Return to Transcripts main page
Laura Coates Live
Trump Makes Unprecedented Shake-up At The Pentagon; CNN Presents "America Asks"; Fans Flock To See Alleged Killer Luigi Mangione In Court; Major Setback In Bid To Free The Menendez Brothers; Laura Coates Interviews Roy Wood Jr. Aired 11p-12a ET
Aired February 21, 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]
KATIE FROST, FORMER TED CRUZ AIDE: I went to a hockey game. I went to a fight and the hockey game broke out. Like --
(LAUGHTER)
-- this is why people love hockey. Let's bring it back. Bring those goalies skating out to face off, too. Let's just do it.
JEMELE HILL, PODCAST HOST, CONTRIBUTING WRITER FOR THE ATLANTIC: Oh, when goalies skate, when they face off, that's the best.
FROST: Oh, it's the best. I love it.
CHUCK ROCHA, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST, FORMER SENIOR ADVISER FOR BERNIE SANDERS'S 2016 AND 2020 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGNS: I want to go back to Mike Lawler and say that you know he does a Michael Jackson impression as well. I mean like dressing up and dancing like Michael Jackson.
ABBY PHILLIP, CNN ANCHOR AND SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, he's a Michael Jackson's super fan.
ROCHA: Yes, very much so.
PHILLIP: That's right. That's right. You just reminded me of that. All right, everyone, thank you very much. Have a great weekend. Thanks for watching "NewsNight," and we'll see you tomorrow morning at 10 a.m. Eastern with our conversation show, "Table for Five." "Laura Coates Live" starts right now.
UNKNOWN (voice-over): This is CNN Breaking News.
LAURA COATES, CNN HOST AND SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Our breaking news tonight, President Trump making an unprecedented shakeup at the Pentagon. He's carrying out a promise from Pete Hegseth as well before he even became the secretary of Defense.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PETE HEGSETH, UNITED STATES SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: Well, first of all, you got to fire -- you know, you got to fire the chairman of the Joint Chiefs and you got to fire this -- I mean, obviously, you're going to bring in a new secretary of Defense, but any general that was involved, general, admiral, whatever that was involved in any of the DEI woke (bleep) got to go.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: The chairman of the Joint Chiefs he's talking about, that's General Charles Q. Brown. Well, President Trump announced that he was fired a short time ago after Hegseth called the general to tell him he was removed.
Brown was actually at the border just today. But his firing has been in the works, frankly, for weeks. Trump has long been railing about diversity in the military, and General Brown is a frequent target of the right, as you know. He's only the second Black man to hold the Joint Chief's chairman job ever.
It's not the only chaos, of course, going on at the Pentagon because minutes after Trump announced Brown's firing, Hegseth said the chief of the Navy was being removed. Admiral Lisa Franchetti was the first woman to serve on the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
And there's this as well. Hegseth is requesting nominations for the Judge Advocates General. Now, they are the lawyers who decide how the military code of justice is going to be enforced. Replacing them with Trump loyalists is raising a lot of concern that the president himself could intervene in the military's legal process and decide what's lawful and what's not.
In just a moment, I'll get the reaction on all of this from Democratic Congressman James Clyburn. Now, while Trump is fighting against subversion in the military, he is facing some pretty big setbacks in the courts. A judge has now temporarily blocked the administration from trying to end DEI programs all across the government.
And the conservative majority Supreme Court is also delivering Trump a blow. It says the government watchdog that he tried to fire get to remain on the job, at least for now. Hampton Dellinger oversees whistleblower claims, and he was let go, if you recall, early this month. But the issue over whether he keeps his job could go back to the Supreme Court as soon as next week when an order handed down by a lower court is set to expire.
And tonight, it's not just the courts that are delivering pushback. Apparently, so are voters. They're calling out Elon Musk and his chainsaw for bureaucracy -- that's a phrase -- after DOGE had been slicing and dicing the federal government for weeks now. These are voters in republican districts and events hosted by Republican lawmakers. In fact, this was the scene at town hall in Georgia with GOP Congressman Rich McCormick.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNKNOWN: From a conservative perspective, the approach of DOGE is completely 180 degrees. They've been indiscriminate, and they've taken a chainsaw to these things.
(APPLAUSE)
UNKNOWN (voice-over): Elon was going to be the main topic tonight, and he's going to continue to be the main topic tonight because we are all freaking pissed off about this. You're going to hear it and feel it.
(APPLAUSE)
UNKNOWN (voice-over): Tyranny is rising in the White House, and a man has declared himself our king. So, I would like to know, rather the people would like to know, what you, congressmen and your fellow congressmen, are going to do to rein in the megalomaniac in the White House.
(APPLAUSE)
COATES: Democrat from, of course, the great state of South Carolina, congressman, always a pleasure to have you here. I am curious, what is your reaction to the firing now of the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, CQ Brown?
