Return to Transcripts main page

Anderson Cooper 360 Degrees

DOJ Preparing to seek indictment against Former FBI Director James Comey; Trump Claims "Triple Sabotage" at United Nations Speech; Trump Threatens ABC Over Jimmy Kimmel's Return; ABC Reports Kimmel's Return Watched by 6.3 Million Viewers; Trump Threatens ABC Over Jimmy Kimmel's Return; One Detainee Killed, Two Wounded at Dallas Ice Facility; FBI Director Posted Photo of Bullet Casing From Crime Scene With "Anti-ICE" Written on It; U.S. Officials Say Trump's New Stance Meant to Put Pressure on Putin to End Ukraine War; Ukraine's Zelenskyy Asks U.N. General Assembly for Support Against Russia; White House Hangs Image of Biden Autopen Signature in New Presidential Walk of Fame; Trump and Epstein Status on National Mall Removed. Aired 8-9p ET

Aired September 24, 2025 - 20:00   ET

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

ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST: ...care nurse, had just arrived for her shift. Now, Sophia's brother was unharmed, but Sophia had a bullet lodged in her brain and doctors had to remove half of her skull. She is now in an inpatient rehabilitation program, and her family is now saying, in part: "Sophia surviving this horrific attack is a miracle. Her healing process is nothing short of miraculous, though she still has a long journey ahead, filled with extensive therapy. Her resilience continues to inspire hope at every step."

Thanks so much for joining us. AC360 begins now.

[20:00:35]

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST, "ANDERSON COOPER: 360": Tonight on 360, we are just learning President Trump could be close to getting both his wish and his repeated command. The prosecution of former FBI director and longtime target, James Comey.

Also tonight, the President promising retribution against ABC for putting Jimmy Kimmel back on air last night. You'll hear Kimmel's emotional message to Charlie Kirk's widow and the defiant stand he's taking toward the President.

And later, there's breaking news in the deadly sniper shooting at an ICE facility in Dallas that killed a detainee, gravely wounding two others. The FBI Director posts alleged evidence on social media, what appears to be an anti-ICE message scrawled on bullets allegedly found at the scene.

Good evening thanks for joining us. Whoever first said that the wheels of justice turned slowly might soon have to eat those words. Just four days after the President demanded in a social media post, which was later deleted, that the Attorney General of the United States prosecute three people Mr. Trump views his political enemies. And five days after forcing out the U.S. Attorney, Erik Siebert, who reportedly refused to carry out those orders due to a lack of evidence in one of those cases, could now be on the fastest of fast track.

Sources familiar with the investigation tell CNN that the Department of Justice is preparing to seek a criminal indictment against former FBI Director James Comey.

Now the probe is being run by the President's hand-picked replacement for Siebert as U.S. Attorney for Virginia's Eastern District. Her name is Lindsey Halligan and until now, she's been serving as a White House senior associate staff secretary. Like Alina Habba acting New Jersey U.S. attorney, she has no experience as a prosecutor. Also like Habba, she was part of the President's legal team on several of his many cases.

People familiar with the investigation tell CNN it centers on whether Comey lied to Congress during his September 2020 testimony on his handling of the Russia probe four years earlier. Now, here's some of what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. TED CRUZ (R-TX): On May 3rd, 2017, in this committee, Chairman Grassley asked you point blank, "Have you ever been an anonymous source in news reports about matters relating to the Trump investigation of the Clinton investigation?" You responded under oath, "Never."

Now, as you know, Mr. McCabe, who works for you, has publicly and repeatedly stated that he leaked information to "The Wall Street Journal" and that you were directly aware of it and that you directly authorized it. Now, what Mr. McCabe is saying and what you testified to this committee cannot both be true. One or the other is false. Who's telling the truth?

JAMES COMEY, FORMER FBI DIRECTOR: I can only speak to my testimony. I stand by what the testimony you summarized that I gave in May of 2017.

CRUZ: Your testimony is you've never authorized anyone to leak. And Mr. McCabe, if he says contrary, is not telling the truth, is that correct?

COMEY: Again, I'm not going to characterize Andy's testimony, but mine is the same today.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: so that was from September 30th, 2020 and the date is important. The five-year statute of limitations deadline for securing an indictment is Tuesday. But there's another reason for the urgency and it is, as several of our legal analysts have said, almost completely without precedent in the entire history of the country, a President who wants his enemies prosecuted and does not mind saying so publicly and loudly and repeatedly.

I mentioned some of that now deleted social media post by the President on Saturday. I want to read you some more of it, because if this was any other President, a post like this would have caused disbelief or outrage.

On Saturday, the President posted "Pam," meaning Pam Bondi, "I have reviewed over 30 statements and posts saying that essentially same old stories last time all talk, no action, nothing is being done. What about Comey, Adam Shifty Schiff, Letitia they're all guilty as hell, but nothing is going to be done." His post ends with -- "We can't delay any longer. It's killing our reputation and credibility. They impeach me twice and indicted me five times over nothing. Justice must be served now."

