Trump Rallies in NC, Where GOP Candidate Trailing in Polls

0:02Tonight, battle of the billionaires. The president pledges to spend$400 million on the midterms as another mogul jumps into the fray. Plus, Donald Trump escalates his rhetoric. Should be tried for what she did. She could go to jail. From threats to anti-Semitic slurs. They made it like, oh, he was some kind of a Shylock type guy. Also, the race for Ohio governor turns even uglier over an ad featuring the estranged mother of the Democrat. And the world's richest man reportedly decided to interfere in the Ukraine war. But what did the president know? Live at the table, Scott Jennings, Lee McGowan, Jason Rance, Roderica Appelweig, and Anna Navarro.

0:52Welcome to a special edition of Newsnight, Midterm Countdown.

1:12Good evening. I'm Abby Phillip in New York. This is a fortnight edition of Newsnight. Just two weeks remain until the midterm elections. And tonight, the president is digging a little deeper into his pocket to help Republicans over the finish line. Well, at least his political group's pockets. As he hits the campaign trail again in North Carolina to help the Republican Senate candidate who is currently polling behind the Democrat, Donald Trump announces that he'll be spending at least$400 million on the midterms. The Republican National Committee is also pumping another$50 million into races. And now, on the Democratic side, billionaire Michael Bloomberg is loosening his purse strings.

1:52He is vowing to spend$80 million on Democratic candidates across the country. All of this is happening as the Cook Political Report has moved two traditionally solid red Senate seats in South Carolina and Mississippi toward the Democrats, and the deep blue seat in Minnesota closer to the Republicans. Now, before we open it up to the table here, we invite you at home to join the debate. Go to CNN.com slash Abby. Weigh in there. We'll get to some of your comments as we go throughout the show. It actually does seem like the Bloomberg money, which is new in the cycle and a cycle in which Democrats are really outspent, is the biggest sign here that they think that there's an opening and that some of these races just need a little extra push.

2:38Yeah, I mean, listen, there's no doubt that Republicans have a huge financial advantage. And so I think Bloomberg is trying to even out the playing field a little bit. And you have seen that races that people weren't paying attention to, like where I live, Congressional District 27 in Florida. Hakeem Jeffries was down there. They've been moved and people are paying attention. People are donating. Small donors are also coming in to these races when folks realize that it is flippable, that these races can make a difference. And meanwhile, Trump is in North Carolina. And honestly, I'm not sure why he's there, because that race is not very competitive.

3:20Republicans have pulled out money. He said tonight that Roy Cooper is going to be the next senator. He told that to the crowd. Is he just, are they just trying to keep him occupied at this point in the campaign? Well, one thing about North Carolina is that President Trump's done quite well there, A. B, Michael Watley is a friend of his. He ran the Republican National Committee. He's been a loyal supporter of President Trump. I think he got into the Senate race at the behest of and with the endorsement of President Trump. So I see it as, you know, regardless of how you see the political situation there today, hey, he's remaining loyal to someone who has been very loyal to him.

3:58And I don't know what's going to happen on Election Day down there. I've seen the polls and I hear all the conjecture. But I know that the president and Michael Watley are very connected. And Watley's been very loyal to him. And I see the president returning the favor. I'm just wondering, are we just tired of the rich buying our elections, pumping hundreds of millions of dollars in with three or four people so that they get representatives that work for them and not for the people? I think the American people at this point have to be kind of exhausted by this amount of money that's being thrown around because rich people clearly want more money and less regulation.

4:27And Donald Trump is going to put$400 million in the race because he wants a Congress that won't hold him accountable. So no money from Bloomberg for you? No, I think, listen, I think he's got to come in the race too. If there's money there, you have to spend money on the other side. And as you guys were both saying, the Democrats don't have the same big pockets that are coming in that the Republicans do because the Democrats don't offer the same deregulation and tax breaks and all the things that the Republicans have. So there's going to be less millions of dollars floating around. I'm just saying overall, it feels exhausting because it feels like we're just going to put 100 millions of dollars into attack ads or talking about communism or talking about evil things rather than talking about the things that will really affect the American people.

5:05Most of these rallies that Trump's having, we're not talking about the things that are on America's minds. We're not talking about, you know, making the case of why we should vote for them. We're making Democrats evil. I have a slightly contrarian view on the money, which is that, But yes, a lot of ads are run. Absolutely true. But a lot of the money by both parties, frankly, is spent on getting people out to vote, turning out the vote. And I know that's what the Republicans are planning to do with some of this money Trump is putting here late is absolute get out the vote activities. I'm not sure it's a terrible thing to be investing in getting people to vote in and participate in our democracy.

