CNN, Outlets Sue Trump Over “Illegal” White House Ban

0:02Tonight, meet the press in court. The media sues the president over his ban as his allies speak out against it. Plus, even the new communist mayor terrify a despot. Why are Donald Trump and Zoran Mamdani meeting just 43 days before the midterms? Also, she declined to show up when J.D. Vance came to campaign. Now, an Iowa Republican candidate calls out Trump's war. And, Fritzker. He's too busy eating. He wants to eat all the time. After the fat jokes, a Democrat reveals he's taking GLP-1s just in time for 2028. I've been driven my whole life to lose weight. Live at the table, Scott Jennings, Ashley Allison, Horace Cooper, Corbin Trent, and Josh Rogan.

0:50Americans with different perspectives aren't talking to each other, but here they do.

1:06Good evening to you. I'm Sarah Seidner in New York, in for Abby Phillip. It was a big day for President Trump, who's in New York ahead of tomorrow's speech at the United Nations. But there were fewer cameras to see it and show it. CNN and other media outlets are suing the Trump administration after he banned three outlets from the White House. The major TV networks are standing in solidarity, declining to replace CNN as today's pool crew. In the suit, the outlets called the ban a direct assault on the First Amendment and a blatant violation of our most fundamental constitutional principles. A hearing is set for Wednesday.

1:42For his part, the president claims the move is an assault on the, quote, fake news rather than the free press. He called the media corrupt, pervasive, out of control, and a threat to national security. He cited no specific story, however, instead claiming that because he won the election, he deserves positive coverage. Before we open it up to the table here, we want to invite you at home to join the debate. So you can head to CNN.com slash Abby and weigh in there. We'll get to some of your comments throughout the show. All right, let's begin with you. Josh, you work for The Washington Post. You were outside, I think, the UN today doing your reporting.

2:17The pool camera system's been around, I think, since the Eisenhower years, so the 1950s. What does this mean for the public that the pool camera is not following the president right now? You know, I've done pool duty in the White House over the years a few times. Everyone depends on it. It's not for the president. It's not for the outlet doing it. It's for the entire press. And otherwise, you'd have to have 100 people following every moment. So the system is designed to be for the benefit of both sides. Now, if the president's lost Fox News, that's probably not a good sign. you know and uh the the i'm not a lawyer but it seems like the legal case is pretty convincing it's pretty compelling that uh the white house doesn't have the right to do this is a pretty good chance it's going to get overturned but what's he done he's done two things uh he's actually ensured that the coverage will stay tough because no matter what you know what we see when the when the government takes access away from the press they double down not on being unfair but on holding that line because once you cave to that tactic that's a slippery slope and the second thing he's done is he's admitted what his actual motivation was he doesn't want to hear it he doesn't really care if you report bad things about him he doesn't want them to be in his face he doesn't want it at his desk in his room in his office and he's built a cocoon around himself where nobody ever tells him no where his reality is just agreed to whether it matches the reality of the rest of us are living in.

3:41And that has its own danger because we have a leader of the free world who is eliminating all of the feedback channels that might tell him that, hey, the American people really don't like the Iran war. Hey, the American people really do care about the Epstein files. Hey, the American people really don't think the economy is good. And so penetrating that bubble of Trump's brain and his awareness, really important. And I think that actually took a hit today. Scott, I don't know if you know this, but your name is up for running for the next press secretary. So do you support the president's ban on the press?

4:14I think he's unlikely to prevail in court, A. B, it seems to me the net result of this has been he has less reach. I mean, his message is not going to get out as much. If this sort of becomes the way it is, he will be seen and heard by fewer people, which I think is actually a net negative since he's his own best spokesperson and his own best press secretary. Number three, I actually think sparring with some of these folks in the Oval works to his advantage. And so if you take them out, you lose that a little bit. So my view is this is unlikely to stick based on what I'm not a lawyer either. But based on what I've heard, it's unlikely to stick.

4:51And it may be a little self-defeating if you consider that you want the president to be heard and seen more like I do. This seems to be working against that. So if you're press secretary, you're not going to do that? Is that what you're pledging here right now? I'm not answering. You're not going to single out any press. Can I add one more thing? I actually think there's a difference between, truthfully, CNN and Politico and MS Now. If you watch MS Now for 10 minutes, it's like total alternate reality. I actually think there's a difference. Well, some people might say that about Fox. Yeah, Obama, he said that about Fox.

