Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live Event/Special

Republicans Characterize No Kings Protests against President Trump as Anti-American; President Trump Promises Argentina $20 Billion Bailout If Trump's Preferred Candidate Wins Upcoming Election; President Trump Confirms He Authorized CIA to Conduct Covert Operations Inside Venezuela; Vice President J.D. Vance States Young Republicans Caught Using Racial and Homophobic Slurs in Group Chat are Kids that Should Not have Lives Ruined Because of It; Some American CEOs Warning U.S. Economy Heading for Recession Due to Immigration Crackdowns and Tariffs. Aired 10-11a ET.

Aired October 18, 2025 - 10:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ABBY PHILLIP, CNN ANCHOR: Today, Americans flood the streets to avoid the road to royalty.

DONALD TRUMP, (R) U.S. PRESIDENT: They're referring to me as a king. I'm not a king.

PHILLIP: But as they flex the First Amendment, Republicans flex a talking point.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Hate America rally.

PHILLIP: Also, America First suddenly feels second. The CIA is in Venezuela and the U.S. is bailing out Argentina.

TRUMP: I'm with this man because his philosophy is correct.

PHILLIP: But MAGA is not buying it.

REP. MARJORIE TAYLOR GREENE, (R-GA): What are we doing? We're buying out and doing a buyout with Argentina?

PHILLIP: Also, a group of young Republicans joked about slavery, rape, and gas chambers. But for the vice president, it's just another episode of "Kids Say the Darndest Things."

J.D. VANCE, (R) VICE PRESIDENT: But the reality is that kids do stupid things.

PHILLIP: And a CEO warns that a black swan event is coming for Donald Trump's economy that will impact your food and your jobs.

Here in the studio, Ana Navarro, Tim Parrish, Miles Taylor, and Lydia Moynihan. It's the weekend. Join the conversation at a "TABLE FOR FIVE". (END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIP: Hi everyone. I'm Abby Phillip in New York.

Now, this will certainly be one crowd size that gets Donald Trump's attention. Today across America, thousands upon thousands say they're protesting the president's actions and speaking up for the First Amendment. Organizers call it No Kings, accusing Trump of acting like a monarch. Republicans all week, though, have chosen to call it something pretty different.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. MIKE JOHNSON, (R-LA) HOUSE SPEAKER: Hate America rally.

REP. STEVE SCALISE, (R-LA) HOUSE MAJORITY LEADER: Hate America rally.

JOHNSON: Hate America rally.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We call it the hate America rally.

SCOTT BESSENT, TREASURY SECRETARY: The farthest left, the hardest core, the most unhinged in the Democratic Party.

SEN. ROGER MARSHALL, (R-KS): This will be a Soros paid for protest where his professional protesters show up.

JOHNSON: It's all the pro-Hamas wing and the, you know, the Antifa people. They're all coming out.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIP: The rallies also produce a noteworthy split screen. The government is still shut down, and not only is there no end in sight, but neither side is even talking to each other. In fact, the House isn't in session right now. And while federal workers aren't getting their paychecks, over at the White House, Trump hosted a fancy dinner in honor of donors to his $250 million ballroom.

I can't figure out, and Lydia, maybe you can help me with this, why all of a sudden is this No Kings rally so triggering to Republicans? There was one before, and it kind of passed almost without much notice, at least among Republicans. What is it about this one that is so problematic?

LYDIA MOYNIHAN, CORRESPONDENT, "NEW YORK POST": Bear in mind, no one is challenging anyone's right to protest. But you mentioned there was a previous No Kings protest. Somebody actually died because there weren't any safety precautions that were taken. Somebody brought a gun and was shot. So I think Republicans are worried about the safety of protesters both on the right and the left who are involved with this.

And now there's questions about who's pushing this. We know that Soros is funneling money that's pushed this. We know that the Communists for America are involved with this. And so I think there are real concerns about how this is going to go. And bear in mind, many of these are the same people who have been leading the anti ICE protests that have, in some cases turned violent.

PHILLIP: So what's wrong with -- even if George Soros were funding it, what's wrong with that? I mean, this is America. He's not allowed to fund a protest?

MOYNIHAN: You are absolutely allowed to protest. But bear in mind, this is stemming in part from an ideology that's challenging the duly elected president.

PHILLIP: I mean, again, what is wrong with that? I mean, what is the problem?

MOYNIHAN: Bear in mind, no one is saying this shouldn't happen. People are allowed to protest freely.

