Return to Transcripts main page
The Source with Kaitlan Collins
Michael Cohen And Trump Reunite After Yearlong Feud; Sources: Scott Jennings Early Favorite For WH Press Secretary; Bessent: "Very Good Chance" Debt Has Peaked At $40 Trillion. Aired 9-10p ET
Aired August 20, 2026 - 21:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[21:00:00]
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
TRAVIS BARKER, AMERICAN MUSICIAN AND SONGWRITER: -- I focused on, like head down, play the drums. I had this desire in me to fulfill what she said to me. You know, I was like, I have to do it.
I think if she was alive, I don't know if I would have tried this hard.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST, ANDERSON COOPER 360: Well, you can listen to full conversation wherever you get your podcasts, or watch the entire episode right now at CNN.com/AllThereIs.
That's it for us. The news continues. "THE SOURCE" starts now.
BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST, THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS: Tonight. Up is down. Black is white. Cats and dogs are living together. And for anyone who never thought they'd see this day, pigs apparently can fly.
I'm Boris Sanchez in for Kaitlan Collins. This is THE SOURCE.
Starting us off tonight, a 40-minute interview that is unlike any President Trump has done during his time in politics. Not because of what he said, about the war or the economy. We've heard all of that before. The news is whom he did this interview with: his former fixer Michael Cohen, who in court admitted to calling the President a, quote, Dictator douchebag, and a Cheeto-dusted cartoon villain who belongs in a cage.
Today, the conversation went a little differently, starting with a sample of the song, Why Can't We Be Friends?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MICHAEL COHEN, FORMER ATTORNEY FOR PRESIDENT TRUMP: Mr. President.
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Hello, Michael. How are you, Michael?
COHEN: How you doing, sir? Welcome, welcome. TRUMP: I'm good, very good. The country's doing good.
COHEN: Well, thanks to you, sir.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: Even for a President who, for years, has seen allies fall in and out of favor, often in highly explosive fashion. This was a fence that seemed far beyond any mending.
And yet, today, Cohen told CNN's Jake Tapper, that relationship is being resuscitated.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
COHEN: The answer is, is that we forgave. And not because the past didn't happen, not because the scars disappeared, not because every disagreement suddenly becomes irrelevant, and certainly not because I have forgotten anything. I have not.
JAKE TAPPER, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT: Right.
COHEN: But remember this: forgiveness does not require amnesia. It requires the courage to stop allowing yesterday to dictate tomorrow.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: Between these two men, there's a lot that would have to be forgotten. It was almost eight years ago to the day that Cohen pleaded guilty in Manhattan federal court and implicated the President in a hush money scheme to silence women about alleged affairs.
In the years since, Cohen would do time in prison, serve as a star witness in Trump's criminal trial, and deliver some remarkable congressional testimony. Watch this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
COHEN: I am ashamed because I know what Mr. Trump is. He is a racist. He is a conman. And he is a cheat.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: Cohen's mission, over the years, was far from subtle. He positioned himself as a champion of the so-called Trump resistance. He titled his two books, "Disloyal" and "Revenge."
To get a sense of just how ugly the relationship got, contrast how Cohen described Trump when he was on his side, versus how they talked about each other when they weren't on good terms.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
COHEN: My job is I protect Mr. Trump.
TRUMP: He's a felon, convicted felon, and not a good person, but that's the only witness, and he's now crashed and burned.
COHEN: I like the man a lot. I respect him a lot.
He's a narcissistic sociopath.
I think Mr. Trump will be great. First of all, his business acumen, his negotiation skills.
TRUMP: But you know, he's a sleazebag. Everybody knows that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: The resuscitation that Cohen described apparently started with a Substack article he wrote, saying how he felt pressured by New York prosecutors to testify against Trump. That could be significant, especially as Trump is fighting to get that conviction tossed out.
But Cohen says the article led to a series of texts and meetings at the President's New Jersey golf club that culminated with this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
COHEN: Boss? You remember when I was by your side? I literally used to analyze the polls, right? And you remember how much attention that I used to pay to that methodology? I would come in, I would say to you, Oh, you know, they're claiming that you're 31 percent, that you're underwater. But I showed you that the--
TRUMP: Right. Well, the polls are crooked. The reporters, as you know, are crooked, but -- many of them. You have some great ones too, but for the most part, it's -- it's really dishonest.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: My lead source tonight is a White House correspondent for The New York Times, also a CNN Political Analyst, and Co-author of the blockbuster book, "Regime Change: Inside the Imperial Presidency of Donald Trump."
Maggie Haberman joins us now.
Maggie, thanks so much for being with us.
