Return to Transcripts main page
Anderson Cooper 360 Degrees
U.S. Launches New Strikes As Trump Vows Revenge Against Iran; Houthis Declare Blockade Of Saudi Shipping; Interview With Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-MD); FBI: Army Vet Accused Of Throwing Incendiary Device At NYC Federal Building Carried Anti-ICE Material; ICE Officer Connected To Fatal Maine Shooting Had Claimed "Cognitive Deficits" After Serious Head Injury; Trump: Qatari-Gifted Air Force One Will Be Sent For Upgrades; Tate Brothers Vow To Fight U.K. Extradition On Rape And Sex Trafficking Charges. Aired 8-9p ET
Aired July 20, 2026 - 20:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOAN MONFORT, PHOTOGRAPHER BEHIND 2007 MESSI-YAMAL VIRAL PHOTO: It's something so, so big, so it's huge. I couldn't imagine never to one of my pictures run around the world.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST: So Monfort told "OutFront" what it was like watching the two to meet again on the world's biggest stage. Pretty incredible story, just to think about it and to imagine that moment. Thanks so much for joining us. AC360 starts now.
[20:00:36]
JOHN KING, CNN HOST: Tonight, the Pentagon admitting, nearly 100 troops have been hurt in just the last two weeks of war with Iran. That is on top of the three, possibly four servicemen and women killed over the weekend and new strikes and counter-strikes underway tonight.
John King here, in for Anderson, it is the 10th round of airstrikes against Iran since the cease fire broke down. It comes with mediators today floating a ten-day pause in hostilities. But President Trump had already signaled his intentions at lunchtime, saying every time Iran kills an American soldier, they will pay for that killing many times over. And at 4:00 P.M. today, CENTCOM launching new attacks.
U.S. officials telling CNN, even though ceasefire talks are continuing, the President is focused right now on making Iran pay for violating that Memorandum of Understanding and this official says, for the American troops killed in action.
(VIDEO CLIP PLAYS)
KING: This is video of a deadly missile strike on a Jordanian air base overnight Friday into Saturday. This morning, the Pentagon identified two soldiers killed in that attack. Private Isabella Gonzales of Texas was just 19 years old. She was assigned to an air defense regiment based in Germany. First Lieutenant Tyler James Feehan was from Hawaii and served also in missile defense with a unit from Fort Bragg, North Carolina.
A third, as yet unidentified serviceman was killed in Northern Iraq, and a fourth is missing still in Jordan. And again, as we mentioned, Pentagon spokesman says nearly 100 service members have been hurt since July 7th. Mostly mild concussions, he said.
Separately, a CNN data review shows that the Pentagon has been slow to disclose war injuries, which that same spokesman says is to protect other service members who might be jeopardized, he claims, by releasing such information prematurely.
But it is the new fatalities that the President first and foremost is concerned with. The most since March, when 13 U.S. service members lost their lives.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP (R) PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: We feel very badly. But, you know, those great people, those great patriots, were out there fighting that Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon. Iran has been very, very badly damaged. They've lost everything almost militarily. They've got very little left --
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KING: Recent events, though, call into question that very little left part Iran stepping up attacks on Kuwait and Jordan, with both reporting missile intercepts, more missile intercepts today. And the U.S. official tells us the Pentagon is sending more fighter jets and support aircraft to the region. Not what you'd be doing if Iran truly, as the President said, has very little left.
Complicating the picture, the Iran backed Houthi rebel group in Yemen today declaring a blockade on Saudi shipping, which has to go through the Bab el Mandeb. That's the other maritime choke point in the region.
And with a tanker reportedly hit tonight in the Strait of Hormuz and any shipping there down to a trickle, oil prices continue rising back toward the $100.00 a barrel mark. Gas prices here in the United States, meantime, back you see it there, $4.00 a gallon up more than a dollar since this war began. The American people who voted midterm elections 15 weeks from tomorrow simply disapprove of this war. New polling. You see it again right there shows 68 percent of Americans believe this is not a war worth fighting, just 28 percent say it is.
Tomorrow, the President will travel to Dover Air Base in Delaware to attend the dignified return of the remains of Private Gonzales and Lieutenant Feehan.
Yesterday he was asked how a war, he himself said would last weeks at most, has gone on this long.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REPORTER: You said the start of the war would be four or five weeks. It's now been nearly five months.
TRUMP: Well, you keep hitting me. This is a far bigger job than were doing. We were doing a little job in stopping them from having a certain capability. Now, we're just ending it. So, it's really not the same thing. What we're doing now is were ending any chance where they can have a nuclear missile. If you look at it after a week and a half, not four weeks, a week and a half, two weeks. We stopped them from probably, but I don't want to have the word probably. Thank you very much.
REPORTER: Thank you, sir.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KING: We start off tonight with Kristen Holmes at the White House. Kristen, you hear the words from the President there saying this is very different. it's not what he intended or not what he expected at the very beginning. What are you hearing about the hours and the days ahead?
KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, that's what we've heard from U.S. officials, John, this kind of idea of separating the different sections of what has been going on. They said that the first part of this, the idea of the actual military action was over and now they were in this other phase. Well, we've seen really an escalation that's brought them back to the first part of this. What happened before the ceasefire, this rise in military expectations.
And we look at the next couple of days and weeks, President Trump is angry. It is clear from the U.S. officials that were talking to that they want retribution, retribution for the fact that Iran violated the ceasefire on multiple occasions, and retribution for the fact that Iran has now taken the lives of these American servicemen and women. That was a line that President Trump really did not want to cross. And as you noted, this is now the most deadly stretch that we have seen in quite some time since the beginning of this "incursion" in Iran.
President Trump not calling it a war, but as we've seen, things are escalating. And every U.S. official I've talked to says President Trump right now is focused on getting retribution, particularly for those deaths.
[20:05:59]
KING: Well, to that point, maybe that's the answer to the question. But we see the pictures of escalation mediators, though, did reportedly float a ten day cease fire proposal today. White House, even considering that.
HOLMES: Everything's a consideration. And we know President Trump has been looking for some kind of diplomatic off ramp, we heard U.S. Secretary of State just yesterday, Marco Rubio, talking about this idea that diplomacy is always something that they are seeking out. But I do want to read you this direct quote. You kind of alluded to it in your opening, but this is what U.S. officials said specifically when we asked about this idea of them accepting the ceasefire.
They said, "Right now, President Trump is focused on making Iran pay for their violations of the MOU and their continued acts of terrorism in the Strait of Hormuz."
Went on to say, "In addition, the President will make Iran pay for the deaths of U.S. soldiers. So that is where his mind is at. Now, what that means, we don't understand in a larger picture yet. We have asked a number of questions. President Trump has floated this idea of Kharg Island.
We know that that would require actual troops on the ground. If President Trump is willing to do that. As of now, it does not seem like that is something he is willing to do. But as we've said, this idea of this floated proposal that came before this 10th night of consecutive strikes that we heard about from the Central Command. So, clearly, they are not considering it in this moment.
KING: Kristen Holmes at the White House, thank you so much.
Joining me now to discuss further the retired U.S. Army Lieutenant General Karen Gibson, the former director of U.S. Intelligence for the U.S. Central Command, also former Senior U.S. Diplomat Allen Eyre, who was a member of the team that negotiated the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran and the former deputy assistant secretary of defense for the Middle East, Dana Stroul.
General, I want to start with you. When you hear Kristen Holmes reporting, you hear the words of the President of the United States, retribution, retaliation. You also hear more assets being sent into the region by the Pentagon.
Forgive the question, but does it sound like a clear plan or does it sound more like an emotional reaction?
LT. GEN. KAREN GIBSON, FORMER DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE FOR U.S.: Well, I think when we see that there are additional assets going forward that would lead me to believe that the Central Command Commander has requested these as a prudent, perhaps pre-positioning of assets for what might be more expanded operations in the future.
I mean, certainly it's an understandable desire to have retribution for the tragic deaths of American service members. But the number of perhaps refueling aircraft and others that are going forward lead me to believe that perhaps there is planning for more expansive target set than what we've seen to date, which has largely been focused on eliminating or reducing Iran's military capabilities that can be used to interdict or affect commercial shipping in the Strait of Hormuz.
KING: And Alan, follow on from there. If you get expanded assets and you get expanded targeting, do you believe that is likely to convince the Iranian leadership, okay, it's time to back down or come back to the table with a more conciliatory approach.
ALAN EYRE, FORMER SENIOR U.S. DIPLOMAT: Highly unlikely John, this Iranian leadership, more radical, more militarized, less risk averse and more anti-U.S. is almost certainly not going to capitulate because they see any capitulation as just inviting further pressure from the United States and Iran, excuse me, and Israel.
So no, I don't, I think what would happen is the Iranians are engaged right now in moving up the escalatory ladder. So, to the extent that the United States escalates, it will respond proportionately, perhaps targeting GCC energy infrastructure or other available targets. But the Iranian leadership, you know, they've lost 6,000 Iranians. They've lost over 50 of their top military and civilian leaders, and they're firmly convinced the U.S. and Israel are seeking to get rid of the regime.
So, they're not really looking for ways to play nice with the United States.
KING: Well, then, Dana, is there any conclusion to make, at least on this day, that this is going to continue to spiral into something bigger and bigger and bigger still?
DANA STROUL, FORMER DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR THE MIDDLE EAST: Well, first of all, making Iran pay is not a strategic objective, and it's not an achievable military objective. So, as what we've seen happen in the past 24 hours is the scope and scale of U.S. strikes inside Iran are expanding.
At first, it was just coastal infrastructure, coastal infrastructure, coastal radars, and the Iranian military capabilities, as the general said, that were threatening commerce and freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz. But now geographically dispersed across Iran, electrical grids, railways, bridges and other infrastructure that could be used for military purposes by Iran and the IRGC, but also are used by civilians.
