Return to Transcripts main page
Laura Coates Live
Trump Warns Of More Charges Against Political Foes; ICE Officer "Relieved Of Current Duties" After Shoving Mother; Kimmel Returns To All TV Markets As Boycott Ends. Aired 11p-12a ET
Aired September 26, 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]
ABBY PHILLIP, CNN ANCHOR AND SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: You can catch me any time on your favorite social media X, Instagram, and TikTok. "Laura Coates Live" starts right now.
LAURA COATES, CNN HOST AND SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Tonight, who's the next entry in Trump's burn book? The president teases more charges against his enemies as a new report suggests the Georgia D.A., Fani Willis, may be under the microscope. Plus, outrage after an ICE officer shoves a mother to the floor at an immigration court. Her kids are there. A video so shocking that ICE is punishing one of its own. And a full circle comeback. Jimmy Kimmel's show returns to all T.V. markets after two station owners blinked on their boycott. Tonight on "Laura Coates Live."
You know, it wasn't long ago when Friday nights under the first Trump administration meant a new legal case was brewing, a ready-to-be- served piping hot. The trend continues now. Former FBI Director James Comey was the first Trump nemesis to face charges. But the president is making it quite clear, he won't be the last.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNKNOWN (voice-over): Now that James Comey has been indicted, who is the next person on your list in this retribution campaign?
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: It's not a list, but I think there'll be others. I mean, they're corrupt. These -- these were corrupt, radical-left Democrats. Comey essentially was a -- he's worse than a Democrat. I would say the Democrats are better than Comey.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: So, who could be next? Well, that's the big question hanging in the air tonight while we're learning this: "The New York Times" is reporting the DOJ has issued a subpoena against Fani Willis. Now, she is the D.A. in Fulton County, in Georgia who charged Trump with election interference. The Times says the prosecutors want to see her travel records. Now, the scope of the investigation, still unclear, and we don't actually know if she is the target.
But the administration has a long rolodex of names under active investigation. You've got former national security Advisor John Bolton, the New York attorney general, Letitia James, the former special counsel, Jack Smith, the former joint chiefs of staff, Chairman Mark Milley, and a whole slew of others. So, Trump has no shortage of enemies to pursue, but he insists it's not about settling scores.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNKNOWN (voice-over): Is this more about justice or is it about revenge?
TRUMP: It's about justice, really. It's not a revenge. It's about justice. It's also -- it's also about the fact that you can't let this go on. They are sick, radical-left people, and they can't get away with it. And Comey -- Comey was one of the people. He wasn't the biggest, but he's a dirty cop. He has always been a dirty cop.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Not revenge. Remember, Trump did demand his A.G. prosecute Comey. He did force out a career prosecutor when charges did not materialize against him. He did install a loyalist with no prosecutorial experience who then brought the indictment. And tonight, he is thanking the FBI, the DOJ, and that loyalist, Lindsey Halligan, while calling Comey a total slime ball. So, not revenge? Try telling that to Comey who told CNN earlier this year that he's living rent- free in Trump's head.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JAMES COMEY, FORMER DIRECTOR, FBI: I often joke I'm the relationship that Trump can't get over, wakes up in the middle of the night thinking about me and how I'm living my best life. I think it has some combination of -- I really have had a happy, productive life since then, and -- and that I spoke out about him, and that despite their absolute best efforts, they were never able -- never able to get me.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Well, here's the thing. Even if it looks like revenge, it doesn't automatically make the charges somehow a joke. At this point, we don't have a lot to go off of, do we? I mean, the indictment, I mean, it's paper-thin. Okay, well, it's two pages-thin, literally. What we do know is that the DOJ is alleging that Comey authorized an anonymous link to the press, and then allegedly lied about it when he testified under oath before Congress.
And here's another big piece of the puzzle. People close to the case tell us that the alleged false statements appear to center around the FBI investigation into Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server, not the Russia investigation. So, you got to watch this space because this case is just getting underway.
With me now, former assistant U.S. attorney, Kim Wehle. You can follow her Substack, "The Little Law School with Kim Wehle." Also here, former federal prosecutor who quit over the decision to dismiss the case against New York City Mayor Eric Adams, Ryan Croswell.
[23:05:04]
He is running for the Democratic Party's nomination in Pennsylvania's 7th congressional district. And national security attorney, there he is, Mark Zaid, representing several clients that are suing the administration. Thank you all for being here on what appears to be another interesting legal Friday night.