[21:05:00]
What we heard today was only part of the full 40-minute interview. But I wonder what you made of the snippets and these interactions between the President and Michael Cohen.
MAGGIE HABERMAN, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, THE NEW YORK TIMES, CO- AUTHOR, "REGIME CHANGE," CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Boris, it was 12 years ago, and nothing had changed.
It's interesting, Boris, when Jonathan and I were reporting out "Regime Change," one of the things that we focused on was Trump's retribution campaign against his perceived enemies, and he has a very long list of them, most of whom were involved in some form of either civil suits against him or prosecutions.
But it became very clear to us, as we were doing the reporting, that Trump was never targeting Michael Cohen, last year. In anything that he was saying publicly, he was not talking about him, and in our conversations with people behind the scenes, his name was not coming up. And as we wrote in the book, a possible reason for that seemed to become clear around that Substack that Cohen wrote earlier this year.
Since then, I know that the -- the Substack is where Michael Cohen pointed this, the start of this new relationship with. My colleague, Ben Protess, and I actually learned that there had been a meeting between Trump and Cohen, last summer, at Bedminster. It was brief. Trump's current lead lawyer, Boris Epshteyn, was there for it, although it's not clear who actually arranged this meeting. But regardless, this has been a while in the making.
And it is very clear that Cohen has wanted to be back with Trump for some time, and Trump would like to have the conviction overturned. And what Cohen said was that he felt coerced, not that he was coerced.
SANCHEZ: Right.
HABERMAN: What he said under oath still stands. But there's a lot happening here.
SANCHEZ: Yes. Yes.
Is it fair to say that while this reunion feels shocking because of all the public statements. Given the arc of some of the characters in Trump's orbit who he's fallen out with and then been reunited with, it's not that surprising.
HABERMAN: Yes, it's not surprising, Boris because, Trump really never closes the door on almost anyone entirely. The exception that, actually, I always said, and others in Trump's world would say too, you know, other -- who work for him would say, when having this conversation was, except for Michael Cohen, and that was because most people believed around Trump that there was just no way that Trump was ever going to get past that trial in 2024.
And I will tell you, there are a number of people in Trump's world, his staff, former staff, extended advisers, who are, even if they are staying silent about it, within Trump's world, they're not happy about this, and they feel like Cohen, with his various forms of testimony, caused a lot of problems for a bunch of other people, and they are kind of stunned to see him, A, walking away from his own role, and that Trump is going on this radio show.
But I will say, Boris, Cohen is one of the only people who actually did prison time, during all of this, over the course of the last several years. And Trump has expressed some empathy over that. Believe it or not.
SANCHEZ: Yes, I do want to compare what President Trump said about Cohen's past testimony, with what Cohen told Jake Tapper today.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: They weaponized you. They weaponized a lot of people. And, I respect the fact that you recanted everything you said.
COHEN: Yes.
TRUMP: And that's a big -- that's a big thing that you did. That's a very big thing.
TAPPER: You testified under oath, obviously, that President Trump directed you to commit crimes. Do you stand by that?
COHEN: So, let me say this, I will not discuss what I had said in the past, what I had stated under oath. I will not go there simply because I want to live for the future.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: That goes to the point you were just making about the difference between him -- Trump suggesting that Cohen recanted his testimony. And Cohen essentially saying, Oh, that's the past. I don't want to look in that direction.
HABERMAN: Cohen is the person who has a potential problem here, Boris because, he is the person who not -- you know, not definitely, it depends on what prosecutors would do, but he said he felt coerced. Again, that's an emotion. That's not saying he was coerced. And he is the one who testified under oath. And so, that creates potential problems for Cohen were he to have to discuss this again or say a number of things about it.
But the President's lawyers have already used his Substack in their efforts to appeal the criminal conviction. I assume we will hear more of this.
SANCHEZ: Other than the appeal, I wonder what else might be in it for the President, if this perhaps sends a message to other people in his orbit.
HABERMAN: Well, I mean, this was always the question in term one, and is a good one about some of the discussions that the President had about potential pardons for people who were facing investigations during the special counsel Robert Mueller's look at possible ties between the Trump campaign and Russians to influence the outcome of the 2016 election.
[21:10:00]
People close to Cohen and a number of them had been concerned after this trial, in 2024, that Cohen would face retribution from the President, that he would be targeted for some kind of a prosecution, including a possible investigation related to his testimony. So, this isn't a huge surprise.
I think, for the President for, again, whatever reason, he has told a number of people that he feels bad about Cohen, and that has caught a bunch of folks in his world by surprise.
SANCHEZ: From a former Trump aide to perhaps the one that is in the news most these days, Natalie Harp. What is your latest on how important her role has become in this White House?
