Return to Transcripts main page

Laura Coates Live

President Trump Calls Zelenskyy A Dictator, Issues A New Warning; Elon Musk's DOGE Slashes Into A Program That Got Lawmakers On Both Sides Of The Aisle Upset; New York City Mayor Eric Adams Speaks Hours After Appearing In Court. Aired 10-11p ET

Aired February 19, 2025 - 23:00   ET

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

[23:00:00]

LAURA COATES, CNN ANCHOR: Tonight, President Trump sets off a global firestorm, calling Ukraine Zelenskyy a dictator and then issuing a new warning. Plus, Eric Adams denies a quid pro quo and all those accusations inside of a courtroom today.

This, as a DOJ, tries to dismiss the criminal case against him. I did say try. Will the judge see it the same way? And 9-11 first responders now falling victim to the DOGE cost-cutting machine. Will Elon Musk backtrack on this one? Tonight, on "Laura Coates Live".

Donald Trump is going full scorched earth against a wartime leader America has supported for the last three years. Well, that is until about 31 days ago. He is tearing into Ukrainian President Zelenskyy and verbalizing the insults he had written out just a few hours before.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A modestly successful comedian, President Zelenskyy talked the United States of America into spending $350 billion to go into a war that basically couldn't be won.

The only thing he was really good at was playing Joe Biden like a fiddle. He played him like a fiddle. A dictator without elections, Zelenskyy better move faster. He's not going to have a country left. Got to move. Got to move fast.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: So, those attacks were basically a word for word rendition of his social media post just this morning. It was long. It was full of petty jabs, and a lot of it frankly, it just wasn't true. First and foremost, need I remind everyone, the war was started by Vladimir Putin, an actual dictator, not Zelenskyy.

Second, Ukraine's been under martial law ever since Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022. It's constitution, the constitution, again, the Constitution prevents elections while under martial law. And you can see here the destruction the war has brought. I mean, I guess you could imagine trying to tell Ukrainians to go to

the polls when bombs and artillery are still going off because of an invasion by Russia. But suggesting this is somehow a way of masterminding, a way to stay in power for Zelenskyy, frankly, is beyond. And that $350 billion in U.S. spending that Trump cited, nowhere near reality.

A research organization puts the number at around 119 billion. Now, that's still very high, but it's also off by over 200 billion, with a B. And if you're wondering where you've heard all of this before, you're right. You have. All of those lies are actually Russian talking points. And the avalanche was triggered by this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY, UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT (through translator): Unfortunately, President Trump, I have great respect for him as a leader of a nation that we have great respect for. The American people who always support us unfortunately lives in this disinformation space.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Now, it wasn't just Trump that went after Zelenskyy for that comment. Vice President J.D. Vance, he piled on as well. He said bad- mouthing Trump in public will go nowhere. Nevermind that it was actually Trump who lashed out first, falsely accusing Zelenskyy yesterday of starting that war.

Now, what's actually happening on the world stage is nothing short of remarkable. The President is openly embracing Vladimir Putin, who, as you know, was persona non grata in the West, for what, the last three years at least.

Not only is Zelenskyy being made out to be an outcast by Trump, he wasn't even invited to talks between Russia and the U.S. and Saudi Arabia. America's European allies don't seem to know what to do. And on top of all of that, what Ukraine will actually look like in the future seems to be a completely open question.

You can see the changes it's gone through from 2014 when Russia annexed Crimea to the start of the 2022 invasion and what it is now. Residents in Kyiv aren't happy about anything they're hearing.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNKNOWN: I just, I have really bad feeling that future of Ukraine is not really bright right now because of everything we hear in news from Trump. We are really upset and we a little bit hate him for these words.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Yet in Moscow --

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) UNKNOWN: What do you think about Donald Trump?

UNKNOWN: I think maybe small Stalin.

UNKNOWN: You think small Stalin?

UNKNOWN: Yes.

UNKNOWN: Why?

UNKNOWN: Why? But character.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Character? Join me now, CNN military analyst, a retired four- star U.S. naval officer, Admiral James Stavridis, excuse me. He also served as NATO's supreme allied commander from 2009 to 2013. Great to have you here, Admiral. Thank you for joining this evening. What is your reaction to President Trump calling Zelenskyy a dictator?

JAMES STAVRIDIS, CNN MILITARY ANALYST: You know, there are so many dictators around the world that President Trump could lash out at. Let's start with Kim Jong-un in Korea. How about Nicolas Maduro in Venezuela? How about Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua? How about Vladimir Putin, as you correctly point out a moment ago?

There are plenty of dictators out there. Zelenskyy is not one of them. He's duly elected. He's operating under his constitution. And by the way, his approval ratings are about 55 to 57 percent, that's 10 points ahead of Donald Trump here in the United States.

