Return to Transcripts main page

Laura Coates Live

Trump Says Nobody Thought Iran Would Attack Gulf Nations, Rips Allies For Refusing To Help; Trump Mulls U.S. Boots On Ground; Trump Muses Over Taking Cuba; Kash Patel Touts FBI's Success Amid Scrutiny Of Leadership. Aired 11p-12a ET

Aired March 16, 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]

PAMELA BROWN, "THE SITUATION ROOM" CO-ANCHOR: Do you think this hurts, this war hurts Vice President Vance's chances of becoming President Trump's successor in 2028?

MARJORIE TAYLOR GREENE, FORMER GEORGIA REPRESENTATIVE: The longer it goes on, it definitely does hurt J.D. Vance. And that's someone that I campaigned for aggressively.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ABBY PHILLIP, CNN ANCHOR AND SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Thank you very much for watching "NewsNight." "Laura Coates Live" starts right now.

LAURA COATES, CNN HOST AND SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Tonight, President Trump tries to build a coalition to secure the Strait of Hormuz. And he says he's shocked that Iran retaliated by striking other Middle Eastern countries. Is anyone else surprised? Plus, Marines head to the Middle East as questions grow about their mission. Will it be to take over Iran's so-called crown jewel? And a sign of what's to come. Trump says he'll have the honor of taking Cuba. Tonight on "Laura Coates Live."

Three weeks into the war with Iran, and we got as close to an admission we may get that President Trump underestimated the threat.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: They weren't supposed to go after all these other countries in the Middle East. Those missiles were set to go after them. So, they hit Qatar, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Bahrain, Kuwait. Nobody expected that. We were shocked.

The greatest experts, nobody thought they were going to hit. They were -- I wouldn't say friendly country. They were like -- their children, they lived with it for years.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: First of all, experts are saying it should have been absolutely expected that Iran would have attacked other Middle Eastern countries. Second, remember justification just last week for why he attacked Iran?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: If we did not hit them, they were going to take over the Middle East. They had thousands and thousands, since their last hit, they had thousands and thousands of missiles and everything else. Those weapons were aimed at Middle Eastern countries that had nothing to do with this.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: And third, a senior government official source, excuse me, senior government source from one Gulf country is telling CNN's Erin Burnett they explicitly told the Trump administration they were going to get hit. And look, that lines up with the reporting. Multiple outlets, including CNN, cite sources who say Trump underestimated and miscalculated Iran's response, especially when it comes to the Strait of Hormuz. Iran is using it to choke off the world's oil supply.

Trump says the United States Military has now destroyed all Iranian minelaying ships there. He doesn't even know if Iran actually set any mines, which begs the question --

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNKNOWN: Why can't the U.S. just immediately reopen the Strait of Hormuz?

TRUMP: Well, we could, but it takes two to tango. We have to get people to take their billion-dollar ship and, you know, drive it up.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: And why don't they want to just, well, drive it up, as Trump says? Probably because of scenes like this. Tankers bursting into flames due to Iranian attacks. So, now, President Trump is asking other countries to help secure the strait.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: We strongly encourage other nations whose economies depend on the strait far more than ours. So, we want them to come and help us with the strait. I think we're going to have some good help. And I think we're going to be disappointed in some nations, too.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Trump says he will eventually announce some countries that are helping. Now, he hasn't named any yet, but a lot of nations are either saying I'm out or are being completely noncommittal. Germany, the defense minister is outright saying this is not our war, we have not started it. The German chancellor says it's not NATO's war. The top E.U. diplomat says it's not Europe's war. So then, who's war? At the same time Trump is asking for help, he's attacking those same countries for not stepping up.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: They should be not only thanking us, they should be helping us. What does surprise me is that they're not eager to help. I always said, you know, the problem with NATO is we'll always be there for them, but they'll never be there for us.

The prime minister of U.K., United Kingdom, yesterday told me, I'm meeting with my team to make determination. I said, you don't need to meet it with the team. You're the prime minister. You can make your own. Why do you have to meet with your team?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: And even though the U.S. has severely degraded Iran's military capabilities, they are still fighting back. Just tonight, there was an explosion at a hotel near the U.S. embassy in Baghdad. Iraqi official says it was the result of a drone strike.

