Return to Transcripts main page

Anderson Cooper 360 Degrees

Arrest Warrant Issued For Former FBI Director James Comey; Interview With Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ); FCC Targets Disney-Owned ABC Stations After Trump Calls For Kimmel Firing; FCC Targets Disney-Owned ABC Stations After Trump Calls For Kimmel Firing; Trump Hosts King Charles At White House For State Dinner; King Charles Gives Vocal Defense Of NATO In Speech To Congress; State Dept. Announces New Passports Featuring Picture Of Trump. Aired 8-9p ET

Aired April 28, 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: Musk is seeking about $130 billion in damages, and he wants to force OpenAI to become a nonprofit again. He says Altman is stealing from the public good. OpenAI's lawyers call Musk's lawsuit revenge driven and a pageant of hypocrisy. Musk is expected to take the stand in this seminal trial again tomorrow.

Thanks so much for joining us tonight, we'll see you back here tomorrow. AC360 with Anderson begins right now.

[20:00:30]

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST, "ANDERSON COOPER: 360": Good evening from our Newsroom, breaking news in the second indictment of James Comey, the former FBI Director and outspoken critic of President Trump. A warrant has now been issued for his arrest and late tonight Mr. Comey responded to the charges.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JAMES COMEY, FORMER FBI DIRECTOR: Well, they're back, this time about a picture of seashells on a North Carolina beach a year ago. And this won't be the end of it, but nothing has changed with me. I'm still innocent, I'm still not afraid, and I still believe in the independent federal judiciary. So, let's go.

But it's really important that all of us remember this is not who we are as a country. This is not how the Department of Justice is supposed to be. And the good news is we get closer every day to restoring those values. Keep the Faith.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: As the former director of the FBI alluded to, the three-page indictment centers around this now deleted Instagram post from him.

On May 15th of last year, Comey took a photo of seashells he says he found on the beach that spelled out 86, 47 -- 47 referring to Donald Trump as the 47th President, 86 defined by Merriam-Websters dictionary in multiple ways. To quote "eject, dismiss, or remove someone, to refuse to serve a customer, to eject or ban a customer, to reject, discontinue or get rid of something."

The Department of Justice and their indictment allege 86 was a threat to kill or harm the President.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TODD BLANCHE, ACTING U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL: The first count is that on or about May 15th of last year, he knowingly and willfully making a threat to take the life of and to inflict bodily harm upon the President of the United States. Count two, same day, May 15th, 2025, that the defendant, James Comey, knowingly and willfully transmitting an interstate commerce, a communication that contained a threat to kill the President of the United States. Both of these counts carry a maximum term of imprisonment of 10 years.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: Back when Mr. Comey first posted this, then DHS Secretary Kristi Noem posted on social media, "Disgraced former FBI director James Comey just called for the assassination of @POTUS Trump. DHS and Secret Service is investigating this threat and will respond appropriately." Noem, of course, has since been fired.

Comey, who had already deleted the initial post, then posted this, minutes after then Secretary Noem, "I posted earlier a picture of some shells I saw today on a beach walk, which I assumed were a political message. I didn't realize some folks associate those numbers with violence. It never occurred to me, but I oppose violence of any kind. So, I took the post down."

The next day, Mr. Comey voluntarily participated in an interview with Secret Service agents at their Washington, D.C., field office, but no charges were ever filed. Then, on September 20th of last year, the President sent what was supposed to be a private message addressed to "Pam" meaning the Attorney General, Pam Bondi, who now has also been fired.

The President accidentally posted that private message on Truth Social. There it is. It reads in part, "Nothing is being done. What about Comey, Adam "Shifty" Schiff, Letitia. They're all guilty as hell. But nothing is going to be done."

He went on to say, "We can't delay any longer. It's killing our reputation and credibility. They impeached me twice and indicted me five times over nothing. Justice must be served."

Five days later, Mr. Comey was indicted for the first time. The charges were related to him allegedly lying to Congress five years earlier, and the statute of limitations was just days from running out.

Now, at the time, the case was brought by newly installed acting U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Lindsey Halligan that woman there. True story, previously, she had been one of President Trump's former personal lawyers. Her predecessor had resigned after refusing to prosecute the President's perceived political enemies. Two months later, that case fell apart. The judge ruled that Halligan was unlawfully appointed. And yes, she is now gone, too. Not fired, she left under pressure.

Which brings us back to today. Why now? After nearly a year since Comey's social media post, did the DOJ bring this new case?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REPORTER: Did you always feel like this was a strong prosecution, or did something change recently?

