Return to Transcripts main page

Laura Coates Live

New Epstein Estate Photos Released; Giffords Speaks Out; Coach In Court; CNN Provides Update On Brian Walshe Murder Trial. Aired 11p- 12a ET

Aired December 12, 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 HOST: "Table for Five" tomorrow at 10 a.m. Eastern Time. You'll see Congressman Moskowitz there again. "Laura Coates Live" starts right now.

LAURA COATES, CNN HOST: Tonight, new photos from Jeffrey Epstein's estate showing the notorious sex offender with Donald Trump and a whole lot of others. Democrats say there may be more to come. Plus, a CNN exclusive. My interview with former Congresswoman Gabby Giffords as she speaks out against the attacks on her husband and much more. And later, Michigan's fired football coach appears in court as we learn the troubling allegations that landed him behind bars. All tonight on "Laura Coates Live."

So, by this time next week, we could finally get eyes on one of the most elusive set of files in American history, because next Friday is the deadline for President Trump's DOJ to fork over the Epstein files, and his administration is feeling the pressure to make sure it will follow through and meet that deadline.

Democrats on the House Oversight Committee, well, they dropped a new batch of photos from Epstein's estate, and I'm talking dozens of them. They go even further in revealing Epstein's deep time to many a powerful man.

And to answer one of your questions, yes, civilian Donald Trump appears in some of these photos. One shows him standing next to Epstein at what looks to be some sort of a party. In another, Trump is on a plane with an unidentified woman. Her face was redacted by the committee. And in a third, he is posing with a group of six women in leis. Their faces are also redacted. There's another photo Trump isn't in directly, but his caricature is. I'm going to let you draw your own conclusions on whatever that means. Tonight, though, Trump is brushing it all off.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNKNOWN (voice-over): What was your reaction to those new photos that were released?

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Well, I haven't seen it. But, I mean, everybody knew this man. He was all over Palm Beach. He has photos with everybody. I mean, almost -- there are hundreds and hundreds of people that have photos with him. So, that's no big deal. I know nothing about it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Well, he is right about one thing. The high-profile people in these photos, they don't end with him. Trump ally and far-right firebrand Steve Bannon is in two photos with Epstein, including one where they're posing for some sort of a mirror selfie, it looks like. Here's Bill Clinton with Epstein and his convicted accomplice, Ghislaine Maxwell. Woody Allen makes an appearance, showing up in two photos directly with Epstein, and in another, seated next to former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers on an airplane. Tech billionaire Bill Gates is in several photos, including one with then Prince Andrew.

Now, none of these images, including the pictures with then civilian Donald Trump, reveal any sexual misconduct. We also don't believe that they show underage girls. And it's not actually clear when or where they were shot which, of course, would make a difference. And the people in them way have all long denied any wrongdoing.

I should also point out the Democrats have released 90 or so photos after Epstein's estate turned over about 95,000. That means they're just shy of 95,000 photos. The White House is accusing them of "selectively releasing cherry-picked photos with random redactions to try and create a false narrative" -- unquote. But the top Democrat on the oversight committee is telling CNN tonight more may be coming.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. ROBERT GARCIA (D-CA): We've actually only reviewed about a fourth of the 95,000 photos that were actually sent to us late last night. And so, as we're going through those photos, we're putting more photos out to the public. Some of what was sent to us in this documentation is also quite disturbing. So, we have to be very thoughtful and careful about how we protect the survivors and how we protect the victims of Jeffrey Epstein.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: I want to begin now with attorney for some of Jeffrey Epstein's survivors, Spencer Kuvin. Thank you for joining us, Spencer. I mean, you have represented multiple Epstein's survivors over the years. Any reaction from them about the new photos released today?

SPENCER KUVIN, ATTORNEY FOR JEFFREY EPSTEIN VICTIMS: Well, thank you, first of all, for having me on. And I think this is just first of many. You know, for too many years, survivors have endured protections of these powerful men and powerful individuals. And I think it's important now that the public see these actual photographs. What we're waiting for, though, is actually the videotapes. We know that the FBI has in custody and that the DOJ has.

[23:05:00]

And we're hoping that by the end of next week, that some of those videotapes will be released to the public.

COATES: And what is on those videotapes? Do you have any idea what location they're taken in and who might be in them?

KUVIN: Well, that's a very good question. We have a very good idea of what they likely will show because I have been inside of the Epstein mansion back during the initial litigation on behalf of one of my clients and saw that they had surveillance cameras inside of his mansion in Palm Beach.