[23:05:03]

A lot more to discuss with lead global security analyst at "The Washington Post," Josh Rogin, and White House and foreign affairs correspondent at Politico, Eli Stokols. Glad to have both of you guys here. I mean, Josh, President Trump is clearly not happy with allies who are dismissing his plea to help secure the Strait of Hormuz. Is there any way these allies would change their mind?

JOSH ROGIN, LEAD GLOBAL SECURITY ANALYST, THE WASHINGTON POST: No. I mean, we're here in day 18 of the Iran war and it's just dawning on President Trump that his assumptions about how the war would play out had nothing to do with the reality of the situation on the ground.

For 18 days, we've heard his officials say that everything is going to plan, this is exactly what they expect it to happen, everything is under control. And then the president of the United States gets on national T.V. and says, no. Actually, we didn't think they were going to hit the Gulf countries. We didn't know about that.

And so, I believe President Trump, I think he's being honest in that moment when he says that they were not prepared for this. And now, they're stuck.

And if you are any European country, just think about what they must be thinking right now. For a year, President Trump has been attacking their economies, threatening to attack NATO, insulting them, and then he starts a war with Iran without consulting them, without even considering their interests. And then when it starts going bad, he says, oh, you come out and bail us out. We don't really need you, but you better bail us out. Of course, they're going to say no. And there's a historical level of anti-Americanism in Europe because of the way we treated them. And there's no way they're going to bail us out of this, and you can understand why.

If I were them, I would do what they were doing, which is to see if they can make a deal with Iran for safe passage, and that's what Iran is doing. Iran is setting up a system where the countries that are not attacking them can get safe passage. And wouldn't you rather do that than send your ships into the Strait of Hormuz to get attacked and be sitting ducks?

COATES: Well, that's quite a risk. I mean, the idea of, on the one hand, for the reason you're talking about strategically. But then, Eli, the United States or President Trump doing just that and deal with Iran would come with significant consequences as well, I would imagine. He's also saying, the administration saying that many countries are on their way, Eli, to the Hormuz, the Strait of Hormuz. But they're not revealing which ones or who. Is there some reason behind us not knowing?

ELI STOKOLS, WHITE HOUSE AND FOREIGN POLICY CORRESPONDENT, POLITICO: Because they haven't really figured out what countries, if any, are going to actually participate in this. From my understanding, the White House has been reaching out to countries, asking for almost symbolic commitments that they will join a coalition. The firm commitments, if there are going to be any, those can wait. The White House, what we understand, is telling people, just participate.

COATES: Performatively?

STOKOLS: Almost like the Board of Peace, right? Just show up, let Donald Trump -- I mean, a lot of this is geared at just trying to mollify and calm the markets, which, you know, you can only really do with theater for so long. When 10 percent of the world's oil supply is hung up in the Strait of Hormuz, there are going to be consequences regardless of what the president says.

And really, the clips that you set up at the beginning where he's going back and forth, he's contradicting himself, he's all over the map, that is not going to settle the market.

So, you know, some effort to stand up a coalition of the willing, I don't know that that's really going to get the markets to calm down the way the president thinks, but that -- my understanding is that is the strategy.

COATES: Well, listen to what the president had to say when he appeared to acknowledge that there are still risks even though he has touted the military's success, of course, in limiting Iran's ability to actually threaten safe passage through the strait. Listen to his comments.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: We hit, to the best of our knowledge, all of their minelaying ships. Now, they can put them on other types of ships, I guess, and drop them in. But we don't know that any have even been dropped in. We're not sure that any have been.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: What does that admission tell you?

ROGIN: That Trump knows that there's no way to keep the strait safe without Iranian cooperation. That's the truth of it. You can bomb the Iranians for years and years and years. They'll be able to put ships in the Strait of Hormuz at risk forever. So, there's no way to insure them. There's no way to escort them. If you escort them, the escort ships become sitting ducks for drones and missiles. Iran can always come up with more drones and missiles. They produce them every single day.

So, the whole idea of having coalition to keep the -- to escort ship to the Strait of Hormuz is not a real thing. It's an alibi. It's an excuse. And what's going to happen is that the Iranians are going to hold the Strait of Hormuz at danger for as long as they can to keep the pressure on Trump to get what they want. And because Trump is not going to give them what they want, what that means is that the war is going to go on for weeks and weeks and months and months.

