Return to Transcripts main page
Laura Coates Live
Trump Orders National Guard Troops To Chicago; Laura Coates Interviews Rep. Hakeem Jeffries Amid Government Shutdown; MAGA Erupts Over Potential Ghislaine Maxwell Pardon; Political Scandal Erupts In High-Stakes Virginia Race; Bad Bunny Backlash Sparks GOP Call For A New Law. Aired 11p-12a ET
Aired October 06, 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 also pre-order the book and get some information about how to get tickets for the tour there. I cannot wait to meet so many of you who watch the show and hopefully will read this book.
Thank you very much for watching "NewsNight." "Laura Coates Live" starts right now.
LAURA COATES, CNN HOST AND SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Tonight, President Trump's troop takeover extends to Chicago with Texas National Guard on their way now. But a legal roadblock in Portland has the White House accusing protesters and judges of insurrection. Plus, is a deal to end the government shutdown from the works? President says yes. What about the Democrats? House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries joins me tonight. And MAGA world's direct message to Trump after he does not rule out a pardon for Jeffrey Epstein's accomplice. Do not do it. Tonight on "Laura Coates Live."
Testing the law. Call it a powerplay. Call it political theater or maybe call it all of the above. A law enforcement source tells us that right now, Texas National Guard troops are on their way to Chicago. This after President Trump ordered them there.
Trump is also railing against a federal judge who blocked his push to send the Guard to Portland. And he's name dropping the Insurrection Act, a centuries old law that could let him send troops to American cities in the face of -- his word here -- an insurrection, regardless of what any court rules.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: So far, it hasn't been necessary. But we have an Insurrection Act for a reason. If I had to enact it, I'd do that. If people were being killed and courts were holding us up or governors or mayors were holding us up, sure, I'd do that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Now, if you're in Chicago or Portland or, frankly, anywhere, you might be wondering, insurrection? Really? But Trump is comparing violence in Chicago to a war zone and claiming that Portland is constantly engulfed in flames.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: So, when you look at Chicago, they've had probably 50 murders in the last six or seven months, eight months. Many, many people shot. Like 30, 40, 50 people shot. Didn't die, but they've been shot. It's like a war zone. Portland is -- is on fire. Portland has been on fire for years and not so much saving it. We have to save something else because I think that's all insurrection. I really think that's really criminal insurrection.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Did you catch that at the end? The criminal insurrection part Well, if it sounds like a justification for the Insurrection Act, well, the Illinois Governor, JB Pritzker, agrees with you.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GOV. JB PRITZKER (D-IL): There is no invasion here. There is no insurrection here. And local and state law enforcement are on the job and managing what they need to. The Trump administration is following a playbook. Cause chaos, create fear and confusion, make it seem like peaceful protesters are a mob by firing gas pellets and tear gas canisters at them. Why? To create the pretext for invoking the Insurrection Act so that he can send military troops to our city.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Important to look at exactly what actually going on in places like Chicago and Portland. The president argues that he needs to send the National Guard troops to protect ICE facilities. And there were some clashes over the weekend. This one was outside an ICE detention facility in Portland. In one Chicago suburb, demonstrators were arrested outside an immigration facility.
The DHS also says a woman was shot by border protection agents after she allegedly tried to ram a federal vehicle. Leaders in Chicago and Portland point out the protests are extremely limited. You heard Governor Pritzker say that local law enforcement is handling it.
And that judge who blocked Trump's push to send troops into Portland? Well, she wrote in her ruling his claim of an emergency was simply untethered to the facts. And this just happens to be a Trump-appointed judge from his first term, mind you.
But the administration is not limiting the insurrection claim to just protesters. Top White House advisor Stephen Miller is actually accusing judges that rule against Trump of engaging in what he calls legal insurrection.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
STEPHEN MILLER, WHITE HOUSE DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF FOR POLICY: It is simply a factually accurate statement that when a judge assumes for him or herself the powers that have been relegated or delegated by the Constitution to the president, that that is a form of illegal insurrection.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[23:05:01]
COATES: I want to talk now with our brilliant legal and political minds: Defense attorney and former federal prosecutor Shan Wu, CNN political commentator Karen Finney, and former senior adviser to the Trump 2024 campaign, Bryan Lanza.
My lawyer friend, we start with you here on the legality issue. Trump is floating the Insurrection Act. The, um, question whether it's legal is up in the air for some reason now, knowing that -- I'm not sure if insurrection actually qualifies here, but what do you think? Is it illegal for the president to try to use that law?
SHAN WU, DEFENSE ATTORNEY, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: So, I think it's legal to try and use that law. He has the power. But here's the issue. I think it's a really great moment for us here. The trial courts, as that judge in Oregon said, that Trump's claims are simply untethered to the facts, the trial courts are revealing the truth for the country. And that's what they do. They're triers of fact. They find the facts. And the facts are going to show whether or not there's any basis to claiming all this violence and rampaging going on.
