Return to Transcripts main page

Smerconish

Rep. Nikki Budzinski, (D-IL), Is Interviewed About House Dems Plan First 100-Days Agenda If They Win; What Happens If The AI Bubble Bursts? Pope Leo Discharged From Hospital; Can NATO Guarantee Ukraine's Security Without The U.S.?. Aired 9-10a ET

Aired October 17, 2026 - 09:00   ET

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

And so I find that creating art to tell the truth about who we are and just speak truth in general is so much more powerful than any words that I could ever say.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

VICTOR BLACKWELL, CNN ANCHOR: Well, thank you for joining me today. I'll see you back here next Saturday. Smerconish is up next.

[09:00:30]

MICHAEL SMERCONISH, CNN ANCHOR: Investigations or legislation? I'm Michael Smerconish in the Philly burbs. That's what's mostly at stake in the upcoming midterm elections. But is the bigger change possible that Democrats seek? That's a different question.

When FDR took office during the depression, he used the phrase first 100 days to explain how he'd hit the ground running. Since then, it's common for presidents to talk about what they'll do in their first 100 days. And now Democrats hoping to take over Congress have jumped on that bandwagon. The AP reporting that Democrats have detailed plans for how they would handle their first 100 days running the House. It's not a wish list, it's more of a schedule.

Hakeem Jeffries, who would likely be speaker, says his party will be united right out of the gate. The plan is to launch the agenda not merely in the first 100 days, but actually in the first 100 hours after the new Congress is sworn in. So what's on the list? First, health care. Restore the Affordable Care 8 Act tax credits that were expanded during the pandemic and expired at the end of 2025.

Second, reverse the Medicaid cuts that Republicans passed in the one Big Beautiful Bill, including the new work requirements. Third, the war. Democrats have already forced multiple votes to end U.S. military action against Iran. In the majority, they push more of those war power resolutions. Fourth, tariffs.

Undo the president's tariff regime and claw back trade power from the White House. And then there's the other half of the agenda, Oversight. Jeffries has told the top Democrats on the Oversight and Judiciary committees to prepare investigations of the president, his family and his administration. On impeachment, Jeffries says it is neither on nor off the table. And among the intangibles, what will be the place for those candidates backed by the Democratic Socialists of America?

Will they form their own version of the GOP's Freedom Caucus? Of course, any Democratic plans depend on them winning the House or the Senate or both. And no matter what, the president still has his veto pen. Take that first item, restoring the COVID tax credits for the ACA. Democrats pass it in the House on day one then it goes to the Senate, where it needs 60 votes to get past a filibuster.

And even if it somehow gets through it lands on Donald Trump's desk. Same story for the Medicaid reversal. Same for repealing the tariffs. Same for ending the war. But if a Democratic House can't pass laws on its own, what can it do?

Number one, the power of the purse. No spending bill becomes law without the House. That's real leverage, because Democrats can refuse to fund things and attach conditions to bills that have to pass. But that leverage runs through a threat of government shutdown. And the record there is mixed.

Number two, the debt ceiling. The government will likely hit its $41.1 trillion borrowing limit sometime in 2027. That would give a Democratic House a card to play, which is why Republicans are talking about raising the debt ceiling in a lame duck session after the election.

Number three, oversight. This is where a House majority has the most power. Committees can call hearings, they can demand documents, they can subpoena people. We've seen this movie before.

In the president's first term, the strategy was to fight subpoenas in court and run out the clock. And when a witness ignores a subpoena, the House can hold him in contempt. But prosecuting contempt is up to the Justice Department. And this is Donald Trump's DOJ.

Number four, impeachment. The House can impeach with a simple majority, but removal takes a 2/3rd vote of the Senate. Donald Trump has been impeached twice, acquitted in the House -- in the Senate, twice. A House impeachment, that's a statement. It's not a removal.

But all this speculation is if the Democrats take the House and only the House. What if they win both chambers? Two big things. First, confirmations. The Senate decides who gets confirmed, cabinet secretaries, ambassadors, and above all else, federal judges.

All that's needed to get a judge through a majority is a majority vote. Second, though most bills need 60 votes in the Senate to get around the filibuster, some only require a majority. Like war powers resolutions, such bills will actually get to the president's desk. Bottom line, what's the point of a 100 day legislative agenda that mostly can't become law? Critics will call it messaging.