5:37You don't think it's a terrible thing to have this much money corrupting our political process? The Democratic voters are supporting candidates that have a lot of money behind them. James Tallarico is going and getting a lot of money from Hollywood. You've got Troy Jackson who's going out and taking money from billionaires. On the one hand, I get your point. It's too much. But it's a talking point. It's not really a talking point, though. But it is. Are you not going to vote for a Democrat because they've got a lot of money behind them? No, but I'm saying if you've got one person like Elon Musk putting$258 million into the races to make sure that Republicans win.

6:08Okay, versus George Soros and Reid. No, but I'm saying for the American people, it's exhausting. And at this point, I'd like to hear what both sides are offering rather than how much money is. It's exhausting. But the way to hear from both sides is when they're spending the money so you can actually cut. So there's a viewer comment from Karen who says even 400 million dollars can't buy wins for the Republican Party. Trump has personally, seriously crippled it. And what she's referring to is that overall, this election is a referendum on how Trump has managed the economy, how Trump has managed his presidency.

6:4270 % of Americans in this Washington Post poll disapprove of Trump's handling of the economy. And when you look more deeply at it, that includes up to 46 % of Republicans who think that the economy is not so good or poor. That's a lot. Yeah, trying to stop gap a very unpopular agenda that has hurt Americans from the gas pump to the grocery checkout line. It's extremely expensive to do. And so to Lee's point, not only is it is it exhausting to see this much money being spent, it's also seeming to be very inefficient at this point. I mean, Republicans and their allies have already spent five hundred million dollars this cycle trying to, you know, try to stop gap an administration that's been very unpopular.

7:32And we're seeing it all over the country while they're trying to move money around. It's not really holding up against a message of Republicans just failing to have any solutions for any for how to push back against this White House. The money doesn't buy elections, correct? I mean, again, there's kind of a contradictory position that I hear is that we want to get money out. And I get generally that position that it buys elections. But you're also saying it doesn't actually buy elections. I think Republicans are in a place where they advise TV ads. Sure. I agree it does. But it either works or it doesn't.

8:03So on the one hand, you're saying that it doesn't work, depending on the message. It's just contradictory. No, but the timing, I think, matters as well, right? So there's something really painful and disgusting about people spending hundreds of millions of dollars on campaigns, trying to influence who wins or who doesn't, when there are so many people that can't make ends meet. So I think certain things are hitting people, particularly in a bad way right now, because of what the American people are going through, the hardships, the economic and financial hardships. Meanwhile, President Trump is trying a lot of different things on the campaign trail.

8:44Some of them are substantive, some of them not so much. This is the latest thing that he has seized on, which is the protests in France. And he's trying to link it to what he says would happen in the United States. Listen. President Trump, if you want to see what is at stake in this election, just look at what's happening in France, a once great nation that is being conquered, looted and burned to the ground by migrants, jihadists and communists who hate Christianity and they hate, frankly, the Western civilization itself. When you see burning steeples and raging fires in France, just remember that is what the radical Democrats want to do to America.

9:26Again, I have questions about this strategy because it does not seem responsive to what voters say that they actually care about. They certainly don't care about France right now in this election. Well, but they're certainly seeing images that are probably quite frightening. And I don't hear the president saying anything that isn't true. France is suffering and all of Europe is suffering from a migrant crisis. And there are people running wild in France, burning things down, destroying historical landmarks, looting stores. and they're flying the colors of the Palestinians while they do it. It has nothing to do with anything other than this attempt to tear down Western civilization wherever they perceive weakness.

10:06And right now there is weakness in Europe. They have allowed this migration crisis. Absolutely false. These things that happened in France are because a bunch of students started it because they didn't like the way that the country was being run. They weren't getting enough. It's the same problem that we have all over the world right now. There is not enough for the people that aren't at the top. There is not enough education. There is not enough money. We are not being paid enough for our jobs. There were French students that started this protest. Has it gotten out of hand? Absolutely. Are terrible things happening there?

