Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Live Event/Special
CNN Saturday Morning Table for Five. President Trump Draws Criticism for His Building New Ball Room in East Wing of White House; President Trump Claims He Does Not Need Congressional Approval to Bomb Alleged Drug Trafficking Boats in Caribbean and Atlantic Ocean; Democratic Senate Candidate in Maine Graham Platner Accused of Having Nazi Tattoo; Most Mainstream Media Outlets Refuse to Sign War Department Pledge Requiring Any Reporting to be Approved by Pentagon; Federal Investigation Uncovers Gambling Cheating Scandals Involving NBA Sports Betting and Poker. Aired 10-11a ET.
Aired October 25, 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, pardons, cash demands, boat bombings, and now the demolition of the entire East Wing.
DONALD TRUMP, (R) U.S. PRESIDENT: We're building a world class ballroom. You hear that sound? Oh, that's music to my ears.
PHILLIP: Is this just a makeover of the U.S. government or a metaphor?
Plus, whether it's through texts or tattoos, nazi references keep showing up in America's politics.
GRAHAM PLATNER, (D) MAINE SENATE CANDIDATE: I am not a secret nazi.
PHILLIP: But is either side willing to jettison these people from their parties?
Also, after the press refused to sign a pledge, only a few remain inside the hallways of the Pentagon, including the MyPillow guy's network.
And the Mafia, the NBA, poker, and gambling.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You're wearing these poker glasses, you'll be able to look right through that filter and see exactly what that card is.
PHILLIP: An explosive scandal raises new questions about sports betting in America.
Here in studio, Jemele Hill, Peter Meijer, Kelly Jane Torrance, and Gianmarco Soresi. It's the weekend. Join the conversation at a "TABLE FOR FIVE".
(END VIDEO CLIP) PHILLIP: Hey everyone. I'm Abby Phillip in New York.
No matter which side of the aisle that you are on, the one adjective that describes Donald Trump's second term is accurate either way -- brazen. And this week we saw unprecedented levels of defiance without guardrails. A president who pardoned a crypto convict who helped enrich his own family and his empire. And by the way, that empire needs the convict's firm to become even richer.
He continues to bomb boats in the international waters, expanding the strikes to the Pacific now. And he's doing it all without congressional oversight or even presenting evidence of why he's striking those boats.
He's demanding the Justice Department pay him more than $200 million for the cases against him, a payment that his own former lawyer will decide whether or not he receives.
And perhaps the most visual act is this -- the demolishing of the White House's East Wing, a building that has been there for over 100 years, in order to build a ballroom that has a price tag that just keeps rising, paid for by billionaires, corporations, and elites. All of this happening while the government is still shut down. The federal workers are standing in food lines right now trying to put food on the table for their families.
The reason I think that, look, I don't want to overstate the East Room thing, but it struck a nerve with a lot of people because I think a lot of people just ask themselves, I didn't know that you could just tear down the White House without asking anybody, OK. And the answer is Trump realized that there was actually nothing standing in his way. And so he did it. It's pretty amazing.
JEMELE HILL, CONTRIBUTING WRITER, "THE ATLANTIC": I think that defines really a lot of his presidency is we have been under this false assumption that somehow these institutions will defend themselves blindly. And the reality is that the institutions only hold up as much as the people are willing to defend them. And what he has quickly realized is that as -- it's a phrase I've used on your show, Abby is he is the who going to check me, boo? President, because there is nobody that is going to stand in his way, because we have allowed politeness to overtake common sense. And so he's relying on the fact that we're so willing to be -- that we're not willing to be impolite in order to check his authority.
He can ignore all the rules that he wants. But to me, the only way we will understand how dangerous a lot of these things are, and it's beyond just reconstructing the ballroom, is if somebody else comes in and does the same thing where they don't have, I guess, maybe not the majority of the country where they didn't win the majority of the vote. Because I promise you, if a Democrat comes in and runs the same game plan, maybe that's the only way the Republicans will understand that checks and balances are here for a reason.
KELLY JANE TORRANCE, EDITOR AT LARGE, "NEW YORK POST": Well, wait a second. I have to admit that I think they actually did in some ways. And, you know, Abby, I have to disagree. I think it really struck a chord, but with the coastal elites. I really doubt your average American, especially ones affected by the government shutdown, are worried about this.