BLANCHE: This investigation just didn't come now. It's the result of a lot work by law enforcement over the past year. We don't time when we bring cases around anything other than when the investigation is at a place where we should go to the grand jury and that's exactly what we did in this case as well.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: FBI agents and federal prosecutors have been working on this over the past year. Now, keeping them honest, the President has made no secret that he wants to see James Comey prosecuted. He even talked about it two days ago.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP (R) PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: FISA was used against me and very, very viciously by a dirty cop. You know, we had the Comey gang. Every one of those people should be prosecuted.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[20:05:23]

COOPER: Well, Pam didn't make it happen and now, her replacement, the Acting Attorney General, is trying again. We begin tonight at the White House, where Kaitlan Collins is standing by. So how confident are White House officials that this case will hold up in court, Kaitlan?

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN'S CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT AND THE ANCHOR OF "THE SOURCE": It kind of depends on who you ask, Anderson. I mean, there are some officials who see that this is just something the President has demanded happen. And they believe that's really a large part of why you saw this play out today. I mean, obviously, that's a big part of the reason Pam Bondi is no longer running the Justice Department and that was because the President felt like she wasn't doing enough to go after the people that he thought should be indicted and prosecuted. And chief among those was James Comey.

But when you speak to legal experts about this, Anderson, a lot of them are skeptical, would be putting it best. I mean, I was just talking to a former DOJ official who said, "this might be the worst case the Justice Department has filed in my lifetime." I mean, they are very skeptical will it even go to trial, that it won't be dismissed. And obviously, this is different than the way the case that they filed against James Comey and tried to bring last fall. That was dismissed because of Lindsey Halligan's appointment, which a judge deemed essentially not sufficient in terms of her being able to bring that case against him.

This is different, they're now trying to do it in a place where James Comey posted this picture from the North Carolina beach town, where he was staying. We're waiting to see, obviously, where he is tried, as he is expected to potentially turn himself in or be arrested since his arrest warrant is out there.

Todd Blanche was not really clear when he was asked by reporters about that earlier today. But yes, this all boils down to that social media post that you saw so many of these officials tweeting about and saying that they believed was an explicit threat against the President with those seashells that James Comey had taken the picture of on the beach that he was on. Proving it in court will be obviously a very different challenge for the Justice Department now.

And so, obviously, we'll see where this goes next here. But one thing is clear that regardless of who is running the DOJ, the President wanted these charges brought against James Comey. He wanted any charges brought against James Comey. And so obviously, were seeing that play out tonight, something that we are told was put in motion when Pam Bondi was still at the DOJ, but obviously it's happening now under her former deputy, Todd Blanche, who is the Acting Attorney General.

COOPER: What's your sense of the timing of this indictment? Obviously, it comes early into Todd Blanche's tenure as acting attorney general and right after the shooting of the White House Correspondents' Dinner?

COLLINS: Yes, and I don't think that that that's a surprise in terms of this coming. This is something that we have been hearing from sources was in the works. They were still very much trying to get this brought. They had told us after it was dismissed the first time, they said not to celebrate too much. That was what our sources said in terms of the fact that they were signifying that this was going to be brought again.

And, Anderson, I think what's important is that this is not just a one off with James Comey, because obviously we've seen them try this with Tish James, the New York Attorney General. But we've also heard this about other people, including John Brennan, Cassidy Hutchinson, people close to Dr. Fauci, former aides of his.

I mean, there are other people that the President has also and his allies believe should have charges brought against them. And obviously, what today signals, is the willingness of the Justice Department to do so.

COOPER: Yes, Kaitlan, thanks very much. But Kaitlan is back at the top of the next hour on "The Source". Joining me now, CNN senior law enforcement analyst Andrew McCabe. He served as Deputy FBI Director, was appointed by and served under Jim Comey until Comey's termination in 2017. Also with us, CNN senior legal analyst and former federal prosecutor Elie Honig. Elie, how strong or not is the Justice Department's case?

ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: You know, I really try to not do predictions in the first few hours after an indictment comes out, but this one has no chance, and here's why, it is not enough for prosecutors under the law to show that a statement is stupid or irresponsible. That's protected by the First Amendment. It's not enough to show that a statement is menacing or even scary. That, too, is protected by the First Amendment. These prosecutors are going to have to show that Jim Comey's seashell statement was a specific threat to kill or inflict physical injury on the President.

And so, it's all going to come down to this phrase 86, which is ambiguous at best. We're all going to turn into etymologists over the next few days and study. What does it mean? It's used both ways. It is, I think, a minority of time used to mean physical violence far more frequently than the definition you cited at the beginning to just mean to get rid of. When you're a prosecutor, you can't go in front of a jury with an ambiguous case. I don't think this even gets to a jury. And if it does, I think it will be rejected.

COOPER: Andrew, is there any reason in your view that an investigator or prosecutor would think Comey was threatening the President's life for attempting to incite violence against him?