And so, the Trump administration has got us into this quagmire. They have no -- obviously, they have no plan to get us out of it. Now, they're begging other countries to come bail us out. That's not going to happen. And the Iranians have done the thing that everyone expected, that Trump administration didn't bother to plan for, which is to ruin the world economy in order to put pressure on Trump to stop attacking them. And this is the exact quagmire that many people predicted.

[23:10:00]

This is why people didn't attack the Iranians in previous administrations. Because this was very predictable. But, nevertheless, Trump walked into this obvious quagmire. And now, we're in it. And now, there's no clear way out. Now, the entire world is going to suffer. Our economy is going to suffer. Europeans, the Iranians are sure going to suffer. The Iranian people suffer more than anyone else. But they're not going to stop. This is an existential fight for them So, I think that Trump is stuck, and he knows it.

COATES: You wonder about the threshold for pain and suffering and how it would compare. But the president is also demanding that China also police the Strait of Hormuz. And Kevin O'Leary, he said that they have an incentive to do so. Listen to what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KEVIN O'LEARY, CHAIRMAN OF O'LEARY VENTURES: Oil, you can't run an economy without it. They need it. They have to have it or they'll have the same problems everybody else is having, spiking prices in perpetuity. Give me one country, even North Korea, that can live without oil. It's a unique situation. It's a unique commodity. Everybody has a stake in this.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Admittedly, it's difficult to take him seriously with that particular outfit on.

(LAUGHTER) I see -- I know, I know. But it was a post-Oscars look. I'm just saying. We'll move on past that. Is China's dependence on oil enough to twist their arm?

ROGIN: No.

STOKOLS: No. Look, Kevin O'Leary should not only go get some new clothes, he should probably go to China and check it out because the place is crawling with electric vehicles. Yes, they buy a lot of oil. It's a huge economy. They do. There is some dependence on oil, but not that much dependence.

I mean, look, they are buying -- to your point earlier, Iran is not going after ships from countries that are not at war with them. So, what is China's incentive to go help Donald Trump and help the United States right now when Iran is still selling them oil and not attacking Chinese ships in the strait?

COATES: The president insists that Iran is ready to negotiate, but he says the terms are not good enough yet. He also says that most of the leadership is dead. And questions if the new supreme leader is even alive, you know, he hasn't actually heard from them. So, who exactly would the administration be negotiating with?

ROGIN: Well, the reporting is that a channel has been opened between our envoy, Steve Witkoff, and the Iranian foreign minister who is still alive. And I'm sure those talks are ongoing.

But the fact that Trump doesn't seem to be aware of that, much less tracking it very closely, seems to be a problem. You would think that the president of the United States, having launched America and the world into a war, would care about the details. But he seems very nonchalant about it.

So, he says that we're negotiating. He doesn't know who we're negotiating with. I would encourage him to call his office and ask them what's actually going on so that he could get tuned into it because we're in a war now.

COATES: Do you think --

ROGIN: He should care about the defense.

COATES: Do you think that he is doing that in front of cameras and something different behind the scenes? Is there a possibility of that?

STOKOLS: He's always performing for the cameras, suggesting that they want to negotiate, but I'm not ready yet.

COATES: I mean, even if he's a nonchalant --

STOKOLS: Everything I'm hearing -- everything I'm hearing is that Donald Trump would love and that the people around him would love to find an off-ramp. It's that there is none right now.

Not only is there not really anybody they can negotiate with in Tehran, it's also the fact that Iran controls the escalation here, and they understand the asymmetric advantage that we've been talking about where they don't have to have a military that is as strong as ours. They can still wreak havoc and put pressure on a democratically- elected leader and a democratic system and really test those pressure points when it comes to, you know, affecting the global oil markets, potentially putting more American troops in harm's way.

And what is Donald Trump's tolerance for more and more casualties dominating American news as this goes forward? I don't see any indications that Iran is begging him to negotiate, as he claims.

COATES: Quite the leverage at this moment. We'll see how it all pans out. Josh, Eli, thank you both.

Up next, 2,500 Marines heading towards Iran as the president plays holly about boots on the ground and what that could actually look like. You know what? We asked the former NATO supreme allied commander to give us some different scenarios, and Admiral James Stavridis is here to explain. And ahead, the other nation the president has his eyes on.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: I do believe I'll be the honor of -- having the honor of taking Cuba.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:15:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNKNOWN (voice-over): What are the circumstances where you would send in ground troops? How are you thinking about that?

