Return to Transcripts main page

Anderson Cooper 360 Degrees

Trump Denounces Pope Leo Again For Stance On Iran War: "He's Wrong"; Trump On His Post With Jesus-Like Image: "Thought It Was Me As A Doctor"; U.S. Navy Blockading Iran's Ports After Peace Talks Stall; Senate Democrats Seek War Powers Resolution To Stop Iran War; NY Times: Iran Proposed Suspending Uranium Enrichment For Five Years As Part Of Peace Deal; Reps. Swalwell & Gonzales Resigning From Congress Amid Scandal. Aired 8-9p ET

Aired April 13, 2026 - 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: A powerful reminder that is remarkable as these missions are, nothing beats coming home.

As all of them said when they we're there on the far side of the moon, and that emotional mission that we heard from Christina herself saying, with all the choices that you have and when they look out there, they choose Earth and choose to come home.

Well, thank you so much for joining us, "AC360" starts now.

[20:00:36]

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST: Good evening from the Newsroom.

Topping our CNN Global War coverage tonight what the Commander and Chief is doing when he's not running the war, presiding over talks to end it. For most wartime Presidents, that would be very little. For this President when he's not traveling to Miami to see a UFC cage match or playing golf on the weekends, it is picking a fight with the Pope over the war and depicting himself as the son of God and apparently staying up much of the night posting things on social media.

At 9:03 P.M. last night, the President of United States started in on the Pope, "Pope Leo is weak on crime and terrible for foreign policy. Also, I don't want a Pope who thinks it's okay for Iran to have a nuclear weapon."

And this, Leo, not his holiness you'll notice, "Leo should be thankful because, as everyone knows, he was a shocking surprise. He wasn't on any list to be Pope and was only put there by the church because he was an American and they thought that would be the best way to deal with President Donald J. Trump. If I wasn't in The White House, Leo wouldn't be in the Vatican," he adds, "Leo should get his act together as Pope. Use common sense. Stop catering to the radical left and focus on being a great pope, not a politician."

The President followed it up moments later when he said this to reporters.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP (R) PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: He's a very liberal person, and he's a man that doesn't believe in stopping crime. He's a man that doesn't think that we should be toying with a country that wants a nuclear weapon so they can blow up the world. I'm not a fan of Pope Leo.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: Not a fan, and not finished yet. At 9:49, he decided it would be a good idea to post this A.I. image depicting himself as Jesus bathed in golden, godlike celestial light with light emerging from both his hands, healing a sick man while a woman prays, staring at the orb of light in Trump-Jesus' hands.

He continued making posts online throughout the night. Several in the 10:00 P.M. hour one at 12:43, five posts from 2:35 to 2:38 A.M., and another at 4:10. Hours later, he did take down this A.I. image of Trump Jesus and came up with one of the lamest lies imaginable.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: I did post it and I thought it was me as a doctor and had to do with Red Cross as a Red Cross worker there, which we support, and only the fake news could come up with that one.

So, I just heard about it and I said, how did they come up with that? It's supposed to be me as a doctor making people better and I do make people better. I make people a lot better.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: Well, keeping them honest, come on, I mean, for those who may be confused, this is Jesus, this is Trump-Jesus, and this is a doctor. We've all been to doctors -- hearing that sermon.

If you think there's no way the President of United States or anyone in their right mind would compare himself to Jesus, yes way.

Cue Pastor Paula White-Cain, the President's spiritual advisor on Easter at The White House.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PAULA WHITE-CAIN, SENIOR ADVISOR, WHITE HOUSE FAITH OFFICE: And Mr. President, no one has paid the price like you have paid the price. It almost cost you your life. You we're betrayed and arrested and falsely accused. It's a familiar pattern that our Lord and Savior showed us, but it didn't end there for Him, and it didn't end there for you.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: It didn't end there for her either. She went on longer, but you get the idea.

So did The White House because they later took that clip down. As for the Pope today, he had this to say.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

POPE LEO XIV, BISHOP OF ROME, HEAD OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND SOVEREIGN OF THE VATICAN CITY STATE: I have no fear, neither the Trump administration nor speaking out loudly about the message of the Gospel. And that's what I believe. I am proud to know what the church is proud to do.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: The President, though, is not through saying this at the at the White House when asked about the conflict with the Pope this afternoon.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: Pope Leo said things that are wrong. He was very much against what I'm doing with regard to Iran. And you cannot have a nuclear Iran. Pope Leo would not be happy with the end result. You have hundreds of millions of people dead, and it's not going to happen.