ANDREW MCCABE, CNN SENIOR LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST: Absolutely not. Absolutely not, for the reasons that Elie just laid out. This is not a statement of I wish to kill the President or I'm going to kill the President. In fact, I think most people stared as I did at the shells on the in the photograph and thought, what is that? So again, to echo what Elie said, this is case has got zero legal potential in front of it. But the bigger picture here, Anderson, is why are we here at all? Why are we even talking about this? Why is this DOJ continuing to persecute James Comey over the perceived political slights between he and Donald Trump?

[20:10:34]

And the answer is because this President's thirst for retribution, for retaliation knows absolutely no bounds. He is not going to stop with a case that gets thrown out, because the U.S. attorney didn't have didn't work the grand jury correctly, and he's not going to stop because this case will ultimately fail on its own lack of merit as well. This, this can this campaign against those people he thinks are enemies will continue until he is gone. Jim Comey knows that as well as anyone, and the rest of us are going to just have to sit here and endure it.

COOPER: It's remarkable when you think Elie, that you have FBI agents working, I guess for the past year on this, prosecutors working for the past year, and that they can find enough, that Todd Blanche, who had a legal career before this is doing this. HONIG: So first of all, I knew Todd Blanche, worked with him in that prior legal career. He would have laughed at this case. Trust me, Todd brought real cases against gangsters, violent criminals, murderers. This case would have -- he would have thrown it off his desk.

I also have questions about that timing, because this post by Jim Comey was about a year ago. It was May 15th of last year, and Blanche was asked today, why did this take almost a year? And he hemmed and hawed, there's no way. I know investigations take time. This is a very simple investigation. You have the post. Jim Comey voluntarily spoke with the Secret Service the next day. There's not that much more you would need --

COOPER: I mean, they could have gone to the beach and talked to every homeowner on the shore, did they see Comey putting the shells there? I mean; I guess --

HONIG: We'll, right, exactly and here's the thing. There was some speculation that maybe Comey was lying. Maybe Comey had put the shells there. They would have charged him with that, right? If, in fact, they could prove that he himself laid out the shells, he would have been charged with a false statement because he denied that. So, there's just no way this case validly took a year. I'm sure that this new and were seeing coordinated effort --

COOPER: So, do you think this is going to be thrown out?

HONIG: I do think it's going to be thrown out. I think the first thing it's going to be thrown out on is vindictive prosecution. This is a textbook case of vindictive prosecution. You have the long history between Comey and Trump. You have the social media post you put up earlier, Trump explicitly calling for his prosecution. And you also have the fact that Comey was indicted once and beat that case. And that is the textbook definition of vindictive prosecution. I charge you, you win, then I charge you with something else a second time. I don't even think it gets past that.

COOPER: Andrew, do you think the DOJ should be spending it's time and resources on this?

MCCABE: Of course not, of course not. They actually have real work to do. It boggles my mind that they're still able to find people inside the department and the FBI for that matter. If we take the acting Attorney General at his word, who would actually spend their time working on this thing and, you know, to kind of undermine that point --

COOPER: But do they have any choice? I mean, if they're ordered to do it, I guess.

MCCABE: Anderson, we all have choices at the end of the day. And I would say if there were any legitimacy, if there were even a legitimate argument that that statement was a threat, do you actually think the Secret Service, after having interviewed him the day after the threat was allegedly made, would have allowed Jim Comey to live his life walking around free, doing nothing for the last year? Do you think this guy is actually a legitimate threat to the President of the United States? And you waited a year to arrest him? It's preposterous. This whole thing is an absolute fraud.

COOPER: Andrew McCabe, Elie Honig, thanks very much.

Up next, retribution by the administration, something Democratic Senator Mark Kelly is quite familiar with, he joins me in a moment,

And later, a historic day in Washington as King Charles becomes only the second British royal ever to address Congress, he reiterated a message from the U.K. Prime minister who called for unity while under fire by President Trump for not getting involved in the war with Iran.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KING CHARLES III, KING OF THE UNITED KINGDOM: Ours is an indispensable partnership, we must not disregard everything that has sustained us for the last 80 years. Instead, we must build on it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:18:42]

COOPER: Again, our breaking news, an arrest warrant issued for former FBI Director James Comey, a second attempt now to prosecute one of the President's biggest critics. It's unclear whether Comey will be taken into custody by law enforcement or turn himself in. As we mentioned earlier, this is due to Comey's Instagram post from last May, now deleted of shells on that beach reading 8647 -- 86 slang for getting rid of something, 47 a reference to Mr. Trump, the 47th President.

The DOJ alleging this was a threat against the Presidents life. Comey is blasting the new indictment brought on by the new acting attorney general, Todd Blanche. Here are some of Comey's response.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

COMEY: Nothing has changed with me. I'm still innocent. I'm still not afraid and I still believe in the independent federal judiciary, so let's go.