TRUMP: I don't even want to talk about it. I don't think it's an appropriate question. You know I'm not going to answer. Could there be possible. For a very good reason, having after me a very good reason.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Well, that was President Trump at the beginning of the war. I think coy about whether he would put boots on the ground in Iran. And now, over 2,500 Marines are heading to the region. For what exactly? Well, that's still to be determined.

My next guest laid out three potential targets if ground forces were to enter the conflict zone in a new op-ed for Bloomberg. Retired Admiral James Stavridis led the NATO alliance in global operations in the Middle East. He's also a senior CNN military analyst, and he joins me now.

Admiral, thank you for joining. You say that Kharg Island, what the president has described as Iran's crown jewel, is a viable target for ground troops, not to destroy, but to control. So, tell me, how big of a military footprint would that really require? And, frankly, would it be enough to even pressure Iran to surrender?

[23:20:02]

JAMES STAVRIDIS, CNN MILITARY ANALYST, FORMER SUPREME ALLIED COMMANDER OF NATO: Let's start with the physical size of Kharg Island, which I suspect few viewers have even heard of. It's an island, obviously. It's about 350 miles up the Persian Gulf. As you're showing on the map right now, you'd have to go north to get to Kharg Island. It's all the way at the upper end of the Persian Gulf. It's about 15 miles off the coast of the Iran, Laura. I've sailed by it too many times to count. It's flat, it's coral, and it's about the size -- about one-third the size of Manhattan. I think two miles by four miles. So, not a very big place, maybe seven or eight square miles. It's not heavily defended.

But here's the punchline: It's absolutely covered with oil infrastructure, piping, storage, ports that big tankers can pull up. So, it is crown jewel, a good expression, beating heart would be another one, of the Iranian economy. Ninety percent of their oil exports come out of Kharg. So, they're worried about whether or not we would put ground troops there.

And I'll close with this: 2,500 Marines doesn't sound like a lot. But it's not a really big island. And this is what Marines do think World War II, Okinawa, Iwo Jima seizing territory, especially islands. That's Marine Corps 101. I think they can handle this mission.

COATES: Admiral, another possible mission that you laid out would actually involve the CIA and Israel's Mossad who is infiltrating Iran to connect with protesters. How risky would an operation like that be?

STAVRIDIS: Extremely risky. And I think if you think in terms of three possible uses of boots on the ground, one seizing Kharg Island, risky but not kind of off the charts. Number two is the one you just referenced, having troops go ashore to support CIA, Mossad, as they try and prepare the population of Iran for an uprising. That's extremely risky. And then there's a third mission, Laura, that I talk about in the Bloomberg piece, which is going after the Iranian- enriched nuclear materials, the uranium that has been enriched to 60 percent. Not quite weapons-grade, but very close. It's in Isfahan, deep into Iran. That's also very risky.

So, of the three, I suspect the option the president is looking at the moment is Kharg Island.

COATES: Well, you know, the Iranian deputy foreign minister did warn against a possible takeover of Kharg Island. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DOMINIC WAGHORN, INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS EDITOR, SKY NEWS: There are thousands of U.S. Marines on the way. What happens if they get used, do you think?

SAEED KHATIBZADEH, IRAN DEPUTY FOREIGN MINISTER: We defend.

WAGHORN: What does that mean, though, for these Marines if they were to land in Kharg Island?

KHATIBZADEH: Just read what happened in Vietnam.

WAGHORN: You're saying it could be a quagmire for the Americans?

KHATIBZADEH: I said that, you know, I hope that, you know, wisdom prevails and, you know, diplomacy prevails on the other side.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: What's your assessment of that statement? Sounds ominous, obviously referring to Vietnam. Could history repeat itself?

STAVRIDIS: I think we're a long, long way from the history of Vietnam repeating itself assuming the administration conducts tactical kind of operations. Kharg Island, good example.

Another one, Laura, that we haven't mentioned is doing something in the Iranian littoral area right off of the Strait of Hormuz, going after some of their missile installations, their minelaying capability.

Point is Vietnam was hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops. It was like Iraq or Afghanistan. I don't think there's much appetite to repeat that. But tactical missions like Kharg Island, I think they make sense in the terms of what the administration would be considering.