So, I get -- I think he's very weak on crime and other things. So, I'm not, I mean, he went public. I'm just responding to Pope Leo.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[20:05:12]

COOPER: The man who has no problem being compared to the Son of God on his clash with the Vicar of Christ. As for more on all this, let's go to CNN s Christopher Lamb who is travelling with the pontiff in Algeria and has actually written the book about Pope Leo.

Christopher, what else did Pope Leo have to say about this dispute with the President?

CHRISTOPHER LAMB, CNN VATICAN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Anderson, I was on board the plane with the Pope, and he came to the back and he addressed us and he responded to questions about, the President's remarks and, you know, among other things that he said to us was, you know, we're not politicians. We're not going to make foreign policy with the same perspective that he, the President, might understand it.

But I do believe in the message of the gospel, "Blessed are the peacemakers."

So, Leo, kind of underlining that, you know, his agenda is to communicate the Church's message, despite what the President might be criticizing him for.

And, you know, Leo emphasizing that his message is one that's a global one and it's not against a particular leader or individual.

And, you know, that's something that I discovered, you know, writing my book on Pope Leo, that this Pope is not someone who, you know, wants to have a fight with President Trump, but he is someone who is in many ways a counterweight to the Trump administration. And, you know, I think we've seen that in recent weeks with his remarks on the war.

And, you know, his style, he's a soft spoken, carefully -- a careful person in his public statements. But it seems that that more gentile style, deliberate style has gotten under the Presidents skin -- Anderson.

COOPER: Christopher Lamb, appreciate it.

In the President's Truth Social post attacking the Pope he also went after CNN's David Axelrod writing, "Leo's weak on crime, weak on nuclear weapons does not sit well with me, nor does the fact that he meets with Obama sympathizers like David Axelrod, a loser from the left who is one of those who wanted church goers and clerics to be arrested".

For more on that, I want to bring in David Axelrod, who's our chief political analyst, and who served as senior advisor to President Obama.

So, David, what's your reaction to President Trump going after Pope Leo and invoking your visit with the Holy Father as part of his criticism?

DAVID AXELROD, CHIEF POLITICAL ANALYST: Yes, he referred to me as an Obama sympathizer. I mean, it's worse than that. I was an Obama accomplice. But I don't know if that has to do with anything.

I had set that meeting up months ago, Anderson, the Pope is from Chicago. I've been very impressed by him. I was coming to Italy. I wanted to meet him. The meeting was set up, just happened to be, the audience was set up for last Thursday.

But the bigger issue is that the President treats the Pope as if he's another politician, as if his responsibilities are political.

He is not a politician. He's the leader of the Catholic Church. He's the keeper of the faith and he is following the fundamental path of those who came before him in challenging things that he sees are violative of the moral code that he is there to uphold and war is one of those.

He is very outspoken on it. And the President doesn't like it. But I think he made a tremendous mistake because there are 72 million Catholics in the U.S. They understand what the role of the Pope is. He's very popular with them for doing what he was chosen to do.

You know, it was incredibly disrespectful of the President to suggest that he doesn't care about crime and he does, he wants countries to have nuclear weapons. That's absurd and then to top it off by posting a picture of himself in a Christ-like scene as a Christ-like figure.

COOPER: Yes, I mean, let's put that up because it's, I mean, it's not really the first time he sort of kind of flirted with this idea of sort of him as a Jesus-like figure. But I mean, he's wearing, you know, Jesus-like robes. He's got light emanating from his hands. He's got --

AXELROD: Yes.

COOPER: -- you know, I don't know if there are, some are pilots, but there's also a strange sort of some sort of figurine above his head and like, he's bathed in this God-like light. You have this lady in the, you know, off his right hand who's praying and she's, I mean, I was tracking her eyes. She's staring at the orb of light coming from his left hand. For him to say that, that he's --

AXELROD: It's not subtle for him.

COOPER: -- form him say that he was, I mean, he claims he was just, you know, this is a picture of him as a doctor. I don't know what hospital he's ever been in, but it's certainly not what my doctor wears.

[20:10:31]

AXELROD: No, I mean, I think he recognized because he got immediate reaction from people across the political spectrum and from people of faith across the political spectrum, including from some of his own supporters who we're appalled by what they saw and demanded that he take it down, which they ultimately did. But, you know, the President never concedes error and he wasn't going to concede it here.

COOPER: It's interesting, though, because, I mean, Pete Hegseth has repeatedly invoked God in his justifications and descriptions of this war and divine protection. He's obviously Evangelical Christian.

