Return to Transcripts main page

Laura Coates Live

Swalwell Officials Resigns From Congress; Trump Teases Second Round Of Talks With Iran; Trump Doubles Down On One-Sided Fight With Pope; A.I. CEO Targeted. Aired 11p-12a ET

Aired April 14, 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)

LAURA COATES, CNN HOST AND SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Well, tonight, Eric Swalwell officially resigns from Congress. And now, the political consequences are giving way to legal scrutiny as authorities in L.A. announce an investigation into a new accuser's allegations. Plus, is a deal actually within reach? President Trump teases a second round of talks with Iran. But the big question, what happens to Iran's nuclear program? Plus, Trump doubling down on his one-sided fight with the pope. Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear, who himself is a deacon, joins me to respond. Tonight on "Laura Coates Live."

Well, my opening statement tonight, you know that old saying that nothing moves quickly in Washington, D.C.? Well, the implosion of now former congressman and now former candidate for governor, Eric Swalwell, move with stunning speed. Eric Swalwell's career in Congress, over. His campaign for California governor, that's done. His future political prospects currently nonexistent. The misconduct allegations against him became so serious and politically toxic that the usual instinct to wait, pull, spin or outlast simply collapsed.

Now, you may think the story will end now that he has resigned. As a former federal prosecutor who tried sexual assault cases, even delayed reporting ones, I can tell you not only is this not anywhere near the end, the criminal investigations are only just beginning. The L.A. County Sheriff's Department says its Special Victims Bureau is investigating Swalwell after a new accuser alleged he raped her at an L.A. hotel in 2018. Here's what Lonna Drewes told CNN's Kyung Lah.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LONNA DREWES, ERIC SWALWELL ACCUSER: I can't believe that he felt so cavalier that he would just drug me, and then rape me, and then choke me. I couldn't move my arms. So, he was on top of me, choking me, and all I could do was just watch. And I passed out. I thought I was dead. I thought I died. And then I woke up, like, 4 o'clock in the morning, and he was next to me, and I left.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Now, she says that she disclosed the assault close in time to the event to people close to her. Also, a therapist, whose attorney did not share detailed corroboration of her claim, was persuaded that they would provide text messages and journal entries and photographs to support their case. CNN could not independently verify the claims.

Swalwell's attorney put out this statement: Swalwell categorically and unequivocally denies each and every allegation of sexual misconduct and assault that has been leveled against him."

Drewes is the latest woman to accuse the now former congressman of sexual misconduct. CNN first reported last Friday that four others had made accusations, including a former staffer.

Now, Democrats were quick to call on him to resign. And Senator Ruben Gallego, who until the last few days was one of Swalwell's closest friends in Congress, says Swalwell had almost everyone fooled.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. RUBEN GALLEGO (D-AZ): This man led a double life. He lied to us. He lied to his family, lied to his constituents, some of the most powerful people in this country. I was manipulated, I was lied to, and everyone else was, too.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Now, I say almost everyone because something that Gallego said, that rumors about Swalwell being -- quote -- "flirty" were swirling around Capitol Hill for years.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GALLEGO: So, I heard rumors of him being flirty.

UNKNOWN (voice-over): And that wasn't an issue enough for you to not trust him, to watch your kids or be close with him?

GALLEGO: Because, you know, you hear this. And then when you're close to somebody and you know his wife, you see this, you see that relationship, you know that, like, it maybe just isn't true. Like everyone else, I fell for the lies. I regret it, but that's what happened.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: But Gallego says he should have confronted Swalwell about those rumors when he first heard them.

[23:04:57]

Now, to be clear, the word he used was flirty. He insists that he had never heard of or witnessed evidence of sexual assault or harassment. But it's the whispers for me. You know, the scandal raises many tough questions about the limitations of the "Me Too" movement, it seems. On one hand, the demand for accountability in the House was swift. On the other hand, the movement was intended to prevent this conduct, not just accelerate the consequences once caught. And the fact that we're even here suggests that some people in power, positions of extraordinary power, may have learned absolutely nothing.

We'll start off with Democratic strategist and co-founder of Lift Our Voices, Julie Roginsky. She is also the author of the "Salty Politics" newsletter on Substack. Here as well, criminal defense attorney Stacy Schneider and political reporter Molly Ball. Glad to have all of you here.