HABERMAN: Well, so as Jonathan and I reported in the book, Harp has carved out this role of being incredibly devoted to the President. She had left these letters for him in his personal spaces during the interregnum four years. The Secret Service had gotten alarmed by some of them. That was not -- while that was notable, that was a campaign, that was different. She is now in the government. She sits 10 feet away from the President. She is a stream of information to him. He does rely on her, and I don't expect that to change.
Frankly, Boris, it was quite striking how many people defended her, over the course of the last few days. Because, most of her colleagues have been uneasy with her for some time. She is representative of how different this term is from term one because, this is the kind of aide who will just give him quick, unfiltered information, connect him to other people, is present there, and basically spends most of her waking hours, trying to work for him, and get him what he wants in the context of this presidency. That did not really exist quite like this, in term one. And again, that is why this is significant. Not some of the -- some of the speculation.
SANCHEZ: Why do you think her role in the White House has made other White House officials unsettled or uneasy?
HABERMAN: Well, it's because of what I was saying before, about the letters, the sort of the full focus on the President above all else. Some of this has gotten attributed to sort of food fighting inside the White House. And there's obviously always staff arguments. It is also a hallmark of any world that Trump has ever been--
SANCHEZ: Right.
HABERMAN: --involved in and run, that people fight and dislike each other. But I think that people have been concerned about just how focused she is on the specific job.
Again, I don't want to speak to things we don't know.
SANCHEZ: Sure.
HABERMAN: But it's also that she, again, has the ability to provide him with information that goes -- some of her colleagues are more aware now than they used to be, but she -- they don't always know sort of what she is giving him in terms of information, and that is significant.
SANCHEZ: It's also significant, as you put it, that so many folks came out in defense of her. Why do you think this reporting, specifically about her, and even Trump's response to some of the political attacks from Jon Ossoff, why do you think that has struck such a nerve in the White House? HABERMAN: Well, look, I think that this is essentially the kind of thing that you're going to see over the next two years, the remainder of this term, you are going to see a lot of very focused pushback. Most of it will involve the media because that is something that Trump supporters can really rally around pretty uniformly.
But the reality is that the President pushed back on your colleague, who asked him a question about Ossoff's remarks. Ossoff is a sitting senator, and just asking a question is asking the question. The amount of blowback she got far outweighed what they said about Ossoff, but it did manage to keep these questions about Natalie Harp and focus on her in the spotlight. So, it didn't exactly work out the way they were hoping to, if the idea was to be a deterrent or to make it go away.
SANCHEZ: Yes, Kristen Holmes, that reporter is going to be on with us later, talking about Scott Jennings, a CNN contributor, and his potential role in the administration. As we know that Karoline Leavitt is leaving the White House.
Just wondering what you're hearing about that position.
HABERMAN: I've heard the same thing that you all have reported, and that others have reported, is that Scott is very much in the running, and last week, had been described to me by somebody as a favorite. But I anticipate they will juggle a few possible options for a while. They may take their time doing this. They may not.
The reality is that Karoline Leavitt was in a unique position because she came in knowing Trump, having worked with him on the campaign. It's very different than term one, where you started out with Sean Spicer, who didn't have the same relationship with Trump. Then it was Sarah Sanders. Then it was Stephanie Grisham. Then it was Kayleigh McEnany.
[21:15:00]
Karoline Leavitt actually really had his trust and worked with him very closely. Whoever comes next, you know, unless it's -- unless it's Steven Cheung, which I do not anticipate, or someone like that, they're going to be starting out at a bit of a deficit. And the President considers himself as, as anyone in that White House will tell you, his own best comms director. So, who knows what this will look like?
SANCHEZ: Maggie Haberman, thanks so much for joining us.
HABERMAN: Thanks, Boris.
SANCHEZ: Of course.
And again, her book, "Regime Change," is available now.
Up next. Multiple sources tell CNN who has emerged as an early favorite to be the next White House press secretary. You heard a bit of that just now. We have more after a quick break.
Plus, what Treasury Secretary, Scott Bessent, is saying tonight, as he downplays the staggering $40 trillion national debt.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[21:20:00]
SANCHEZ: Tonight, sources say, a familiar face on this network is in the running for a top job at the White House. Multiple sources tell CNN that contributor, Scott Jennings, has emerged as an early favorite to be President Trump's next White House press secretary. Emphasis, though, on early, as those sources all stress the process is far from complete.
But it comes as the Trump administration is dealing with a critical vacancy, with Karoline Leavitt departing at the end of the month, leaving the White House podium without a permanent voice, and with the midterm elections fewer than three months away.