But it's really important that all of us remember this is not who we are as a country. This is not how the Department of Justice is supposed to be.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: Joining me now is Arizona Democratic Senator Mark Kelly. Senator Kelly, I'm wondering what your reaction is to this second indictment now against the former FBI director.

SEN. MARK KELLY (D-AZ): Well, it's very clear that the President wants to throw people he doesn't like into jail. I mean, we've seen this before with Letitia James. You know, we've seen it now with James Comey. We've seen it with others, including me. I said something the President didn't like, and then he said I should be hanged and executed and prosecuted. They tried to indict us. They failed to get an indictment. Obviously, in this case, it did not work out the same.

[20:20:12]

COOPER: You and your wife, former Congresswoman Gabby Giffords, obviously, no political violence firsthand, does indicting James Comey over the seashells, do you think it trivializes what is obviously a very real problem in America of political violence?

KELLY: Yes, Anderson, this is a real problem. I mean, the President, you know, has had three attempts on his life. Melissa Hortman has been killed along with her husband. She was a State Senator from Minnesota, Charlie Kirk assassinated. You know, my wife, Gabby, 15 years ago was nearly assassinated, shot in the head. It's a real problem. And it's our patriotic duty to condemn this kind of violence.

I mean, these were, you know, a bunch of seashells on a beach. The President seems to throw people in, you know, different categories. You're either, you know, on his side and a supporter, he's going to help you. He's going to try to, you know, in the case, if you're really close to him, he's going to try to, you know, help you, you know, enrich yourself what he does with his family and close friends.

If you are a perceived enemy, he'll try to throw you in jail. If you speak out against him, he's going to try to silence you. You know, this is not the America that any of us are, you know, used to. We're in some, you know, challenging times. I think it's on all of us to, you know, to address how serious this is. You know, we can't be, we should be able to disagree politically. And disagree, disagree with the President.

I disagree with him on I would say a lot of things, but that doesn't give him the right to try to silence us. That's not what a democracy is, at least not ours.

COOPER: I'm wondering as a sitting U.S. Senator, do you feel like you need to be more cautious about, you know, objecting against the administration? You've been retaliated against by the Defense Secretary for participation in video that advised troops to of their rights not to follow illegal orders. A federal judge blocked that retaliation. Hegseth is appealing that decision. I mean, do you worry this has a chilling effect on even members of Congress?

KELLY: Well, that's what the President wants and I think it does. Retired service members I've heard from directly because what the President is trying to do to me; they have changed what they say and what they do. But he's not going to shut me up.

In this case, he picked the wrong guy to go after. You know, I make sure that I come to work every day. I'm going to do my job. I'm going to hold this administration accountable to when I think they are doing things that are not in the best interest of our country or against the law, or in violation of the constitution. I mean, that's my obligation to do that. I was elected to do this job, so I'm not going to be intimidated.

But I do know that others have been intimidated because of this President and this administration's actions.

COOPER: Which is really stunning. I mean, just, you know, I know people are kind of maybe get used to this sort of thing, but to think that people who have served this country, veterans, high level officers, feel intimidated that, you know, feel intimidated to express publicly their opinion about, you know, the conduct of a war or whatever this current administration. I mean, that's, that's really alarming.

KELLY: It is, I mean, and why wouldn't they be? I said something that the President didn't like. I told members of the military that they should not follow illegal orders, which is basically follow the law. He then said I should be hanged, executed, prosecuted, tried to indict us. Now, they're trying to reduce me in rank.

So of course, there are people out there that are going to feel intimidated and are going to be silenced. That's why I'm in court next week, you know, fighting for not only my constitutional rights, but the other 2 million retired service members. And really all of us. I mean, it's sort of a feature of our government, Anderson, that as citizens, we have an obligation to speak out when we think they're making bad decisions.

And it is, you know, I have to say, after 25 years of service in the Navy, I never thought I'd find myself here in this in this situation. But we have rising political violence. We have an administration at the same time that wants to silence people. And if they have a perceived political enemy and they're not enemies, right? These are people just doing their jobs. They want to throw them in jail.

COOPER: And they're trying repeatedly with James Comey right now. Senator Mark Kelly, thank you very much.

KELLY: Thank you.

COOPER: Up next, King Charles pushes back gently on President Trump in an address before a joint meeting of Congress. We'll have more on that and the state dinner happening now at the White House.

And later, Disney refusing to take action against Jimmy Kimmel and pushing back as the FCC now suddenly is trying to take action against the ABC stations that Disney owns. This is Kimmel pushed back on calls from the White House to have him fired for joking the First Lady as, "an expectant widow" before the White House Correspondents' Dinner.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JIMMY KIMMEL, "JIMMY KIMMEL LIVE" HOST: I agree that hateful and violent rhetoric is something we should reject? I do, and I think a great place to start to dial that back would be to have a conversation with your husband about it.