Molly, let me begin with you because I want to play for you how Lisa Bloom, that's the attorney for the accuser who just came out, her name is Lonna Drewes, how she sees Swalwell's resignation from Congress.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LISA BLOOM, LONNA DREWES'S ATTORNEY: I do not, in my opinion, see that as an act of accountability at all. I see it as an effort to avoid the expulsion hearing that was coming because once he steps down, the ethics committee no longer has jurisdiction to impose consequences on him.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Not just Swalwell. It was also Gonzales, who has also resigned as well. There were calls for him earlier to do so. It might surprise people to know that they keep their taxpayer-funded pensions. They also keep their benefits. Now that they have resigned, though, how is it being viewed in terms of dodging at least the congressional consequences?

MOLLY BALL, POLITICAL REPORTER: Well, look, I think within the halls of Congress, most of these men's colleagues are simply relieved to have them gone and to not be asked about this issue.

But, as you say, it does raise a lot of bigger issues about, first of all, the processes in place both to hold men accountable, to hold anyone accountable who is accused of behavior like this, but also to protect victims and to give them avenues, to give them recourse, to give them safe channels, to report these kinds of things because that's what these whisper campaigns are. They are victims crying out for help that don't have a safe channel to do so essentially, right?

Now, I would also say, as you know, the court of public opinion, the court of political opinion has very different evidentiary standards than a court of law.

COATES: Yes.

BALL: And the things that you -- that maybe -- that may inspire, you know, repulsion or political backlash among the public, that doesn't necessarily mean you will be able to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. And so, whether there is legal accountability waiting for Swalwell, I think, is going to depend on a lot of things that have -- that we don't know yet in terms of what the evidence is. And, of course, alleged perpetrators always do have a due process and have rights in that system as well.

So, we don't know what that process will look like. But I think as far as Congress is concerned, this is not the first time we've had this conversation. I'm sure it won't be the last, human nature being what it is. But we certainly do see in both of these cases that if what has been alleged is true, these men could have been brought to justice earlier and should have been.

COATES: Julie, Congressman Swalwell has been in office since 2013. And Drewes said that one reason she spoke out was she saw he was running for governor and thought to herself, this can't happen. What does that tell you about why these allegations are coming to light now? Do you think that this would have happened if he didn't run for governor? Would he have been exposed?

JULIE ROGINSKY, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: We don't know. Ultimately, all it takes is one to get the ball rolling, and then others come forward very often. So, certainly running for governor probably accelerated that timeline, which begs the question, why in the world did he think that he was going to be able to get away with this?

It's just something that, again, I kind of marvel as somebody who has done political campaigns for most of my adult life. I just don't understand how somebody with this in his background thinks that he's going to move up. He could run for president. He could run for governor. He has done both of those things. It's just astounding.

But I will also say, look, Congress has an epidemic of nondisclosure agreements that they use to silence survivors. And what ends up happening is that they get settlements, they get a non-disclosure agreement attached to those settlements, and then the poor survivors have to leave their office and probably their chosen career. And these perpetrators continue to prey on their staff members, others on the Hill.

This is a bipartisan problem and it needs a bipartisan solution. We need to stop getting rid of -- we need to start getting rid of these taxpayer- funded settlements and non-disclosure agreements that preclude survivors from coming forward.

[23:10:04]

Otherwise, there's going to be 500 other Eric Swalwells in the next several decades and none of this is going to change. So, I would really caution people to not focus just on Eric Swalwell and the problem at large, which is that there is an epidemic of silencing going on in this country.

COATES: I am very curious to see his reaction to the idea of the accusations of NDAs. He has said that they were not used and allegations were not there. But there's obviously a shift the day after in terms of his decision to resign and then thereafter from Congress.

Stacy, let's -- you and I talk about the legal side of this because Molly puts a very important point out there, which we know the difference between the court of public opinion and the court of law. And the number one question I always get when issues like this comes up has always been, well, could you indict a case like this? Could you try successfully a case like this based on the facts you know right now? And you and I know we are in the infancy of what it takes to fully prove a case or defend against one.

Lonna Drewes' team filed a police report today in Los Angeles. The Manhattan D.A. has also launched an investigation. These cases are difficult to bring, particularly when they are delayed in the reporting. And what you've heard repeatedly from the attorneys and also from at least Lonna today has been about contemporaneous and close in time reporting of this. There's a reason they're saying this, right?

STACY SCHNEIDER, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Yes, there's a specific reason. So, rape cases, sexual assault cases often, most of the time, are he said, she said cases, and the only two people who know what happened are the two people in the room. So, the courts rely on something called prompt outcry statements. Usually, statements made by an alleged victim outside of the court, not on the stand, are considered hearsay.