Mark, I want to begin with you because there's a lot of conversation around what Comey ought to do in response to an indictment. And two things have come up, vindictive prosecution and selective prosecution. These are two separate concepts requiring two different things. Tell me what your approach would be if you were to represent Comey. Either of those things or neither? Both?
MARK ZAID, NATIONAL SECURITY ATTORNEY: Oh, I think both certainly can be assessed or alleged. They're very difficult --
COATES: Uh-hmm.
ZAID: -- generally and -- and our -- my two colleagues that are on the panel there with you will know much better than I about that. I mean, the vindictive prosecution in particular is writing its own every time Trump and his allies speak, tweet, comment, whatever. I mean, they're just serving up on a dish. I've practiced somewhat before the Eastern District of Virginia. It's a very no-nonsense judge who's there.
COATES: Uh-hmm.
ZAID: He'll hold both sides, feet to the fire. But I don't think he's going to put up with a lot of comments that are being made sort of extra judicially by the parties. If I was one of his lawyers, and I am not, uh, I would be fighting this as well in the public domain to some extent as the lawyer --
COATES: Hmm.
ZAID: -- but I would be really careful with that because let them make the mistakes. So much of this administration -- it's what gives us the ability to do -- what I'm doing in the civil arena in federal court are unforced errors.
Could you imagine, and I'll finish with this, if the indictment had been issued without any of the whole blue that had been made by Trump and the others, the prosecutor's firing, anything, they had just issued grand jury indictment of the two counts.
COATES: Hmm.
ZAID: All of the rest of what we're talking about might not exist. They could still argue about it.
COATES: Yeah.
ZAID: But none of it would exist if not for what they have done, uh, publicly.
COATES: Well, let's talk about that self-inflicted wounds that could actually come out, Kim, and just for the audience's sake. Selected prosecution, meaning that there were other people who are similarly situated like you, and the government (INAUDIBLE) chose not to prosecute them but chose you. The vindictive requires a specific animus against you, and you're acting on that.
The tweets, the comments that Mark is talking about may fall under the umbrella more so of the vindictive prosecution of sorts. But talk to me about those tweets, those statements. What impact will those actually have in the long run for a judge who will undoubtedly entertain a motion to dismiss based on either?
KIM WEHLE, PROFESSOR AT UNIVERSITY OF BALTIMORE SCHOOL OF LAW: Well, both of them really relate to this question of a fair trial. They get to the question of due process. And there's, I think, also an issue about whether he can get a fair jury with the Trump -- the president saying all these terrible things about him.
But essentially, the law gives prosecutors a presumption that they are acting at good faith, that they're doing things by the book. And, therefore, it's a high burden to demonstrate that you're either being, uh, chosen for, uh, something like your race or --
COATES: Uh-hmm.
WEHLE: -- some other protected characteristic or in a, you know, in a vindictive way because you're being politically targeted. The fact that the president is saying these things, I think, is direct evidence. It makes it very, I think, unusually direct for the defense to make that argument.
COATES: Uh-hmm.
WEHLE: That being said, remember, Laura, last summer, the Supreme Court in Trump versus United States in giving president's immunity specifically said that directives to prosecutors, even if they potentially are illegal directives to prosecutors, give Trump and future presidents complete immunity from any kind of legal accountability.
So, for a lot of reasons, not just because of this indictment, but I think largely because of what the Supreme Court did, we're in a post- rule of law presidency.
COATES: Hold on, Kim. On that point, that would mean you couldn't go after Trump for a prosecution because of the immunity. But the idea of being able to dismiss a case based on that, is that distinct from what the Supreme Court said about immunity?
WEHLE: I think the question is going to be, that does -- does -- if the directive comes from the president.
COATES: Uh-hmm. WEHLE: The president, I think this Supreme Court believes, has this unitary executive power, almost like a king, can exercise his discretion in this unlimited way. And if that discretion includes making directives to people below him, I think there might be an argument --
COATES: Hmm.
WEHLE: -- that is persuasive to this Supreme Court, if something like this were to get to the Supreme Court, that there's an umbrella sort of immunity that sort of bleeds into some of the lower level prosecutors if the directive came from Donald Trump.
[23:10:00]
We're in unchartered territory here.
COATES: Yeah. We really are. I mean, Ryan, the president is already warning that there are more indictments on the way. "The New York Times" reporting tonight, the DOJ is looking for information on Fulton County D.A. Fani Willis. We remember, of course, her role in his own prosecution. Here's what the attorney general, Pam Bondi, said tonight.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PAM BONDI, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL: Whether you're a former FBI director, whether you're a former head of an intel community, whether you are a current state or local elected official, whether you are billionaire funding organizations to try to keep Donald Trump out of office, everything is on the table, we will investigate you.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Obviously, those seem pretty pointed and specific. You can almost follow the line to who they might be intimating, they're talking about. How are you seeing the scope, the speed in which this is all taking place? Of course, we remember, you left your job because of the way in which the decision to dismiss a case against Mayor Eric Adams. How does this all play for you?
