Return to Transcripts main page

Laura Coates Live

Trump Calls For "Honorable" Investigation Into Pretti Shooting; Man Attacks Rep. Ilhan Omar During Town Hall; Anthropic CEO Warns Of The Risks That Come With A.I. Aired 11p-12a ET

Aired January 27, 2026 - 23:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[23:00:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ABBY PHILLIP, CNN ANCHOR AND SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Tomorrow night, CNN is live from Minneapolis as residents question officials and community leaders. Anderson Cooper and Sara Sidner will moderate "State of Emergency: Confronting the Crisis in Minnesota," a CNN town hall. That begins Wednesday at 8 p.m. or you can watch it on the CNN app. Thank you very much for watching "NewsNight." "Laura Coates Live" starts right now.

LAURA COATES, CNN HOST AND SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Well, tonight, a new government account of what happened to Alex Pretti as DHS investigates itself but sidelines the DOJ? Plus, Minnesota Congresswoman Ilhan Omar attacked with some unknown substance as she speaks out against ICE and Kristi Noem. Hear her message before and after that attack. And the A.I. warning from the man at the top. Wake up! The CEO of Anthropic says we're about to be tested. He means as a species. Tonight on "Laura Coates Live."

Well, the first time that federal agents killed a protester in Minneapolis, the investigation into the officer who fired the fatal shots was shut down. But now, after the killing of Alex Pretti and the blowback over the original story, it got so loud it was hard to ignore. President Trump now trying to pivot.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Well, you know, we're doing a big investigation. I want to see the investigation. I'm going to be watching over it. I want a very honorable and honest investigation. I have to see it myself.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: An honorable and honest investigation. But what does that look like under the Trump administration? Because if it was anything like what Renee Good got or should I say didn't get, that's a far cry from honorable. I won't even insert the word transparent.

And to be absolutely clear, every prosecutor knows that an investigation is not just performative. An investigation is also not an indictment. It doesn't even guarantee an indictment, let alone a trial will happen. Sometimes, the right conclusion that they will get to is not to prosecute at all.

But you have to actually have an investigation that answers the question of whether the officers followed their training, followed the law, followed the Constitution, honored their badge or wielded it as a weapon. And as of now, the DOJ has actually not opened a civil rights investigation to Pretti's killing.

And I can tell you from actually being a trial attorney in civil rights division, here's what normal looks like. The DOJ would normally open a civil rights investigation after a law enforcement shooting that results in someone's death. And that's for high profile or smoking gun cases either because the stated work is to protect the rights of people who interact with law enforcement.

But there are some key differences here. Minnesota's Bureau of Criminal Apprehension is investigating what happened this weekend even though it was shut out of Renee Good's shooting. Homeland Security Investigations branch is also looking at it.

And tonight, CNN's exclusive look at Customs and Border Protection's initial report. Now, in it, it says that two officers fired at Pretti about five seconds after another officer yelled, he's got a gun, multiple times. But the report, it's notable for what it does not say. It does not say that Pretti brandished a weapon. It does not say he came to -- quote -- "massacre law enforcement," which is what DHS and other Trump officials claimed right after the shooting happened.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KRISTI NOEM, UNITED STATES SECRETARY OF HOMELAND SECURITY: He came with weapons and ammunition to stop a law enforcement operation of federal law enforcement officers. He committed an act of domestic terrorism.

GREGORY BOVINO, U.S. BORDER PATROL CHIEF: This looks like a situation where an individual wanted to do maximum damage and massacre law enforcement.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Now, top Trump aide Stephen Miller took it a step further, calling Pretti an assassin trying to murder federal agents. But tonight, we are seeing another pivot because Miller is now telling CNN that federal agents may not have been following proper protocol before Pretti was killed. He says the initial statement from DHS was based on reports from CBP on the ground.

And President Trump himself is backing away from the domestic terrorist in assassin talk.

[23:04:58]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNKNOWN (voice-over): Do you agree with the assessment from some of your own officials that Alex Pretti is a domestic terrorist or an assassin?