10:34Absolutely. But to suggest that what Donald Trump is saying, that what's happening in France, big spooky thing happening in France is going to come over here, because this is what you're going to get from the radical Democrats. How many words did he say? It already has. He's got it in radical 6th. We had it in January 6th. We had it in January 6th. We had it in free Palestine rallies. We are not doing that. On a more basic level, part of the issue is that there's an assumption that this is being carried out by foreigners when a lot of the people who are carrying out the violence are also white French people.

11:10So, I mean, I guess just because if you can find a few viral videos, you can just pin it on the brown people. But there are also plenty of white people in the streets carrying out horrific violence that should be condemned, too. And I mean, I just have a hard time thinking that there's people in Paris, Texas right now who are voting because of what's happening in Paris, France, when diesel is six dollars a gallon, when meat, ground beef is six dollars and 30 cents a pound, when gas is five dollars a gallon. So, you know, anger, fear, they are great motivators to get people to the polls. And they've certainly been very effective for Donald Trump in the past.

11:50Those caravans and all of those things that he conjured up back in 2020. They weren't conjured. They were real. You know that they were real. He exaggerated. Let me make my point and then you can... There were videos. Yeah, sure. Well, it's not conjured. I mean... What he's conjured, what he's saying about France is definitely false. Well, they're conjured in the sense that it gets talked about two weeks before an election and that as soon as the election happens, it stops happening. My point is that people... As soon as the election happens, miraculously, we just stop talking about the caravan.

12:19Well, actually, when the election happens, the president closes the border. Because, you know, Jason, people do actually report on this stuff. And the caravans are happening all the time. They're not just happening around the elections. They just don't always make it to the United States. But that's not what the Trump administration wants you to believe. They want you to believe that it only happens around elections and that it should be used to scare people. I disagree. They want you to believe what is true, which is it depends on who is in power, whether they make it or not. And if the president is in power, the border is closed.

12:51And if the Democrats are in power, it won't be. My point is people in Paris, Texas, don't give a damn about what's happening in Paris, France, because they can't pay for diesel. That is just such a strange coincidence. Is it a mystery to you that millions upon millions of people streamed into this country over four years? Listen, it is a strange coincidence that all of a sudden, when elections are over, the administration stops talking about immigration. He has never stopped talking about immigration. All right. Next for us, the president is floating the idea of jail time for Democrats and uses an anti-Semitic slur in the process.

13:19So how are Republicans responding to this? Plus, it's being called shameful, despicable and sick. Is an ad going after Vivek Ramaswamy's Democratic opponent a new low in politics? We'll debate that.

13:42Hey, I'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. eye. 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.

14:27We 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, and also importantly, how to keep the game from playing you.

15:08Gambling 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.

15:34Tonight, with the midterms just two weeks away, Donald Trump is escalating his rhetoric about Democrats, once again floating the possibility of jail time for some of his fiercest critics. Today, Trump warned that Michigan Senator Alyssa Slotkin could face prosecution months after she and other Democratic lawmakers posted a video urging service members to disobey illegal orders. Listen. She's a lightweight, by the way, total lightweight. stupid person. She's a person that should be tried for what she did, where she said, no, no, we control government. You don't have to listen to the president. And we'll see what happens.

16:13That's still, you know, that's still up in the air. Slotkin is facing criticism from the right over suggesting that she wants to deter young people from seeking jobs in the Trump administration. She wasn't the only Democrat on the president's mind today when he was asked about the unprecedented investigation into Democratic Congresswoman Ilhan Omar, Trump had this to say. They keep talking about deportation. No, she could go to jail. This is just my opinion. I think she's a sick, a very dishonest person, but who hates our country. And she comes from a country that is essentially not even a country, Somalia.

16:56It's a real shithouse, okay? The president keeps, Lee, ramping up the rhetoric against Democrats, the threats of prosecution against people that he thinks have committed crimes. I mean, he talked about Tim Waltz. He talked about all sorts of people who... Letitia James. Letitia James, people that he has concluded have committed crimes. And it seems like his confidence that action will be taken in response to his wants and wills is getting higher and higher. Yeah, well, I mean, he doesn't have any indication that what he wants, he doesn't get. I mean, he's had a year and a half being president where we've pretty much done everything he's asked for.

17:41We've ruled pretty much by executive order. He is acting kind of textbook fascist behavior-like. When you start going after your political enemies like this, I mean, like or hate Ilhan Omar. You don't have to like her at all. Once we're going into someone's house and talking about taking their citizenship away for something her father filled out when she was a young girl, that kind of thing. It's not an investigation looking for the truth. It's a conclusion looking for a case. Right. They're trying to build a case by seizing her stuff instead of having a case to seize her stuff. And if the administration can just go after anyone that happens to be a naturalized citizen who criticizes the president, then every naturalized American in this country that speaks out is on notice.