RYAN CROSSWELL, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: Laura, it's a continuation of the abuse of power I witnessed firsthand, which led me to leave the job that I love and run for Congress here in Pennsylvania.
Um, I think this is unprecedented in American history. You have a president who put out an enemies list, essentially, that prevailed upon his attorney general to pursue one of the people on that list, which she did. And now, you have the attorney general saying that there'll be more to come.
I think the most galling part about all this was that Pam Bondi also said no one is above the law, except we know that's not true. Eric Adams is above law. Tom Homan is above the law. Apparently, anybody in the Epstein files is above the law. And really, anyone who's a friend of Donald Trump's is above the law. At the same time that they're pursuing these charges against James Comey, I have no doubt that he will not be convicted.
COATES: Really? Why are you so sure?
CROSSWELL: Well, first of all -- I think that there's going to be very valid selective or vindictive prosecution motion that just may stop us in his tracks. But the facts are contradicted by the IG's report and is being brought by U.S. attorney whose previous experience is in insurance, attorney whose first indictment was so sloppy, the paragraphs were mis-numbered and there's two count twos (ph), and it appears he has to go this alone because no one else in the office is willing to do it.
COATES: Mark, on that point, and, of course, we understand that she was in the grand jury herself, which is really to have the U.S. attorney be handling a case like that in front of a grand jury as opposed to a line or career prosecutor. It might speak volumes given the last turn of events over the past few weeks.
Let me ask you this. The federal judge that's assigned to this case, a Biden appointee. We know how quickly a judge was identified based on which president has appointed them, and then we're supposed to discredit them based on that. I'm saying in the -- you know, "we" in the sense of the sarcastic way. But the idea that Trump has already labeled this judge a crooked Joe Biden-appointed judge, what does that tell you and what do you know about that judge?
ZAID: It tells me he's setting this up in case. If not, maybe the likelihood, as Ryan references. And people like Andy McCarthy, you know, who's well to the right, conservative, who's written how these charges will likely be thrown out, he's setting the stage for that attack, at least to his base, throwing them some meat, that he can blame the failure if that's where it goes on the crooked Biden appointee.
As I said, this judge has grown up in the Eastern District of Virginia. He clerked for one of his colleagues when he was back in early young lawyer. He was involved there, working in the public defender's office for many years. He was in a magistrate judge, appointed in 2015, where he served for six years, and then became elevated up to a district judge. He's got a lot of experience. He knows this district and how it -- the law is to be interpreted very well.
And it's unfortunate we're hearing this, who appointed the judge.
COATES: Yeah.
ZAID: You know, we had a case dismissed against "The New York Times" just recently, days after President Trump filed a civil case in Florida in the middle district, which was a judge he appointed. So, there are many judges. And Chief Justice Roberts has said, please stop with the --
COATES: Uh-hmm.
ZAID: -- you know, who will point. That's not how it's supposed to be. We're supposed to -- as we heard earlier. We're talking about the rule of law. And that's what all of us, I know, as lawyers, are, you know, so wedded to.
COATES: Kim, really quick. I mean, Comey has already come out and said, let's have a trial.
[23:14:58]
He talked about his heartbreak for the Justice Department, but wanting to have a trial. I know he wants to be outspoken. Would you advise him to stop speaking?
WEHLE: Again, I think we're in a new era here. Normally, you know, that the advice is not to talk about the case in particular. But I think he understands this is a shot across the bow. It's a warning to people to not cross Donald Trump. It has massive implications for the rule of law, for democracy, for individual rights, for freedoms.
And also add, you know, state of mind, this idea that he made a false statement knowingly five years ago on a Zoom during COVID. There was lots of confusion around that transaction or that -- that conversation. It's very difficult. The prosecution has to prove his state of mind.
COATES: Hmm.
WEHLE: So, I think he's probably pretty confident given his experience. That proof beyond reasonable doubt is going to be tough here.
COATES: We've got to have that very definitive through line for a case like perjury. Ryan, final question to you. Do you think that you will see more resignations from DOJ based on what has happened here?
CROSSWELL: I do, Laura. Something I predicted, I think, on an earlier appearance on your show, I think morale is down. I think that people don't want to be a part of that, and that's really scary.