Final thought, our real problem is at the Strait of Hormuz, which the Iranians have managed to kind of close in a virtual fashion by putting some mines in the water going after some of the tankers. If we took Kharg Island, you can see the shape of the deal, which would be we don't destroy Kharg Island, therefore, take down your economy, but how about you open the Strait of Hormuz again? I think that's a conversation that is on the minds of the administration.

COATES: And the global economy at that. Admiral James Stavridis, thank you so much.

STAVRIDIS: Thanks, Laura.

COATES: Up next, will the war last days, weeks?

[23:25:00]

Are we talking months? And how much financial pain is the American public willing to endure? I'll ask Republican Congressman Byron Donalds that very question, next. Plus, an FBI agent forced out by the administration is ringing the alarm, saying that Kash Patel's leadership is distracting the bureau from critical counterterrorism. She'll join me tonight.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:30:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) COATES: It has been two weeks since the war with Iran started. But the big question is, when will it end and how? That's all anybody's guess. The president is saying the war will end soon. And he's telling that Iran has been defeated. But that's about all we've got on specifics.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: But we're going to have a much safer world as soon as it's finished. It's going to be finished pretty quickly.

UNKNOWN (voice-over): On Iran, you called it an excursion. You said it would be over soon. Are you thinking this week it will be over?

TRUMP: No.

UNKNOWN (voice-over): Are you talking about days?

TRUMP: I think so.

UNKNOWN (voice-over): Can we wrap this war up this week?

TRUMP: Yes, sure.

UNKNOWN (voice-over): Will we?

TRUMP: I don't think so. But it will be soon. Won't be long.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Let's talk more about the war with Congressman Byron Donalds, a Republican from Florida who sits on the Financial Services Committee. He's also running for governor of Florida and has been endorsed by the president. Congressman, thank you for joining. I'm wondering what your understanding is of the timeline for when this war might end. How do you interpret soon?

REP. BYRON DONALDS (R-FL): First, it's good to be back with you, Laura. One thing that people need to understand is that you can't really have the president negotiating the timelines of military conflict through the press. That's bad strategy. You basically are putting our troops, I believe, in further harm's way. You limit the ability of his diplomatic team to actually negotiate the end of this conflict whenever that may be.

So, I get that not just you, but a lot of the press are trying to ask these questions with bated breath, when is this over, what is the next step, what is the next step, but that's not how you conduct these affairs.

And I do think that the president is right with, frankly, being a little glib with you guys and not giving you a direct answer because you cannot actually continue this conflict and manage it appropriately from America's interests being first and foremost if you're going to basically flag for the press when you're going to wind things down, if you're going to foreshadow those things through media. It doesn't work. It actually makes this conflict last longer as oppose to it ending more quickly, which I do believe is what the American people want to see happen.

COATES: Speaking of the American people wanting that to happen, obviously, there is an overwhelming concern for our service members, obviously. There are also the economic interests at stake. Voters wanting to understand the length of war because they see the cost of war. You got gas prices, one example, skyrocketing across the country. In your own state of Florida, voters, I understand, are paying almost a dollar more for a gallon of gas than they were before the war began. I'm curious what you have been hearing from voters in terms of their threshold for economic pain.

DONALDS: Well, I think, first and foremost, nobody wants to pay higher gas prices. We all acknowledge that and recognize that. Let's also be clear, gas prices are significantly cheaper than it was under the previous administration where there was no such military conflict, but they ran a terrible economy with high inflation. So, let's put all these into perspective.

COATES: Do your voters share that perspective?

DONALDS: -- talk about the course of war.

COATES: When you're talking to voters, do they say --

DONALDS: -- Yes, they do, actually. And I would also add that the people in Florida as well as the people of America do understand that the Iranian regime has been a theocratic dictatorship that has been held bench on moving terrorism across the globe, targeting our troops more than once over the last 47 years. So, I think if you're going to ask a question of gas prices being up 70, 80 cents or nuclear Iran, I think the people of our country and the people of Florida definitely understand that the president is making the right choice on behalf of American interests, not just today, but into the future.