REP. JAMES CLYBURN (D-SC): Well, I think that it's very, very unnerving. I believe that everybody knows, for the outstanding soldier, General Brown is and has been -- for many, many years, he has a 40-year career in military. Nobody has found any fault with him because of his skin color.
[23:05:01]
He has been declared DEI a woke. I have no idea.
COATES: Is that why, you think, the president has let him go, because he's Black?
CLYBURN: That's what I think.
COATES: As you know, there have been others who have been fired, including -- Defense Secretary Hegseth has fired other senior military leaders. Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Lisa Franchetti. Air Force vice chief of staff, General James Slife. DOGE is creating a whole lot of chaos, as you know. But just in terms of why you think the Joint Chiefs of Staff CQ Brown was let go, what is your reaction to those who would say, hold on, there were others who were let go? Are you leaping to conclusions? What's your reaction?
CLYBURN: I'm not leaping to anything. I'm going by that book that Hegseth wrote. What did he write in that book? Now, you know that these words that they're throwing around like "woke," that's an acronym that they've come up with, and you know what it means. When they say DEI, you know what it means. As I heard somebody say earlier today, they are substituting these acronyms for the N-word. So why would you apply the term woke to General Brown? What does that mean?
COATES: Congressman, I wonder, when you are seeing and hearing this, and given the views that you have expressed, what is this doing to the many men and women who serve on behalf of this nation, who might also share your views that from the commander-in-chief down, this is what their thoughts are? What is that doing to the morale? And what is that saying to our allies and adversaries across the seas?
CLYBURN: Well, you know, when I think about what's going on today and all the comparisons being made, I think Governor Pritzker hit the nail on the head in the state address there in Illinois. I guess it was day before yesterday --
COATES: Uh-hmm.
CLYBURN: -- when he talked about what happened in Germany. How quickly it was done. I said something similar several years ago. And Karl Rove took me to task.
COATES: I remember.
CLYBURN: He told me very uncomplimentary things. But I said no more than what Governor Pritzker said yesterday in the State of the Union address there in Illinois. So, we all know what's going on here. We ought to stop pretending that we don't. We know exactly what this man is trying to do. We know exactly what they're doing.
What is the vice president doing over there endorsing a right-wing candidate to be chancellor of Germany? What is that about? Elon Musk just left Germany, making a big contribution to the right-wingers in Germany. What is that about? We know what that is. And we ought to stop pretending that we don't know, stop making excuses, and face what the facts are.
COATES: One final question for you, and it's a big one, congressman, because you've asked a lot of questions here about what's happening, and a lot of voters are responding, what are you all, meaning the Democrats and Republicans, by the way, but what are you as members of Congress prepared to do about it? The writing was more than on the wall. It was in Project 2025. It was on the campaign trail. The executive orders that he has laid out are no surprise in large part. What can Congress do?
CLYBURN: Well, I'm glad you asked that question. When I talked about Project 2025 before the campaign, you may recall I spoke at the Democratic National Convention --
COATES: Uh-hmm.
CLYBURN: -- back in, I guess, it was July or August. I said at the time that Project 2025 is Jim Crow 2.0. A lot of people did not believe me. Democrats in the Congress, they got to wake up. Democrats all over this country have got to wake up, and we got to start voting.
But I know this: Democrats are not going to come back to power in the Congress unless Democratic voters turn out in better numbers than they've been turning out. And I don't know what else we can do except take the case to them. And that is what we are doing. And I believe people are beginning to wake up now and find out that we cannot put this on automatic pilot.
COATES: Congressman James Clyburn, thank you.
CLYBURN: Thank you.
COATES: Joining me now is CNN political commentator Van Jones, CNN senior political commentator Scott Jennings, and pollster Frank Luntz is here with me as well.
[23:10:03]
I want to begin with you, Frank, here. I'm going to favor you because you're sitting right next to me. You teach at West Point. How will the firing of General CQ Brown, how is that going to sit with cadets and other military leaders?
FRANK LUNTZ, POLLSTER AND COMMUNICATIONS STRATEGIST: So, you know that because I teach at West Point, there's no politics --
COATES: Uh-hmm.
LUNTZ: -- there's no partisanship. I'm on CNN, so I want to answer your question directly. I know what's appropriate and what isn't.
COATES: Uh-hmm.
LUNTZ: And the great thing about West Point, the cadets know what their job is. They know -- they know how to focus on the skills that the military requires of them. They know how to keep the politics out and how to respect the Constitution. So, with all due respect --
COATES: Uh-hmm.
LUNTZ: -- I'm going to duck it. But I will tell the American people who are watching that they can have full confidence in these young men and women to do the right thing at the right time for the right reasons, what they teach them, do the hard right rather than the easy wrong, and they teach them effectively there.
