Return to Transcripts main page

Laura Coates Live

Apparent Confession From Kirk Killer Surfaces; VP Vance Honors Kirk And Vows Action Against Left-Wing Orgs; New Reporting On Kash Patel's Standing In Trump World; Governor Hochul Endorses Zohran Mamdani. Aired 11p-12a ET

Aired September 15, 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]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ABBY PHILLIP, CNN HOST: Just in, an appeals court has denied the president's last-minute push to fire Fed Governor Lisa Cook over claims that she lied on her mortgage forms. This means she will be able to vote on whether to cut interest rates at the next meeting.

"Laura Coates Live" is right now.

LAURA COATES, CNN HOST AND SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Tonight, the apparent online confession from the suspect in Charlie Kirk's killing as he prepared to show up in court for the very first time. What we're learning about his messages and his partner. Plus, the vice president honors Kirk, hosting his radio show while vowing a plan of action to avenge Kirk's death. And later, the brand-new reporting on Kash Patel standing in Trump's world as the FBI director defends his handling of the case. All tonight on "Laura Coates Live."

So, by this time tomorrow, we're going to have the clearest picture yet of the man who was accused of assassinating Charlie Kirk. But tonight, the focus is on what he allegedly wrote online just before he was arrested.

"The Washington Post" is reporting that Tyler Robinson appeared to confess to killing Kirk in an online group chat.

Now, the Post says it obtained screenshots of the messages written just two hours before Tyler Robinson was taken to custody. One says, "Hey guys, I have bad news for you all. It was me at UVU yesterday. I'm sorry for all of this." He followed up, "I'm surrendering through a sheriff friend in a few moments. Thanks for all the good times and laughs. You've all been so amazing. Thank you all for everything."

Now, the Post says the chat was on the online platform Discord. It started as a hub for gamers, but it's now used by all kinds of different communities.

A short time ago, the FBI Director, Kash Patel, said that he had evidence that Robinson confessed.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) KASH PATEL, DIRECTOR, FBI: We've collected information where, through witness interviews from the FBI and local law enforcement, that he essentially admitted after the shooting and assassination of Charlie Kirk. The suspect admitted to it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: And that's not all we're looking at. The director also claims that Robinson wrote a note before the murder and that DNA evidence links him to the crime.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PATEL: I will say what was found in terms of information, a text message exchange, where he, the suspect, specifically stated that he had the opportunity to take out Charlie Kirk, and he was going to do that. And when he was asked why, he said some hatred cannot be negotiated with.

The DNA hits from the towel that was wrapped around the firearm. And the DNA on the screwdriver are positively processed for the suspect in custody.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Now, of course, all these things are going to have to come into play if you're talking about any charges that will be filed against him. We don't know what they're going to be yet, not until tomorrow, that is, because that's when Utah is going to lay out those charges in court tomorrow. And the state's public safety commissioner says we could learn a lot more about the evidence against him.

Now, it's not entirely clear at all what his specific motive was. We haven't heard it from him. But that is not stopping the political fight over what he believes. President Trump says that based on what he is seeing, and it's his opinion, he says, he thinks the suspect was radicalized on the internet.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: It seems like he has wonderful parents, a wonderful neighbor. A smart guy. Great boards, great marks, great student. And then something happened to him over a fairly short period of time. It looks like he was radicalized over the internet. And he's radicalized on the left. He's a left. A lot of problems with the left. And they get protected, and they shouldn't be protected.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Well, now, the White House is seizing on the aftermath of Kirk's murder. Trump, he is laying out a new push to crack down on what he claims are left-wing groups that fund and incite violence.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNKNOWN (voice-over): Do you plan on designating, uh, Antifa finally a domestic terror organization?

TRUMP: Well, it's something I would do, yeah. I've been speaking to the attorney general about bringing RICO against some of the people that you've been reading about, that have been putting up millions and millions of dollars for agitation.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[23:05:01]

COATES: Hmm. RICO would be an interesting choice. I wonder what will come of that. We're going to get to all of it, by the way, tonight. But I want to start with the investigation. CNN's Ed Lavandera has been with us in Orem, Utah. Ed, we've heard now about this apparent confession. There's also reporting that Robinson was active in another Discord chat while the manhunt was actually underway to figure out who had shot Charlie Kirk. What can you tell us?

ED LAVANDERA, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, that conversation that you've been talking about, "The Washington Post" reported on, happened just a few hours before Tyler Robinson was taken into custody.

