Return to Transcripts main page
Laura Coates Live
Trump Rolls Out His Most MAGA Picks For New White House Term; Key Witness Testifies In Daniel Penny Subway Trial; Biden To Host Trump Inside The Oval Office; Laura Coates Interviews CNN's Dr. Sanjay Gupta. Aired 11p-12a ET
Aired November 12, 2024 - 23:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[23:00:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
LAURA COATES, CNN HOST AND SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Who? That's the question many are stuck on tonight. Well, unconventional politicians do make some unconventional choices. One example, Pete Hegseth for secretary of defense.
Now, if he wasn't on your bingo card, you're actually not alone tonight. One defense official telling CNN -- quote -- "Everyone is simply shocked." And if you recognize him, it may be from Fox News. He has been there for eight years and cohost his show on the weekend. There he is. He's a veteran who served tours in Afghanistan and also Iraq. Advisers tell us he has been an informal adviser to Trump for several years already.
And one source says Trump thinks he has, well, the look. So, it'll require a lot more than the look for a T.V. personality with no government experience to run the most powerful military in the entire world.
It's also curious when you factor in what Trump told Joe Rogan.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT-ELECT: It's very dangerous to pick somebody outside of a politician because a politician has been basically vetted for years.
JOR ROGAN, PODCASTER: (voice-over): Right.
TRUMP: You pick a business guy, and they've never been vetted at all and they are, you know, the head of a big company or something, but they've never been vetted. You know nothing about his personal life. You know nothing about --
ROGAN (voice-over): Right.
TRUMP: -- where he has been. When you put him in, it's a little bit dangerous because --
ROGAN (voice-over): Right. TRUMP: -- all of a sudden, they get checked up and you hear things that you say, wow, this is not going to work out too well. So, it's very dangerous.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Very dangerous. (INAUDIBLE) very dangerous? The global hot spot that Hegseth will be dealing with throughout the world. The conflict in Iraq and Ukraine -- excuse me -- the Israel Hamas war, the Iranian aggression in the Middle East, a more hostile China. Needless to say, he will have, well, a lot on his plate. Will he be up to the task? Well, we'll see about that. And make no mistake, the stakes are incredibly high.
But first, got to get through the Senate and the confirmation process. Now, two people who won't need the confirmation of the Senate, Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy. They have been picked together to lead the new Department of Government Efficiency. Yep. DOGE for short, as in the meme. And the cryptocurrency that Musk likes to boost -- I'm not joking, they're going to pronounce it DOGE. It remains to be seen if it will have this as the department's logo and mascot.
All right, seriously, for real, it's kind of basically a task force tasked with giving advice and guidance. Now, if anyone ends up listening to that advice, well, the consequences, of course, could be very significant, especially considering what Ramaswamy has already pledged to do.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VIVEK RAMASWAMY, FORMER PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Shut down the FBI. Shut down the ATF. Shut down the CDC. Shut down the U.S. Department of Education. Fire 75% of the federal bureaucrats in Washington D.C. and send them home packing because they never should have that job in the first place. Rescind every unconstitutional federal regulation that Congress never passed: SCC to FTC to FDA to TSA. I call that 1,000 standing around, by the way. God knows what. Shut it down.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: What could possibly go wrong? Musk himself wants to find 2 trillion bucks to cut from the federal budget. Analysts say that could have, well, catastrophic economic fallout. It'd be nearly impossible without cutting the third rails of American politics. I'm talking about defense and social security. Even Musk has acknowledged those risks. When it was pointed out that his plan could cause a -- quote -- "severe overreaction and a market tumble in the near term," he wrote this: Sounds about right.
Well, time will tell how this will be carried out and how Musk will sort out all his conflicts of interest. Now, aside from those picks, Trump has also announced John Ratcliffe as his CIA director. Now, he has been a key loyalist working as director of National Intelligence in Trump's first term. And South Dakota's governor, Kristi Noem, got the nod to head the Department of Homeland Security. She'll work with immigration hardliner, Tom Homan, Trump's border czar. Why czars? Well, they're also not Senate-confirmed.
I'd say we'll see what picks we'll learn about tomorrow, but we've still got, what, 56 whole minutes left of today.
Joining us now, former Democratic congressman and undersecretary of the Army, Patrick Murphy, former Trump campaign official, Bryan Lanza, and national political correspondent for "The Bulwark," Marc Caputo.
[23:05:03]
Glad to have you all here. You saluted, you go first. That's the rules of the game, Bryan. Sorry. On this very point, Patrick, the Department of Defense is enormous. They've got a budget of what? Nearly $850 billion with a "B," oversight of more than two million active duty and, of course, reserve forces. Does Pete Hegseth have the experience and maybe even the rapport to be able to lead?
