that she somehow is going to be a fraud czar all of a sudden, talk about changing tax when it becomes politically expedient. My goodness, she was second in charge in this state.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Let's see my panel for this hour. Senior advisor to the Texas Democratic Party, Kurt Bardella, Republican strategist Leslie Shedd, CNN political commentator Karen Finney, editorial board member for "The Washington Post," Carine Hajjar, and White House correspondent for Bloomberg, Jeff Mason.
And, of course, you're part of my panel as well. Be part of our coverage. Send me your questions and comments at cnn.com/engagepolitics, and the panel will answer them live on air this hour.
All right, I know why you're all giggling. You're going to answer the questions. What? What? Yes, we're going to answer questions starting with this one, Karen, because you laughed first. So, Democrats are making a last-minute move, you know, in deep red Mississippi.
KAREN FINNEY, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, FORMER SENIOR ADVISOR TO HILLARY CLINTON: Yes.
COATES: Is that about thinking they can win or about peeling away Republican resources?
FINNEY: I'll tell you, it's such an exciting race. Scott Colom has worked his heart out, and he has actually been competitive for some time. I was on a call with him just a couple weeks ago, and they were like, if we just had $500,000 to get this one ad, and then the gift that keeps giving. Cindy Hyde-Smith had that horrible comment, that went viral, and it made people take a look and say, wait a second, this is closer, maybe we could win in Mississippi.
I'll tell you the other thing. We talked about this right after the Callais decision. You know, yes, the gerrymandering harmed the power of Black voters throughout the south in the House races but, as I mentioned at the time, in these statewide races where we are seeing record turnout of Black voters who are furious about what happened and the idea that you might try to take away power, and that is part of -- we're seeing it across the south and it's part of what is fueling Mississippi. So, yes, we really could win in Mississippi. It would be fantastic.
COATES: How do you see it, Carine?
CARINE HAJJAR, EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBER AT THE WASHINGTON POST, FELLOW AT STEAMBOAT INSTITUTE: Well, if you think about a lot of these voters in these deep red states, 2024, Trump campaigned on ending foreign entanglements, on, you know, ushering in an economic boom quickly, on tackling inflation and, on a lot of those, he has sort of done the opposite.
And so, I'm not surprised that some voters are sitting there saying, well, you know, these were very explicit promises that were made to us, and the president has double-backed on them. So, I'm sure some independents are peeling away, and it will be very interesting to see. I still think Republicans will be safe in those two deep red races in particular, but it will be interesting to see how their margins shift compared to 2024.
COATES: I want to talk about the money in politics because you know it's always the ever-present elephant or donkey in the room, depending on what you're thinking about. And billionaires, they are flooding the midterms with cash. In fact, former New York City mayor, Michael Bloomberg, is dropping 80 million bucks every month to help Democrats retake the House.
Democrats, of course, have long campaigned, as you all know, against billionaires for putting money into races and putting their thumb on the scale of elections. Why is it OK when it's helping or coming from Bloomberg's checkbook, you think?
KURT BARDELLA, SENIOR ADVISOR TO TEXAS DEMOCRATIC PARTY, PODCAST CO- HOST, PUBLISHER ON SUBSTACK, FORMER SENIOR ADVISER FOR REPUBLICANS AT HOUSE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE: Well, I think we're seeing this massive cash. And we've been talking about this for a few weeks now, that Republicans have hundreds of millions of more dollars in part by one single billionaire, Elon Musk particularly, and what we're seeing -- what he's doing in Texas.
And so, this is a balancing of the scales. This is a reaction to something that we've been seen play out for a few weeks now. And, again, at the end of the day, we all believe as Democrats, yes, campaign finance reform should happen. We should have a different court that doesn't allow unlimited open-ended checkbook writing by one single person.
But as long as the rules are what they are, we also can't just sit there, do nothing and say, well, because we're on a moral high ground, we're just not going to compete here and lose elections that we could win if we put the resources in. We've got to level the playing field somehow. The way to get the reforms that we want is to first take back power. This is one of the ways that we can do it.