And one final point. This district, the Eastern District of Virginia, has handled some of the most important terrorism and espionage cases in this country's history. And this is what it has been reduced to. It makes us all safe. And it's why, as Mr. Comey pointed out in his comments, we all need to vote, we all need to deal with this in the ballot box, and we all need to get rid of the congressmen who are allowing this to happen, including here in PA7 in 2026.
COATES: Everyone, thank you for joining. Up next, it is the video that cost an ICE agent his job. So disturbing. And tonight, there are also calls for him to potentially lose far more than just his badge. And later, the Jimmy Kimmel boycott officially ends. But is President Trump and his FCC chair ready to let it all go? We'll have that conversation next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:20:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: A simply violent confrontation at a New York immigration court sparking national outrage tonight, so much so that the ICE officer involved --
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
-- has been relieved of his current duties. You are looking at the now viral video of a woman being separated from her husband after he was detained at a scheduled asylum hearing. You can see her crying while an officer forcibly carried her into a room as her two children watched. Shortly after, she is pushed to the floor. I should warn you, this video is disturbing.
UNKNOWN: (INAUDIBLE)
UNKNOWN: Adios! Adios! Adios!
UNKNOWN: Oh, my God!
COATES: For months, we've been bringing you stories of families being separated under the current immigration crackdown. DHS has typically defended the actions of their agents. But tonight, that is not the case, saying in a statement -- quote --
(END VIDEO CLIP)
"The officer's conduct in this video is unacceptable and beneath the men and women of ICE. Our ICE law enforcement are held to the highest professional standards and this officer is being relieved of current duties as we conduct a full investigation."
Joining me now, New York State Senator Gustavo Rivera. Senator, thank you for joining. I mean, that video, I have seen it multiple times. It does not get easier to watch. It is intolerable. What's your reaction?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
STATE SEN. GUSTAVO RIVERA (D-NY): Uh-hmm. I think the first thing we have to say is that the Trump administration pulled the bait and switch on the American public. They made the argument that the reason why they were going to perform so many -- so we're going to kick so many people out of the country is to identify violent criminals and -- and then deport them.
And -- but the reality is that, you know, we -- first of all, nobody wants violent criminals on the streets. But what we're seeing -- the reality is what you see there. And -- and consider that this was done in full view of dozens of reporters. Obviously, you think about the things that happen without cameras there.
This is the type of abuse of power that this administration is doing every single day. And there's one small silver lining, is that it was made public. So, these egregious actions were -- were so made so public that this person is -- is no longer working for ICE. We don't know where they're going end up but, at least, that one action is the first positive step.
COATES: You know, you make a very compelling point, that this was in front of cameras. I mean, it wasn't as if these were hidden cameras somewhere or this particular officer was unaware that he was being watched. It seemed to me a certain level of being emboldened to think he was totally indifferent to those cameras being there.
And, as you said, he was relieved of his current duties by ICE with an investigation that is pending. He has also now been referred to the U.S. Attorney's Office and to Pam Bondi for felony prosecution.
I wonder, given that we don't know what the full investigation outcome might yield, current duties, my mind goes to, is that going to be enough for him to be properly held accountable if he is simply relieved of his duties or do you think something else needs to happen in terms of criminal prosecution?
RIVERA: Well, I certainly -- I think that anybody who has two eyes in front of their head saw clearly that there was an assault on somebody that is half the size of a person that is doing the attack.
[23:24:55]
And I think that while we certainly should focus on this particular action and hold this person accountable, let's not forget that this is a person who is working for an administration that has an entire agency where hundreds -- thousands of agents are all across the country right now without any type of identifying information on them, wearing masks, literally kidnapping people off of street corners.
Just a couple of weeks ago, I'm a state senator in the Bronx --
COATES: Uh-hmm.
RIVERA: -- I'm in the Grand Concourse, a big -- you know, big central piece of the Bronx, and I have a lot of neighbors who I represent who are -- who have all sorts of statuses, undocumented folks or people with work visas, et cetera, but there was an unmarked van just down the block from my office in the afternoon or an evening of a day just picking up people randomly off the street. This is what is happening in our country.
So, while we can -- while we should look at these actions and certainly hold that one agent accountable, let us not forget that it is an administration that has an agency that is tasked with quotas, which ultimately lead to our neighbors, friends, and community being put in fear. We need to -- we need to speak up to make sure that people know and stop it in any way that we can.