TRUMP: Well, I haven't heard that. But, certainly, he shouldn't have been carrying a gun. But all of -- hey, look, bottom line, everybody in this room, we view that as a very unfortunate incident, OK? Everyone, unless you're a stupid person.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Did you catch that part where Trump said that Pretti shouldn't have been carrying a gun? You know, it wasn't a one-off or the only time he said that today.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: I don't like the fact that he was carrying a gun that was fully loaded, and he had two magazines with him. And it's pretty unusual. But nobody knows when they saw the gun, how they saw the gun, everything else. The bottom line was terrible. Both of them were terrible. The other was terrible, too.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: The problem is Trump may be tying himself in a new kind of knot by making the gun the story. Can you remember this? It's back from -- in 2020, when Mark and Patricia McCloskey pointed guns at protesters who marched through their neighborhood in St. Louis after the police killing of George Floyd. And back then, Trump was all about protecting their Second Amendment rights, if I recall.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: These people were standing there, never used it. And they were legal, the weapons. And now, I understand somebody local, they want to prosecute these people. It's a disgrace.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: So, did his view of the Second Amendment change all that much in the six years since that conversation? Well, my first guest can speak with authority on what should be happening in Minnesota because she led the DOJ's Civil Rights Division under President Biden. Former assistant attorney general Kristen Clarke joins me now, also a trial attorney in the Civil Rights Division at one point as well.

You know the DOJ has not launched a civil rights probe, which seems to run counter to a standard protocol of at least investigating whether someone's Fourth Amendment or civil rights have been harmed by a shooting by law enforcement. Walk us through the process when a case like this would have happened under your watch. What would have been a normal protocol?

KRISTEN CLARKE, FORMER ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, CIVIL RIGHTS DIVISION: Yes. Well, first, thanks for having me, Laura. And like you, I worked in the civil rights division. I was a prosecutor under the Bush administration, prosecuting law enforcement misconduct cases. And for the four years of the Biden administration, I supervise these cases across the country. And what I can tell you is that what is happening now is a stark departure from normal practice and procedure.

The federal government should have its head down, quietly investigating both of these tragic murders carefully, thoroughly, thoughtfully. They should be talking to the civilian witnesses, talking to the agents, reviewing body cam footage and privately recorded, you know, images of what happened. They should be looking at policies. They should be looking at training. They should be looking at prior incidences that -- where these officers may have used force, used deadly force. After weeks, if not months, then the public should be learning the results of the investigation.

But that is not what's happening here and it's deeply, deeply troubling.

COATES: In fact, we have a witness who captured cellphone footage of the death and killing of Alex Pretti. She's talking to Anderson Cooper tonight. No one has contacted her. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST: Have you been contacted by anyone from the federal government? FBI?

STELLA CARLSON, WITNESS TO SHOOTING OF ALEX PRETTI: No. No, I have not.

COOPER: Border Patrol? Homeland Security?

CARLSON: I do have a legal team now who are fielding much of that, and I am no longer accessible in those ways.

COOPER: I talked to your attorney this morning. She said she had not received any outreach from the FBI or anybody from the federal government.

CARLSON: I do not think they have my name yet.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: He was killed on Saturday. I mean, we know the turnaround. We've gotten people into a grand jury setting within 24 to 48 hours to keep their memories fresh and to not have a credibility issue when you're looking to indict a case. But they haven't talked to a key witness. Is that concerning?

CLARKE: Absolutely. Across Republican, prior Republican and Democratic administrations, I've never seen anything like this. I will tell you, prosecuting these kinds of misconduct cases are some of the toughest cases that the Civil Rights Division handled, some of the toughest cases that I have worked on.

COATES: Why is that?

CLARKE: You leave no stone unturned. These cases take time. And they're hard cases because, you know, here, we have two people who have died and families who are grieving and a public that is expecting accountability.

[23:09:57]

And you want to make sure that you can carry out an investigation where at the end of the day, regardless of the outcome, regardless of whether you prosecute or regardless of whether you close the case, the family and the public has trust in the work that you've done, trust in the outcome. And here, we've seen so many things that have eroded and destroyed the public's trust in the federal government's handling of these two tragic murders.