Bills passed for show. However, if Democrats do take the House and the Senate, they'll have the power to say no. Getting to yes for the next two years, that still runs through 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. [09:05:03]

All of this leads us today's poll question at smerconish.com, if Democrats win the House, what should they prioritize, investigations or legislation?

Joining us now to discuss his former senator from West Virginia, Joe Manchin. We also have Nikki Budzinski, representative from Illinois. She's running for chair of the New Democrat Coalition, the largest caucus within the House Democrats.

Senator Manchin, to you, welcome back. You were the deciding vote in a 50-50 Senate. If Democrats win the Senate next month, can they get anything past Donald Trump's veto?

JOE MANCHIN, FORMER WEST VIRGINIA SENATOR: Well, nothing's going to change with President Trump. He's going to be the same person he is today. So unless he gets what he wants, he's not going to be supporting any of it and he would veto it. So that doesn't stop the Democrats from doing the right thing.

And you know the Waterloo, Republicans Waterloo is high cost of living. Just simply people cannot sustain any type of a quality life. They can't pay for the groceries. They can't pay for the gasoline or diesel fuel. And everything else in their life is so high energy cost.

That should be what they attack first. The Democrats -- I mean, the Democrats Waterloo in the last administration was the immigration, the border. And I tried to tell them, I said, you people have lost your mind having pardons at the border, we've never done that. But they did it. And you see what happened.

The problem now is, is that if they go in, Democrats go in, strictly talking about. All I'm concerned about right now is reducing the cost for you to be able to live a life that you can take care of yourself and your family. If they can't do that and they start with investigations, Michael, it's over. They're going to tee up everything in 2028 for Republican takeover completely. If they show they can legislate, that they can do things, even though he doesn't pass them, even though they're not his ideas, and he could veto that, let him veto good policy that helps people reduce -- that's it.

If they can do that, they're fine. If they can't, and they're just consumed with retaliation and retribution, which is what we've been seeing for the last two years, that's not what the American people want or need right now. And they'll fall into that trap. It's all over.

SMERCONISH: Congresswoman, you told the Associated Press that the antidote to Democratic infighting is, quote, getting things done with President Trump in the White House. What can the Democratic House actually get done?

REP. NIKKI BUDZINSKI (D-IL): Well, we can demonstrate that first we can govern right out of the gate and address the biggest concerns that the American people have, which is cost. We need to fix our broken health care system. We need to lower utility bills. We need to build on the 21st century road to housing law. making affordable housing really attainable in this country.

We have a lot of work to do. And I agree with Senator Manchin that it should be laser focused on cost, bringing down costs, hitting the ground running in January. We can show that we can lead. And I think it's equally important that we can govern.

By getting things done, I think that is a very unifying force. And I think that Leader Jeffries is very focused on those items. You outlined them earlier in your segment that have built consensus in our caucus that we can hit the ground running on. And I think we'll be ready to do that on day one.

SMERCONISH: Congresswoman --

MANCHIN: Michael --

SMERCONISH: -- Senator Manchin cautioned against retribution, what role do you see in investigations? Because you know there's a lot of clamoring --

BUDZINSKI: Yes.

SMERCONISH: -- by the very people who might cause Democrats to win back the House. They want to see some level of retribution. What would you say to them?

BUDZINSKI: I wouldn't say it's retribution. I would say it's accountability. I think we do need to bring accountability to this White House. I think we can be doing that. I often say that Democrats in January we need to demonstrate that we can walk and chew gum at the same time. We need to stay focused on the issues the American people care the most about, which is putting money back in their pocket, getting to the issues of bringing down costs.

But we can do that all alongside making sure that we are an important check on this administration. One of the most, if not the most corrupt administrations we've seen. And the American people are demanding accountability to that. I think we can do both. And that's what Democrats are gearing up to do in January.

SMERCONISH: Senator Manchin, you want it in? Go ahead.

MANCHIN: Michael, first of all, no one's talking about the debt of the nation. We're going to -- we're going to accumulate another $2 trillion of debt this year, this fiscal year. That is one of the greatest contributing factor towards inflation and high cost. Nobody wants to tackle that because that's a tough one. You've got to start looking and basically setting your priorities on what we should be spending money, everyone paying their fair share and I mean everybody paying something.