So, we believe that they're going to show activities that were occurring inside the mansion, not only in Palm Beach, but also on his private island and also in his mansion in Manhattan. One of my clients actually saw the surveillance room inside the mansion up in Manhattan and saw that there were cameras and videotape recordings that were being taken from inside.

COATES: I'm a little confused. On behalf of our audience, I'll ask you to explain. Why is the Epstein estate turning over these photos to lawmakers and not, say, the DOJ who has until next week to do this in part? Does that surprise you that it's them? Does the estate, do you believe, have more comprehensive information than the DOJ on this?

KUVIN: I think what we're seeing now is a subset of what the FBI actually has. The congressional committee subpoenaed the Epstein estate for the production and turnover of these documents. So, the committee has had these documents and this information for a very long time. It's taking them a while to get through it.

But you have to remember that the FBI has been sitting on their materials now for almost 20 years. They have categorized their materials. They have thoroughly reviewed them. They have likely written investigative memos and summary memos on the materials that they have had. So, what we're seeing now is only a fraction of what is likely out there, but is in the FBI's custody.

So, the fact that, you know, Pam Bondi came out and said that she had produced everything that existed when she produced this little folder that she did a while back, we all knew that that was just a lie and was absolutely untrue.

COATES: Well, do you trust they'll actually meet the deadline next week?

KUVIN: Well, you know, very interesting question. We certainly hope so. The law that was passed has a provision in place that requires the attorney general to outline in detail any objections to materials that are not being produced.

But there is no penalty clause written into the law. So, it'll be interesting to see how press organizations like CNN and others enforce their production of this information, and we might see this end up in litigation in the federal courts if they don't produce it.

COATES: I'm picking up what you're putting down, Spencer Kuvin. Thank you so much for joining.

KUVIN: Thank you for having me on. COATES: So, what will House oversight Democrats release next? You know what? Let's just ask one of them. Congressman from Virginia, James Walkinshaw, joins me now.

Congressman, some people are very cynical about the prospects of this deadline being met, particularly without a penalty clause. But I do wonder because you heard from the oversight ranking member, Robert Garcia, talking about the review of the different documents and photographs, and then wanting to be a little bit prudent about what gets out and cautious. But there's the accusation of cherry picking and only selectively putting some things out. Why only release the images that were released today?

REP. JAMES WALKINSHAW (D-VA): Well, as the ranking member noted, the committee received, I think, 75,000 photographs. They're being painstakingly reviewed by a relatively small staff to ensure that all of the victims are protected, that there is no chance that a piece of information, perhaps not even a photo of a victim, perhaps another piece of information in a photograph could reveal a victim's identity. So that's painstaking work. It takes time. And as we have with the previous tranches of information and photographs from the estate, it will all be released ultimately.

COATES: I know there are photos. We've just been alerted to possibly videos as well. What specifically type of categories might the public not see? I know there were redacted images of people. But some of these pictures we've already seen, they're not really painting the full picture. Will there be documents to accompany analysis in terms of the filing by law enforcement? Anything more to contextualize what we're seeing?

WALKINSHAW: Well, I think the context for what we're seeing belongs to the Department of Justice. And you noted the deadline coming up for the law that Congress passed and President Trump signed to release the files. But before that law was passed, the Department of Justice was under subpoena, just like the Epstein estate is under subpoena, to the Oversight Committee to release documents.

[23:10:02]

They have not complied with that subpoena. The Department of Justice, long before the bill passed to release the files, has been covering up the files and ignoring a valid subpoena. They have the context for what we're seeing today.

COATES: One of the concerns or criticisms that has been out there has been the idea of cherry picking and that all the people who are seen in these new photos have been previously linked to Epstein in some way, shape or form. What is the committee trying to get at with the release?

WALKINSHAW: I think the allegation of cherry picking, I find a bit strange. If Democrats were cherry picking, we wouldn't have released photos of President Clinton, we wouldn't have released photos of other prominent Democrats like Larry Summers. Democrats have been open and transparent in following this investigation wherever it leads, whether it leads to prominent Democrats or prominent Republicans.

COATES: You mentioned former President Bill Clinton. The House Oversight chairman says that both President Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton, secretary of state, obviously, must appear before the committee for depositions next week or they would face contempt of Congress. Should they appear? Should they comply?

WALKINSHAW: I think President Clinton and Secretary Clinton should appear before the committee for depositions when President Trump appears before the committee for depositions.