But in cases of sexual assault, the courts deem that if someone tells somebody what happened to them, close to the time it happened, the trauma of that event is noteworthy and credible enough to be an admissible statement into court.

So, prosecutors, I imagine, on both coasts now, in California and New York, are now going to speak to the prompt outcry witnesses. These are friends, family members, therapists, a doctor, whom an alleged victim has spoken to about what happened to them. And those statements will be used as corroboration of that person's account because, like you said, Laura, some of these alleged incidents are further back in time, 2024, 2018.

There's now so-called rape kit like we, you know, see in a -- an act between strangers, an act of violence. Women will get hospital treatment, and there's a rape kit that can bring forth evidence. These are people who knew each other, allegedly, and they can be proven.

It takes time. The police will be going. Detectives will be out trying to pull old surveillance video.

COATES: Yes.

SCHNEIDER: They will be talking to witnesses, bartenders. There was alcohol, allegedly, involved in this. So, there are patterns to the investigation and it can be corroborated enough where the victim would be credible to bring forth charges.

COATES: It's all very important to think about the context of it. Molly, I want to -- we have a limited time left, but I want to play for you what Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said. She is calling out Speaker Johnson for his handling of the Swalwell and Gonzales resignations. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ (D-NY): The only reason that this is changing in terms of a resignation today is because the speaker of the House -- speaker of the House feels like he can play politics with the vote numbers. I'm just calling it how I see it. And the fact that we have victims of abuse and these things are being handled in that kind of calculation is disgusting.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Is the timing curious?

BALL: Absolutely. I don't think it's a coincidence that both of these men stepped down from Congress on the same day in a situation where you have an extremely tight vote margin in the House of Representatives.

I will say, you know, Tony Gonzales had already announced that he was not running for reelection. His political career was already over. His service in Congress was already over. He was just planning to serve out the rest of this term in Congress.

COATES: Until January.

BALL: Until his term ended in January instead of stepping down in the middle. And sadly, the victim of the affair to which he has admitted is no longer with us. But, you know, I don't think it's a coincidence that both of these resignations happened at the same time. And now, the balance of power in the House remains exactly the same.

COATES: And to her larger point, if that was the calculus, that's quite telling about where Congress is. Thank you, everyone, so much.

Still ahead, almost finished, but not quite yet. The president gives a brand-new assessment about the war in Iran.

[23:15:00]

Plus, the backlash over the president's feud with the pope and that A.I. Jesus image appears to have some staying power. Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear has a lot to say about this. He will join me tonight.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COATES: Tonight, with a U.S. blockade in place at the Strait of Hormuz and hopes growing for a potential second round of talks, the president tells Fox News the war may soon be over.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: I had to divert because if I didn't do that, right now, you would have Iran with a nuclear weapon. And if they had a nuclear weapon, you would be calling everybody over there, sir, and you don't want to do that.

MARIA BARTIROMO, FOX BUSINESS CHANNEL HOST: Well, you keep saying was. Is this war over?

TRUMP: I think it's close to over, yes. I mean, I view it as very close to over. You know what? If I pulled up stakes right now, it would take them 20 years to rebuild that country.

[23:20:00]

And we're not finished. We'll see what happens. I think they want to make a deal very badly.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: With me now, lead global security analyst for "The Washington Post," Josh Rogin, and vice president and senior director of the Atlantic Council's Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security, Matthew Kroenig. Glad to have both of you here. Josh, is the war close to being over? The president seems to think so.

JOSH ROGIN, LEAD GLOBAL SECURITY ANALYST, WASHINGTON POST INTELLIGENCE: Make no mistake, a blockade is an act of war. We are still at war, and there's no sign of that war ending time -- ending any time soon. Now, of course, President Trump would like the war to be over soon. He's clearly signaling he wants the war to be over soon.

But the Iranians have a different strategy. Their strategy is to stretch this out as long as possible. Their strategy is to inflict as much pain on the U.S. and world economy as possible.

And that's why Trump's strategy of blockading their blockade really doesn't make any sense when you think about it. They're -- they're going to blockade the strait or we're going to blockade the strait to counter their blockade of the strait. And the rest, it's a recipe for continued stalemate.

And so, I think that's exactly what's going to happen. Trump is going to signal he wants to get out, and that's going to tell the Iranians that all they have to do is keep this going longer and longer.