5:24But he didn't kick them out, did he? Do you support the president's ban on the press? Because, I mean, you work here at CNN. Do you think the journalists here are reporting fake news? I sometimes strongly disagree with the framing, but no, I think we need to cover the news here. And I think we still can cover the news, but I consider this to be a news outlet. I consider Politico to be a news outlet. MS is a different story, my view. Yeah, I mean, here's what I'll say. This is undemocratic, and this also is a distraction. And so the American people need to be able to do two things at once. He wants us talking about the quote-unquote fake news, so we aren't talking about the disastrous economy.

6:04the war in Iran. He really, he is very gifted at trying to do the pivot to take us off, our eyes off the ball. And we are not buying it. We know why you do not want the press in there. I'm actually really grateful that the other news outlets are standing in unison because guess what? The leopards will eat your face. Okay? If you've ever heard that song. And the leopards are eating people's faces, even though we think sometimes we can be in good juxtaposition. I'm glad that you're saying that he should not ban the press because I think we both would agree that we have a great deal of respect for all of our colleagues, including Sarah Seidner and those that sit in that press, in the briefing room that sit in the Oval Office.

6:45And I don't think you would ever accuse them of saying that they were doing fake news. Even if you don't agree, that's the benefit of the news is that you get to ask questions and then he gets to answer. But by doing this, it's a distraction that we should not fall for. Part of it, I think more than just being a distraction, is also a continuation of what Trump likes to do, is just to push the bounds of the Constitution, push the boundaries of the office, push the boundaries of his ability as a commander-in-chief even to unilaterally declare war against Iran. And who's going to check him? And the problem is nobody so far has been very good at checking him.

7:17So that is one thing that I'm glad to see now, is at least that other media has banded together, up to and including Fox, to say, nah, this is a line too far for us. They've gone after law firms. They've gone after universities. They've really tried to have their way, they being this administration, against so many people. And there's been so little opposition and backbone. But the courts have pushed back. Congress has not. But the courts have. And that's what's going to happen here. And, you know, we didn't know before Trump that 90 percent of the things that we think the government should do were not enshrined in law.

7:49They're just norms. They're things we all agree are good for our society. So Trump is attacking all of those. And in some cases he gets his way. But in a lot of cases, the courts do push back. And I think that's what's going to happen. You can't have laws for everything. That's another thing we've learned. Like you can't think of every single thing that's going to happen. You know, you have to have norms that are enforceable. Let me ask you to Ashley's questions. How is this ban helping anything? How is it helping bring prices down? How is it helping, you know, end the war with the war on? How is it helping with gas prices?

8:19How is this ban helping the American public as Republicans look to the midterms alongside Democrats? trying to convince the American public that they are the right party to go to. All right. Well, let's clear up something. I'm a free speech guy. I believe that the best way to deal with bad speech is more good speech. I wouldn't advocate a policy that suggests otherwise. I will tell you that when we were sitting in a different administration, that would be that of Mr. Obama heading toward midterm elections, Fox had the right to have the Super Bowl. And it was a tradition that the president of the United States would meet with someone like Bill O 'Reilly.

9:03He eventually did, but there was a lot of caterwauling before that. And by the way, by the way, that's not banning the press. That incident that you just talked about there is not banning the press. But he actually did directly go after Fox. I don't support that. I didn't support it then. I don't support the behavior now. But it is remarkable to me to watch people that sat idly by while Fox was being marginalized. So here's the thing. And now they're upset today. No, it's not the thing. Other outlets, all of them, all of the other outlets actually came to Fox's aid and said they need to be able to.

9:43This was one interview. One interview. No, no, not the O 'Reilly interview. No, no, no. I'm talking about the interview with one of his czars. This was an interview. There was a pool. They said they didn't want Fox News there. They tried to ban Fox News. And all of the outness stood behind Fox News and said they should be able to do their work. So a very similar scenario where only in that this was a group of journalists that said, no, no, no, you can't do that. And the Obama administration backed off. And we're likely to see this president back off. My point is that I am a free speech guy. And if the president doesn't, the courts are going to insist.

10:22The same way when one Jim Acosta, which I believe the way he behaved with regard to an intern, merited some sort of sanction. But he got his credentials. His credentials were completely restored. My point about that is that this isn't a first time down this road. and I have been a free speech guy, I remain a free speech guy and I will be tomorrow. It's not the first time down this road for this administration. The Department of War or state or whatever you want to call it at this point. Defense. Defense, yeah. They have banned reporters. This is not the first opportunity this administration has said to, we're not going to engage with this.

11:08And the FCC is going after the licenses. I don't understand your frame. You're talking about the Super Bowl. I am a free speech person. Right, but Trump is not. Right. I am not an advocate for speech restrictions. So all six of us agree that this is a bad move. You would agree, though, that a lot of the people who are sort of up in arms about this are some of the same people who are clamoring for Trump to be thrown off social media, though, yes? No, I think the people that are up in arms are the people, our colleagues at this network. That's what I think, actually. I feel like there's some amount of hypocrisy regarding the speech issue.