With respect to President Trump, we know Jeffrey Epstein said in the emails that were released several weeks ago, he knew about the girls. Jeffrey Epstein said in the emails, President Trump spent hours with one of the young women at Epstein's home. These are real pieces of important evidence about President Trump. So, if we want to depose someone, let's depose President Trump.

COATES: Is that the order that would make the difference, hearing from Clinton before Trump? Because, obviously, I'm a little bit skeptical of whether President Trump would actually listen to your subpoena.

(LAUGHTER)

WALKINSHAW: I don't think he would. His Department of Justice has ignored our subpoenas. But my message to Chairman Comer would be let's follow both, Democrats and Republicans. So, if you want to subpoena Democrats, let's subpoena Republicans as well. And the Republican with close ties to Jeffrey Epstein is President Trump.

COATES: I see one of the former advisors, obviously, Steve Bannon, who was in these pictures, including that mirror selfie I think we just showed. What does the committee know about the nature of their relationship, between Bannon and Epstein?

WALKINSHAW: I don't think we know. I think those are good questions to ask, the depth of their relationship. And, again, I think the DOJ files might shed some light on that.

COATES: Will an inspector general's report or review of any of this be assisted -- assisting to your inquiry? Because DOJ has until next Friday to release the files. Some of your colleagues do want there to be an independent review. Is that possible?

WALKINSHAW: It could be possible. I think we need to get the files, and the American people need to see the files, and then we can determine the path forward, what additional investigation is needed. But right now, we have a lot of things that we just don't know because Donald Trump and Donald Trump's DOJ have been covering up the files --

(CROSSTALK)

COATES: Excuse me. Sorry, congressman. Is the support that you had to get that file release, is it still in place between the Republicans and Democrats? WALKINSHAW: I think so. You know, I think there is very strong support. I mean, we saw an overwhelming vote in both the House and Senate on the bill to release the files. I think there's bipartisan interest now after a lot of effort to cover this up from Republicans in Washington. I think this is an issue, especially set aside politicians in Washington. Across the country, Democrats, independents, Republicans especially want to end this cover up so we can get some transparency and, hopefully, one day, some closure for the victims.

COATES: Many campaigned on it. Thank you so much, congressman.

WALKINSHAW: Thank you.

COATES: Up next, my exclusive interview with former Congresswoman Gabby Giffords as she speaks out about the attacks against her husband, political violence, the recovery, and much more, next.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Do you -- tell me your opinion of President Trump's second term? Do you think that Trump is doing a good job in his second term?

GABBY GIFFORDS, FORMER ARIZONA REPRESENTATIVE: Disastrous. Voters want a government that works for everyday people, not just billionaires.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:15:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COATES: Tonight, a CNN exclusive. For weeks, President Trump and his administration have blasted Arizona Senator Mark Kelly for this message to troops.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. MARK KELLY (D-AR): Our laws are clear. You can refuse illegal orders.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Kelly is a retired Navy captain and was just repeating military policy. But Trump called the video seditious and threatened to investigate Kelly. Now, Kelly's wife is speaking out to defend him, former Arizona Congresswoman Gabby Giffords.

It has been almost 15 years since she survived the mass shooting that nearly killed her. And this is the first T.V. interview she has done in three years. Speaking is difficult because Gabby Giffords has aphasia, a disorder caused by damage to the part of the brain responsible for speaking. So, the executive director of the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence joined her to help her answer questions. As you'll see, Gabby's fighting spirit is as strong as ever. And we started talking about the threats that are facing her husband.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

COATES: A lot of rocks have been thrown at your husband recently, particularly after he, along with other members of Congress, had the video reminding or just saying to officers and, of course, to service members that they should not follow illegal orders.

[23:20:00]

What has been your reaction to the way that your husband, Senator Kelly, has been targeted by the president?

GIFFORDS: He is my best friend. He is so funny. I love him a lot. Fight, fight, fight every day. Yeah.

COATES: It's a hard fight, though, especially when you've got so much criticism.

GIFFORDS: We're a team. We're a team.

EMMA BROWN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, GIFFORDS: Yes. Yes, you know, Gabby, of course, was the subject of an assassination attempt 15 years ago. We've seen a real rise in political violence in this country. Over the summer, we lost Melissa Hortman, you know, in Minnesota. We saw Charlie Kirk assassinated. There is a real need to tone down the rhetoric and for our leaders on both sides of the aisle to help us build bridges across party lines.