COATES: He has said that he believes they want a deal very badly. I mean, he U.S. and Iran are trying to get back to the negotiating table, we're told. The vice president expected to lead a second round, possibly, of talks, Matthew. And Witkoff, Kushner, they're going to join as well. A New York Times op-ed put it this way: For Kushner and Witkoff, CEO diplomacy is longer working. What should the U.S. do differently?

MATTHEW KROENIG, VICE PRESIDENT AND SENIOR DIRECTOR, SCOWCROFT CENTER FOR STRATEGY AND SECURITY: Well, I think there are two different tracks of diplomacy happening. So, one is on the nuclear deal. I think they are actually -- Kushner and Witkoff were right to insist on zero enrichment and to walk away from Iran's demands that they retain enrichment because once they can enrich fuel for a reactor, they can enrich fuel for a nuclear weapon. So, I think they did that right.

Where I think there is room for negotiation is on the strait. And I could imagine a narrower deal where essentially the ceasefire continues. And the United States agrees not to resume large-scale bombing of Iran in exchange for the Iranians not holding the strait hostage. Now, I don't think that's a likely outcome, but I could at least see that as a possibility, whereas a bigger deal on the nuclear program, I think, is just not in the cards.

COATES: And yet Iran is saying -- I mean, the U.S. is saying they cannot have anything. He talks about pulling up stakes. They could take 20 years to rebuild. Iran insists that it is within its legal ability and right to enrich uranium. Who will see the ground on this issue?

ROGIN: Right. It's almost as if the Trump team doesn't care about the 20-year history of us negotiating with Iran over this very issue because if they had consulted any of the experts or any of the people in the State Department who have worked on this this whole time, they would know that.

Of course, Iran is going to insist on the principle of uranium enrichment and, of course, the United States is going to have to come up with a fix that takes away the threat of that enrichment while giving them that face-saving measure. That's the basic premise that the Iran deal was rooted in and that Trump got rid of, and it's the only way to get to an agreement now. So, eventually, we're going to have to get there.

How long is it going to take for Witkoff and Kushner to realize that and then come up with that? Well, that's the problem because until they realize the obvious fact that we're going to have to come to some sort of compromise where we eliminate the threat of Iran's nuclear enrichment while allowing them to save face by keeping the principle of enrichment, we're going to be at war with Iran, and that could be a very long time, quite unfortunately, for the American soldiers who are in harm's way and the Iranian people, by the way.

COATES: Good point. I want to turn back to the U.S. blockade. The U.S. Military, Matthew, says that six ships have turned around and returned to Iranian ports. You've got CENTCOM saying U.S. forces have completely halted economic trade going into and out of Iran by sea. You've got tracking data showing multiple Iran-linked ships passing through the strait. So, is this blockade even working?

KROENIG: Well, I'm somewhat more optimistic, I think, than Josh. You know, the Iranians were trying to hold the strait hostage with this threat to attack ships. And the United States came back and countered the blockade by putting in place our own blockade, saying essentially that we'll allow other ships to pass but not Iranian ships.

And the Iranians are very dependent on trade through the strait. Fifty to 70 percent of U.S. -- Iranian government revenue is dependent on energy exports. So, if the United States can drive that down to zero over the coming weeks, that really creates dilemmas for the regime in Tehran. Do they stop subsidies to their people? Does that lead to more uprisings? Are they able to pay their security services? Do they decide to stand aside if there are other uprisings?

So, I do think the United States is in the driver's seat now, and this is a different position than we were in just a few days ago where the Iranians seemed to hold all the cards.

COATES: Well, we'll see. Many questions still lingering. Josh, Matthew, thank you both.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

J.D. VANCE, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: I think it's very, very important for the pope to be careful when he talks about matters of theology.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[23:25:02]

COATES: Vice President J.D. Vance with a new warning to the pope, just as the president digs in on his feud. Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear, who also serves as the deacon of his church, with me to respond, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COATES: President Trump again slamming the pope for criticizing the Iran war. Trump told an Italian newspaper the pope -- quote -- "doesn't understand and shouldn't be talking about war, because he has no idea what's going on. He doesn't understand that 42,000 protesters were killed in Iran last month."

The pope did not respond to Trump's comments.

[23:30:00]

But in a letter released by the Vatican today, he called on the Catholic Church to defend democracy. Of course, this back and forth comes with, well, this backdrop: The president's A.I.-generated photo showing him depicted as Jesus healing the sick. Now, Trump says he thought it showed him as a doctor. He has deleted the image. Now, the vice president and House speaker say people simply misunderstood the post.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MIKE JOHNSON, SPEAKER OF THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES: I talked to the president about it as soon as I saw it, and told him that I don't think it was being received in the same way he intended it. He agreed, and he pulled it down. That was the right thing to do.