PATRICK MURPHY, FORMER PENNSYLVANIA REPRESENTATIVE, FORMER UNDERSECRETARY OF THE U.S. ARMY: You know, two things. One, the longest serving secretary of defense in American history was for eight years under President John F. Kennedy, one of my favorite presidents of all time. And it was a fellow World War II veteran because John F. Kennedy was a World War II veteran. His name was Robert McNamara, age 44.
COATES: Uh-hmm.
MURPHY: And Pete Hegseth, you might disagree with his politics, but he went to Princeton, he went to Harvard, he went to Iraq, Afghanistan, Guantanamo Bay. He has been a leading voice of my generation, of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans. I may disagree with him on policy, but let me tell you something, I do not question (INAUDIBLE) our country, (INAUDIBLE) our troops.
And as long as he remembers that he takes an oath to support and defend the Constitution and not an oath to loyalty, just to the president, that he abides by that, keeps your family safe, the president, this is one of the reasons why elections have consequences. You can pick who he wants.
COATES: I mean, the prerogative does belong to Trump. You've named one from the JFK administration. Recently, though, you've got people like Lloyd Austin, a 41-year military career, commander of U.S. Central Command, a four-star general, retired. You got Mark Esper, a 21-year military career official. Also, Jim Mattis, of course, 43 years.
Just thinking about how they compare to this new pick, but not taking anything away from him, as he has pointed out. I mean, he's a two-time Bronze Star recipient. And you've already named some of his accolades as well. But the absence of government experience, John Bolton actually referred to his pick as a fealty choice. Do you have any concerns about how this may play out, not only in the confirmation, but also leading the military as we know it?
BRYAN LANZA, FORMER DEPUTY COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR FOR TRUMP 2016 CAMPAIGN: Yeah. And I don't think so. Listen, I've been involved in the -- in the confirmation process in 2016 as the communications director for the transition, so we handled the media strategy for all the cabinet designees.
Listen, I think Pete is going to go through the same screening with everybody else. He's going to go through the same training. We're going to set up mock, you know, confirmations hearings. And his records are going to be exposed in a good way or in a negative way.
But his record sounds really good to me. You know, two Ivy League degrees. You know, we had a previous candidate for president (INAUDIBLE) Ivy League degrees. It's good that we're celebrating Ivy League degrees today.
But I think, you know, Pete's service is commitment to his country and his commitment to President Trump. You know, the president has his prerogative. He chose somebody who he's comfortable with. He chose somebody who, over the years, he has leaned on for advice. And, you know, we will see whether he can manage the big bureaucracy of the DOD.
COATES: Hmm.
LANZA: But we know one thing. We know he loves his country, we know he -- he has fought and defended this Constitution, and we know he's going to give maximum effort to the -- to the people of the DOD and give the best advice to the president, which is the best we can ask for.
And I don't want to be critical of vets in the military, but Austin, with this 41 years-experience, the leave in Afghanistan, all those years of experience still led to a very dramatic failure that sort of damage us worldwide.
So, you can have the experienced crew who has all these things, but they constantly make the same mistakes, so it's good to get somebody outside disruptive -- you know, McNamara, I was an admirer of his. There was a book written about him where they referred to him as the whiz kid, you know, from the -- from the training. I think Pete is very much in that line.
MURPHY: I mean, Robert McNamara told president, like, I have no government experience except for serving in combat as a -- as a captain in the -- like the Army Air Corps. But to the point -- listen, I always want to try and be gracious in victory and defeat. I mean, try to be -- I'm a proud Democrat.
But elections have consequences. Right? I mean, he gets to pick what he wants. He has to still go through Senate confirmation. But the Republicans, you know, they have the House, the Senate, the White House, Supreme Court. I mean -- and then they're going to have to, you know --
COATES: They've got all the marbles in many respects. Let me ask Marc Caputo, who's over there. CNN's Kaitlan Collins reporting tonight that Hegseth's name was actually not on the proverbial shortlist and that some source at Mar-a-Lago thought it couldn't actually be real. I'm not saying it was an onion headline, but just not real. What does this say about Trump's decision process?
MARC CAPUTO, NATIONAL POLITICAL REPORTER, THE BULWARK: This says that Donald Trump is going to decide what he wants to decide when he decides it. Right before this went out, I was told, hey, heads up, something -- something is coming down the pike. They purposely held it for the end of the day.
We're just going to be seeing more of this out of the Trump administration. This is the Trump playbook, kind of big, splashy, disruptive news that gets everyone chattering in a Twitter. I imagine this is probably the first in a long line of these things we're going to see over the next four years.
COATES: The absence of this shortlist, though, does that suggest that Trump is isolated in his or maybe unilaterally deciding who he wants as opposed to seeking the counsel of many people around him? I mean, Mar-a-Lago seems to be full of people right now leaning for influence.
[23:10:00]
CAPUTO: Yes and no. I -- you know, Trump world is one of those places where two contradictory things can be true at the same time. You know, ultimately, he is the decider, and he's the guy who makes these decisions. Very often, he seeks out different people and their opinions kind of over and over again to arrive at the decision he wants to arrive at.