[10:05:02]
But let's look at some facts. You know, Barack Obama and Joe Biden had donations of millions of dollars to each of their inaugural committees, and these were to put on big parties, mostly attended by the well-heeled. Now, who donated with Obama in 2022? It was AT&T, Microsoft, Chevron. With Joe Biden, his first his inaugural, it was, again, Microsoft, AT&T. A lot of these big companies that certainly have a lot of business before the government, as we've certainly seen with Microsoft in Trump's first term. So I sort of disagree that this is sort of unprecedented to take donations.
PHILLIP: But I mean, look, every president takes donations for their inaugural. That's actually how the inaugural works. President Trump actually dwarfs both Obama and Biden in terms of how much they took in, and then added, and then he added on top of that invitations to those the heads of those companies to the inauguration almost in exchange for their donations. I just don't know why that is comparable to, you know, this. This is $200 and something million dollars. It's a quarter of $1 billion.
TORRANCE: At least it's for something, and not just parties. It's for the people of America, really.
PHILLIP: Yes, I understand. And I take your point that, like --
GIANMARCO SORESI, COMEDIAN, "THIEF OF JOY" ON YouTube: Wait, for the people of America? For the people of America? It's for the donors who could go to the dinner.
TORRANCE: The people's house.
SORESI: Hey, listen, I'm not going to defend Biden or Obama. I think it's -- I think if Trump does anything well, he provides a visual metaphor. You know, less Americans are reading, we need pictures. We need to see corruption in front of us. I think, listen, people are going to -- people are going to criticize him. I mean, Trump, he's the one who's going to have to live there for seven more years.
(LAUGHTER)
SORESI: So I think it's good.
PHILLIP: We'll get to that in a little bit. We'll get to that a little bit later.
SORESI: Yes. Yes. And it's going to it's going to take a long time to build it because he's not allowed to rely on --
PHILLIP: Well, trust me, it's going to be fast because he wants to see it before he leaves. SORESI: Yes. Listen, you know who is encouraging him to focus on this
project? People in boats off the coast of Venezuela. They are more than happy to go, you know what? Focus on, focus on this. I'm happy for him to find a new little pet project. It prevents him from thinking about Portland. It's great in my opinion.
PHILLIP: Yes, I mean, maybe not. Listen, this is just one small thing, right? But there are all the other things. There's -- he wants the justice department to pay him for prosecuting him.
SORESI: For the chairs.
PHILLIP: For, for prosecuting -- I mean, look, that's another quarter of $1 billion that he wants to change hands. How much of this, you know, how much of this should the American people really take?
PETER MEIJER, (R) FORMER U.S. CONGRESSMAN, MICHIGAN: I mean, we'll have elections coming up, right? I mean, that will gauge some of that.
But I mean, he's the "you can just do things" president, right. Like when it came to this ballroom, a lot of the complaints were he didn't follow the process. He should have gone through the commission. Yes, we probably would have approved this after 18 months of red tape and everything else. Like, no, no, no. I just hope what he did to the East Wing, and the first thing I had to do was figure out what the East Wing was. I realized, I think I went in there one time. It's got like a ramp, and you look off to the side.
SORESI: If Aaron Sorkin had focused on that, he wouldn't have touched --
MEIJER: A hundred percent. You know, Aaron Sorkin is really to blame here for not raising the prestige of the East Wing in the American public's conception. But that sense of like, can he bring this same level of brazen disregard for kind of red tape and NIMBY rules to getting more nuclear power plants built, to expanding all the areas where we haven't been able to get things through for permitting. So I think this is a very great sign that we have a YIMBY president for once.
HILL: But here's the thing. I don't think people are bothered by the fact that the White House is getting a makeover. I don't think people care about that part. I think what people care about is the sort of pay for play system that he seems to have created in his presidency. Like, I'm not --
MEIJER: It's like every president, too.
HILL: Not to this degree, not to this degree.
SORESI: But maybe it'll be so visual and so big that people will start paying attention. I think every chair should have a plaque that it's a bribe from Apple.
HILL: It's also doing this, as Abby pointed out, during a shutdown where you have TSA workers not reporting to work because they haven't been paid in three weeks. You have that going on at the same time where you're trying to make this symbol of your own presidency. Like it just feels very much that if he had it his way, much like we've seen with everything, it's like he put his face on every single building to remind people of his presence because he's so insecure and such a narcissist. And I don't think people like --
MEIJER: -- Donald Trump, if he wasn't doing that, you know. He just he completely.
HILL: It's just it's just over the top.