COATES: Does the trust require there to be some coordination between the state and local officials and the feds? Because oftentimes, people have looked at, for example, the trial of Derek Chauvin. They see the state prosecution and they see the federal government as a backstop of sorts that comes second. Do you see the absence of coordination as depleting the trust for the American people or just that normally happens quietly anyway?

CLARKE: Yes. Well, a couple of things. Trust requires being fair and impartial, no judgment, right? Trust requires having just a little bit of empathy here. An ounce of empathy from the federal government, I think, would go a long way here. And instead, what we've seen is the casting of dispersions against the two people who have lost their lives.

And here, we have local and state law enforcement agencies that want to investigate these tragic murders that unfolded in their jurisdictions. And ordinarily, the federal government would be a willing partner to collaborate with the state.

At this point, time is of the essence. I think that the federal government should either get out of the way so that the state attorney general can carry out their investigation or work hand in hand and in partnership with the state to look closely at the facts and figure out whether there is a prosecutable violation of federal law that has unfolded here.

COATES: I mean, the feds haven't even given the names of the agents to the state yet.

CLARKE: Deeply, deeply troubling. And it is understandable why the public doesn't have trust in some of the announcements that we've heard today. We've heard the president say that he wants to have an honest investigation. It is really critical. We are running out of time. Nobody is going to forget these two tragic and horrendous murders that happened in January of 2026. The federal government needs to partner with the state now or get out of the way so that the state can carry out a full, fair, and impartial investigation.

COATES: And part of that deadline that clock is ticking for is that memories fade and that in and of itself can create credibility issues and trust issues. And if you don't have evidence that can be fleeting or go away, you cannot do a complete investigation.

CLARKE: That's right.

COATES: Time is of the essence. But Attorney General Pam Bondi has talked to Minnesota not only about the immigration crackdown but also about voter rolls, has put that in addition to one of the conditions for them to step down or step aside in some way. What exactly would they be after with the voter rolls? And what an odd pairing.

CLARKE: Yes. It's unclear. And we know that there are a number of cases happening across the country as states are resisting this unusual and unprecedented request from the federal government to turn over the full state voter data file that includes personal identifying information like social security numbers. So, those cases need to play out in the courts.

And what concerns me here is that this letter may land as blackmail, may land as some attempt to coerce the states to, and here, Minnesota, to turn over that data in exchange for the rollback of this, you know, unprecedented deployment of ICE agents across the city and across the state.

COATES: Might a judge look at that and see a disingenuous motivation that could harm the government's case?

CLARKE: I think so. I do think that one issue in the cases about the voter files will be why, why are you doing this? What is the law enforcement objective here? And I think this raises into question the legitimacy of the Justice Department's attempt to get its hand on all of that data.

COATES: So great to have you here. Thank you so much.

CLARKE: Thank you.

COATES: Kristen Clarke, everyone. Up next, a Trump voter who did back the president three times and spent more than 20 years inside DHS as an immigration officer and special agent. He's now speaking out about his anger and disappointment with what he is now seeing. You want to hear what he has to say.

And later, damage control inside the administration as everyone from Kristi Noem to Stephen Miller now appear to shift blame in their rush to judgment. Who will the president believe?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:15:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COATES: You know, we're getting a first look at how DHS explains Alex Pretti's final moments. They tell Congress that two officers fired their guns just seconds after an officer yelled, he's got a gun, multiple times.

We're also hearing from a key witness for the first time. The woman seen here in a pink coat. Stella Carlson spoke with my colleague, Anderson Cooper, earlier today, and she told him Pretti was calm. She says he wasn't threatening. But as for the officers, she says they were angry.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CARLSON: I watched him die. I mean, I watched him die. I remember him arching his back, and his head rolling back, and he looked.

[23:20:00]

It was so fast moving, but not for me.

COOPER: You knew he was gone then?

CARLSON: I knew he was gone. There was no way with the way his body was moving. And I only knew that because of the way they were manipulating his dead body, just playing with it, like they're in a video game.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: How awful. These scenes caught on camera, they're being seen all around the country, including by former ICE and CBP officers who are shocked by what they're seeing.