COATES: An important point to raise on that especially, but Trump has sidelined him from negotiations. Frankly, Trump has sidelined Ukraine from negotiations. He has barred NATO membership, said they need to give up territory. And CNN's reporting that they demanded 50% percent of Ukraine's rare earth minerals. But I note he has asked no concessions of Russia. How could Ukraine possibly accept any of this?

STAVRIDIS: I don't think they can. And let's start with the basics here. Ukraine cannot give up any more territory than they have already lost to Russia. They've already lost about 20 percent of the country. We've got to kind of allow them to hold that remaining 80 percent. Number two, we've got to keep aid flowing. And yes, the Europeans can do more here, and I think they will.

And third and finally, we've got to give Ukraine security guarantees if we are going to negotiate a conclusion here so that they can be confident that they will not simply be reinvaded by Vladimir Putin if they do agree a ceasefire.

So, this negotiation, Laura, has a long way to go. And I think the pivotal actors ultimately are going to be the Europeans, the degree to which they step up to substitute for an increasingly, unfortunately, skeptical United States will determine the future of Ukraine.

COATES: Well, one, do you think that Europe, in fact, will do that? And two, does Zelenskyy have the requisite level of leverage to demand anything you've just said?

STAVRIDIS: As to number one, yeah, I think the Europeans will. They just had a summit in Paris. There's some disagreement. As always, the challenge for Europe is to find a way to synchronize their views, to come together. But I think there's a growing consensus in Europe that the United States is not a consistent, reliable security partner. That means they are going to have to begin to step up.

In terms of Zelenskyy, the leverage that he has is, in fact, his position on the battlefield, the fighting spirit of the Ukrainians, and the means that we provide them, we, the United States, but increasingly the Europeans. I think, can hold off Putin indefinitely.

COATES: Admiral James Stavridis, thank you so much for joining us this evening.

STAVRIDIS: My pleasure, Laura.

COATES: I want to continue our conversation now with White House and foreign policy correspondent for "Politico", Eli Stokols. CNN senior political commentator and Republican strategist Brad Todd and former Obama White House senior director Nayyera Haq.

This is quite a night in foreign policy world, which of many nights. I want to begin with you here, Eli. President Trump obviously, should I say not pleased with Zelenskyy trying to take him down a couple notches? Why?

ELI STOKOLS, "POLITICO" WHITE HOUSE AND FOREIGN POLICY CORRESPONDENT: Well, I mean, there are a lot of hypotheses about that. I think you can go back eight days to the phone call that the President held -- a 90-minute phone call, he said, with Vladimir Putin.

And ever since then, he has been espousing, as you laid out, all these Kremlin talking points, explaining, oh, they can't be in -- Ukraine can't be in NATO because Russia doesn't want them in NATO. It's Ukraine's fault that the war started. I think that there's a consensus that that call really influenced the President and the President has been reiterating a lot of what he heard from Vladimir Putin.

There is a sense among people that I talk to in Washington and people that I've talked to in Europe that, above all else, President Trump just wants to normalize the relationship with Russia. He wants to be head-to-head with Vladimir Putin. He respects strength, powerful leaders. He wants to do deals with Russia.

The conversation that -- that Marco Rubio and other members of the U.S. delegation had in Saudi Arabia with the Russians a day ago, that conversation was almost whistling past the matter of resolving the Ukraine War.

[23:10:05]

They were already talking about economic cooperation down the road in the Arctic and other places. And you get the sense that that is what this President is focused on. He wants to end the war. How the war ends doesn't seem to be too interested in the details.

COATES: That's the real - that's the problem though. I mean, the details are really important, I hear you. What's your thought?

NAYYERA HAQ, FORMER OBAMA WHITE HOUSE SENIOR DIRECTOR: Well, this is, the other piece here is that you had sitting at the table two countries that are part of the oil cartel, OPEC, who have defied European sanctions. They want to keep their economies based on oil and gas. And under Trump, so does the United States.

So, you have something much bigger going on here than just whether or not the people of Ukraine can have their own country and have sovereignty, but it's their desire to return to a world in which oil and gas countries are leading the way.

BRAD TODD, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Oil and gas is going to continue to be the center of the world economy. That's not going to change. Our demands for computing or going skyrocketing and we will only satisfy them mostly with oil and gas.

Oil and gas actually is the key to this. You can't necessarily beat Vladimir Putin on the battlefield in Ukraine because the Ukrainian people are fourth their size, they've stalled him out. But what we can do is we can take Vladimir Putin down with oil. Urals oil right now is selling at $68 a barrel. If it's at $50 he can't make it. American oil wells are still profitable.