I mean, the President is so hostile to the Pope, Roman Catholic, who literally holds the title, among others, the Vicar of Christ. What message do you think it sends to Catholics? I mean, do you think this is something specific to Pope Leo, or do you think this is -- I mean, where does this come from?

AXELROD: Look, Pope Leo has been very outspoken, including about what Pete Hegseth said, he took that on directly and said, God does not endorse wars and should not be invoked in that way because that was the implication of what Hegseth said, that was God's war, that we are fighting what were sort of intimations of the old Crusade, and the Pope spoke out very, very bluntly about that.

And I think that's part of what the President was reacting to.

COOPER: Yes, David Axelrod, thanks for your time.

AXELROD: Good to see you.

COOPER: I want to bring in CNN's political commentator, Alyssa Farah Griffin, who served as communications director in the first Trump administration. Welcome back.

ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Good to be here. COOPER: Good to have you back. What is, I mean, I want to put this image up again because I just think it's so interesting given the, you know, his spiritual advisor indicating he was a Jesus-like figure. What does it say, though, that he would post this and also choose to go after the Pope repeatedly and he's up all night posting.

GRIFFIN: Yes, I would say a few things stand out to me. First, these all-night Twitter raids or Truth Social posts that he's doing. Listen, you want a President who's going to take a middle of the night phone call. It's a 24-hour job, but not to be posting on social media bizarre things he hasn't run by staff that they end up having to clean the next day.

COOPER: Also, there's a reason sleep exists. It actually helps your brain.

GRIFFIN: It's good, cognitively for your function, for your judgment, frankly.

COOPER: It's how you don't develop tau and tangles.

GRIFFIN: Correct and in my experience with him, he only had a couple of people who had access to his social media and when they posted on his behalf, it was at his direction. So, when you see a 4:00 A.M. timestamp, that's very, very likely just Donald Trump, not Dan Scavino or someone else.

COOPER: So, he was up at 4:00 A.M. He posted five times in the --

GRIFFIN: That's what it seems like. But then think of this, that Donald Trump very rarely deletes any of his posts. I could count something like half a dozen that he did under pressure.

There was this Obama, the Obama's depicted as monkeys. After there was pressure, he eventually took it down, but he usually does not cave. I think this speaks to the blowback from his own base. It is a Christian conservative evangelical base. And this is textbook blasphemy. You do not depict anyone as Christ other than Christ himself and to make light of it in this way.

But also it comes at a moment when he is bleeding support with his base over the war in Iran. You have people like Tucker Carlson, like Candace Owens, like Megyn Kelly with huge platforms who are really turning on him, and his supporters are. So, this is not a moment he should pick this fight, yet he is. It really makes absolutely no sense.

COOPER: Do you think, and does he track the Megyn Kellys, the Tucker Carlsons and their responses?

GRIFFIN: He absolutely does. And I mean, he had already come after them just last week responding, realizing the pressure that they are able to put on his base, realizing the millions of his own followers that they reach, and I think he's hearing. He's looking at the polling that we see heading into the midterms. He sees that he's historically unpopular. And I think he got himself into a quagmire, regardless of your views on the war, that's really hard for him to end. And it goes after, it goes completely against what he ran on, that he was going to end foreign entanglements and these forever wars.

So, he's feeling the pressure but the worst thing he could do is declare war on the biggest religion in the world, Christianity, and the biggest religion in the United States, which makes up his base.

COOPER: Again, there's the Obama test on this. If President Obama had posted an A.I. image of him as Jesus healing people, I mean --

GRIFFIN: I am sure David Axelrod would have gotten that taken down very quickly if that happened. But that's what it comes back to or there are probably five figures on the planet, if not fewer, that you really, as a politician, don't start a fight with. I would put the Pope very high on that list. A beloved figure, regardless of your faith. It's a tactical failure, but it's also just a fight he does not need to allow.

[20:15:35]

COOPER: But it's also an interesting window into the President's viewpoints. I mean, he views the Pope as a political figure -- I mean, as a political figure, as somebody who, you know, he said this thing the other recently about, you know, even if some which I think The White House may have taken down, you know, even if somebody is a bad person, if they've said something nice about me I'll -- and the corollary to that is any slight he perceives he will attack even if it's the Pope.

GRIFFIN: Right and we've seen that many times over. The thing that I don't think he gets; he understands his base on a political level. He gets the issues that are going to resonate with them. But he's never truly understood the faith that drives many of them, despite doing historically well with Evangelicals and with Catholics.