You know, my next guest is actually one of them. Oscar Hagelsieb is a former assistant special agent in charge at Homeland Security. He served nearly 25 years as an immigration officer and special agent. And he says he voted for President Trump three times. Oscar, thank you for being here. I'm eager to get your take on all that we are seeing because you hear DHS say that multiple officers' guns went off, that someone shouted that Pretti had a gun. Can you tell me how you evaluate that information, particularly from a training standpoint?

OSCAR HAGELSIEB, FORMER DHS OFFICER, VOTED FOR TRUMP: Hi, Laura. Thanks for having me. Good to see you again. Basically, what I'm seeing from this video is when somebody -- and it's something that's engraved in our training, right? When you see a gun, it's not -- the officer didn't say he has a gun. It's gun, gun, gun. Three times. Gun, gun, gun. And that's engraved in our training. And that's meant for somebody that you see that is carrying a weapon, that is actively carrying the weapon. It could be a threat to you. So, you yell, gun, gun, gun so that everybody in that scene is aware that there's a weapon involved and that you pulled out your weapon and are ready to take lethal action, right?

So, what I see from that video is somebody saw the weapon and yelled, gun, gun, gun, based on their training, which is what we're trained to do.

COATES: We know that there has been a lot of discussion about the multiple officers firing, the protocol that would be in place for that. You just described identifying the presence of a gun if that person posed a threat. Would you still call gun, gun, gun even if the person was not reaching for it or brandishing it in some way? Would you treat it differently then? HAGELSIEB: Immediately. Immediately. When you see a gun, we're trained to say gun, gun, gun. So, there's a presence of a gun. Unfortunately, in this situation, Mr. Pretti was allowed to have a gun, right? That's your Second Amendment right, to carry a gun. And I think that, unfortunately, it was called upon when the gun was in a holster, right? It should have never been called upon like a threat, right? And, unfortunately, it led to him losing his life.

COATES: You've been very critical of how the administration has reacted to the aftermath of the killing. I mean, today, Trump said he does not believe Pretti was an assassin, which is how some in his administration put it. But listen to what the assistant DHS secretary said on Fox earlier about labeling Pretti a domestic terrorist. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DANA PERINO, FOX NEWS HOST: Is the department and the secretary pulling back that label of domestic terrorist from the Alex Pretti situation?

TRICIA MCLAUGHLIN, ASSISTANT HOMELAND SECURITY SECRETARY: Dana, in this situation, we have seen on the ground in Minneapolis a highly- coordinated campaign of violence against our law enforcement.

UNKNOWN: Then are you standing by, calling him a domestic terrorist?

MCLAUGHLIN: Well, we'll let this investigation that Homeland Security investigators are leading, the FBI is supporting, and CBP is doing a separate internal investigation as well, Dana.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: She didn't walk that back. What's your reaction?

HAGELSIEB: That's unfortunate because -- I mean, as a senior law enforcement agent, right? I've worked for every secretary of Homeland Security since the beginning, right? Except for the current one, right? What you should say and what any law enforcement agency leadership should say is that we don't know what happened, right?

We need to take a step back, evaluate what happened, evaluate the evidence, and then we'll determine what transpired, right? Because for all intents and purposes, Mr. Pretti could have been a Trump supporter. He could have been somebody that had aspiration to support Trump, right? You don't know that.

To call somebody out immediately, that's public relations 101. Like I said, what you say is, like, we don't know what's going on, we're going to -- we're going to take all the evidence and see where the investigation leads us.

[23:25:05]

But just to immediately label him as a domestic terrorist is irrational and it's unprofessional.

COATES: And, of course, the focus being on the actual shooting itself, what would be known to the officers at the time, not the aftermath and the investigation of who he may have been as a person.

I mean, you speak about politics. You voted for President Trump three times, as I mentioned. He, as you know, pledged to carry out the largest mass deportation in U.S. history. Now that you're seeing the way that's being carried out, do you have second thoughts about your decision to vote for him? And would you do it again if that was part of the reason you did in the first place?

HAGELSIEB: You know, Laura, I'm all about law enforcement, right? I was a law enforcement agent for almost 25 years, right? I'm all about enforcing the law. I think that my criticism is against Bovino, right? Because the way that he acted and the way that he interpreted what Trump was trying to convey as far as immigration enforcement is, like Mr. Bovino took it above and beyond.