PHILLIP: Yes, I guess that's the part.

MOYNIHAN: -- Republicans to say.

PHILLIP: I'm just not -- I'm just not understanding why all of a sudden it's you know, traitorous to go out in the streets and protest the president when that's, in fact, what you're allowed to do in this country.

TIM PARRISH, CONSERVATIVE STRATEGIST: Yes. No one, again, no one -- I want to reiterate, no one is challenging the idea that people can go peacefully gather and protest. That's not an issue. What we are saying is we want people to do so peacefully. We don't want them to burn things down. We don't want someone to get shot on the street.

The last time they had this protest, there was the military parade, if you remember, that was happening. So it kind of fell on deaf ears. It didn't get covered as much.

But yes, people can go protest. People can do whatever they want. But when you trace the dollars and you trace the support, it does go back to some left extremist groups, Antifa, pro-Hamas groups that are in fact putting this on.

[10:05:03]

PHILLIP: There's been no evidence of that, by the way.

MOYNIHAN: There actually is. There's federal reports suggesting that maybe they may be linked to it.

MILES TAYLOR, FORMER DHS CHIEF OF STAFF, FIRST TRUMP ADMINISTRATION: Wait, wait, wait, time out. You said no one is challenging their right to protest. And yet what I heard from Republican leaders this week is that the protesters were terrorists. I heard them constantly, from the speaker of the House to U.S. senators to Trump cabinet members, equating the protesters with Antifa. Now, those would be bad words in any other circumstance because it's First Amendment protected speech and saying it's terrorism, that's a morally wrong thing to do. But this is worse than that, because just last month, this administration designated Antifa as a domestic terrorist organization. PARRISH: Do you disagree with that?

MOYNIHAN: Good.

TAYLOR: Yes, I do. They are equating protesters with terrorists. And by equating protesters with terrorists, they're creating a chilling effect, and they're opening the aperture to investigate them. I'll tell you why. NSPM-seven, National Security Presidential Memorandum seven that was passed by the White House, issued by the White House last month, says that people who directly or indirectly support those domestic terrorist organizations can be investigated. By that standard, they're saying that protesters and people who organized protests were Antifa might show up could be investigated.

And then this week, the administration took control or made moves to take control of the criminal division of the IRS. This would be like if George W. Bush had said Code Pink was Al Qaeda, or people protesting the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were associated with the Islamic state.

PARRISH: I think that's a stretch. I think that people who do these protests, that do them peacefully, and they make their voices known, is OK. When you get to the place where you're burning stuff down and you're destroying cities, that's another issue. And when you trace back and you look at who supports these groups, who is organizing these events, it's absolutely linked to people who've done the things that I just mentioned.

ANA NAVARRO, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Let me just say, I'm probably -- I don't know, at this table. I actually went to the No Kings rally in June. To me, they were organically created. People chose to go because they are unhappy with what's happening in this country. I think there's much more unhappiness today even than there was back in June.

What I saw was people of all creeds, all ages, people with different backgrounds, all coming together and exercising their First Amendment right of assembly and of freedom of speech. I think that at a time when people feel that the government -- some people in this country feel the government is bullying them into silence and fear, this is a way of showing that we are not afraid. I did not go because Soros told me to go. I did not go because the communists told me to go. I went as an American to exercise my rights. I didn't see any of the things that you all are suggesting.

MOYNIHAN: If you were really fearful about fascism, you would not be allowed to protest. That's the irony in all of this, is that people are allowed to demonstrate.

PHILLIP: That's totally true.

MOYNIHAN: Republicans are 100 percent OK with that. That kind of undermines the whole point. You have signs that say Trump is a nazi.

PHILLIP: So I think you're so right that --

NAVARRO: By the way --

PHILLIP: -- the fact of protesting is a demonstration of people's rights, in a democracy. But you just said Republicans have no problem with it, and yet they've spent the entire week demonizing --

MOYNIHAN: There were like four soundbites. Sean Duffy, by the way, I actually have a quote from another Trump cabinet member who said, I'm all about free speech. I'm all about protests. It's the great American way. I'm concerned about who is paying for it and who's organizing it. Bear in mind this is happening in a moment where there has been an increase in violence against the rightwing.

PHILLIP: Hold on one second. You're jumping all over the place on this one.