Joining us now is CNN's Senior White House Correspondent, Kristen Holmes, with her latest reporting.
Now, Kristen, you learned that Jennings recently met with White House Chief of Staff, Susie Wiles. What are you hearing about their sit- down?
KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, Boris, I'm told this came at the request of the White House, and this really was, for all intents and purposes, a preliminary meeting. This was the two of them, meeting face to face, for the first time, as Susie Wiles is really starting this process to find a new press secretary.
And it really is believed, at the White House, that there are two people who are going to determine who the next press secretary is going to be. One of them being Susie Wiles. The other, of course, President Trump.
And this was -- the idea behind it was kind of Susie laying out exactly what she wanted from a press secretary, and introducing herself -- or introducing herself to Jennings, and Jennings kind of making his own elevator pitch and talking about the job in general.
It does seem as though she really likes him. That's what I've been told by multiple sources inside the White House. In fact, there's a general belief in the West Wing that she backs Jennings.
But I did get some pushback from that, essentially saying it was too early to determine that the Chief of Staff had backed anyone in this process because this is going to take a long time. They're really being thoughtful about it, and Karoline has big shoes to fill. So yes, she might like him, but it doesn't necessarily mean this is something that is happening or happening right away.
SANCHEZ: So, what are the conversations like inside the White House about Jennings and whether he fits what President Trump and what other officials are looking for at the White House?
HOLMES: Well, one of the things that I was told by a number of sources is that Wiles has said that she is looking for a quote-unquote, Grown- up, somebody who understands the job but is also professional in that job. It's one thing to just stand at the podium and attack people, but they also want somebody who can work with reporters, behind the scenes, to actually try and shape the narrative, and that's something that they believe Karoline Leavitt has done.
And I want to read you what one person told me and my colleague, Alayna Treene. Said, "Can he do all the closed door legwork that has made Karoline so effective? No one knows." And that came from a Trump adviser.
And I will tell you, there's been a lot of pushback in the West Wing to Jennings. But really, when you break it down from these conversations that we're having with these officials, it's not so much about Jennings. It's so much about Karoline Leavitt leaving, and again, the critical role she has played.
SANCHEZ: Tell us more about that. Because there are concerns about her departure. She's leaving some big shoes to fill.
HOLMES: Yes, she's been with the team for so long. She's really structured the narrative, and she plays a role really outside of just being a press secretary, just being on the comms team. It's not somebody who just goes out there and kind of spews messaging. She also is sitting in on these meetings with President Trump, and weighing in on things with Susie Wiles that are beyond just being in communication.
I want to read to you what someone told me last night, when they were kind of waxing poetic about what it was going to be like when she left. They said: She's thoughtful, she's not impulsive, she actually understands the job. Some outside person doesn't understand the way it works. It feels like her and Susie Wiles are the only people holding this place together sometimes.
And I've heard from a number of people who just feel like the wheels are going to come off the wagon, that there's not going to be any strategy, there's not going to be any thoughtfulness put into this.
And I will tell you that I've heard from high-up officials that that is why this process is not going to be an overnight one because Wiles is aware of how big those shoes are to fill and wants to spend a lot of time really going through this process to make sure the person is the right fit.
But as we heard just now from Maggie, talking to you, those are going to be some big shoes to fill, and this person is likely going to be at a disadvantage for a number of reasons. One of which being Karoline understands how President Trump works. Will an outside person be able to do that?
SANCHEZ: Kristen Holmes, live for us on the North Lawn. Thank you so much.
I want to bring in two political sources now.
Former Obama campaign adviser, Ameshia Cross.
And former Republican Congressman, Adam Kinzinger.
Thank you both for joining us.
Adam, first to you. Here's what Jennings said when he was asked about being considered for the press secretary job, numerous times, including on THE SOURCE last week.
[21:25:00]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, CNN HOST, THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS: Your name keeps getting floated, which I'm sure you've seen. Have you heard anything from the White House on that job opening?
SCOTT JENNINGS, AMERICAN COMMENTATOR AND WRITER: I don't really have anything to say about it, other than, I mean, I would get to see you every day, and I would think you'd be happy about this--
(CROSSTALK)
COLLINS: You already -- I already see you every day.
JENNINGS: --I'm just saying like every single -- not really.
COLLINS: Pretty much.
JENNINGS: We see each other one or two days a week. But can you imagine every single day, getting to go to work, where I am -- I mean, this should be -- this should be an amazing thing for you.
COLLINS: We already work together, Scott. OK. But that's not a no.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: Do you believe he's the right person for the job, Adam?