COATES: I'll let you duck it. But Van, not you. Van, what's your reaction --
(LAUGHTER)
-- to the firing?
VAN JONES, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: It's very disturbing. I expect my conservative friends to agree with me that if you're going to break this kind of precedent -- of course, Donald Trump said he's going to shake up the soda bottle so you can say, well, anything Donald Trump does, we can't complain about it. We just have to take it because he said he was going to do it on campaign trail.
That's not how a democratic republic works. Now, constitutional republic works. There are traditions. There are norms. If you're going to break with this norm and have a purge, that's what it looks like, it's different countries, it's a purge of the top military, you want to identify what did that general do that was inappropriate. What was the scandal? What was the bad hire? And there is literally nothing. I've been looking all day, calling around, and it's basically just a slander that he has woken DEI.
Well, if you are the head of a military that is multiracial and multicultural and you want it to be cohesive, you need to have policies in place to help that happen. If there are good policies or bad policies, you can -- but just the fact that he -- apparently, his only crime for this level of a break with 200 years of tradition is that he's -- quote, unquote -- "woke."
That's very scary because what that means is this could be a pretext. And it could be that Trump just wants to put generals in place that will do what he says right or wrong and not do what Mr. Luntz was talking about, these cadets doing the hard right and not the easy wrong.
It's very disturbing. I can't find a good reason for breaking with this type of president. And conservatives usually want to conserve tradition. So, I'm looking forward to hearing my conservative friend speak out.
COATES: Scott, our conservative friend, speak out.
SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, FORMER SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO PRESIDNET TO PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: Yeah, I'll give you a good reason, because this person serves at the pleasure of the president. This is the principal military adviser to the president. And I don't necessarily think he had to have done anything wrong or had to have had a scandal or have any kind of mark against him at all.
It's just that the president wants to have the most confidence in his principal military adviser. Obviously, he wants to pick somebody else. And there shouldn't be anything wrong with that because under our Constitution, we have a civilian-led military, and the president is the commander-in-chief, and he should have the principal military adviser that he wants.
I don't think there's anything wrong at all with General Brown. I think he has served this country honorably. I think he's a good man. And you might remember back in the first Trump term, he was promoted and nominated to be the head of the Air Force by Donald Trump. So obviously Trump has liked him in the past and thinks he's had an amazing career. He even put out a positive statement about him tonight.
But at the end of the day, this is a position that serves at the pleasure of the president. The president is Donald Trump, and he deserves to have the top advisors that he wants and that he has the most confidence in.
COATES: Frank, does it ring differently for voters on these issues when it's, yes, there are many people in the cabinet who serve the president or the president. Does it ring differently to voters when it's members of the military? Is there a different appetite for having a concrete, tangible, why him?
LUNTZ: So, you actually are correct because the military is the most trusted institution in the country right now, and soldiers are the most trusted profession. And in fact, number one is soldiers. At the very bottom, 22nd are politicians. So, the soldiers have tremendous credibility.
The public is asking, how do we get the best? And that's what they're looking for. How do we get people who have a keen understanding of the challenges that we face, who understand that decisions they're making are going to affect the country now and in the future? And third, is this someone who understands what sacrifice really means? This is a very serious decision, and I'm hoping the president is going to say more about it.
But Scott is right. In the end, the generals, the admirals, the people in the military serve at the pleasure of the president, and it's always under civilian control, not under military control.
[23:15:01]
COATES: Well, you know, I'm asking this question on this, Van, because, you know, when you look at the criteria laid out just now by Frank and the type of trust the American people want to have, say, in the military, they have that same requirement and trust that they want for people who are going to be in a position of authority over their livelihoods, over how their federal government agencies are run, over their ability to retain their employment. Republican lawmakers, you know, they're home this week. There's backlash against the DOGE cuts. And that backlash seems quite tangible.
JONES: Hmm.
COATES: Does that impact and should it impact the White House at all?
JONES: Well, it should. I mean, there are two different issues here. No one is saying that Donald Trump doesn't have the right to break 200 years of precedent and fire the top general for no reason at all. He has the right to do it. I'm saying it's not right to do it.
You have all kinds of norms. Our founders talked about what they call republican virtues. Not Republican and Democrat, though, that didn't exist, but the virtues that let you keep a republic together. And when you have a purge, a multi-purge, that is a very big deal. The president has the right to do it, yes. But usually, this never happened before and where all the other presidents just didn't want to have good generals.
So -- and nobody can tell me what's wrong with America's military. What is wrong with America's military? We have the most lethal military in the world. It's the most respected in the world. It's better than anybody else's by far. What's wrong with it, except that Donald Trump doesn't like some generals and keeps making these DEI claims.