HAQ: So, that's an argument for keeping the sanctions on Russia.

TODD: Sure.

HAQ: The oil and gas sanctions.

TODD: Donald Trump's strategy, though, is to free any nation that's dependent on Russian oil and gas with American oil and gas.

HAQ: By giving profits -- oil and gas profits, back to Russia who invaded a country for the second time. I was at the U.N. in 2015 when Russia invaded Crimea, and universally people recognized that that was a lame response to one country invading and taking over the borders of another.

TODD: The United States did nothing. Barack Obama did nothing about it.

HAQ: And so --

TODD: Barack Obama allowed it to happen. That's the original sin in the Ukraine War, that Barack Obama allowed it to happen.

HAQ: And so then in answer to that, if Barack Obama was too weak, then the argument is then to do what Biden did, which is unify NATO, get bipartisan U.S. support and American public support for arming the people of NATO, yet stopping just short of taking the war directly to Russia and making this a battle between the United States and Russia.

COATES: Well, you know who doesn't agree?

TODD: No, Biden didn't give Ukraine the ability to win the war when it was on the right foot.

COATES: Wait, hold on a second.

TODD: He held back what they said.

COATES: You both don't agree, but no one else doesn't agree. There are a few Republicans who are not in line with what Trump is doing or saying. I'll mention one in particular is Don Bacon. Listen to this and I'll have you respond.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. DON BACON (R-NE): Well, the President needs a do-over day to start again. He took a bad term. I think what he said is wrong and it's -- and it's a shame.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: And by the way, Eli, Senator Lindsey Graham is also saying that he blames Putin above all others.

TODD: Sure.

COATES: And so, I know we're talking a lot about former presidents.

TODD: He's the aggressor. He started the war.

COATES: He is, indeed.

TODD: He's a thug and a dictator and a murderer and he started the war.

COATES: So, why am I not hearing that from other Republicans?

TODD: I think Republicans view Vladimir Putin as an enemy. And the question is how do you contain him and how do you break his alliance with China? Who is the bigger threat? How do you weaken him so that he can't empower China? Russia is right now nothing but a gas station with nuclear weapons, to use John McCain's old phrase. So, the question is how do you minimize Russia's ability to help China battle the United States?

COATES: So Eli, to Nayyera's point and combined with that, is what's happened right now minimizing the role of Russia, making him seem more dismissed in the eyes of Trump? I mean, he seems to be, after that 90- minute phone call you talked about, rubbing a whole lot of elbow.

STOKOLS: Well, I mean, Trump is not -- Trump is not letting Vladimir Putin off the hook. I mean, he's giving Russia sit downs with the U.S. with no conditions. That happened yesterday. Russia hasn't conceded anything and they're not calling on Russia to make concessions. This is taking place as Russia continues to bomb Ukraine this week. And so, yes, I think it's clear that Trump -- you know, Trump, I mean,

a lot of Republicans can stand up and say that -- that we all know that Putin started this war. Lindsey Graham actually spoke with Zelenskyy today. Zelenskyy posted about that.

So, there has been some outreach expressing, look, there is bipartisan support and bicameral support here in the U.S. But if the President, an increasingly emboldened president early in his second term, is out there sort of running roughshod over the norms, ignoring NATO, and wants to go his own way because he wants some economic deal with Putin or he wants the Nobel Prize for making peace, you know, he seems like he's going to do what he wants to do at this point.

TODD: It would be a mistake to let Russia get off the mat economically, that Russia has failed to do -- he's not going to win this war. Putin is not. His goal is to topple Ukraine completely. He has not done that. He's lost 150,000 soldiers to a nation that's a fourth his size. This has not worked out the way he wanted to. And it would be a mistake to let them off the mat. But the real answer to beat Russia is to drive the price of oil down so low that he can't make money.

HAQ: The challenge is this is not a discussion between Trump or the U.S. government and Saudi Arabia and Putin right now that is about taking Russia down a peg. If anything, it's elevating pariah states. It's sidelining allies and democracies in Europe and around the world.

STOKOLS: And that's an amazing, that's an important point because it's an amazing retreat from American values that have defined foreign policy from Republican and Democratic presidents going back decades.

[23:15:07]

And so, to just sort of be agnostic about whose fault the war is, who's right, who's wrong, you know, just saying that it's fine if other stronger countries invade.

TODD: But if stronger countries invade --

COATES: Hold on. We are past the idea of whose fault it is. And I think it's a decided factor that it is Vladimir Putin for invading. But then there's the idea of American values that you speak about. And I want to address this because this is what Democratic Governor J.B. Pritzker from Illinois had to say and raising the specter of frankly Nazi Germany in criticizing Trump. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GOV. J.B. PRITZKER (D-IL): I do not invoke the specter of Nazis lightly, but I know the history intimately. The authoritarian playbook is laid bare here. They point to a group of people who don't look like you and tell you to blame them for your problems. I just have one question. What comes next? We don't have kings in America. And I don't intend to bend the knee to one.