VANCE: But I think the president was posting a joke. And, of course, he took it down because he recognized that a lot of people weren't understanding his humor in that case.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Joining me now, the governor of Kentucky, Democrat Andy Beshear. Governor, thank you for being here. You said the president's post was -- quote -- "not presidential," among other things. What does it say about the president that he continues to attack the pope at all, let alone still?

GOV. ANDY BESHEAR (D-KY): What it says is that either he has never read the New Testament or he doesn't understand it. Of course, the pope is going to be against war. Why? Because Jesus Christ was against war. And I think that Jesus was the most powerful person who ever walked the planet. He could have dominated nations and made himself a king. He could have been the prince of power, and he chose to be the prince of peace.

It shows that Donald Trump fundamentally does not understand faith, does not understand what the pope stands for. But I tell you what, I don't think that's a surprise to many of us anymore.

COATES: Well, the vice president spoke just tonight and said that he welcomed the dialogue with the pope. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

VANCE: I like it when the pope talks about matters of war and peace because I think that, at the very least, it invites a conversation. I like that the pope is an advocate for peace. I think that's certainly one of his roles. On the other hand, how can you say that God is never on the side of those who wield the sword?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Governor, what the vice president has said, that's a starkly different tone than the president of the United States has taken. What's your reaction?

BESHEAR: Well, J.D. Vance is a better apologist than he is a negotiator, as we've seen in his failure in these negotiations to end this war on Iran. The pope is doing what he believes. He's trying to preach the New Testament. And J.D. Vance is out there again apologizing for a president that directly attacks the pope, calling him weak, calling him names, and then posts a photo online of himself as Jesus, and then lies, claiming he thought that it was a doctor.

I don't know about you, but a doctor has never walked into the room that I'm in in Jesus robes with orbs on his hand and things coming out of the sky. I think if my doctor walked in like that, I think I've got a much better prognosis than I thought. J.D. Vance is just scrambling. And he is unwilling to tell the truth to the American people, that what Donald Trump did and said is deeply wrong.

COATES: What is interesting in particular is there has been a world where politics and religion were intentionally kept totally separate. You wouldn't do so. You wouldn't mention it for whatever reason. You would look at it maybe strategically in terms of gaining more voters, expanding a tent. But you have been very open about your faith. And you recently called out Democrats for backing away from talking about religion.

Do you think that Democrats, and really Republicans possibly, too, but Democrats should use this moment to open up more about faith and reclaim the conversation from Republicans who have been talking about it, particularly during campaigns, as the party that is more in line with the moral compass?

BESHEAR: Democrats should talk about faith more if it's authentic to them. I'm talking about it right now because faith is supposed to help people, not hurt them. Donald Trump is trying to use it as a weapon to justify the division he sows, the war he started, the hurt that American people are feeling because of his tariffs and the price of gas going through the roof. I talk about faith because it motivates me to do good. That idea that I'm supposed to love my neighbor as myself and that everyone is my neighbor, that's the teaching of the parable of the good Samaritan.

You can either use faith like Donald Trump is using it as a weapon, as something to divide people or try to justify your actions, or you can use it to ask us to be better, to be more united, to look out for one another, to make this a better country where everyone can succeed. That's why I talk about my faith, because it drives me to create the type of world that I think my kids and everyone else is deserve.

COATES: Well, you know, members of Congress have put their faith in the Bible that is the Constitution for them.

[23:35:02]

And Democratic Congressman Jamie Raskin, he is pushing a long shot bid to remove Trump via the 25th Amendment, as I'm sure you've heard. He has introduced a bill to form a commission to investigate if Trump is fit for office. Now, it takes no rocket science or the lawyer of all lawyers to know that this effort is almost certainly going to fail given the process by which you can pursue the 25th Amendment and who would need to sign on to it. The vice president, majority of his cabinet as well or he voluntarily does it. Do you think it's wise for Democrats to be spending time on these kinds of efforts?

BESHEAR: Well, I get why he's concerned. We're seeing some very concerning signs from this president. But it can create a distraction. And think about it. Right now, we're talking about this instead of -- instead of talking about the price of groceries, the price of people's mortgages, the fact that the new age -- average age for first time home ownership is now 40, that so much of the American people believe the American dream is slipping away, and the fact that Donald Trump's tariffs, war in Iran, and big, beautiful bill, which is quite ugly, are causing all of it.