He is going through a deliberative process with a lot of these different picks. In this case, he's not. So, in -- as I said, in some cases, he's going to choose the guy he wants. Other cases, he's going to leave it up to a council.
COATES: Hmm.
CAPUTO: But Trump really despises what he calls the deep state. I'm not saying it exists. But he has had a big problem with the generals, as he calls them, with the Pentagon, with the intelligence agencies, the national security bureaucracy, and this is the first of many disruptions that you're going to see.
So, I think the kind of shock and awe and the surprise and the out of the box pick or outside of the box pick is one of these things that's sort of indicative of the way he is going to govern.
COATES: Well, speaking of departments that could be different, Bryan, Trump is tapping Elon Musk and also Vivek Ramaswamy to lead the new Department of Government Efficiency, AKA DOGE. I can't make that up. DOGE. It sounds like they're outside consultant with no real power. But that can't be right if you're Elon Musk just wanting sort of a perfunctory role.
LANZA: Well, listen, it's also very important to understand the way government works. You know, John Kerry has the presidential envoy to climate change. Mhmm. He has no real government puncture or role in there other than just sort of advisory. So, you know, that's the way, you know, if we're looking at that model, that model exists already. You know, Barack Obama had these czars where they really didn't have a role as more advisory.
I think the difference with Elon and with Vivek is they're sort of men of actions. They're not going to come to the table with just suggestions. They're going to set up the apparatus. It's like this is what we reviewed, these are the strong recommendations. And the best part you have is they're going to be reporting to President Trump, who is an executor.
So, they're going to come in with a plan, they're going to say, we've analyzed these things, and the president is going to come in, red marker, everything, we're just going to move forward.
Whereas the typical bureaucratic process is it gets lost in the White House due to interagency conversations and ultimately nothing happens. You know, President Trump feels fully empowered to bring out the red Sharpie and clear the line.
MURPHY: You know, I think -- you see President Trump was acting -- President-elect Trump was acting decisively. You know, the weeks that it took before -- I mean, it took a month for some of these positions. Before, eight years ago, I think he was picking people to help advise him.
COATES: Uh-hmm.
MURPHY: And now, he's telling people --
LANZA: Uh-hmm.
MURPHY: -- this is why I want you to execute for me. And whether you like it or not, that's what we're going to see, and that's why you're seeing picks like Marco Rubio for secretary of state, who's a China hawk. And, you know, I think America, at her best, is the reluctant warrior. So, we're going to see, you know, this battle between some Neocons versus folks who wanted to shrink the Pentagon. It's going be an interesting four years.
COATES: But as -- I mean, you know, the power of the purse in Congress. I mean, even a department that looks at government efficiency is going to spend. It's going to potentially cost some money and also trying to shave off a number of things. Look at the list that Vivek Ramaswamy listed off. That can lead to consequences that can cost more in the long run as well if you don't have agencies or even bureaucracies set up in this way. Will Congress go along with that?
MURPHY: I think it makes sense, and it makes sense for constituents. I know -- when I was -- I was a Blue Dog Democrat. Right? So, I was forged on security balanced-budgets. And part of that, I wrote a bill that was called the improper payments bill. We actually save trillions of dollars -- I'm sorry -- billions of dollars in taxpayer from improper payments.
The government could be more efficient. We know that. Right? But are you going to ask folks to roll up their sleeves and get after it to save taxpayer moneys for people or are you just going to say, I'm going to fire the folks in AFG, the union members that work at the VA or like which -- you know, that would be different. But we'll see. When he's saying save $2 trillion off of $5 trillion budget, we'll see.
COATES: Well, we'll see about what's going on as well. Marc, you're reporting Trump favors Senator Rick Scott in his bid tomorrow for Senate leader. He's withholding an endorsement. Why?
CAPUTO: Well, the big thing for Donald Trump is, can you win? And his big question about Rick Scott with the Senate leadership race is, can Rick win? And the answer so far that had come back to him was probably not. So, even though Rick Scott has been as MAGA as they come, one of the things he doesn't really want to do, Trump, he's busy doing the things that are causing us to talk about his various wild and in some cases out of the box appointments. He doesn't really want to get bogged down in a Senate battle.
In the end, Donald Trump has already sort of won. He has bent the Senate Republican Conference to his will by getting all of these three guys. Now, Rick Scott was already there, but John Cornyn and John Thune to agree, to agree to allow him to have recess appointments, which would essentially bypass the entire appointment and sort of nomination process in the Senate. So, he has essentially gotten them proactively to agree to give up power. That's something that didn't happen before.
One of my sources said, you know, in the past, in the Senate, this would be considered a human rights violation. And now, they just kind of folded like a cheap suit (ph).
[23:15:02]
So, Trump kind of wins either way. And in the end, Rick Scott was sort of the fulcrum in which he leveraged these two other guys regardless of who wins.
COATES: Teflon Don. Thank you, everyone.