So that was Saturday, a day after Erik Siebert was forced out or as the President said also on online, I fired him. That same day, he named Lindsey Halligan, Siebert's replacement, saying she'll be, "... fair, smart and will provide desperately needed justice for all." And just to underscore what the President thinks about the man, he's demanding charges against. Here's some of what he has said about James Comey loud and clear on camera.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP (R) PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Comey and all those, you know, sleazebags.

Comey lied to everybody.

We fired Comey that fraud --

That phony crooked Comey.

Comey should hang his head in disgrace.

Comey is a dirty cop.

Comey is a corrupt person.

One of the best things is firing James Comey's (bleep) out of there.

He's a leaker.

Comey, who is the worst.

They lied to Congress many times, you know, Comey and all those guys.

Comey lies and leaks. He's a liar and he's a leaker.

Is this guy being looked at? But we're going to straighten it out.

[20:05:29]

COOPER: CNN senior justice correspondent Evan Perez starts us off now from Washington. What exactly are prosecutors saying here -- Evan?

EVAN PEREZ, CNN SENIOR JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Well, they're looking at possible perjury charges against the former FBI director. From some of those clips that you just played, Anderson, you can see that this has been on the President's mind for some time. As a matter of fact, he pushed for this way back during the administration of Bill Barr, right?

He wanted the Justice Department to bring charges against James Comey. He believed that Comey had lied and had essentially set him up as part of the Trump-Russia investigation. And so, that has been on his mind and that remains on his mind at this hour.

Now, for prosecutors, what they're looking at is whether they can sustain these charges. We know that there's a grand jury, of course, that meets in the courthouses of the Eastern District of Virginia. There's a courthouse in Alexandria and also in Richmond. So those are the ones that are possibilities for us to see some action.

And as you pointed out, Anderson, all of this has to happen before the statute of limitations expires on Tuesday.

Now, one of the witnesses that we've seen brought in is a friend of Comey, somebody who worked -- served as his lawyer, Dan Richmond. He came and spoke to the FBI. And if you remember, back in 2017, after Comey was fired, one of the things that happened was, there was these memos that Comey had written, which were leaked to "The New York Times."

And so, we know that that is at least one of the things that prosecutors have been looking at. Now, we don't know again, what specific testimony they're going to focus on, but that at this hour, we know is what they're doing. They're focusing on those statements from that that testimony in 2020.

COOPER: All right, Evan, thanks very much. I want to talk more about this. I want to bring in CNN senior political and global affairs commentator Rahm Emanuel. He's also a former Obama White House chief of staff; CNN senior legal analyst, former federal prosecutor, Elie Honig; and Cardozo Law School professor and former federal prosecutor Jessica Roth. James Comey hired Jessica to work in the Southern District of New York and swore her in.

Elie, how fast and what kind of case do you think the government has here?

ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Well it could happen really soon, I mean, all you have to do is go into a grand jury. Ordinarily, grand jury is all but a rubber stamp for federal prosecutors, although I do think there's some chance in a case like this, they may reject the case.

Really important to know, though, if they're going to bring perjury charges against James Comey, they have to show that he squarely lied and knowingly lied. And if you look at the video that you showed at the beginning of the show, if Jim Comey testified, I never leaked, but somebody else said he authorized me to leak. That's not necessarily inconsistent, right?

So, they're going to have to show something, not just sort of dicey or shady testimony, but a square right down the middle lie. And I do want to say, a grand jury may well indict, but getting a jury to convict is a whole different story.

COOPER: Yes, Jessica, how tough is it to prove a perjury charge?

JESSICA ROTH, CARDOZO LAW SCHOOL PROFESSOR AND FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: Well, I mean, as Elie was alluding to, you have to show that the defendant who you're charging intentionally lied before the body under oath. And so, if somebody has a different memory than another person of how some events transpired, that's not necessarily going to make the case because they have to actually know that they're saying something false.

COOPER: But somebody can just say, that's not how I remember it.

ROTH: They could and if that's true, then that's not lying under oath. But, you know, as Elie said, they have to be aware of what they have to prove, ultimately, if they take the case to trial. But under professional rules, prosecutors are not supposed to seek a grand jury indictment unless they believe they actually have sufficient evidence to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt at trial.

So, although the standard for proof in the grand jury is actually lower under professional norms and Justice Department regulations, you're not actually supposed to go into the grand jury unless you believe you will have sufficient evidence by the time of trial to convict, and also for it to be upheld on appeal.

COOPER: Rahm, by President Trump, speaking about Comey for so many years, and there's so much tape on it and then sending this, you know, the social media post to Pam Bondi, which was then deleted, kind of ordering this or at least encouraging her to do this, has he already kind of hurt the case against Comey.