But hours earlier in the day, just after the federal authorities and local authorities had released some of the first images of the person they believed to be the suspect in a stairwell here on the Utah Valley University campus, the suspect got a message through the Discord app from a friend, someone who they communicated online. They hadn't seen each other in a while. But according to reporting from "The New York Times," that person texted Tyler Robinson saying, WYA, where are you at? And the suspect reportedly responded by saying, that's my doppelganger trying to get me in trouble.

So, that was interesting to see, you know, the series of messages that were unfolding, that we're just now kind of getting a clearer picture on of just how quickly things were developing and changing as those initial images of the potential suspect were being shared with the public.

COATES: You know, we're hearing from Utah's governor frequently, frankly, since we've -- all this unfolded, and he is addressing the suspect's roommate. What do we know?

LAVANDERA: Well, the roommate, according to the governor, was involved in a romantic relationship with the suspect, Tyler Robinson, and that this roommate was in the process or is in the process of transitioning from male to female. The governor is quick to point out, though, that that roommate is cooperating. This is a little bit more of about what he had to say about this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GOV. SPENCER COX (R-UT): The roommate was a romantic partner, uh, a male transitioning to -- to female. I can say that he has been very cooperative. This -- this partner has been incredibly cooperative, had -- had no idea that this was happening, and is working with investigators right now. (END VIDEO CLIP)

LAVANDERA: And Laura, given these new details, the governor also went out of his way to say that it is still far too early to determine exactly how this play in to a motive behind this shooting and the killing that they're accusing Tyler Robinson of. So, it's just, you know, one more piece of this puzzle as people try to figure out what the motive was and what was behind all of this and how it unfolded.

COATES: Ed Lavandera, thank you so much. I want to talk more about this puzzle and what goes into the prosecution of this suspect and how they have to bring a case and how and why.

I want to bring in to that end, CNN chief law enforcement and intelligence analyst John Miller, also criminologist and author Scott Bonn, who you can see on a national speaking tour right now entitled "Serial Killers with Dr. Scott Bonn." Also here, former federal prosecutor, Neama Rahmani. Thank you all for being here.

I want to begin with the investigation, John, because you know authorities are uncovering the suspect's digital footprint that we're even talking right now. And the FBI director is revealing that tonight, the suspect wrote in a text message -- quote -- "Some hatred cannot be negotiated with."

So, walk me through as you've been evaluating everything. What do you think is the most important piece of evidence or pieces you've seen so far? And, obviously, it's the prosecutor's burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. So, what more are they looking to find?

JOHN MILLER, CNN CHIEF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND INTELLIGENCE ANALYST: Well, Laura, it's the totality of the evidence and the way the pieces fit together. Perhaps the strongest evidence is something the FBI director revealed today when he said that, uh, DNA tests matched DNA found on the towel that the gun, the murder weapon, was wrapped in, as well as a screwdriver which investigators believe was used to break down the gun in order to sneak it into the building before the shooting.

But that also fits with a statement by the suspect's father, allegedly made to deputy sheriff, saying that his son had admitted to being the shooter, and statements made to the deputy sheriff, uh, implying that he had been the shooter, and then conversations he had with his friends on their Discord chat platform where they said it looked like him and he jokingly said, the guy is my look-alike, my doppelganger, but just before he was arrested, coming back and making that alleged confession where he says, I have bad news, it was me, that was me at UVU, and then explaining that he had been confronted by his father and, you know, spoke to the sheriff, and that they were on their way to get him.

[23:10:01]

So, when you look at all of that together, along with the photographs of him arriving, the photographs of him leaving, the video that is allegedly him where he can't be identified but -- piece all that together, and you as a former federal prosecutor would say I would go to court with that with some degree of confidence.

COATES: At the very least, it's enough for probable cause, for the charges that he will be filed against tomorrow, and then possibly the next steps of the trial date and beyond. And now, for people who look at it and say -- Scott, look, this is open and shut if there's a confession, if there's all these things that John has mentioned. But still, you have to prove the case in court in order to get a conviction. There is still a lot that has to be done even with all the things -- if true and a certainty are there.

But there's also reporting, Scott, from "The Washington Post" and "The New York Times" that suggests that the he communicated with acquaintances after the shooting. And, as John talked about, the doppelganger comment and beyond. What does it tell you that he didn't go MIA, that if he confessed in this manner or joked about this or even thanked the people for the fun times they had?