I mean, I've been very critical of him because of the fact like, if you see it, like there's no leadership that should be like actively throwing, you know, mace bombs at an individual.

And just the fact that when he was in Chicago, correct? After coming out of the courthouse, he gets on a vehicle and he does a let's charge, right? Like you don't do that. It's like you're charging -- he's like conveying to his troops, like we're going to charge into battle, which you're conveying battle into an inner city of the United States.

And simply the terminology "turn and burn," right? That's a terminology that's really defined to military, right? Why would you use that terminology? I think that Mr. Bovino took an opportunity that he saw that he was going to be able to promote himself based on what Trump was saying, but he took it too far.

COATES: Oscar Hagelsieb, thank you so much for your insight tonight.

HAGELSIEB: Laura, thank you. Thank you for seeing.

COATES: Thank you. Up next, a scary moment for Minnesota Congresswoman Ilhan Omar. A man spraying her with some sort of substance just as she was denouncing ICE. Her colleague, Congressman Jason Crow, will join me to react to that and much more. Plus, the pressure mounting on Kristi Noem as some Republicans now join in on the calls to remove her. Could it change the president's mind about her? Next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:30:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COATES: A frightening scene during a town hall meeting in Democratic Congresswoman Ilhan Omar's district of Minneapolis as a man rushed and sprayed the congressman with some sort of unknown substance just moments after she called for DHS Secretary Kristi Noem to step down following the shootings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti. Here's how the incident unfolded just earlier tonight.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. ILHAN OMAR (D-MN): Kristi Noem must resign or face impeachment.

(APPLAUSE)

UNKNOWN: (INAUDIBLE).

UNKNOWN: Oh!

(BLEEP)

UNKNOWN: What was that?

OMAR: I don't know.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: What was that? ABC News caught up with President Trump who said he did not see the video but called her a fraud and said -- quote -- "She probably had herself sprayed" -- unquote.

Now, the congresswoman appeared not to be injured and went on to finish her town hall. But here's what she told our own Sara Sidner afterwards.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SARA SIDNER, CNN ANCHOR AND SENIOR NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Representative Omar, are you OK?

OMAR: You know, I'm going to go figure if I am, but I feel OK. I feel that it is important for people, whether they are in elected office or not, to allow these people to intimidate us, to make us not fight for our constituents and for the country we love. And, as I said, you know, I've survived war, and I'm definitely going to survive intimidation and whatever these people think they can throw at me because I'm built that way.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Congresswoman Omar's colleague joins me now, Democratic congressman from Colorado, Jason Crow. Congressman, thank you for joining. I have no idea what that substance is. It's under investigation. That man has now been arrested. But what a very scary and disgusting situation during a typical town hall meeting with constituents. What's your reaction to this?

REP. JASON CROW (D-CO): Well, Laura, it's a terrifying incident. And my first reaction was for my friend, Congresswoman Omar. I've served with her. I came into Congress with her. We've worked together on a variety of things. I was just talking to her the other day about what's happening in her district, in her hometown of Minneapolis, and how we can be supportive of her and her efforts.

And my second thought is about the environment of political extremism and danger that we have in America today where simply standing up to represent your constituents to hold a town hall to do the very function of a democracy, which is show up and listen to your constituents, can pose a danger like this.

[23:35:01]

You know, the House sergeant at arms actually put out data that in the last year alone, threats against members of Congress have increased over 50 percent.

So, it's important we take precautions, but it's also equally important that we are not threatened and intimidated because if we allow these threats to get us to back off of our job, then all is lost, right? Our democracy will be lost. Our civil discourse will be lost. So, taking precaution, but also not allowing us to be threatened away from doing our duty.

COATES: I want to talk about what's going on in Minneapolis and the immigration crackdown that has been a source of such grave concern, including leading to the deaths of at least two people in Minnesota. There's a blame game happening in Trump's camp.

Axios reports that sources close to Kristi Noem claim that her statement saying that Alex Pretti wanted to -- quote -- "massacre agents" was dictated by Stephen Miller. Then Miller is blaming -- quote -- "reports from CPB on the ground."

So, who does the buck stop with here? Kristi Noem?