RAHM EMANUEL, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL AND GLOBAL AFFAIRS COMMENTATOR: I'm only laughing because encouraging would not be the word -- adjective I would use, directing is the is the key adjective here. I mean, look, I do think when this gets to trial, assuming it through the grand jury, given the low bar, that is going to be admissible evidence that this was not -- this is not on the level. This was directed by the President to pay retribution, political retribution. Everything you played beforehand, I'm not an attorney, that's what I would play.

But I find it ironic, Anderson, in the very week that we find the border czar took $50,000.00 in hard, cold cash, and the FBI and the Justice Department cover up and dismiss the case -- took the cash.

They're going to go after a guy that the former U.S. attorney said, we don't have a case. And they fire -- pressure him out. So this is not on the legal level and on the political level. I actually think they're going to -- I think the President and the Republicans in the Senate and the House are going to pay a price because Independent swing voters, which are going to be the most important in the 2026, are uncomfortable and the data is very clear about this, uncomfortable with it, untethered, unhinged Donald Trump and by not speaking up and doing their responsibility the Congress being a rubber stamp, they're going to pay a political price and this is just another nail in that coffin.

[20:10:52]

COOPER: Rahm, I do want to point out, The White House points out that that Comey did nothing wrong. I also want to point out it was allegedly in a covered bag so unclear if he knew it was cash, maybe take out from a cafe.

EMANUEL: Anderson, I'm from Chicago, $50,000.00 what you give to an older man on election day? Okay, that's walking around money. Okay. They gave a guy $50,000.00 and they dismissed the case.

Here, the U.S. attorney says there's not a case. They fired him and they put in there -- I don't know her legal background and credentials, but they order a criminal probe to harass Comey because the President wants retribution for somebody he thinks harassed him and he's up front about it.

COOPER: Anybody ever hands me a bag in public? I'm not touching it.

HONIG: Look and make sure it's cash.

COOPER: But how -- I mean, to the point of putting the thumb on the scale of justice here. I mean, has he messed up the case?

HONIG: Yes, I mean, not only is there going to be a political cost to this, there is a motion, a defense motion that you can make if Comey gets indicted. Watch for this, the first thing his defense lawyer is going to do, this is before a trial, is going to ask the judge to throw it out based on what we call selective or vindictive prosecution. People make those motions all the time. They're really hard because it's hard to prove that there was political pressure to bring a case.

Here, you have exhibit A, it's Donald Trump's social media post. He says explicitly, he names Comey among the three people he wants indicted. He gets rid of the old prosecutor and brings in a new one to do just that. I have never seen a better case for selective prosecution. Don't be surprised if they get this indictment through. If a judge throws it out on that basis before it ever gets to trial.

ROTH: I'm sure that motion is already ready to go by Comey's lawyers, and it's that combination of Trump being so flagrant in calling for Comey's prosecution, essentially without regard to what the evidence is, and then replacing the experienced career prosecutor in the Eastern District of Virginia with somebody who's a Trump loyalist with no career experience as a prosecutor. It's that one two combination that I think is going to make a very compelling motion to dismiss the indictment.

COOPER: And Rahm, to Republicans who say, look, a Democratic administration indicted then former President Trump, as the President pointed out multiple times in his social media post and that's what unleashed all of this. You say what?

EMANUEL: Well, look, first of all, that's not going to -- on the legal side and even on public opinion side, Donald Trump is the President. This is not a retrospective. This is -- that's what they did. This is what happened. It's going to be a political thing. Now, look, I start from everything, Anderson, from a midterm election. Democrats are filled with anger and rage. And that's what their motivation, swing voters are filled with disquiet, uncomfortable with the unhinged, untethered Donald Trump.

This is going to be another chink in that communication of a Donald Trump that is not just breaking norms, but close to breaking the law. And then pushing and they're going to want something more than a Republican rubberstamp Congress. And in this districts across the country, states, gubernatorial, congressional, an unhinged Donald Trump and a complacent and complicit Republican Congress, they're going to pay the price and notice just last week when Cruz spoke up how things flipped so quickly when a senator found, a Republican senator, that was more of a senator than a Republican, the political dynamics quickly shift around the Jimmy Kimmel case.

COOPER: That's a good point, Rahm Emanuel, thank you. Elie Honig, Jessica Roth.

We mentioned last night the President's remarks, yesterday, the U.N. pointing out repeatedly a nonfunctioning teleprompter and an escalator that stopped. Late tonight the President posted this statement. I want to read it to you now in full.

"A real disgrace took place at the United Nations yesterday. Not one, not two, but three very, very sinister events. First, the escalator going up the main speaking floor came to a screeching halt. It stopped on a dime. It's amazing that Melania and I didn't fall forward onto the sharp edges of the steel steps face first. It was only that we were each holding the handrail tightly, or it would have been a disaster."