And I find that such an interesting contrast to the Supreme Court, which is frantically trying to shortcut fact-finding by taking all these emergency orders on their shadow docket. And that's what's really going on here. We're going to see actual fact-finding that the judges are going to find versus the sort of lofty legal principles of can the executive invoke the Insurrection Act.
KAREN FINNEY, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: It has been part of point also that they're going to determine the facts of whether or not what is happening meet the legal requirement in the (INAUDIBLE), in the statute around when you may then invoke the Insurrection Act.
I mean, the president is making certain claims and a theory, right? And the courts, they're trying to determine whether it really meet that standard, which is a legal proceeding. I don't think it's a legal insurrection. Correct me if I'm wrong, but that's how the courts work.
COATES: It was. And I'm sure, hopefully, again, it's on point, of course. But, you know, thinking about it, you're both right, in fact, in thinking about what the courts are supposed to look at and then what they are considering as well in terms of the overall aspect of it.
And yet, there's the political notion of it, too. I mean, there's the should you, the can you, and the what if you do, what's the consequence politically. I mean, are you concerned all about the idea of a military presence in some of these cities if it's untethered to the facts? BRYAN LANZA, FORMER DEPUTY COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR FOR TRUMP 2016 CAMPAIGN: I think everybody should be concerned. Listen, a lot of this feels like where we live in George Floyd-Black Lives Matter moments, where we had these massive protesters all across the country and law enforcement mayors, governors in certain blue states did nothing to call those protesters and they got violent. It feels like -- you know, it feels like --
(LAUGHTER)
-- we're reliving some of these things all over again.
(CROSSTALK)
You didn't see -- you didn't see Portland burn during Black Lives Matter?
FINNEY: I think -- I think that our very --
WU: Just checking.
FINNEY: Okay. But our very own correspondent who is in Portland, who was on in the last hour, showed that that's like 50 people, some of whom --
LANZA: I understand that. But you're --
FINNEY: Hold on.
LANZA: -- you're conflating what I said. I said George Floyd. The protesters during George Floyd --
FINNEY: But it's not like George Floyd --
LANZA: Exactly. That's what I said. I said -- I said they responded to George Floyd and in the matter --
FINNEY: Now four years later?
LANZA: Correct. I mean, that's the only thing I can think of why because, remember, Tom Cotton during the George Floyd protest, you know, he said President Trump should send in the troops to deal with this. And the administration didn't send it in. Now, they feel like they're going to stop anything that gets any type of oxygen so we don't repeat what took place in George Floyd. And if it means we send in the military, ultimately, the courts are going to make those decisions.
COATES: Look at the --
LANZA: That's the way the process is.
COATES: Look at the image. I mean -- uh, excuse me. I didn't mean to cut you off. But we do have some footage of what it's like there. I mean, this is -- if you -- this is where things are right now. This is Portland right now. Outside of an ICE facility in Portland. I mean, I think --
WU: Do you think they're peaceful?
COATES: Well, I -- I don't --
FINNEY: I think --
COATES: I don't see violence in the moment. I don't -- I mean -- but my point -- I mean, Shan, what about your thoughts on this? Because the suggestion that essentially you want to nip it in the bud in order to not to get to -- I think your point is to get to --
LANZA: To relive, yeah.
COATES: -- at different points. Is that something, though -- I mean, constitutionally speaking, to invoke the -- I mean, Insurrection Act comes if there's an insurrection. The idea of having military troops go into an area, there is a standard. The idea of simply trying to prevent what could be just, if that's where it stops there, just protesting under the First Amendment, that's a conflict.
WU: That is a conflict. I mean, the concept of nipping an insurrection in the bud is really quite dangerous because you can decide when you want to nip it and it becomes simply suppression of people exercising their constitutional rights. And no matter what standard you use, you're not going to meet that standard if there's literally nothing like that happening.
FINNEY: I mean, it would have been nice if President Trump cared about that on January 6th when there actually was an insurrection.
WU: Right.
FINNEY: But I'll set that aside. I think it's interesting, though, politically, in Bryan's talking points, that he would say George Floyd because Portland is one -- that is -- that is another city that is on Trump's list. And what was happening in the country around George Floyd was something -- as we know, he wanted to deploy the military on American streets against American citizens, and was stopped by some of our military leaders.
[23:09:59]
So, I think we have to take a step back because what's happening in Portland is not even the most egregious. What happened over the weekend in Chicago, late last week, is one of the most disgusting displays of abuse of power I think we've ever seen in this country. And I think we have to ask ourselves why this is happening. And it tends to be happening in places where Donald Trump does not have political control.