Up next, much more on Donald Trump's new pick to lead the Pentagon, including what he has said about so called woke generals. As the reporting suggests, Donald Trump might have a plan to purge the military with just a stroke of a pen.
And later, inside the Daniel Penny subway trial in New York. A key witness recants his initial story and tells the jury a new version of what he saw.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PETE HEGSETH, FORMER FOX AND FRIENDS WEEKEND HOST: It's one thing to have DEI inside your corporation or inside your university. It's a whole another thing to have it inside the 101st Airborne. You can move to a different state if you want to go to a different school or if you want a different tax rate. We only have one military. And if the military goes woke, then it is less equipped to fight the wars it needs to fight.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: That's Donald Trump's pick for defense secretary from the now former Fox and Friends weekend host, Pete Hegseth.
[23:20:03]
For years, he has been a warrior against what he calls the -- quote -- "woke military." Hegseth, well, he knows the military well, an army veteran of Afghanistan and also Iraq. He's also a graduate of Princeton and Harvard's Kennedy School of Government, and served as executive director of an advocacy group for veterans. "The Washington Post" reports the group is backed by the Koch brothers. Hegseth also raised eyebrows in 2019 when he privately encouraged Donald Trump to pardon some service members accused of war crimes. But he has no government experience.
Let's talk about this with Congressman Seth Moulton, a Democrat from Massachusetts. He sits on the House Armed Services Committee. Welcome. Let's get your reaction to --
REP. SETH MOULTON (D-MA): Yeah.
COATES: -- this choice of Hegseth as defense secretary.
MOULTON: Well, I think, first of all, everyone is just surprised --
COATES: Yeah.
MOULTON: -- because he wasn't on the list. He's not someone that has much experience. You know, he served in the National Guard. But people are wondering what is he going to do, what he -- what is his agenda. All we know is that his agenda is clearly to politicize things. That's what he has done for years on Fox News. That's what he's known for. And he specifically focuses on politicizing the military.
So, as someone who believes in the core American values, including making sure we have a military that is not politicized, that is not, you know, behaving like Trump's want, Trump wants the Hitler's general model where they just do what the political leader wants irrespective of morals or military guidance, I'm afraid that that's fundamentally why Trump is picking Hegseth.
And so, that's what we got to be careful of, and that's why those of us on the Armed Services Committee in Congress are really asking a lot of questions right now.
COATES: Well, there'll be more questions to come in any confirmation. I'll see what's revealed. But one question many are asking is about this purge list.
MOULTON: Hmm.
COATES: If Hegseth was not on a list, now the question is generals who might be on a list. "The Wall Street Journal" is reporting that Trump is considering an executive order to form a panel that would actually fast track efforts to remove certain generals and also admirals. This is about purging maybe politically opposite viewpoints of people?
MOULTON: I mean, let's just take a moment to step back and recognize how truly unprecedented this --
COATES: Hmm.
MOULTON: -- even this idea is, in American history. It's about as un- American as you can get. This is what Xi Jinping is doing right now in China.
COATES: Hmm.
MOULTON: He's going through his generals, he's finding those who don't agree with the ideology, not just the ideals, but the ideology of the Chinese Communist Party, and he's getting rid of them, he's purging them.
That's the model that Donald Trump apparently wants to follow. It's fundamentally un-American, it's against our values, it's against our Constitution. And if he follows through with this, it'll be very dangerous for not just for our national security but for the military as an institution.
COATES: I mean, we assume morale that will be unapologetically following the commands of the commander in chief. But this can't do well for the morale of the military and the armed services who might look at this and say, if I don't agree with you, you're going to take away our leadership?
MOULTON: I mean, this is going to cause a lot of junior officers, for example, like young 23-year-old lieutenants, to be asking serious questions about when they have to disobey orders.
COATES: Uh-hmm.
MOULTON: That's a rare moment in military history. Look, I served under George W. Bush. I didn't agree with the Iraq war. I did particularly like Donald Rumsfeld, not exactly the most loved secretary of defense, but I didn't think he was there just to politicize the military. I mean, I might have not have agreed with his strategy, I might not have agreed with the decision to go into Iraq, but I didn't think he was just trying to pursue some politically- ideological agenda. And yet, that's what Trump and Hegseth are actually saying.
So, look, let's give him the benefit of the doubt for a moment here and give him a chance to prove himself. I mean, Hegseth has no experience, so let's see what he actually wants to do. But the warning signs are there. And I think those of us in Congress, certainly Democrats, but I think there are going to be some responsible veteran Republicans as well, who are going to keep a very careful eye --
COATES: Uh-hmm.
MOULTON: -- on whether he is living up to and upholding the values fundamental to our country of what our military is all about.
COATES: It's an unbelievably important position as is secretary of state. And he has tapped Marco Rubio, somebody who -- I think Senator John Fetterman has supported him. He is obviously going to have some, perhaps, an easier time being confirmed than an unknown person. What do you think his selection says about Trump's foreign policy initiatives?