And so, I think it has been really disappointing to see the president, you know, threaten Senator Kelly and other members of Congress and senators the way that he has. But one thing about Gabby and Mark is that they've seen far scarier things --

(LAUGHTER)

-- than Donald Trump over time.

COATES: You have faced an assassination attempt. And I can't believe it has been 15 years. And thinking about all of the moments of gun violence since. You mentioned the assassination of Charlie Kirk. What was your reaction to that horror?

GIFFORDS: Forgiveness, forgiveness, forgiveness.

COATES: You have chosen to forgive the person who has tried to assassinate you. How?

GIFFORDS: Do not look back. I hope others are inspired to keep moving forward no matter what.

BROWN: Yes. You know, Gabby -- Gabby's superpower is that she is always focused on the future. You know, the thing that she says to everybody is move ahead. I think also, you know, you were really moved that Erika Kirk forgave Charlie's shooter. It's an awful, awful thing that they went through. He was an Arizonan. You know, it's an Arizona family. Gabby and Senator Kelly, obviously, home in Arizona, represent Arizona.

And I think, you know, we really understand Gabby came out right after that shooting and wrote an op-ed with Jeff Flake, you know, making the point that political violence hurting Republicans and Democrats alike and there is so much that we can do. But political violence is at this intersection of extreme rhetoric and easy access to guns, right? That's where we come in.

COATES: She's referring to the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, the organization the congresswoman started after she was shot. Each year, it grades the states based on their gun control laws.

GIFFORDS: California, excellent, A-plus. Mississippi not so much.

BROWN: Yes.

COATES: That state has different level, right?

BROWN: Different laws, yes. So, we put out a scorecard every year that gives every state a grade A to F.

COATES: So, what makes California better than Mississippi?

BROWN: It has --

COATES: Respect.

BROWN: Yes. So, it has something like universal background checks, it has red flag laws, it has funding for community violence intervention, it has a safe storage law, requires parents to lock up their guns so their kid can't get it.

COATES: This is all in California.

BROWN: All in California. So --

COATES: What's missing in a place like Mississippi? All of those things.

BROWN: Yes, all of those. I mean, Mississippi has barely any gun laws, right?

COATES: You know, part of your recovery wasn't just in terms of vocabulary. It also included how you were thinking, how you were able to understand information, even telling time, right? The clocks.

GIFFORDS: Clock. Nemesis.

(LAUGHTER)

COATES: The clock was your nemesis?

GIFFORDS: Nemesis, yes. COATES: My goodness.

BROWN: Yes, yes. Yes, when the bullet entered Gabby's brain, it scrambled a lot of what you and I can do so intrinsically. She had to relearn how to use a clock, you know, relearn how to speak, relearn how to walk.

COATES: Because it entered her brain.

BROWN: Yes, yes. So, her --

COATES: Her thinking is clear.

BROWN: Her musical ability is interesting --

GIFFORDS: Amazing!

BROWN: Amazing!

(SINGING)

COATES: You made me a better singer! I'm always here for an Annie reference, are you kidding?

(LAUGHTER)

Well, I am curious about your journey because after all that you have been through, some people were given, give up or not fight as hard as you have fought on the policy level. Why do you keep fighting to change the laws? Why do you not want to just be in the private life?

GIFFORDS: I want to make the world a better place. I want to make the world a better place.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

COATES: She is really a remarkable woman. Still ahead tonight, the ominous five-word prediction from Trump's hand-picked RNC chair that has Republicans concerned about their future.

[23:25:01]

Plus, a stunning fall from grace. Michigan's head football coach accused of stalking and much more as we learn what he allegedly did with a staffer that got him fired and arrested. And later, the jury has the case of the Brian Walshe murder trial. No quick verdict. Instead, a very curious question from the jury. We'll unpack it all, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:30:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COATES: Former Michigan University football coach Sherrone Brown appearing in court for the first time after his arrest. Brown, who appeared via video link in all-white jail outfit, is being charged with one felony count, third-degree home invasion, and misdemeanor charges of stalking and breaking and entering. A plea of not guilty was entered.

The husband and father of three daughters was fired after credible evidence emerged of an inappropriate relationship with the woman on the team's staff. The judge released Moore on a $25,000 bond, but ordered him to stay away from the woman.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ODETALLA M. ODETALLA, DICTRICT COURT MAGISTRATE (voice-over): You may not go to that location for any reason whatsoever. Are we understood on the no contact and no go to, sir?