And he doesn't understand that for most practicing Christians, their faith still does come before politics. In a moment that it feels like few things come before Donald Trump with his supporters, their faith does. And I thought it was notable that you had some pretty prominent voices on the right saying, take this down. This isn't it, sir and he did cave to that pressure, which is very, very rare for Donald Trump.

COOPER: Yes, Alyssa Farah Griffin, thanks so much, appreciate it, incredible developments. More on the actual war military and Iran analysts on the President's decision to apply pressure by blockading Iranian ports inside and outside the Strait of Hormuz.

And later, Senator Cory Booker on his support of new legislation to rein in Presidential powers over this war.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:21:10]

COOPER: Those are vessels in the Strait of Hormuz over the weekend. Today, the President said the U.S. Navy is now enforcing a blockade on Iranian ports. This, after 21 hours of peace talks ended with no agreement. A U.S. official tell CNN the Navy now has at least 15 ships in the region. Tonight, "The New York Times" is reporting that Iran offered a five-year hiatus on enriching uranium.

The administration, our sources say, wanted 20. Now, a source familiar with the talks tells CNN there are discussions in the works for a second in-person meeting with Iranian officials before ceasefire expires on April 21st.

Joining us now, CNN global affairs analyst Karim Sadjadpour and retired Army Major General James Spider Marks. So, Karim, you've heard this reporting from "The New York Times," Iran offering reportedly a five-year, suspension of uranium enrichment, which would be a step. What do you make of that offer? What does it tell you about Iran?

KARIM SADJADPOUR, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: So, Anderson, in talking to folks who we're involved in the negotiations on the U.S. side, what they say is that behind closed doors, Iran appears much more eager for a deal than they do publicly because of the country's economic desperation. The other thing that I heard was that Iran projects unity publicly, but also behind closed doors, there's a lot of jockeying for power.

You know, after the Supreme Leader was killed, after ruling for 37 years. Theres a lot of people who are who are vying to be Iran's most powerful official, especially given we don't know the health of Mojtaba Khamenei.

COOPER: So how, and we, that's still unknown. Has he been seen? Has he --

SADJADPOUR: We don't know that he's been seen. The Israelis have said that they believe he's alive. I've also heard from sources in Iran saying he's alive. But we've been told he's roughed up. You know, his health is not great.

COOPER: General Marks walk us through the process of blockading Iranian ports. How big a task is it if, I mean, I assume militarily, the U.S. has the force to do it, but what does it require?

MAJ. GEN. JAMES "SPIDER" MARKS (RET), U.S. ARMY, CNN MILITARY ANALYST AND NATIONAL SECURITY CONTRIBUTOR: Yes, it's a significant endeavor and as has been discussed, a blockade is an act of war. I think at this point it's a distinction without a difference. We've essentially been at war for the past five plus weeks. So, we can put that to the side. But the actual modalities are quite complicated. You got surface ship requirements; you've got subsurface requirements. You're certainly going to have air cover as a matter of routine. And if you're blocking a port, you tend to be somewhat stationary. But you also don't want to remain stationary for too long.

You then become a target. But the other the other thing is that it becomes very much threading the needle when you're conducting a blockade, you are going to stop every vessel unless you know a priori or there is some recognition of a of a certain vessels authorization to go through that's already been established. So, it's going to be a very, very long process. It's going to be an incredible demand in terms of the forces that are there, the Naval forces that are there. And it also brings to bear the discussion; are other nations are going to get involved in terms of this blockade. So far it hasn't happened, but that's not a limiting factor to getting it done. It just is simply a very long process. And it's going to relieve some of the pressure, but it's still going to take some time to do that.

COOPER: Karim, would blocking Iranian ports, though, stop Iran's hold over the Strait?

SADJADPOUR: So, the danger, Anderson, is that Iran may retaliate by launching strikes against oil installations in places like Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

COOPER: And other ports, port installations.

SADJADPOUR: Other port installations, so basically, Iran usually thrives in atmospheres of instability, and they want to spike the price of oil. And so, in a blockade where oil is not coming out, you could argue that that plays to Iran's strengths.

COOPER: Does the -- from an economic standpoint, how much damage, I mean, how much do they need their ports to be open? How much of their income is from that?

[20:25:25]

SADJADPOUR: You know, a long-term closure of the Strait of Hormuz is the tactical equivalent of a suicide bombing for Iran. It does enormous damage to others. But, you know, they can't survive either. I think they're banking on the fact that the United States and President Trump have a shorter-term pain threshold, and they can outlast him.