11:43If you're mad about reporters being restricted from going to the White House to report, why would you simultaneously have been someone that would have called for Donald Trump? Because they're two separate issues. No, it's speech. No, the government and a corporation are not the same. It's platforms. No, it is a fault. The government. You know this. One is the government. And one is the social media. Funded by us. It's a false equivalence because private companies are allowed to have policies. Yes. that where they're looking at their own private companies can say, hey, this goes against our policy.

12:14Like making a cake. This First Amendment is about the government, right? The government. Wait, wait, wait, wait. Hold on a second. But you would agree that trying to restrict the speech of a government official is also not a good idea, right? It's not against the First Amendment. We're talking about the First Amendment, correct? And that's where we disagree. I agree with you. It's not the First Amendment. The courts don't agree with either of you. It's not the First Amendment. We're just having a discussion about what's good practice. And some people wanted to stop Trump from speaking. But this is about the First Amendment.

12:43And what you're talking about is a company's right. I actually don't think people want to stop Trump from speaking. They wanted to stop Trump from lying about an election that everyone had. And inciting violence. I'm not even just talking about President Trump. The whole deplatforming movement was an anti-free speech initiative. And we saw it rise to a zenith over during the Biden years. My point about that, I will repeat, I am a free speech guy, not just a First Amendment guy, a free speech guy. And people drop the ball. What about free speech when one type of speech is lifted up via an algorithm and one is not?

13:24Do you consider that free speech when a corporation is able to do that? I actually think algorithms right now are a major reason why everybody in America seems to be living in different universes. It's hard to have a shared national purpose when you don't have a shared national reality. And I think that's a worthy conversation. The bubbles that we all live in that are reinforced continuously. What do you think about the Macklemore free speech situation? He should have been able to free speech it up. That's a good one. I had no problem with him ruining the experience of people going to see Sharon with his preaching.

14:00I had no problem with it. I believe free speech. And so should stadium owners, did they quell his speech? Yes, they did. And were you against that? Even if you didn't like the speech? I don't know how many times I have to say free speech guy. I'm the free speech guy. Right. Okay. I'm consistent. I have watched, and there's a lot of inconsistent. I know you're not talking to me. Especially on the left. But what we're talking about tonight. As you said to me, I don't know why you're talking to me. I don't know why you're looking at me saying that. Because one thing I am is consistent. Do you think a stadium owner should be forced to platform blame the anti-Semitism?

14:37Do you think a platform owner should be forced to keep somebody on that is lying? It's the same scenario. In one instance, you disagree, argue. How is it different? So if you owned a venue and somebody came by and said, I'm going to come in here and engage in the worst kind of racism, anti-Semitism, whatever, and you would be forced to platform that? What is happening on social media platforms, Scott? What are you talking about? If you look at X right now, there's a lot of racism. A lot of racism, a lot of misogyny. That's the inconsistency. TikTok live is out there. You were just arguing that a private company can do whatever it wants.

15:14in the case of the stadium owners, they didn't want to platform some lunatic wearing a Jewish anti-Semitic getup. They didn't want to participate in that. Right, but you were just auguring a very different point. You're talking about... We're talking about the White House and the President of the United States targeting media organizations in a systematic way and using the power of the government to do it. That's why it's different. That's why it's not the same. So you're saying it's a narrow issue. If it's the elite media, then we're all together connected. But if it's just random people in America, it's okay to shut them down.

15:51What I'm saying is that the government is funded by the people and responds to the laws and the policies that we have established. So the government has a responsibility not to target media outlets based on their views. And that's the law. That's the law that's relevant here. All of the rest of it is a different situation. And at the end of the day, the context is that the Trump administration is using the FCC, the DOJ, and lots of other official tools of government that all of us are paying for to try to influence the coverage that Trump doesn't like. He said it. And that's A, not moral, and B, not ethical, and C, potentially not legal, and has nothing to do with McLemore.

16:35McLemore is not in the government. May I just make this racist question? At least as far as I know. Not yet, anyway. government stood on a platform. And if Macklemore was in the government, or Robert Kraft was in the government, then that would be relevant to what we're talking about. Point made. Understood. When the federal government stood on a platform and insisted that we all take a shot, and people around got so confused about the importance of doing this, people were fired. People weren't allowed to rent property. People weren't able to continue their livelihood. That is not a First Amendment violation.