(END VIDEO CLIP) COATES: I mean, speaking of kings, he did, of course, liken himself to a king. There was the screenshot that we had as well of him putting a crown on. Long live the king. There's an illustration of him wearing a crown.

X, as well, he has likened himself. Is this trolling? Is this, obviously, he knows quite well we'll be talking about it and what it means. But we're talking about it because it seems the actions are lining up with what he's saying.

TODD: Of course it's trolling. He wants people to come on cable news shows and get screwed into the ceiling over it. This -- if he were a king -- if he were a --

COATES: While on my seat, up with headlights.

TODD: If he were a king, he would wouldn't be taking his defeats in court and appealing them up the next chain which is exactly what's happening right now. It's with -- this is silly. We had an election. We've moved on from the election with a duly elected president and new Congress. He's operating within the law. This is crazy talk.

COATES: It is, yeah, silly. Crazy talk is how I would describe a great deal of what's been going on. But Nayyera, if you think about it, the reason, yes, he's trolling. He knows it's a fact. But is there proof in this pudding?

HAQ: Well, just because you're the executive does not mean that you're operating within the rule of law, despite what Trump would like to tweet, that, you know, it's the -- it's what he wants is decided for the country. So, there's a lot of language to be concerned about, a lot of acts that he's taking to be concerned about.

Not the people are using, and I say people, not political leaders, are using their power to push back, whether it's through the courts or taking to the streets or going local activism. I think what we forget in all of this is that there are many people in this country who are truly okay with authoritarian strong men and the fact that somebody else suffers for their benefit. And that's the much bigger challenge that we need to address.

COATES: Well, we'll see how it all comes out in the wash. Thank you, gentlemen and Nayyera, of course, everyone so much.

Elon Musk's DOGE slashes into a program that got lawmakers on both sides of the aisle upset today. The cuts to a group that helps 9-11 survivors. We'll talk about that next. Plus, the DOJ makes the argument that the corruption case against Eric Adams should be dropped or the judge decide. They do need the leave of court, as it's called. A former STNY prosecutor who was in court today joins me just ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:22:09]

ERIC ADAMS, NEW YORK CITY MAYOR: I did nothing wrong. I did not break a law and I have been committed to that in my entire life. I'm a victim of a very over-aggressive investigation. And I'm telling you, it hurts and I'm a victim.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: New York City Mayor Eric Adams speaking hours after appearing in court, defiant, time (inaudible) and declaring more than once that he is the victim. Adams hopes a judge will dismiss the federal bribery case, like the DOJ ordered, but Judge Dale Ho didn't go that far. Judge Ho says he'll make a decision at a later date, saying he doesn't want to, quote, "shoot from the hip". After a week of drama and many resignations, the end of this saga is still yet to be determined.

Joining me now, Nick Akerman, former Watergate prosecutor and former assistant U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York. He was also, by the way, in that courtroom today. So, I have got to download with you right now about what that scene was like. Because in your brief, you argued the judge should deny the motion to dismiss the Adams case. Tell me how you thought the judge handled this motion today.

NICK AKERMAN, FORMER ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY, SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK: I thought he handles it quite well. This was a preliminary conference. I was there representing common cause. We filed an amicus brief. I didn't know whether I'd speak or not, turns out I didn't.

But what the judge did was basically go through the motion to dismiss with Adams and with Emil Beauvais, who is the acting assistant attorney general. And basically wound up getting them to kind of narrow what their contentions were, got Adams to admit that he knowingly signed the -- the agreement to go ahead with this dismissal.

COATES: And why was that so important, that part about him signing? Because he said it was not a quid pro quo, he was not promised anything, you know, nefarious. Why was that important that he signed that?

AKERMAN: Well, it's important because it was his lawyers who signed it. And I think the judge wanted to make sure that he understood what his lawyers were putting in. And the judge went through that pretty meticulously.

COATES: The judge, as you know, has some pretty limited options here. It's the prosecutors who are requesting that they dismiss the case -- the prosecution. So realistically, what can the judge do besides not shoot from the hip? What can he really do?

AKERMAN: Well, what he can really do is, first of all, if he finds that this dismissal is not in the public interest, he can refuse to dismiss the indictment, for starters. And as part of that, he may well have a fact-finding hearing where people would be called to testify. The former U.S. attorney, Danielle Sassoon, and Mr. Bove could both be called to testify because the documentation that exists here on the public record right now would show that this was really a corrupt deal.