Now, he may disagree with how the mayors and governors in those areas are handling their cities, but they were duly elected by the people of that city. And now, he's saying he knows better than them, even better than the police chiefs, how to handle what's going on.
COATES: Hmm.
FINNEY: And again, when we're talking about American children and seniors being zip-tied on the side of the street in the middle of the night, as some have said, some of these kids were buck naked, that is a disgusting display of abuse of power.
WU: Yeah, that's irreparable harm.
FINNEY: Correct.
WU: I mean, I think when you're talking about, you know, TROs, preliminary injunctions, you'll get the harm issue. The Supreme Court hate to keep railing on them. They just get it wrong. Their idea of harm is, oh, there's this lofty theoretical harm to the executive branch's power. That's harm. When you are pulling innocent citizens out, zip tying them, kids without clothes, grabbing people, firing pepper canisters, that's harm.
And I think the governor's brief put it really well, which is that's harm to the sovereignty of the state. And you're going to contrast that with this lawful --
(CROSSTALK)
COATES: Talking about this -- yes, I hear your point. Talking about the sovereignty issue, though, because Chicago's mayor, Brandon Johnson, he is creating what he is calling this ICE-free zone -- we've heard about this -- which ban federal immigration agents from using city-owned property to carry out the operations. Does Chicago had legal authority to create these zones?
WU: I think they do and kind of goes to the concept of the sanctuary city issue. I mean, there can be legal challenges to what they're doing, but they should be legal challenges. And that's what to watch for, is let it play out in the courts and let that be tested. If the feds are going to argue a supremacy clause, you're somehow interfering with our ability to act federally, that's fine, they can argue that, but it needs to get played out in the courts.
COATES: Speaking of the courts, I mean, Stephen Miller, this is how he described the protests in Illinois and Oregon. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MILLER: This is the textbook definition of domestic terrorism, using the actual imminent threat of violence to keep federal officials from doing their jobs. And unless we send in troops and resources, then we will continue to bleed federal law enforcement resources in these street battles. It's absurd. It's unconstitutional and must be put down.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Do you think that's incendiary?
LANZA: Yeah, but I think that's what he wants it to be, right? He wants to get the message to the community of those areas that that behavior is not going to be tolerated anymore. At some point, we're going to hit a trigger point where reinforcements, more resources are going to come in. I think that's the whole point of what Stephen is trying to do.
FINNEY: But he's also -- I mean, our own reporting has shown that part of what we're seeing is that it has been eternally called the California strategy, where part of the goal is to send in ICE to incite violence from people, which is part of why -- hold on. let me finish. This is part of why you're hearing so many of the political leaders in these cities calling on people to stay calm, don't engage with ICE, just, you know, go about your business.
But we're seeing over and over again -- I mean, think about if someone rolls up on you, four white guys were hopping up on people, they don't identify themselves, they don't --
LANZA: Having violent episode.
FINNEY: They don't -- they don't -- this one was in a hospital. They don't identify themselves. They don't have credentials. They don't have any kind of warning.
COATES: Hold on. You're saying if that happened to you, have a violent episode?
LANZA: I mean, I'm not going to sit back when somebody unidentified just comes and charge in a fight.
COATES: So, do you -- so, do you agree with --
LANZA: I understand that.
COATES: -- the ICE agents not having anything --
LANZA: I mean, listen --
COATES: that's anonymity?
LANZA: Listen --
FINNEY: -- all over the country.
LANZA: I don't know what ICE's due process is in this point, whether these citizens have the right to due process or others don't. But I know as an American citizen, I do have rights, right? And those things come forward and you have to deal with it. But at the end of the day, I think the important thing to realize is the reason ICE is in these cities is because local cities have decided not to cooperate with our immigration laws, with our federal system, which the voters overwhelmingly voted and support.
So, Donald Trump is going into these cities, Dem-run cities.
FINNEY: The voters of those cities elected those leaders knowing what their policies -- LANZA: And the country elected President Trump to enforce immigration laws. He didn't hide what he was going to do. He was pretty clear what he said.
COATES: I will say --
LANZA: And they said, yes, this is what we want.
FINNEY: But you have to have --
COATES: I will say --
FINNEY: -- a border patrol saying that the -- that the Michigan -- that Lake Michigan is a border. That's why he's allowed to be there. Come on.
COATES: I'm looking at the fact. I mean, there's the polling right now, 58% opposed. I wonder if the so-called mandate sticks. Thank you. We have more to talk about.
Still ahead tonight, cracks forming in the Republican resistance to Democrats' demand and the battle to reopen the federal government. The Republican congresswoman, Marjorie Taylor Greene, just give Democrats the help they need. I'll talk about it with Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries next.