TORRANCE: You know, I will say I agree with you a bit on that. But I hate it when you ever, you ever go into a new state, and welcome to, you know, Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro. Like every, you know, city, you know, the city of New York is doing this. Mayor Eric Adams -- it's, obviously, not on the level of Donald Trump, but every politician tries to kind of take credit for things and using, in this case, you know, taxpayer dollars in a way to promote yourself.
[10:10:00]
HILL: Well, let's not forget, he also doesn't have the greatest taste. So like I am very curious as to what this all --
PHILLIP: It's going to be dripping in gold for sure.
HILL: Right.
PHILLIP: But the other the other thing that he's doing right now, because frankly, who going to check me, boo? is he's bombing whoever he wants and killing a lot of people. And here's what he said earlier this week when he was asked about whether or not he needed to consult with Congress in any way on this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, (R) U.S. PRESIDENT: I don't think we're going to necessarily ask for a declaration of war. I think we're just going to kill people that are bringing drugs into our country. OK? We're going to kill them. You know, they're going to be, like, dead.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SORESI: Future Nobel Peace Prize winner Donald J. Trump.
(LAUGHTER)
TORRANCE: Kind of like the, you know, previous Nobel Peace Prize winner Barack Obama, who did actually, you know, kill an American citizen with a drone.
MEIJER: One intentionally, one accidentally.
TORRANCE: You know, with a drone attack. Not that I'm you know, I'm not. You know, I'm just saying.
SORESI: Sure. I'm not here to defend any president.
PHILLIP: Look, look, and you are right about that. But I think the one thing is, at least we knew who he killed. In this situation, In this situation, the Department of Defense and Trump have basically calculated correctly that nobody is going to say anything because, who cares about these fishermen and who they are? You just bomb people to send a message and call it a day.
But I guess, you know, do you think that there are any downsides to this, that when we set a precedent in the world that people just drop bombs and ask questions later, I mean, does that really make us safer?
MEIJER: Well, precedent has been set, though. I think this is not anything new. I mean, I wish it was.
PHILLIP: But I mean by , not by --
MEIJER: And that's the case with so many elements.
PHILLIP: I mean, maybe, but precedents has been set by who? I feel like when we put the United States in the same --
MEIJER: Barack Obama --
PHILLIP: No, no, no, but I'm talking about like, what is the justification? Right. And then if we put ourselves in the same bucket as the Russias of the world or, you know, the Houthis or whatever it is, like, the other people who act kind of lawlessly on the global stage, I don't think that's the category of states that we want to be aligned with. We are the ones setting the rules about the so-called rules of engagement. When we violate our own rules, how does that set us up in the world?
MEIJER: And, again, this is not me defending the practice, just the thing that Donald Trump is great at is bringing attention to an issue that what he is doing may be unprecedented in the way he's describing it, and may be unprecedented in the kind of brazenness. But in the substance, the precedent has always been set. It's just we kind of looked the other way, right? We didn't really care or there wasn't that level of outrage when Barack Obama was bombing American citizens in Yemen, right. Because they're a part of Al Qaeda and the Arabian Peninsula. We could have a presidential finding, even though, again, in the same bucket as the -- you're calling them fishermen. I mean, narcotraffickers, at least in the main.
PHILLIP: I'm just saying I don't know who they are. And I don't think the government does either.
HILL: Yes. And there's just too many examples in history where we have done things like that, and then we found out later what the true cost of it was. And so -- and what's amazing to me is like how Barack Obamas name is always summoned to justify what Trump is doing. I was like, you would think that Barack Obama would have had more Republican support the way they like to conjure his name and say like, well, Barack Obama did it. Well, why didn't you support him then when he was in office if he's behaving just like Donald Trump? PHILLIP: All right, next for us, the Democratic candidate says that
he's covered up his tattoo resembling a nazi symbol. Is this disqualifying or forgivable in today's politics?
Plus, most of the free press rejected the Pentagon's required pledge. Thats an affront to the First Amendment. So, who did end up signing it? We'll discuss next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[10:18:23]
PHILLIP: Welcome back. Last week we talked about Young Republicans using nazi language in text chains. We even had a Trump nominee drop out after he texted that he had a nazi streak in him. And now Democratic candidate for the U.S. Senate says that he's covering up a tattoo that resembles, you guessed it, a nazi symbol.
So here's what Graham Platner's ink looks like now. He says he got a skull and crossbones nearly 20 years ago while he was in the marines during a drunken night out, and he says that he had no clue it had any associations with the nazis. Platner is seeking the seat held by Republican Susan Collins.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Are you a secret nazi?