ADAM KINZINGER, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, FORMER U.S. REPRESENTATIVE (R-IL): I mean, to his credit, he's being honest about his interest. A lot of people just pretend like they're not interested and go after it. I mean, look, so outside of my personal opinions of Donald Trump and what this is going to do, what it's going to mean, I think he'd be fine at the job. He's tactically good at being able to kind of fight back and everything else.
But whoever the next press person is, is going to have to be comfortable with things like Donald Trump saying, I'm the best at flagpoles, I'm really good at flagpoles, or bragging about his new plush jet that he has, while troops are stuck on the USS Lincoln for 250 days, and then Donald Trump says, Well, actually, they haven't been deployed long enough, which he actually said.
So, can Scott do the job? I'm certain he can. I'm certain, from the behind the scenes, he can probably build the relationships necessary. I just honestly don't know why anybody would want this job, particularly if they want to have much of a career after it. Because this is not a good time to be in the Trump administration. Just my personal opinion. I wish him luck, though.
SANCHEZ: Ameshia, how difficult of a job would Jennings have, or anyone have, stepping into that role?
AMESHIA CROSS, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST, FORMER OBAMA CAMPAIGN ADVISER: I think it's extremely tough. We know that the economic numbers, in terms of people's personal economies, job losses, people who are working multiple jobs just making ends meet, that has maximized during this administration. We know that the effects of the Big Beautiful Bill Act, people are feeling every day with health care concerns, with student loan concerns, you name it.
We know that this is a president who has an approval rating right now, that is literally in the toilet. I think that it would have been a whole lot easier to do it while he was riding high than it is on this side of things. And we have the midterms coming up, where there's expected to be a very large bleed for conservatives. It's going to be a very hard row to hoe for whoever walks in.
I will say that this will be an interesting trajectory for him. Because, in most cases, a person walks into the TV talking head after they have served as press secretary, not prior to.
SANCHEZ: Right.
CROSS: This is a very interesting conversation to have because he's walking into a very -- he would be walking into a very difficult situation, and he has not been tested to be able to show his effectiveness in that way.
Love her or hate her, Karoline Leavitt understood the job, not only the President and how he would react, but also how the media and the public would react, and I think that those relationships did her justice.
SANCHEZ: There's also the angle of her role, Karoline Leavitt's, Adam, as an adviser to Trump. What kind of person would fit that role the way that she does? I feel like it would be hard to find.
KINZINGER: Yes, I mean, does Trump take advice? I mean, I don't -- you know, I had interactions with him obviously in the first term. When you actually meet with him, he seems to be interested in what you're saying, and then whoever talks to him last is the one that really influences him, if anybody influences him at all. And this term seems very different. This seems like this is just a term of gut feeling.
And so, I don't know what Scott and the President's relationship is behind the scenes, personally. I think it would need to be somebody, if Scott has this that's -- that is able to kind of work with the President to kind of keep him calm or give him advice when necessary, without triggering him, and probably ultimately have to be comfortable with the President not taking advice. So, I think from a personality perspective, certainly, Scott has the ability to get along with him, to get along with people, and he may be a good fit for that. I haven't heard any other names. I mean, I've kind of seen names thrown around of who's being considered. This seems to be the most logical choice at this moment, but only he and the President could probably answer that ultimately.
SANCHEZ: Ameshia. Adam. Please don't leave yet. Plenty more to discuss.
Up next. Reining in the national debt, once a central theme for Republicans. Now that it's $40 trillion and change though, some White House officials have a different message.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SCOTT BESSENT, TREASURY SECRETARY: There's nothing magic about the 40- trillion number, and we can grow our way out of that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[21:30:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BESSENT: There's nothing magic about the 40-trillion number, and we can grow our way out of that.
SARA EISEN, "SQUAWK ON THE STREET" CO-ANCHOR, CNBC: So, do you think we've seen peak deficit during this administration?
BESSENT: I think a very -- very good chance we have.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: That was Treasury Secretary, Scott Bessent, today on this staggering number that is growing by the second, as the national debt climbs past the $40 trillion mark, two years earlier than expected. The numbers doubled in just the past decade, increasing $3.8 trillion in the 19 months since President Trump returned to the White House, a far cry from the pledge that he made just last year.
[21:35:00]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: In the near future, I want to do what has not been done in 24 years: balance the federal budget.
Now it's our turn to prosper, and in so doing, use trillions and trillions of dollars to reduce our taxes and pay down our national debt, and it'll all happen very quickly.
Balancing our federal budget, which I think we're going to do very quickly, only because of our policy of fair tariffs.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: My political sources are back now.
Adam, reining in the national debt used to be a central theme for Republicans, but those days appear to be gone.