COATES: One of the things that you point, you point out the nature of not -- of wearing masks, of not having identifiable information, an issue that has come up time and time again to criticize the methods that are being used by these ICE agents. It is -- goes without saying this has also come on the heels of a shooting that appeared to target ICE agents. Detainees were actually killed. One detainee, two others shot. Listen to what the vice president had to say about this last night.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
J.D. VANCE, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: The Democrats and the media, because they so hate the idea of a real border, are engaging in a kind of blood libel against ICE agents. They're accusing them of engaging in crimes. They're accusing them of being part of the Gestapo. They're actually inciting violence against our law enforcement. They know exactly what they're doing. And now, it's time to stop.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: What's your reaction, given your statements about the methodology of ICE and what the vice president is saying about how Democrats are viewing their tactics?
RIVERA: I would say that if these agencies were actually following the law and actually doing what they say they're doing, then I would have no problem. If you're identifying dangerous criminals and deporting them, that is something that is -- that I think everybody can accept there should be done.
But that is not what they're doing. They are kidnapping people who are working folks, who are -- and by the way, let's not forget, that video was shot inside a building that has courtrooms in it. This person was present there. That family, the family of the person who was kidnapped by ICE, was there because he was asked to present himself for a legal process.
Thousands of people go through this process every year. They go there, they go through their hearings, they show up as they should. He was trying to follow the law. He was trying to follow the rules. And what happened was that he was unjustly snatched from the arms of his family.
So, what I would tell the vice president and anybody else is that if they -- when they start doing what they say they're doing, then we'll stop criticizing them. But if what they're doing is what we're seeing in our communities, where our neighbors, our friends, our communities, with no regard for criminal record, for due process, or even legal immigration status are being snatched off of street corners, we're going to continue to criticize them because we have to.
COATES: State senator, thank you so much for joining us. I know this is the very beginning, it seems, of this investigation, and we'll continue to follow the story. Thank you.
RIVERA: Thank you for covering it.
COATES: Still ahead, blink, the boycott breaks, and Jimmy Kimmel is back on the air across all stations. Now call me a skeptic, but what's in it for Sinclair and Nexstar? And later, who gets the blame if the government shuts down? The debate, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) [23:30:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: Well, the Kimmel blackout is over. Major T.V. owners Nexstar and Sinclair bringing "The Jimmy Kimmel Live" show back to their affiliate ABC stations tonight. That's nine days after vowing to indefinitely preempt the show following the late-night show host's comments regarding Charlie Kirk's suspected killer. So, what led to the sudden turnaround?
While both companies did not reveal what specifically changed their minds, they did insist the decision was made after thoughtful conversations with ABC and reiterated pulling the show was independent from any government sway. Notably, FCC Chair Brendan Carr, who initiated a very public pressure campaign against Kimmel, has yet to make a statement.
I want to bring in former White House spokesperson for President George W. Bush, Pete Seat, and Democratic strategist Mike Nellis. Welcome to you both.
Pete, let me begin with you. Just like that, Kimmel is back all across the country on these affiliate stations. Why do you think Nexstar and Sinclair made this decision, and is it a good one?
PETE SEAT, FORMER WHITE HOUSE SPOKESMAN FOR FORMER PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: The most predictable conclusion we could have imagined, Laura. Jimmy Kimmel was temporarily suspended. And now, two of the large affiliates, Sinclair and Nexstar, are bringing him back on the air. I think they're doing it. They waited a couple of days because they wanted to make sure he got all of it out of his system. We know that ABC and Disney temporarily suspended him because he was hot to the touch.
[23:35:00]
He was ready to go on the air last Wednesday with a monologue that was going to make the situation much, much worse. And I think these affiliate stations wanted to wait. But it also allows Sinclair and Nexstar to communicate to the network that they will not be a lapdog. They will not air programming that they believe is disrespectful to a large segment of this country.
COATES: Mike, this is a victory for ABC. Right? Field all the different affiliate stations, picking up the programming that they want and not to preempt it. It did come with a nine-day pause. I am curious about this statement that they've made, Nexstar and -- and Sinclair, about this, though, and suggesting that the -- their decisions were independent from any government sway. What do you make of that?
MIKE NELLIS, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: That's what they're going to have to say in this moment because what FCC Chairman Carr and what Donald Trump have done is that they've used the power of the federal government to put pressure on ABC to get Kimmel removed off the air. They've abused their power. And the only reason they're walking it back, the reason Jimmy Kimmel is back on air, the reason the Nexstar and Sinclair are allowing them back on air for their affiliates is because tens of millions of Americans spoke out, left, right, center, comedians, politicians.
When Mike Nellis and Ted Cruz agree on something, you know that it's probably in the right, because we're very different people with very different backgrounds.