GRAHAM PLATNER, (D) MAINE SENATE CANDIDATE: I am not a secret nazi. Myself and a few of the other machine gun squad leaders, and we got very inebriated, and we did what marines on liberty do, and we decided to go get a tattoo. And we went to a tattoo parlor in Split, Croatia, and we chose a terrifying looking skull and crossbones off the wall because we were marines.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: So the question is, is either party willing to jettison people like this? Honestly, it kind of seems like the answer is no. We had a Democratic congresswoman on the show a couple of days ago. She wouldn't tell him to get lost. And I mean, and, you know, the Republicans have their own nazi problems, but it's like, is there a line anymore?
SORESI: At least the Republicans keep it to the group chat. You know, they keep it in private, not on your chest.
(LAUGHTER)
SORESI: I mean, I don't know. I, I wish he had gone and covered up with something a little -- I mean, I look at that, I'm like, that sounds like another nazi tattoo.
[10:00:00]
Its like a heart, like his mom. It looks like some kind of alien animal.
TORRANCE: A little anchor.
MEIJER: Just erase it. And by the way, it didn't resemble a nazi tattoo. It was literally like, it's -- there's a word for it. It's a Totenkopf.
SORESI: Yes. It was a skull and crossbones, so maybe there's a chance. Maybe there's a chance. It just -- and why is it next to a swastika? That should have been the first thing in the book.
MEIJER: Or maybe like when you're running for office, as a former candidate, you kind of think, what are my liabilities? Are there, you know, Facebook posts that I'm not going to look back on?
SORESI: Let's see.
(CROSS TALK)
TORRANCE: Theres no way that he did not know by this point. And there seems to be evidence he did.
MEIJER: His political director said that.
TORRANCE: Exactly.
(CROSS TALK)
PHILLIP: Hey, Kelly, let me ask you, I mean, because I think this has been one of the more interesting things, is that I think both parties are having this debate right now internally about do we give in to the other side when we say that this person did something outrageous and we're going to kick them out? And there are many people, very loud voices, Republicans and Democrats, who are saying, don't give in. As reprehensible as the thing is, just let it go, because if you give in, that's a victory to the other side. That feels incredibly corrosive to our politics.
TORRANCE: I agree with you, Abby. And we've seen this for years. And, you know, I remember, you know, people thinking Brett Kavanaugh shouldn't step down as a Supreme Court nominee because of what happened, because then you give the precedent that they can get rid of other nominees this way.
But I agree, it's very corrosive. And they're having this debate. And there are people on both sides that think this kind of thing is OK. But I will say, you know, the Young Republicans in the nazi group chat, we'll call it, a bunch of them have lost their jobs or had job offers rescinded. As you say, this guy is still running. Democrats are refusing.
SORESI: He got that tattoo a long time ago. Those text messages were yesterday.
TORRANCE: And what about the Virginia Democratic A.G. candidate, Jones. I mean, he you know, you have no Democrats really calling for him. And, you know, yes, he wasn't a nazi. He just said that he wanted to see his opponent's children killed.
PHILLIP: Yes, look, I think in both of these cases, both Graham Platner and Jay Jones, there is a sort of like voter valve that they have to kind of deal with. However, look at the polling from this Maine race right now, OK? Just look at it. The first choice in the Democratic primary, Graham Platner, is at 58 percent right now. So it very well could be that the voters may decide that this is all good and well.
TORRANCE: Democratic voters, note.
MEIJER: Number two, Janet Mills, not a nobody. The sitting Democratic governor, right. So this is not like, oh, he just gets name I.D. from this.
I mean, I will say, as a former enlisted man myself, the idea of getting drunk and getting a tattoo at a bar, I can empathize. I understand that, right? But again, within 20 years, were factoring in a political career, you don't want to you don't want to lead your supporters to have to say, well, you know, he may be a nazi, but at least he's our nazi.
PHILLIP: OK, one question for you, because here's one other thing. He said, "In the nearly 20 years since this hasn't come up, I enlisted in the army, which involved a full physical that examines tattoos for hate symbols." That's probably true. "I passed a full background check to receive a security clearance to join the ambassador to Afghanistan's security detail." So, I mean, that leads me to wonder what's going on in the military that these tattoos really aren't getting checked?
SORESI: When you say the symbol, did you know it was a nazi symbol, right? It did feel like a new. I didn't know about this.
MEIJER: He saw his bare chest in the context of a --
PHILLIP: He's not wrong. He's not wrong that he gets this tattoo while he's in the military. And then nobody says anything about it. What's, what, like, what's going on?