MOULTON: Well, on the one hand, I think there are Democrats who believe they can work with Rubio, that he's a reasonable person, and that's obviously a good sign. On the other hand, I mean --
(LAUGHTER)
-- this is the guy who, you know, ran against Trump, tried to like do the name calling stunt as a way to attack Trump in the primary.
[23:25:00]
He's kind of all over the map. Does he oppose Trump? Does he like Trump? What exactly are his values? I think that's the question I'm going to be asking. When you're the secretary of defense -- sorry, secretary of state, especially, you're really out there representing American values.
COATES: Uh-hmm.
MOULTON: You are one of -- you -- you're our face to the world when it comes to diplomacy, when it comes to negotiations, when it comes to saying what is America all about and what do we stand for, what's important to us. And I think there are a lot of Americans who are not quite sure what's important to Marco Rubio. So, that's kind of what I'm going to be wondering as he goes through his confirmation.
COATES: Well, for Americans, I think you and I wonder what allies and those who'll be looking to him for guidance will be. There has been a lot of backlash since the election. You have made comments, in particular "The New York Times." I want to address them and read them in full.
MOULTON: Sure.
COATES: This is part of your comment to contextualize it, that you said, "I have two little girls. I don't want them getting run over on a playing field by a male or formally male athlete. But as a Democrat, I'm supposed to be afraid to say that."
And I have to wonder, given some of the backlash that has come from it and in the post mortem of what happened to Democrats in this election, do you feel like cancel culture is swirling around you?
MOULTON: Yes. It's okay. I'll be fine. But, unfortunately, the backlash proves my point that we can't even have discussions about these issues. And we need to.
We need to in part because when Democrats refuse to even discuss these contentious issues, whether they be issues of identity politics or just why are Democrats not trusted on the economy, why are we not trusted on immigration, core issues in this election, if we can't even have discussions, we can't listen to American voters and say, by the way, that we may not agree with you, but we value your opinion, we want to listen and understand your perspective, we're never going to connect with the majority of Americans, and we're not going to have a chance of winning these debates, winning elections, and preventing a radical hateful Trump agenda from just sailing through Congress.
So, this is actually really important to some of the very communities that are at risk here and that we as Democrats need to stand up for and protect.
COATES: Congressman Seth Moulton, you're back in Congress this week. There's a work cut out for you. Thanks for stopping by.
MOULTON: Thank you.
COATES: Up next, Marine veteran Daniel Penny on trial for the choke hold death of a homeless man in a New York City subway. And now, the jury is hearing from a critical witness, a man who was not only there, but who helped Penny hold the victim down. Could his testimony actually help or hurt the case against the defendant? Inside the blockbuster trial, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:30:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: He was right there helping to hold Jordan Neely down. And today, Eric Gonzalez testified under oath. He told Daniel Penny -- quote -- "Let him go." Important testimony in the trial centered around a fatal choke hold. But this key witness also admitting that he initially lied to investigators.
Let me take you back if you don't remember this case. This is where Daniel Penny, a 26-year-old Marine vet, fatally pinned down Jordan Neely, a homeless 30-year-old man with a history of mental illness, on a New York City subway.
Penny is now facing second-degree manslaughter and criminally- negligent homicide charges. He has plead not guilty, claiming he acted out of defense for the passengers on the subway car. And the government -- and the argument there is that Neely was making passengers on the subway feel unsafe. And the prosecution alleges Penny had good intentions, but went too far in trying to subdue Neely.
Here's a look at what occurred on that subway train. And I have to warn you, what you are about to see is disturbing.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
(END VIDEO CLIP) COATES: I want to bring in Gloria Pazmino. She's a CNN national correspondent who was in the courtroom today. Also, here, Elliot Williams, a CNN legal analyst and former federal prosecutor. Gloria, thank you for joining. Elliot, of course, as well. How is the prosecution feeling about their case thus far?
GLORIA PAZMINO, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Laura, they had a good day in court today, and the burden is on them to prove that Daniel Penny acted recklessly. As you said, he has been charged with manslaughter and criminally-negligent homicide. And what they're trying to prove is that Daniel Penny ignored the risk involved in the maneuver that he used against -- against Jordan Neely, placing him in that chokehold.
So, today's testimony by Eric Gonzalez was important because he talked about how he saw them struggling on the subway floor, and he jumped in to help. And while he did this, he signaled and said to Mr. Penny, I'm going to hold his arms down so you can let him go. But we know from video evidence and from testimony that Mr. Penny did not let go. In fact, he held Jordan Neely in that chokehold for nearly six minutes.
Now, as you said, the defense has said that he was doing this in an attempt to protect the other passengers on the subway, many of whom have testified about feeling afraid and fearing for their lives when they saw Jordan Neely get on the train and start yelling about being hungry, about being thirsty, and about not being afraid of going to jail.