[09:10:00]

We've got so many people that pay nothing, but we got other people aren't paying enough that have so much and it needs to be balanced out, Michael. Until we're serious about the debt of this nation, that'll be the downfall of us. And that's what we've been warned about many, many years ago, that it'll be the debt of the nation will take you down before anything else. We're not talking about that at all.

The other thing is tariffs. My God, they're damaging as far as cost, supply costs. The war, war should have AUMF, authorization to use military force. The people should be speaking for the people they represent. Do we want to end this war?

Do we want to know how this war is going to end? What the end result is going to be? We have no knowledge at all what the plan is. You should ask for accountability on that.

I'm not saying they shouldn't be holding everybody responsible and their families and from the administration to what they're doing, but if you put that on the front burner and you don't basically bring down my cost to where I can live a life or have a pathway forward that my children and grandchildren can basically enjoy their life and have them start their family and have upward bound, then you're not giving me any hope whatsoever that you're going to change things except this clash going back.

And that's why I think independent minded people are the best to have in the legislature. They're looking at both sides, not wedded to one side or the other. That needs to be done very, very clearly for the American people or the Democratic Party to have a chance to regain really control.

SMERCONISH: Senator Manchin, a follow up to you. You know what it's like, you're uniquely qualified to address this question. You know what it's like to be a tiebreaker in the United States Senate. If Democrats take control of the Senate, how do you see the confirmation process being impacted particularly the federal bench?

MANCHIN: If Democrats, and I always looked at district judges and the judge system, is something that I don't think we should have ever gotten rid of the filibuster for. That was a 60 vote threshold. That really got you more moderate centrist people because it took buy in from both sides. Now we can get extremes, but your circuit and district judges are completely different. Circuit is really up there high and it takes a whole another sense, I think, responsibility and experience level.

District judges, you can have a little different say about how you will move forward. They have a tremendous amount of opportunity to set the standard. The qualifications, character of a person. Qualifications, experience level means everything. Not just because they're a D or an R, but because they have the ability to basically look over our, you know, our old system, the rule of law.

If a person is going to basically be wedded to a party and not the Constitution and not the rule of law, that's not a person I want. Might be my best friend, but they don't deserve to be making decisions for you and I. We have to start using common sense, getting quality people that are qualified. But also character means something. Michael, we've lost count of character because the parties now have basically got it to where no one votes in the primary, 18 percent, 20 percent show up. They get exactly what they want, extreme left or extreme right. An independent or independent minded Democrat, Republican has a hard time breaking through their primaries because they're so controlled. We're trying to open primaries up, change the whole system of competition. There is no competition in the political process in America today.

So, you know, when you have competition --

SMERCONISH: Congress --

MANCHIN: -- you get the best players on the field.

SMERCONISH: Congresswoman, you get the final word. There's a lot there to unpack from Senator Manchin, take your choice.

BUDZINSKI: Yes. Look, I would say independence, people do want pragmatism and independence, but that cannot just be a label. If you are a Republican and you've converted yourself to an independent, but you still have a 94 percent voting record with President Donald Trump, I don't call that independence. I do think that there is a hunger from the American people about pragmatism, common sense policy. I work very hard to be one of the most bipartisan members in the House, which means that I do break with my party when it doesn't meet the needs of my constituents.

I do think that there is a hunger for that. But right now we need a Democratic majority in the House and the Senate to put a check on this administration that's critically important. And that's what I will tell you. I'm very laser focused on headed into November 3rd.

SMERCONISH: Congresswoman Budzinski, thank you for being here.

MANCHIN: Michael --

SMERCONISH: Senator Manchin, real fast, real fast.

MANCHIN: Just one quick thing. OK. On this, basically, the percentage, people voting 90 percent if you're Democrat, you end up voting 90 percent if you're Republican. We're not taking any serious votes at all. I think the Congresswoman, all due respect, would agree with that.

Serious votes were not taken. You're being basically raided on insulin. You know, just very minor things. That's ridiculous. Look at the serious issues that aren't getting done.

How people vote on that. That's what you should be looking at.

SMERCONISH: I appreciate both of you. Thank you so much.

[09:15:01]

To everybody at home, what are your thoughts? Hit me up on social media. You can find me on all the usual platforms. I'll read some throughout the course of the program.

From Facebook, legislation -- this is to the question of, what should be the focus if Democrats take the House legislation or investigation. Laura says legislation they need to reel in this out of control administration. Also, if they don't have the Senate what's the point of wasting time on impeachment? A great observation, that is the poll question today.