"This was about sabotage, as noted by days earlier post in 'The London Times' that said U.N. workers joked about turning off an escalator. The people that did it should be arrested. Then, as I stood before television, a crowd of millions of people all over the world and important leaders in the hall, my teleprompter didn't work. It was stone cold, dark. I immediately thought to myself, wow. First the escalator event and now that teleprompter. What kind of place is this?"

"I then proceeded to make a speech without a teleprompter, which kicked in about 15 minutes later. The good news is the speech has gotten fantastic reviews. Maybe they appreciated the fact that very few people could have done what I did. And third, after making the speech, I was told that the sound was completely off in the auditorium where the speech was made that world leaders, unless they use the interpreters earpieces, couldn't hear a thing."

"First person I saw at the conclusion of the speech was Melania, who was sitting right up front. I said, how did I do? She said, couldn't hear a word you said."

[20:15:39] "This wasn't a coincidence. This was triple sabotage at the U.N. They ought to be ashamed of themselves. I'm sending a copy of this letter to the Secretary General, and I demand an immediate investigation. No wonder the United Nations hasn't been able to do the job they were put in existence to do."

"All security tapes at the escalator should be saved especially the emergency stop button. Secret Service is involved. Thank you for your attention in this matter."

Much more ahead tonight, Kara Swisher and First Amendment, attorney Rebecca Tushnet on Jimmy Kimmel's return to late night and the Presidents latest threat of more retribution.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JIMMY KIMMEL, "JIMMY KIMMEL LIVE" HOST: The President of the United States made it very clear he wants to see me and the hundreds of people who work here fired from our jobs. Our leader celebrates Americans losing their livelihoods because he can't take a joke.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: Later, CNN's John Miller with breaking news on what investigators are uncovering in the wake of today's deadly sniper shooting at an ICE center in Dallas. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:20:58]

COOPER: ABC and Disney tonight have good reason to brace for retribution from the President for putting Jimmy Kimmel back on the air. He's already promised it. Quoting from his social media post, "I can't believe ABC fake news gave Jimmy Kimmel his job back. The White House was told by ABC that his show was cancelled." He continued with the threat, "I think we're going to test ABC out on this. Let's see how we do. Last time I went after them, they gave me $16 million. This one sounds even more lucrative. A true bunch of losers. Let Jimmy Kimmel rot in his bad ratings."

That is both the backdrop to and the threat hanging over ABC, their parent company Disney and Kimmel now that he's back from suspension, over remarks he made in the wake of Charlie Kirk's murder. High stakes as well for a late night monologue, according to ABC, more than six million T.V. viewers, plus 26 million online watched as he opened it last night with the exact same words. Tonight show host Jack Paar once used after he returned from a different and certainly less serious fight over censorship, 65 years ago.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)

(CROWD chanting "Jimmy!")

KIMMEL: Thank you. Anyway, as I was saying before I was interrupted.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: Kimmel also made light of the conditions for his return.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KIMMEL: Disney has asked me to read the following statement, and I agreed to do it. Here we go, to re-activate your Disney+ and Hulu account, open the Disney+ App on your smart T.V. or T.V. connected device.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: Like any good joke, there was truth behind it, a suspension set off calls for people to cancel subscriptions to streaming services owned by Disney, and a soaring number of Google searches for instructions how. Two big affiliate groups, Sinclair and Nexstar, together accounting for nearly a quarter of ABC households, did not carry Kimmel's return last night, meaning their viewers did not get to hear him choke up while addressing Charlie Kirk's supporters.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KIMMEL: I have no illusions about changing anyone's mind, but I do want to make something clear because it's important to me as a human and that is, you understand that it was never my intention to make light of the murder of a young man. I don't -- I don't think there's anything funny about it.

I posted a message on Instagram on the day he was killed, sending love to his family and asking for compassion and I meant it and I still do. Nor was it my intention to blame any specific group for the actions of what it was, obviously, a deeply disturbed individual that was really the opposite of the point I was trying to make. But I understand that to some that felt either ill-timed or unclear, or maybe both. And for those who think I did point a finger, I get why you're upset. If the situation was reversed, there was a good chance I'd have felt the same way.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: Kimmel also directly addressed the President in his pressure campaign to get him pulled from the air, as well as a wider climate of censorship he sees taking hold in the country.

[20:25:04]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KIMMEL: The President of the United States made it very clear he wants to see me, and the hundreds of people who work here fired from our jobs. Our leader celebrates Americans losing their livelihoods because he can't take a joke.

And it's not just comedy, he's gunning for our journalists too. He's suing them, he's bullying them over the weekend, his foxy friend Pete Hegseth announced a new policy that requires journalists with Pentagon press credentials to sign a pledge promising not to report information that hasn't been explicitly authorized for release. That includes unclassified information they want to pick and choose what the news is.