Now, what you're asking about is DOGE, and what you're asking about is Elon Musk role, which I think is also terrifying. What if we had a president AOC, and she went in there and said, I'm just going to bring in all my friends with their laptops, they're going to do whatever they want you, and nobody can tell me anything about it? I think Republicans would be literally in the streets.
I think that you would -- for the first time, you would see Republicans in the streets if a Democratic president were to go in there and have someone who has never been vetted, someone who has not never passed the back -- I worked in White House. I had a background check. He has gone there with a bunch of kids with laptops.
So, this is -- this is all stuff that I don't understand constitutional conservatives who know how this is supposed to work. Like the ends -- I might like some of the ends. I'd like to see less waste, fraud and abuse. But you've got to pay attention to the process. If you now say it's okay for one to do it, do not complain in four years when the Democrat comes in there and does it. I don't think we're going to live this way. I like the American way of government. I like truth, justice and the American way, not the Elon Musk way.
COATES: I want to turn to the people who are asking questions about it because, you know, on this program, we turn to the audience and ask what questions they have. They have every right to have you seated at this particular table. And it's time for what we call "America Asks." We have questions from our viewers. And one of them is from Stacy from Virginia. And she asks, I'm curious about all this money Trump and Musk are supposedly saving Americans. Where is it going to go? Scott, what's your reaction?
JENNINGS: I'll answer that question because it's a good one. But if I may respond to Van briefly, I just have a different view about what Donald Trump is doing. And, you keep -- you keep using the phrase constitutional conservatives. My view of the Constitution is very simple. All executive authority is vested in president of the United States. The political oversight of our government is elected by the people and is the president.
He should have the latitude to run the government. I feel like because Donald Trump is the president and you all don't like him, that somehow the bureaucracy or the military or other institutions should be able to act somewhat independently of him or not be subjected to the same political oversight. So, I think he is -- he is -- he is --
JONES: If Obama did this --
JENNINGS: -- engaging in executive authority that the Constitution gives him.
JONES: If Obama did this --
JENNINGS: It allows him.
JONES: If Obama did this, I would be more outraged because I believe Obama understands our Constitution. This is -- I'm not picking on Donald Trump because he's Donald Trump. Any American president did this -- these are unprecedented moves. Congress is supposed to tell you what agencies are there in the budget. He's telling, I'm going to make it up myself, is unprecedented. You can't say that any president has done this before.
So, if Obama did this --
JENNINGS: Well --
JONES: If Obama did this, I would be even more outraged.
LUNTZ: Can I add something?
COATES: Sure, Frank, and then we are going to answer Stacy's question after this. But hold on. Frank, answer -- go ahead.
LUNTZ: I'm not speaking in terms of other constitutional or conservative. The American people think Washington spends too much, that it wastes too much, then I believe that Washington is corrupt. And it is a very simple process. The public is not asking, they are demanding. They cannot afford to pay the taxes they're being asked to pay. They can't afford the inflation, the costs, and the affordability. And they're saying Washington needs to spend less so the American people can have more.
JONES: Pass a bill. Pass a bill and have the president sign it. That's our system. Pass a bill with your party --
LUNTZ: Let me tell you something --
JONES: -- and let the president sign it.
LUNTZ: Do you want to understand why Harris lost the election? The public didn't want to wait anymore. Your point is well taken about the Constitution.
[23:20:00]
But the American people are fed up. They're angry as hell. They want Washington to change. And the reason why Trump is more popular today than he was even during the election, he's at the height of his popularity --
JONES: Sure.
LUNTZ: -- whether we agree with it or not because they want action --
JONES: There are authoritarians --
LUNTZ: They want results.
JONES: Authoritarians are popular --
LUNTZ: And they're tired of waiting. This is not authoritarian.
JONES: It's authoritarian.
COATES: I can't hear both of you. Van, go ahead.
JONES: Hold on a second. I understand people are upset. My people are upset, too. But if we had a president who -- a Democratic president who ran over these norms, you would be upset. And I agree with some of the ends. But you have both parties. You have both houses of Congress. Go to Congress, pass a bill, have the president sign it, have the courts approve it. That is our system.
Just because people are upset doesn't mean that the Constitution and our norms should go in the garbage can. You have the ability. You have all the power to do it the right way. Instead, you want to do it the wrong way.
COATES: Wait, what am I hearing from Stacy? You didn't answer my question. I know, Stacy. Fellas, here was her question again. Her question is, where is the money going to go? Scott?
JENNINGS: Yeah. So, there are two -- there are two ideas on the table. One, which was proposed by Elon Musk, that there would be some sort of a DOGE dividend, where the savings from this effort would go back as a rebate to the American people. The other idea, which I actually think is a better idea, is to take the savings and let's pay down the debt.