COATES: Does that make voters more angry, though, at the idea of -- because you -- you know, obviously, who has the biggest wallet often has the biggest say. And voters have been talking really all throughout this election cycle and before about feeling as though the powers that be are not the powerful for them.
[23:10:04]
LESLIE SHEDD, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST, FORMER COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR AND SENIOR ADVISER FOR HOUSE FOREIGN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE: I mean, I think, for sure, that is something that plays out here. But, again, you know, money has been in politics for as long as there has been politics. What's the old adage of trying to keep money out of politics is like water on concrete. It finds every crack and crevice.
You have billionaires on both sides of the aisle, right? There are a bunch of different billionaires that are funneling money into Democrat campaigns. And there are Democrats who -- I mean, Michael Bloomberg has now, like, contributed over a hundred million dollars to Democrat campaigns this cycle. He's not the only Democrat billionaire that has done that. So, there's a lot of money that goes into politics.
I agree. I think that it frustrates me with how much goes in there. If it were up to me, what I would say is anybody can write a check for as much as they want to any campaign, but every single dollar has to be disclosed publicly and easily to find online. Instead of having all these super PACs and dark money groups out there, get all the money out there. They're going to get into the campaigns, anyway. Let's just be transparent about it.
BARDELLA: I think one of the little subtle differences, too, though, with Elon Musk, he makes himself the center of the show, like, I'm the guy that's going to be on the stage handing out checks and being, you know, basically a glorified used car salesman.
COATES: But he hasn't been that way recently.
BARDELLA: Right, but his political identity though has been very front and center.
COATES: Yes.
BARDELLA: Whereas with Bloomberg, he's going to cut the check, but you're not going to see him on any stage at any rally, at any ad doing anything really --
SHEDD: Yes, but he cuts the checks so late, too. I mean, I don't even know if Democrats are going to be able to effectively spend this money this quickly and actually have any kind of impact.
COATES: I want to bring you in, Jeff, because -- on a different issue because the president says that he will, this is his quote, "will be spending over $400 million by Election Day." He likely means, of course, his super PAC, MAGA, Inc. If his message is strong enough to win on its own, why the half a billion-dollar price tag, do you think, is necessary?
JEFF MASON, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, BLOOMBERG: Well, I mean --
(LAUGHTER)
That question comes after a discussion about money in politics, right?
COATES: Yes.
MASON: This is just the reality of U.S. elections, is that there's a lot of money in politics. The question, though -- I mean, the question that I ask as having covered a bunch of campaigns over many years now is, does it matter? Is it going to matter?
It certainly can move the dial, we can see how it can move the dial, but President Trump won his first election on kind of a shoestring budget compared to Hillary Clinton. Kamala Harris, in the last presidential election, had -- I think it was $2 billion in the end, and she lost all the swing states.
So, when there's a trend, and we seem to be seeing a trend right now, the money may not matter. Now, I don't want to say that it doesn't have any effect at all. Clearly, it can move the dial, as I said, but it's -- it's -- it may not be as determinative as inflation worries about the war and all the issues.
FINNEY: I would just -- the thing I want to mention, 20 years ago, when I was at the DNC, culture of corruption. The reason that it matters now and what we saw then, it's not just the money in politics. People actually for years were like, yes, yes, Washington is corrupt. It's that they believe the corruption is what is keeping their prices high.
So, when you have Elon Musk out there, you know, making himself the center of attention and he's getting -- people feel like, wait a second, what kind of tax breaks is he getting? What kind of sweetheart deals is he getting from Trump? And we see Trump making billions of dollars and building and letting our prices go up. People are, like, wait a second, who's looking out for us? That's the difference. It's not just the money. It's the corruptive, corrosive impact of those millions of dollars. And what do those guys get? Nobody is looking out for us.
BARDELLA: That's the cause and effect. I mean, 2006 was the first congressional race I've ever worked on. It was the seat to fill. Randy "Duke" Cunningham and the Jack Abramoff scandal. He ended up going to jail. And again, he's handing out appropriations, sweetheart deals, defense contracts to a lobbyist who's paying him off. That theme cut so viscerally and it's one of the reasons why we saw such major political activity on culture corruption back in 2006.
COATES: We'll see what happens in 14 days. Everyone, please, stand by.