COATES: One of the things that you obviously seen through the question about and through the president for how the war started, the length of time, all of these things, curiously, were not explained in advance. You've got Republicans who support the war, many do. But some like Karl Rove, for example, they question whether the president did enough to get the American public and allies to understand and buy into it. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KARL ROVE, FORMER GEORGE W. BUSH SENIOR ADVISER: So, we were able to consciously, deliberately, and over long course of time to lay out the case. That has not been the instance here. The president took an action because he felt he needed to take an action, driven by a desire to end this problem once and for all. And so, he hasn't had the time to do the run-up to this in terms of laying out a plan and laying out a message to the American people, and it shows in all the polling.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Was that a misstep by the president or similar to what Karl Rove is suggesting that there was just no time to take those steps? DONALDS: No. I think Karl is wrong on this. And let's be clear, what he was dealing with when he was in the Bush administration was very different. It was post 9/11. America had been attacked.

[23:35:00]

We all knew that there was going to be retaliation and it gave the Bush administration ample time to make that case.

I will add that their initial incursions went far too long, which is why the American people are frustrated with even the thought of a potential endless war. Contrast that with what President Trump is dealing with. We took out their nuclear compounds last summer. The Iranians then quickly moved to try to reconstitute those programs and re-enrich uranium. We sent our diplomatic teams to negotiate this. The Iranians came to the table, they lied repeatedly, and they were stonewalling, and the president was left with a choice.

Do we let the Iranians reconstitute their nuclear program and then put those nuclear warheads on top of their ballistic missiles, threatening our allies all through Europe and the Middle East and potentially the United States? So, in that kind of a situation, you have to move very, very quickly. It doesn't give you the time to make the case the way Karl Rove and the Bush administration was able to do that post 9/11. Two different things. I think his analysis is very wrong.

I think it also demonstrates the fact that President Trump, who desired a diplomatic solution to this, Steve Witkoff, and his team were negotiating this, trying to get a diplomatic solution. The Iranians were doing what they've always done. They come to the table, but they play games because what they're counting on, quite frankly, is weakness in the west so they can continue with their nuclear ambitions to support their terror ambitions.

COATES: You've articulated an imminence that, as you realize, has not from the administration. But let me move on. I mean, as you, the White House is ramping up the pressure on Cuba's regime, including cutting off its oil supply, which led to a nationwide blackout today. And now, the president has said this, that he can take Cuba. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: I do believe I'll be the honor of -- having the honor of taking Cuba. That would be a good honor. That's a big honor.

UNKNOWN (voice-over): Taking Cuba?

TRUMP: Taking Cuba in some form, yes. Taking Cuba. I mean, whether I free it, take it -- I think I could do anything I want with it, you want to know the truth. They're a very weakened nation right now.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: What do you think the president meant by that statement? What's his plan with Cuba? DONALDS: I think the president was actually very clear in his statement. We got to understand a couple things. Number one, the Cubans have been a communist regime up the coast of Florida for more than six decades. Number two, we have 1.6 million Cubans in the state of Florida.

If the Cuban regime falls, and Laura, let's be clear, it needs to fall, it should have fallen a long time ago. But to be honest, we haven't had presidents of the United States with the resolve to make that happen. Donald Trump is taking the security of the western hemisphere very seriously. And so, it's time for them to go away.

Look, if they want to negotiate and actually come into the community of nations, communities in our hemisphere, and actually be a liberal democracy based upon individual liberty, based upon fundamental freedoms and constitutional rights, that will be a good thing for the people of Cuba and for their relatives here in the United States, mostly in Florida.

So, I think the president is right on this. At this time, with the fact that their regime is being squeezed by the fact they're not getting their oil from the Venezuelans the way that they were used to, now is the time to say, look, well, if their economy isn't going to be self-sufficient, we do need to put the squeeze on them. It's time for that regime to fall.

COATES: I am curious to see whether the military presence, if there were to be any, the government's focus, et cetera, will be stretching the resources too thin across all these various different endeavors. Congressman Byron Donalds, thank you so much for joining.

DONALDS: Thank you.

COATES: Breaking tonight, Kouri Richins has been found guilty of murdering her husband and the father of her three children, Eric Richins. Kouri is the Utah mom who prosecutors say drugged her husband with fentanyl and went on to write a children's book about grief just months later. Prosecutors argue Richins was in love with someone else and plagued with financial issues. They say she killed her husband because she thought she'd get millions of dollars from his life insurance.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BRAD BLOODWORTH, PROSECUTOR, SUMMIT COUNTY: Kouri Richins is an intensely ambitious person. She is a risk taker. There was a way forward. Eric had to die.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: The jury, after a three-week trial, deliberated for only three hours before reaching a verdict. Kouri Richins could face up to life in prison without parole.