SHERRONE BROWN, FORMER FOOTBALL COACH, MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY: Yes, Your Honor.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Joining us now is Detroit Free Press sports reporter Tony Garcia, who was in the courtroom today for this hearing. Tony, we are learning a lot more information from what we even knew yesterday. I want you to listen for a second to what the prosecutor said happened when Coach Moore went to a woman's apartment after he had been fired. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KATI REZMIERSKI, PROSECUTOR, WASHTENAW COUNTY (voice-over): Marched his way into that apartment, immediately then proceeded to a kitchen drawer, grabbed several butter knives and a pair of kitchen scissors, and began to threaten his own life. "I'm going to kill myself. I'm going to make you watch. My blood is on your hands. You've ruined my life."

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: What more did we learn about this relationship?

TONY GARCIA, SPORTS REPORTER, DETROIT FREE PRESS: Yes, I would say that was really the key moment. I mean, you could hear a pin drop in that courtroom when that audio was being played today or when the prosecutor was saying it in front of us, I should say.

I mean, we also learned about sort of how the university came to find this information out. So, as you mentioned, the prosecution said that Moore and the victim were in a multi-year relationship for a number of years, she said. And then on Monday of this week, the victim ended that relationship, but he continued to make a contact with her, according to the prosecution.

Now, Moore and the victim had both been internally investigated earlier this fall by the university and both denied having any relationship. That is until this week on Wednesday when the victim came forward, changed her story, said what happened, and the university took an action.

COATES: And that just happened as recently within the last week?

GARCIA: Yes, that was all this week. I mean, on Monday, we met with Coach Moore, Sherrone Moore, to preview the Citrus Bowl, as business as usual. And later that day, allegedly, is when she broke up with him. And two days later, he was fired. Hours after that, he was arrested. He then had to go to a mental health facility first to be examined. And they then sent him to the county jail where he spent nearly 48 hours.

COATES: And the next time you saw him was this video link. It was pretty stunning to see someone who everyone is accustomed to seeing on the right side, in a uniform, coaching. Now, just a few weeks ago, he was giving a press conference about the upcoming bowl game, as you mentioned. How did he seem to you in terms of his demeanor? I mean, he -- so he looked affected by all that it transpired.

GARCIA: Yes. Dejected is the word I would use. He was a shell of the man that we had come to know and seen publicly. I mean, there are all these pictures and very emotional interviews postgame, smiling, crying, hugging teammates, coaches, staffers. And this looked like a man who was just shell shocked and really contemplating everything that was unraveling in front of him.

COATES: If that's how he feels, if the allegations are true, my attention also goes to the victim. Tony Garcia, thank you so much.

GARCIA: Thanks for having me, Laura.

COATES: Now, on to another case in another courtroom. This one now in the hands of the jury. I'm talking about the trial of Brian Walshe. He's the man accused of murdering his wife, Ana. Tricky to prove since Ana's body has never been found. And the prosecution, they have to prove premeditation in order to get that conviction on their first- degree murder charge, although they will have the option to select second-degree murder as well now. Here is a part of their closing argument.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANNE YAS, PROSECUTOR: The defendant did not want anyone to find Ana's body and to know how she died. So, the defendant bought cutting tools at Lowes and Home Depot, and he cut up Ana's body, the woman that he claimed to love, and he threw her into dumpsters.

[23:35:01]

The defendant intended to kill Ana Walshe.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: The jury deliberated for four hours today and will continue on Monday. I want to talk about it with the former federal prosecutor and president of West Coast Trial Lawyers, Neama Rahmani. Neama, that's the prosecution's version. They are talking about his behavior after the alleged murder. They want to show what happened after, like the Google searches about disposing of a dead body, the purchase of items like a hacksaw, cleaning products. But the first- degree charge does exclusively rely, of course, on premeditation. Will the post-death conduct be enough to make their case for first-degree premeditated murder?

NEAMA RAHMANI, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR, PRESIDENT OF WEST COAST TRIAL LAWYERS: Laura, I think so. And, frankly, I was surprised the jurors didn't return a guilty verdict this afternoon. Never underestimate the power of a Friday afternoon to convince both men and women to agree on something.

Now, obviously it's a long trial and maybe they are deliberating between that first-degree premeditation and second-degree, which is just malice murder. But, really, the defense wasn't arguing second- degree. They were arguing for an acquittal. They want a home run here. They say that Ana died of natural causes, that Walshe was a loving husband, and there's no history of violence.