[23:25:16]

This was a quid pro quo. Essentially, the Trump administration told Adams, you play ball with us on rounding up immigrants and do it in the way that we tell you to do it whether it's legal or not and we'll drop the case.

But to make sure that you do what we're asking you to do, we're going to have this indictment dismissed without prejudice which means they can hold it over his head to make sure he marches to the right tune.

COATES: Now, of course they have denied that they made that explicit agreement saying you do this and we won't do this. But you have read between the lines to suggest, of course, that dismissal without prejudice means a sort of Damocles remains there. But I will note, Bove -- he said they're not dismissing the case on its merits, which of course blows the mind, but because it makes it difficult for Mayor Adams to do his job.

And on that point, I wonder what you thought about the fact that the judge asked if there would be the same consideration if, say, a governor of a border state faced federal prosecution. Bove said yes. But how much will the judge weigh the idea that one can't do their job if they've got an indictment, if there are actual factual allegations behind the reason to indict?

AKERMAN: Totally ridiculous. I mean, in this case, it is a complete and utter pretext. The idea that he can't govern is belied by the fact that Mayor Adams himself said numerous times that he had no problem --

COATES: He did say that.

AKERMAN: -- governing while he was under indictment. I mean, what more do you really need than that? And then they cite two ridiculous pieces of evidence on the former U.S. attorney who has since left that job, put out a website that talked about good government, referred to some of the articles that were on the case that were already published, and an op-ed that he did talking about the problems with good government in New York state. I mean, it really blows the mind how absurd and to what lengths they've gone to try and justify this deal.

COATES: Again, they've got the prerogative, right? Their discretion of whether they want to pursue a case or not. You have mentioned really quickly here that you believe the Manhattan D.A should pick up the case. How exactly would that work?

AKERMAN: Well, it'd be pretty simple. I mean, you could take the same facts on which the federal indictment rests and charge state crimes. So, what he'd have to do is make a motion probably before this judge asking that all of the grand jury materials and other evidence that's been gathered by the U.S. Attorney's office be turned over to the D.A. That can be done.

So that if, in fact, the federal indictment disappears, this is an opportunity for Alvin Bragg to come in, pick up the pieces, and go ahead with the prosecution. No reason not to do it. And it also shows, just as with many other matters that Trump is getting involved in, that there are state powers that can be brought to bear to overcome what Trump is doing. And this would be the perfect situation to do it in.

COATES: I wonder if Manhattan D.A. Alvin Bragg would like to have this sort of deja vu moment again with state and federal charges being discussed. Nick Akerman, we'll see. Thank you so much.

AKERMAN: Thank you.

COATES: Well, the DOGE acts now falling left and right, as you know, on federal agencies. And this time, it's cutting into the program that helps give aid to 9-11 responders. Will Republicans speak out? The top advocate for 9-11 heroes, John Feal is live with me next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:33:16]

COATES: After some confusion about who was the head of DOGE, President Trump insists there's only one leader and it's the world's richest man.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: I signed an order creating the Department of Government Efficiency and put a man named Elon Musk in charge. Thank you, Elon, for doing it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Well, DOGE is quickly deconstructing the government in ways that sometimes reveal huge contradictions. Tonight, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth ordering eight percent budget cuts for the next five years. But just last week, didn't he say this?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PETE HEGSETH, DEFENSE SECRETARY: I think the U.S. needs to spend more than the Biden administration was willing to, who historically under invested in the capabilities of our military.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: And the budget Trump endorsed today includes a $100 billion increase in defense spending. Meanwhile, other cuts enacted by the DOGE have now been reversed. The Veterans Affairs Department reinstated terminated employees who worked on the crisis line and the USDA is rescinding termination letters sent to people working on the response to bird flu.

Most fire bill employees have not been reinstated, though, and some of them protest in front of the Washington headquarters of Musk's SpaceX. But the impacts, they are tangible and they are felt. Look at the World Trade Center Health Program which helps 9-11 survivors. That falls under the CDC and up to 20 percent of the staff have been

slashed. Now, fired employees worry about the care that victims of America's deadliest terror attack will receive.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANTHONY GARDNER, FORMER PUBLIC AFFAIRS SPECIALIST, WORLD TRADE CENTER HEALTH PROGRAM: These cuts are, you know, need to be reversed as soon as possible because this will ultimately lead to delays for certification of treatment.

[23:35:06]

And it could be from a range of conditions from mental health conditions that the program covers like post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety to cancers. So, this is literally life and death for our members and they deserve better.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Joining me now, John Feal, a 9-11 first responder, also an advocate for other first responders. He helps secure federal funding for the World Trade Center Health Program. This hero joins us now. John, thank you. Please tell me, how would the cuts impact your healthcare and the thousands, by the way, of other 9-11 survivors?