[23:15:02]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: Day 7 of the shutdown about to begin. And Democrats tonight have picked up support from one of President Trump's biggest supporters, Marjorie Taylor Greene.
The congresswoman tweeting that while she's no fan of Obamacare -- quote -- "I'm absolutely disgusted that health insurance premiums will double if the tax credits expire this year."
She goes on, "Not a single Republican in leadership talked to us about this or has given us a plan to help Americans deal with their health insurance premiums doubling," saying those subsidies is one of the main demands Democrats have before voting to end the shutdown.
[23:20:07]
And Congresswoman Greene's comments come after Trump said this today in the Oval Office.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: We're speaking with the Democrats. And some very good things could happen with respect to healthcare.
KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Would you make a deal with them on the ACA subsidies?
TRUMP: If we -- if we made the right deal, I'd make a deal.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: With me now, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries. Leader Jeffries, welcome. Um, as you know, the president says there's a negotiation going on right now with the Democrats on the party's healthcare demands. Is that true? Is there a negotiation going on?
REP. HAKEEM JEFFRIES (D-NY): Well, that's news to me.
COATES: Hmm.
JEFFRIES: Since the Oval Office meeting that took place last Monday, Donald Trump, the White House, the administration, Republican leaders in the House and the Senate, they've largely gone radio silent. There has been no communication from them to either myself, House Democratic leaders, Leader Schumer, members of the Senate.
But if the President is willing to actually now have a conversation, realizing that Democrats are not going to support his partisan Republican spending bill that continues to gut the healthcare of the American people, that we're ready, willing, and able to sit down with them any time, any place, you know, at the White House, in the Congress in order to reopen the government, enact the spending agreement that actually meets the needs of the American people and address decisively the Republican healthcare crisis.
COATES: Let's talk about healthcare because I wonder if a deal on just extending the ACA subsidies would even be good enough for Democrats to vote to reopen the government or are you suggesting that the Medicaid cuts also be reversed?
JEFFRIES: Well, the Republican healthcare crisis and the assault on healthcare has been all-encompassing. We're talking about the largest cut to Medicaid in American history. Hospitals and nursing homes and community-based health centers are closing all across the country, including in rural America.
The Affordable Care Act tax credits are about to expire, and that's going to trigger dramatic increases in premiums, co-pays, and deductibles for tens of millions of working-class Americans and middle-class Americans.
We also know that Republicans have set in motion a $536 billion cut to Medicare because of their one big ugly bill if Congress doesn't act by the end of the year. And on top of all that, they've basically frozen medical research in the United States of America.
So, this has been an unrelenting assault on the healthcare of the American people, but it is certainly the case that we need to address the Affordable Care Act tax credits with the fierce urgency of now because of the open enrollment period that's getting ready to begin on November 1st and the fact that notices are going out to millions of Americans throughout the country now indicating that their premiums, co-pays, and healthcare deductibles are about to skyrocket. COATES: So, as you know, there's, uh, word Speaker Johnson has been courting Democratic Senator Patty Murray, giving her assurances about negotiations once the shutdown ends. You've got two Democrats, senators Cortez Masto and Fetterman, and independent senator, Angus King, all voting for the C.R. today, but it still failed to advance in the Senate. Are you confident that Democrats will stay united for the duration of this fight?
JEFFRIES: Yes. Leader Schumer has done a tremendous job. Senate Democrats have done a tremendous job in holding the line. They've now voted down this partisan Republican spending bill because it's gutting the healthcare of the American people five consecutive times.
This is the classic definition of legislative insanity on behalf of Republicans. They continue to do the same thing and are expecting different results. The results aren't changing because Democrats are standing up for the healthcare of the American people. And opposition has been clear. Eight words. We've made this clear repeatedly. Cancel the cuts, lower the costs, save health care.
COATES: Hundreds of thousands of federal workers. I have been one. I have been one during a shutdown. I did not get paid until it was back pay. And I remember the frustration of having to work still. Many will not get paid by this week's end. Many people depend paycheck to paycheck to make ends meet. And even then, it's a struggle. What is your message to them who are feeling a frustration and saying, look, I don't care what the issue is, I have needs, my family has needs, and this has to stop?
JEFFRIES: Well, we stand with these federal workers. They've been under assault by the Trump administration since day one, January 20th. I have been subject to disrespect, to mass firings, uh, to being laid off in violation of the law. This all does need to end.
[23:25:00]
And we do have to reopen the government, but we also have to make sure that moving forward, uh, we have a federal government that actually is respecting the taxpayer and respecting the hardworking federal employees, the public servants, who are trying to deliver a government that actually makes life better for the American people as opposed to what we're seeing from Republicans, which is a government of the billionaires, by the billionaires, and for the billionaires.
So, we're going to continue to stand with those hardworking federal employees. We're going to work as hard as we can to get the government reopened, but also do it in a way where we enact a spending agreement that makes life better for the American people as opposed to making life worse.