I know that's not as interesting as muzzling a comedian, but it's so important to have a free press and it is nuts that we aren't paying more attention to it.

(CHEERING APPLAUSE)

KIMMEL: Walter Cronkite must be spinning in his grave right now. He's dead, right? Look, I never imagined I would be in a situation like this. I barely paid attention in school.

But one thing I did learn from, from Lenny Bruce and George Carlin and Howard Stern, is that a government threat to silence a comedian the President doesn't like is anti-American.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: Well, before the monologue aired, Kimmel got a boost from podcaster Joe Rogan. Here's his remarks.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOE ROGAN, PODCAST HOST, "THE JOE ROGAN EXPERIENCE": The companies, if they're being pressured by the government. So if that's real, and if people on the right are like, yeah, go get them, oh -- oh, my God, you're crazy. You're crazy for supporting this because this will be used on you.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: A spokesman for Charlie Kirk's organization, Turning Point USA, weighed in on Kimmel's monologue, saying it was not enough.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANDREW KOLVET, TPUSA SPOKESPERSON: What we need is, I'm sorry, I lied, I was wrong and I won't do it again. And my apologies to the Kirk family and Erika Kirk.

When somebody like Jimmy Kimmel says that the shooter of Charlie was MAGA, what he's really saying is that it's okay to lie about conservatives, that their lives don't matter, that his agenda, his political agenda and cultural agenda is more important than the life of my friend who was just taken from us and robbed from us.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: Vice President Vance also addressed Kimmel's remarks, suggesting the administration, the FCC Chairman, Brendan Carr, had nothing to do with his suspension.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

J.D. VANCE, (R) VICE-PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: What people will say is, well, you know, didn't the FCC commissioner put a tweet out that said something bad? Well, compare that, the FCC commissioner making a joke on social media, what is the government action that the Trump administration has engaged in to kick Jimmy Kimmel or anybody else off the air? Zero. What government pressure have we brought to bear to tell people that they're not allowed to speak their mind? Zero. We believe in free speech.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: In point of fact, Kimmel was pulled from the air not after Brendan Carr made a joke on social media, but after Carr put pressure on ABC affiliates (on camera) just hours before those two affiliate groups, Nexstar and Sinclair decided to preempt last Wednesday night's show.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BRENDAN CARR, FCC CHAIRMAN: We can do this the easy way or the hard way. These companies can find ways to change conduct, to take action, frankly on Kimmel, or there's going to be additional work for the FCC ahead.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: You can call that pressure or maybe you see that as just making a suggestion for affiliates.

Joining us now is Kara Swisher, co-host of the "Pivot" podcast and host of the "On" with Kara Swisher podcast, also, Harvard law school professor and First Amendment attorney, Rebecca Tushnet.

Kara, first of all, what did you make -- what did you think of Jimmy Kimmel's monologue?

KARA SWISHER, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: I thought he did a great job. It's a really hard needle to thread. I think he came off as human. He was funny. That's the critical thing. He's a comic. He should be funny, relaxed, actually, surprisingly. And he made a lot of good jokes, mostly at the expense of Donald Trump and Brendan Carr and those of the deserved attack vectors for a comic in this situation like him.

So, I thought he was good and he made -- he wasn't too lecturing. I think that could have been a problem, he said sort of the right things about the free press and was -- I think, appropriately apologetic, and tried to say, if you heard me the wrong way, I'm really sorry. I thought it was pretty good. He did well, so he did well, that's the other thing, by the way, at 26 million on YouTube -- 6.25, you know, it's sort of a clapback at President Trump because it was popular. People wanted to hear it.

COOPER: And, Kara, you interpret it as a clapback against the President.

SWISHER: I think that, yes, definitely. He was making a lot of jokes at the expense of --

COOPER: No, I mean, those numbers?

SWISHER: Oh, yes, people wanted to see it. It was popular. You know, the one thing President Trump is aware of is popularity and this was a popular -- I don't know if this is going to stay popular but he certainly did Jimmy Kimmel a favor. He always says he does favors for people's ratings.

Well, congratulations, President Trump, you did a great job getting Jimmy Kimmel noticed and so.

COOPER: Professor, the President called Kimmel show another arm of the DNC, like in the airtime, he gets to an unlawful campaign contribution against him. Does that argument have any basis in law?

REBECCA TUSHNET, HARVARD LAW SCHOOL PROFESSOR AND FIRST AMENDMENT ATTORNEY: Not in current law. So, this has been an idea floating around on kind of the radical fringes for a while. That speech that they don't like is a campaign contribution. And you know, obviously, it's nonsensical here. It's nonsensical in general, but it's particularly so here where the there's no way you could say he's supporting a political party.

[20:30:55]

But even if he was, saying things in support of a political party is not a political contribution and that, I mean, I really don't know what, like, it's deeply bizarre.