But like you said, I think the dismembering of the body, those Google searches, top 10 ways to dispose of a body, they're so damaging in this case that I think it's just a matter of time. And Monday, we will get that guilty verdict.

Let's not forget, Walshe told law enforcement that his wife was on a business trip. And he blamed his children, all of whom are under the age of seven, for conducting those searches. So, I think it's not a matter of if, but when he'll be convicted.

COATES: Yes, I'm not so sure, and here's why. Well, one, as you know, juries can be total wild cards. But also, it was the note, the note about the rug. Also, the fact that I'm still waiting for, like the jurors, to find out how exactly she died. Now, they don't have to prove motive. You know that.

But that how question, I wonder how much it's lingering in the brains of these jurors, and if they can bridge the gap between 1:30 a.m. when the guests left and 4:52 a.m. when he's searching for ways to dispose of a body. I'm curious what they're doing back there.

But the defense also did not call a single witness, Neama. They hinted that Brian would testify. He didn't. It's his right not to. And the burden never shifts to him to prove his innocence. But why do you think he chose not to testify? Is it because they're confident that there were enough reasonable doubt moments? Should they be confident?

RAHMANI: I don't think they should be. Maybe, at best, they can pick off one or two holdout jurors. If Brian Walshe took the stand, it would be a grueling and brutal examination. He would be raked over the coals with those lies to the police. I don't think he'd be able to explain it away. And let's not forget, he is a convicted felon for a federal fraud charge. That would likely come into evidence, the fact that he's a felon. So, it would really expose him. I think that defense thought maybe they could attack causation to the prosecution's expert. Of course, the prosecution expert said anything is possible. Certainly, it's possible that Ana died of natural causes, but it's not reasonable. And we're talking about reasonable doubt here. And you and I prosecuted many cases. Those jury instructions say that any doubt has to be reasonable. So, I don't think it's a reasonable explanation that your wife dies in her sleep on New Year's Eve or New Year's Day and you decide to panic, and you dismember the body.

It is very difficult to solve through human bone. And there are millions of reasons and life insurance proceeds why Brian would want his wife dead. I think the jurors maybe wanted an extra day or so. I have to -- I think that guilty verdict will come Monday. That's my prediction.

COATES: And, of course, the defense is saying, nope, it was a sudden non-violent, unexplained death. He just panicked. And you can't judge his panic. I don't know about that. But the jury did come back this afternoon with a question about a specific exhibit. It looks like they were referring to a rug the prosecution says was found dumped with Ana's blood and a piece of her Gucci necklace that she was known to wear. Why do you think the jury is zeroing in on this above all?

RAHMANI: I'm surprised. Obviously, it's a no body case. But I thought the fact that Brian Walshe had pleaded guilty to lying with the police and dismembering the body, the evidence of the blood on the hacksaw, all the cleaning supplies, we've all seen those pictures and still videos of him covering it up, I think the coverup would be enough to prove the crime.

[23:40:02]

But maybe, just maybe, there's one or two jurors who are holdouts or they just need more because we know that these no body cases can be difficult. But again, this is not your typical no body case because the reason we know there's no body is the defendant has accepted responsibility for disposing of the body.

So, again, I think, at best, there's one, maybe two jurors, I think they're going to come around. I don't think this is the type of deliberation that we're going to see drag out to the end of the week because, again, I've been covering murder cases for about 25 years now, I haven't seen as much evidence as I have in this particular case.

I think this is a slow guilty plea because the state of Massachusetts or the commonwealth doesn't have the death penalty. There was no offer or discount that could have been given to the defense. So, Brian Walshe is going to play it out, but I think the results is going to be inevitable to say.

COATES: Brian Walshe hopes you are dead wrong. Neama Rahmani, thank you so much.

RAHMANI: Thanks, Laura. Talk soon. COATES: A special full hour on the Brian Walshe trial hosted by yours truly, it airs tomorrow night at 8 p.m. Eastern right here on CNN. Up next, it may have been one of the toughest weeks for the president yet, and it's ending with a dire election prediction from someone he handpicked. My Friday night panel is with me, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:45:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COATES: You know the book "Alexander and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day?" Nothing goes right for poor Alexander in the children's book. He got gum in his hair, he tripped over his skateboard, he dropped his sweater in the sink, and it just got worse.