COATES: Let's talk about voters because you've obviously made an impression in Kentucky as the governor. But you were in New York last week, and you spoke at the Reverend Al Sharpton's National Action Network Convention. And there were tons of Democratic stars who were there. But Sharpton says the crowd was impressed by you. Quote -- "If there was one that was an eyebrow raiser, it was Beshear." And that's pretty high praise. Why do you think voters are so drawn to your message?

BESHEAR: First, Al Sharpton is an incredible leader. And getting invited by him to come and sit down and have a conversation on important issues with him, that was a real honor, and I'm grateful. I believe that people respond to my message because while I stand up for all my convictions, I spend 80 percent of my time on things that matter to a hundred percent of the American people. I believe that being a person of principle and of faith combined with just that recognition that people are desperate for someone that puts them first is what's resonating right now.

COATES: Governor Andy Beshear, thank you.

BESHEAR: Thank you very much.

COATES: We'll unpack what the governor said and more with CNN political commentator and former senior adviser to the Trump 2024 campaign, Bryan Lanza. Also here, Democratic strategist Sawyer Hackett. Good to have both of you here.

Sawyer, there's been a lot of backlash when it comes to Trump's posts of many things, including now the AI-generated image of himself. You heard Beshear talk about the idea of how best to spend one's resources and time. Is the 25th Amendment discussion rather than the economy the right tactic?

SAWYER HACKETT, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: I frankly get a little tired of this kind of like distraction, discourse that we have in the Democratic Party. What's a distraction? What's not a distraction? Is Trump as A.I. Jesus a distraction from the Iran war, which is a distraction from the Epstein scandal?

I think everybody in the Democratic Party has their own, you know, has their job in the Democratic tent. I think Governor Beshear, he's got to focus on the people of his state. He's also a potential 2028 candidate. And so, of course he's going to -- you know, he's going to bring it back to the issues that elect candidates, elect Democrats, and that's, you know, cost of living and health care and things that actually matter to voters on a day to day basis.

But I think, you know, Democrats like Jamie Raskin and other Democrats in Congress, other Democrats who are outspoken have a role to play, too. And some of that is about raising the ire of Republicans, of Trump, of calling him out when he needs to get called out.

You know, we shouldn't let it just go by without saying that this man is unfit to be president, that he should be removed from office. We can't just keep pointing back to the midterms and say, you know, accountability is coming. We have to be able to show that we're at least, you know, making the moves to hold him accountable right now, even if we are shut out of power.

COATES: Walking and chewing gum at the same time. I know Republicans have talked a lot about that. Bryan, you heard Beshear say that the vice president is scrambling to try to explain the post that Trump has made, probably among other things. I wonder if religious voters who have been drawn to Trump from the first campaign, particularly before Roe v. Wade was impacted by the Supreme Court and pro-life movement to now, is there a fear that the religious voters are going to abandon Trump?

BRYAN LANZA, FORMER DEPUTY COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR FOR TRUMP 2016 CAMPAIGN, FORMER SENIOR ADVISER FOR TRUMP-VANCE 2024 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN: Not any time soon. I think religious, you know, evangelical religious voters, they probably get frustrated from time to time with Donald Trump's tweets. I can promise them that the rest of us do, too. But that's just we've become accustomed to it, right? So, I don't think that they abandon Trump over a tweet. They would abandon him over a policy --

COATES: This is -- this is quite a tweet. And the sparring one-sided with the pope, that doesn't impact, you think?

LANZA: Listen, he sparred with the previous pope just before South Carolina in 2016, and went on to win South Carolina by a landslide.

[23:40:03]

That is the most evangelical state that we have, the most religious state that we have. So, I think we've shown the presidential politics that the pope is not this big, vote good, and everybody expects him to be. But I think where Trump would have a problem is if his policy started to alienate evangelicals, and we haven't seen any of that yet.

COATES: Let's talk about alienation because there are several MAGA members who are concerned about the direction of the movement. And like former Congresswoman from Georgia, Marjorie Taylor Greene, as one example, you have Congresswoman Ilhan Omar from my home state of Minnesota says that she thinks Democrats should bring them into the fold. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. ILHAN OMAR (D-MN): I think, as Americans, it is really important for us to work together for the preservation of everything that is good in our country and to support leaders that we can trust to safeguard what is good about our country. I think it's an important thing for us to put our arms around and say, yes, then now let's figure out how do we save our country from the disaster that this man is creating.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Is there a way to put one's arms politically around and embrace those who have been formerly supportive of Trump, including ex-MAGA folks, without alienating voters?