SCOTT BONN, CRIMINOLOGIST, AUTHOR: At some level, Laura, I believe that he is, uh, proud of what he did. And this is something that had been planned for quite a while, I'm sure. And while we don't know the specific motive, I can almost guarantee you it's rooted in rage in some way and it's highly specific. And I think Charlie Kirk represented something both personal to him as well as symbolic. And he was striking out at things that he had grown to hate and resent. And I'm talking about Christian conservatism and gun ownership.

And so, at some level, I think he was actually taking recognition, saying, yes, I did this, and at some level, taking some pride in it.

COATES: I wonder -- you know, he's not really speaking to investors, again, we're finding, Neama, on this very point. Now, he doesn't have to, right? It is his absolute right to remain silent. He doesn't have to, say, cooperate as, say, a witness in a case or somebody who would be a co-conspirator or defendant with a deal of any kind. But he's not being forthcoming at this juncture.

And we know that tomorrow, Utah, they're going to file charges officially against him tomorrow. He's already being held on several things like aggravated murder and felony charges of a firearm and obstruction of justice. These are state level charges. What role will the federal government play here, if any?

NEAMA RAHMANI, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR, PRESIDENT OF WEST COAST TRIAL LAWYERS: I think the federal government is going to file this case. When you have the president of the United States, you have the attorney general, you have the director of the FBI talking about a case, you're likely going to see federal charges. And we've seen it in other cases. Obviously, Luigi Mangione.

COATES: Uh-hmm.

RAHMANI: Decarlos Brown in North Carolina. Those cases are a little bit unique because New York doesn't have the death penalty. North Carolina has really a hold on the death penalty because even though it's legal under state law, a physician has to be present and the medical board isn't allowing it. Utah, of course, does have the death penalty. Now, they haven't had an execution in 15 years, but they do have lethal injection. They even have the firing squad as a backup.

COATES: Uh-hmm.

RAHMANI: So, after tomorrow, the state has 60 days to file their notice of intent to seek the death penalty. I fully expect that to happen because that's what President Trump and the governor of Utah have both said will happen.

So, from there the question is, what does Robinson's defense do? Like John said, it is a very strong case in terms of the evidence. So, do they start to put on some sort of mitigation package to try to save his life? Maybe try to work out some sort of deal? I don't know if they'll offer a deal. This is one of most high-profile murders, certainly, in recent history right now.

COATES: Uh-hmm.

RAHMANI: So, there's going to be a lot of pressure on the defense to try to save his life because in terms of the evidence, obviously, there's a presumption of evidence, but, like you said, it's pretty much an open and shut case from a guilt perspective.

COATES: Well, we'll see. I mean, you know, I -- I hesitate only because, John Miller, um, it wouldn't be premature to note that this is obviously a probable case cause fighting. And yet the investigators will always treat this as if they do not have an open and shut case, right? They're very prudent. Investigator will be very diligent to make sure no stone is left unturned. Every T is crossed, every I is dotted to make sure they're not relying on just one bit of evidence with everything cumulatively.

And then you've got the deputy FBI director, Dan Bongino, John, who's not ruling out a wider conspiracy despite multiple officials believing that the suspect acted entirely alone. Are you getting any indication from your reporting that the investigation is pointing to other conspirators?

MILLER: No. The signal we're getting is the opposite. But, as you also know, uh, the FBI deputy director would be, uh, irresponsible not to say we are pulling that thread all the way backwards.

[23:15:03]

COATES: Uh-hmm.

MILLER: Was there someone else who knew who were these text messages, too, and, you know, they were in advance of the killing? Was it a hint or was it more than that? Did they have knowledge beforehand? Did they have knowledge after the fact? What about everybody in that chat room? Are they going to be interviewed about their conversations outside that chat room with the suspect online by text, by phone, by voice, in person?

You really have to go backwards to look for two things. One, what was he consuming online or in other places that brought him to the point that he felt he had to do this -- this murder? And two, who was consuming it with him? Who was he sharing that with? They're going to have to know that the answer to all those questions is nothing and nobody or they're going to have to know who and when and where, and the case could expand.

COATES: It certainly could, and we'll see what happens tomorrow. We got a really comprehensive look at what they know so far and the charges that correspond to it. Thank you, everyone.

Still ahead, the White House announces a plan to avenge Charlie Kirk's death. The vice president making his feelings quite clear. Plus, the new report on Kash Patel standing in Trump world as he's facing some blowback for the way he initially handled the investigation.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:20:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COATES: Well, the Trump White House tonight putting what he calls the radical left on notice. They're promising to figuratively avenge Charlie Kirk's assassination. They're going after organizations and people they say are contributing to a culture of hate and of violence. Well, the vice president, a great friend of Charlie Kirk, joined in that call. He was actually hosting his good friend's radio show.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

J.D. VANCE, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: There is no unity with the people who celebrate Charlie Kirk's assassination. And there is no unity with the people who fund these articles, who pay the salaries of these terrorist sympathizers, who argue that Charlie Kirk, a loving husband and father, deserved a shot to the neck because he spoke words with which they disagree.