Go to smerconish.com and cast your ballot on this issue. If Democrats win the House, what should they prioritize? Investigations or legislation?

Up ahead, the Nasdaq was down 4 and a half percent this week caused by heavy selling and artificial intelligence related stocks. Is the AI bubble about to burst? Author Walter Isaacson is here. He just sat down with tech leaders Elon Musk, Dario Amodei and Alex Karp for a new podcast. And could the best thing for the economy not be AI and robotics, but more skilled workers?

Plus, we'll be live from Rome as Pope Leo will be released from the hospital four days after lung cancer surgery. Make sure you're signing up for the newsletter at smerconish.com. You'll get the work of illustrators like Steve Breen.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:20:30]

SMERCONISH: It's been a tricky time for fans of Big Tech. The Nasdaq has been plunging, politicians are attacking data centers, and everybody is scared of AI. We can't kid ourselves. Big Tech is here to stay. There may be doom and gloom in the air, but some see hope.

The question is how we can best utilize technology not just for the economy, but for the public good.

My next guest, Walter Isaacson, knows something about the issue. He's written best-selling books about Steve Jobs, Elon Musk, and "The Innovators" who created the digital revolution. In fact, there's a new edition of that last book coming out this month. He's also the former CEO of CNN and the host of a new podcast, "The Builders," where he sits down with some of the biggest names in technology, including Musk, Peter Thiel, Dario Amodei, and Alex Karp.

They discuss the future of artificial intelligence and the dangers that can occur when the technology gets out of our control. He also wrote a piece with Jim Farley, the CEO of Ford Motor, in yesterday's Washington Post. It's about the modern economy and the need for people in skilled trades. Walter Isaacson joins me now.

Walter, thank you for being here. You've just updated --

WALTER ISAACSON, HOST OF "THE BUILDERS" PODCAST: Thank you.

SMERCONISH: -- the book "The Innovators," about the people who created the computer and the Internet, bringing it into the AI age. And meanwhile, as I just said, I took note of that Washington Post piece yesterday that America needs more skilled trade workers. I wonder, are these two sides of the same coin? In other words, we need people who can invent the future. We also need people who can build it.

ISAACSON: Absolutely. A really smart question. People always worried. Will AI destroy jobs? It will certainly disrupt jobs. But in the end, as with any new technology, more productivity will mean more jobs.

But the type of jobs are shifting to people who can build physical things in the real world, people who are -- everything from welders to HVAC. Here in New Orleans, you know, my wife and I, we support the New Orleans Career Center because it takes kids from high school and says learn trades and skills. That's what Jim Farley of Ford was saying, something we discussed three years ago with him at the Aspen Institute.

So I think as we go into this era of AI, we shouldn't be afraid, but we should become a country again and a workforce again that builds things in the physical, real world.

SMERCONISH: I read the piece that you co-authored, and it brought me back to junior high and high school. I'll date myself. And I remember at the end of the school day, you know, part of the student body went to athletics, and others boarded a different bus and they went to what was then called the tech school to learn the very types of essential skills that you're advocating. The pendulum seems to have swung away from that, but maybe now comes back.

ISAACSON: Absolutely. I think what you're seeing, and here in Louisiana, you know, we're good at building things. We're probably not the greatest at inventing frontier models of large language models and chat bots, but if you need to build a data center, if you need to build a pipeline, well, those are the type of things we're going to have to get back to in the economy. Jim Farley at Ford was talking about that three or four years ago before the AI boom happened. The AI boom kicks that up, you know, one order of magnitude.

SMERCONISH: This week I'd be -- I'd be derelict if I didn't ask you about Elon Musk, in particular. Ukraine's military lost Starlink speed in the middle of that war with Russia. Musk blames Trump. A new report says it was actually Musk's idea. You know, the personality, you've written about Elon Musk deciding Starlink's use in Ukraine before, does this fit with what you know of him?

How do you do discern what just transpired.

ISAACSON: When it happened before where Musk was controlling Starlink's use in Ukraine, he went in at the very beginning of that war and pretty much saved Ukraine by immediately giving him communications. Then, as you say, move back and forth. What happened then was that Space X, Starlink, they decided to create something that was called Starshield, that's totally in the control of the Pentagon, the federal government. And what you saw this past week really comes down to a decision by Trump and the Trump administration to take Starshield and throttle it.