I think what you've seen is an administration that is trying to flex its muscle, abuse its power. And only way we're going to stop them is when people speak out. What we're also seeing is lot of MAGA influencers online who are aggressively defending the administration and denying reality right now.
And what I find is they had a lot of really good points on cancel culture over the last couple years. Maybe it did go too far in a few areas. But they didn't really believe that. They just wanted to be able to wield it themselves. Their support for the First Amendment is situational, the same reason their support for the Second Amendment is situational because two weeks ago, they said they were going to remove the constitutional right to own a gun from everybody who's transgender in this country and the NRA had to call them out on that.
COATES: Hmm. You think about the way in which whiplash comes into play, Pete, when people are trying to prove their positions. And we have so many shifts in terms of how the government is viewed and what they're doing.
I know there has been a lot of focus on Jimmy Kimmel in the last nine days plus, but in the next several days, there's going to be a huge focus on Capitol Hill. Why, Pete? Because here we are before the movie we seem to keep getting different versions of a potential government shutdown. It could really happen on Tuesday.
And Democrats, they are calling for an extension on healthcare subsidies, among other items to get their support. President Trump is calling their demands totally unreasonable, canceled the previously scheduled meeting with Democrats. And the president, if you remember, back in 2013, he did have an idea on how to break this kind of standoff then. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: Very simply. You have to get everybody in a room. You have to be a leader. The president has to lead. He's got to get Mr. Boehner and everybody else in a room, and they have to make a deal. And you have to be nice and be angry and be wild and cajole and do all sorts of things. But you have to get a deal that's good for everybody and good for the country.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: What's changed that he's not in the room this time?
SEAT: Well, Democrats are not interested in making the responsible choice here. A clean continuing resolution was brought to the floor. It had passed the House of Representatives, Republican-controlled House, came to the Senate, and Democrats tanked that.
Let's keep in mind, Republicans have a majority in the Senate, 53 seats. A couple probably won't vote for a clean C.R., as Rand Paul and Lisa Murkowski did not. So, some Democrats will have to vote with Republicans since we don't have a 60-vote major -- filibuster proof majority.
So, Democrats are the ones who are stopping this from happening, from keeping the government funded. And quite frankly, it's largely because Chuck Schumer is more worried about AOC running against him in a primary and catering to the far-left of the party than doing the responsible thing, the very thing that they demanded Republicans do when Joe Biden was president, and that's pass a clean continuing resolution.
COATES: And yet, Mike, Republicans are in the majority. Why would Democrats be blamed for a shutdown?
NELLIS: Right, Republicans are going to be the ones who are blamed for the shutdown. Donald Trump is president of United States. I think the real question is, is he competent enough and strong enough to bring everybody into a room like he would have done 10 years ago and cut a deal right now? And the truth is he isn't.
Democrats have asked him to meet to talk about how they can bring back healthcare subsidies that are going to lower costs for millions of Americans, to talk about how we're going to deal with the tariffs that are driving up prices for everybody, to talk about how we're going to reverse the cuts in the Republican budget that have been devastating on school lunches and community policing and a whole bunch of other things.
And Donald Trump blew them off. He agreed to do it. He blew them off. Instead, he went to the Ryder Cup today.
[23:40:00]
He's going to be golfing all weekend. So, he doesn't seem particularly interested in solving this problem. He doesn't seem particularly interested in how it's going to impact millions of Americans who work for the federal government and tens of millions of Americans who rely on the federal government when they need them for these roles. So, he's not solving the problem. And that's about confidence. That's about leadership. And it isn't the Democratic Party's fault. It's on Donald Trump. The buck stops with him.
COATES: Well, we'll see on Tuesday because the American people will have a lot to say and be impacted the most by whatever Congress and the government decides to do. Gentlemen, we'll see you soon. Pete Seat, Mike Nellis, thank you both.
Still ahead, our big question for tonight, how far past Watergate are we? My next guest, the perfect person to pose that question to, Richard Nixon's former White House counsel, John Dean, is with me with some perspective and wisdom right after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:44:58]
COATES: Well, the indictment of James Comey as pundits invoking one infamous 50-year-old scandal over and over and over.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS, ABC HOST: Since the Watergate scandal more than 50 years ago, presidents have refrained from interfering directly in criminal prosecutions by the Justice Department.
ARI MELBER, MSNBC HOST AND CHIEF LEGAL CORRESPONDENT: And remember, much of what Donald Trump says and admits in public involves Watergate level confessions.