Ramaswamy confronted tonight over a stunning campaign ad using the estranged mother of his opponent. Did it cross the line? Is that a rhetorical question? Plus, new questions over just how much power Elon Musk has as a new report says he may have played a key role in disrupting a key satellite system for Ukraine.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:15:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: You know, an explosive ad is reviving the question that we've asked for a very long time: How low is too low in politics? The ad targets a Democratic nominee for Ohio governor, Amy Acton, and it uses Acton's own estranged mother speaking against her.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONNA ARTHUR, MOTHER OF AMY ACTON: She has lied her entire life. My daughter needs help, and she can't help you if she needs help herself. People can change but, first, they have to tell the truth.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: All right. Well, here's the detail and an important one the ad leaves out. When Amy Acton was a child, she says she was sexually abused by their mother's husband at the time. Ultimately, her mother lost custody of her children. And Acton says she hasn't spoken to her mother in decades.
[23:20:00]
And after initially denying any responsibility for that ad, tonight, her Republican opponent, Vivek Ramaswamy, confirms, yes, it came from his campaign and it is part of a $4 million ad buy that will run in the final two weeks of the campaign. Acton says Ramaswamy is exploiting her mother.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ACTON: My mother, I was removed from her at the age of 12, my brother was 9, for child abuse and neglect that got bad enough. We were actually living in a tent in the middle of winter. She was eventually arrested, the court documents show, from the tent. So, yes, that's the last time I've seen her, was in court when I was 12 years old.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: I find this unbelievable. I mean, I know that we're all accustomed and perhaps desensitized in many ways and yes, you can get very low in politics, but he was heckled at a town hall event, even tonight. Doesn't this ad -- does this go too far? SHEDD: Absolutely. It's despicable. He needs to backtrack immediately.
COATES: Why isn't he, though?
SHEDD: I honestly don't know what he's thinking. In addition to the fact that this is just morally wrong and reprehensible, I don't think it's politically smart either. I think he thought that maybe this could fly under the radar and be this ad where her mother is, you know, on his side.
But now, the entire state of Ohio is going to be blanketed with news stories about the story behind this. Amy Acton reacted very quickly, got a good response ad up, like, from her brother. And now, that's going to tell the story. This is going to backlash because people are going to think what I think, which is that this is gross and it's wrong.
COATES: I want to play that ad that her brother -- a portion of it, that her brother actually released as well. And honestly, it's heartbreaking.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PHILIP STEARNS, BROTHER OF AMY ACTON: I received a lot of abuse, but Amy always got the worst of it. She continued to receive that abuse because she knew she had to protect me from that. If she hadn't done that, who knows where I would have ended up.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: I mean, again, not only I think the ad is bruisingly low --
FINNEY: Yes.
COATES: -- but if you had the whole context of it, it's one of those -- did -- was he not aware of the full context of it and went ahead with this as a part of the campaign? What would have possibly been the political conversation behind the scenes to say, let's do this?
FINNEY: It's so craven and disgusting that it is a failure of judgment on the part of his whole team. And this, to my mind, the closing argument should be, you can have a man who would put an ad on television about a woman who was raped, not just -- I mean, because her brother said she was raped by their stepfather for years and the mother let it go on before they were removed.
You want that guy for your governor making decisions for you or do you want the woman who endured that, protected her brother, became a doctor, and is now running for governor? That's who I want.
HAJJAR: Well, I also think that the political miscalculation goes deeper, too. Ohio is a state where we're talking about agriculture, we're talking about manufacturing. I went to Ohio earlier in the year. I was in Middletown and talking to voters about tariffs, about inflation. And this is a state where they need serious policy solutions. And so not only is this just the type of mudslinging we've unfortunately seen throughout this race, but it's disrespectful to voters who deserve, you know, a substantive policy debate in the closing days of this election, and that's not what they're getting.
COATES: Jeff, do you look at this and see -- I mean, is it going to break through in terms of the noise of other regular voters who are -- I mean, obviously, to Corinne's point and all of our points here, the idea of the substantive policy issues people wants answers to. But is this -- do they think somehow looking at other states and how there has been personal attacks made, whether it's Michigan in conversations about family members or in Texas about masculinity and beyond, do they see this in the same ilk?