(END VIDEO CLIP) (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:29:58]

COOPER: We have more breaking news. The FCC, the Federal Communications Commission has suddenly ordered years ahead of schedule a review of licenses for the Disney owned and operated ABC local stations. Now, this comes just one day after the First Lady and the President demanded ABC and its parent company, Disney, fired Jimmy Kimmel over a joke he made on his late-night talk show days before the White House Correspondents' Dinner. The FCC is saying in a filing, and I quote, "Disney's ABC is hereby directed to file license renewals for all of their licensed T.V. stations within 30 days. In other words, by May 28th, 2026. The FCC chair, Brendan Carr, is a Trump ally. Now, the FCC says the license review is related to an ongoing probe into Disney's diversity initiatives. It would only involve the eight ABC stations owned by Disney.

[20:30:49]

Critics of the action see it as government retaliation for airing Kimmel's show and resisting pressure from the President. Disney released a statement that reads, quote, "ABC and its stations have a long record of operating in full compliance with FCC rules and serving their local communities with trusted news, emergency information, and public interest programming."

Disney adds, "We are confident that record demonstrates our continued qualifications as licensees under the Communications Act and the First Amendment and are prepared to show that through the appropriate legal channels."

Now, again, the FCC action comes on the heels of Melania Trump calling for Jimmy Kimmel's firing based on this joke he told in a sketch last Thursday.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JIMMY KIMMEL, HOST, "JIMMY KIMMEL LIVE": Of course, our First Lady Melania is here. Look at Melania, so beautiful. Mrs. Trump, you have a glow like an expectant widow.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: That was three days before the shooting. Monday morning, the First Lady posted on X, "His monologue about my family isn't comedy. His words are corrosive, and they deepen the political sickness within the country." The President later said the joke was a, quote, "despicable cult of violence" and added that Kimmel be immediately fired by Disney and ABC.

Kimmel, for his part, is not backing down, had this to say on the show last night.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) KIMMEL: It was a very light roast joke about the fact that he's almost 80 and she's younger than I am. It was not, by any stretch of the definition, a call to assassination, and they know that. I agree that hateful and violent rhetoric is something we should reject. I do, and I think a great place to start, to dial that back, would be to have a conversation with your husband about it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: Joining me now is Bill Carter, editor-at-large of LateNighter.com, also CNN Media Analyst, Sara Fischer, who is a media correspondent at Axios. So, Bill, what do you make of how Kimmel responded to the President and First Lady? Do you think he has anything to be worried about at this point? Obviously, ABC and Disney have not taken him off the air.

BILL CARTER, EDITOR-AT-LARGE OF LATENIGHTER.COM: Doesn't seem like he does. I think he responded very calmly and in character. I mean, he wasn't intimidated. He made jokes. He did say he clearly didn't want this to be implying violence. I think he covered himself and gave, you know, ABC and Disney a safe harbor in what they have to do, which is stand up to what is now a naked intimidation tactic.

COOPER: Sara, how extraordinary is this FCC order that all ABC stations have to apply -- local stations have to apply for license renewals within 30 days? This wasn't supposed to happen for another couple of years.

SARA FISCHER, CNN MEDIA ANALYST: It's completely unprecedented, Anderson, for several reasons. One, as you note, they're expediting the review. We rarely see that happen. Typically, you just reapply for your license when it expires every eight years. Two, they are citing this public interest standard, which is very rarely cited for things like DEI, in going after these stations.

And then three, you typically go after one broadcast station if you find that something that they did violated your rules. You don't go after every single station that's owned by a broadcast network. And so all these things combined lead people to believe that Chairman Carr is going after Disney and ABC, trying to, you know, impose a punishment for the way that they are covering things, as opposed to taking issue with what one broadcaster has actually done that could violate its rules.

COOPER: Bill, do you think the FCC is going to try to make ABC stations' support for Kimmel a factor in whether their licenses get renewed? I mean, is this like the only lever the FCC has to pull right now against Disney?

CARTER: I find that really astonishing. I mean, are they going to make the case that his speech is somehow to be condemned? I mean, clearly ABC is going to say, the man has a First Amendment right, and we're going to stand up for it. I don't think that'll in any way fly.

I mean, look, this is part of his retribution tour. I mean, he's going after people who criticize him or make fun of him, or in James Comey's case, you know, didn't support him. And Kimmel is obviously a person that irritates him, and he doesn't back down.

And he gets people like Carr and, you know, the people in the Justice Department to do this, even though they have to know there's no case to be made here. This is harassment. And really, it's just an effort that I think is going to fail, because I can't see Disney caving into this.

[20:35:07]

It's irritating to them, and it's certainly stress on Kimmel, but I can't see them backing down. It's too important.