UNKNOWN: It's totally different than anything that we have seen since Watergate.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: We also can't forget the notorious 1971 memo drafted by Nixon's former White House counsel, John Dean, titled, "Dealing with our Political Enemies." Exact words of Dean's memo revealed efforts to -- quote -- "maximize the fact of our incumbency in dealing with persons known to be active in their opposition to the administration."
Dean revealed the existence of Nixon's so-called enemies list when he testified before the Senate Watergate Committee in 1973. But perhaps the most ironic part of these comparisons to Watergate are Nixon's warnings against political retribution on his very last day in office.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RICHARD NIXON, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Always give your best, never get discouraged, never be petty. Always remember, others may hate you. Those who hate you don't win unless you hate them, and then you destroy yourself.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Joining me now, the man himself, CNN contributor and former Nixon White House counsel, John Dean. John, I can't tell you how many conversations you and I have had comparing the state of political affairs and rule of law to what happened in Watergate.
And you just heard those words from President Nixon, warning really against political retribution. And you know all too well the impact of a so-called enemies list for one's political adversaries. Then it shocked the nation.
But now, it seems to be par for whatever this course is. It has been over 50 years since Watergate. Have we learned any lessons?
JOHN DEAN, CNN CONTRIBUTOR, FORMER NIXON WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL: I don't think so. We've learned that we can't keep the lessons we learned.
COATES: Hmm.
DEAN: That's -- as you and I have discussed, we're way beyond Watergate, have been since Trump won. It's only getting compounded in Trump 2. And there really are very few comparisons. Yes, Nixon had an authoritarian personality. Yes, he had authoritarian instincts. Yes, he had an enemies list. I'm not sure, Laura, he even knew about -- his staff is the one who insisted on that memo.
COATES: Uh-hmm.
DEAN: And I almost got fired for not writing it. And the reason there was never any action against the enemies is they all ended up in my desk drawer, and then later before the Senate.
COATES: It was an important point, and it contrasts what we're seeing today because some people believe that we are seeing an active referenced campaign enemies list now being acted on not in the desk drawer of counsel, but instead the Department of Justice.
You see indictments specifically of, say, James Comey, and Trump posting on Truth Social calling on his attorney general to prosecute him, among others, by the way. Hillary Clinton responded at one point, saying -- quote -- "Imagine if Richard Nixon had just tweeted out the Watergate scandal rather than putting it on secret tapes." What do you make of that comparison?
DEAN: It's a nice comparison. Laura, you and I both worked at the Department of Justice. We know that the ethics there have been dissembled and the place has got to be in shambles and it's still ongoing. We haven't heard the end of that story or seen the end of that story. We don't know how far that department, was once a very proud and able group of attorneys, is going to fall further given the treatment they're suffering.
But, you know, I think -- I think Hillary makes a good point. She always seems to. She's very perceptive. I'm not exactly a Nixon apologist, not known for that, nor a defender, but I think he would be appalled at what he's seeing at this point.
COATES: Why?
DEAN: Why?
(LAUGHTER)
I think, basically, he was an institutionalist, and he has seen the destruction of institutions, not only the departments and agencies of the executive branch, but the presidency itself. In the long run, what Trump is doing is weakening the president.
COATES: Hmm.
DEAN: What the Supreme Court has done is weaken the president. So, we'll see how this plays out and it's going to be -- What next is going to take a lot of repair work, a lot of repair work, decades.
COATES: Fascinating. John Dean, thank you as always.
[23:50:00]
DEAN: Thank you, Laura.
COATES: You know, everything seems to feel like it's in fast forward this week, hasn't it? So, you know what? I feel like a fun rewind, back to 1987, when a teen star named Debbie Gibson was taken the music world by storm and paving the way for so many of today's stars. How did she do it? And what's she up to now? She's got a new book, so I'll ask her next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
(MUSIC PLAYING)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: "Only in My Dream" the teenage me ever think I'd get to meet Debbie Gibson. But I'm not dreaming. And Debbie Gibson is here. She is a teen pop sensation, singer, songwriter, Broadway star, and now author that has had us all bopping along to her music for literally decades.
[23:55:01]
And now, she's telling the all behind the scenes stories we never knew before. I'm talking the highs of topping the charts, the lows of her financial troubles, and everything in between. All in her memoir, "Eternally Electric."
Debbie Gibson joins me now. Debbie, I'm so excited to talk to you. I have been a lifelong fan. Let's just go back for a second because how it began -- I mean, your mother, such an important and beautiful soul in your life. She took out a $10,000 loan to make this --
DEBBIE GIBSON, SINGER: Uh-hmm.