HILL: Well, there's always, there have been reports about there being a white supremacist presence in our in our military in general. So that kind of feeds your question.
MEIJER: Or lack of history or education. I've never seen it either.
PHILLIP: And you would think that the tattoo examiners, like, have a rolodex of things that they're looking for, and one of them would be --
HILL: With him, though, it's not just the tattoo is the only reason why people. There are other problematic things that he has said and tweeted before that he said on social media.
SORESI: A new generation of candidates with a Reddit account. We've got to get used to this.
HILL: But here's the thing, though, is that as an isolated incident, maybe we buy it. And certainly, listen, I'm not going to throw a rock from this glass house. I had a tattoo that I had to get rid of an ex from a long time ago. And I wasn't even drunk, so that made it worse.
TORRANCE: That's understandable.
HILL: Right, exactly.
SORESI: I had a tattoo of an ex --
HILL: I had a tattoo of an ex. I had to get it covered, otherwise I wouldn't be married now.
TORRANCE: I've never admitted this in public. Me too. So you know, we've all been there, gotten the bad tattos.
(CROSS TALK)
PHILLIP: OK.
HILL: But I don't love these purity tests that sometimes we hold politicians to because I think they get in your own way of progress. Right? I get that.
[10:25:03]
But the problem is, when you start coupling all these incidents together, it leads to a lack of trust. And I understand now that people are -- people think that burn it all down means we should accept, hey, he seems like a fighter. He seems like this. Who cares about that? Like, I get that we're kind of in that mindset. But we -- I don't want to go back to the days where, saying, yes, we'll get you eliminated from consideration for the presidency. But I think --
SORESI: Do that impression again. Yes.
HILL: Yes. And we're going to go to Michigan, yes. That shouldn't get you eliminated from being considered to be --
PHILLIP: I feel like there's a long way between that and --
HILL: Right, but we can't do this. We can't do this.
PHILLIP: Well, yes, I mean, look, this authenticity thing, I'm of two minds about it, right? I do think authentic politicians really are necessary in this era. Right? But you can't be somebody who doesn't have common sense and says crazy things. I mean, there is a line between authentic and just somebody who is, like, not suited for the job.
SORESI: It's incredibly stupid. Let's just give -- if we gave benefit of the doubt, it's incredibly stupid. And he's been publicly punished. He has the most hideous tattoo on his chest now, and I think that will deter other future, you know, progressive candidates from not getting it covered up.
PHILLIP: Yes.
TORRANCE: Honestly, though, you remind me of me. Theres a great line in the Whit Stillman film "Barcelona." The character says, you know, they always tell us to be yourself. Well, what if yourself is a bad person? Then what?
(LAUGHTER)
TORRANCE: And I think it plays to your point. Authenticity, great. But at the same time, you know, people's judgment matters.
PHILLIP: Yes, ain't that the truth?
Well, next for us, as Donald Trump intensifies his boat bombings, we're now learning which press members are allowed inside the Pentagon to get answers about it. They include Infowars and the MyPillow guy's outlet.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[10:31:27]
PHILLIP: Most of the free press refused to sign a pledge required by the Defense Department Secretary Pete Hegseth, which is to get any reporting approved by the Pentagon. Outlets, of course, including Hegseth's former employer, FOX News, said it's a violation of the First Amendment. And so reporters were booted from their offices. A couple of weeks later, we are now finding out who did end up signing it, and it's quite a crew. Some of them are freelancers and foreign media members. Others, most of them, are MAGA allies. One American News, the Gateway Pundit, which settled a defamation suit over election conspiracies, and Lindell TV, one of the few people with a pen and paper in the hallways of the Defense Department, now represents the MyPillow guy's network. I'm today years old when I realized that there was a MyPillow guy network.
(LAUGHTER)
PHILLIP: However, I mean, I don't know. I mean, reporters are going to report, but it is a sad state of affairs that the Pentagon is now trying to create state media inside the Pentagon.
HILL: And kudos to the journalists and the organizations that didn't sign it. And really, that should have been a collective effort.
PHILLIP: You know what I would say it was.
HILL: It was for mainstream media.
PHILLIP: Because all the people left over --
HILL: Are people who are not credible journalists.
SORESI: It will fail. MEIJER: FOX News, I mean, the conservative side was very well
represented in that too.
SORESI: Yes. But I think Lindell TV, is that what it's called?
PHILLIP: Yes.
SORESI: You know, MyPillow guy making -- it's not going to work. It'd be like if McDonald's made a hotel or CNN made a streaming platform. It's not --
(LAUGHTER)
SORESI: And ultimately, you know, it'll correct itself, I think.