President Trump may feel like Alexander tonight, except Trump's bad day, it lasted a week. There were election losses in Miami and rural Georgia, usually GOP strongholds. Critics and even some supporters mocked Trump for giving the economy an A-plus, I mean with five pluses, Senate GOP's health care bill failed, and Indiana Republicans rejected Trump's redistricting push. And that last loss could make winning the midterms even more difficult Republicans. Even the Republican Party chairman knows how this story ends, apparently.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOE GRUTERS, CHAIRMAN, RNC (voice-over): But let me put it in perspective. Only three times in the last 100 years has the incumbent party been successful winning a midterm.

UNKNOWN (voice-over): Wow.

GRUTERS (voice-over): Four times in the last 150. It's -- we're facing almost certain defeat. The only person that could bring the nose up and help us win is the president of United States, Donald J. Trump.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: I want to bring in my political insiders, former Louisiana Republican congressman, Garret Graves, and Democratic strategist Chris Meagher. Glad to have both of you here. Garrett, let me start with you. I mean, what's your impression of the week? Is it truly the catastrophe that the story alludes?

GARRET GRAVES, FORMER LOUISIANA REPRESENTATIVE: A lot of luck. The catastrophe that I see was the previous administration. Trump has been in office for 11 months. I think he's trying to unwind the energy policy that caused so many problems, trying to unwind the excessive spending that created record inflation rates.

I'm not concerned. Look, do I think that there needs to be a focus on affordability? Yes. But I do think that Republicans have an opportunity between now and the midterms to show that their policies have been successful in bringing down inflation, bringing down energy rates. And you've already seen wages go up in excess of what inflations done already this year. So, I think you've already seen progress.

COATES: And yet you've got Congresswoman AOC, for example, who is thinking that this is a catastrophe, essentially, of a week. You're smiling because you're not surprised that that may be the source of somebody criticizing what's going on. However, she believes it could lead to a blue wave. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MANU RAJU, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Do you think there will be a wave, a blue wave?

REP. ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ (D-NY): I think so. I think that Democrats have to fight for something. I think we have to have a working-class agenda that's focused on the economics. But if we do that, I think people are really upset at the violations of ICE. I think people are really upset that the tariffs have jacked up the cost of everything. I think there's a lot of anger at the fact that people are now worse off than their parents were. And we need to channel that into constructive solutions to help make people's lives possible.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: And, of course, she rode the blue wave in 2018 during the first term. Do you think that she'll be right about 2026?

CHRIS MEAGHER, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: I do. You know, there's not just history is on the Democrat side, but I think everything that we've seen this year in the special elections and the elections in Virginia and New Jersey, and the focus of the two parties.

Democrats are laser-focused on what actually matters to voters right now, which is kitchen table issues and affordability. Donald Trump, apparently, just woke up and decided this was the week he was going to start talking about affordability, and then didn't spend any time talking about affordability in that speech the other day in Pennsylvania.

So, Democrats know what they need to do. We're starting to hone in on it. Donald Trump promised to lower prices on day one, hasn't done anything, and people are really feeling the effect of that.

COATES: Republicans, more broadly, have complained about Obamacare for years and years. No surprise to either one of you. And today, the House Republicans unveiled their health care plan. You see the details there right on your screen there. And it does expand certain health care programs, but it doesn't actually address the premiums, which is the meat of the matter for so many people. This looks to be likely DOA as well. So, why go this route?

GRAVES: Well, look, Laura, what's important to keep in mind is that when the Affordable Care Act passed, President Obama said it was going to help to reduce the cost of health care. We haven't seen that. As a matter of fact, what they're fighting over right now is not a subsidy, but a second subsidy.

[23:50:03]

So, there was an initial subsidy because they knew that Obamacare was going to be too expensive. The federal government was going to have to step in and subsidize costs. Then during COVID, they added a second subsidy. I think it's a mistake to have the federal government come in and just subsidize excessive cost of care. What they need to be doing is addressing the fundamentals of why we have such high health care costs in America and bringing those down.

I think there is an affordability issue here that was caused by Obamacare and it needs to be addressed by making sure that you hit the fundamentals here and look at the cost in health care approaches in other countries that do it for half of the cost of the United States.

COATES: Trump has suggested he will work with Democrats to try to get a solution and a compromise. Do you believe that? What would that look like?

MEAGHER: I wish I could believe it. The fact is, we've known this day is coming for a long time, right?

COATES: Yes.

MEAGHER: Republicans just now introduced their plan this week, apparently. And to your point, it's already probably DOA. The fact is, people are getting letters in the mail right now that some of them are even afraid to open because they know when they do, it's going to say that their health care costs are going to be doubled and tripled.