CROW: The president is the one who created this environment of lawlessness, recklessness, and impunity. He's the one that jammed through a blank check funding bill with congressional Republicans to create the force and the environment and to give these folks a free pass. Kristi Noem is complicit. She is a part of it and must be held accountable.

And I have joined with my colleagues, Democrats in the House, to initiate a bill to start impeachment proceedings against Kristi Noem because if the murder of Alex Pretti and Renee Good in broad daylight, seen clearly on camera by any American who can see what happened, cold-blooded murder by federal agents of these innocent civilians just doing their job and speaking up and protecting their community, is not enough to say, this has got to stop, Kristi Noem, Donald Trump, this runaway rogue agency of ICE, then I don't know what will.

So, I'm here to say it's going to stop, and I'm going to do everything in my power to stop it.

COATES: Well, you've got the power of the purse. Congress appears to be on track for a shutdown over DHS funding. You've got Republican Senator Susan Collins saying that she's waiting on a list of changes to ICE and DHS that Democrats want. What specific guardrails are you demanding that could thwart a shutdown? CROW: Well, there are immediate guardrails that need to be put in place, and that is the masks need to come off, the unmarked vehicles need to go away, they need to stop snatching U.S. citizens off street corners and holding them without court hearings, deporting people without court hearings, there need to be trainings and rules and force put in place, we need to protect sensitive sites, schools, churches, nonprofit organizations, other places that are sanctuaries in our communities and for our families need to be off limits. All of that needs to happen immediately.

But let's also be clear that Donald Trump has corrupted this entire agency. They have hired and filled it with people that have looked at these recruiting, these disgusting recruiting videos that Kristi Noem has put out. And these folks have said, yes, that's what I want to do for a living, sign me up. These folks have no business carrying a gun, holding a badge, and policing our communities. They have got to go.

COATES: Congressman, at least two instances --

CROW: So, we need a wholesale from the ground up.

COATES: Excuse me. I hear you, but at least two instances, we've heard that there have been -- quote, unquote -- "experienced officers who have been involved in these shootings, who are not recent recruits." Does that change the calculus for you?

CROW: No. Them, too. I'm not -- I'm not saying this isn't either or this is an and, right? These inexperienced folks that have no business being in uniforms, police in our communities need to go. And if people are lawless and violating the law, they need to go, too, right?

We don't have to choose between folks who are violating the law, that are not suitable for positions of public trust. This agency has clearly been corrupted by Donald Trump and Kristi Noem and Stephen Miller. We need to start from the ground up because Americans want violent criminal laws to be enforced.

COATES: We'll see if they're in line with what you think. Congressman Jason Crow, thank you so much for joining.

CROW: Thank you.

COATES: Next, a new warning from the CEO of a major A.I. company putting a number on how many jobs he thinks could be wiped out in the next couple of years. That's only just a fraction of the dilemma he says is coming. So, should elected officials and businesses be taking him seriously? I'll ask Andrew Yang next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:40:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COATES: You know, for years, we've heard warnings about artificial intelligence. But tonight's alert, well, that might be the loudest one yet.

It comes from the head of Anthropic, which makes the chatbot Claude. Now, its CEO, Dario Amodei, says we're entering a defining moment as A.I. becomes even more powerful. He argues that we're only a couple years away from A.I. being able to build the next generation of A.I. on its own. I'm talking no humans required. It could soon seize political power, disrupt economy. They're talking about half of all white-collar jobs gone within five years. That's according to Amodei. He describes A.I. as a serious threat to our civilization and it will -- quote -- "test who we are as a species."

But Amodei says there's hope. He points to the engineers and researchers working to find guardrails to contain A.I. You know what? He credits the public speaking out about the risks.

[23:45:00]

One of those voices joins me now, Andrew Yang, former 2020 presidential candidate, founder of the Forward Party, and CEO of Noble Mobile. Andrew, so good to see you. You and I have talked about A.I. frequently in the past. I'm concerned about how you would rate this warning from the CEO of Anthropic. I mean, does humanity need this wake-up call?