COATES: Elliot, can you give me your assessment of how the prosecution's case is going? I mean, how effective are the arguments you're making about good intentions but going too far? How does that play?
[23:35:00]
ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: Well, it's important to remember, this is a manslaughter case, it's not murder. Now, in New York, that is recklessly causing the death of another person. Now, what does the word "recklessly" mean? It's consciously disregarding a risk to that person in a way that's unreasonable. Now, those are all vague terms.
But he had good intentions. There's no question there was a threat that was presented. People were scared. One woman said, I was scared shitless. One person said, he terrified everybody in the train car. Fine. Right? But then the question is, was the chokehold, you know, sufficient to neutralize that threat?
I think for the purposes of manslaughter in New York, you probably get there because of, number one, you have that video, with the amount of time, the number of people saying it. I think one person said, hey, man, you got a really good chokehold, you don't want to catch a murder charge, make sure he doesn't defecate on himself. Those kinds of things are being said in the moment, and that's not going to play well in front of a jury, even in light of the good intentions that started the whole thing off. COATES: I mean, Gloria, just hearing that, the atmosphere in the courtroom must have been very difficult. And I understand that Neely's father has been there most days. How has that been with him there and, of course, Daniel Penny a few feet away?
PAZMINO: Yeah, Andrew Zachary is Mr. Jordan Neely's father, and he has been there since day one. And one thing I have to say, Laura, is that the video, different angles of this video, different close ups of this video, has been played in court for these jurors and everyone in the courtroom over and over multiple times as they question witnesses. And I have watched, as his father often watches the video, he holds his head in his hands, and I've watched him cry as the video plays.
COATES: Hmm.
PAZMINO: Now, Mr. Penny is just a few feet away on the other side of the courtroom. Every day, he comes in. He says, good morning. He does not appear to show any emotion. He's usually looking straight ahead towards the bench. He also has a pretty big monitor directly in front of him. So, he is seeing that video as well being played over and over.
It is definitely a heavy environment and emotional environment in that courtroom because, as I said, we're being showed this video of a man dying multiple times, and we're seeing all these different reactions that witnesses are having, as well as the family of Mr. Neely and those who have been in the courtroom to support him.
COATES: Hmm. To many, he was a stranger, but his own father watching this play by play, and I only imagine what he's feeling of seeing his son. Elliot, this case has echoes of the 1984 Bernhard Goetz case.
WILLIAMS: Right.
COATES: It was a subway shooting, which you were writing a book about, frankly, and you and I have talked about this, and the parallels when we first heard about this. What are the parallels you see?
WILLIAMS: Okay, number one, rough city. People are scared and the threat of crime was present however real it was. Right? Number one, white assailant or accused assailant and Black victim and responding to a threat. There was a real threat both to Bernhard Goetz. He was frightened in the train car where these four men came up to him.
Daniel Penny was frightened in the car. The question is, what is the threat and who is empowered to use force, and how are they allowed to get away with it? Now, Goetz ultimately was acquitted of the violent crime charges. He was only convicted of a gun charge.
But it was polarizing. You had even in 1984 polarized media that sort of whipped up a frenzy about the various sides around this case and it really has parallels to all of these issues that we're still dealing with in in terms of crime and safety in in cities today.
COATES: I can't wait to read that book. It's coming out soon. I'm excited about it. It's actually written by you, Elliot Williams. Gloria Pazmino, Elliot Williams, thank you so much for being here, both of you.
Well, it's going to be a moment to behold. President-elect Donald Trump returning to the Oval Office to meet President Joe Biden. If that's not awkward enough, there's already some drama brewing. Imagine that. What's next?
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:40:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: Well, tomorrow, a meeting will take Washington back to the future. President Biden welcomes Donald Trump back to the White House. The last time a president and president-elect sat down in the Oval Office after the election, it was back in 2016 when Barack Obama and Trump met just two days after Trump won. The meeting between the two men lasted 90 minutes.
It is a tradition that dates back to 1841, and it has happened every time the presidency has changed hands until 2020. Back then, Biden did not receive an invite from Trump because Trump did not concede the election.
I want to bring in Chris Whipple. He is the author of "The Fight of His Life: Inside Joe Biden's White House." Chris, welcome back. This is a meeting --
CHRIS WHIPPLE, AUTHOR: Good to be here.
COATES: -- that was supposed to happen four years ago, but never did. How is Biden going to approach tomorrow?
WHIPPLE: Well, look, it is a time-honored tradition for the outgoing president to welcome the incoming president, and it's obviously a tradition that Trump did not honor. So, the operative word here, I think, is awkward.
(LAUGHTER)
These guys hate each other. You know, Donald Trump uses a word for Joe Biden that I can't say on the air that begins with "R" and has two syllables. Joe Biden calls Donald Trump, you know, that sick blank. We know how they feel about each other. It's no surprise, really, that Biden would invite Trump, because that's who Joe Biden is. He's a -- he respects tradition and protocols and does the right thing.