People want action. They're tired of costs going up, whether it's energy costs, whether it's health care costs, whether it's costs when they go to the grocery store. And they want their leaders in Washington to actually take an action.

Democrats have seen this and realized it. They put a proposal on the table. You know, it hasn't gotten through. We'll see what happens going forward.

COATES: Is there a sweet spot, though, from when Democrats demanding Republicans come up with something tangible and survivable becomes an unwillingness to compromise? Is there a concern that Democrats might drag the fight out until the midterms in a way that would hurt Democrats?

MEAGHER: I think Democrats, if we can somehow find a way to reach a solution that actually helps the American people, that actually brings health care costs down, that they would be willing to take that because that's going to be electorally beneficial for Democrats just as well.

COATES: Do you think that President Trump is meeting the moment when it comes to the economy? You heard his great oil week. There has been a lot of critique and it's justified in many ways. He has addressed some of it. Do you think that he is meeting the moment? GRAVES: Look, I don't think that you can take 11 months and say that in 11 months, we're going to give you a great in your entire four-year presidency.

COATES: He did himself the great.

GRAVES: I think that the president is doing an amazing job under the conditions, under the conditions of incredibly polarized political environment, under the conditions of being handed inflation rates up to 9 percent under President Biden with excessive spending, pushing energy markets and directions where they don't want to go. You are seeing a lot of underwinding of those policies.

And also, Laura, keep in mind, trying to unwind 50 years of flawed approach toward how we handle China and manufacturing. These are some huge challenges just taking on, and I think he is doing a great job under these conditions.

COATES: He was president before those years. How about the tariffs? Is that an impact?

MEAGHER: Of course. The tariffs have been a national sales tax on the American people. The goods that they're buying, whether it's groceries or t-shirts, the costs are going up on the American people at a point that they can't afford it, and they're feeling it.

COATES: Garret, Chris, thank you both so much.

GRAVES: Thank you.

COATES: Much more after a quick break. But first, this time of year is about giving back. And as Anderson Cooper is about to tell you right now, donations to the top five CNN heroes of the year will be matched dollar for dollar.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST: I'm Anderson Cooper. Each of this year's top five CNN heroes proves that one person really can make a difference. And again, this year, we're making it easy for you to support their great work. Just go to cnn.com/heroes and click donate to make a direct contribution to that hero's fundraiser on pledge. You'll receive an email confirming your donation, which is tax deductible in the United States.

No matter the amount, you can make a big difference in helping our heroes continue their life-changing work. And right now through January 4th, your donations will be matched by the Elevate Prize Foundation, dollar for dollar, up to a total of $50,000 for each of this year's honorees.

CNN is proud to offer you this simple way to support each cause and celebrate all these everyday people changing the world. You can donate from your laptop, your tablet or your phone. Just go to cnn.com/heroes or text the word heroes to 707070 or scan the Q.R. code. Your donation in any amount will help them help others. Thank you. (END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:55:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COATES: It's almost midnight here on the East Coast, so it's time to bring in our friend, Elex Michaelson, who is out in L.A. Elex, good to see you. Look, the Powerball jackpot reaching a billion dollars for the second time this year. What is the first thing that we are buying if you win tomorrow?

ELEX MICHAELSON, CNN ANCHOR AND CORRESPONDENT: I know. Well, maybe CNN.

(LAUGHTER)

COATES: We got to add some billions to that, boy.

MICHAELSON: I don't know. What are you buying?

COATES: CNN.

(LAUGHTER)

Coates News Network. I mean, it only makes sense, right?

MICHAELSON: Yes. Yes, that's it. That's it.

COATES: In the meantime, we're not winning it. But if we had, it was a nice dream. Now, it's time for your wonderful show, "The Story Is." What you got coming up?

MICHAELSON: We've got a big show, including A.G. Rob Bonta making some news in California politics. A great panel. A lot going on tonight. But I hope that you have a great weekend, Laura.

COATES: You, too.

MICHAELSON: We'll talk. And biggest thing coming up on Monday night right here on "The Story Is."

[00:00:02]

Laura Coates in studio with me.

COATES: Oh, my gosh. I can't wait.

MICHAELSON: So, that is reason to watch.

COATES: That's my jackpot.

MICHAELSON: That's why we call it deep tease.

(LAUGHTER)

And if I win this weekend, you get to do the whole show.

(LAUGHTER)

COATES: Somehow, that's not the way this is supposed to go. OK, have a great show. Good night.

MICHAELSON: All right. Have a good weekend.