18:19Like, I'm someone that criticizes the president. I'm a naturalized citizen. Does that mean you can just come to my house and look around for something that makes me a criminal? I think this whole thing is a lot. As the second naturalized citizen at the table, please don't give him any ideas. I'm just saying, I think it's something that should alarm people. This is something that should not be happening in this nation. It didn't alarm the judge that looked at the documents as part of an investigation that started under the Biden administration. And the judge looked at this and said there's probable cause to move forward.

18:45Now, that's a lower bar than saying someone should be charged. But it should be a very high bar to go after a sitting congressperson, which they're not even supposed to have open investigations. So George Santos should not have been investigated. They're not even supposed to have open. Don't do a this or that. We're talking about Ilhan Omar. And I'm saying there is a statute where we are up to an election. They're not supposed to do it 60 days at least up to an election. And we're 18 days out from an election. And I also just want to note that the judge didn't just say, oh, go run wild. The judge put restrictions on what they could do because of the sensitivity of doing this when it comes to a sitting congressperson.

19:20But again, it didn't violate anything that the judge had. I didn't say that it did. No, no, I know. But the point is, the judge was using this as a constant talking point on the campaign trail, thereby jeopardizing any sort of legal action against Ilhan Omar, because any time he opens up his mouth to attack her, it looks like he's weaponized his DOJ against her and it weakens their case. The Democratic Party has said for years that they want to throw Donald Trump in jail. They say he's a criminal. They say that he's violated all sorts of laws. And it's coming from the very side that now is saying, well, actually, some people are above the law.

19:56So long as you're a Democrat, we have to get the A. Our Supreme Court said he was above the law. Our Supreme Court said he was above the law. He has committed a lot of crimes. So let's not pretend that that hasn't happened. He just happens to be the sitting president The Supreme Court said you can't go after him. So Ilhan Omar should get a pass because some people should be above the law. That makes no sense, Jason. That if you have a D next to your name, and you happen to be an adversary of the president, you should be able to get away with crimes is what you're suggesting. She hasn't committed a crime.

20:21George Santos was targeted intentionally because he violated law. He should have been gone. They should have targeted him. They should have targeted Senator Menendez. They should target criminals, period. She's not a criminal. The targeting of Ilhan Omar had happened after the election or before 60 days within the election, and Donald Trump weren't making it a talking point at all his rallies, throwing red meat to the base. I think the questions would be very different and the discussion would be very different. You believe that the conversation would be dramatically different if he never even mentioned Ilhan Omar?

20:55Yes, I do. I do think that if gas wasn't$6 a gallon. He wasn't trying to use it to gin up his base. It would be a very different discussion. Of course he is. Why do you think he says it at every rally? So one of the other things that Trump is doing, it's not just what he's doing in the Oval Office. Here's Trump on the campaign trail. He was in Kansas campaigning for a Republican, Roger Marshall, and he uses an anti-Semitic slur in the process. Listen. Nobody believes it, but I have to say it because I think it's appropriate. Roger was given a real—I know the guy, he's one of the— he's a tough guy and all, but he's also high quality and he's a fine person.

21:35And he was given a bum rap because he was mandated by law to request strongly money owed from patients. You're not allowed not to do it. You have to, by law, go after those people. And they made it like, oh, he was some kind of a Shylock type guy. And if he didn't make these requests, he would be breaking the law. So not the first time, maybe not even the second time, but he has used this term before, Scott, and he's been told. He claimed the first time that he didn't know what it meant. He was told that it was a slur. Why is he using an anti-Semitic slur, and why is no one saying anything about it?

22:14Why are no Republicans saying anything about it? So I consulted with a close friend of mine who's from Israel and is currently seeking American citizenship, And I said, what do you think of this? And how does this strike you? I'm just going to read you what she told me. Look at what he does, not what he says. The same people fussing about it or making excuses for Al-Sayed, who compares Israel to Iran. I know which I'd prefer. His daughter is Orthodox Jew, for God's sake. Who cares about a non-PC term? Who cares about a slur? That's her view. Is that your position? Who cares about using an anti-Semitic slur?