COOPER: Sara, I mean, Brendan Carr certainly has a record here of, you know, backing up things it seems like the President wants done. I want to play a clip from December when Carr was asked by Democratic Senator Ben Ray Lujan about the agency's independence.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. BEN RAY LUJAN (D), NEW MEXICO: So are your website wrong? Is your website lying?

BRENDAN CARR, CHAIRMAN, FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION: Possibly. The FCC is not an independent agency.

LUJAN: OK, can I read this to you? The FCC's mission on the homepage of the FCC, man. An independent U.S. government agency overseen by Congress. Is that factual or is that a lie?

CARR: The FCC is not formally an independent agency.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: I mean, is the FCC an independent agency?

FISCHER: Yes. And Anderson, when that exchange happened, I took a screenshot of the FCC's website right as he was saying that. And a half hour later, they had actually scrubbed the word independent from the website. So you can --

COOPER: Wow.

FISCHER: -- kind of see that they're sort of making up their interpretation of what the agency's role is in real time. The FCC is supposed to act independently from the executive branch. And, by the way, so is the DOJ. So many of these, you know, agencies. But in the Trump administration, it's been a trend that he is trying to sort of consolidate power over what are supposed to be these independent branches.

For Brendan Carr, I got to say, this has been surprising in all the many years that he served as a lawyer at the FCC. Of course, he was conservative, but he was not somebody that seemed to be in the pocket of any one president or political figure. He seemed to have made this sort of 180 degree switch once he became the chairman, I think likely to keep his position. We see how Donald Trump acts towards his members of his cabinet and his administration when they don't fall in line.

COOPER: It's so interesting to see all these characters pop up in all these different places, willing to do whatever it takes, it seems, to please the President of the United States. Bill Carter, Sara Fischer as well, thanks so much for your reporting.

Coming up, the President will now be featured on some American passports. That's right. His face. There it is. Just the latest in a long line of Trump branded government swag to celebrate the nation's 250th birthday. That's what they're saying this is for, to celebrate the birthday.

Also, up next, we'll take you live to the state dinner of the White House honoring King Charles and Queen Camilla after King Charles delivered address to a joint meeting of Congress.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:41:44]

COOPER: Breaking news on a historic night in the nation's capital. These are live pictures from the state dinner honoring Britain's King Charles and Queen Camilla at the White House. It is the culmination of a day of pomp and circumstance in which the King delivered a pointed speech, at least by the standards of the British monarchy.

It was delivered, of course, impeccably politely to the U.S. Congress. The royal visit comes at a time when the relationship between the U.S. and the United Kingdom is strained more than it's been in decades, notably because of the war in Iran and the British prime minister's reluctance to get involved in President Trump's response to that. There was, however, no tension on display in the King and Queen's formal welcome ceremony and full military review on the White House south lawn this morning.

President Trump seemed to stick to his prepared remarks, paying tribute to joint American-British ties and making no allusion to the ongoing disagreement between the two nations.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Long before Americans had a nation or a constitution, we first had a culture, a character, and a creed. Before we ever proclaimed our independence, Americans carried within us the rarest of gifts, moral courage, and it came from a small but mighty kingdom from across the sea.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: The President and the King then held a private bilateral meeting in the Oval Office, and later on Capitol Hill, King Charles addressed that joint meeting of Congress, following in his late mother Queen Elizabeth's footsteps, being only the second British monarch to do so.

For a figure constitutionally bound to remain above politics, the King's speech was restrained but forceful, a rallying cry for democracy.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KING CHARLES III, UNITED KINGDOM: I pray with all my heart that our alliance will continue to defend our shared values with our partners in Europe and the Commonwealth and across the world. And --

(APPLAUSE)

CHARLES: And that we ignore the clarion calls to become ever more inward-looking. America's words carry weight and meaning, as they have since independence. The actions of this great nation matter even more.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: Well, the White House, for its part, posted this photo on social media today. The caption there, if you can read it, "Two Kings."

Joining me now, CNN Global Affairs Analyst Brett McGurk and CNN Royal Correspondent Max Foster and CNN Political Director David Chalian. So, Max, what do you make of the King's address to Congress? You've heard a lot of the King's speeches, that it was certainly more pointed, at least by British monarch standards, than many American political observers maybe expected it to be.

MAX FOSTER, CNN ROYAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, I think that's really interesting. I think this is a case of perspective, really. So, when he did lean into these issues, saying support for Ukraine, support for NATO, support for the threat of climate change, these actually are mainstream views in Europe and the United Kingdom.

So if you were looking at this from the U.K., it wouldn't have felt very political. But I think the point you're making is that if you look at it from a U.S. point of view, they did feel political because they speak to current political debate. So that's --

COOPER: We're looking at live pictures, by the way, just now.

FOSTER: Yes, so we've got the President there, speaking there. It would be interesting to hear his interpretation, actually, because it did sometimes feel quite pointed towards the President's policies, particularly when you talk about holding executive to account.