17:09Yes, I am. That is not a First Amendment violation, but it is an entirely a free speech trampling. They literally forced zero people to take the COVID vaccine. They recommended it. A lot of military and first responders lost their jobs. My daughter. My kids have to take vaccines to go to school. Every one of them. I had to take shots to go to culinary school. Like taking vaccines to go into public places is pretty standard. After losing his license because he disagreed professionally. And let me tell you what. We have pivoted away. The distraction. Hold on, hold on. The distraction. Hold on. And this particular category.

17:48We have pivoted away from the First Amendment and what the First Amendment says and the Constitution. Yes. And the Constitution is clear about the government's interference with free speech. I will leave it there. Next, the president meets with someone he's called a lunatic who's a member of the group. He and his administration have been calling crazy. And now Trump is, well, he's heaping praise on Zoran Mamdani. Plus, another Republican candidate speaks out against President Trump, this time over the war in Iran. We'll discuss. Hey,

18:26I'm Anderson Cooper. On my podcast, All There Is, we explore grief and loss in all its complexities. My guest is Lil Jon. He's a rapper, DJ, and producer known for hits like Get Low and Turn Down for What. In February 2026, his 27-year-old son Nathan went missing near Nathan's home in Georgia. Three days later, his body was found in a pond nearby. Lil Jon has a memoir that just came out called I Only Shout So You Can Hear Me. It takes time to heal. And I kept myself busy that I didn't let myself mourn. I needed to laugh again. I needed to be silly and interact with people and feel other people's energy and make people happy, too.

19:10We have to share so other people can see that they can get through it, too. Talking grief, building community. That's what the podcast is all about. This is all there is. Listen and follow wherever you get your podcasts. I'm Dr. Sanjay Gupta, host of the Chasing Life podcast. You may have noticed gambling doesn't require a casino anymore. You can just open up your phone. It's designed to keep us coming back or maybe never even leaving in the first place. We're going to talk to Dr. Timothy Fong, co-director of UCLA's gambling studies program. You're going to learn what your brain is really chasing when you place a bet.

19:47And also importantly, how to keep the game from playing you. Gambling addiction, gambling disorder is the hidden addiction. You can't smell it. You can't taste it. You can't see it. You can't have a urine drug test. Who are we talking about here, Professor? Who's the most likely demographic to be affected by this? Literally any single human on Earth. Listen to Chasing Life, streaming now, wherever you get your podcasts.

20:13All right, tonight, as the right continues to villainize Democratic socialists, including New York City Mayor Zoran Mamdani, the president gushed some praise on him in their third meeting in less than a year. We're told they discussed housing and immigration as the presidents in New York for the U.N. General Assembly this week. Now, Donald Trump even left the door open to supporting a huge housing plan from the mayor, despite him and his party calling them threats to America. Now, in April, Trump posted that Mamdani was, quote, destroying New York. But today, Trump once again put on some praise.

20:47Trump said he wants Mamdani to be a great mayor and suggests he's off to a great start. Mamdani sat down with CNN's Christiane Amanpour to discuss their relationship. I just wondered if you thought that you might get to this working relationship when he was calling you, you know, a lunatic, radical, probably a communist during the campaign. You were calling him a fascist, amongst other things. Things have changed. Well, I think we've both said that we would be willing to have a conversation if it could benefit the people of the city. And to me, you can hold very disparate opinions and also be able to sit down because that is what this work demands of us.

21:26If I was only willing to speak with people who agreed with me all the time, I would be sitting at home looking in a mirror. All right, Scott, do you agree with Trump that Mondani has great potential? Potential? Yeah, he has the potential to, you know, bring about the downfall of America. Yeah, sure. Trump also said, Mom Donnie is off to a good start. Do you agree with him? Look, he's a New Yorker. Yes or no, yes or no, yes or no. I don't agree with much of anything Mom Donnie has done. However, I will say this about the meeting. But that means you're not agreeing with the president right now. Yeah, okay, fine.

21:59The man is still a pothole. Listen. I can't agree with that. Isn't this what you guys say you want? We have two people from two different parties. Absolutely. They both love New York. I don't agree much with Mom Donnie. I'm sure Trump doesn't either. but they had a meeting to talk about something they could possibly do, whether they get there or not. It's okay to talk. It's okay for us to talk to each other. It's kind of what we're modeling here on a nightly basis. Will they ever come to an agreement about anything? I don't know. Do I want the president and mayor of New York City, whoever they are, to have a relationship?

22:28Of course I do. And I don't have any problem at all with him meeting. Now, that having been said, Mom Donnie is currently suing Trump over this public charge rule on the welfare for immigrants, which I thought the president might bring up today, but I guess it didn't come up. But do I have a problem with them meeting? No, of course not. Trump probably respects a good lawsuit. I mean, he is himself a fan and apparently did himself. So maybe he's like, you know, really kind of impressed. I think he sort of feels the Momdani swagger. I know that's true. He likes winners. He likes guys who are handsome for some reason.