HACKETT: You know, I don't give Donald Trump credit for anything because I don't think he deserves credit for nearly anything. But I will say that Donald Trump understands the politics of addition, I think, better than a lot of Democrats do, especially Democrats over the last, you know, four to five years.

What you heard there from Representative Omar is an articulation of what I think is kind of the consensus position of Democrats today, which is we need to be an open-tent party. We need to, you know, not necessarily embrace all of the ideas that somebody like a Marjorie Taylor Greene brings to our coalition.

But, you know, when they're standing up and speaking out and saying, hey, look I was wrong about Trump, this is not the man -- he's not the person that I thought he was, this is not what I voted for, we have to be a party that at least appreciates that they're willing to, you know, speak up at that moment and, you know, speak out against Trump.

And this is someone, you know, who has shown an incredible amount of grace. Representative Omar has shown an incredible amount of grace to people who -- you know, Marjorie Taylor Greene has called her a terrorist before. And this is somebody who's saying, you know, we need to bring these people into our coalition when they say they've had enough of Trump. And so, I think Democrats should all take a page out of her book there.

COATES: Well, let's talk about what voters are going to be discussing and thinking out for the polls. And Bryan, some MAGA members, they are against the war in Iran. Most lawmakers are supporting Trump in spite of the rising gas prices, and they are rising and continuing. Some say it's the price, though, that Americans have to pay for national security, for protection of the country. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARTIROMO: Are you going to be able to message all of the senators before the midterm elections? I mean, you've got a message that national security is a priority. You've also got a message your affordability calls in the face of oil prices that are up 50 percent in the last month.

SEN. TIM SCOTT (R-SC): Well, they're still lower than they were under President Biden. So, that's good news.

BARTIROMO: Yes.

SCOTT: And one, yes, affordability will be solved. Number two, the gas prices are coming down.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. ROGER MARSHALL (R-KS): It's going to be tax day very soon. and Americans are going to get an extra thousand or fifteen hundred dollars rebate as well. So, I'm sorry the gas prices are going up, but help is on its way. And your national security, yes, is even more important than your pocketbook.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Is that a winning message for voters?

LANZA: I think they hope is a winning message. I think that the Republican Party, what they're left selling at this point is saying the threat of a nuclear Iran, the threat of this consistent disruptive force in the Middle East is a real threat to our national security, and the price for that is temporary increase in prices through gas, through eggs. I think that's the argument they have to sell. That's the argument they hope that sells. I think it's a tough argument to sell at this point.

COATES: They heard it here. Bryan Lanza thinks that hope is a good strategy. I think there was a candidate who had that, Bryan. I wonder if you supported him. Thank you so much, both of you.

Up next, has A.I. just met its Luigi Mangione moment? Police charging a man they say threw a fire bomb at A.I. CEO Sam Altman's home and had alleged plans to target other executives. San Francisco D.A. prosecuting the case is live with me, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:45:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COATES: A 20-year-old was just charged with trying to murder one of the country's biggest A.I. titans, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman. Prosecutors say that pictures you're looking at now show the suspect, Daniel Moreno-Gama, throwing a Molotov cocktail-style device at Altman's home early Friday morning.

They say he then made his way to OpenAI headquarters, where he started hurling a chair at the glass doors while threatening to -- quote -- "burn it down and kill anyone inside." Now, we should note that, thankfully, nobody was injured. The police recovered a manifesto they say was written by the suspect where he issued explicit threats and expressed a number of anti A.I. beliefs with a whole section titled "Some more words on the matter of our impending extinction."

Tonight, he's being held without bail. His lawyer says he was experiencing an acute mental health crisis and that he was overcharged.

I'm joined now by San Francisco district attorney, Brooke Jenkins, whose office is prosecuting this case. D.A. Jenkins, thank you for being here. As we've mentioned, your office is charging this person with two counts of attempted murder and attempted arson. His lawyer tonight is arguing that this is a property crime at best. Listen to what he said.

[23:49:55]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DIAMOND WARD, SAN FRANCISCO DEPUTY PUBLIC DEFENDER: It is unfair and is unjust for the San Francisco district attorney and the federal government to fearmonger and to exploit the mental illness of a vulnerable young man by turning a vandalism case into an attempted murder life exposure case to gain support of a billionaire?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: What is your response to her statement?