[09:25:00]

Now you ask, does Elon favor that? Whatever Elon's gone, I mean, I don't like it, but he goes back and forth of being a hero for the Ukrainians, and then hating Zelenskyy. He's very mercurial. But that's why you do not want somebody like him having full power over this technology. It should be our democratically elected leaders.

And if we don't like what Trump is doing and throttling Star -- Starshield, the use of Starlink for Ukraine, that's what we have to do when we vote.

SMERCONISH: But you can't imagine Musk doing it without pressure, or at least the support of the White House. True?

ISAACSON: Oh, yes. No, the White House decides how Starshield is used. And this is something that we're looking at the broader picture here, which I talk about in this Builders podcast and the new introduction, you know, to my book "The Innovators," which is when you have breathtaking new technologies like this, you have huge investments that come along and you get an accumulation of great power. Sometimes were called the robber barons a century ago. And that's why you do need somebody like a Teddy Roosevelt who comes along. And when I talk -- and says, all right, we're going to put some guardrails here.

We're going to take control over it. So even when I talk to people like Dario and Daniela Amodei or Elon Musk and others about this new technology, they say, we're in a race to do this. We can't slow down. But if there's going to be guardrails, it's got to be the government or some entity that puts these guardrails on. And that's what this podcast series on The Builders is about.

Like, how do we control a technology that might leave human values behind?

SMERCONISH: Quick final question. Do you worry about a bubble? It occurs to me that you ran CNN right after the dot-com bubble burst, with tech stocks falling in the last couple of days, trillions being spent on AI. Are we watching the same movie?

ISAACSON: Absolutely. And by the way, you want to go back 100 years? Like I talked about the last time we had this type of investment in infrastructure, like 4 percent or 5 percent of the GDP was when the railroads were all racing to build railways across America. What happens? You get a country that has an amazing rail system, they get through, but 250 railway companies go bankrupt.

You're going to see a lot of destruction in the wake here, because this investment of trillions of dollars in data centers is being driven by a race, but not driven by, you know, a return on investment at the moment.

SMERCONISH: The book is called "The Innovators." Good luck with the podcast. Walter Isaacson, nice to have you here.

Let's see what everybody is saying at home via social media as you're watching the program. From the world of X. I don't know if the AI tech bubble is ready to burst, but I think the AI tech leaders are starting to realize their Republican buddies are about to lose control of all three branches of government -- I'm not sure how they're going to lose control of the third, but OK, we've got two more years -- and the Dems will slow down their growth.

I take note of what Walter Isaacson said at the end when I asked him the bubble question and he points out that we got a great railroad system, but there was a lot of disruption and a lot of people went bankrupt in that process. Maybe that's what's about to happen with AI.

Still to come, more of your social media reaction to today's program. We'll take you live to Rome when Pope Leo is released from the hospital four days after his lung cancer surgery. And President Trump just waived new sanctions against Russia days before they were set to take effect. Zelenskyy calling this a mistake that will only embolden Putin. So is this the end for Trump and Zelenskyy?

Will the European Union and NATO stopped step in? I'll ask Admiral James Stavridis.

I also want to remind you, answer today's poll question at smerconish.com. By the way, I'm aware of the fact that we've had some glitches with it because it was overwhelmed. Hopefully it's getting fixed. The question, if Democrats win the House, what would they prioritize, investigations or legislation? Sign up for the newsletter while you're there, you'll get the work of illustrators like Eric Allie.

This is a live shot from Rome right now. We're showing you as we anticipate Pope Leo being discharged from the hospital. Christopher Lamb is standing by for CNN.

Do we have Christopher?

CHRISTOPHER LAMB, CNN VATICAN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, I'm here.

SMERCONISH: Hi, Christopher. Give us the update.

LAMB: Hi. Well, Alex (ph), we can see at the moment a sizable crowd has gathered outside the front of the Gemelli Hospital here in Rome. I think we can hear --

SMERCONISH: Oh, here's the Holy Father.

LAMB: -- the pope coming out now, possibly. Yes. Yes, he's coming out now, I think.

SMERCONISH: He looks great.

LAMB: Yes. Yes, yes, he's coming out. Yes, he's coming out. He's just been in the hospital, as you know, for lung cancer surgery. And he's been -- he's greeting, I think, an official from the hospital.