MASON: I don't know. I mean, I think you're right to say that people have become desensitized. There are lots of things that President Trump said as a candidate in 2016 that many political watchers thought was going to be the end of his political career, and it did the opposite. It didn't hurt him at all. So, that is -- it is just a different political time right now.
But, to your point, I think the polls also show that voters care about issues, and they care about their pocketbooks, and that's the reason you see Democrats in many polls doing better than Republicans.
HAJJAR: I will just say, Trump in particular gets away with that more than others. People can't out-Trump Trump, and I don't think that Vivek Ramaswamy has or the campaign really has that mystique, I guess. So, I don't see it really paying off for him.
COATES: In a different state entirely, Abdul El-Sayed has featured prominently an area that people have been talking at, and he says, through Islamophobia or through criticisms of his faith, he has addressed the issue head-on. Listen.
[23:25:05]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
EL-SAYED: My name is Abdul. It means "servant." I pray every day. I reflect on my role in this life, on this earth, how we need it better than we found it, to serve God, to serve our neighbors. All across Michigan, families pray. They feel hopeless. Faith is a thing there's just too little of in Washington.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: When you look at this, Kurt, do you think this focus on faith, in particular, given the political journey in the last several months that El-Sayed has discussed, is this something that is going to be beneficial to Democrats at the polls?
BARDELLA: Yes. I mean, he's not the only person we're seeing invoke faith and religion in a positive way. We've seen James Talarico do that all the time in Texas.
COATES: Of course.
BARDELLA: I think for too long, Democrats surrendered faith, frankly, to the Republicans and no party has a monopoly on what it means to have faith and what it means to believe in God. And when I watch that ad, that could have been a Republican ad in any district talking about Christianity. We see it all the time.
The Republicans, when they invoke God and faith in tragedy, in times of not acting on policy but we need to come together and pray, no one bats an eye, no one attacks them politically, no one says, you know, what's your background there and do you care more about God than you do about the Constitution? They get none of that.
So, I think it's great that Democrats and these high-profile races are finally seizing that mantle, refusing to let Republicans have that monopoly on faith. It doesn't belong to any party. It belongs to everybody.
COATES: Why did they wait so long?
FINNEY: I don't know. I think they waited so long. I think the point is, you know, it has become so clear that the tactic is to other him and to use his faith against him. And I thought it was just as he did over the weekend. They tried the same thing with JFK.
I happen to be Catholic. We used to be very verboten to be Catholics. We used to be wacky Catholics, right? Mitt Romney, when he ran for president, his campaign contemplated whether or not he should do a speech, talking about what it is to be a Mormon because, at the end of the day, it's about your values.
So, it's a way to bring people back in that says, look, we may worship differently, but we still are people who are led by our values and we're led by our faith, and that is a shared ground.
SHEDD: I think it's important, though, to remember that yes, there are some people on the fringe that are absolutely, you know, their attacks are based on the fact that he is Muslim, but not for everybody, and it's because of the answers that he has given on national security questions that should be very easy to answer, right? Like, do you condemn terrorists?
FINNEY: He did condemn the Muslim brotherhood.
SHEDD: It took him a long time to do it. He has been equivocating on this for a very long time on way too many issues. The answer he gave about the synagogue attack was offensive. The fact that he did not want to condemn the ayatollah who, by the way, is responsible for killing Americans. I mean, it's just one thing after another after another. That opens him up to criticism.
So, just as much as it should be easy to criticize that Amy Acton ad and condemn it and say that's bad, it should be easy to condemn terrorists, and he hasn't done that.
FINNEY: But why is it that the Muslim guy is the one who keeps getting asked the question? Let's ask all the white candidates in all the races the same question. That's the point he has been trying to make. Why are we asking the brown guy?
SHEDD: He's making them about his religion, but he's not. He can't answer these basic questions.
FINNEY: He should answer them.
COATES: Well, you know what? I interviewed him on Sunday. Go to my Instagram, @thelauracoates. The whole interview is right there. You decide for yourselves. Everyone, stand by.