All I'm saying is there has been a concerted effort, and we played a lot of people, and we probably could have played even more, demonizing people who decide to come out into the streets. And I don't -- the other part of this, because I'm going to play what Ted Cruz said about the Soros of it all, I don't understand what the leap is between the fact that the protests are happening and the idea that it's going to produce riots. Here's Ted Cruz.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. TED CRUZ, (R-TX): Follow the money, cut off the money. And you look at this No Kings rally, and there's considerable evidence that George Soros and his network is behind funding these rallies, which may well be riots all across the country. And Soros is writing the check.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIP: So, OK, he says cut off the money. This is a free country. If you want to fund a protest and a rally, I would argue, and I'm sure you would agree, that you should be able to do that, right? But the idea that there are going to be riots, you also said that. Where is the evidence of that?

PARRISH: Well, I mean, you go back and you look in the past, what we've seen. When we've seen some of these stories -- and I'm with you, I don't mind that George Soros. He can spend his money however he wants to. This is America. If he wants to fund rallies and protests, do it. But what we have seen is we've seen crates of bricks and rocks and things be set aside. We have seen protests get out of hand. These protests, these type protests have --

PHILLIP: For what. What have they been set aside for?

PARRISH: For people to pick them up and throw them at police.

[10:10:00]

PHILLIP: Where? Where?

PARRISH: Come on, Abby. We've seen -- (CROSS TALK)

PHILLIP: I want us to just -- I want us to just talk about the issue at hand here, because I'm asking you, what evidence do you have of the No Kings rallies being set up for violence? And you're talking about perhaps some isolated incidents around ICE facilities. I'm asking about the No Kings protests, which are -- look at the map, 2,500 rallies planned in all 50 states all across the country. Can you give me evidence that there is a plot to cause violence and destruction as a result of these?

PARRISH: Look, I would hope that when these rallies happen that there is no violence. But what we've seen in the past is we have absolutely not only seen evidence and intelligence, but what we've actually seen is people carry out attacks, they destroy property. They go to these cache of weapons and bricks that they.

PHILLIP: You're mixing incidents.

PARRISH: It's the same groups, it's the same exact groups.

PHILLIP: It's not. Hold on. It's not. And I do think that this is -- you can't you can't talk out of one side of your mouth about this being a free country where you're allowed to protest, and then with the other side of your mouth say that you're going to guilt by association -- and I don't even know if the association is real, by the way, but guilt by association any American who decides to go out and protest their government if there are maybe other people somewhere in the country that might show up who are, you know, have common cause.

People have a right to protest. Those people who show up at No Kings may not have been the people at the ICE rally, so how can you blame them or use that example?

MOYNIHAN: Let me tell you --

PARRISH: I'm not blaming those people. What I'm saying is the past certainly informs us and how we should deal with these types of groups.

NAVARRO: Bear in mind, can I tell you what I what I witnessed on the ground when I was at the No Kings rally in June? I witnessed people who I think were instigators come into the crowd with signs and, you know, hats that would be offensive to the crowd that was there for the purpose of baiting people into having --

PHILLIP: Pro-Trump people?

NAVARRO: Like, I think they were instigators. I have no evidence for that, but I think it's very strange that somebody would go to try to do that in the --

(CROSS TALK)

NAVARRO: I am telling you, I am telling you. I am telling you what I witnessed.

MOYNIHAN: OK, OK. And we are telling you what we've witnessed.

(CROSS TALK)

MOYNIHAN: In L.A., in Portland, in Washington, D.C.

NAVARRO: Were you there?

MOYNIHAN: I have to physically be on the ground? I can't look at multiple news clips.

TAYLOR: Lydia, Lydia asked a question earlier, and I think it's important to address it, which was, I mean this legitimately, are people afraid to go because what they've heard from the right. I will tell you firsthand, a lot of people I've talked to have said, I'm worried about going because I'm seeing all of this stuff about retribution out of the White House. Tim knows it, Lydia knows it, Ana knows it, everyone at this table knows and that there's -- let me finish, Tim, that there's a revenge campaign coming out of the White House. Ordinary Americans are scared to exercise their First Amendment rights because they're being told that they are terrorists. Do Ana I look like people who are going to go engage in violent protests.

PARRISH: That is --

TAYLOR: I will show up -- one second, Tim. I'm finishing. I will show up at the -- I will show up at the rallies today, not because -- Tim. Tim --

PARRISH: -- and causing violence against people.

TAYLOR: I will show up at those rallies today not because I hate America or I'm going to engage in violence. I committed my life and career to protecting you, you, you, and you from terrorist attacks, from cyberattacks. And I'm showing up because I love America. And I don't want a president to turn it into a dumpster fire.