ANDREW YANG, FOUNDER OF FORWARD PARTY, CEO OF NOBLE MOBILE, FORMER 2020 PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I rate this warning a 10 out of 10, Laura. Dario Amodei is the CEO of Anthropic, one of the most successful A.I. companies right now. Claude is replacing coders at an industry-wide scale. And Dario has raised his hand and said, you know what? You should start taxing A.I. companies, including us, because we're going to replace up to 50 percent of entry-level white-collar jobs in the next one to five years. He's not talking his own book. He's actually calling it like he sees it, and we should take him 100 percent at his word.

COATES: Is that a real estimate, you think? A reasonable one?

YANG: I happen to think it is a very reasonable estimate. I talked to CEOs and recent college graduates alike. And a lot of entry-level white-collar jobs are going by the wayside. A lot of young people are not getting a foothold into a big company as they would have in past generations. You can see that in the numbers.

COATES: Well, then, it's a little bit striking that Amodei also talks about government intervention and regulation, and he advocates for a kind of a light touch, saying -- quote -- "the most constructive thing we can do today is advocate for limited rules while we learn whether or not there is evidence to support stronger ones." So, what is the right role for the government here given that warning?

YANG: Well, in the same essay, Laura, he points out that right now, government has become this rah-rah enabler of the A.I. buildup in part because the data centers are such a huge part of economic growth and stock market prices.

And so, even his call for a limited regulation would be a very different picture than we're getting right now where government is essentially cheerleading and facilitating and saying any hindrance is going to impede our competition with China.

One of the major elements that I don't think Dario writes about in his essay explicitly, but there is a way that you can take some of the risk off the table and some of the gains off the table and not hurt our competition vis-a-vis Chinese A.I. companies. This isn't like a completely zero-sum game where if you had a slight tax, for example, I don't think it would meaningfully affect our competition with Chinese companies.

COATES: So, do you think either political party is taking this seriously enough or are they ill-equipped to keep pace with the, well, really the pace of A.I.?

YANG: No. It's fascinating, Laura, because if you're an individual governor, like Josh Shapiro, for example, you end up taking the side of the A.I. companies because they're building data centers in your communities. You say, this is great, that, you know, this is going to be good for us. But if you look at polling and the public, 75, 80 percent of Americans are nervous or worse about A.I. and would welcome regulation and taxes on these companies.

So, you see a massive disconnect between both parties and what Americans want. And I think that's going to create a massive opportunity for someone in either party or both parties or a new party because right now, there's a massive disconnect between policymakers and the American people.

COATES: You know, I wonder if soft regulation would be on the table. But given the competition concerns, probably not.

But, you know, one thing he also decried was what was happening in Minneapolis. And he is not the only tech CEO that is speaking out, Andrew. I mean, "The New York Times" reports that the OpenAI CEO, Sam Altman, reportedly told employees that ICE is -- quote -- "going too far." We've seen business leaders retreat from politics over the last -- at least year. Is it time for CEOs to speak out again?

YANG: Oh, I think you're seeing CEOs speak out about the killing of Alex Pretti, Laura, because it's impossible for them not to. Their employees are angry or distressed. And if you ignore it and say nothing, it's worse than tone deaf. It feels like you're abdicating your responsibility as a leader and as a human being because, as a human being, if you see these videos, you have a natural reaction, and then if you self-suppress or silence your response, you seem like an unfeeling automaton.

[23:50:04]

So, a lot of CEOs are making statements at a minimum internally to let their staff know that, look, I get it, I see it, I feel it. And the vast majority of Americans are in agreement that the killing of Alex Pretti was beyond the pale and that ICE has gone way beyond whatever mission that some Americans would agree on.

COATES: Andrew Yang, thank you for joining.

YANG: Thanks, Lauri. Great to be with you as always.

COATES: Meanwhile, the owners of Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube face a historic lawsuit that claims their platforms are addictive and damaging to young people. The suit centers around a 19-year-old woman who says she became addicted to social media apps at the age of 10. She says she received unsolicited messages from adults and was bullied and also extorted. More than 1,200 plaintiffs have signed on to this lawsuit. Snapchat and TikTok, they were also sued, but they settled before jury selection start. That'll be tomorrow in Los Angeles.

Now, this case, just the tip of the iceberg. These platforms face more than 1,000 other lawsuits. So, tomorrow's case could redefine the landscape for social media sites.