Up next, as Trump fuels fears that he's pushing Ukraine to surrender, we have news on how Elon Musk may have put the Ukrainian military at a disadvantage. Remember, the panel is here to answer your questions tonight. Just send them to us at cnn.com/engagepolitics. We're answering right now.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:30:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: You know, there is a significant new report from "The Wall Street Journal" tonight. It says Elon Musk personally ordered the slowdown of a critical military-grade version of Starlink that the very technology Ukrainian forces rely on for survival on the front lines. A source told the journal, Musk and President Trump discussed the plan before the switch was flipped, but other U.S. officials claim that Musk acted entirely on his own.
Musk and Trump have both denied any involvement in this, but it raises a key question: How could a private citizen execute an order of this magnitude unilaterally? Well, some experts have suggested it would be unlikely for the Pentagon not to have at least been aware, which is why lawmakers, they want answers.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. BRIAN FITZPATRICK (R-PA): If it is in fact Mr. Musk that ordered this, that is likely a violation of the law. There's got to be consequences, Kaitlan. The executive branch of government does not have a dime of their own money in their own right. The taxpayer money is sent to them through the legislative branch, and there needs to be financial consequences to any agency or any agency head that had any part in this.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: My panel is back with me, and you are part of my panel asking questions. We just got one on this very topic. Karen, it came out.
FINNEY: Yes. The question was, why is no one talking about how Elon Musk owns three quarters of the satellites around the planet and has the ability to control all internet? Dominance in this category is inevitable, and E.M. can have control that is dangerous.
[23:35:02]
I mean, I think the point is, "The Wall Street Journal" story makes people ask these kinds of questions and say, wait a second, this guy has so much power and control of our communication systems and may have actually impacted an outcome in this war.
So, it's a great question, and I basically said I actually think it's going to get a lot more attention now that this story is out and because, as we saw over the weekend, there was an incident with No Kings having their Instagram account apparently with a glitch, according to Meta. I can tell you the lawyers are not buying that and there are legal drafts being briefed as we speak because people are concerned. So, it just raises the concern level on these things.
COATES: I mean, this, the contact, this happened days after the president publicly warned Ukraine not to hit Russian refineries because of gas prices, which is, you all know, a major midterm issue. And meanwhile, Musk has spent more than $275 million in the midterms and his company, SpaceX, we were talking about it, holds billions in U.S. defense contracts. I mean, competitive interest comes to mind for people.
HAJJAR: But the president is also making a strategic miscalculation here. I mean, the Russians are the ones who are attacking civilian infrastructure, and that is what Ukraine is responding to.
So, if the president actually wanted to address the fuel prices issue, he wouldn't be playing nice and cozying up to the Russians, who cannot be appeased into good behavior. They've already proven that. The president floated this sort of energy infrastructure ceasefire, and the Russians kept on, you know, doing what they're doing anyways. So, if anything, this is making him look extremely weak.
COATES: Any insight as to whether the administration will run any interference for Musk, knowing that Democrats have already signaled that they're going to try to investigate if they are able to retake the House, at the very least?
MASON: I haven't gotten any signal of that, but the president has certainly denied it, as we've already reported, and so has Musk. But Democrats, if they win the House, this will probably be added to their list of things they want to probe.
COATES: Appetite for it?
BARDELLA: Yes. I mean, I think you're going to see the House Armed Services Committee under Democrat rule make this agenda item number one, likely, and find out. OK, you're saying one thing, he's saying another. We're going to find out and issue subpoenas to every single person at DOD who has any touchpoint with Elon Musk and find out who knew what, when, what emails, what text messages, what conversations were happening, did it reach the Oval Office. If it did, what were those conversations. We're going to make Donald Trump have to issue executive privilege to try to hide from that, and that in itself will tell us the full story about really what's going on here.
COATES: Republicans care about this issue as well. They want to know.
They're often hawkish in a lot of these issues and have campaigned on such.
SHEDD: So, first, I do want to say, and I'm not saying it's not true, but this is one of many different, often conflicting reports that have come out about who was responsible for this. So, this is one report. Reuters has said it comes from the White House. There has been different kind of accusations here.