KINZINGER: Boris, I was elected in 2010, and this was the big issue. The debt at that time was like $16 trillion, $17 trillion. If you remember, Paul Ryan put out an elaborate video about how we were going to go off this debt cliff. And that is all we talked about. I mean, at one point we either did -- I don't remember if we actually would shut it down or we almost shut down the government over a discrepancy of like $1 billion or $2 billion with the Democrats.
The scary thing to me is that now $40 trillion in debt with much higher interest rates. We had almost 0 percent interest rate back then. Nobody's talking about it now. I mean, today we are because it crossed $40 trillion.
Boris, you could eliminate the United States military, the whole U.S. military right now, not spend another dollar on it, eliminate all foreign aid, and we would still be running deficits among the highest in the last 20 years.
This is something now -- the generation, largely the boomer generation, but frankly everybody, put such a burden on this country now, living lavishly without being willing to pay for it, that now the next generations, our generation, and the generations that follow us will have to be spending down and paying interest on the lavishness of the prior generations for the rest of their life. They don't get to invest more in education. They don't get to invest more in roads and bridges. They get the privilege of paying for the excessive spending of people like Donald Trump, yes, Joe Biden, yes, Obama, yes, every president.
And I'll just say very quickly: when I got elected, we had an opportunity for a big debt negotiation. And to Obama's credit, he was willing to put things on the table that were anathema to Democrats, and so was John Boehner. Ultimately, it was tanked by what ended up becoming the Freedom Caucus, and the Trump -- the MAGA movement, and here we are.
And there is no way to grow ourselves out of this deficit, by the way. We're long past that time.
SANCHEZ: I just want to play, Ameshia, some of what Bessent said today, to compare that to what President Trump said, back in 2015, during his first run for the White House.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BESSENT: There's nothing magic about the 40-trillion number, and we can grow our way out of that. TRUMP: We owe $18 trillion. It's going to soon be $22 trillion. When it hits $24 trillion, that's the magic number. That's called the point of no return. A couple of you folks from the Wharton School of Finance, I see you nodding. You -- understand. $24 trillion is the point of no return. It's going to be very hard to come back.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: We're now nearly double past the point of no return there, the magic number that Treasury Secretary, Scott Bessent, denies exists. I just wonder how does this get fixed? Does it?
CROSS: I don't think that it does. I mean, President Trump came into office, arguing that he was going to lower the debt. He quoted several other presidents who had made similar pledges, and all he did was explode the national debt. In addition to that, there's no sign of stopping. It's going to be probably close to double that by the time we get to the New Year.
SANCHEZ: Wow.
CROSS: By the way, that he is spending like there is no tomorrow, there has to be an acknowledgement that that is going to, as the former Congressman said, put generations upon generations into debt. But this president does not care. With that being said, he's also somebody remember -- remember, DOGE. Wasn't this supposed to be part of their deal, that they were supposed to cut government spending?
The Republican Party has always been, or you know, was said to be the party of controlling the deficit. They were the party to ensure that there was checks and balances when it came to how much spending occurred and limits to the national debt. This president has blown all of that out of the water, and nobody really wants to talk about it.
The number is massive today, but the number was massive six months ago. Nobody wants to talk about it because he doesn't have a plan to fix it. And the Republican Party is in his camp, they do not want to challenge him on it.
SANCHEZ: Pivoting to a completely different subject. CNN has some exclusive new reporting I wanted to ask about. Sources are telling us, the U.S. Navy is considering renaming an aircraft carrier that was set to honor a black war hero, to honor potentially President Trump instead.
[21:40:00]
In 1941, Mess Attendant Third Class Doris Miller jumped into action during the attack on Pearl Harbor. He carried several wounded shipmates to safety, also manned an anti-aircraft gun despite not having any training on that weapon.
What is your reaction to what sources are telling us tonight?
CROSS: I'm disgusted, and I am disgusted because this isn't a long line of President Trump trying to erase the efforts, the achievements, the accomplishments in the history of Black people across this country, especially those who have such a high honor in our American history.
And I think that one of the first things that this president did, when he got into office, was to issue all of those anti-DEI executive orders. Beyond that, we've seen the disparate impact regulations that he's put out. Just this week, we saw the calls from the Department of Education to basically ignore black kids when it comes to paying attention to the disparities that exist in discipline. Everywhere you turn, this president has proven his racism loudly and proudly, and this is just the next rung of that.
SANCHEZ: Adam, as a former service member, how are you reacting to this?
KINZINGER: This is -- this angers me, and here's the other thing: Chappie James was a general in the United States Air Force.