So, when you see someone celebrating Charlie's murder, call them out in hell. Call their employer. We don't believe in political violence, but we do believe in civility. And there is no civility in the celebration of political assassination.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Speaker Mike Johnson's tone was somewhat different than the vice president's, holding a vigil for Kirk. He didn't call for any crackdown and instead advocated for a civil political discourse. But after the event, Speaker Johnson lamented that only a handful of Democrats showed up.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MIKE JOHNSON, SPEAKER OF THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES: Well, I'm glad it was bipartisan. I wish more had participated, and I'm not sure why they didn't. So, I don't know what else we can do other than offer an all member bipartisan vigil. We've done that routinely for other things.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Here with me now is CNN political commentator and Republican strategist Shermichael Singleton and former Republican Illinois congressman, Joe Walsh, host of "The Social Contract." Good to have both of you.

I mean, Joe, you heard the vice president with his views on unity. Marjorie Taylor Greene went even further, and I'll tell you how she put it. "There is nothing left to talk about with the left. They hate us. To be honest, I want a peaceful national divorce." Is that really the sentiment, you think, that is happening on Capitol Hill, at least among some?

JOE WALSH, PODCAST HOST, FORMER ILLINOIS REPRESENTATIVE: I think, Laura, we have to pull back and think of how -- and I'm going to use the word outrageous. It is what Trump and Vance have done.

Last week was traumatic for the whole darn country. And Donald Trump gets up in front of the country three or four or five times now and goes after half the country instead of even attempting to unify, lower the temperature, heal the divide, tell everybody to stand down. And J.D. Vance did the same damn thing. This is outrageous. They're trying to divide the country after a trauma like that. It's unspeakable.

COATES: What do you say, Shermichael, given that they both seem to feel that the division is too great?

SHERMICHAEL SINGLETON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: Look, Speaker Johnson said something that I thought was pretty surprising. You had a bipartisan vigil and mostly only Republicans showed up, very few Democrats. I was actually surprised by that.

Now, I know how many Democrats feel about some of Charlie's political positions, but I would have thought that would have been good opportunity to what Joe was talking about, national unity, to say, you know what, positive to the side, this was abhorrent. We can't become a country where we justify or be silent or muted when this type of violence occurs. Let us at least show up in force with our Republican colleagues to send a message to the American people. And many did not.

COATES: Why do you think that is, though? And I want to dig deeper into this because, obviously, I've never known a politician who misses a good photo-op.

SINGLETON: Yeah.

COATES: I mean --

WALSH: It's true.

COATES: -- who wants to make sure that they have on their record in the tallies that they themselves are projecting unity, that they are advancing it in some way. It doesn't seem to be politically expedient these days. Why do you think that is?

WALSH: I -- I don't know the details, Laura, of that vigil. I've heard Democratic members say there were conflicts with other events.

COATES: Uh-hmm.

WALSH: They didn't know about it till later in the day. But --

COATES: Vigil aside, there's a thought that disunity is more advantageous politically.

WALSH: That --

COATES: And that's a striking and sad testimony.

WALSH: No -- that is true. But I'll say to what happened last week, generally, the Democrats have been much more unified in -- this is wrong. The president of the United States, again, we can't overlook this, did not lift a finger and hasn't to unify the country.

[23:25:00]

He's humanely incapable of it. That's really problematic.

COATES: One thing that he did say -- he was asked about the decision to lower the flag for Charlie Kirk's assassination and not with respect to the Minnesota Democrat, Melissa Hortman, and her husband who were killed several months ago. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: Well, if the governor had asked me to do that, I would have done that. But the governor of Minnesota didn't ask me. I didn't -- uh, I wouldn't have thought of that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Now, his critics are pointing to that as an example of a total lack of empathy or concern. What do you say?

SINGLETON: I think there are many people who, I think, if they could go back and rewind the clock, I think, maybe some out there are going to disagree with me, would probably do some things in the past different. I've had --

COATES: In respect to --

SINGLETON: I've had -- in respect to people on the other side being killed as a result of political violence. I've even had conversations with people that I know, uh, who have said, you know, I think all of us just have to be a lot more unified going forward when these types of things occur.