22:48It's not a word that I would use. But I can tell the difference in this country between who defends the Jewish people and who runs them down every single day. And it's not Donald Trump. If a Democrat used that term, you would be fine with it? They use worse terms. They call them genocide artists. They call them murderers. They call them worse things every single day that aren't true. But hold on. There's a difference between making arguments about things that Democrats believe are happening on the ground in a conflict and using a stereotype that positions Jews as, you know, people who are trying to take advantage of you or charge you too much or whatever the stereotype is.

23:30There's obviously a difference between those two things. And again, it's not as if the president does not know that it's a slur. He's said it before and he's been told. It's been said many times. He keeps doing it. Why? Yeah, so as the Jew at the table, you should not use that term, period. He was not using it directly to call the senator that, to be clear. He was defending him, saying that he was being called that. I still don't think you should use that term. It's offensive. I also agree that the folks who are claiming that this is an offensive anti-Semitic slur, and I can't believe that they would say that, are the same ones who have defended anti-Semitism and just called it simply anti-Israel rhetoric.

24:12So I just want across the board, Republicans and Democrats should be on the exact same page to cool it using language, even if he wasn't directly calling him that. Not necessary to use that word. It just isn't necessary. And the same way it's not necessary to constantly attack Jews as genociders, use AIPAC instead of just saying Jew, which is what a lot of Democrats want to do. I think both sides need to be consistent. Dial it down. Period. All right. Well, let me quote what the Anti-Defamation League wrote. And they said the term Shylock is rooted in a longstanding anti-Semitic stereotype. Regardless of intent, its use can reinforce harmful tropes about Jews and normalized language that has long been used to target the Jewish community.

24:57And I will say that the Anti-Defamation League comes after people, whether they are Democrats or Republicans or anything in between, when they see something that is anti-Semitic. So with this, I am going to go with the ADL. I'm going to go with the Jew at the table who's saying it is offensive. And I think it is wrong for the president of the United States, who I hold to a higher standard than I do anybody else, because he's got the largest pulpit of anybody else is using those terms and normalizing those terms. This is also OK. I was going to say this is I mean, Trump, this is not Trump's first slur.

25:28And usually we see more of them the closer we get to Election Day, because to our point in the earlier segment, This is red meat that Trump continuously throws to distract from everything but the fact that his agenda has made gas prices extremely expensive and has made generally a cost of living very high for Americans. He was out there trying to defend Roger Marshall, who is in his own hot water, you know, suing his own patients, which is a complete contrast with Adam Hamilton, the Democrat who has really put forward a coalition that has brought in independents, Republicans and given them the permission structure necessary to win in November.

26:07All right, next for us, outrage in Ohio over a Ramaswamy campaign attack ad that features his opponent's estranged mother, even as conservatives say it crosses the line. We'll debate that next.

26:32The ugly race for Ohio governor just got uglier after an ad popped up on social media today showing the estranged mother of Democratic candidate Amy Acton urging people not to vote for her daughter. My name is Donna Arthur, and I'm Amy Acton's mother. It's not easy for a mother to say this, but Amy has a serious problem. She is a liar. She lies about her past. She says she grew up living in a tent. None of that is true. She's lied her entire life. My daughter needs help, and she can't help you if she needs help herself. don't vote for people who lie. Don't let her become your governor. Acton has said she has not seen her mother since she was 12 years old.

27:26After a man her mother married abused her and faced criminal charges for it. Acton's Republican opponent Vivek Ramaswamy is taking credit for the video and says it's part of a larger$4 million ad campaign that he's launching during this final midterm stretch. Now earlier today, Acton responded with an ad of her own, this time featuring her brother. I received a lot of abuse, but Amy always got the worst of it. She continued to receive that abuse because she knew she had to protect me from that. And to think that that's somehow a talking point, shame on Vivek. It's the contempt he has for Amy. It's the contempt he has for Ohio.

28:07He's not fit to lead. This is one of the strangest things that I've seen at the end of a campaign. I cannot figure out the strategy here because it seems extremely risky for Ramaswamy to put out an ad like this on the, you know, the eve of a campaign midterm. Is it a sign that they really think that they are that down bad? it? It is extremely risky. I agree with you. This kind of thing, you know, I think the way it first got out was they were testing it in some sort of focus group and it sort of escaped the lab. And they might think that it tested well. Of course, what you can't test in those settings is the rebuttal.