Next, an FBI agent pushed out of the bureau after 25 years is warning -- quote -- "Kash Patel is playing a dangerous game." Her claims, right after this.

[23:40:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COATES: We just gotten some new information about the attack at the Temple Israel synagogue in Michigan last week. It turns out the attacker's ex-wife called 911 to try to warn police that something wasn't right with him after his family members were killed in Lebanon.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNKNOWN (voice-over): He just lost his position like a couple of days ago. He's like, he's like suicidal. I feel like his voice is not stable, so I just want to make sure he's OK.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: That call was, unfortunately, too late. Our Detroit affiliate, WWJTV, says it was made at 12:26 p.m., about seven minutes after Ayman Ghazali had already driven his car filled with fireworks into the synagogue. The IDF says the man's brother was a Hezbollah commander. That attack has raised terror fears across the United States.

[23:44:59]

It's a key issue that will come up this week when FBI Director Kash Patel testifies before Congress. And my next guest worries that Patel's leadership may be making the country less safe. Jacqueline Maguire writes, "Kash Patel is consumed politically motivated revenge and conspiracy theories, distracting the FBI, once again, from the danger of terrorism."

Jacqueline is here with me now. She says that she was forced out of the bureau last year after a storied 25-year career. Jacqueline, thank you for being here with us. And before we get into your piece, which is very, very compelling, I just want to get your sense of the threat level right now. I mean, you have Senator Ted Cruz recently saying that he thinks that the terror threat is higher now than it has been in decades. Is that hyperbole or a fair assessment?

JACQUELINE MAGUIRE, FORMER EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, FBI: You know, I want to caveat by saying I don't have access to any information, intelligence that people inside the government are seeing right now. But we are in a wartime situation, we are in a war environment. And along with that goes an elevated threat. We are at war with the biggest state sponsor of terrorism that has been a threat for decades. That threat must be elevated right now.

COATES: There is the physical, and then there is cyber threat. Do you see a sophistication about their capabilities in either realm?

MAGUIRE: I think both. I think Iran uses proxies around the world. They have killed hundreds of Americans over the years. They have targeted Americans more recently here in this country, U.S. citizens, including President Trump, for assassination. And they have cyber capabilities through their proxies, through hacking groups, through criminal hackers. So, they really cover a lot of different bases with the threat, and we need to be prepared as a country and as a government.

COATES: The scope of that vigilance is quite extraordinary. You write in your op-ed that you were pushed out of your post along with seven other senior executives just last year. And you take issue with Director Kash Patel for -- quote -- "distracting the FBI." Tell me what the most egregious examples of this distraction are.

MAGUIRE: In my article, I give a few examples, and there is more of them. But I think the FBI has a lot on its plate all the time. It deals with lot of threats, both on the criminal side and on the national security side, counterterrorism, counterintelligence like espionage. Now, we have the cyber threat as well. So, those have to be triaged. And the resources and the expertise of bureau personnel must be used against the most significant threats. And the bureau is in a unique position with their mandate to protect the national security of the United States.

COATES: Patel thinks that they are doing that. In fact, when he put out a statement -- a bunch of statistics showing significant decrease in violent crime and significant increases in counterintelligence arrests just last year. What's your response to that?

MAGUIRE: I would have to see the statistics over the years to compare that and really look at each case by case. I think, you know, the quantitative data is interesting, but I want to see the qualitative, and I want to make sure that they are focused and really dialed in on the threat that we face today.

COATES: One thing they have been dialed in on this past weekend, as you likely saw, was that the director, Kash Patel, had FBI agents that were training with UFC fighters at Quantico, and he called it a tremendous opportunity that would have the FBI be even better prepared to protect the American people. Do you think the file, the rank-and- file members of the FBI see it that way?

MAGUIRE: I don't want to speak for the rank-and-file --

COATES: Would you see it that way?

MAGUIRE: I headed up Quantico as the assistant director of the training division. I do not any see any sense in the relationship with the UFC because we train our agents to be in arrest scenarios to mitigate the threat, to get people under control. I personally have not watched a UFC fight, but I'm not sure that they're fighting each other to get each other into control. We want to deescalate situations.