And I think seeing an assassination, it changes people's minds and their outlooks on things that they thought in the past -- you know, this is just something, this is politics, this is something that we're not going to give a lot of attention to. I think, now, that changes things. WALSH: You're right, Shermichael. Most everybody would. You and I always would. Most politicians would. The president and the vice president purposely have not done that.

COATES: They're talking about vengeance in the form of firings, trying to identify people through their employers and otherwise. The vengeance seems to be the figurative version of making sure people are let go. And there -- you know, vice president is urging on firing people who have celebrated Kirk's murder, which --

SINGLETON: There have been teachers, nurses, doctors, college professors. And a lot of conservatives out there, I would say, are wondering if I go to my physician now or my nurse, will I get the same treatment? If I'm sending my kid to get educated at high school or college, if my kid happens to come from a conservative home or be conservative themselves, will they get fair and objective treatment?

COATES: I mean, I want to press you on this. Do you really think that there are people out there who say, based on my political ideology, I might get different medical treatment or --

SINGLETON: I think -- that's a good question, Laura. I think if you look at some of the posts that people have made, who work in some of those fields, conservatives have been bringing that question to ask on social media. I've seen it.

COATES: What do think, Joe?

WALSH: You have -- but we've got our government. J.D. Vance today encouraging people to go after the employers of people who have criticized Charlie Kirk. Pam Bondi tonight, Laura, said she's going to go after hate speech, anybody who espouses any sort of hate speech against Charlie Kirk.

SINGLETON: Well, I think --

WALSH: This is the attorney general.

(CROSSTALK)

COATES: Go ahead.

SINGLETON: I don't think it's about going after people who have a differing view.

WALSH: That's exactly what they said.

SINGLETON: I think it's about some of the posts, and I will show you some that I have seen, of people literally saying good for him. I mean, Joe, we can both agree that's not acceptable. I would -- I would --

COATES: Of course.

SINGLETON: I would absolutely fire somebody --

WALSH: No, no, it's not -- it's --

SINGLETON: -- to say something like that, regardless of what their personal philosophy may be.

WALSH: Right. But that's the -- that's the employer's call. That's not the vice president of the United States basically putting a vendetta out there. Anybody that says anything about J.D. Vance, you need to go after. You don't want the government --

SINGLETON: No, no, I don't want that. But I do think -- I do think it's fair for conservatives, if you're at a Costco or FedEx, for example, or any other place, that may have employees making posts online saying that they're okay with it and say, wait a minute here, we're going to take our business elsewhere if you don't get rid of these people. And as a result, you're seeing some of these businesses say, hey, we got to let you go, this isn't in sync with the moral values that we want represented as a company or an institution.

WALSH: Agreed. I just don't want the president and the vice president dictating what speech is acceptable out there.

SINGLETON: No, that's fair. And I think you're sending to public space, people are going about it on their own way before J.D. Vance's comments.

COATES: Shermichael and Joe, not the end of the conversation, but it is for tonight. Thank you both. Oh, this is lovely.

(LAUGHTER)

What's happening to my left right now. Up next, Kash Patel defiant in the face of criticism and scrutiny over his handling of the Charlie Kirk case. Is any of it having an impact with how the president sees him? Marc Caputo has some brand-new reporting that he'll share with us next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:30:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COATES: A divide in the MAGAverse. President Trump standing by FBI Director Kash Patel tonight. And you know what? So is the attorney general, Pam Bondi.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PAM BONDI, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL: Everyone worked so hard. This was solved so fast. Thanks to the work of Kash Patel, the FBI, and all of our local partners working together.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: But, you know, this is where the intrigue comes in, because multiple influential figures in the MAGA movement have criticized Kash Patel over this in the last few days. The question (INAUDIBLE) job after he took to X in the early hours after the assassination of Charlie Kirk, repeatedly giving inaccurate or confusing information. Now, Patel, for his part, taking to one of the president's favorite shows this morning to clear things up.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PATEL: Could I have worded it a little better in the heat of the moment?

[23:35:00]

Sure. But do I regret putting it out? Absolutely not. I was telling the world what the FBI was doing, as we were doing, and I'm continuing to do that. And I challenge anyone out there to find a director that has been more transparent and more willing to work the media on high- profile cases or any case the FBI is handling.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: And you know what? It seems to have worked. Because tonight, an administration official is telling Axios -- quote -- "Kash's job is safe. The president is happy."