JOHN FEAL, 9-11 RESPONDER: Well, thank you for having me, Laura. The World Trade Center Health Program is a lifeline to 137,000 people that are in the program. And there are thousands waiting to get in the program. There's a backlog to get into the program.

They're cutting the staff that was already under-staffed. The program has no fraud, has no abusive spending, has no waste. This is a program that's running on fumes but doing a great job. There's over 30,000 people with a 9-11 related certified cancer.

By cutting this 20 percent, it will create a bigger backlog, will not allow people to get their illnesses certified in a timely manner where they can't get treated and then they can file a claim to get compensated. This is going to cause a lot of harm.

These people, men and women, uniformed and non-uniformed that are in the program rely on the services of the World Trade Center Health Program for their physicals, for their yearly screening, for going for chest x-rays, for going to oncology, and that's going to be removed because if you had an appointment in a month from now, you might not have an appointment now for eight months or a year.

COATES: Oh my God.

FEAL: This will kill people. I'm not being a drama queen. I'm not trying to build up ratings. This will kill people. The weight, the redundancy that we have to keep fighting over the last 20 years to get these bills passed, it's an insult to all those men and women that I've brought to D.C. with me over 300 times in the last two decades. To watch somebody who doesn't understand the nuances of the federal

government, is there fraud somewhere else in the government? Maybe. It's not my concern. My concern is the federal -- the World Trade Center Health Program and what they're doing to it.

They took a sledgehammer to a program that should have been addressed with the surgical knife and -- and shame on them. You know, Donald Trump, signed our bill in 2019.

COATES: Yeah.

FEAL: Turned to me, shook my hand, gave me the Sharpie that he signed the bill with, and he said, nobody deserves this more than you. You worked harder than anybody. And for him to callously and recklessly allow Elon Musk to do this to us, his words are shallow and meaningless to me now. So, I'm disappointed, but I'm hopeful that they reverse this because there's going to be a lot of harm done to a lot of people that are already suffering.

Shame on Elon Musk. Shame on Robert Kennedy Jr. It's just common sense. This is reckless, it's inhumane, it's cruel, and it lacks empathy, and it lacks humanity. I mean, what's their end game? How -- let's see how mean we can be. Let's see how -- how much we can hurt human beings. I don't -- I don't get that. This is just common sense. This is (inaudible).

COATES: Well, John, one of the arguments that people have expressed, the argument they've said is that this is a matter of some of the programs that are targeted are just inefficient and it can be run better. What's your response given that you know what a lifeline this is?

FEAL: There is no argument. They have no argument. And if you really want to save money, stop going golfing every day. If you really want to save money, don't go to the Super Bowl. Don't drive your limousine around the racetrack. There you go, I just saved the government a couple billion dollars.

Come on, there's no argument. They have no legitimate argument to cut 20 percent of the staff of those affected by the aftermath of 9-11. Heroes and survivors, those who worked and went to school in lower Manhattan and the cops and the firefighters with stage three, stage four, or more than one cancer. This is -- this is repulsive at its highest. This is disgusting.

The fact that I'm having this conversation on a Wednesday night at 11:30 with Laura Coates about what the federal government is about to do to this program, that the pain that it's going to cause -- if this doesn't make America great again, we're screwed.

I mean Robert Kennedy said let's make America healthy again. How are you making these men and women healthy again by taking away their ability to get enrolled in a program or to get their illnesses certified -- makes no sense.

[23:40:07] Somebody explain to me like a 12-year-old what they what they're -- what they're doing.

COATES: John Feal, hero, survivor, champion. I hope someone will give you an answer. You deserve one. John Feal, thank you so much.

FEAL: Thank you for having me.

COATES: Unbelievable to think about. What is at stake in the lifelines being cut off for so many people? Still ahead tonight, our discussions continue, including new backlash over "Jesus Christ Superstar" and the pick to have Cynthia Erivo play the role of Jesus.

Michael Eric Dyson is standing by to talk about that outrage and apparently, there is outrage tonight. And later, what the fuss over a potential asteroid hitting the Earth is revealing about the divide between Elon Musk and, you guessed it, the American public.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:45:25]

(MUSIC PLAYING)

COATES: That was Cynthia Erivo as Mary Magdalene singing "Everything's Alright" in the all-female album of the musical Jesus Christ Superstar. And now, Erivo is getting an upgraded role. She'll be playing Jesus in this summer's performances of the show at the Hollywood Bowl. And conservatives? They're mad. Elon Musk weighing in, responding with the eyebrow raised emoji to someone who said, "Imagine doing this to any other religion."