COATES: At what point does it become a take it or leave it for you?
JEFFRIES: Well, listen, we've said that we'll sit down and try to find a bipartisan path forward involving a good faith negotiation between Democrats and Republicans. And we've maintained that position for the last several weeks. And, unfortunately, what we've seen from Republicans is a lack of seriousness at best.
Republicans canceled votes last week. They've canceled votes this week. Donald Trump was on the golf course over the weekend, unheard of in the middle of a government shutdown. And of course, they went radio silent after the Oval Office meeting.
And what we got instead from Donald Trump were deep fakes, lies, and threats to punish people because the Republicans have made this decision to shut down the government in the absence of getting Democrats to capitulate.
We are not going to capitulate when the healthcare of the American people is on the line and when we're trying to drive down the high cost of living in an environment where Republicans have been raising costs, including through the Trump tariffs all year.
COATES: Leader Jeffries, Democratic Senator Andy Kim is signaling that this standoff is more than just a battle for Americans' healthcare. I want you to hear what he had to say.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. ANDREW KIM (D-NJ): Back then in 2019, did we have a president that was pushing rescissions left and right, overruling what Congress has passed into law? We didn't see the actions fully. What we're seeing now -- did we see Black Hawk helicopters over American cities? Did we see the blatant lawlessness of circumventing Congress to be able to enact tariffs globally, declaring national emergencies left and right, uh, in ways that are clearly an abuse of power? You know, what we are seeing now is different.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Leader, do you agree with the senator's suggestion that this fight is about more than just healthcare?
JEFFRIES: Well, Senator Kim is right on target when he says that what we've seen from this administration is a consistent abuse of power in all of the things.
And Donald Trump and the administration has unleashed unprecedented extremism on the American people, an attack on the economy, an attack on healthcare, an attack on law-abiding immigrant families, an attack on the rule of law, an attack on diversity, on voting rights, on civil rights, on the American way of life and, of course, on democracy itself.
But this particular fight, of course, amongst all of the things that we have to push back against because of -- the unprecedented extremism being directed at the American people is centered on protecting the healthcare of everyday Americans because of this Republican health care crisis that has to be addressed with urgency in an environment where tens of millions of Americans literally right now as we speak are about to experience dramatically increased premiums that are going to bankrupt many or deprive them of the healthcare that they need for themselves, their loved ones, their children, and their families. COATES: Leader Hakeem Jeffries, thank you.
JEFFRIES: Thank you much.
COATES: Up next, a warning from one of Trump's biggest supporters. If you pardon Ghislaine Maxwell, there is no coming back from it. Do not do it, says Laura Loomer. She is sounding the MAGA alarm after the president says he's not ruling out helping Jeffrey Epstein's convicted accomplice. The DOJ's former pardon attorney standing by on just how unusual all of this is, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:30:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: New tonight, President Trump is not ruling out a pardon for Epstein's accomplice, Ghislaine Maxwell.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I say, well, I'll take a look at it.
COLLINS: But you're considering that?
TRUMP: I will speak to the DOJ. I wouldn't consider it or not continue. I don't know. I'll think about it.
COLLINS: Why would she be a candidate?
TRUMP: I will speak to the DOJ.
COLLINS: Why would she be a candidate for clemency, sir?
TRUMP: I don't know. I may not have to speak to the DOJ. I'll look at it. I'll -- I have -- a lot of people have asked me for pardons. I call him Puff Daddy. He has asked me for a pardon.
COLLINS: But she was convicted of child sex trafficking.
TRUMP: Yeah. I mean, I'm going to have to take a look at it. I have to ask DOJ. I didn't know they rejected it. I didn't know she was even asking for it, frankly.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Now, this was a few hours after the Supreme Court refused to hear Maxwell's appeal for throwing out her 20-year prison sentence, which would mean now her only shot at freedom might be a pardon from President Trump.
[23:34:58]
But if that's the shot, this might be the chaser. MAGA influencer Laura Loomer, who is not in the administration but in the past, has had immense influence on the president, tweeting this tonight, "I strongly advise against anyone lobbying the Trump administration and the DOJ to pardon Ghislaine Maxwell. Do not do it. I repeat, do not do it. There will be no coming back from that. I repeat again, for the love of God, do not do it."
Joining me now, former DOJ pardon attorney, Liz Oyer. She was fired from her position for allegedly refusing to restore gun rights to actor Mel Gibson, one of the president's supporters. Liz, listen, we know now the president is going to -- quote -- "take a look at pardoning Ghislaine Maxwell." Are you surprised by that?