22:59A lot of back-slapping. If Trump didn't talk to people who he was involved in lawsuits with, he wouldn't talk to anybody. Basically everybody. But Momdani is very pragmatic, okay? And he's very smart. and his team has taken a, like, it doesn't just, you know, defeat the Republicans who say that he's a crazy socialist communist because it defeats the, you know, hawkish Democrats who want to paint these progressive Gen X, Gen Z, and millennial politicians as crazy, and once they get into government, they're never going to be able to do anything. Here is one of the most prominent young progressive politicians in the country, successful.

23:33He's got a huge political mandate. He's got the capital to spend, and he spends it on building a relationship with Trump. Yeah. So that flips the narrative. And I think it's great. The problem, of course, is that on the thing that really matters that they talked about they made no progress, which is the temporary protected status for Haitians and Syrians and Afghans, people who have fled oppression and repression and torture, many of whom did so in the defense of America, working with the U.S. military, and we're sending them back to the slaughter. And it's unconscionable. and Mamdani tried to raise it with Trump and Trump didn't really seem that interested in it.

24:10And it affects New Yorkers, but it affects people all over this country. Again, many of whom who fought and sacrificed with our military and were going to send them back to be murdered by the Taliban. And that came up today and Mamdani brought it up, but Trump didn't really seem that interested in it at all. The president meeting with a whack job doesn't mean that the president approves of the whack job. The president meets with Xi Jinping. The president meets with the leader of France and all other European countries. It doesn't mean that he is approving of them. It doesn't mean that they are wonderful people.

24:44But politics is the art of what's possible. You get together to try to figure out. But what makes him a whack job? One to build houses, one to bring down the cost of food. His radical idea that the government is the solution to the problems that the people in New York City face. A supermarket? A supermarket? We've tried this. we know what works. When a company like Wegmans shows up, you get excellent service. When a company like New York City Mondami's show up, you get crappy service and the bill runs up. That's actually not true. The VA is one of the most popular health care providers in this country when you poll the people getting it.

25:23The TVA is one of the most popular utilities in the country. One of the best hospitals in San Francisco is a publicly owned hospital. The fact that government can't do things is nuts. I'm not aware and bragging about the VA when one of the achievements of our president is that he had to fire people who were literally letting our veterans die. The idea that the government is the best tool for solving problems, where has that ever succeeded? Can we get back to Mamdani? Okay. New York City. You don't have to like his policies, but... And I can call him a whack job. Yes. Okay. Why? Is there any basis for calling him that?

26:02No. When you actually look at how he has governed, I think there will be people who are upset with Mondani, actually, for meeting with Donald Trump because they don't think you should engage somebody who is like, there are people there. I believe it, but I don't think that's the problem. But Mondani is mature enough as an elected official, as a mayor of the city of cities, New York, to say, I'm going to sit down with the president if it helps my constituents. There are potholes. I don't know if you're on social media, but they're actually not. But people who are residents and telling who their names are and their their addresses.

26:41That's what a whack job does. Are you talking about the public information, the public information about the tax? I think if you look at Mondani's approval rating and Donald Trump's approval rating, if you look at Mondani's approval rating since he's been governing and you look at Donald Trump's approval rating, they tell you something. The people of New York do not think he has a whack job. The people of America might not think. But of course, Cooper and most Texans do. But he doesn't work in Texas. I just came on your show and called him a whack job, and you said, why? Now you're telling me the answer to that is there's some people in New York who voted for him.

27:16Millions. Who like him. Millions. That's not millions. That's not an argument. What is it, then? That's just evidence of some deluded people continuing to be deluded. But you're talking about fellow Americans being deluded who are voters, right, and who care about their city. Does that feel good to you to sort of lash out at people that just want a better governed city and they think that maybe this person can do it? The mayor's incompetence leads to leading companies leaving the city, abandoning the city for fear that they're being labeled as people who are getting a free ride. When it turns out, as a lawsuit has developed, oh, you got a lot of the locations wrong about the Pita tear tax.

28:00It is incompetence. And this is what you get when someone of this kind of a radical persuasion takes over the city. I mean, I think a lot of people would say what you're saying. I know I don't. If it's a second home, you don't even live there. You just got a multi-billion dollar property in New York. And so the one you don't live in, maybe you should pay a little bit more taxes on it. I absolutely and fundamentally do not agree with that. Well, there you go. And our governor in Texas has just announced that we're going to have a two-thirds vote by the community before we raise taxes on property.