COOPER: Kara, the -- I mean, it passed his prologue, ABC paid $16 million, according to the president, paid $16 million to settle the George Stephanopoulos lawsuit. What do you see him, I mean, do you think he actually is going to go after ABC more and what do you -- what levers would he use?

KARA SWISHER, CNN CONTRIBUTOR AND HOST OF "ON WITH KARA SWISHER" PODCAST: I don't know. I don't know. I mean, he's obviously -- through Brendan Carr -- that wasn't a joke that Brendan Carr told. That's ridiculous with --

(CROSSTALK)

COOPER: Right. Vance is portraying it as just a joke.

SWISHER: Clearly, a threat. It's ridiculous. Everything's a joke after they make the threat, you know? And actually, Jimmy Kibble made a joke of it by using Robert De Niro playing a mobster, which I thought was really funny actually. That was the best, my favorite part. But I don't know what he could do. He does all kinds of lawsuits. He did against the New York Times, which was, for right now, is not going anywhere, was thrown out by a judge. We'll see if they re-file or they try to do something else. And so, he keeps doing these things and he sees what he can get. He's like a fisher --

(CROSSTALK) COOPER: Kara, do you think if ABC hadn't paid the $16 million initially, that they wouldn't be in this situation?

SWISHER: I don't know. I think you'll see people say if you give a bully a cookie, they come back for another cookie. Right? That's -- it's a mixing book (ph).

(CROSSTALK)

COOPER: I believe it's if you give a mouse a cookie, but --

SWISHER: Mouse a cookie. But I'm saying a bully a cookie.

(LAUGH)

SWISHER: Anyone --

(CROSSTALK)

COOPER: Maybe that's a whole new line of children's books for you there, Kara.

SWISHER: Yeah. Yeah. I think it's really -- I don't know. I think in that case, it was a much more complex case. The Paramount one was very clearly to get that deal done. That's pretty much what Shari Redstone was doing there. And it's same thing with Nexstar. In this case, Nexstar is not going to put on Kimmel until they get -- until they get approval for this deal they want to do, which would expand their coverage across the country.

And once they get that, they'll probably put Kimmel right back on would be my guess. But we'll see.

COOPER: Professor, I mean, as a law professor, when you saw the law firms early on, to me that was sort of the first wave of this trial balloon by the administration, and it seemed successful. A couple law firms fought back, but a lot caved, made side agreements with the administration. Do you think that is what started this?

TUSHNET: No. I think they came in with a plan. So Brendan Carr wrote the FCC chapter of Project 2025. He was very overt about what he planned to do. So certainly, the law firm was one of the signals. But it was a comprehensive plan and Carr came in ready to do it.

COOPER: Kara, I'm wondering what you thought of Joe Rogan defending Kimmel, or at least not necessarily defending Kimmel, but pointing out, listen, if you're conservative and you think this is great, wait until there's a change in the administration and you don't want these same kind of bully tactics being used.

SWISHER: I thought it took him long enough to say something, after everybody else said and after it was all settled.

(CROSSTALK)

COOPER: Well, I think he said he was out hunting. I think he was -- he said he was out hunting.

(CROSSTALK)

SWISHER: OK, sure. Whatever.

COOPER: You know?

SWISHER: Whatever. I mean, I'm sure he was hiking with Gavin Newsom, but one of the -- that's a reference to the Kamala Harris thing. But, I think this idea, a lot of conservatives are doing this if they, like Ted Cruz did the same thing. If we -- if we do this to them, they're going to do it to us. I don't think that's a particularly good argument. I think you should do it because comics should be able to say whatever they want, even if it's hurtful and mean and whatever.

And so, I think the better argument is the First Amendment allows Jimmy Kimmel to make any joke he wants and he should be able to, and I think that's the very best argument. Everything else is they're going to come for us if we go for them, I'm not -- I'm not a fan of those arguments, but great. That's great. He should support Jimmy Kimmel as a comic himself.

COOPER: Kara Swisher, thanks very much. Rebecca Tushnet as well, thank you.

TUSHNET: Thank you.

COOPER: Up next, late (ph) details on the deadly shooting at an ICE detention processing facility in Dallas. Former Senior National Security Adviser, also -- National Security Official, Brett McGurk is going to join us on the White House warning to Russia that the president is losing his patience on the war in Ukraine.

[20:35:00]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

J.D. VANCE, (R) VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: And he's doing everything that he can to stop it. But look, if the Russians refuse to negotiate in good faith, I think it's going to be very, very bad for their country.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COOPER: Investigation is underway tonight into a deadly shooting at an ICE facility in Dallas that killed at least one detainee and critically injured two others. No motive has been officially revealed, but the FBI is calling the attack an act of targeted violence.