TORRANCE: You know, I have to say, you know, when I first saw the rules, I thought, yes, these look bad. This is terrible. But at the same time, I do think that it's -- the press needs to remember that it is supposed to be in an adversarial position with the government, and it shouldn't be all friendly. I always get puzzled when I see pictures, you know, with people at the Christmas parties with the presidents, the press members taking a smiling picture next to the guy you're supposed to be, you know, going after and fact checking and everything.
And, you know, I've been in the, you know, the Pentagon and in the press space. And you do almost feel like you're a part of the Pentagon. And the press does not, should not be feeling like an insider. You know, the press is very willing to criticize people, leaders like President Trump, but it's less willing and should be more willing to criticize the government itself, like the Pentagon and the Defense Department.
PHILLIP: Well, you know, I mean, I don't think that the presence of the press inside the Pentagon is a sign of its closeness to the Pentagon. And that's why these rule changes really matter, because what Pete Hegseth realized was that when they when reporters are in the Pentagon, they have access to information that he can't control, and that's why he's kicking them out. So I think it's actually, in some ways, a little bit of the opposite of what you're suggesting.
But I agree with you that, yes, I mean, that's the whole point. I mean, ask Barack Obama how he liked the Pentagon press corps when he was president. I mean, they broke a lot of stories about what was going on in his presidency, and every president.
So Pete Hegseth is trying to change that because he doesn't like the adversarial nature. He wants people like RedState who write "Two attacks to watch for as Colombia's president and the U.S. left team up to protect drug cartels," "Trump touts success of anti-cartel task force in crushing drug operations." "Venezuela prepares for war. Trump unfazed. Americans sleep soundly."
MEIJER: But I think if anything, they're losing -- the Pentagon is losing access to being able to push out the message they can control.
[10:35:02]
Because what does this actually mean in practice? It means they're not in the bullpen. They're not sitting there asking questions with the spokesperson for the Department of War. So the official message that that Secretary Hegseth wants to get out is going to be only heard by a select amount of outlets. They're still going to figure out and have ways of messaging on Signal, on other platforms, or with existing relationships to get those more significant and adversarial stories. Those are still going to get out. I mean, they've been getting out, "The Washington Post" and "New York Post".
TORRANCE: They meet in a parking lot.
MEIJER: Yes, exactly.
HILL: Yes. Well, not only that, I hope he the -- among this being another example of them sort of cracking down on this idea of a free press, because that's the only way a democracy can work, it actually is going to have the opposite effect, because the one thing about it is reporters, the media, we get the last word. And this is probably going to put a battery in the backs of a lot of journalists, because now that you've sort of -- one thing that we don't like to do is lose access. And what will definitely happen is they are going to be like a dog with a bone, because now they're going to go out of their way to try to find things that probably run counter to the messaging that he wants. It would have actually been better for him to make peace with the media, as opposed to doing the opposite, because now he's made a whole bunch of enemies on both sides.
PHILLIP: I think you're -- well, look, I think you're right about that. I mean, I don't think it's a good idea for the government to try to tell the media what to do. But you're right. Reporters are going to report and they're probably going to report ten times harder, as they should be.
HILL: As they should have been anyway.
MEIJER: They're not getting the chew toys.
SORESI: Do they need this incentive for the ten times harder? Let's kick them all out. Then we got to get on it.
HILL: Kick out Mike Lindell.
PHILLIP: Next for us, the NBA, the Mafia, X-ray glasses, what a poker and sports betting scandal means for America's new favorite pastime -- gambling.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[10:41:27]
PHILLIP: It's one of the fastest growing and most lucrative industries in America, sports gambling. And now a major scandal involving the Mafia and the NBA is sparking a new debate. The FBI has charged dozens of people across 11 states with different cheating schemes, including an NBA coach, a current player, and four major crime families. One investigation, called Operation Nothing Bet, accuses a player and coach of rigging games. Another, called Operation Royal Flush, investigating poker cheating that includes x-ray glasses and tables. And the question now facing all of us, is there enough regulation? Does this happen more often than we think? And how should the leagues, the bettors, protect themselves from this fraud? How do we protect sports from this fiasco?
SORESI: Illegal, and people didn't want that. And that's the consequence. And now you've got to lean in. I think you start. I'm betting on who's going to get busted for gambling. You wanted it.
TORRANCE: I'm hearing bigger names are going to be coming out as people make deals, you know.