He -- obviously, this is his first hospital stay since his election. He had that surgery on Tuesday and, of course, the lung cancer diagnosis. But he's going to be getting back to the Vatican now. And tomorrow we're expecting to see him make a public appearance and speak to the world on at the Sunday Angelus. But we can see a big group of well-wishers and also a lot of journalists down there as well, who have been gathering to cover this story.

The Pope is going to get in his Ford Explorer SUV back to the Vatican. It's got the number plate SCV1, which in Italian stands for Vatican City State 1 for the pope.

But his recovery has gone well, we're told by the Vatican. The surgery was on Tuesday. And of course, there's only a few days since that.

But the longer term prognosis is still not clear for Leo. We don't have the final test results following the surgery, and that's going to be crucial. But it does seem that his short term recovery has been going pretty well.

I think he's speaking to some people now probably from the hospital. He's been thanking medical staff. He certainly thanked them on Friday, and he'll soon be returning to the Vatican.

This hospital, the Gemelli, is one very closely associated with the popes. There's a special set of rooms for the pope on the 10th floor of the hospital. That's where he's been treated in the last few days.

He has said a mass today in the hospital for -- sorry, he said a mass at the hospital as he did yesterday for medical staff. And we are expecting him to depart fairly shortly. Whenever the pope goes to somewhere like a hospital, there's a lot of people who want to meet him and talk to him.

He has also received letters from young people, children who have been treated for cancer in the hospital. They've written to him.

And I think this is significant that the pope is leaving hospital fairly swiftly because, you know, his diagnosis and the surgery that he had on Tuesday really came as a huge shock for people in the Vatican, because Leo is seen as a pope who's relatively young and in relatively good health. That's what was -- that's what people thought in the Vatican. He is someone who keeps fit, who's active. So, the diagnosis really came as a big, big shock for everyone.

And I think there are a lot of questions about how he's going to manage in the future. The big one, of course, is, is he going to go to Latin America on a trip which is scheduled on the 6th of November until the 17th of November? He's expected to go to Uruguay, Argentina and Peru. But we don't know if the doctors are going to advise if that's sensible or not.

All the thinking is that he will take the doctor's advice. It sounds like he's getting into the car now and he's waving and saying goodbye to the people who've gathered to see him outside of the hospital.

So, Pope Leo leaving now the Gemelli Hospital which is in the northwest of Rome. He will be driven back to the Vatican, where he will continue his recovery. But tomorrow, Sunday, he will appear from the window of the Apostolic Palace where he lives and which overlooks Saint Peter's to lead the Sunday Angelus. That will be the first time we really hear and see Pope Leo in public since the lung cancer surgery.

So, I think it is a positive sign that the pope has been released fairly swiftly. The doctor said that the tests, the x-rays show that his recovery is going according to plan. As I say, he is someone who keeps in good physical condition and that is surely to his benefit given the situation --

SMERCONISH: Christopher, can I just make a -- can I just make a comment?

LAMB: Sorry. Yes.

SMERCONISH: I was -- I was so pleasantly surprised to see him walk out of his own accord. I don't know what my expectation had be, but he walked out. His color looked good. The fact that he was able to interact with people is just wonderful news to see.

LAMB: Yes, I think that's very positive. Yes, and I think that's what we were all waiting for to see how he was after this surgery. We've seen a couple of pictures, but we haven't seen him in person.

[09:35:00]

And as you say, he looks well given everything that he's gone through. He's walking out and he's greeting people, talking to people. That's a positive sign, I think.

And, you know, we still don't know how things are going to be long term. There's uncertainty about that. But certainly the departure now, you know, encouraging, as you say.

SMERCONISH: Absolutely. Christopher Lamb, thank you for that report. Wonderful news. We appreciate it.

Still to come, President Trump just put new Russian sanctions that he recently signed into law on hold as his relationship with President Zelenskyy deteriorates. Is NATO ready to step in and pick up the slack? Retired U.S. Navy admiral, former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO James Stavridis in the on deck circle to analyze.

Sign up for the newsletter at Smerconish.com. You'll get the work of Jack Ohman.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:40:21]

SMERCONISH: The war in Ukraine, entering another dangerous chapter as the relationship between President Zelenskyy and President Trump continues to falter. And now President Trump has signed an executive order waiving new sanctions on Russia as the administration looks to Moscow for help lowering fuel prices.