[20:40:00]

Former podcaster turned FBI Director, Kash Patel quickly posted on social media this photograph showing one of five unspent shell casings said to be found at the scene with an anti-ICE message one of them has scrolled on it. They say the suspected shooter killed himself at the scene. President Trump wasted no time on Truth Social blaming Democrats, saying this violence is a result of the radical left Democrats constantly demonizing law enforcement, calling for ICE to be demolished and comparing ICE officers to Nazis.

The message was echoed by others as well, Senator Ted Cruz and Vice President J.D. Vance.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. TED CRUZ, (R-TX): This must stop. To every politician who is using rhetoric demonizing ICE and demonizing CBP, stop.

VANCE: In Dallas, Texas, an ICE facility, an Immigrations and Customs Enforcement facility was opened fire upon by a violent left-wing extremist, a person who wrote anti-ICE messaging on their bullets.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: Joining now is CNN Chief Law Enforcement and Intelligence Analyst, John Miller. I understand you have some new reporting on what you're learning.

JOHN MILLER, CNN CHIEF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND INTELLIGENCE ANALYST: You know, as the case develops tonight, the FBI has executed search warrants on the shooter's car which was found near the scene, which has paperwork and signs around it, talking about nuclear fallout over Texas. So, you see kind of a multi-issue individual here. At the same time, search warrants at the home, search warrants for his computer.

He apparently, according to investigative sources, was on a number of gaming platforms. But on some of them, he shared a handle with his brother. So they're trying to sort out whose communications are who. What are they looking for? I mean, they're looking for a message. They're looking for political influence. They're looking for motivation, but they're also looking to see if there's any connection between this shooter and any of the 12 people who were arrested in another attack against an ICE location in Texas on July 4th, specifically because that also had a sniper element in it, an individual who hid in the woods and opened fire on police as they responded to stop a dozen people dressed in black who were shooting fireworks at the location and trying to set cars on fire.

Part of the paperwork left behind at that, the propaganda talked about the SRA or the Socialist Rifle Association, which is -- I guess, they're counter to the NRA, saying that they're armed too. Because of the rifle involved, the sniper issue here, they're looking to see are there connections between the individual or between the radicalization.

COOPER: Yet again, we've seen inscriptions on a bullet at this site that Director Patel put on social media, which is a little unusual to put evidence that quickly on social media. What does it suggest? Because I mean, obviously, there was reporting on that at the Charlie Kirk assassination. Luigi Mangione as well. You've talked before about these people kind of researching other shooters, killers, murderers, and taking tactics that they like or want to use.

MILLER: They study each other. In some measure, they try to compete with each other. But we saw writing on the rifles and mass shootings with messages. Now, we're seeing inscriptions on the bullets. And now, we're seeing a sniper attack with inscriptions on the bullets, followed by another sniper attack with inscriptions. So, they do follow each other. They do learn from each other, and they do imitate each other.

COOPER: This facility, I guess, I mean, there's a lot of facilities popping up, it seems. And is that part of the vulnerability? I mean, that they're not sort of a -- it's not like a prison, it's a processing facility, as I understand.

MILLER: So a lot of these facilities, and I can't speak to this one specifically, but a lot of them didn't start out as secure locations. They were thrown together to deal with the volume of the number of people being rounded up, you know. But what we're seeing in Texas, in this case, is somebody from an elevated position who opened fire on the facility through the windows, at the doors, the presumed motive was to kill or injure federal agents or ICE personnel. And as he swept over the parking area, there were detainees who they had in a van that were struck by this gunfire.

COOPER: John Miller, thank you very much. Just ahead, what to make of what sounded like a change in policy that the vice president now says was not, namely the president's apparent show of frustration, saying yesterday that Ukraine may now be able to win back all the territory that Russia has taken in the war. I'll have more on that.

And later, this statue of President Trump and Jeffrey Epstein, we talked about it last night, holding hands appeared on the National Mall suddenly yesterday. Well, as quickly as it appeared, it is gone. All that just ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:49:34]

COOPER: Trump administration officials say the president's apparent shift on his position about Russia's war in Ukraine is meant to put pressure on Vladimir Putin to come to the negotiating table, which he so far refused to do. At his meeting on with Ukrainian leader, Zelenskyy at the U.N. yesterday, the president was full of praise for Ukraine's military battling Russian forces. Gone was any of his previous talk that Ukraine would have to cede territory, no talk of land swaps.

Instead he posted on Truth Social, I think Ukraine, with the support of the European Union is in a position to fight and win all of Ukraine back in its original form.

[20:50:00]

Well, that prompted a lot of suggestions that perhaps President Trump had a change of position. Today, however, Vice President Vance insisted there's been no change in policy.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

VANCE: We have engaged in incredibly good faith negotiations with both the Russians and the Ukrainians. And I believe the president is growing incredibly impatient with the Russians right now, because he doesn't feel like they're putting enough on the table to end the war. If the Russians refuse to negotiate in good faith, I think it's going to be very, very bad for their country. That's what the president made clear. It's not a shift in position; it's an acknowledgement of the reality on the ground.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: CNN Global Affairs Analyst, Brett McGurk joins me now. So Brett, what do you think happened here? I mean, do you think there is some sort of a change in the U.S. posture to Ukraine?