PARRISH: I did the same thing. And you're talking about talk, that you people feel threatened because of talk. We're talking about action from the left that has gone completely unhinged with violence.

TAYLOR: It's not just talk.

PARRISH: And in Arlington County.

TAYLOR: The president of the United states accused me of treason and issued an executive order --

PARRISH: -- attacking a restaurant. We've seen that happen. So you're talking about talk.

PHILLIP: OK, all right, that's it for us.

MAGA is wondering why Donald Trump is so focused on the problems abroad when there are plenty back home in the United States. Plus, they joked about slavery, rape, and gas chambers, and yet, Vice

President Vance is defending the racist text chains by young Republicans. We'll discuss that.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:18:35]

PHILLIP: Welcome back. The America First crowd had another bad week as the shutdown drags on and President Trump fires thousands of federal workers as punishment. He promised Argentina a $20 billion bailout if his preferred candidate wins, a move that many American farmers say is a slap in the face. Trump even admitted it, it doesn't help the United States. And as he escalates his strikes on boats from Venezuela, he confirmed that he authorized the CIA to conduct covert operations inside that nation.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, (R) U.S. PRESIDENT: Number one, they have emptied their prisons into the United States of America. And the other thing are drugs. We have a lot of drugs coming in from Venezuela.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIP: You know, for a president who ran on this sort of anti- interventionist, he's actually argued against this sort of regime change, nation building policy. And yet that's kind of what we're seeing. In addition to that, also a bailout of a foreign country at the expense of American farmers. I don't know, I mean, is it surprising?

TAYLOR: Well, it's a really weird week for him to disclose covert operations in a foreign country, a week in which his administration is prosecuting the former national security advisor for allegedly leaking classified information. But I'll put that to the side for a second.

What worries me, Abby, is right now, the administration is not being held accountable for these strikes in Venezuela. I warned three years ago that White House officials wanted to go engage, and they asked us about whether they could do missile strikes against unarmed individuals in boats in the western hemisphere.

[10:20:02]

OK, that set off alarm bells because our lawyers said that would be inconsistent with the rules of engagement and the laws of war.

And right now, I've not seen any information out of this White House that what they are doing is consistent with the rules of engagement and the laws of war. And in fact, the people who have been pushing back in the military, we found out this week, are getting pushed out of the Pentagon.

NAVARRO: Let me tell you, I've never been a CIA operative. But it strikes me as a little weird that if you are going to authorize covert CIA operations in a foreign nation for regime change purposes, you would be announcing it and confirming it in the press. That's just, to me, that makes no sense.

And it reminded me, actually, of Trump's first term when John Bolton was holding, was seen holding a notepad that talked about the number of troops that were on the Colombian border, and it drove Venezuelans to think that that there was going to be regime change coming from the United States imminently.

Look, let's let me just say this --

MOYNIHAN: I've got to jump in here.

NAVARRO: Nicolas Maduro is one of the worst people that has ever, ever lived. OK? And he stole an election. That election was won by the Venezuelan opposition. Nicolas Maduro is a cruel dictator.

What I don't understand is how the how Donald Trump, on the one hand, can be saying, because Nicolas Maduro, that I agree with, is a horrible dictator, we're going to do regime change. But at the same time, he is removing temporary protective status from hundreds of thousands of Venezuelans who have fled that cruel, oppressive dictatorship.

PHILLIP: So real quick, I mean, do you -- you're no fan of Maduro, but --

NAVARRO: No, I detest him.

PHILLIP: Right, yes, to put it mildly. I mean.

NAVARRO: And Ortega and anybody --

PHILLIP: If there were a regime change effort, would you back it?

NAVARRO: I'm very torn on this because I've actually gone through regime change, right? I was born in Nicaragua. I saw Carter influence the ouster of Somoza in Nicaragua and bring in the Sandinistas. I want to see my Venezuelan brothers and sisters live in freedom. I don't know what comes of a regime change from the United States like we saw, we saw in the 60s and the 70s and the 80s. A lot of times those things did not work out.

PHILLIP: That is very fraught.

MOYNIHAN: I've got to jump in here because I feel like were living in the twilight zone. We're talking about that this was a bad week for America First policy. Trump brokered a ceasefire deal in the Middle East. Hamas put down weapons. The hostages were released. And we're not going to talk about that? That is the biggest foreign policy victory that we have seen in this entire administration, and that deserves more mention than Argentina or Venezuela or any other country.