SORESI: Sure, sure. I mean, maybe were not paying these, you know, coaches and players enough money.
HILL: No, that's not what it is.
PHILLIP: Because they are making a ton of money.
HILL: They are.
PHILLIP: And they're still doing this foolishness.
HILL: But this is what this is something that's not talked about in a lot, and I've covered sports now for multiple decades. There's an intense gambling culture, whether it's part of this or not. You know, guys, when they're on the plane, they're playing card games. I mean, Michael Jordan's gambling exploits are legendary. So it's like infused in the culture because it feeds their competitive instincts.
I think sports gambling is basically going to be the new tobacco. And we have allowed such widespread access. When you look at the number of young people that are gambling, it is really terrifying. What is unfortunate about this is you hear people say this all the time, just in conversation. Sports are rigged. They're rigged, they're phony. It's like wrestling. And all this does is feed a perception about the game that cuts at the very integrity. When you talk about players giving inside information or taking themselves out of games, altering outcomes.
PHILLIP: I mean that's --
HILL: And it's staggering, because I know Chauncey Billups. I literally just saw him a few months ago at the summer league in Vegas, and he is considered, from a character standpoint, to be one of the most upstanding people ever. But there is a little bit of, of doubt that's placed here because I couldn't help but think about the fact that Donald Trump really can't stand the NBA for a lot of reasons. And I'm not saying that these guys didn't do -- we don't know what they did yet.
PHILLIP: But this predated Trump. HILL: It did. The investigation started with this. But what I
noticed, it's not about the fact that they got caught, but I'm looking at who are the faces of this. You mentioned, it is four major crime families that I've got to be honest, I didn't know they were still in business.
PHILLIP: None of us did.
HILL: And I didn't even know -- but we're not seeing any of those faces. We're seeing the faces of the players.
SORESI: Yes, but if the players want to get out of trouble, all they have to do is make a small donation to Trump's ballroom, and everything --
(LAUGHTER)
TORRANCE: You make a point although --
PHILLIP: I mean, you say that as a joke, but.
TORRANCE: I will say "The New York Post" has certainly been digging and doing all kinds of fun, you know, mob articles about the families, anything. But, you know, this was, you know, I agree with a lot of what you said. This was inevitable. You know, you have these big sports books teaming up, and there's a lot of money at stake.
HILL: The media, too.
TORRANCE: And the other thing, that's really interesting is, you know, there's now, you know, better returns, and there's more things to bet on. You know, before you would have had to have like so many people on a team in on something to throw a game. Now people are betting on single shots, drives in the NFL.
[10:45:01]
PHILLIP: Individual players.
TORRANCE: Exactly, specific things, like one player's.
PHILLIP: And that, actually, that's.
TORRANCE: That makes it a lot easier to do.
PHILLIP: -- that's what the scheme in part centers on is those types of bets.
TORRANCE: You couldn't do that --
PHILLIP: To your point about the media, you know, this is the CNN write about this, "The mixed messages are everywhere. Consider the longtime broadcaster Brant Musburger got summoned to the ESPN offices for referring to an over-under during a college football game. But now game breaks are littered with ads from FanDuel, DraftKings, the network itself has its own sportsbook, ESPN Bet." They've got talent out there giving bets.
I mean, I don't it goes back to me also. I mean, I think these people are going to face the consequences for their actions. But the erosion of trust in sports seems like an inevitability of this.
MEIJER: To me, the victims are going to be the folks who are betting $500 here, $1,000 there, who really can't afford to lose that, that are under that illusion. Right? That addiction to gambling.
PHILLIP: These are, the sums of money, they are massive.
MEIJER: Whales. I don't know, it's really hard for me to look at somebody as a victim when they're engaged in like a high stakes underground poker game. Like, if you get cheated out of that, I'm sorry.
PHILLIP: I'm saying, like, regular people are betting huge sums of money. They are taking their life savings and putting it in. They are they are putting basically, essentially credit cards. They're taking out, you know, they're taking out money from places they shouldn't be taking out money from.
MEIJER: The tobacco analogy there.
TORRANCE: I think that's always been the case like in Vegas and stuff. But it's gotten it's worse now because there's so much more to bet on.
MEIJER: There's no friction. You don't have to go to Vegas.
TORRANCE: And it's everywhere. As you say, like you've got -- they're teaming up with --
HILL: And the NCAA just announced that they were going to now allow athletes and staff to be able to bet on games on professional games.
PHILLIP: Why?
HILL: I was like, what? Who asked for this?
SORESI: As a theater kid, I just sit back, and I go let it burn.