The surprise -- the only surprise to me is that Trump is showing up, frankly, because in a way, it's almost he's acknowledging Biden's legitimacy as president.
COATES: Hmm.
[23:44:56]
WHIPPLE: And I don't know what they can -- he can possibly think he has to gain from this except attention because can you imagine a really constructive conversation? I can't.
COATES: I almost see a Martinis of enemies sort of moment, a James Bond film ensuing. But you know who will not be there? The first lady, Melania Trump. She says she has a scheduling conflict. She had been invited by Dr. Jill Biden. Is that really what's going on?
WHIPPLE: No, I don't think so. I think -- again, it's -- it's no surprise to me that Melania won't be there because of -- this is a toxic, contentious relationship between these two couples, between these two families, and it has been for a long time. And I think, I -- you know, I don't -- obviously, it's -- it is again to be applauded that the Bidens invited both of them to come, that Dr. Jill Biden invited Melania. Not a surprise to me that Melania didn't accept. The surprise is that Trump is going, I think.
COATES: Why do you think Trump is going? Is it because -- I mean, is it -- is it equal parts gloating and attention or something else?
WHIPPLE: That could well be it. You know, when it comes to -- when it comes to Donald Trump, sometimes, the -- the simple answer is the right one. I -- I don't think he's playing three-dimensional chess that we're somehow not detecting here. I think it -- it may just be that he wants to go and -- and gloat in Biden's presence.
COATES: Well, you know, I -- with not a simple answer, I think, Democrats are finding in this postmortem. It has been a week now since Harris lost, and it was a decisive victory by Trump and, frankly, Republicans nearly across the board when it comes to the House and Senate. Do you have the idea of what the Biden team believes is the reason Harris lost?
WHIPPLE: Look, there's plenty of finger-pointing that's going on right now between the Biden camp and the Harris camp. And I think that the -- you know, the Harris camp may well feel that it was mission impossible, that they -- Biden put them into a hole that they just couldn't come back from. I think David Plouffe hinted at that in his very first post after the election.
In the case of Biden's true believers within the campaign, there's this -- there's -- there's an attitude that, okay, well, all you geniuses said that anybody but except Biden could beat Trump, and you got exactly what you asked for, and look at the result.
So, I don't think that that applies to Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. I think -- I have not heard anything to suggest that Joe Biden has been blaming her or suggesting that she didn't run a good campaign. I think there's real respect between the two of them.
COATES: What do you think his legacy is going to be? I mean, Pelosi seems to think had he stepped down sooner, had there been a primary, a lot of would-a, could-a, should-a. What's his legacy going to be now?
WHIPPLE: I think it's a two-part answer to that question. There's a substantive legacy, and then there's a political legacy. I think the substantive legacy is that he is -- has been a consequential president. This is a guy who rescued, pulled an economy out of a free fall, alleviated a once in a century pandemic, created 16,000,000 jobs, stood up NATO to face Putin's invasion of Ukraine. Without a doubt, that's a -- that's a very strong legacy.
On the political side, it's a different story, I think, because the -- you know, the very first sentence or the second sentence of Joe Biden's political obituary will be that he stepped away from the ticket at the 11th hour and that his successor lost to Donald Trump.
There will be people who blame Joe Biden for not having stepped aside, and there have been, as we know, who blame Joe Biden for not stepping aside sooner and having an open primary process. I personally feel the jury is out on that. I think it's almost impossible to know whether an earlier primary would have given us a different result.
COATES: Well, we will see. History books will be written. Chris Whipple, thank you so much for joining.
WHIPPLE: Good to be with you.
COATES: Up next, it has changed lives, waistlines and, frankly, even entire industries. But is Ozempic the miracle drug everyone is making it out to be? Dr. Sanjay Gupta joins me next on his year-long investigation.
Plus, the bittersweet announcement from Hollywood icon Denzel Washington.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:50:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: Well, they're referred to by some as miracle drugs people are using to lose weight. By now, you've probably heard of all of them: Ozempic, Wegovy, Mounjaro, Zepbound. But what exactly do these treatments do in your body and are they safe?
Well, CNN's Dr. Sanjay Gupta's new documentary explores exactly those questions and more. Here's a clip.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNKNOWN (voice-over): What it did help me was not have a whole lot of thoughts about food. My cravings went away.
SANJAY GUPTA, CNN CHIEF MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Those voices in her head that had made her crave food, experts call it food chatter, they were silenced. And that is part of the magic of these new medications. GLP-1 seems to act in a way that no other known hormone can.
Here's how it seems to work. Every time you eat, all sorts of hormones are released, like GLP-1. They are called post-nutrient hormones. They travel here, to the hypothalamus, and the brain to tell you that you are full or satiated. [23:55:04]
They also travel over here, to the pancreas, to kick out more insulin to help absorb the energy you just consumed. And also, over here, to your gut, to slow down the emptying, allowing you to better digest your food. In so many ways, it seems like the perfect hormone to help you stop eating as much. It seemed perfect for Rashida (ph). In that first year, she lost 100 pounds. It changed her life.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: "Dr. Sanjay Gupta Reports: Is Ozempic Right for You?" It premieres Sunday night at 8 p.m. Eastern Time. And Dr. Sanjay Gupta joins me now.