BROOKE JENKINS, SAN FRANCISCO DISTRICT ATTORNEY: I'm honestly troubled by the statements. It doesn't seem as though this is an attorney that has reviewed the evidence in this case. Again, you -- the segment highlighted that there was a manifesto. There is a document that says what his intent was. He also made statements at the scene of the OpenAI office saying what his intent was, which was to burn that office down. He was in possession of kerosene and a lighter at that scene.

And so, this is something that we must take seriously not only in San Francisco but, again, the broader situation of the threat that individuals like him pose to those who are in this industry.

And so, for me, I'm troubled by a situation where this is being played down as something as trivial as a property crime when Mr. Altman and his family could have been extremely harmed in this situation as well as others.

COATES: You know, you've called out a lot of the inflammatory rhetoric we're seeing when it comes to A.I. A senior White House A.I. advisor posted online -- quote -- "The doomers need to take a serious look at what they have helped incite." Do you believe that some of the warnings that are out there about A.I., some would call them apocalyptic, others more complimentary but warnings, nonetheless, are fueling these sorts of attacks?

JENKINS: I absolutely do. I think that there is a culture, particularly online but also in many rooms where A.I. is being discussed, that is pushing this notion that humanity is going to become extinct due to A.I., and stoking the fears of those who are suspicious and who have valid concerns, and taking those valid concerns and turning them into this type of situation where someone thinks that we're going to go extinct and that they have to save the human race.

We can't continue to stroke that fire. We have to calm things down. We have to ensure that people understand that we as legislators and elected officials will ensure that the appropriate regulations are in place so that we can continue to function as a society.

COATES: And yet, obviously, you're not suggesting people can't voice their First Amendment views on their concerns about A.I. You just believe that the radicalization of some can be accelerated in this way?

JENKINS: It can absolutely be accelerated. And again, I hold elected officials to a higher standard that we are supposed to be the ones who are trying to keep people safe and to calm the fire of those flames. And so, that's what I'm saying, is that we have to be the ones to ensure that people understand that we are here to look out for the members of society and do what we need to in a regulatory fashion and otherwise to make sure that those concerns are addressed, but what we cannot do is feed that fire just like we've seen in this country politically and incite people to commit violence.

COATES: District Attorney Brooke Jenkins, we are following this case. Thank you so much.

JENKINS: Thank you.

COATES: Well, it might be the strangest question ever asked to a president. What do you know about a FEMA official who claims to be teleporting to a Waffle House? I'm not kidding. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:55:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COATES: Well, the clock is about to strike midnight here on the East Coast. This means it is time to check in with Elex Michaelson out on the West Coast. Elex, good to see you.

You've seen this, right? A top official at FEMA claims that he was teleported against his will to a Waffle House. It was 50 miles away. Again, the word here, teleported. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GREGG PHILLIPS, HEAD, OFFICE OF RESPONSE AND RECOVERY, FEMA: We had a teleport incident, two of them. The car lifted up and took me where I was going. And I ended up at a Waffle House, like 50 miles away from where I was. It was an incredibly frightening moment to experience yourself in your car flying through the air.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: OK. Well, today, K-File spoke with President Trump on the phone about this, seriously. And he said -- quote -- "I don't know anything about teleporting. It just sounds a little strange, but I know nothing about teleporting or him, but I'll find out about it right now." He and I share the bewilderment. Do you?

ELEX MICHAELSON, CNN ANCHOR AND CORRESPONDENT: I mean, yes, but then you see all the stuff that we're learning recently about aliens and new technology and the possibility that they're already here. So, maybe, it's --

(LAUGHTER)

I mean, it sounds absurd, right? I mean, obviously, but maybe there's a real thing here.

[00:00:01]

COATES: Maybe. I mean, how can I find -- say it's a real thing. If you could teleport to any fast food joint on the planet, where are you going?

MICHAELSON: Well, for us here in Southern California, there's no option. I mean, In-N-Out is clearly -- I guess I've just been teleported there.

(LAUGHTER)

I'm ready for a double-double animal style fry.

COATES: Am I at Del Taco? Hello, Del Taco. Nice to see you again, my old friend, when I had a stronger metabolism.

(LAUGHTER)

MICHAELSON: Del Taco is your choice?

COATES: Yes. Don't judge me. It wasn't a Waffle House. Have a great show, Elex.

(LAUGHTER)

MICHAELSON: Del Taco. Wow. Thank you, Laura.