But we need to get to the bottom of this, and not because of Ukraine. I'm a big, strong supporter of Ukraine. I care about Ukraine. But to me, this isn't about that. This is about U.S. national security. The United States uses Starlink for our military.
So, either, one, there's some kind of a glitch in the system. Russia has hacked into it or some nefarious actor. We need to know that in order to protect our own troops.
Option two is there's some defense contractor that has gone rogue here and is disregarding the, you know, instructions from the White House and from the Department of War, and doing what he wants. And, again, that is very, like, concerning for me as well because what happens if he doesn't agree with, you know, another decision that's made by the U.S. military or by a future administration?
Or the third, is that somebody within the U.S. national security infrastructure? The president said it's not him. The secretary of war said it's not him. The secretary of state said it's not him. So, there's some rogue, deep state actor right now wandering around in the Trump administration that is disregarding what the commander-in-chief has said, and all of that should be concerning to Americans. So, we need to get to the bottom of this for our own national security. We use Starlink.
BARDELLA: This is very --
COATES: I was going to say, or someone who's telling you they have nothing to do with it is not being forthcoming. We have no idea. I'm just saying.
BARDELLA: You know what to say.
COATES: I know. It happens.
BARDELLA: If a defense contractor getting taxpayer dollars from a taxpayer contract is disregarding the orders of the secretary of war, the White House, they would lose that contract tomorrow, they would lose access to U.S. government resources. That would be the end of it, and that's what should happen. If that doesn't happen, if they're not doing that right now, then it tells you there's something else going on here.
COATES: My point, I'm being facetious, but this is why credibility is so impactful. We know how important it is, that, you know, if people think they can't believe in whatever institution, then they will have the type of questions and the press will be here.
Everyone, stand by. We've got a lot more, including your answers to your burning questions in just a moment. But first, can a Democrat win in deep red Arkansas? My next guest is seen as the party's best chance in years to make history in a district they hope to flip.
[23:40:02]
You're going to meet him, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: All right, there are long shots, then there are Hail Marys, and Democrats are hoping to land a Hail Mary pass in, of all places, Arkansas. In the state's second congressional district, incumbent Republican French Hill is facing a spirited campaign from Democratic nominee Chris Jones. Some polls suggest this race is closer than one would think. And if Jones wins, he would be the first Black person to represent Arkansas in Congress.
And Chris Jones joins me now. Chris, welcome. We know you from running for governor in 2022 against Sarah Huckabee Sanders. You did not succeed in that election. Why do you believe this time is different?
CHRIS JONES, ARKANSAS U.S. HOUSE CANDIDATE: Well, thanks for having me on, Laura.
[23:45:00]
There are a couple things that matter now. One, the context is very different. I was not running in a completely chaotic Trump administration with a completely feckless Congress at the helm with him. So, that's different. The other piece is that now, having run statewide, I have name I.D. and infrastructure across the district that's making a difference. And then the third piece I think that matters is that there are a lot of strong candidates on the down ballot that are helping to lift all of us up.
COATES: It's surprising to many people, given the demographics and given the fact that it's 2026, that you would be the first Black person to ever represent Arkansas in Congress. What would that mean to you?
JONES: You know, it would mean a lot. In fact, you know, Arkansas is the only formerly confederate state that has never sent a Black person to Congress and has never elected a Black person statewide. It's also historic in that Congress itself has never had an ordained minister rocket scientist in Congress. So, that would be a first as well.
But at the end of the day, those historic firsts are only important to the extent that it eases the pain on people's lives right now and that it shifts and changes the future that they're facing.
COATES: Ordained minister rocket scientist is quite the flex. I'm just going to put that pause, mic drop for a second. I think that's very unique, sir. Very unique. You know, a lot of people assumed efforts to gut the Voting Rights Act, and I do mean gut it along with redistricting, would mean that the south would not even be in play this cycle. So, tell me, what are you seeing on the ground that might, in fact, change that perception?
JONES: Well, first of all, across the board, everyone is feeling the pain at the pump. That's a result of these tariffs and this war of choice in Iran. That is impacting across the board, and it hurts.