28:34Because I don't know if everyone watched the whole press conference, but at the very end of the press conference, They dismissed. It was it was masterfully done. They dismissed the president and said he is out of time. But the mayor will stay and feel the rest of your questions. And Trump knew, even if he didn't want to ask, answer the tough questions he would get, that if he walked away, it would look like. So he literally had to stand there as long as Mondani and Mondani kept saying, like, you can go if you want. You can go if you want. And he just had to stay there behind, not in front, not next to, not being the one at the podium.

29:08It was the command. And I just think that, like, as someone who can acknowledge that Donald Trump is really good at making television, even if I don't like to watch the television, he has this stage present. He has this way. Mom, Donnie, I will say slightly outplayed Donald Trump today with that press conference. You may be right. I'll concede it. We have some agreement. We are moving on next. A Republican candidate for Senate in Iowa distancing herself a bit from Trump. She says it's time to end the war in Iran and give Americans a break from rising prices. We will debate all this. Go ahead.

29:55Tonight, as Republican candidates continue to distance themselves from Trump ahead of the midterms, Iowa's GOP Senate nominee is putting even more daylight between herself and the White House. Last week, Congresswoman Ashley Hinson snubbed J.D. Vance, declining to show up at a

30:12more clear that what amounted to a public critique of the administration, perhaps, saying Iowans are being squeezed and shouldn't have to foot the bill at the pump or the checkout line for the war in Iran. That's what she wrote on social media. The three-term congresswoman has recently spoken out against Trump's beef policy, and her campaign is highlighting her efforts at bipartisanship. Vincent is now calling for an immediate end to the war. Ashley, Allison, I'm going to start with you here. No, I'm not a fellow. No, I'm starting with you here because what are Democrats seeing here that they are going to try to seize on?

30:51Well, OK, if I strictly speaking as a political strategist, what she is doing is making a gamble that the base that still likes Donald Trump, enough of them will show up. and she can get these mythical middle moderates who don't have their minds made up about what they really want. And so she's talking to them. That's a really big gamble because what we have seen is those folks go like to Trump, to Obama, to Biden. They are very, very swingable. And in this backdrop, Donald Trump is not the person they are really rooting for. So as a Democratic strategist, I would say seize on it, say, you know, she's inconsistent.

31:31She what will she really do when she really when she shows up in Congress? Will she really have her back when or when will when she goes to the Hill? Will she really have your back? And then I would say if I was the candidate opposing her, I would say I've always been on this area on the war. I've been saying over and over, yes, Iowans are struggling, but you supported the man who are allowing Iowans to struggle. and just really, really hammer that message. Now, again, I'm a progressive, and so most people won't agree with what I was saying. I also think that they are in Iowa, right? And they need to know the constituents that are going to elect.

32:08And so I would only talk about, as a Democrat, the issues that really matter to Iowans and really pinpoint the issues that Iowans are suffering because of Donald Trump's tariffs, because of energy policy, because of all of the things and the economy and where, it doesn't matter what she's saying now. Now it might be too late. Where has she stood before? And I would hammer it home. And we finally hit that magical 29 number that Chuck Schumer was waiting on everybody. Once we get him down to 29, then we can really go to work on him. Well, we've hit 29 now. One of the latest polls got Trump's approval down to 29%.

32:44And it's not just that the overall approval rating is dropping. It's plummeting in states like Florida. It's plummeting in states like Tennessee. He's under 50 % now. Like these states that he won by double digits, 20 points. West Virginia, he's like at 54 % in West Virginia. The people that are getting him so low are the people that Henson is trying to go after. And it's a real hard question if they want to stick with this party. I think they're looking for something different. They're not, yeah. Do you think that you're going to see more of this? Because Henson, I think by and large, everyone looks at her, both Democrats and Republicans, as a very strong candidate in Iowa.

33:22That is not disputed. someone who is a formidable politician. But she is making a choice here. And we're starting to see it, at least in one other candidate who has said, like, some of your policies aren't going to fly. I think two things. One, she said the war should come to an immediate and successful end. And the difference between her and the Democrats is Democrats want to preach defeat and actually Henson and the Republicans want to preach victory over Iran. So I think that's a key distinction. Number two, I think every candidate in both parties and every jurisdiction is going to run the race that they think they have to run to win in that jurisdiction.

33:56Some of the issues in Iowa are related to Iowa. They're agriculture related. They wouldn't be the same as an issue, say, in an urban congressional district. So I think every candidate in both parties are going to run on the issue set and take the positions they have to take. And if you're President Trump, you need not worry about any of this because the only thing that matters is that Republicans come back. If Democrat majorities come back, we're going to lurch towards socialism. We're going to lurch toward impeachment. We're going to lurch toward all this chaos. But if Republicans come back, you can continue to try to improve the country.