PHILLIP: Just let me note, that happened a week ago, and we talked about it then. But to the to the question of Trump running as an America First candidate and engaging in military strikes that he didn't go to Congress to authorize. He claims that there is a war going on between the United States and the cartels. He also is bailing out a foreign country. How does that strike you as a conservative?

PARRISH: Well, I would say I would say that there is absolutely --

PHILLIP: Hold on.

MOYNIHAN: America First, America First does not mean an isolationist policy. America First is putting the interests of Americans ahead of any other nation. And sometimes that does mean getting involved, but it means having their best interests first and foremost and not making deals that don't make sense for us. But yes, sometimes there is international intervention.

PHILLIP: But that means taking $20 billion and bailing out Argentina when farmers are actually suffering because Argentina is doing business with China and we are in a trade war with China, and they've stopped buying our soybeans. Then that $20 billion is, you know, a little over half of the cost of what it would take to extend the subsidies for millions of Americans whose health care costs are going go up. That's America First?

PARRISH: I think that -- Abby, I think that the comment you made that America is in a supposed war with the cartels, any family in this country who has lost someone in their family to fentanyl use would absolutely agree with President Trump that we are in --

PHILLIP: Sure, I understand that, but the reason I said it that way --

PARRISH: -- fact, at war with cartels. I would appreciate the president taking every action to stop the flow of drugs.

PHILLIP: The reason I said it that way is because 99 percent of the fentanyl that comes into this country comes from Mexico. It does not come from Venezuela. So if Trump is saying we are in a war against the cartels to stop drug trafficking, that war would be with the Mexican cartels, not with fishermen coming on boats out of Venezuela. So I'm just asking for a real justification that I think we ought to ask for every president when they start dropping bombs around the world for what is the actual reason? Do we actually know who these people are? Do we know that they're even Venezuelans? Because some of them reportedly were from other countries. And when we start bombing citizens of other countries, we don't want we don't want other countries bombing our citizens in international waters. So what are the rules of engagement?

PARRISH: I don't think that there are Americans bringing drugs from the United States into south America by boat, which is what we're seeing now.

[10:25:03]

But I want to address a few points you made. On the Mexican border, first of all, the president has designated several Mexican drug cartels as terrorists of our country. And there are special forces elements on the ground addressing.

PHILLIP: He's not bombing them.

PARRISH: He is -- well, because that's a little bit of a different scenario when you talk about bombing right next door in Mexico and what they're doing in Venezuela. But the president is actually taking action, decisive action. Many Americans appreciate it, certainly those families that have been impacted by fentanyl.

PHILLIP: Coming up, a racist and antisemitic text chain between young Republicans is exposed. But one of the top Republicans in the country is saying it's just kids being kids. We'll discuss that next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:30:00]

PHILLIP: It's a texting scandal that was already explosive enough. But then the vice president of the United States decided to weigh in. J.D. Vance defending the young Republicans involved in thousands of leaked messages joking about gas chambers, slavery, and rape.

And now, before you hear his response, just keep in mind "Politico" reports that they referred to black people as "monkeys," "watermelon people." One of them fantasized about raping their enemies, calling rape, quote, "epic." Another talked about sending political opponents into gas chambers to, quote, "watch them burn." And slurs were reportedly used more than 250 times, including racist and homophobic ones. And now here is J.D. Vance.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

J.D. VANCE, (R) VICE PRESIDENT: Grow up. I'm sorry. Focus on the real issues. Don't focus on what kids say in group chats. The reality is that kids do stupid things, especially young boys. They tell edgy, offensive jokes. Like, that's what kids do. And I really don't want us to grow up in a country where a kid telling a stupid joke, telling a very offensive, stupid joke, is cause to ruin their lives. And at some point, were all going to have to say, enough of this B.S.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIP: Many Republicans, including Vance, played what about whataboutism with the Democrats, pointing out a Virginia candidate's text talking about putting bullets into his opponent's head, and that is absolutely reprehensible. But Vance instinct to consistently insist that these guys who, by the way, are not kids, deserve second and third chances, that their lives don't deserve to be ruined as opposed to ever saying one word about why that should not be acceptable in the Republican Party is very interesting. It's a choice.