[20:45:11]

But I think he didn't cross a constitutional line here, partly because it wasn't seen as political from a European point of view, but also he wasn't speaking to his subjects. He was speaking to the American people. But, of course, from an American point of view, it would have felt quite political.

So I think that's something very different we're seeing from this monarch, as opposed to his mother, who went before. He never expressed any opinion whatsoever. So I think there is a change here. But I think he feels like he's representing a world view. And as a friend of the United States, you can have disagreements, but still stand shoulder to shoulder.

COOPER: David, the King received a big round of applause when he invoked the Magna Carta's principle that executive power is subject to checks and balances. That was a quote from him. Did it surprise you?

DAVID CHALIAN, CNN POLITICAL DIRECTOR: Yes. I mean, that's a popular line to deliver in Congress, even though this Congress hasn't necessarily been living up to -- making sure that their Article I responsibilities are seen as co-equal. But, Anderson, I do think it can be sort of intentional.

And, yes, we can perceive it here as political in nature, but not, I would say, it wasn't a speech where the King was trying to get in the muck or pick a fight with Donald Trump. He would never do that, obviously. But by sticking to, as you mentioned, the Magna Carta, the sort of organizing principles of our nations and their interconnectedness and trying to, in this moment of difference that Trump clearly has expressed time and again with NATO, with Europe, over the issue of Ukraine, over the issue of Iran, to try and stitch that together into the longer arc of history and the story of the durability of the relationship.

COOPER: Brett, I want to play more of what the King said about America's relationship with Britain.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHARLES: But in this unpredictable environment, our alliance cannot rest on past achievements or assume that foundational principles simply endure. As my prime minister said last month, ours is an indispensable partnership. We must not disregard everything that has sustained us for the last 80 years. Instead, we must build on it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: It's interesting to hear, I mean, though diplomatic, to hear the British monarch publicly express that level of concern about the future of the U.S. and British alliance.

BRETT MCGURK, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: Anderson, I thought his speech was extraordinary, and I thought the President's speech was quite good, too. And if you took them in a vacuum, you would think that the Western alliance are actually working very strongly together, when in fact what the King there is referring to is that we're not.

And, you know, the difficulty, Anderson, with dealing with allies, particularly our transatlantic allies, is they are democracies. And in order to work together, you have to be attuned to their political constraints. And when it comes right now, the prime minister of the U.K., Keir Starmer, has about a 20 percent approval rating. But the war in Iran, what President Trump is doing in Iran, also has about 20 percent support in the U.K. So you have to be mindful of that.

I've helped build coalitions. You have to be mindful of the politics. And what concerns me is -- I'm kind of old-fashioned. Sometimes I go to the National Archives. You can see the Magna Carta. You can see the Declaration of Independence. You can see the Constitution, these rooted values.

But we're becoming so transactional in our foreign policy, Anderson, that, well, you're not helping us in Iran, so maybe we'll do less in Ukraine. And it's so unfortunate because our adversaries in the world are aligning, China, Russia, Iran.

We've talked about a lot on your program. And there's an opportunity here, if we could come together, if the King's speech here could actually translate into some shared interests and working together in burden sharing, there's an opportunity because Ukraine has a chance of actually prevailing right now against the Russians, if you look at what's happening in Ukraine.

And we really need the Brits with us in the U.K. and their Navy in the Strait of Hormuz and everything we've been talking about on your program. I don't think that's going to happen, unfortunately. But that would be the traditional play for alliances to help each other. And that's what the King was talking about, and he's absolutely right.

COOPER: And, Max, you know, President Trump, King Charles, did not directly address any of the tension of the Iran war. Can you just talk for our viewers how much input the British government likely had in the drafting of the King's speech and the message the prime minister and others wanted him to get across? How does that work?

FOSTER: Well, he's here on the invitation of the British government, so they would have a say on every element here. They would allow the King to write his speech. I don't know his team did, but I know the foreign secretary was on the plane on the way over as they worked it through. So he is expressing a view.

[20:50:02]

I mean, actually, Keir Starmer spoke to this yesterday where he talked about not wanting another Iraq. So Britain too readily supporting George Bush in going into Iraq, which was seen as a mistake in the U.K., and not wanting to do that again with Iran. So Keir Starmer saying we didn't support America in the same way with Iran.

And that's, you know, it's very sensitive for the King to speak around that. But what he did do was talk about all the conflicts where the U.S. and the U.K. did work together. So in the arc of history, actually, they have been friends who show up for each other, but they don't have to agree all the time.

They just need to respect each other. And it's interesting that the King felt he was able to say these very pointed things, as you put them, but it's also felt that he had the currency with the President because of their personal relationship to be able to do that. And in a way, I think the King was representing a lot of the rest of the world's view about what's happening in America.