I mean, I think what Frank was saying is correct. We're living under this massive debt. We're spending more than we should spend. The American people are tired of waiting. And so, to me, the beauty of the DOGE effort is we're reducing the waste, eliminating wasteful spending out of government. I don't know that it makes sense necessarily to turn it right back around. We could pay down the debt with it. We could just have a smaller government. And so, that way, we're actually spending less, which I think ultimately is a goal of the American people.
LUNTZ: They should do both. By the way, in the end, give the people something back and pay them the debt for the rest of it. At some point, Van, and I know you're upset about the process, by the way, I hear you about that, at some point, you have to listen to what the voters are demanding or you're going to have the same reaction in 2026 that you had in 2024.
JONES: Just don't complain when we do it.
LUNTZ: In the end, they voted for Trump, they voted for Republicans.
JENNINGS: Van -- can I respond to Van for a second? Van, you keep saying --
JONES: Just don't complain.
JENNINGS: Van, you keep saying that we would be upset if a Democratic president violated norms. Brother, last year, Joe Biden was asleep and Kamala Harris was at a dance party with Beyonce all year. You violated norms for the entire year. And it's one of the reasons that Donald Trump won the election. Norms were violated for four straight years. And yes, I didn't like it. But Donald Trump, in my opinion, is not exceeding his authority under the Constitution with his violence.
JONES: Listen, you -- nobody has been more critical of my party than I have.
JENNINGS: I know. JONES: And what I'm telling you is there is a lie that's being sold to American people, that because people are upset and because Biden didn't do a great job, that Trump can do whatever he wants to. And that is the -- you go over that edge, you're in a different country. And we don't want to be in a different country. He can do everything he wants to do lawfully and within our norms immediately, aggressively. He's choosing to do it the wrong way, and we will pay a price for it as a country if it continues.
COATES: Leave Beyonce out of it. Thanks, everyone.
(LAUGHTER)
Still ahead on this Friday night, the Luigi Mangione circus. Fans flocking to see the alleged cold-blooded killer outside of court. No video cameras were allowed in. But my next guest was one of the few people who was there to witness his every move, and she's going to tell us all about it. Plus, does Mangione's lawyer have a strategy to fight the evidence? The new clues we got from her today.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:25:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: There was apparently beetle mania outside of a New York City courtroom today. Masses of people rallying in support of, not the Beatles, but Luigi Mangione, the suspect in the murder of UnitedHealthcare CEO. This as he appeared in front of a judge today.
Now, the case is revealing, as you well know, the public's anger toward the healthcare industry. Some of his supporters carrying signs declaring, free Luigi. Others were wearing green to show solidarity with the accused killer.
And inside court, Mangione was wearing a green sweater underneath a vest that appeared to be bulletproof. His ankles shackled while wearing low furs without socks. A judge denying a request to unshackle him.
All of this was playing out in the same court, can you believe it, as President Trump's hush money trial. The spectacle overshadowing the true seriousness of this case.
Once the hearing started, prosecutors detailed the evidence that they say proves Mangione killed Brian Thompson in New York City last December.
With me now, sketch artist Christine Cornell. She was in court today for Mangione's hearing. Christine, as is the case in these very monumental cases, you were just feet away from the defendant, Mangione, today. Can you describe what his demeanor was like?
CHRISTINE CORNELL, COURTROOM SKETCH ARTIST: You know, Mr. Mangione doesn't show an awful lot of emotional play on his face. I mean, he has very distinct markings. He kind of reminds me of a husky. And he's very alert. But he's not engaging. I did catch his eye briefly when I put my binoculars on him, which I'm sure he wasn't really enjoying. But I wanted to get those -- the delicate drawing of his eyes. They're elegant, his features. And, you know, he's kind of pretty. But he's also a little vacant.
COATES: Did he react as the statements were being made? Was there a moment in time that you saw his emotions go from stoic to more emotive?
CORNELL: Nope, no emotion at all. He did have his neck craned around to watch the prosecutor while he talked about the, you know, quantity of evidence they had with the defense attorney interjecting. We haven't seen that stuff yet, sir, you know.
COATES: Uh-hmm.
[23:30:00]
CORNELL: They were basically dickering around those -- those little, you know, procedural-type stuff.
(CROSSTALK)
-- his face.
COATES: Really? Well, he had a lot of supporters.
CORNELL: Yeah.
COATES: Frankly, a ton of supporters outside. And I understand also inside the court. Many of them were wearing green. They -- apparently, to show some sort of solidarity with the alleged killer and defendant. What was the atmosphere inside the courtroom like? What was the reaction when people saw him come in, particularly those who were wearing green in support?
CORNELL: You know, I think that the reason they wouldn't unshackle him didn't have so much to do with the officers being worried about what he might do, but the supporters.
COATES: Really?