PARRISH: Yes. Abby, this is no excuse. This is absolutely reprehensible, abhorrent behavior. I totally agree, these were not just children. One of them is a sitting state senator. The governor of that state is actually called on that person to step down. Across the Republican Party, I've seen messages of folks saying, you've got to step down, you've got to resign. There's no room for this type of behavior in the Republican Party. Young Republican, older Republican, anywhere, otherwise.

And I agree that these weren't just kids. And even if it was kids, we should not be raising Americans to use this type of language against black people or people from the LGBTQ community or any of those groups. So this is absolutely, it's reprehensible behavior. And I'm disappointed in any leader who would make any excuse for this.

Now, I will say that what the vice president's point probably actually was in that soundbite was you have the text that you referenced in Virginia, and where's the equal anger coming out? When we saw the guy who is running to be the chief law enforcement officer of the commonwealth of Virginia, who didn't just say, put two bullets in in the speaker's head, but he said, I want to watch a woman's children die in her arms so that I can urinate on their graves. I think the vice president's point is, where's the equal anger at these college Republicans or these young Republicans that we have not seen in the Jay Jones scandal?

TAYLOR: What you just did in the first part of that was beautiful. That is what the president of the United States should have done. That's what the vice president should have done. And you're right, we should be universally condemning that language when it happens. I completely agree with you there.

I think a lot of people had wished the vice president did that, though. These aren't just words. I mean, there's people, whatever community they're from where there were those slurs, they're like, OK, well, that's the vice president of the United States condoning this.

PARRISH: I don't think he condoned that. I think that's a stretch to say that vice president --

PHILLIP: Hold on a second, why do you think that he did that? J.D. Vance knows that he has a long political future ahead. What is he looking at?

TAYLOR: I mean, unfortunately, I think he sees that this is what's happening in the party. That's the party he's got to appeal to.

When I came up in the Bush years, my butt would have been kicked out of the door if I had said anything like that in a group chat. I wouldn't have gotten another job in a Republican office. It was different then. It was different then because we talked about our principles.

And now people who used to be on the fringes of the conservative movement with me are now the core, and that's who he's got to appeal to. And he did excuse it. He said, grow up for focusing on this. I see those words, and I don't think we need to grow up. I think we need to say the people who said those things are the ones that need to grow up. That's the moral authority the vice president of the United States should have shown, rather than grooming young men to be little creeps by excusing that behavior.

PARRISH: But I want to be very clear. The vice president of the United States did not condone. That word "condone" was not --

MOYNIHAN: OK, he did not condone. I will add those people are being held accountable. They have been fired as they absolutely should. That is what we all agree on the right.

But my question is, why aren't we getting that same reaction, why aren't we getting that same reaction --

PHILLIP: Hold on a second. But J.D. Vance said the opposite of that. He said there's no need to ruin the lives of these individuals because of what they said. He came out against consequences. That's part of the problem. Yes, he didn't use the word "condone," but he said, don't punish them for this stuff because they just made a mistake because they're just kids. I mean that is what he said.

NAVARRO: The most ironic thing to me is, is that these are the same people who just last month in the wake of the horrible Charlie Kirk assassination, said that we should be on the lookout for anybody that made any comments against Charlie Kirk in social media and contact their employers and make sure that they lose their jobs.

[10:35:18]

There's people in foreign nations who I guess tweeted stuff or said things on social media whose U.S. visas have now been revoked or denied. And so it can't be consequences for thee, but not for me.

MOYNIHAN: Elsewhere, I will say on Twitter, J.D. Vance has basically tried to not excuse it because, again, these people have been held accountable, but condemn the fact that the media is only focused on a group chat when in reality, as you mentioned, the top law enforcement official, Jay Jones, said in a string of text messages he wants to watch children die. Why are we not talking about that? That is a man who the Democratic Party continues to back.

PHILLIP: I think this issue would probably come and gone. And, you know, the New York Republican Party, or New York Republicans are dissolving, essentially, the Young Republicans and reconstituting it because they do believe that there should be consequences here.

I think what has extended the life cycle of this story is the fact that the vice president of the United States saw it fit not once, but twice, not just in a social media post, but with his own mouth, to essentially say, this is not a big deal. And we don't need to punish these people because we are too reactive to criticism from the left.

And you're right, most regular people don't think that that's the moral of the story. But he chose to make it the moral of the story. That's why we're talking about it. I honestly think that we would have this would have been a story about a bunch of young Republicans that nobody knows. And it would have been, that's terrible. But J.D. Vance, his decision to get in there, that is what has made this a different kind of story.