28:52And when people actually find out the story, nobody really knows or could know what happened back in 1978 here. I do know this. The person who was accused of abusing her fled the stayed and ran away and never faced a trial, which tells us something as well. So I agree. It is an extremely risky strategy. I talked to a lot of people in Ohio tonight before I came out here. I got a lot of a lot of people who were unsure that this was the right thing to do. I also talked to a lot of political people who believe for the last two weeks in Ohio, things have actually been tracking in the right direction for Republicans.

29:25They're actually okay with what they're seeing in the early voting data. They believe Husted is in an improved position. But to throw out a piece like this at the end of a race is not a competence-inspiring item. And we'll have to see where it lands. Risky to me, that word, is I guess like a political assessment of the ad. From the human level, I find it appalling, disgusting, painful to watch. more than one in five women have experienced rape and, you know, in this country of every creed, every color, every ethnicity and every political affiliation. And I think this stirs a lot of feelings, particularly amongst women.

30:10It is painful to watch for from all the angles, right? You've got this elderly lady who they unearthed from God knows where talking against her daughter. and then you learn the story of the daughter. I did not know Amy Acton had been sexually abused by the man who married her mother since she was nine years old, from the age of nine to 12. This man was indicted and as you said, fled the state so as not to face trial. The mother continued married to the man who was indicted for raping his daughter. Until he died in 2004. Until he died. So, I mean, this is desperate. And it's pathetic. And it speaks to the low character, the low moral compass of Vivek Ramaswamy.

30:56I think to me, this is I cannot imagine people voting for this guy after thinking that he is that this was a good idea to put out this ad. So it's just it's such a low blow. He takes credit for it tonight. And then he says this about the wanting to be on the issues in this campaign. Listen. And the thing that I want to say is that I would love for this race and this election to be about the substantive issues that impact Ohioans. And unfortunately, Amy Acton has been hiding from those issues. She won't debate me. I've never met Amy Acton, which is a regret. I wish I'd met at least my opponent.

31:36I've also never met her mother. She was not compensated. I asked my team that question because we've got the question. She was not compensated. I mean, put that in an ad, right? Yeah, this is an indictment now on Vivek or on a story. I agree. And look, prior to this, I would have voted for him if I lived in Ohio after this, knowing the backstory. I wouldn't. Is this a political risk that potentially can play for him only if no one finds out the backstory? It is so unbelievably disgusting to put this kind of ad out. And we're seeing smears like this. And we've seen that this is not necessarily new, but I've never seen it this low.

32:18And I don't think Vivek should want to be known for that. And it's just, it's a shame. Because I do think he could lead, but this shows that he can't. It's very interesting that the same party that is jumping down drag queens' throats, saying that they're endangering children because they want to read to them some free books at a library, But then siding with a pedophile, siding with somebody who has abetted sexual abuse of a child. It's not even it's not even Vex first time doing this. He has another ad in which he's got, you know, sex offenders that are anybody who's willing to throw a stone at Amy Acton.

32:57It's been it's been a free for all. And so it's very it's an it's a problem. I appreciate that the Republican voices tonight are both calling it what it is, which is completely problematic. but also this was a coordinated strategy by the Ramaswamy campaign to get this out there. And I bet you a lot of people are going to do what I did after seeing that ad and go to Amy for Ohio and donate to Amy Acton, because this is just too disgusting to let it go. Too disgusting. I think the problem is he's doubling down. If he if they sort of escaped from a lab and then they'd found out online that people were responding to it poorly.

33:31Vivek is saying, ah, I see that people are responding to it poorly. I'm going to put more money into it and put it in TV ads across the nation, across the state of Ohio. And I think that's the problem. It speaks to Vivek Ramaswamy's moral compass. It speaks to the dirtiness of the campaign, the entire concept of bringing out someone's mother you haven't seen in 48 years, who chose her abusing husband over her own children, and then having her say she's a liar. She's not her mother. She wasn't her mother for 48 years. She had to take her own stepfather to court as a 12-year-old. And Vivek Ramaswamy thinks that's a person to bring out and re-traumatize this person again.

34:07And then he says, you know what, I'm loving this. Let's put more money into it and run it as a campaign. Is that someone you want as your governor? Like, that is such poor judgment. He's violating rule number one, which is do no harm and never be the subject of your story. His point was to give Amy Acton a bad day, and the blowback has been unbelievable. All right, but they are still doubling down, which is the perplexing part about it. Next for us, a new report finds that Elon Musk slowed down his Starlink service and blindsided Ukraine. But was it just him? We'll debate.