Joining me now, the reporter behind that reporting, senior politics reporter for Axios, Marc Caputo. Marc, welcome. So, why is the MAGA world divided over how he has been performing as FBI director? What's he got to do to regain any lost trust?

MARC CAPUTO, SENIOR POLITICS REPORTER, AXIOS: I think he needs to have more sort of successes to the degree that the arrest in Utah was a success, but not due to things that led up to that arrest.

Also, when he did have the press conference with Utah's governor, Spencer Cox, there was this sort of odd moment where Director Patel had said of Charlie Chris -- pardon me. I always say Charlie Chris because I'm a Floridian.

COATES: Hmm.

CAPUTO: Charlie Kirk. But when he said of Charlie Kirk, uh, I'll see you in Valhalla, my friend, a reference to Norse mythology, everyone thought that was kind of strange. One senior administration official told me that was pretty cringe.

But in the end, with Donald Trump, what matters is winning, delivering. And the suspect in this case, Tyler Robinson, was caught pretty quickly. And Patel made sure that the media knew, and he said on social media that one of the reasons that the suspect was caught is that he, Patel, had demanded that a photo be released, surveillance photo of the suspect, so that people could see and turn him in. And indeed, that's what happened.

COATES: Yeah. It seemed to lead his -- suspect's father to asking his son whether it was him and leading, apparently, to the arrest later on. Yet there is the idea of transparency that most people don't usually think of when it comes to an FBI director being so forthcoming as he seemed to suggest on air today.

But the vice president, J.D. Vance, hosted "The Charlie Kirk Show" today. It was the first show since Kirk's assassination. His widow said that the show was going to still go on. And, of course, the vice president now pulled in that seat just today. How notable was it for the vice president to stand in the gap?

CAPUTO: Well, highly. J.D. Vance has sort of been a podcast figure politically for quite some time and was instrumental in Donald Trump embracing that during the campaign.

But what a lot of people don't understand, who don't cover the White House, we talk to these folks all the time, is how much of a friend Charlie Kirk was to people in the administration. This was legitimate friendship. It wasn't just sort of a marriage of political convenience. And J.D. Vance was among them.

Charlie Kirk was one of the most vociferous forces or voices arguing to Donald Trump and J.D. Vance, among others. But he was very prominent. And his death really was taken personally by the White House, by the vice president, by the president. And so, to that degree, it's not a surprise.

But this is an entirely different world that you're saying because the -- you just -- you have not witnessed this sort of media usage by any vice president or any administration. One person mentioned me on social media, but sort of recalled FDR's fireside chats --

COATES: Uh-hmm.

CAPUTO: -- you know, way back when. But that's a very different medium and a very different time. And what you're seeing slowly or perhaps quickly is a meshing of the Trump political operation and Turning Point USA. They did have a close connection during the campaign. That was Charlie Kirk's organization. And I think this is sort of a prelude of what to come.

COATES: Both the president and vice president crediting Charlie Kirk for their role and their success electorally. Marc Caputo, thank you so much.

CAPUTO: Thank you.

COATES: Joining me now, journalist and FBI historian Garrett Graff, who's also the author of "The Devil Reached Toward the Sky." Garrett, welcome. Look, you heard President Trump, standing by Kash Patel tonight. He is facing mounting criticism, though, over how he handled this investigation, especially initially, especially from some people within MAGA. In your opinion, did he meet the moment?

GARRETT GRAFF, JOURNALIST, AUTHOR, HISTORIAN: He absolutely did not. And, you know, I think one of the things that the last week has shown is the extent to which he is just completely unsuited for this job.

Um, one of the reasons that FBI directors are historically not super, duper transparent about ongoing investigations is the way that that can undermine and compromise the investigation and subsequent prosecution.

[23:39:56]

And we saw Kash Patel make a number of different remarks over his many public appearances that are going to be fodder for presumably future defense attorney motions that might actually very much jeopardize the government's ability to go after the death penalty in this case.

COATES: One instance, of course, if you say you have one subject and that person is gone, political juror might say to themselves, does the government have the right person now? I assume that's what you're meaning, of course, why the other evidence has to come into play, to support whatever their burden is.

But then you heard the comments we played from Patel this morning, Garrett. He defended, tweeting that a subject for this shooting was in custody. There was one still at large, of course. He argues that he was being transparent, that that's what he ought to be, and almost challenge the public to find one who is even more or as transparent as he is.

From the FBI perspective, though, more generally, given that this is a state prosecution, at least for now, what impact does that have on the investigation by the FBI?