COOPER: That is, I mean, generally, any time you are in a you know, a kinetic involvement with anyone, if the other side is on a different clock and has different motivations or different, you know, timeline concerns, if they don't have the same timeline concerns as you do, that's a great advantage.

MARKS: This is Vietnam over the course of about 13 years exactly. Every tactical engagement the United States just dominated, slaughtered thousands and won tactical battles. But as described by Karim, the horizon for being able to withstand the pain for Iran is much, much greater than the United States.

Look, we've got an election coming up. Folks are jockeying for position and they're having economic challenges and they can't get the gas at the pump in an appropriate price. I mean, all these legitimate concerns are now right here in front of our nose. The Iranians could care less about all of that. They've developed over five decades this immense muscle memory, the muscles have been damaged over the course of the last five plus weeks, but they're not going anywhere. They're going to hang in there. They're incredibly resilient. So, we're at a point, we're at a transition where we can continue to inflict pain on those areas in Iran that matter to us. That's nukes, that's ballistic missiles, that's proxies. Everything else I think, remains in that category of being unnecessarily punitive at this point. Those though, you know, we're at a point where that decision needs to be made in very short order.

There are no more military victories to be had in this case. Iran has been punished significantly. It's a matter of political determination in terms of where you're going to move next.

COOPER: Karim, Iran's foreign minister, talked to counterparts in some of the other areas, like Qatar and Saudi Arabia today, saying it was America's greed that led to the talks falling apart. Do you have much confidence in anything coming from them, I mean, if there is another meeting?

SADJADPOUR: You know, Anderson, what I find interesting about this war is when viewers are listening to it, they hear terms like enriched uranium and artificial intelligence, and this war goes back to the same themes that the Ancient Greeks wrote about 2,500 years ago about pride, resolve, humiliation, hubris. And these are these basic emotions which you see in President Trump and on the Iranian side.

COOPER: That's interesting, and they're playing out in the negotiations.

SADJADPOUR: They're playing out in the negotiations, for example, enriching uranium really does nothing for Iran economically. It's something which is basically taking the country to war and to bankruptcy. But because of their pride, they're refusing to cede it. And on the U.S. side, President Trump can't afford to demand less than he did before the war started. Otherwise, the war will be viewed as a failure.

COOPER: Karim Sadjadpour, thanks so much, General Marks, appreciate it as well.

Coming up next, one of the sponsors of the Senate's second and newest war powers resolution, Cory Booker, joins us. And later, two congressmen, Democrat Eric Swalwell and Republican Tony Gonzalez, both resigning after a flurry of sexual misconduct allegations. We'll be right.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:33:14]

COOPER: Senate Democrats are pressuring Republicans to pass a war powers resolution to stop the Iran war and force President Trump to seek congressional approval for any additional military action. New Jersey Senator Cory Booker says it's time for the Senate to do its job and stop what he calls a reckless war of choice.

Senator Booker joins us now. So Senator, you obviously need Republican support to pass the war powers resolution. Do you think you're any closer to that tonight?

SEN. CORY BOOKER (D-NJ): No, realistically, we're not. We're probably not going to pick up any votes from Republicans beyond maybe Rand Paul. But the point is, we're going to continue to press this. The Senate seems to want to do business as usual, when clearly, with the global economy, with Americans spending more and more at the gas pumps, more and more on everything from fuel to food, with American soldiers dying, with hundreds more injured, with a situation that's being made worse and not better.

We're going to continue to call it out. The Senate is not doing its job. No hearings, open hearings, no oversight, no checks and balance for a Senate -- for a President who thinks he can unilaterally declare war. This is a threat to our democracy. It's clearly hurting the American people. And we're not going to just stand back and let the Senate roll on as usual.

COOPER: Given the situation that this country is now in regarding Iran and in the region, what would you like to see happen?

BOOKER: Well, clearly, I'd like to see us unravel this horrific mess that he's gotten us into. It's unfortunate, but we're not going to get back the tens of billions of dollars he spent here. We're not going to get back to the situation that we had, which was an open Strait of Hormuz, a free-flowing of commerce of the world through that, and obviously, the cost of the human lives.

[20:35:00]

So we need to get our President to focus on his promises to the American people, which is to focus on domestic issues, lowering people's costs, dealing with the health care crisis that he caused and more, and getting out of this sinkhole that he's now gotten us in, which now he does not have a clear and easy off-ramp.