BRETT MCGURK, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: Well, rhetorically, it's a huge shift. I mean, I -- two words, Anderson, head spinning. I mean, literally Zelenskyy's head spun towards President Trump when Trump was asked, what should NATO do to these Russian incursions in the NATO airspace? And Trump said, without flinching, shoot them down. So a head spinning change. If you compare the meeting in February, just seven months ago, where Zelenskyy was in the Oval Office and President Trump told him, you don't hold the cards. Basically, you need to fold to the larger power of Russia to now here we are seven months later. It's a massive change, but there's a reason for it, I think.

We're now out of the summer season. That's the fighting season in Ukraine. The Russians launched one of the largest offensives of the entire war on the ground earlier this summer, expected to achieve some breakthroughs. Anderson, it was a complete debacle. They almost picked up no significant territory, suffered about 200,000 casualties. Maybe (inaudible) 30,000 Russians killed. So the battlefield dynamic has changed.

And so, jury is still out on whether this is a policy shift, but the words from the president very strong. I actually thought that's exactly where he should be, sending a message to Putin. And not just Putin, Anderson, split screen to the UNGA week in New York was that Beijing Summit three weeks ago, Putin, Xi Jinping, Kim Jong-un, all working together in Ukraine, joining, coordinating. And I thought the messaging from the president this week in New York was right. I hope it continues, because that is what you need to back up diplomacy.

COOPER: The thing about it though is he didn't make this, those remarks, at the podium where we're seeing him right now, in front of the world leaders. This was not a speech saying we are now -- we're not talking land swaps. We -- they should fight, fight. And they can win. This was -- these were remarks, it was a tweet (ph). He also posted on social media. He said Putin and Russia are in big economic trouble, and this is the time for Ukraine to act.

All of that again through Vance's interpretation is, this is just a way to, or through -- administration officials who were talking to CNN saying this is a way to pressure Russia to get to the negotiating table.

MCGURK: I hope so.

COOPER: Do you think that's a message to appease people in the president's orbit who don't want a change in policy to Russia or --

MCGURK: Yeah, there's definitely a debate within the administration of how to approach Ukraine. That's been there since day one. And I think they kind of have had a revealed reality over the seven months of the actual conflict. But look for the diplomacy to work and we want to end this war. There has to be a diplomatic resolution. You're going to need a couple of things. I think security guarantees for Ukraine, military support for Ukraine.

Something the president did this summer, Anderson, when he announced that NATO initiative where European allies would purchase U.S. equipment, that equipment is starting to move. About $2 billion now has been shipped to Ukraine. My understanding is that's really working. Zelenskyy met with the head of NATO today in New York, said the same thing.

Look, it is too early to draw a conclusion. President Trump can change his mind tomorrow. I don't think the president reads Thucydides, the Greek military historian, but it kind of defines how I think Trump has seen this conflict. There's a line in Thucydides that the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must, talking about the Athenian - the Peloponnesian war, Athens versus a small island in Milos.

Trump came into office thinking, Russia's the larger power. Ukraine's going to basically have to just cut a deal here. And as the seven months has gone on, he has seen --

COOPER: Yeah.

MCGURK: -- there's a fighting spirit in Ukraine. And they might actually be able to hold their ground and get a real deal. Let's hope so.

COOPER: Yeah.

MCGURK: Too early to draw a conclusion, but I hope this is now the policy direction.

COOPER: Brett McGurk, appreciate your time. Thank you. Coming up, the Jeffrey Epstein-Donald Trump's statue that somehow made it onto the National Mall, at least for a few hours, and how it's now ended up off the mall. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:59:17]

COOPER: A few quick items to tell you about. The White House today unveiled a new Presidential Walk of Fame, they're calling it, outside the West Wing, featuring photos of past presidents. And then this, instead of former President Biden's portrait, a photo of his autopen signature was used. President Trump and his allies have, of course, fixated on Biden's autopen used to sign some official documents, including pardons.

(Inaudible) last reported in the White House over a statue of President Trump holding hands with Jeffrey Epstein, which appeared on the National Mall in Washington, D.C. yesterday morning. This is what the statute looks like today, despite a permit from the National Park Service, allowing the sculpture to remain in place until 8:00 p.m. Sunday. It was instead unceremoniously removed and destroyed at around 5:30 a.m. this morning.

In a statement to CNN, an Interior Department spokeswoman, Elizabeth Peace said, "The statue was removed because it was not compliant with the permit issued." And organizer behind the statute believes it may have --