In addition, the Starlink controversy has raised new questions about who controls critical communications on the battlefield and just how much Ukraine can depend on the United States. The Starlink and Starshield services in Ukraine have resumed operation, but they're not yet fully restored to predisruption speeds. If Washington pulls back can NATO fill that void?

This week, NATO's top military commander laid out a new theory of victory, a plan to block a Russian advance, blunt its military capabilities and break its ability to sustain a longer war. But can European allies make up for a reduction in American support? And if Putin's ambitions extend beyond Ukraine, is NATO prepared to defend its own territory?

My next guest is retired U.S. Navy admiral and former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, Admiral James Stavridis. Admiral, welcome back.

You recently wrote this piece for Bloomberg, NATO Has a Plan to Fend Off Russia. Now it needs the will.

And you argue that having a plan is only half the battle. NATO's got the combined military resources to deter Moscow, but its success will ultimately depend on whether all 32 member states have the political will to act.

You've also got a new novel coming out in a few weeks. It's called "The Turning Tide: A Novel of Love and War," historical fiction, set in the second world war. I don't know where you find the time.

OK, here's my question. Is there any benign explanation for why the president just waived sanctions on Russia fossil fuel sales? He cited national interests, but he didn't explain. Read those tea leaves.

ADM. JAMES STAVRIDIS (RET.), CNN SENIOR MILITARY ANALYST: All I can think is that the idea is to get gas prices down, which is the ultimate example of some short term gain, which probably won't happen before the midterms. That will bring you a lot of long term pain.

I think waiving the sanctions is a big mistake. By the way, these are the Lindsey Graham sanctions named for one of the president's closest advisers, one of the great national security thinkers of the United States. He must be shocked up in heaven to see this.

And clearly, Michael, there are two things we need to do to solve the problem in Ukraine. One is continue to get weapons to the Ukrainians. We're doing that quite effectively via the Europeans who are paying for them, by the way. And the second thing is put economic pressure on Putin. That's his fuel. That's what's allowing him to continue the war.

If we do those two things, we'll succeed in keeping Ukraine free. But no, I don't see any sensible explanation for waiving those sanctions.

SMERCONISH: You may have heard a part of my conversation with Walter Isaacson during the course of this show about Elon Musk and Starlink and Starshield. OK, good.

So that all comes after Ukraine's military satellite service slowed down in the middle of the war. And what I wondered for you, especially after reading your piece in Bloomberg, if I'm in the Baltic states and I'm watching what just transpired, how concerned am I?

STAVRIDIS: You're very worried and you should be. Now, does that mean there are going to be Russian tanks rolling into the Baltic states? I don't think in the immediate future.

What Putin is going to try and do is use hybrid warfare, shadow warfare, gray zone warfare, unattributed strikes against undersea cables to cut the Baltics off, using manipulation of social media, using unmanned drones that are unmarked, like the one that landed at Leipzig Airport in Germany just a few weeks ago. All of those are going to be the modalities that Putin will use.

But make no mistake, if he succeeds in Ukraine, Michael, he will garner enormous new resources, 40 million new subjects, oil, gas, the breadbasket of Europe. That's why he wants Ukraine.

It's not some mystic vision of greater Russia. He wants it for the good old fashioned reason. He wants the resources. That's when our Baltic friends, our European friends will meet max danger, max Putin if Ukraine falls.

SMERCONISH: OK, so what then does it mean for NATO? Because NATO's battle plan leans heavily on drones, heavily on satellites.

[09:45:04]

Should the alliance depend on satellites that are owned by Elon Musk? If you were supreme allied commander of NATO, your old role, Ike's old role, today, how worried would you be about the Musk factor?

STAVRIDIS: I would hedge my bets to be sure. Walter, a good friend of mine, brilliant historian, used the word about Elon mercurial. That about sums it up.

So, what do you need? You need European satellites. The Europeans are increasing their capability. Canada is building a pretty capable space industry.

Certainly, there are other commercial alternatives to Elon Musk, but he is quite clearly a technology genius. You want to take what you can, but I wouldn't bet everything on the stability of any product that Elon Musk can control.

SMERCONISH: How worried should we be that there's such power vested in the hands of -- beyond Musk, any one private citizen playing such a critical role in a time of war?

STAVRIDIS: We ought to be concerned about it. But I'm cautiously optimistic. Our democracy will carry us through this.