And it's going to be really interesting to see how other countries view this because he's almost championing a view within the United States, which many other parts of the world want to be heard.

COOPER: David, do you think that this visit could in any way alter President Trump's public criticism of British Prime Minister?

CHALIAN: I don't, Anderson. I think this is like a totally separate track for Donald Trump, who clearly loves all the pageantry, loves associating himself with the royal family and this particular relationship. In fact, tonight, when I first watched the speech, I thought, wow, President Trump is not going to be pleased with the coverage of this speech and the sort of the praise of the pointedness that the king has been given here.

And yet, when the President was greeting the King on the South Portico tonight in advance of the state dinner, he praised the speech, said he gave a great speech, said he was jealous of it, perhaps. So he clearly wants to keep this on a track where there's no division here and the imagery and the pageantry moves forward. But I don't think it has any real bearing on his policy pursuit or the transactional nature, as Brett was saying, of the way Donald Trump pursues his goals on the global stage.

COOPER: Yes. Max Foster, David Chalian, Brett McGurk, thanks very much. I appreciate it.

Up next, those looking to renew their passports could soon get a commemorative version featuring a picture of President Trump. Details ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:56:34]

COOPER: Welcome back. Some news to tell you about. The State Department, headed by Marco Rubio, who's the Secretary of State, in addition to being the National Security Adviser and was for a time the archivist of the National Archives and the head of USAID, has decided to commemorate America's 250th anniversary.

Some passports will feature an image of President Trump. The State Department said the new passport will be the default one out of the Washington agency for those who were new in person. This is just another example of the President adding his name or image to government items.

You may remember him adding his likeness to the National Park Pass right next to George Washington. And back in February, a large banner was hung outside the Justice Department with his face on it.

Joining me now is CNN's Senior Political Commentator Adam Kinzinger, former Republican Congressman. So, I don't know when your passport expires, but if you renewed it and chose to do it in person this year in Washington, D.C., you would have President Trump's face on it for the rest of his term and then for seven years after he leaves office. How do you feel about that?

ADAM KINZINGER, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, first off, I'd recommend people not renew this in person in D.C. then. I mean, look, Anderson, this whole thing's as silly as everybody knows it is, right? The thing about the 250th anniversary of America, which is something we should be proud of, is we always stood against authoritarianism, against putting people above the common good of the country.

And a president is seen as a servant, not somebody to worship. And so, yes, I mean, look, I think whoever the next president is in January of 2029, if it was me, I would say, hey, everybody can replace their Donald Trump passport for free if you write in and do that.

So I think this will last for a couple years, and it's sad, and again, it's just -- it is the opposite of what we should be celebrating at 250 years, which is just, we are a people that elect our own president. The president is not a king, and we're proud of that.

COOPER: You do know that the White House just put out a picture of the President and the King with this saying, two kings, so --

KINZINGER: Yes, yes. Look, I mean, this is what they do. All they do is they just try to provoke people online. I mean, we're in a real war. We have economic issues. There's an energy crisis, but this is where the energy is spent, so whatever.

COOPER: Do you anticipate this continuing, though? I mean, it does seem like --

KINZINGER: Sure.

COOPER: -- why wouldn't there be an effort to put him on currency, or why wouldn't there be an effort to put him on, you know, commemorative coins, or his face --

KINZINGER: Yes.

COOPER: -- on the Washington, you know, the arch -- the Trump arch that he wants to build?

KINZINGER: Well, this is exactly -- here's what happens, and this is why Rubio is doing this, is they sit around and they're like, man, I've got to get in Trump's good graces, so what do I do? And they come up with some way to praise him, to worship him.

It started out early on, if you remember last year, people were hanging these big banners with Trump's face on it, and then they could go to the Cabinet meetings and tell the President they were doing it, and he would love them. And then somebody else would get in his good graces, so they're just sitting here out competing each other for who can impress Donald Trump the most.

So this is going to continue for a long time, Anderson, until he's out of office. And we will look back, and it will be as silly as it is now --

COOPER: You know, it's interesting, I mean, Pam Bondi, I assume, put up that banner at the Justice Department, and maybe it worked for like a day, but it's never enough. Clearly, she is no longer there.

KINZINGER: That's right. Look, it's never enough. I mean, you can buy a little time with Donald Trump, but if you get close to him, he will always throw you under the bus. You'll always end up on the outs. I can't think of anybody, actually, that's been close to him that, in the long run, has ended up still in his inner circle.

So buy yourself time, that's what they're trying to do. But, look, in the long run, we're going to look back and say this was as silly as it feels right now.

COOPER: Yes, we'll see how the passport renewal business goes right now. Adam Kinzinger, thanks very much.

That's it for us. The news continues. I'll see you tomorrow. The Source with Kaitlan Collins starts now.