CORNELL: I mean, all he would have to do is swing around and raise an arm and say something, and you'd have a mayhem. The only time I've ever seen people gather like fans of a defendant who's accused of something really kind of brutal, kind of --
(LAUGHTER)
-- is John Gotti. And he had a regular following. He'd show up in the wee hours. But -- I mean, talk about the age of social media, he had maybe 50 people. You might've had, you know, several thousand today.
COATES: When he walked in and he was visible to those who supported him and, frankly, those who were in the courtroom for other reasons, did they say anything? Could you hear what they were saying in reaction to being around him?
CORNELL: I don't think there was anybody in that room that wasn't there for him.
COATES: How did the judge react to that?
CORNELL: You know, I think that the judge was a little taken aback by the whole spectacle of this. The last time Mr. Mangione was in court, it was very small. I think I may have been the only courtroom artist there. It was tiny. This time, this was an explosion. I mean, he didn't even take the time to say -- to ask the lawyers to stand up and say their names and present themselves. It was just kind of, you know, let's get through this. And then I almost felt as if he wanted to get out of there as swift as he could, too.
The defense attorney was complaining that she hasn't had time to sit with him and be with him and the judge said, well, you're going to have to do it right here and now, and then he left the room.
COATES: And when that conversation was happening -- go ahead. What did you say, Christine?
CORNELL: She just -- his lawyer just wanted to speak to him. She said, I didn't get a chance to see him before this hearing. And the judge asked if it was possible for them to meet somewhere. And nope, the officers weren't going to have any more moving of bodies around. If they were going to talk, they were going to have to -- have their little private conference right there in the courtroom. There was no special accommodation to be made.
COATES: Christine Cornell, always a front seat to the history. Let's not forget the seriousness of the charges he is facing. Thank you so much.
CORNELL: Thank you, ma'am.
COATES: I want to bring in Jeremy Saland, who was a former Manhattan prosecutor. Jeremy, you know, Beatlemania as one description, people wearing green in support of, obviously, the Mario Brothers character, Luigi, apparently. But half a million dollars, a ton of fans today, a sign that says jury nullification. Should prosecutors be nervous about even jury selection?
JEREMY SALAND, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY, FORMER MANHATTAN PROSECUTOR: Well, we know and you know from your experience, all you need is one. You don't need to necessarily get the acquittal. You need one for the hung to hang that jury. But jury nullification is a concern, but within reason, too, because you find that jury and you find those people. You can find it for Donald Trump. You can find it for Eric Adams if it ever gets there. You can find it for any case if you do your due diligence and you really make sure you do your homework with that jury selection.
I still think you've got to try to push if you're Karen Agnifilo for some sort of, you know, infirmity, meaning he's not guilty by reason of insanity, very difficult, extreme emotional disturbance, which is even an elevated version of that. But sure enough, the qualification is certainly going to come into play because all he need is one.
COATES: You know, speaking of his attorney, Karen Agnifilo, she said that she's still trying to figure out if prosecutors will even pursue the death penalty in this case. I wonder, will that decision change maybe how she defends him? And if so, how?
SALAND: Well, it's a good question because in New York, that's not -- when I say New York, New York State, that's not going to happen.
COATES: Uh-hmm.
SALAND: The federal government, the U.S. Attorney's Office out of the Southern District can pursue that. But we also know the Manhattan case is going first in time. My assumption, and I can't tell you what's going to happen, but if there is a conviction on the state level before Judge Carro, who's a sitting and presiding judge, and they get a murder one conviction, which is going to be a hard lift, in my opinion, but even a murder two, which can be up to a life sentence, I don't know whether or not the Southern District continues with that case to redo this again solely to get the death penalty.
[23:35:03]
Maybe they do, maybe they don't. But that still does not change that basic issue here, at least on the state level for now, which is if we can get this extreme emotional distress or that other issue of the infirmity, we can get this to a manslaughter in the first degree, which doesn't give a life sentence, yet still think you have to have that sort of attack of the case other than the initial things, which is research is bad, any statements that were obtained were done unlawfully, things like that.
COATES: The burden still is in the prosecution. But, certainly, there is a weight to pull if you're the defense in a case so public. Jeremy Saland, thank you so much.
SALAND: My pleasure.
COATES: We're also ahead on this true crime Friday night. After a major groundswell to release the Menendez brothers, the new D.A. says, not so fast, casting some major doubt on a critical piece of evidence.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
NATHAN HOCHMAN, LOS ANGELES COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY: If they had this evidence, if this letter truly existed, the defense counsel would have absolutely used it at the trial.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: The investigative reporter who found that letter and remains close to the brothers joins me next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:40:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: Well, tonight, the Menendez brothers are facing a new setback in their quest for freedom after serving more than 30 years in prison for murdering their parents inside their Beverly Hills home in 1989. The L.A. County District Attorney, Nathan Hochman, opposing a new trial for the brothers, casting doubt on new evidence at the center of their petition.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HOCHMAN: So, this letter truly existed. The defense counsel would have absolutely used it at the trial. The notion that this letter could be part of a continuum of lies and deceit and fabricating stories required us to go back into the history of the Menendez case to analyze whether or not that would be true. And when we analyze that, what we found out is that Erik and Lyle Menendez had told five different versions of the events of what had happened.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: I want to bring in former federal prosecutor Neama Rahmani and a journalist who has been working on the story of Lyle and Erik Menendez for literally decades, Robert Rand. Robert, I want to begin with you because you were at the news conference. You found the D.A.'s remarks disappointing. Why?