The second thing is Arkansas actually redistricted four years ago, gerrymandered. Let me be clear. They took 25,000 Black voters, Democratic voters out of the district, and brought in 25,000 votes. There are three different congressional districts in Little Rock alone.
So, they've done it, and we've worked in those lines, but what we're seeing is a massive pushback across the board from this effectively cheating that the Republicans are trying to do.
COATES: And, of course, the idea of having in one city those three different blocks obviously trying to dilute is the assumption there, dilute the voting strength of particular voting blocks. Used to be protected --
JONES: I will say that they're trying it, but on -- I will say they're it, but on day one and day two, we saw historic turnout in this general election, to the tune of the largest county in the district almost doubled its turnout from the previous four years ago. So, we're seeing people actually show up to vote.
COATES: Trump, he won your district by about 15-percentage points in 2024. So, you, of course, may need GOP voters to get you over the hump. How do you appeal to them?
JONES: You know, it's pretty straightforward. They voted for him, even though I didn't. They voted for him because they did not want any more foreign wars. He took them to war, and Congress didn't stop it. They voted for him because he said he was going to bring prices down on day one. He has increased prices through tariffs, and Congress didn't do anything to stop it. They voted for him to release the Epstein files. He hasn't done it, and Congress hasn't done anything to push him to do it. So, in this environment, they're saying, what are we getting for our vote? And they're ready for a change.
COATES: Gas prices, very important across the nation. They continue to burn a hole in the pocket of drivers in Arkansas and, of course, all across the country. Your opponent suggested people only want lower gas prices because of politics. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. FRENCH HILL (R-AR), ARKANSAS U.S. HOUSE CANDIDATE: I'm not on the side of Iran. And I feel like, in this particular election campaign, many people apparently are in order to have a short-term political advantage about fuel prices. None of us like high fuel prices. None of us want a war in the Gulf.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: What's your response to that, Chris?
JONES: Well, look, none of us want high fuel prices, but there's one person who could have voted to end the tariffs. And six different times, he voted to continue them. In fact, one time, the vote was 2-12 to 2-12. His one vote could have shifted things.
So, you know, he can talk all day he wants about wanting something, but his vote shows that he's actually OK with the war and OK with tariffs, and Arkansans are saying that's enough.
COATES: Fourteen days from now, we will see the final verdict. Chris Jones, thank you for joining.
JONES: Thanks for having me.
COATES: Still ahead, your turn to drive the conversation. The panel is back and ready to continue answering your questions. Send them to us at cnn.com/engagepolitics.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:50:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: We've been getting so many great questions from all of you guys tonight. So, let's start answering them, shall we? Here is the first one. Why won't Republican candidates just tell Trump that he is a liability on the campaign trail? Kurt?
BARDELLA: Because Trump is a child, and they don't want to hurt his feelings and risk a tantrum on social media.
COATES: OK. There we go. From Mississippi to Minnesota to campus, the status quo is the common factor Americans are voting against. Karen, does this hurt Democrats as much as it hurts Republicans?
FINNEY: So, I look at it less as about the status quo as people are trying to figure out, can I trust you to fight for me to deliver? And when you are the status quo, it is -- or in office, it's harder to separate yourself, as Republicans are finding out from that question we just had.
[23:55:03]
It's hard to do that. So, I think, ultimately, it's going to matter whether or not you can deliver, because I think it doesn't matter, are you new or are you status quo? If you don't deliver, you lose the trust of the voters. COATES: All right. Another question. Why are political ads not subject to fact checking before they are allowed on air? I'll take this one. You know, political speech is kind of the highest level that the court will assign to being able to have First Amendment protection because you can't really have a court weighing in on the subjectivity or the accuracy without silencing the public debate. So, that's part of the reason.
Also, the defamation law is that if you have invited yourself into the public square or public scrutiny, you have to prove that actual malice. So, it's a little bit harder to do all of those things.
A Democratic blue tsunami in 2026: How could it reshape the 2028 presidential election? Jeff, why don't you take that one?
MASON: Well, number one, it would give Democrats a chance to show they can govern and what they would do in terms of their governing priorities, and that will either hand a bunch of material to Democratic presidential candidates to highlight or a bunch of material to Republican presidential candidates to criticize.