LIZ OYER, FORMER DOJ PARDON ATTORNEY: Not surprised that this president has said that in light of what he has said before about this issue. But if you had told me that any other president in history had said they were considering pardoning someone like Ghislaine Maxwell, yes, I would be shocked. It would be absolutely unprecedented for someone like Ghislaine Maxwell to even receive serious consideration of a presidential pardon.
COATES: She wants consideration from the Supreme Court, as you well know. And she has been arguing that she should have been shielded from prosecution entirely by Jeffrey Epstein's controversial 2008 non- prosecution agreement --
OYER: Right.
COATES: -- that so-called sweetheart deal. Well, prosecutors in that case, they agreed not to bring charges against Epstein or co- conspirators, um, but in appeals court, by the way, previously ruled the prosecutors in New York were not bound by that agreement. Did she have a good case for the Supreme Court?
OYER: So, you know, there actually is a split among courts of authority on whether the Justice Department has the authority to bind the entire department or just a specific office within the department in a plea agreement. And that was the issue that was at stake here.
But the real problem with her claim was that Ghislaine Maxwell was not a party to Jeffrey Epstein's plea agreement. So, it's not clear that she even had standing to raise that issue in the first place. So, from that perspective, it really wasn't a very strong claim and it is no surprise whatsoever that the Supreme Court declined to hear her case. They would not want to get involved in a controversy of this nature. There's no reason for them to get involved. So, it's unsurprising that the Supreme Court is not a path of relief for her.
COATES: Sometimes, they seem to like the controversies, but that's another conversation entirely. Liz, we've seen Maxwell's attorney talk about why they think that she should get a pardon from the president of the United States. Obviously, it's his prerogative to give out pardons. But there normally is a process and one must apply for them at first.
OYER: Right.
COATES: That's no longer really the protocol, is it? OYER: It doesn't seem to be. It seems like this president is making decisions without going through the ordinary process of advice from the Justice Department and soliciting input of victims. Notably, that has been absent throughout this process. All of the discussion that has been happening within the White House and within the Department of Justice seems to be omitting the views of the victims, which is highly, highly unusual.
It's really just notable that a case of this nature, which involves someone convicted of sex trafficking of children, of minors, is even being discussed as a possible candidate for a pardon. The standards that have been in place in the Justice Department for many, many decades would say that just based on the nature of the offense, this is not the type of case where a consideration of a pardon would be appropriate and certainly not without soliciting the input of the victims.
COATES: So, what is the criteria normally?
OYER: So, typically, a pardon is reserved for somebody who has completed their entire sentence, paid their debt to society, repaid any obligations that they have to the victims, and demonstrated exemplary conduct in the community for a lengthy period of time since receiving the pardon. It typically also involves showing remorse for the crime of conviction.
So, Ghislaine Maxwell meets none of those criteria. She's somebody who maintains, it seems, that she really didn't do anything wrong. She went to trial and was convicted by a jury. And she's somebody that the Justice Department has said has lied about her involvement with Jeffrey Epstein in the past and has been determined not to be credible. So, she meets literally none of the criteria that we'd ordinarily think about for granting a presidential pardon.
COATES: Now that the appellate process has run its course, she can testify in front of Congress, right?
OYER: She can. And, uh, she will likely do that only if there's something in it for her. I don't anticipate that she will do that out of the goodness of her heart.
But it seems clear from the statements of her lawyer that they are looking for an angle to cut her a deal that will get her out from under the 20-year prison sentence she's now serving one way or another. And if testifying before Congress helps with that, she may well do that. But we have to question whether anything that she would say in that circumstance would actually be credible.
COATES: Liz Oyer, thank you so much.
OYER: Thanks so much for having me, Laura.
[23:40:01]
COATES: Still ahead, an October surprise in Virginia after a major scandal erupts in the race for the state's attorney general. And this one involves a Democratic candidate's text joking about shooting a political opponent, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: We are just weeks away from one of the first major bellwether elections of Trump's second term. It's in Virginia. And the race for attorney general there just got really ugly. Newly revealed text messages from Democratic candidate Jay Jones sent in 2022 appear to show violent and disturbing thoughts that he expressed about his former Republican colleague, the House speaker, Todd Gilbert.
[23:44:52]
CNN obtained messages where Jones writes, if he had two bullets, had the opportunity to shoot the Republicans, Gilbert or two dictators, one of them being Hitler -- quote -- "Gilbert gets two bullets to the head. Spoiler: Put Gilbert in the crew with the two worst people you know and he receives both bullets every time."
Jay Jones is apologizing for these messages, telling CNN -- quote -- "I take full responsibility for my actions, and I want to issue my deepest apology to Speaker Gilbert and his family. Reading back those words made me sick to my stomach. I am embarrassed, ashamed, and sorry."