COOPER: Do you believe Iran is still a nuclear threat to the United States in the short term?

BOOKER: Well, again, if you go back to the Iran deal that he tore up, they were not a short-term nuclear threat. Remember, he was the one that pulled us out of a deal that involved our European allies, Russia, and many others that set back the nuclear program.

Now he tore it up, and they started moving more and more towards more and more enrichment. Remember, the problem we are in right now, from having had them at one point closer and closer to a nuclear weapon, to having the Strait of Hormuz blocked, to having more of a global economic crisis and a crisis at home, all of this is of Donald Trump's making. He made this mess.

He brought the chaos. He brought the cruelty. He brought the death and destruction. And he brought the economic pain at home. So again, we have a President who has shown no capacity to handle -- to be a commander-in-chief and to handle these kind of difficult decisions of war and peace. We have seen a President that has no strategy, no justifiable provocation. And what makes this worse is not him, simply, but the enabling Republican Congress, who won't even hold a hearing on any aspect of this war, even just publicly accounting for how much money they're spending, not to mention the fact that we've had a President threaten societal destruction, a President that has been reckless in his words and is actually showing more of a guy that is losing it than a person that is a commander-in-chief and a thoughtful leader.

So I blame this squarely on the Republicans in Congress for enabling him. And I'm going to continue the lead in the Congress to do everything we can to force the Senate to do its job.

COOPER: The New York Times is reporting Iran offered to suspend uranium enrichment for five years. The White House apparently wants 20. Is there a number that you think you would negotiate to?

BOOKER: Again, I go back to the deal that we had, the so-called JCPOA. The very first pillar of that was that they committed to never having a nuclear weapon, never pursuing a nuclear weapon. We had caps on their enrichment. We had open inspections into Natanz, Fordow, all of their facilities, with cameras and constant surprise snap inspections.

So this is a President that unraveled a deal and has made not only the situation worse, but made Iran, if you think about it, even more powerful. Now that they're flexing around the Straits of Hormuz, number one, he released billions of dollars to the very country we're at war with in allowing them to sell their oil. He's actually empowering some of our adversaries like China in the process.

This President is now trying to play catch-up to what he inherited in the first place, was a non-nuclear Iran who didn't have the capacity to enrich to the lengths they are right now. Now they have, somewhere under their rubble, fissile material that is more dangerous than when he inherited a deal in place that set their nuclear program far back and made them commit publicly with safeguards that they would never get a nuclear weapon.

COOPER: Senator Cory Booker, I appreciate your time tonight. Thank you.

BOOKER: I appreciate your time. Thank you.

COOPER: More perspective on ways out of this. We'll discuss it with two experts in the Middle East next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:42:59]

COOPER: As we've reported, the U.S. Navy has launched a blockade of Iranian ports near the Strait of Hormuz. President Trump has threatened to eliminate any Iranian vessels that approach U.S. ships. Administration officials say the blockade is a pressure tactic to get Iran to -- back to the negotiating table. And the President said he got a call this morning from Iranian officials who want to make a deal. Now, for its part, Iran has issued a warning against the blockade and said no port in the Persian Gulf is a, quote, and the Sea of Oman "will be safe," end quote, if the ports are blocked.

CNN's Chief International Correspondent, Clarissa Ward, is in Saudi Arabia. So how are Gulf nations reacting to this U.S. blockade?

CLARISSA WARD, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, it's interesting, Anderson. We've learned that this morning, the Saudi Arabian foreign minister spoke with his Iranian counterpart and also the Qatari foreign minister also spoke with the Iranian foreign minister. I think that's making it clear that the Gulf countries are definitely keen for the most part to try to keep diplomacy on the table and to prevent things from escalating further.

Because when Iran makes these threats about no ports in the Persian Gulf or the Gulf of Oman being safe, they mean it. We've seen during the more kinetic phase of this conflict that ports in the UAE and Kuwait and Oman were all hit, not to mention energy infrastructure. There's concern as well that they could retaliate potentially by targeting some of the pipelines here and in the UAE that circumvent the Strait of Hormuz.

At the same time, though, Anderson, and this is important and kind of interesting, there is broad, if quiet, support for President Trump's blockade because many of the Gulf countries have been very worried going into those talks between the U.S. and Iran and Islamabad on Saturday that they would end with somehow Iran still maintaining control or even partial control of the Strait of Hormuz. That for them is a red line.

This conflict has been devastating for their economies, and so they are very keen to be sure that any resolution does not end with Iran retaining any control of the Strait, Anderson.