34:57The Wall Street Journal

35:06to the network, hampering its ability to use drones, intercept missiles, or launch its own attacks. According to the journal, one source claims that Musk and President Trump discussed the matter prior to the decision to throttle Starlink. The paper also reports that some U.S. officials believe that Musk acted alone, but one person familiar with the situation said Musk spoke to multiple senior administration officials, including Trump, before imposing the new speed cap. This has become a bit of a he said, she said situation between Musk and the administration. But it seems like everybody agrees there was something that happened with Starlink over the last week or two.

35:47And I guess even if it was Musk and then he informed the White House or in consultation with the White House, it seems like a really dangerous and morally questionable decision to do that in the middle of a war in which people are dying every day. Yeah, I mean, minus context that might explain some of this, I agree with you. I think it was a foolish decision. I don't know the reason behind the decision. So it's a little bit difficult to have an informed conversation when you don't know the why. Is it possible, and this is obviously pure speculation, but obviously the tone between the president and Putin and Zelensky has changed.

36:29And is it possible that the reasoning here was potentially because they thought they could come to some sort of an agreement to end this war and he thought he was helping? Maybe. That's the only thing I can think of, given the context of what we have in this Wall Street Journal report. I don't like the whole we're dealing with three independent sources who have not come forward. They're saying contradictory things as far as what the president knew. So I do think this, we would probably be wise to wait a little bit more for the information to just give us a little bit of contact. But it's also coming at a time when Trump is lifting sanctions on Russia, which has even earned him the rebuke of Republicans in Congress, violating the Graham Act that was just passed.

37:12And look, this has led to very real human consequences. I think we've all seen in the last day the images of Angelina, the 14-month-old Ukrainian baby who was in a park with her mother and got killed by a Russian drone. And now you learn that because of actions like throttling Starlink, the ability of Ukraine to respond or intercept something like that has been severely hampered. It's hard not to feel some sort of disgust with it. And if Donald Trump is involved and knew about it, and they've been denying it? Because I saw a very, you know, a very offended, indignant Marco Rubio responding to it.

37:53Shame on them. Shame on them for abandoning Zelensky, coddling up to Putin, and the deaths and things that are going on in Ukraine. I just, I find it really appalling. We've got a viewer question that says, how can a private citizen, Elon Musk in this case, have control whatsoever over a military satellite system. So before you respond to that, I just want to note there are two systems that are at play here. There's Starlink, which is a commercial system, and then Starshield, which is a military system that is licensed to the United States government. The US government controls that. But Elon Musk, it is true, controls Starlink.

38:31He has the technology. He controls it, but it gives him so much power in these geopolitical situations. This is not really something that we've seen before. And it's a product of the consolidation of power among a select few wealthy people who now can decide who lives and dies in various places on this planet. Yeah, it's yet another quagmire in a foreign country for the Trump administration. Either one of two things is happening here. It's not our war. Okay. Either one of two things are happening here. One, you've got Trump back-channeling Elon, you know, military strategy, or you have Elon acting unilaterally as a trillionaire to just pick winners and losers and actively working with what we had labeled, at least in this country, a dictator.

39:20And this is happening because Trump also struck a deal with Putin to get diesel to try to save him from the war he's having in Iran. You know, he's on October 9th. That deal was struck on the 10th. He's asked Ukraine to stop striking of Republic. Sorry, Russian assets. And now you have Elon Musk on the 14th cutting Starlink. It's a huge issue. And this is not even going to have an impact on gas prices. So it's a problem. And the fact that Elon Musk thinks that he can just act like this is exactly your point. And, you know, to your point about the chain of events here, the administration, Marco Rubio, Pete Hexitt, they keep insisting nothing has changed.

40:02Everything is fine. But the president is striking a very different tone. All these changes are happening on the battlefield while the president is saying things like this. We want Zelensky to make a deal. He can make a deal. He could have made a deal two years ago when we had our little chat in the Oval Office. We had a now quite well-remembered chat with JD, myself, some others, Zelensky. Could have made a good deal then. Could have made a much better deal then, probably, possibly, that he could make now. But he's going to have to want to make a deal. We've given a lot to Ukraine. We've gotten absolutely nothing back except grief, death, tremendous monetary loss.