ROBERT RAND, AUTHOR, EMMY AND DUPONT-COLUMBIA AWARD-WINNING JOURNALIST: I was disappointed. I was not surprised. Nathan Hochman in his media tour of the last few months certainly telegraphed what his feelings were, and those were negative, about the brothers. And he made several factual errors in his presentation this afternoon. One of them was that Jose Menendez was kneecapped. He was shot in the knees to make it look like a mob hit. And you can go to my Instagram right now, I'm Robert Rand, and you can see a photo of Jose Menendez's knees, and they are not -- they are not gunshots.
COATES: Neama, you've previously worked with D.A. Hochman, and I wonder what your thoughts are about the case that he is questioning. He's questioning the authenticity of Erik Menendez's undated letter to his cousin. He's asking about why it wasn't raised before. And could you address Robert's point about factual inaccuracies?
NEAMA RAHMANI, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR, PRESIDENT OF WEST COAST TRIAL LAWYERS: Well, I know Nathan Hochman, and I believe Robert when he says the letter is authentic. But Nathan really went after the two key pieces of evidence, the new evidence that was the basis of the habeas petition. The first is the letter. And Hochman said that, look, it's not reliable because it's a photocopy. I haven't seen the envelope and it's something that the defense should have had.
But he went further, and he said that it was inconsistent with Erik's testimony. Eric said he talked to his cousin six years earlier about the alleged abuse. And this letter was obviously dated eight months. And importantly, he said that it was cumulative and it wouldn't add anything because both Erik and his cousin testified at that second trial and, therefore, the letter doesn't add anything new.
And he also went after the declaration from Roy Rossello, the member of the boy band Menudo, and he said that declaration came to light in 2022. So, it really wouldn't have changed anything about the brothers' state of mind in 1989. So, all of that, including the delay, Hochman said that this letter was known as early as 2015. It was part of a Barbara Walters interview. So, he thought the defense delayed, and for that reason, he's going to recommend that the habeas petition be denied.
COATES: Robert, what do you say to the fact that this letter is being questioned in terms of its authenticity?
RAND: Andy Cano and Erik Menendez exchanged hundreds of letters. And the fact that they Andy Cano did not remember one paragraph from one of these hundreds of letters is not surprising to me. So, I think D.A. Hochman is wrong when he says why didn't this letter come up before. And I'm really upset with his dismissal of the Menendez's menu connection. I was the EP of the documentary on Peacock.
COATES: Uh-hmm.
RAND: And that was a documentary that was put together by a team of investigative reporters. And the dismissal of that evidence is really a slap in the face of sexual abuse survivors.
COATES: Neama, now what? I mean, D.A. Hochman once again offered no recommendation on resentencing.
[23:45:01]
Clemency, though, is still on the table. Is Governor Gavin Newsom now the last hope for the Menendez brothers to secure freedom?
RAHMANI: Laura, he may be. And obviously, the governor can step in at any time --
COATES: Uh-hmm.
RAHMANI: -- and pardon or commute their sentence. And that's still an option. But the governor says he wants to wait to see how this process plays out. The next would be resentencing. And we know former District Attorney George Gascon did initiate that process.
But Nathan Hochman really telegraphed his hand today when he talked about the lies, those five lies. And, you know, when he was pressed by the local media here in L.A., do you believe that the brothers were abused? I believe they were abused. But Nathan Hochman didn't really take a position on it. He said there's no new corroborating evidence of the abuse. And when he was asked, would it change your mind if you directly spoke to Erik and Lyle? He said it would not.
So, I think that in a couple weeks when that resentencing recommendation is due, Nathan Hochman is going to come out against resentencing. So, the question is, what will a judge do? Is he going to take the unprecedented step of saying that Erik and Lyle should be resentenced and be eligible for parole? Of course, then, it'll end up on Gavin Newsom's desk anyway because he needs to accept or reject the parole board's recommendation.
COATES: I'm curious to see how both the brothers and the family think as this continues to fall out. Robert Rand, Neama Rahmani, thank you both.
RAHMANI: Thanks, Laura.
RAND: Thank you.