Karen Finney and Bryan Lanza are back with me now. I mean, Bryan, obviously, Republicans are seizing on these messages and taking the opportunity to try to undermine the campaign, and also send a larger message to the world, of course, including the president, by the way, who posted -- quote -- "Ask GFX to make the text nice and large -- I'm sorry. It has to -- Jesus Christ. "It has just to come out that the radical left lunatic, Jay Jones, who is running against Jason Mayers, the great attorney general in Virginia, made sick and demented jokes, if they were jokes at all. Jay Jones should drop out of the race immediately."
Okay, now, there's more to that. And Jones is apologizing about that for these texts and took full responsibility. Is it enough?
LANZA: No. I mean, I have young kids. I can't imagine speaking to somebody, much less forgiving somebody who had violent thoughts towards my young kids. This guy is just not qualified for elective office. I don't -- I think it's going to be universal. He should drop out.
I think every Democrat who's running for any office say this type of -- this guy's politics should not be allowed in electoral, and he should drop out. I mean, this is -- this is exactly what's wrong, you know, what's broken with our political culture, is people like this, sick and demented people who actually put these things down on paper and send it to colleagues.
COATES: So, right now, Karen, we don't know any elected Democrat in Virginia that's calling him to drop out of the race.
LANZA: It's crazy. COATES: I also know that anyone is actually supporting him in those messages either. So, that's important to note. But the Democratic candidate for governor, Abigail Spanberger, who condemned the messages, let's talk about calling on him to actually resign. Um, are you worried this could end up being a liability for Democrats?
FINNEY: I don't. I mean -- but let me just say, what a horrible thing to even think about putting in a text. I mean, it's so disgusting. Truly. Um, I guess the voters are going to have their say. It sounds like he's not going to drop out. Who knows?
But sure. I mean, look, I think this is one where calling on him to drop out shouldn't be so hard. And it's not a matter of what are his politics. He may have, you know, great policies. I've seen some of his ads. That's fine. But you can.
In this era where we're criticizing a president who says, my opponents, they're my enemy, I don't forgive them, you know, the kinds of screeds we hear from Donald Trump every single day, we can't say that's not okay and say we want to bring the temperature down and then not do it, say, to our own people. You just can't do that. You cannot say that. You should never be thinking things like that.
COATES: Let me ask you, Bryan, because there have been some Democrats who are standing by Jones, and they're arguing that there is a double standard at play here. And I want to hear your reaction because one of the state senators told our colleague, Eva McKend -- quote -- "Republicans get to say whatever they want to say. Donald Trump said he could stand in middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot anybody and still be elected. And guess what? He said it, and he still got elected." What's your response?
LANZA: My response is this individual actually pinpointed two young kids, a colleague of his, who he wanted to kill. Like there's a huge difference of -- you know, Donald Trump giving his speech, joking about what could happen on Times Square. And this guy going to colleague and saying these two young kids are worthy of death, and they're my colleagues.
I mean, it's -- I think there's a vast difference. I mean, President Trump sort of pushes the line he always has, but he hasn't actually talked on violence to young kids. That's the thing I can't escape. How much anger does this individual have that he's actually wishing the death of young kids? Like that's -- that's -- I can't even get my head around it.
COATES: Well, as parents, I know who can.
LANZA: Yeah.
COATES: But I ask you this, though, Karen. What should be the response from Democrats? Is there any room to -- for the apology to be enough?
FINNEY: Well, it can -- it can be. Look, I think every Democrat has to make their own decision. I mean, it's -- it's -- politically, tactically, that's what you would tell a candidate to do, to take responsibility and apologize.
But I also -- as I say, I think we're also going to try to stand in this moment against political violence, stand against the kind of screeds we hear and see from Trump every single day. We should also be willing to take on our own people and say that's not okay, that's not acceptable. To my mind, this is not hard.
[23:50:00]
He should drop out. Other Democrats are going to have to make their own decisions.
COATES: Karen, Bryan, thank you both. Still ahead, a Republican member of Congress demands a new lobby passed before Bad Bunny takes the stage at the Super Bowl. I'll you what it is next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNKNOWN (voice-over): Ladies and gentlemen, Bad Bunny!
COATES: Soon to be Super Bowl headliner Bad Bunny returning to SNL, leaning in to conservative backlash against his selection as the next halftime show performer. He expressed his excitement for the upcoming performance, and then ended his monologue with this pointed message in Spanish.
BAD BUNNY, RAPPER AND SINGER (ON SCREEN TEXT): More than just my achievement, it's everyone's achievement, proving that no one can ever erase or take away (Latinos) mark and our contribution to this country.
(APPLAUSE)
[23:55:00]
And if you didn't understand what I just said --
(LAUGHTER)
-- you have four months to learn.