GUPTA: Hi, Laura.
COATES: Dr. Gupta, hello. You say obesity is more of a brain disease. Right?
GUPTA: Yeah, that's right. And, you know, we've -- we've sort of known this for some time, but these medications, I think, in some ways have really put a fine point on this, Laura.
One of the things that sort of struck me is when you look at how these medications work, as you just saw there, it is doing a lot in terms of what is happening in the brain. And what it has taught us, I think, is that for some people, not everybody, but some people who have obesity, they -- they never really stop thinking about food and they never really feel full.
It's kind of incredible spending time with people who have this sort of constant food chatter. Even as they're eating their meal, they're already thinking about their next meal. If their pantry doesn't have enough food in it, they get anxiety.
So, you know, the way that we used to think about depression and addiction decades ago, people used to think depression, just pull yourself up by your bootstraps. And now, I think it's pretty widely accepted that it's a brain disease. I think we're at those sorts of nascent days with regard to obesity as well where it's becoming increasingly accepted as a disease of the brain in addition to all the other impacts that it has on the body.
COATES: It was so interesting to see the way that you charted what it actually does in the body.
GUPTA: Yeah.
COATES: Many people have no idea and your special, of course, explores that. But what do we know about the long-term effects of the disease?
GUPTA: I think, you know, whenever you have drugs that are relatively new, it's -- it's going to take time to collect some of that data. We know that most of the side effects that people have do occur within the first few months. So, you know, people who get through those first few months, they might have gastrointestinal side effects.
Sometimes, people just lose the joy for food. As it was described to me, they just -- they have no interest in food. And as a result, they become less social, things like that. Those are side effects. In addition to losing fat, you lose muscle, so you're losing lean muscle mass. For people who are older, in particular, that can be a problem.
But one thing I do want to point out, Laura, is that as much as we've just heard about these drugs over the last few years, they've actually been around for a couple of decades now. They just didn't have a lot of fanfare about it back in 2003 when they were released. But the point being that you have some 20 years-worth of data, long-term data, on a small group of people who've been taking these medications for, you know, quite some time now.
COATES: Well, I'm certainly going to tune in and watch this. Everyone has been talking about these drugs. I'd like to know more and through the eyes of somebody we so respect. Sanjay, thank you so much.
GUPTA: Thanks for having me, Laura.
COATES: Be sure to catch "Dr. Sanjay Gupta Reports: Is Ozempic Right for You?" It premieres Sunday night at 8 only on CNN.
Well, in case you missed it or we're about to miss it, breaking news, everyone. John Krasinski is People Magazine 2024 sexiest man alive. That's right. Jim from "The Office" is now the sexiest man alive. Maybe it's because of his turn on Jack Ryan. Maybe it's for his brain. After all, he's the man behind the hit "A Quiet Place." Congratulations, John Krasinski, or maybe I should say congrats to his wife, Emily Blunt. No, it's not Pam. Everyone, keep up.
And while we're on the topic of sexiest man alive, 1996's winner, Denzel Washington, is saying he is getting ready to retire. Now wait, before you smash your television, there is some good news. Check out what Washington said in an interview while promoting "Gladiator 2."
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DENZEL WASHINGTON, ACTOR: I want to do things I haven't done. I played Othello at 22. I'm about to play Othello at 70. After that, I'm -- I'm -- I'm playing Hannibal. After that, I've been talking with Steve McQueen about a film. After that, Ryan Coogler is writing a part for me in the next "Black Panther." After that, I'm going to do the film "Othello." After that, I'm going to do King Lear. After that, I'm going to retire.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Could I be cast as Desdemona for a -- sorry. All right, we are going to get a lot more of Denzel before he retires. And finally, before we go tonight, in case you missed it, the viral "Wheel of Fortune" mistake, I could not let you end your day without seeing.
[00:00:03]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
(APPLAUSE)
UNKNOWN: I'd like to buy a U.
UNKNOWN: Well, you're going to get three Us.
(APPLAUSE)
UNKNOWN: I'd like to solve the puzzle.
UNKNOWN: Okay. Well, let's hear it.
UNKNOWN: Treat yourself a round of sausage.
UNKNOWN: I'm sorry. That's not it. Over to Katina (ph).
UNKNOWN: I'd like to solve.
UNKNOWN: Okay.
UNKNOWN: Give yourself a round of applause.
UNKNOWN: Yeah, that's it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(LAUGHTER)
COATES: Well, treat yourself to a round of sausage, everyone. I don't know. Thanks for watching. "Anderson Cooper 360" is next. Jesus.