TAYLOR: But do you know who could fix this right now? Who could fix this with a short and very compassionate statement would be the president. And my question would be, I mean, Tim, would you call on the president to condemn this?

PARRISH: I would call on all Republican leaders to condemn this.

TAYLOR: There we go.

PARRISH: And I think the further point is that we've got to bring down the temperature around this type of stuff. We also saw in Virginia, the speaker of the house went to the pulpit of a church on the Jay Jones incident and said move along. This is a nothingburger. They're trying to distract you. And so politicians on both sides of the aisle need to have the courage to say, this is bad, this is wrong. And I do. I call on all Republican leaders to say this is not what we stand for.

Look, the vice president of United States is the United States Marine like me. I know his values. He does not condone this. He doesn't believe that, that this is OK, that we should get away, that these guys should get away with it. And I bet that if he was asked about this, the vice president would agree that these people should be held accountable.

PHILLIP: He was asked about it and he said the opposite. I don't think.

(CROSS TALK)

PHILLIP: Let's not try to create a fantasyland when the reality is staring us in the face. He was asked about it, and he said, don't ruin these kids' lives. They are not kids. And yes, maybe there should be consequences.

NAVARRO: Most of them are in their 20s.

PHILLIP: And most other people have said that full stop. He didn't, OK? That actually happened. So just take it for what it is.

Coming up next, the president likes to tout the economy, but are some of Trump's policies the ones triggering the perfect storm of trouble ahead? We're going to debate that next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:43:15]

PHILLIP: CEOs across America have been warning about the red flags throughout the economy, but some are warning of a black swan event coming right for Donald Trump. An agriculture CEO says that American farmers are facing a labor shortage due to the president's deportations, and a technology CEO has a similar warning, saying that Trump's embrace of A.I. could backfire on creating jobs in America.

I think the big picture, Ana, is that they feel like this is an economy that's sort of hiding a lot of flaws on the inside, and we're not really seeing it because some of the top line numbers appear to make things seem mostly OK. But a combination of labor shortages, A.I., which is going to create a lot of unemployment, tariffs, that's already created a lot of instability. That's what's worrying people.

NAVARRO: The immigration crackdowns. Look, I live in Miami. We are ground zero for some of these deportations and rounding up of people. It is creating labor shortages. It is creating -- it is leaving homes abandoned, cars abandoned, whole communities right now that are not spending, going out and spending money. I continue to see the stock market defy what I see are very alarming signs in this economy. And I keep wondering, when is it going to catch up?

And you know what I wish? We are seeing like a tale of two different Trumps, right? The Trump, the statesman that we saw in Israel that was able to bring Hamas and Israel to the table and craft a peace deal. But why in the hell can't he use that same dealmaking prowess to get Democrats and Republicans at a table to craft an immigration deal, to craft a health care deal so that this country can have some financial security?

[10:45:12]

PHILLIP: There was a filing in the federal registrar this month that said this, "The near total cessation of the inflow of illegal aliens results in significant disruptions to production costs and threatening the stability of domestic food production and prices for U.S. consumers. Unless the department acts immediately to provide a source of stable and lawful labor, this threat will grow." So that is on top of grocery prices already being a dominant source of headache and inflation for American families. There's that.

And it's not an argument to say just continue to let undocumented immigrants in. But by not having a plan for the day after, that's what can cause a problem.

MOYNIHAN: Well, first, for context, I think since Trump got into office, we've been hearing that a recession is going to happen. And I think those tales are greatly overexaggerated because here we are, and we actually have a very strong economy. Inflation is being curbed. But there actually is a plan. There are H-2A visas that allow for temporary and seasonal migrants that are legal to come in and help fill these needs as needed.

But you know what every Trump voter says to this? This is exactly what I voted for. They don't want people basically coming in suppressing wages. They want the free market to take effect, and they want people to be paid a fair wage who are doing this kind of labor. And that's exactly what they voted for.

PHILLIP: So you're saying that they voted for there to not be workers in farms that pick their food and produce and process their meat, and those prices go up, or some of those companies go out of business? That's -- those are the consequences?

MOYNIHAN: Not illegal. They want legal migrants. And we have a program to do exactly that.

PHILLIP: That program has been around for a long time, and it's still not enough to meet the need for labor. MOYNIHAN: They know they can pay illegals a lot less. And so

businesses are taking that.

PHILLIP: I agree with -- I agree with you. But what I'm saying is that that is that program is not enough. If it were enough, we wouldn't be --

MOYNIHAN: Or, again, maybe you have greedy businesses who don't want to pay a fair wage.