COATES: Ahead, Elon Musk says he wants to legalize comedy. When was it outlawed? Well, Beards are back for the New York Yankees. Did you ever know they were banned? Well, Roy Wood Jr. has an opinion on all of it. He's with me next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:50:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: Well, it's Friday night TGIF, and have I got a question for you. What is Elon Musk, facial hair, and comedy all have in common? Not much. But Roy Wood Jr. has a lot to say about all of it. So, let's go ahead and bring him in. As you know, he's the host of CNN's new show, "Have I Got News for You," and have I got Roy for you. Let's start with Elon Musk, my friend. Can you please listen to his new policy push? Listen to this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ELON MUSK, CEO OF TESLA MOTORS, LEADER OF DEPARTMENT OF GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY: We're trying to get good things done, but also like, you know, have a good time doing it, and, you know, have like a sense of humor. You know?
(APPLAUSE)
So, like -- I mean, the left -- sort of the left wanted to make comedy illegal, you know? Like you can't make fun of anything. So, it was like comedy sucks! It's like nothing is funny. You can't make fun of anything. It's like legalize comedy!
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: When was it illegal to be funny? Did you get arrested at some point because you were too funny? What happened?
ROY WOOD JR., COMEDIAN: Why is he dressed like "The Terminator" from 1984, the original one? Listen, I will give Elon this much credit. Of all of the non-elected leaders we've had in our country, he is one of the most casually dressed people I've ever seen. I don't know if I've ever seen Elon in a full suit. And if he was in a suit, it was wrinkled.
I don't think comedy has ever been illegal. It has just been an opportunity. We live in a time where more people can say they don't like what you do. That's all it is. I don't think that that's making anything illegal. I think outside of Kathy Griffin, I don't think there's many comedians we can say where they just straight up lost bread because of a joke they attempted to do. You know, they may have lost a couple of opportunities, but you didn't lose no audience. You wouldn't unable to sell tickets. They ain't stopping, man.
The irony is that if Elon went on the road right now with that chainsaw act, he'd do about a thousand seats.
(LAUGHTER)
About a thousand seats.
(LAUGHTER)
But the boy is 10,000 -- I'll say this also about DOGE. I have learned about so many departments in our country that I didn't even know existed until DOGE cut them off. They're like, yes, we have defunded the Department of Oxygen. Sip your breath slowly.
(LAUGHTER)
I think also it's ironic that they were the ones whining after the SNL 50 when they were cracking jokes --
COATES: Hmm.
WOOD: -- about the right. So, you know, I think all is fair. If you're going to crack jokes, you got to be able to take the jokes.
COATES: Double DOGE standard. We'll say that on that point. How about, um -- well, I don't know if you could play on the Yankees. I mean, facial hair, there was a time when, well, you couldn't have it. Now, there's a change. They now say well-groomed beards are allowed. That's opposed to the 1970s rule that banned all facial hair except, of course, a fabulous mustache. What do you think? Time to stick with the tradition or change? What do you think?
WOOD: I think you have to change with the times. The Yankees signed a very, very dope reliever, Devin Williams, and that brother is a Ferrari standing on that mound, and that beard was part of the intimidation. You need the beard every now and then. God bless the Yankees for finally going eye (ph). We guess you can have facial hair. This is like when your company lets you have casual, frothy, but you still got to tuck your polo shirt into your jeans. So, it's like --
(LAUGHTER)
-- when you think about the Yankees, you also have to be slow to criticize the Yankees because they also pay the most. And if I pay you the most and I tell you to cut your facial hair. you're going to cut your facial hair. They also win the most. So, as much as you want to hate on the policy, you got to give them some credit that, hmm, this is how we like for our people to look. I think it's great for expression.
[23:55:00]
I think that allowing players to have facial hair, when you talk about baseball and growing the fan base, anything that allows a smidge of player personality to sneak through is important to the growth of the game because you know how baseball is. God forbid, you smile and get too happy about something you did, somebody going to hit you in the head with a baseball the next day. So, let the kids be able to get a little beard or goatee.
COATES: Let's just not see one sunflower seed stuck in it because -- oh, let me ask you about this weekend. What can people expect from the episode of "Have I got News for You"? Very quick.
WOOD: With Saturday 9 p.m., it's a wonderful, wonderful show of myself, Amber Ruffin. We have Joyelle Nicole Johnson. We have Mike Lawler, the wonderful New York Republican congressman as well.
COATES: Yeah.
WOOD: Little bit of fireworks fly this week. But it's always a good time we get people from the right on the show and crack a couple jokes about what's happening this week.
COATES: I love it. Roy Wood Jr., looking forward to that beard growing. Thank you so much, my friend. Nice seeing you.
(LAUGHTER)
WOOD: Yeah, see you.
(LAUGHTER)
COATES: Be sure to catch "Have I Got News for You." It's tomorrow night at 9:00 only on CNN. Hey, thank you all for watching. "Anderson Cooper 360" is next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