(APPLAUSE)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: I want to bring in L.A. Times columnist LZ Granderson. His new column is titled, "Anyone calling Bad Bunny un-American needs a geography lesson." LZ, glad you are here. A really pointed piece and a good one. You say all the MAGA outrage over Bad Bunny scoring this halftime show is flawed. Stems from ignorance. Why?
LZ GRANDERSON, OP-ED COLUMNIST FOR LOS ANGELES TIMES: Well, I think, first -- and first of all, thank you again for having me. I wrote the piece largely because I think people are too focused in on, you know, the Spanish part and not the fact that it's a global conversation, right? The NFL, for the last few seasons, have been very, very determined and intentional about having games not just in Mexico but, you know, all throughout Europe. I'm pretty sure, Asia is on its calendar, going to afford as well.
And so, when you consider the fact that the NFL may have started domestically but is trying to grow globally, and you look at Bad Bunny, the fact that he's the number two most streamed artist of all time, when you look at it from a business perspective, why wouldn't the NFL want someone with that kind of global range and global popularity to be at the halftime act as it's trying to branch out globally?
But, you know, unfortunately, the conservatives are so focused on domestic issues and the politics around that and the cultural conversations around that. They can't see the real practical reason why the NFL would do what it did with Bad Bunny.
COATES: The forest through the trees, as you would say. I mean, President Trump spoke out on Bad Bunny tonight. Listen to what he had to say.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNKNOWN: Do you think maybe we should just kind of entertain blowing off the NFL like a boycott or something along those lines? This guy does not seem like a unifying entertainer and a lot of folks don't even know who he is.
TRUMP (via telephone): I've never -- I've never heard of him. I don't know who he is. I don't know why they're doing it. It's like crazy. And then they blame it on some promoter that they hired to pick up entertainment. I think it's -- I think it's absolutely ridiculous. And while we're at it, I'd like them to change the kickoff rule, which looks ridiculous.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Never heard of Bad Bunny, the person who's looking at all the entertainment to hire people. It sounds odd to me. But is this all the hubbub? Will it eventually subside?
GRANDERSON: Well, you know, one, if Bad Bunny is where you choose to boycott the NFL, given the last 20, 30 years of some of the offenses that we know the NFL has been involved in, then, you know, ball power to you. I would have chosen a different hill but fine, Bad Bunny is your hill.
(LAUGHTER)
As far as, you know, someone from the silent generation, not knowing who Bad Bunny is, that doesn't surprise me either. Uh, President Trump is a very old man. Bad Bunny is a young artist. So, it is an unusual for very old people not to know who really young artists are, regardless of how popular the young artist is. So, that's not unusual either. I think at this point, you know, everyone really doesn't want to say what the upset issue is, which is this is an immigration extension conversation, right?
And it's about what's happening in our country right now. It has nothing to do with Bad Bunny, who has already performed at the halftime at the Super Bowl five years ago. This has nothing to do with Bad Bunny, who is a U.S. citizen. This has nothing to do with Bad Bunny, who has four number one albums on the Billboard pop charts. He's popular in America. It's not about him.
It's about what we're doing right now in our streets in Chicago, in Portland, what the president is trying to do under the guise of fighting crime, under the guise of getting criminals out. It is all on this umbrella of immigration. That's what we're not actually talking about. We're trying to pretend as if it's about Bad Bunny, but it's not.
COATES: You know, one of the things that has been happening, too, in a larger issue and context, because in response to that statement that Bad Bunny made, that four months clip, Congressman Marjorie Taylor Greene is demanding Congress make English the official language of America and do so before the big game. Could -- could -- how well his show does, could that actually shape politics in America? I mean, first of all, we do not have an official language. There's a lot of good reasons for that. But what's your take?
GRANDERSON: Well, you know, this is the conversation that has been going on for quite some time. As you pointed out, this -- you know, this is not the first time that we've done this in terms of trying to make English the official language. And, you know, to me, it's just out of fear.
I'll just give a quick story. You know, I'm an educator, and I was teaching this course with my class about sports journalism. And I was pointing out that I had an opportunity to cover the first boxing match for the first openly gay boxer, who happens to be Puerto Rican. And I traveled to Puerto RICO, and I don't speak Spanish, so I needed a translator.
[00:00:02]
Fast forward, a couple of decades to today, well, the industry that you and I work in, they're not going to spend that kind of money for translators. What they want are people who are bilingual, who can do more than one skill.
And so, when I talk about Bad Bunny, when I talk about this conversation with the Super Bowl, I'm saying, hey look, I got it, you don't know Spanish, why don't you pick one Bad Bunny song and learn the English translation and make it fun as opposed to a threatening thing?
COATES: I have my favorites. We'll see if he performs. LZ Granderson, thank you so much.
GRANDERSON: Thank you.
COATES: And hey, thank all of you for watching. "Anderson Cooper 360" is next.