NAVARRO: But here's the problem. Getting an H-2A visa takes a considerable amount of time. If you don't pick these crops today, they will rot. If you don't milk these cows today, they will probably die, get infections. All sorts of things can happen. And so there seems to be no plan for how to fill these gaps that are happening today in agriculture that have such an effect.

MOYNIHAN: And we were just fine. Before millions of illegal immigrants came into the U.S.

PARRISH: I think you said something very important. Yes, we have to have -- people still have to follow the law. They have to follow the process in how they come into the country. Yes, I agree, we need milk, we need meat, we need these things. But you have to follow the law.

And I think we should address the A.I. thing. The A.I. stuff is happening. There's a group out there, the National Artificial Intelligence Association, doing great work, talking about the American companies need to dominate the A.I. space. It's not going to get rid of jobs. It's going to keep America number one on something that is coming. That tidal wave is coming. And United States of America needs to be --

PHILLIP: I think A.I. is super important. I think it needs to be addressed. But you've got to be real. It is going to cost jobs. People are going to lose jobs as a result of this technology. They already are.

Next for us, the panel's unpopular opinions, what they are not afraid to say out loud.

First, a programing note for you. From Louis Armstrong to trombone shorty music is the heartbeat of New Orleans. Don't miss the next episode of "Soul of a City" tomorrow at 10:00 p.m. right here on CNN.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:53:34]

PHILLIP: We're back, and it's time for your unpopular opinion. So you each have 30 seconds to tell us yours. Miles, you're up first.

TAYLOR: OK, well Taylor Swift got a lot of grief --

PHILLIP: Her again. TAYLOR: -- about this new album, "The Life of a Showgirl." I will

admit, on first listen, I thought, this is junk. This is not very good. Most of the reviewers came out and said, this is junk. It's not very good. On repeat listens, like a lot of her albums, I will say the unpopular opinion is I think the album is kind of good. It's kind of catchy. There's some good songs on there. I didn't think so at first.

MOYNIHAN: Taylor Swift ages like fine wine. Like, every album gets better.

PARRISH: I have my friend is -- my friend is just screaming the Elizabeth Taylor part of the song where it just screams Elizabeth Taylor. He's just screaming that part.

TAYLOR: That song that I thought was junk. And now I was listening to it on the plane.

PHILLIP: All right, Lydia.

MOYNIHAN: OK, I've gone down the rabbit hole. I want to know about E.T.s. This was one promise of the administration, we get more visibility. Theres a big documentary, "The Age of Disclosure," that's coming out on Amazon Prime. I actually don't know what the chyron says. I don't know that E.T.s exist, but I think they could. And I think that the government isn't telling us everything they know. So I hope we get a little bit more visibility here.

PHILLIP: OK. All right, go ahead, Tim.

PARRISH: I think that big box stores and people are being absolutely rude to those of us who want to have a good Halloween and like to eat at Thanksgiving, and they're celebrating Christmas way too early. I'm seeing Christmas stuff on store shelves. It's just disrespectful. We want a party at Halloween. We want to eat all of, you know, big mama's cooking. And if they're going to celebrate Christmas this early, it's absolutely rude. I don't appreciate it.

TAYLOR: I think that's a popular opinion.

PHILLIP: Yes, they're pushing it on us a little too soon.

All right, Ana, and Cha-Cha.

[10:55:00]

NAVARRO: We hate commercials, Cha-Cha and I hate commercials that feature dogs barking or cats meowing or doorbells ringing. All of those commercials that trigger dogs watching the TV have got to stop. They are not fair. They are not just. I feel like we should be respected. Oh, and squirrels. My God, commercials with squirrels are even worse.

PHILLIP: Cha-Cha, I feel like your voice is being squashed here. What do you have to say for yourself?

NAVARRO: She wants no doorbell ringing in commercials. (LAUGHTER)

NAVARRO: She wants, you know, that commercial where the cats going, meow, meow, meow. No commercial with cats meowing, no.

PHILLIP: Doorbells, doorbells are bad.

NAVARRO: Bad.

PHILLIP: They're bad.

All right, everybody, thank you very much. Thanks for watching "TABLE FOR FIVE". You can catch me every weeknight at 10:00 p.m. eastern with our Newsnight Roundtable and anytime on your favorite social media, X, Instagram, and TikTok. But in the meantime, CNN's coverage continues right now.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)