COATES: What do you think, Carine? You're nodding.
HAJJAR: Yes, I completely agree. I mean, Democrats have struggled to articulate sort of a guiding message. And there's still a lot of infighting. DSA candidates are still, you know, in the chat. So, we'll see what's going to happen going forward. I think there's going to be a lot more infighting.
BARDELLA: It's about who wins and where they win. If someone wins in Michigan or Texas, for instance, that's going to reshape the map, too.
FINNEY: Don't forget the governors, by the way.
COATES: Yes.
FINNEY: It's not just about Congress, it's about the governors.
SHEDD: The biggest thing, too, is if they take all of this too far, if they don't come in and govern like they should do and have proven actual results, I think that that hurts them in the long run. If they make this into nothing but just investigating Trump, that hurts them in 2028.
COATES: All right. How about this question? Why is the Democratic pool of candidates always characterized as moving leftward when those candidates are not proven to win general elections? Karen, why don't you take that?
FINNEY: You know, the leftward thing is a spin. I mean, four DSA candidates won their House primaries, 36 new Democrats, centrists won, six faith leaders won their primaries and are running. So, if we do the math right there, I would not say the Democratic Party is moving to the left, I would say we are a big-tent party and the country is electing candidates who represent them. COATES: All right. Here's another question. Do you think that Democrats are ready to counter the inevitable bogus voter fraud claims that are going to come out of Trump's mouth in a few weeks? Carine?
HAJJAR: Well, I'm sure they're preparing. But three things they might look to, inflation numbers, gas prices over the last year, and then a clip of, you know, surprisingly circumspect Trump, couple of this, saying himself that presidents and the ruling party always struggle in midterm elections.
COATES: There's a reality there. OK, how about this one? What happens if the Dems take the House and the GOP keeps the Senate? Will both parties put aside politics and bring civility to government? Jeff?
(LAUGHTER)
MASON: Going with no. But what I would say to that broader question is it would be a gift to President Trump to at least hold on to power in one of those houses. And if he keeps the Senate, if the Republicans keep the Senate, that will certainly blunt the investigations and the momentum that Democrats would have if they won the House.
COATES: I was hoping for some civility. That would be nice, right? OK, well, how about this? When candidates completely bypass the debate stage, does it actually hurt their turnout or has the traditional televised debate lost its impact? Why don't you take that one, Leslie?
SHEDD: I do not think that debates matter anymore. I love them. I wish they did. I think that they're important. But at the end of the day, I just don't think that voters are watching debates on their local T.V. stations. If you're a really good debater, do your debate because you can clip that up and put it on social media. If you're not a good debater, don't do a debate.
BARDELLA: And that's why debates matter. It's not about what actually happens that night on that stage on that local T.V. station. It's the clips that play and get tens of millions of views after that can elevate someone, like we've seen with Jon Ossoff in Georgia, or it can give you a really cringe moment, like we saw Darline Graham have in her primary.
COATES: Let's open this last question up. Which Senate race do you think has the chance for a surprise and isn't getting enough attention? Who wants to take it?
SHEDD: So, I don't have a Senate race, but going back to the debate, the attorney general race in New York is incredibly interesting to me. If you haven't seen the candidate there, her name is Saritha Komatireddy. She is incredibly impressive. She just did a debate with Letitia James and wiped the floor with her, and a lot of the clips from it went absolutely viral.
So, that would be one where, at the very least, I think she can overperform significantly there, and I'll be interested to see what happens. FINNEY: I have to take a point of personal privilege because Tish James is my cousin, and she's going to win because she kicks ass and delivers for the people of New York State. Sorry, I do have a very biased opinion, though. I'll admit that.
COATES: So, Karen says, the floor was not wiped (ph).
(LAUGHTER)
[00:00:00]
Thank you, everyone, so much. Remember, you can stream my show live or watch on-demand any time with an "All Access" subscription. Scan the Q.R. code on your screen or go to cnn.com/watch to learn more. I'm coming up on Instagram live to talk to you all about more questions in a moment. And here comes Elex Michaelson with "The Story Is."