Chappie James, one of the best fighter pilots to ever exist, he actually pulled a gun on Muammar Gaddafi at the front gate of a U.S. base in Libya when Gaddafi was taking over Libya, and Gaddafi backed down. This guy is an epic, actually a Republican, by the way, he was a Republican. One of the very first things that Pete Hegseth did was remove his photo from the Pentagon. Now why, why would you remove this hero from the Pentagon if not because of his race?
And to take a guy who is -- look, Donald Trump is president. Nobody's denying that. He's the Commander-in-Chief. He also is a draft dodger. This White House puts out pictures of him in his military academy uniform when he was a kid because they want it to look like he was some service member and he demands it because it makes him look cool. He was a child in a military academy. That's the extent of his military service.
And now, to put his name on a ship and take off this African American soldier who shot at airplanes, despite not even knowing how to do that because he wasn't trained on it, is disgusting, sick. And if there is, my personal opinion, if there's anybody left that looks and says Donald Trump is a man that's out for anybody but himself, after knowing this? I don't know how you can. To be quite honest, I just don't.
SANCHEZ: Adam Kinzinger. Ameshia Cross. Appreciate the perspective. Thanks so much for joining us.
KINZINGER: You bet.
SANCHEZ: Up next. Facebook and Instagram's parent company in probably its biggest legal fight yet, a loss that could fundamentally change how Meta operates. We're going to explain what a former employee turned whistleblower said in court. Kara Swisher is my source tonight.
[21:45:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) SANCHEZ: Tonight, one of the biggest legal tests yet involving social media and children is playing out in a federal courtroom in Oakland. A former Meta engineering director testified that Mark Zuckerberg fostered a culture where child safety took a back seat to growth, engagement, and profit on Facebook and Instagram.
29 states have sued Meta, accusing it of designing apps to hook young users, contributing to the youth mental health crisis and improperly collecting data from kids under 13. They also claim that Meta misled people about the platform's safety.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ROB BONTA, CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY GENERAL: We cannot adequately protect our children from the harms of Instagram and Facebook when the company, one of the largest, richest, most powerful companies on the face of the earth, lies to us and hides the truth, and designs these platforms to drive compulsive use, while lying to your face and telling you it's safe. Parents cannot do their job if they're being lied to. Teens, parents, the community, the public deserve the truth.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: Meta has denied wrongdoing. The trial happening now involves four of the 29 states. It could last up to two months, and they could collectively get more than a trillion dollars in damages. A judge would ultimately decide what penalties or changes Meta could face.
My source tonight is CNN contributor, and internet and technology expert, Kara Swisher.
Kara, great to see you.
KARA SWISHER, CNN CONTRIBUTOR, INTERNET AND TECHNOLOGY EXPERT, HOST, "ON" & "PIVOT" PODCASTS: Good to see you.
SANCHEZ: So, when a former Meta executive says that child safety was secondary to growth and engagement, what does that mean in terms of how these platforms are actually designed?
SWISHER: Well, they're designed to keep you there. They're like a casino, and if kids are in the casino, then they play blackjack, essentially, and so -- and it's not safe enough for them because there's adults there, there's not -- there's not enough rules around things or limits for people. And so, it creates sort of a Wild West situation. So, it's a bunch of kids partying in Vegas, is what I think they're trying to say.
SANCHEZ: What could go wrong, right? Do tech companies--
SWISHER: What could go wrong?
SANCHEZ: Do tech companies -- do these tech giants, like Zuckerberg, feel like these sorts of cases pose an existential threat?
SWISHER: I think they think everything poses it. It's a very paranoid company in that regard, and it's been a good thing for Mark that way. Anytime there's a -- you know, even in AI, he just turned the ship around, really quickly he got out of the Metaverse. So, he's very good that way. But I think he's always been plagued by this idea that he's sort of stealing people's privacy, or that they know too much, or there's a lot of whistleblowers talking about the harms that their system does.
[21:50:00]
And that this -- this is Arturo -- I think it's Bejar, I think that's his name, you know, he's test -- he's a safety engineer. He's testifying that safety is not of interest to them. Growth is. And that sort of tracks on my experience with the company.
SANCHEZ: My understanding is that that trillion-dollar figure was floated by the company itself. So, it's maybe not necessarily--
SWISHER: Yes.
SANCHEZ: --the most accurate reflection of what the decision--
SWISHER: No.
SANCHEZ: --in terms of penalties might be. But where do you see this ending? What could be the damage to Meta if the--
SWISHER: Well--
SANCHEZ: --plaintiffs prevail?
SWISHER: Well, I think $200 billion is what people were talking about. The states were certainly talking about that. And that's a very, you know, a big number, $1.4 trillion.