40:50If I may, that meeting that he's speaking about in the Oval Office, where he berated Zelensky for his outfit, where he said, have you even thanked us when that whole thing went down? America made a deal back in 1994 called the Budapest Memorandum, where they said if Ukraine gives up their nuclear weapons, they had their assurances that if they were ever in danger, we would protect them. So we are betraying them right now. We were betraying our word. We are betraying our international alliances and we are helping our literal enemy. The fact that we are giving aid to Russia at a time where they are attacking Ukraine at the same time that Russia is telling the Iranians where our bases are and where to hit is the most absurd betrayal of who our allies are supposed to be and who our enemies are supposed to be.

41:40The Canadian prime minister recently said that U.S. promises are written in pencil. And I think it is so shameful that this is how we're behaving. This is how our president behaves. This is how this trillionaire that has hundreds of millions of billions of dollars of government contracts from the U.S., who is literally a trillionaire because of U.S. government contracts. They are single-handedly choosing that Ukraine loses this war when Ukraine is our ally. I am ashamed of our country. I am ashamed of what we are doing. And I really feel like the American people should be, too, because we promised them otherwise.

42:09As I keep asking, why is the president not putting pressure on Russia to make a deal, to stop attacking Ukraine, to stop invading a neighboring country? Why is that not coming up? I think he's putting pressure on both of them publicly and I'm sure privately. I haven't heard any pressure on Russia at all publicly. He's just giving Russia, he's allowing Russia to take sanctions off Russia. I mean, give me an example if you've heard it. I think privately right now they're engaged in a lot of conversation with Russia about ending this. Also, I think there's some prisoner recovery that's going on as well.

42:47What I see is the president is wanting to end this. He's wanted to end it since he took over. It has been, I think, one of the greatest frustrations of this administration. But he can't get them to the table to make a meaningful deal. Putin has frustrated and I think spit in the face of the president, frankly, on occasion when he even invited him to Alaska to try to resolve this thing. Regarding the Starlink issue, I don't know what the truth is. There were contradictory sources in the journal. I do think if we are going to be throttling something like that, that decision has to be made in conjunction with the U.S.

43:25government. Because I don't know that I would think, I don't think a private company should unilaterally make that decision, in my view. I don't know who would buy Starlink knowing you could be throttled in the middle of a war. All right. Next for us, we're going to react to your feedback from CNN.com slash Abby. We'll be right back.

43:53And now we've got some viewer feedback from CNN.com slash Abby. This first one says, I think that for every dollar spent on political advertising by both parties, half should go to the deficit. We could solve some serious problems with some of this money. Would love it. I'd love to see public funding, personally. I agree with that person. I would love to go to, like, a British model where, you know, our election season was six weeks long. We had public funding. Everyone got the same amount. Three days before, you can't do advertisements on TV. You can't be on the Internet. You follow, like, that would be great.

44:25I would like to see way less money in politics. So we would just be fully dependent upon the corporate media to tell us what to do? No, I'm saying everyone has the same amount. I would love to see less billionaires putting their feet up. I don't want public dollars going to the Vivek Ramaswamy app. Well, hopefully he wouldn't choose to spend his money on that. There is that. Okay, I've got a question here from a 10th grader. It says, Stymies me that Trump suggests that the French riots will plague America when he himself launched the riot on January 6th and seems to have no issue inciting violence himself.

44:57Crazy age to grow up in, for sure. That 10th grader has a hell of a domain of language. He also used the word he watched. He's ready for the PSATs up in there. He watches the show, so must be learning something. But it is an important point. I mean, when it comes to riots, there was one. And he didn't do much to slap it. Yeah, there's been a lot of riots in America. And I think this current movement in Europe is an extension of the things that we have seen in this country on college campuses and big urban areas. And it wears lots of costumes, but it's always the route is the exact same. People who want to tear down the West.

45:35To be clear, it's a little bit of an ahistorical view of France where there are violent riots actually all the time. If you want to endorse it, go ahead. I don't want to endorse it. I'm just saying the idea that this is like some modern phenomenon. And it's happening. It's happening. Look at the flag. It's happening in several places around Europe. Last week it was Spain. 56 million migrants. The cost of living for these people who live in Europe has become unattainable. All right. Before we go, you can stream the show live or watch on demand. Anytime with an all-access subscription, scan the QR code on your screen or go to CNN.com slash watch to learn more.

46:12And thank you very much for watching Newsnight. Laura Coates Live starts right now. I'm Adi Kornish. 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. And she is also the sort of rare fashion writer who, at this point, kind of outside the system.

46:44And 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. Follow Engagement Party. Wherever you get your podcasts.