Well, now I want to bring in Michael Eric Dyson, professor of African- American and Diaspora Studies at Vanderbilt. He's also the co-author of "Unequal, A Story of America". The prolific author and scholar joins me now. Michael, next to Erivo, John Legend also played the role. Declan Bennett also starred as Jesus, from alphabet to the messiah. What is the outrage really about?

MICHAEL ERIC DYSON, PROFESSOR OF AFRICAN AMERICAN AND DIASPORA: Well, thanks for having me. You know, I think God is smiling and then Jesus is happy. I've been an ordained minister for 45 years and I am ecstatic.

First of all, Cynthia Erivo is a genius. She has a magnificent range. She can act, she can sing, she can be on Broadway, she can do a small club. I've seen her in every venue. She is a stunning and remarkable artist.

And here we are trying to limit the notion of who God is. If we are made in the image of God, that means all of us -- black, queer women are made in the image of God. White, straight men are made in the image of God.

All peoples are made in the image of God and have the permission to see themselves reflected in the divine image and the divine image reflected in them. This is about race and class and culture. This is about sexuality. And for Elon Musk to raise an eyebrow, Sir, stick to DOGE and leave this alone because this is not your bailiwick.

COATES: Let me raise -- well, you put my raised eyebrow down. Michael Eric Dyson, after that, let me talk to you about Target next, though. Black faith leaders, they're calling for a 40-day boycott at the store after they rolled back, as you well know, their DEI programs. Let me -- listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JAMAL BRYANT, PASTOR: What we learned from the Montgomery bus boycott is that racist America doesn't respond to speeches. They respond to dollars. And if they start losing $29 million a day for 40 days, we will break the back of the system. I want the stock to go down because we are standing in righteous indignation against racism.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Fifty thousand people -- 50,000 have signed on for the boycott. And there's more. The daughters of one of Target's founders are out with an op-ed in the "L.A. Times" calling Target's DEI rollback a betrayal. Why is the backlash against Target seemingly so much louder than other companies who have also rolled back DEI?

DYSON: Well, I guess Target has a target on its back, pun intended. Probably because black people spend money there. Isn't that one of Beyonce's favorite stores? So, black people have appropriated that particular symbol of easy access, of class availability, and black people's investment in Target with the products that are being sold and also the investment of their time and money.

And so, this becomes one single outlet to express their outrage at the rollback of people who have been especially and significantly devoted to Target. We're simply saying, we put our monies and our dollars out there, please return that investment with recognizing who we are as people of color, in this case especially as African American people

COATES: It certainly would show the economic power. People not only, they vote with their pocketbooks as well at the ballot as we well know, even between elections. Michael Eric Dyson, let me ask you this though. Trevor Noah, he's been making some waves recently when he suggested on his podcast that maybe desegregation was a mistake. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO TAPE)

TREVOR NOAH, COMEDIAN: I would love to know if you think integration was the right solution maybe, on the other side of, you know, what America, of civil rights?

RUJA BENJAMIN, PROFESSOR OF AFRICAN AMWRICAN STUDIES, PRINCETON: Yeah. No, I don't. And I, and I don't think it's actually that controversial when if -- if you understand that segregation and integration weren't the only options.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: I encourage everyone to listen to the full context. It's a really fascinating conversation that goes into the nuance of a lot.

[23:50:00]

What did you think of that moment?

DYSON: Well, Ruha Benjamin is a brilliant woman, a great scholar. Trevor Noah, we know, is a smart guy. And this is an argument that's been happening over a century among African-American people. Martin Luther King Jr. said, be careful 10 days before he died, lest we integrate ourselves out of power. James Baldwin said, we don't want to integrate into a burning house.

So, there have been warning signs altogether. However, isn't it paradoxical? Without the fame that Trevor Noah has derived from hosting the Oscars in an integrated society, he wouldn't have the wherewithal and the notoriety to be able to remark upon self- segregation.

Now, black people do self-segregate. Go to any black church on Sunday morning, mostly black people there. Go to a club. Go to a barbershop. Go to a beauty shop. There are integrated spaces in America, but they're also segregated, self-segregated spaces where black people are able to let their hair down, to articulate their visions, and to gather themselves together. So, I think we need both end.

Martin Luther King Jr. said I am not going nowhere. I have built this nation and for me to leave behind the wherewithal, the economic investment that we made possible in America would be suicide. But at the same time, we need spaces where we can retreat in order to reinforce our egos and to stand tall in the beauty and pride of our race.

COATES: I hate to leave this conversation behind, but unfortunately I have to. We'll continue another day. Michael Eric Dyson, as always, thank you.

DYSON: Thank you.