GRAFF: Well, what -- what we've seen Kash Patel do is make a number of horror (ph) personal decisions about his involvement and his commentary on this case, including going out to the scene himself, which is something that FBI director typically do not because it is more of a distraction than a benefit to the agents on the ground.

Kash Patel talking about how his own personal friendship to this victim, uh, influenced his interest in the case. That's something that a defense attorney is going to want to try to dig into.

COATES: Hmm.

GRAFF: Him talking about how he was conducting crime scene searches himself, um, participating in crime scene searches himself, which is going to lead to plenty of questions since he is not in any way a trained crime scene search technician. The FBI has plenty of those, and Kash Patel is not one of them.

COATES: So, you think about giving this case to, say, a prosecutor, right? What they have to grapple with is all the things you've just named and try to prove their case. Even when people think it's open and shut, the onus still remains on the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. And, of course, defense counsel is going to try to insert reasonable doubt at every stage for reasons that you've said, among others, by the way.

But I want to turn our attention to a different federal prosecutor, this time Maurene Comey who, as you know, was a federal prosecutor involved in the Epstein and the Ghislaine Maxwell and, of course, the Diddy cases as well. She is no longer prosecuted because she was fired by the

administration. She's now suing the administration, arguing essentially due process. She was not given any notice or opportunity to be heard, and that, she thinks, she was targeted for being the daughter of the former FBI director, James Comey, because she didn't have any reason, she says, to be fired at all. How significant is this lawsuit?

GRAFF: I think it's significant, as the Justice Department would say, as part of a, you know, pattern of practice across the Justice Department and the FBI. We saw actually last Wednesday, hours before Charlie Kirk was shot, a very similar lawsuit come from former FBI officials outlining the firing purges that Kash Patel has tried --

COATES: Uh-hmm.

GRAFF: -- to activate and implement over the last couple of weeks and months that contain very similar language, including, you know, sort of I'm being ordered by people above me to do this, and sort of a lack of due process for people who would be normally under, you know, civil service-type protections.

And that Maurene Comey's lawsuit basically includes a scene where she says that the U.S. attorney told her, Washington ordered me to fire you. And that -- that makes -- that jives very closely with some of the language that we saw outlined in the FBI lawsuit last week.

COATES: Uh-hmm.

GRAFF: And I think it makes clear that both at the Justice Department writ large and the FBI in particular, that we are witnessing something that is actually a political purge.

COATES: We'll see how the courts see it. There's now an active lawsuit against the administration, including, by the way, the attorney general of the United States, too. Garrett Graff, thank you.

GRAFF: Any time.

COATES: Still ahead, New York Governor Kathy Hochul says she'll back Zohran Mamdani for mayor. So, will the rest of her party's holdouts, will they follow suit or might they just be about to dig in even more? The former New York City mayor, Bill de Blasio, standing by on that next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:45:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ZOHRAN MAMDANI, NEW YORK CITY MAYORAL CANDIDATE: Now, I'm excited to welcome Governor Hochul to our movement. This is a time for unity. It is a time for strength and it is a time to speak in one voice. (END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Just over a month to go until early voting in the New York City mayoral race. And as many top Democrats in Congress are still hesitant to rally behind their party's nominee, Zohran Mamdani, tonight, he is celebrating a major endorsement from the New York governor, Kathy Hochul, who officially threw her support behind Mamdani in an op-ed for "The New York Times" yesterday.

[23:50:03]

Here she is explaining why she decided to get on board.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GOV. KATHY HOCHUL (D-NY): I disagree with many statements, and I'll -- I've said that.

I think what put me over the top was this discussion about Donald Trump inserting himself into our local election. So, that's probably what made me even more committed to work with -- to know that I could work with an individual who will stand up to Donald Trump.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Well, if Mamdani's opposition to Trump is what won Hochul over, it's only fitting that Trump is slamming her endorsement today, writing -- quote -- "Governor Kathy Hochul of New York has endorsed the 'little communist,' Zohran Mamdani. This is a rather shocking development." Adding to the backlash is New York Congresswoman Elise Stefanik, who many see as a potential challenger to Hochul in 2026.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. ELISE STEFANIK (R-NY): The vast majority of New York City and New York residents do not want communism. They do not want antisemitism. She has now embraced communism, she has embraced defunding the police, she has embraced tax hikes, she has embraced government-run grocery stores, she has embraced decriminalizing sex work. This is insane.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Joining me now, the former New York City mayor, Bill de Blasio. He has endorsed Mamdani. Mayor, welcome. Look, the governor is placing a stronger emphasis, it seems, on how Mamdani would push back against President Trump rather than unequivocally backing his agenda. Right approach?