So, one-time training is not the usual training. You have to do multiple repetitions to get that muscle memory, to make sure that people are training safe, going on the street, keeping themselves safe, keeping their colleagues safe, and keeping, most importantly, the public safe. COATES: A really important article. I encourage everyone to read it. And, of course, he'll be testifying on the Hill later on this week. Thank you so much.

MAGUIRE: Thank you.

COATES: Jacqueline Maguire. Up next, Major General John Klinner, who was deployed less than a week before a fatal plane crash would lead to his death in Iraq. Please stick around because his sister-in-law will join me to pay tribute to him.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:50:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNKNOWN (voice-over): Do you have a comment on the six service members who passed last week?

TRUMP: Who else?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: President Trump aboard Air Force One expressing his frustration at a reporter's repeated questions, including one about the six service members who died when a refueling plane crashed in Iraq last week. One of those members was Air Force Major John "Alex" Klinner. He was from Auburn, Alabama. He was married, and he was a father to a two-year-old and two seven-month-old twins.

[23:55:00]

His wife, Libby, wrote on Instagram about what her kids will miss about their dad. Quote -- "They won't get to see firsthand the way he would jump up to help in any way he could. They won't see how goofy and funny he was. They won't witness his selflessness, the way he thought about everyone else before himself. They won't get to feel the deep love he had for them." Major Klinner had just been deployed to the region for the war. He was just 33 years old.

I'm joined now by his sister-in-law, Sarah Rose Harrell. Sarah Rose, thank you for being here. I'm so sad that it's under these circumstances, but I want the world to understand and just have you share with us a bit more about your brother-in-law and what it was like to even be around him.

SARAH ROSE HARRILL, SISTER-IN-LAW OF MAJOR JOHN "ALEX" KLINNER: Yes. Alex was the kind of person who made everything so much more fun. He had a very steady strength and consistency about him. He was selfless. He was always ready to help anyone. And above all, he was a truly incredible husband and the best dad.

COATES: I mean, it is heartbreaking to think about his loss for your family and really the world after the man that you have described. And we know that he was commissioned through the Air Force ROTC while at Auburn University. Can you tell me what led him to want to serve his country?

HARRILL: You know, Alex really was a true servant leader. And he, in all areas of his life, was racing to the back of the line to serve others. And I think because of that, just being such an innate part of who he was and what drove him, it naturally led to a career in the service.

COATES: A servant leader. What a beautiful way to describe him. I understand that he was just promoted to major in January. But he also just received another degree from Oklahoma State University. What was he looking forward to about his future?

HARRILL: He and Libby have built a beautiful life together. And they really were excited about what was coming next and what that chapter might look like. He had two years left on his commitment, so they were still, you know, thinking through what that might end up looking like. But I can tell you that it absolutely would have included so much time with his family, being in the backyard, pushing his two-and-a-half year-old on the swing, getting out to the park, and just getting to spend more time with them.

COATES: You started the GoFundMe page to help your sister, to help her beloved children, their beloved children, and to navigate what must be this unthinkable future. You've raised $1.3 million just since last week. What does it mean to receive this outpouring of support from the whole country?

HARRILL: Yes. We've been amazed and so humbled by the support of the American people, but also just people around the globe that have wanted to reach out and support Libby and her children as they try to determine what the next chapter of their lives will look like. It has been humbling, and I have been so eternally grateful to everyone that has participated in this. Libby stays home with their three very small children. And so, this will provide some additional support and allow her to be able to continue to do that in the near future.

And something Alex would want us to make sure that the public is aware of is that, you know, there are five other families walking through this unimaginable loss alongside us. And we, again, have been so grateful for the support we've received. We'd also just humbly ask that if you're able to, to also consider supporting those other families as well who are trying to navigate this unimaginable situation. We just want to ensure that all of these American heroes' memories and legacy is not forgotten.

COATES: It certainly will not be a true servant leader and sounds like an entire family of them as well. Sarah Rose Harrill, thank you so much. We're so sorry for your loss.

[00:00:00]

And can you just send our love to Libby and the kids?

HARRILL: Yes, absolutely. Thank you.

COATES: Thank you for sharing Alex's story. Thank you all for watching. "The Story is with Elex Michaelson" is next.