The attorney for the plaintiff joins me now, Matthew Bergman. He's also the founding attorney of the Social Media Victims Law Center. Matthew Bergman, thank you for joining us. I have to ask you. What would justice look like to your client?

MATTHEW BERGMAN, FOUNDING ATTORNEY, SOCIAL MEDIA VICTIMS LAW CENTER: Justice, first of all, has already been achieved in that this is the first time an individual has ever gone to trial with a social media company for the harms that have been inflicted on young people. We spent three years working to get to this point. The simple fact that an individual has the opportunity to plead their case before a neutral and fair jury is a victory in and of itself.

COATES: The idea that there might even be some testimony from people who many people want to hear from, including Mark Zuckerberg and the head of Instagram, it's possible that they may also testify possibly as early as next week. What would your clients want to see going forward in terms of what they would have to disclose and what are you hoping to achieve there?

BERGMAN: Well, what we're seeking is fundamentally accountability. We're seeking for social media companies to follow the same rules that every other company in America has. Basically, the golden rule, that they shouldn't make products that are addictive. And if they know their products are hurting people, they should change their products and make them safer. It's a basic principle of the golden rule and one that social media companies, unfortunately, for too long have been immune from.

COATES: Section 230 assists in that feeling of immunity, shielding platforms from being able to be held to account. What will your argument be for that issue?

BERGMAN: Well, that's exactly the problem. For too long, cases weren't even getting past the starting gate. Section 230 was interpreted so far afield from what Congress ever intended, that any effort to hold the social media company accountable was thrown out of court before they have actually begun.

Through a three-year effort, we and other good lawyers around the country have been able to get around Section 230 by focusing on the design of the platform as opposed to the third-party content and noting the deliberately addictive nature of the design that has enabled these pieces to get to trial.

COATES: I was going to say you've been relying also in some ways to the big tobacco-type of litigation as a parallel, not a perfect factual one, and the addictive nature of it.

I want to read for you what Meta has to say. They're the owner of Facebook and Instagram. Meta says the lawsuits --quote -- "misportray our company and the work we do every day to provide young people with safe, valuable experiences online."

I would assume you're going to argue that that is wholly incorrect.

BERGMAN: Well, the jury is going to make the ultimate determination as to whether Meta's statements given to the press should be credited or whether its internal documents and statements internally regarding their decisions to place profits over safety should be given credence. And, ultimately, a jury will have to decide.

COATES: I'll be watching very closely as so many will be. Matthew Bergman, thank you for joining.

BERGMAN: Thank you very much.

COATES: Up next, did you think Bill Belichick is a Hall of Fame coach? If your answer is yes, well, prepare to be a little bit shocked next.

[23:55:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COATES: Well, it's almost midnight here in the nation's capital, so time to bring in our friend, Elex Michaelson, who's out in Los Angeles. I wonder if the news has gotten to the West Coast yet that former Patriots coach Bill Belichick was not elected to the Pro Football Hall of Fame. According to ESPN, he asked his associates questions, like, six Super Bowls isn't enough? I mean --

(LAUGHTER)

-- isn't it enough? Are you surprised?

ELEX MICHAELSON, CNN ANCHOR AND CORRESPONDENT: You think about it. He is -- he is on paper, one of if not the greatest coach of all time. you know, critics say he did all that with Tom Brady, and then Tom Brady went on and won the championship without him. But look at nine Super Bowl appearances, 31 playoff wins. He was the coach of the year three times. What more does this guy need to do is -- and is his girlfriend that unpopular?

(LAUGHTER)

COATES: I knew you were going to go there because, honestly, I was biting my tongue, thinking, stick with the stats, Laura, but you know I'm all over that story, thinking, what's the real issue here?

[00:00:06]

There has been some bad press about him lately. By the way, that has been a bigger issue with people than like the Deflategate. Sorry, John Berman. Somewhere, he's awake right now, yelling at me for even mentioning it. I'm so sorry. You know what? I better change my tune. Have a great show, Elex. John Berman is going to call me and yell.

MICHAELSON: Thank you very much, Laura. We won't be talking about deflated balls on "The Story Is," which starts right now.