(LAUGHTER)
SORESI: I mean, this is this is what you want. This is just the inevitable a dissolution of sports and --
TORRANCE: True nerds. We can finally we get to say, hey, guess what? This is why you shouldn't, you know, worship sports figures and why you should maybe read some books instead of watching --
PHILLIP: I'm sympathetic to that. I feel like a bystander in this, in this whole thing. But it is, I mean, you can laugh at the demise of all these people, but I have a feeling that this is like a house of cards. When you have millions of people just like betting their lives away. MEIJER: And they should get the money back. The people who made those bets, what happens with the money they lost on the game that was rigged? And on the other hand, though, you know, if some of these basketball players are, you know, faking an injury, at least it prepares them for their acting career. You know, I think a lot of times they start at a big movie and they're not quite trained yet. So who knows?
PHILLIP: In case you were wondering, the grift is coming for your industry, too. Those basketball players are going to be knocking on your door soon.
SORESI: Sure.
PHILLIP: All right, next for us, the panel's unpopular opinions, what they're not afraid to say out loud.
But first, a quick programing note for you. This Sunday, discover the diverse brands that bond Sao Paulo. The new episode of CNN original series "Tony Shalhoub, Breaking Bread," it airs Sunday night at 9:00 p.m. right here on CNN.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[10:52:48]
PHILLIP: We're back, and it's time for your unpopular opinions. You each have 30 seconds to tell us yours, Gianmarco, you're up first.
SORESI: Yes. I do a lot of yoga. We need to put a stop to these sculpt yoga classes. This is a new trend that's taking over every studio. It's an hour-and-a-half yoga.
PHILLIP: It's Pilates.
SORESI: Yes, it's even worse than Pilates. You go there and there's weights. You do three downward dogs, and then you're just doing you're doing arms and legs. It's for people who want to say, I do yoga. And then you're sooner you go to yoga class, I say, well, start up the treadmill. It's almost time for yoga. We need to go back. People wanted yoga for peace. And then they said, I'm not toned enough. So now it's toned. No one's peaceful. It needs to get out of yoga studio. They're taking over.
PHILLIP: Good.
TORRANCE: All right, I got it. And I know this is unpopular around this table, but I have to say, I'm kind of for the East Wing demolition. You know, we became civilized when we created structures to eat indoors. And I have to say, you know, you've got state dinners with foreign leaders, and they're sitting in a tent outside on the lawn. But still, but let's face it. Right now, you can only get a couple hundred people in. This ballroom is going to have, you know, room for 1,000.
And it is going to be something I think future presidents will be able to use and enjoy. Let's be civilized and let people, especially people from other countries that, you know, maybe not used to eating in a tent.
PHILLIP: Get ready for the --
TORRANCE: Not our best.
PHILLIP: It'll be more ballroom than White House very soon. Don't you worry about that.
HILL: All right, words is how I generally make my living. And I am so upset with Merriam-Webster because they released -- they came for everybody when they told -- they released this in a tweet where they said that it's not it's not "butt naked," it's "buck naked." And I was like, that doesn't make any sense, "buck naked." That is the official terminology. So, Miriam, you are wrong. It is "butt naked" -- like, what is "buck naked"? I don't even know what that is. Right?
PHILLIP: It is so weird.
HILL: That is wrong. And I think they need to be called about it. So I'm saying lets rebel. Let's use "butt naked".
TORRANCE: Naked as a buck.
PHILLIP: They're trying to come for urban --
[10:55:00]
SORESI: Oh, is that what it is? Oh, yes.
HILL: I mean, is that a thing? I mean like --
MEIJER: It's almost like were inventing these words.
(LAUGHTER)
MEIJER: -- from somewhere.
Breakfast is terrible.
HILL: Oh, jeez.
MEIJER: It is the worst meal of the day. The idea that it's the most important meal, I think is a, frankly, a homicidal phrase. When you look at the fact that the number one killer of Americans is heart disease, right? And what do we do? We have greasy, eggy, cheesy. It doesn't make any sense. I think it should be skipped. I think it should be stricken.
PHILLIP: Eggs are natures superfood, did you know that?
MEIJER: Barack Obama agrees with me. A lot of successful people, they don't say it out loud because, again, it's an unpopular opinion.
PHILLIP: Your blood sugar doesn't agree with you. TORRANCE: Exactly.
PHILLIP: All right, everybody, thank you very much. And 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 at X, Instagram, and TikTok. But in the meantime, CNN's coverage continues next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