[20:45:12]

COOPER: Is there much hope for a potential second round of talks?

WARD: Well, I think behind the scenes, there's no question there are frantic efforts going on with a number of different regional actors from Pakistan and Egypt to Turkey, all sort of shuttling back and forth, trying to get the two sides back to the table. There's still nine days left on this ceasefire, and there is some optimism, depending on who you talk to, that potentially that would be long enough to get the two to meet again, to try to hash out a deal.

CNN's learned from one U.S. official that essentially the whole thing really fell apart after the U.S. demanded this 20-year pause in the enrichment of uranium. Iran then countered with five years. The U.S. said forget it, and that's where it ended.

So there's some hope that potentially still a deal could be made, and there are frantic efforts underway, not just here in the Gulf, but more broadly, as I said, to try to ensure that that happens, because the economic fallout for all of this, not just here in the Gulf, but more broadly, has been devastating, Anderson.

COOPER: Yes. Clarissa Ward, thanks so much. Appreciate it.

We're joined now by Ryan Crocker, who served as U.S. ambassador six times, most recently to Afghanistan, but also Iraq, Pakistan, Syria, Kuwait, and Lebanon. Also with us, Alan Eyre, a distinguished diplomatic fellow at the Middle East Institute. He was a key member of President Obama's negotiating team for the 2015 Iran nuclear agreement, which, as Cory Booker said a moment ago, President Trump pulled out of in 2018.

Ambassador, your experience in the region is obviously extraordinary. What do you make of where the war is at this point and the U.S. blockade of Iranian ports?

RYAN CROCKER, FMR. U.S. AMB. TO LEBANON, AFGHANISTAN, IRAQ, PAKISTAN & SYRIA: Well, let's start with the blockade, Anderson. I think that was a fairly smart move under the circumstances. As Clarissa just said, the status quo before the blockade was announced and implemented gave Iran effective control over the straits, and that was not an equitable situation for the Gulf States, nor for us, nor really for the rest of the world. So this is a -- as a counter move, this makes sense.

But it is a highly complex, highly complicated situation, and we'll have to see what happens next. But at least it did shift the balance a bit on the strait.

COOPER: Alan, do you think the U.S. blockade of the ports will be effective in getting, you know, the parties back to a negotiating table?

ALAN EYRE, DISTINGUISHED DIPLOMATIC FELLOW, MIDDLE EAST INSTITUTE: Well, I think the parties want to get back to the negotiating table. I don't think the blockade is going to be effective in the short term. Blockades, if done extremely well, will definitely increase the long- term economic pressure on Iran. But in the timeframe that's relevant to the increasing economic consequences of the closure of the strait, it's not going to have a significant effect.

The Iranians are, I think, willing to negotiate. So at some point, I think before the ceasefire ends, they will return to the table.

COOPER: Ambassador, CNN is reporting the White House is considering potential second round of talks. What do you recommend? Given your experience, what do you see as possible pathways here?

CROCKER: Well, clearly, talking is better than shooting. I would hope that -- and the bazaar is open. We said 20, they said five. So the negotiation is continuing, even though it's indirect at this point. I think the steps I would like to see now is a continued discussion and a prolongation of the ceasefire. I think that -- and Alan knows this better than anyone as a veteran of the 2015 negotiations and that agreement that took two years.

So this is not going to happen overnight. I think we may see enough progress that the ceasefire will be prolonged, talks will continue, and we will not see a return to military activity.

COOPER: You think we will not see a return to military activity?

CROCKER: Well, that's my hope. But again, this is a highly complex situation. We don't know what command and control is in Iran right now. We are having trouble reading that particular room. There was no Alan Eyre in Islamabad, as far as I know, someone who knows the country and speaks the language to give us some guidance. So there's a lot of room here for miscalculation on both sides.

But, you know, we'll take it step by step and hope to avoid a return to armed conflict. Clearly, President Trump is signaling he does not want that. And the Iranians, by showing up in Islamabad for a face-to- face meeting, I think are sending the same signal.

[20:50:06]

COOPER: Alan, does this administration know what they don't know about the Iranian regime? I mean, do they know the actual strength of the, you know, the new supreme leader, and whether he's -- and we assume he's alive, but whether he's actually in power? Do we know who they're negotiating against and what other players there are vying for control?

EYRE: Well, I assume they're getting intelligence on Iran. Obviously, I'm not seeing classified information anymore. But more important to me is whether this administration has the inclination and the ability to actually negotiate. As my former boss, Ambassador Crocker, said, you know, this takes time. It takes expertise.