But mostly, over the past couple of years, Meta has paid, what I consider, parking tickets. Like, if you get a parking ticket that's $0.05, you certainly would keep parking in the place that you are. And so, they've gotten like a $5 million one. There's all sorts of ones, but they're not very big. I've always said put two zeros on everything and then keep going upwards.
And I think this is -- this could be an existential moment. It's sort of like people are comparing it to the cigarette cases. There were a lot of them before they finally prevailed, and they got all kinds of information. And it'll be interesting to see what they get out of the company and what will be shown in court, some of this evidence that they have.
SANCHEZ: I have to ask you about what seems like the hot political topic of the week: these data centers across the country.
SWISHER: It is.
SANCHEZ: Several states have proposed or passed laws to ban or regulate them.
Today, you had Republican Senate candidate, Mike Rogers, calling for a one-year moratorium on new data centers in Michigan.
There was a poll, from earlier this year, showing 71 percent oppose data center construction in their area.
SWISHER: Yes.
SANCHEZ: What kind of political pressure are tech giants facing over these data centers? How are they responding?
SWISHER: Well, they're going to have to slow down because they're getting like pushback everywhere, whether it's Utah, or Virginia, or Michigan.
I interviewed -- I've been talking about this for a year because you could start to see it boil up, and it's really the proxy for everything else people are mad tech leaders for, from privacy, to worries about AI and jobs, to their infinite wealth, to Elon Musk dancing on the stage with a chainsaw. All this stuff, you know, that it adds up in data centers or the manifestation of that because, they're real, and they're there, and they're making noise, and they're maybe spewing gas, and things like that, and it looks like they're ending days and maybe the local officials are in the pockets. You know, it goes on and on. And so, people are pissed because it's where they live.
We obviously have data centers all around the country. It's just a question of how they get put in place and who makes these decisions. And so, citizens are justifiably angry, especially young people, but everybody. I've interviewed older people, younger people. It just feels like they're just rolling on over, you know, the train's going through town, and you're just going to have to take it, and people aren't going to take it anymore.
SANCHEZ: Yes. There is, I think, a counterargument to be made about how they could be a positive development, especially in Rust Belt places.
SWISHER: Sure.
SANCHEZ: But it's almost ironic that the people who build them and support them fostered a culture, rife with distrust, where now if they try to make that positive argument, nobody believes them.
SWISHER: Well, let's link those two stories. People know that social media is bad for their kids. Anyone with a kid knows that. Like, in seconds. You yourself are addicted to social media. Everybody is.
SANCHEZ: Right.
SWISHER: And so, you know -- and then when you think about data centers, why would they be telling us the truth here?
Now, in some cases, like, I interviewed the Mayor of Lansing, Michigan. Speaking of Michigan. It's nice that Mike Rogers has flip- flopped, just the way Vivek Ramaswamy has, and others because, public sentiment is headed this way. But it's a flip-flop nonetheless. One of the things that's really interesting is just to watch, like even places where they're trying to do good versions of these things, closed-loop water systems, although there's questions about that, far away, they pay back power bills and things like that. Even then, citizens in Lansing, Michigan, didn't want the thing, even though it was much better -- a much better offer and not hidden in NDAs and things like that. They weren't interested because of the reputation. They just don't believe them. And until Americans believe their tech leaders again, I'm not so sure they can build them.
And we should be building some of these, by the way. Look, there -- we need this stuff in this country. But it has to be done in the right way. And Donald Trump telling everybody to, like, just take it, it's not really going over very well.
SANCHEZ: Kara Swisher, always love getting your perspective. Thanks for being up late with us.
SWISHER: Thanks, Boris.
SANCHEZ: Of course.
Up next. The Source Code. We're giving you a number at the center of a story in the news. Can you guess the story? Tonight's Source Code, 11,300. We'll be right back with the answer.
[21:55:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: Tonight's Source Code is 11,300. That's roughly the number of nautical miles the USS Abraham Lincoln will sail for its journey home to San Diego after nearly nine grueling months at sea.
Sources say the USS George Washington has arrived in the Middle East to relieve the Lincoln.
[22:00:00]
Some 5,000 sailors are beginning the long voyage after more than a 250-day deployment, largely supporting operations against Iran. That journey takes about a month, and it's unclear if they're going to stop at any ports along the way. Of course, the return comes after scrutiny about conditions aboard the Lincoln, including exhausted service members' concerns over morale and mental health, and reports of supply problems.
Thank you all so much for joining us tonight.
You can catch me tomorrow and every weekday on "CNN NEWS CENTRAL" starting at 01:00 p.m. Eastern.
"CNN NEWSNIGHT WITH ABBY PHILLIP" starts in just a few seconds.