34:28He shouldn't worry about socialism. You can say that everyone runs a local race, but the Iran war is the thing that unites everyone in this country because it's harming everyone in this country. It's the most unpopular war in American history for a reason. And that was at the beginning. And it just keeps getting less and less popular because it's increased our energy prices. It's increased inflation. Everybody sees that at least 18 Americans have died. Eight hundred Americans wounded, 18 bases damaged. Our reputation, our credibility on the world in tatters. And there's no end in sight. So when I see a Republican politician who's running for something, slightly moved to the acknowledgement that your situation, whatever district it is, Iowa, Florida, Kansas, it doesn't matter, is linked to the Iran war.

35:16That's the reveal. They're acknowledging a reality that everybody knows because we're at the point in the Iran war where if you don't acknowledge that, you don't have any credibility. She's trying to save her credibility by saying the obvious, what everybody knows, that the Iran war has made all of our lives worse in some way and will continue to do so. I agree. She's not really pledging to do anything real to stop it. But that acknowledgment of that reality, it's not specific to her. It's something that every Republican has to eventually come to terms with. If they want the voters to believe them, you can't tell the voters not to believe their eyes.

35:52And you fear, you recognize the fear from lack of spending from the RNC and like Trump PAC. Is that why more of these candidates have done it? Wait, you say lack of spending? The fear that Trump won't spend on their races. I wonder why more... You think the Republican Party is not going to spend on one of our greatest recruits in America, Ashley Henson? She's probably our best Senate candidate. I'm talking about generally speaking across the board. Why is it more Republicans haven't seen the tea leaves and seen, hey, this is a very unpopular war. They know it. They know it. Horace, everybody knows it.

36:22I keep hearing all of this about this unpopular war. This is exactly the mindset that could have cost us winning World War II. People suffered a great amount. It was not easy. People had to do without. They lost jobs. They lost homes. They made sacrifices. Here's the thing. That is the reason why war is never popular. The Nazis and the Japanese and the Italians started World War II. We didn't start it. We started the Iran War. Some people during the Carter administration invaded our embassy, humiliated our people, and have been killing Americans since then. I am ready to have them light up. I want regime change.

37:06That's not the policy. Can we talk about... Regime change is actually not really on the table. The Trump administration has been clear that they're really focusing on the straight-up-form moves. The Trump administration may be clear, but Cooper is ready to replace the people that we're negotiating with by another round of decapitation. How did that go last time? Well, we'll do it again. I bet you eventually we will find some people who will sit at the table and they'll want to cooperate. We just can't. How long are you willing to? And we're running out of bombs. Wait, how long do you think the American public should suffer through this?

37:40That mindset loses World War I. That mindset loses the Civil War. That mindset might lose for Ashley Henson. You know, what about the lessons of Vietnam or Iraq or Afghanistan? You mean where we were trying not to win? Where we enter into a quagmire with no strategy and then can't get ourselves out and a lot of innocent people die for no benefit. That's the relevant thing. I disagree with you. There's no benefit. In Vietnam? Why do the war? What do you think the point of Iran is so different? What's the benefit? Hold on. I want to hear Scott's. The benefit to defeating Iran and preventing these people.

38:10But we're not defeating them. Yes. We are defeating them. We've already defeated. They're defeated. By any historical metric. They're trying to make a deal with the IRGC. You gave a long list. Let me give you my list. We've sunk their Navy. We've destroyed their Air Force. We've decimated their defense industrial complex. We took out their leadership. They haven't exported a drop of oil since July. And our economy is in free fall. They are defeated. This is what we heard. Scott, are we, do you consider us still at war right now? You consider that we're still at war. I hope so. Horace hopes we're still at war.

38:39Are we still at war? Yeah, I think the president considers it, yes. But I think by any historical standard, we have defeated these people. The strait is open. We've exported a billion barrels of oil out of there. And look, we are. The idea that one political party is cheering for American defeat. No, we're not. And one party is clear out about who the enemy is and how we defeated him. It's your candidate that's saying. It's your candidate that's saying. Yeah, I got a high pitch. Don't point at Scott. Scott, no, I can point at him now. It's fine. That's what I thought. Okay, so the thing about it is it's your candidate, though, that is trying to distance herself from this war.

39:18She's a successful end. She wants a successful end. That's what Republicans want. success, victory. Democrats want defeat. No, we do not want defeat. They want withdrawal and defeat, and that is a mindset. We do not want defeat, but what I'm saying is... Listen to him. I'm independent. I just want the troops to come home. Independent. Henson is seeing the writing on the wall, and J.D. Vance being saying, give me one more chance. She's like, the people don't want one more chance of what we're getting right now, and so that is why she is dissing herself, and you may see other Republicans is doing that.