It's certainly better than shooting. But you have to be willing to engage in a long, protracted, baton-death-march slog of talking to Iranians. And we know previously Mr. Witkoff said to President Trump, well, we could probably reach a deal, but it would take months, as if that's out of the question. No, it could take months.

The JCPOA, the hard part, took two years. The total process took five years. So nothing can --

COOPER: Why does -- can you explain why it takes so long?

EYRE: Because as Oppenheimer said, God is in the details, right? You can't just agree on principles. Iran will never have a nuclear weapon. Iran will allow free passage through the strait. You know, ambiguity, I think, for this administration is a feature and not a bug. But it's not going to lead to a lasting negotiation.

A negotiation only holds if both sides know the guardrails and if they each benefit from it. So that's why you need detailed agreements. Doesn't all have to be on paper. Doesn't all have to be publicly available. But, you know, you've got to play the scales. You have to sort of go through all the permutations of what does this mean, what does that mean.

And I don't know if this administration is willing to do that. They tend to bungee jump in and out of issues and then move on to the next one.

COOPER: Ambassador, how much does the different clocks or the different kind of willingness to wait this out or the different time frames both sides are operating under, the U.S. and Iran, how much does that play into decisions that are being made?

CROCKER: Well, that's a great question, Anderson. And it's very hard to say really how either side is viewing the clock. Clearly, there is a sense of urgency on the American side. But as Alan points out, to reach a detailed, lasting, stable agreement, that is going to take a lot of time.

And again, my hope is that in the immediate period, the ceasefire will hold, that talks will continue indirect, then maybe later direct. And the two-week deadline kind of evaporates. And we see a return to the status quo ante on the ground or in the water, more specifically. It's going to look like February 27th, free passage of all ships, no Iranian restrictions or dues, and the talks continue. That's about the best case I can conjure right now.

COOPER: Ambassador Crocker, Alan Eyre, I appreciate your expertise. Thank you.

Next, more breaking news. We'll take you to Capitol Hill, where two congressmen, Democratic Eric Swalwell and Republican Tony Gonzales are stepping down with each facing allegations of sexual misconduct.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:58:01]

COOPER: We have more breaking news. Two resignations from Congress. California Democrat Eric Swalwell has announced he'll step down from his House seat after four women accused him of sexual misconduct. The scandal also led him to drop his campaign for governor of California, where he was considered a front runner. Also, Texas Republican Congressman Tony Gonzales also said he is resigning, also in the middle of a sexual misconduct scandal.

CNN's Manu Raju joins us now from Capitol Hill with more. So talk more about Swalwell and Gonzales' decisions.

MANU RAJU, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, it was an abrupt collapse for Swalwell because just a couple of days ago, he was signaling that he planned to carry on with this fight, denying these allegations of sexual misconduct and including alleged rape, but saying that he was making no indication that he planned to step aside. But seeing Democrat after Democrat say that it's time for him to go essentially left him with no choice because he was certain to face a vote for his ouster, an expulsion vote in the United States House that could have happened as soon as the middle of this week and would have put a lot of Democrats in a difficult position.

Similarly with Gonzales, also facing an expulsion vote potentially earlier this middle of this week as well. He could have lost that as well. And Anderson, the decision by Gonzales to resign immediately -- announced that resignation immediately after Swalwell essentially negates any advantage that Democrats could have in the narrowly divided Republican House.

Now, with each of them stepping aside, Mike Johnson, the Speaker, could still only afford to lose one Republican vote on any party line vote, Anderson.

COOPER: And what's the latest on New York criminal investigation into Swalwell?

RAJU: Yes, that appears to still be ongoing. Over the weekend, we learned that the Manhattan DA's office had asked for people to come forward with any information regarding Eric Swalwell, asking for some of the victims to have -- if they wanted to share any information, to do just that, keeping an open line of communication.

Where that exactly goes is unclear. But if there is information to go ahead in a criminal probe, perhaps it will. That's different than the House Ethics Investigation, which was announced today.

Now that Swalwell will no longer be a member of Congress, this committee does not have jurisdiction over former members of Congress. So Swalwell avoiding an ethics probe, or perhaps not a criminal probe, Anderson.

COOPER: All right, Manu Raju, a busy day for you. Appreciate it all. Thanks for your reporting.

That's it for us. Thanks for watching. We'll see you tomorrow.

The news continues. "The Source with Kaitlan Collins" starts now.