And going back to the situation in Ukraine, here are brave Ukrainians who live in a real democracy, who are asking for help. They're not asking us to send troops to the front lines, but like Winston Churchill said in the second world war, Churchill said to Roosevelt, give us the tools. We will finish the job.

Here the job is defending their own nation. We ought to support them. I think in the end, democracy will continue to flow. Support to Ukraine. And in the interim, our European friends are stepping up.

SMERCONISH: Admiral, you wrote that NATO's Achilles' heel is political will. Right now is the weakest will among NATO members in Washington?

STAVRIDIS: I think it is in terms of Ukraine. Certainly, the shred of hope I can give listeners is that we're at a moment right before our midterms, when the political winds blow the strongest.

Hopefully, we'll see those die down somewhat in the wake of the actual midterms. And at least in my wheelhouse of foreign policy, we can kind of take some of the domestic political concerns, put them aside and do what's right. In this case, what's right is supporting Ukraine.

SMERCONISH: Quick final question. You say cutting U.S. troops in Europe would be misguided. The administration has already cut, I think the number is 5,000. And NATO's commander expects more. Can Europe defend itself without the United States?

STAVRIDIS: The short answer is yes. Let's look at Europe and the United States. We have a population of 350 million. Europeans have 500 million. Our defense budget is much bigger. But guess what? The European collective defense budget north of 400 billion.

Russia's defense budget, which is the threat, under 200 billion. So, they have the capacity. The question for Europe is, same as we've talked about a moment ago for the alliance, does Europe have the will to come together?

I'll close with this. Sometimes people ask me, who's going to win the war in Ukraine? Will it be Ukraine or Russia? It could be Europe.

Europe could win the war in the sense that it could provide the spur that drives them to work together, to find their own defense industrial base and be more independent of the United States. I hope that's the outcome.

SMERCONISH: Thank you, Admiral Stavridis. We appreciate your insight and expertise.

More social media reaction. Follow me on all the usual platforms and places. I'll respond to some in just a moment. Make sure you're signing up for the newsletter at Smerconish.com.

Hey, I need to tell everybody. The poll question, apparently overwhelmed today, not functioning. And I'm apologetic. Sorry about that because I love today's poll question, so I may have to keep it up through tomorrow if we can get it functioning again.

As I was saying, you'll get cartoonists like Rob Rogers if you sign up for the newsletter. I'm back in just a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) [09:53:49]

SMERCONISH: You can follow me on X. I'm active on Facebook, my YouTube page, always for you to get to me and have your voice heard.

As much as they have complained about the GOP, the focus should be on legislation and passing what they are promising. This is, what should the Ds do? But as they all do, their focus will be on Trump. Sadly, both parties do the same crap when they take over.

Sammy, how Democrats comport themselves is going to set the stage for what's to come in 2028. One of the interesting things, and perhaps you heard me say it at the outset of the program, will they try and impeach Trump for a third time? Is that a futile effort if they don't control the Senate?

You need two-thirds in the Senate as well. So, is it going to be investigatory or through legislation that they most handle themselves, Democrats, assuming they take control of the House or the House and the Senate?

More social media reaction to today's program. What do we have?

Michael, it is baffling why you constantly use the term retribution instead of accountability. In light of the Trump administration's rampant corruption, doesn't the word accountability strike you as more appropriate?

Yes, it probably does. Accountability is probably a better word, but there's a lot of -- there's a lot of vengeance in the hearts and minds of voters who are coming out.

[09:55:04]

A lot of people who accountability is not enough. And I think they're looking for more than that. So, either word applies. More social media reaction. What do we have?

Trump buying Russian diesel and suspending the Graham sanction bill provisions is a big deal. I agree. How much are you covering this development, Michael?

Did you not watch the segment that I just did with Admiral Stavridis where it was all about that? Putin -- I lost the second part. Give me that back. Putin -- what did it say? Putin must have -- hurry up. Put it back up there.

Must have something incriminating. Kompromat --

Yes. OK, I hear you. I can't understand it. Lindsey Graham must be rolling over in his grave that this sanctions bill should now be waived.

And I said to Admiral Stavridis, my first question, is there any benign explanation? The president cited national security interests. The only national security interest I can think of is him wanting to lessen fuel prices. I want to lessen fuel prices, but not at the expense of Ukraine.

OK. If you missed any of today's program, you can always listen anywhere you get your podcasts. Thank you for watching. We'll see you next week.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)