COATES: I wonder if you have heard about this asteroid that may or may not hit the Earth in about seven years. Because those odds keep shifting, but NASA is on the case. And so is our own Harry Enten, he's got some data on this that Elon Musk may not like. He'll explain why, next.

(COMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:56:00]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

STANLEY ANDERSON, PLAYING THE ROLE OF PRESIDENT IN THE MOVIE "ARMAGEDDON": Is this going to hit us?

BILLY BOB THORNTON, PLAYING THE ROLE OF DAN TRUMAN IN THE MOVIE "ARMAGEDDON": We're efforting that as we speak, Sir.

ANDERSON: What kind of damage are we --

THORNTON: Damage? Total, Sir. It's what we call a global killer. The end of mankind. Doesn't matter where it hits. Nothing would survive.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: That was from Michael Bay's 1998 blockbuster hit "Armageddon". But here's the thing, that movie apparently now has some chance at becoming reality, though a slim one. NASA says there's a 1.5 percent chance of an asteroid colliding with Earth in the year 2032. It was as high as a three percent chance earlier today, and the odds are going to keep on shifting.

Scientists say that it's the riskiest asteroid ever detected. It's about the size of a large building, large enough to cause, quote, "regional damage depending on where it hits". So, how worried should anyone be, and how much should we listen to Billy Bob Thornton in that movie? Well, CNN's Harry Enten is with us to answer those questions. Harry, put these odds into perspective for me, please.

HARRY ENTEN, CNN SENIOR DATA REPORTER: Yeah. I prefer Bruce Willis in "Armageddon". I'll just note that.

COATES: That's a good one.

ENTEN: Either way, either way. Look, let's talk about the numbers, all right? What's the chance of this asteroid actually hitting and putting that into some perspective? All right, so there's about a one of three chance that this 2032 asteroid hits. Now, I want to take a look at the chance of dying via some alternative methods.

All right, what's the chance of dying via shark attack? 0.00000003 percent. Okay, that's way less than the chance of this asteroid hitting. How about lightning? 0.0000005 percent. Again, way less than the chance of this asteroid hitting. How about a beer wasp? 0.00003 percent. Again, way less than the chance that this asteroid hits.

Now, of course, we probably won't die if this asteroid hits. It's going to be regional damage and we'll have some good chance, good idea of where that asteroid was exactly and hopefully, get those people out of there. But the idea of a one to three chance is pretty gosh darn high Laura, my goodness gracious.

Now here's the thing, here's the thing, I want to connect a little bit to some modern times things that are going on in our modern day right now. And I want to note that it should be a top priority for NASA because keep in mind, Elon Musk and DOGE perhaps want to cut the funding from NASA.

Now, what's the number one thing folks want from NASA? Monitoring asteroids that could hit Earth. Look at this, 60 percent say that should be a top priority for NASA, exactly what this asteroid could potentially do in 2032. And of course, you know, Elon Musk has this whole idea, hey, maybe we

could send someone to Mars, but just 11 percent of folks want that to be a top priority for NASA. The big thing here is to monitor those asteroids like that one that could hit in 2032, which has a far better chance of hitting than dying by a bee attack, a shark attack, or a lightning strike, Laura Coates.

COATES: I had to tell you, there's a movie reference for the shark, the lightning, the bee that I could go to right now, we could talk for hours. But I have to ask you, while we're waiting for this asteroid which I hope does not actually come, how do you really feel about the "Armageddon" reference?

ENTEN: Yeah, okay, so, you know, when we were playing around and potentially doing this segment, your executive producer, Rashid, was talking to me about "Armageddon". The bottom line is the science behind "Armageddon", total garbage, all right? How science -- the great scientific journal rated this as they spoke with scientists, thumbs down to the science for "Armageddon".

The much better film that came out right around the same time, "Deep Impact," that got thumbs up. Remember, that asteroid actually hit Earth. Hopefully that won't happen here. Hopefully this asteroid goes far, far away.

But the bottom line is if we're going to make references to asteroid films, let's at least get the science right. "Deep Impact" gives the thumbs up versus "Armageddon", thumbs down despite the fact that I love Steven Tyler.

("I DON'T WANT TO MISS A THING" BY AEROSMITH PLAYING)

COATES: Oh, that's a good song. Remember that? That's a good one. You have Morgan Freeman on one hand, Aerosmith (ph) on the other.

ENTEN: It's tough. It's tough.

COATES: Harry Enten -- it's a tough one. Let's just hope neither happens. Thank you so much, my friend.

ENTEN: Bye.

COATES: This is my part -- is a moment I treasure.

[00:00:00]

Okay, I won't sing. Go, Harry. Listen. I don't want to close my eyes but it's time to go. So, thank you all for watching. "Anderson Cooper 360" is next.