COATES: -- recording studio in your garage. You wrote your own songs, you produced your own demos, and you were able to sit there as a young woman that you were and convinced record company execs to let you steer your own ship. That wasn't normal at that time for a pop star, male or female. How did you pull it off?
GIBSON: I mean, I look back, and I still don't know how I pulled it off or how we pulled it off.
COATES: Uh-hmm.
GIBSON: And looking at my mom there, it just -- it makes me so emotional and proud.
COATES: Hmm.
GIBSON: I'm proud of what she did. You know, she left the planet a few years ago.
COATES: Oh.
GIBSON: But she left me an empowered woman. And she also left the musical landscape different than when she entered it. And she believed in particular because she had four daughters --
COATES: Hmm.
GIBSON: -- in the young female voice. And to see the musical landscape now and how young female voices are dominating.
COATES: Yes.
GIBSON: You know, women are writing, they are producing, they are creating these gorgeous production numbers at the award shows. And you feel like you know it's their vision. You know that nobody interfered.
COATES: Uh-hmm.
(LAUGHTER)
GIBSON: But back then, there was lot of interference, but it was a natural state that the music business was in.
COATES: Do you feel like you've paved a way in the industry for female singers, for songwriters of this generation, people like a Billie Eilish or a Taylor Swift? You must have pride watching their careers.
GIBSON: I do have pride. And on one hand, I think they all have the chops and they all have the goods and they all have that ambition and they were going to do what they're doing, whether I came before them or not. But I do hope that I helped kind of oil that machine, that music machine, because it does take each generation like doing that for the next generation.
COATES: Now, I mean, we talk quite openly about mental health and anxiety. But at the time --
GIBSON: Yeah.
COATES: -- you were putting on a brave face and suppressing a lot of what you were feeling to keep going.
GIBSON. Yes. I mean, I didn't know the term back then, but I was in a constant state of fight or flight. I was always on edge waiting for the next cynical comment to come at me or, you know, um, I felt like I was not allowed to voice any dismay --
COATES: Hmm.
GIBSON: -- because that would mean I wasn't appreciative of everything I had. And so, that stifling of that, I think it's like the lid starts to kind of boil. You know, like --
COATES: Yes.
GIBSON: -- you're boiling and that lid eventually has to come off. And so, for me, it was in the form of panic attacks. And if anyone out there has had a panic attack, and then like -- then you panic over having the next one and the next one, and it's a vicious cycle --
COATES: Uh-hmm.
GIBSON: -- and you don't know where your next breath is coming from.
COATES: You described some pretty real financial lows as well.
GIBSON: Yeah.
COATES: And, you know, can you just describe a little bit about what that has been like when you're pivoting the uncertainty, the vulnerability, sometimes needing help?
GIBSON: Yeah. So, having been the breadwinner from the time I was 17 -- I mean, you know, it's like I provided these experiences for my family and bought this house with my mother and all of these things to get to a place where -- and, by the way, I was always just like a natural leader. I wanted to be the person helping, and I didn't know how to receive. And again, I'm sure this resonates with a lot of people.
And, you know, everyone wants to kind of say, yep, I'm great, life's great, I'm fine, look at me. And I wasn't fine, and I did need help, and I knew I needed like some financial bridges to get to the next place.
I talk about this in the book and I can say I was like, well, I'm going to go to some of my friends. Like one of them I point out is Lance Bass (ph) because he was one of those first calls. I reached out to a handful of friends and I was like, listen, if everyone can help me out with five grand, I can get through what I need to get through --
COATES: Uh-hmm.
GIBSON: -- to get to the next place. I will pay everybody back. And by the way, being accountable. I learned so much through that time because your currency is your word. When you have all of these things stripped away from you and you realized that you're still okay, and not only are you okay, that you can go on to have, in my case, one of the most joyful, you know, fortuitous --
COATES: Uh-hmm.
GIBSON: -- just fruitful chapters where I'm not just surviving but I'm thriving.
COATES: Yes. GIBSON: Like you realize that within yourself and your own power. It's -- it's -- it's incredible and it's worthy of writing a book, and I think that's why I wrote it now.
[00:00:03]
COATES: And it's worthy of reading. It is --
GIBSON: Oh, thank you.
COATES: -- "Eternally Electric." Sounds just like you. Debbie Gibson --
GIBSON: Oh, thank you.
COATES: -- thank you so much.
GIBSON: And to you.
(LAUGHTER)
COATES: So sweet. Thank you.
GIBSON: Thank you.
COATES: Thank you all for watching. "Anderson Cooper 360" is next.