BILL DE BLASIO, FORMER NEW YORK CITY MAYOR: Look, I think Governor Hochul did the right thing. She listened to what the people in New York City are saying. There is a reason that Zohran Mamdani is way ahead in the polls. He is speaking about affordability crises in New York City every single day.

Laura, I wish Democrats all over the state, all over this country will pay attention and not get caught up in labels or taxes as you just saw from Stefanik but actually listen to Mamdani is saying because voters are feeling it. He's talking about their lives as they're living it, and he's saying he won't accept the status quo.

You know, it's funny, listening to Elise Stefanik. I think she thinks that kind of rhetoric is going to move voters. I think it goes right over their heads. When people are actually caring about how they pay the rent, you know, how they get to work, how they afford to get to work, how they afford food, that's what Mamdani is focused on.

I think Hochul had her finger on the pulse, enough to realize that's where the people of her state's biggest city were, and it was important to join in that.

COATES: Well, there are others who are not joining in, including several prominent New York Democrats who are holding back from endorsing Mamdani. I'm talking about Chuck Schumer, Hakeem Jeffries as most note. I want you to listen to what Senator Chris Van Hollen had to say about that.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. CHRIS VAN HOLLEN (D-MD): Many Democratic members of the Senate and House representing New York have stayed on the sidelines. That kind of spineless politics is what people are sick of. They need to get behind him and get behind him now.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Do they need to back him or is this indicative of maybe welcome disagreement within the party? What do you see?

DE BLASIO: Uh, Democrats are used to a certain level of disagreement with the tent party. But Chris Van Hollen is totally right. It is time for all Democrats to get behind Zohran Mamdani. He is our nominee for a good reason. He overwhelmingly won the primary. He walked the streets of the city. He connected with people.

As Governor Hochul said in her op-ed in "The New York Times," he has an urgency, he has a connection to people that is being deeply felt. And, you know, I don't understand why Democrats are missing the fact that people want to see consistency in our politics. They don't want this kind of sitting on the sidelines, waiting to see where things will go. They actually want to see the ability to take a stand, not be scared of our shadow as Democrats.

COATES: Hmm.

DE BLASIO: In fact, Democrats appear to be wavering. It only hurts the --quote, unquote -- "brand" of the Democratic Party even more. So, here we have -- yeah, he is aggressive, he is a populist, and no question, in the best sense, Mamdani is someone who's talking about the need for urgent change. I say, Laura --

COATES: Yeah.

DE BLASIO: -- if Democrats had sounded like that in 2024, I truly believe we would have won the presidential election, if we sounded that urgent about the kitchen table issues that were affecting everyday people. But when Democrats sort of put their finger in the air, worrying, you know, where's the wind flying, it actually makes people disrespect our party and it hurts us.

COATES: Let me tell you something that just came in. This is breaking news, actually, mayor. It's coming from the president the United States. And here's what he has just written.

[23:54:55]

"Today, I have the great honor of bringing a $15 billion defamation and libel lawsuit against 'The New York Times,' one of the worst and most degenerate newspapers in history of our country, becoming a virtual mouthpiece for the radical left Democrat Party." He talked about -- "I view it as a single largest illegal campaign contribution ever."

Talking about the endorsement of Kamala Harris actually put dead center on the front page of "The New York Times," which is unheard of, he believes. He talks about engaging in a decades long method of lying about your favorite president, me, he says, his family and his business and beyond. And he goes into it. What's your reaction to this?

DE BLASIO: It's a classic Trump strategy and it has to be stopped. I mean, look, this is going to be a moment of truth for "The New York Times" and for media more generally. This has to be confronted. When -- we saw it with universities. We saw it with law firms. We've seen it in some parts of the media. When there's a willingness to settle and give in on these lawsuits, it only gets the Trump administration, the Trump world convinced they could do even more lawsuits and create even more of a chilling effect.

So, I'm not saying it's easy. I do feel for "The New York Times." That's a dangerous threat. But it's absolutely imperative they fight it every step of the way. It's false. It's a false accusation. I've watched the Times coverage. They've bent over backwards in many cases to try and present both sides. This is the kind of thing that has to be confronted if we're going to protect our basic democratic rights.

COATES: Mayor Bill de Blasio, thank you for your reaction, and we'll see what their reaction is next. I appreciate it.

And thank you all so much for watching. "Anderson Cooper 360" is next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)