39:51That's your team, not mine. My team is very clear where we are. We don't want to be defeated as a country, but we also are like Americans are suffering too. We can hold those two truths at the same time. And we'll leave it there. Next, we're heading to Illinois. Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker revealing he's lost 80 pounds using GLP-1 drugs. Is it part of his prep for a presidential run? We'll debate that in a bit.

40:28Tonight, Illinois Governor J.D. Pritzker says he has lost 80 pounds while using a GLP-1 medication. He says two years ago he was diagnosed with diabetes and his doctor advised him to use the medication, which Pritzker calls life-changing. He was asked if the decision, though, had anything to do with presidential aspirations. Here's what he said. Did you do this in any way? to better your image so that you could run for president? I've been driven my whole life to lose weight. Yeah. The fact that I am now able to do it because this GLP-1 became available is truly like, I mean, it's something that has meant a lot to me.

41:09I have not made any decisions about what I might do in the future. I can tell you I want to be the governor of the state of Illinois for a while longer, and I'm running for reelection. I'm going to give you an easy out. Tell me you're not running for president in 2028. I honestly am focused on what's best for the people of Illinois. All right, Corbyn, do you think that Americans care whether or not J.D. Pritzker is on a GLP-1? I certainly hope not. I certainly hope not. But, you know, I hope that's not the reason for it because, you know, I hope we don't feel pressured to get on GLP-1 so we can run for a higher office than we've currently got.

41:43But he's also proven very successful at running for office in his current, you know, in his current form. So I hope not. Listen, if going from fat to thin were a good route to becoming president, we'd be all covering the Mike Pompeo administration right now. You know, it didn't it doesn't really track the records. But it's good for his health. I celebrate that. He's doing, you know, that whatever he can do to ensure best outcomes, people, everybody has a different way to manage their health and their weight loss. And if this is helping people, I'm here for it for him. I think that there's a lot of stigma to these drugs that just needs to be released.

42:21He was diagnosed with diabetes. If you know anyone with diabetes, it's a lifelong struggle. The reason he probably was on these drugs is to save his life. Like, you cannot be president if you're dead. It's fact. And, you know, he was talking about high cholesterol, high blood pressure. And I will say the American people probably would have taken issue with somebody of that stature to get access to GOP-1. Maybe when they first came out and people who needed them for actual medical reasons like diabetes, they were becoming a scarcity. But they had become so available to people that whatever tools you need to be the best version of yourself and healthy, we need to accept that.

42:59And we need to encourage people that to be healthy so we can live long lives for this country, for our families and for ourselves. Look, about 40 percent of the U.S. population is considered obese. Could this be something that sort of links him with with people that people understand this battle is really, really hard? Yeah, a lot of people fight. I fought it my entire life, truthfully. I think this may actually by the time 28 rolls around, we may have a lot of candidates talking about universal access to these things. And would it make sense to pay for that versus all of the negative outcomes that come from obesity?

43:32I know some states have done it and had some success. Are you arguing for universal health care? That's what I heard. Did you hear me say yes, yes? I'm arguing for, you know, like, state Medicaid programs. You know, we're managing a lot of chronic diseases that flow from obesity. What if you eliminated the obesity? You know, overall, would it cost you less? I don't know that we've done it at a widespread enough scale to know the answer yet. But I suspect this conversation is coming and it ought to come because, frankly, the results of these drugs are pretty miraculous for a lot of people. All right.

44:03I think we are done at the table here. Thank you all for joining us. Appreciate it. Thanks for a good discussion, everyone. Thank you for being here. We will be back in just a moment. I'm Adi Cornish. I'm Ari Shapiro, and it's Engagement Party. It is Engagement Party. And we get to talk about what we're obsessed with, what we're engaged with, what we need to process with a friend. Her name is Amy O'Dell. She is a fashion writer, blogger. But the thing is, she's a journalist who's written about the sacred cows of fashion. And yes, I mean, Gwyneth Paltrow and Anna Wintour. She has done biographies of both.

44:34And she is also the sort of rare fashion writer who, at this point, kind of outside the system. And so the question that we're going to try to tackle is... Is fashion terrible now? Well, no, I mean, I would phrase it as how do you develop a personal style in the age of AI slop? You know, on social media, like, creators have to try a whole bunch of different things and see what catches, and then they make it over and over and over again. The same thing happens with clothing. So they're sort of seeding the market, seeding the internet with all of these different ideas, and then they can see what sells, and then they can just make them really fast.

45:06Follow Engagement Party. Wherever you get your podcasts.