[20:10:39]
And as the United States expands that aperture, the Iranians, as Alan said, are going to respond in kind. So, they are now targeting desalination plants in the gulf, civilian hotels. And today, beyond the U.S. Military base in Jordan, actually, Jordanian port infrastructure. You take all that together. And this is all signs of an escalating scope of military targeting on both sides.
KING: General Gibson, help somebody out there who might be confused. Do you have a unique perspective from your position at CENTCOM? On the one hand, there is no question in four plus months, the United States has developed, delivered, excuse me, some punishing military blows against Iranian capabilities. And yet Iran can still, as it had over the weekend, launch missiles into Jordan and strike those bases and sadly kill U.S. servicemen and women.
Help that in the context, in terms of what Iran has lost, but what it still capable of doing?
GIBSON: Yes, so, I think in terms of the strike against Jordan, the range itself of that weapon was not a surprise. Perhaps the precision and accuracy of the strike, depending on whether the building that they actually struck, was the one they intended to. That might be somewhat of a surprise. But even though the U.S. Military has conducted punishing airstrikes for months and really significantly degraded much of Iran's inventory, there is still much that remains. And actually, eliminating it entirely is a very high bar, particularly for things like one way attack drones. They're cheap, they're plentiful, they're easy to hide, they're hard to find. There aren't a lot of signatures until they begin to launch one.
It's really -- it reminds me very much of trying to entirely eliminate the IED network in Iraq that was being used against American service members, you know, decades ago. It's just a very asymmetric fight. And it is incredibly difficult to eliminate every one of those weapons, obviously, as they've demonstrated, they still have and continue to produce inventory.
KING: And as we have the conversation about the United States and Iran, we see the Houthis deciding to get involved as well, to join the escalation, if you will. It's not directly connected, maybe, but it certainly is connected. What's the impact of that?
EYRE: Well, the obvious one, John, which is that again, this is not because Iran asked them to. It's because they've got their own beef with the Saudis and the animosity mutual between those two have acted up in the last couple of weeks.
So yes, that will not only restrict Saudi's ability to export what it was shipping overland to avoid the Strait of Hormuz. But it will also degrade the Saudi's ability to import vital foods they need for their own population. And one other quick point, John, let's not forget this war right now is all about reopening or trying to reopen a Strait that was fully open before we started the war. The putative cause of this war, the nuclear issue is so far down the road you can't even see it.
KING: Dana, you heard at the top of the program, the Pentagon now conceding. Well, CNN's reporting that they've been slow to disclose the injuries in the war. That's not how the Pentagon would describe it. But tonight, they say a hundred or so killed in the last couple of weeks. Do we need, there hasn't been a Pentagon briefing in, I believe, two months in the middle of an injured, I'm sorry, injured, forgive me for that, injured here.
There hasn't been a Pentagon briefing in two months. Does the administration should it be more transparent or are they right to say, we can't tell you about these injuries because of security concerns?
I think it's two challenges. And we've seen other department of defense teams and other Pentagon teams balance these tensions. So, on the one hand, information that's extremely timely allows the enemy, in this case, Iran, to learn whether or not they're targeting is effective. And if it's not effective, then they're going to learn how to improve over time.
So, there's always a need to limit exactly what is available in the public domain immediately. At the same time, transparency is part of our system here of rules, congressional oversight in a democracy where the public has a right to know what it's military service members whose lives are at risk every day are doing, what we're achieving and what this blood and treasure is for, and the lack of transparency, the lack of public articulation is a core vulnerability.
And it's why so many Americans and so many members of Congress are questioning exactly what we can realistically achieve in this war.
[20:15:08]
KING: General Gibson, let me close with you. You heard Kristen Holmes, our White House correspondent, saying, of course, everything is always being considered, but it does seem with more assets going in and more escalation going in, that the administration, at least at the moment, does not believe. And Alan made this point that Iran is ready to come back to the table in any conciliatory or any meaningful way.
So then, are there new military objectives that might bring that about?
GIBSON: Well, when I think about as a former intelligence professional, what an adversary is going to do, I look at two things. One, what is their will and intent, their desire, and two, what is their ability? And we've already talked about the effect that we've had not total in trying to degrade their ability to conduct strikes.
But when we look at their will and intent, their desire, their stated desire to institute a new mechanism for navigation through the straits, that they'll control the fact that they continue to hit shipping despite all of these strikes by U.S. Central Command leads me to believe that were not affecting their will and intent.
And I think continuing along the path of having the same kinds of strikes that we've had in the past, it's going to take something that really far more significant to change their calculus and cause them to back off on this insistence that they will control vessels that go through the straits. It's a tough one to a tough nut to crack.
KING: Sure, seems to be, General Gibson, Alan Eyre, Dana Stroul, grateful for your time, thank you so much.
Up next, a lawmaker who's calling for ending the war right now, Senator Chris Van Hollen will join us.
And later, what authorities in New York are revealing about the Army veteran they said, did this lighting a fire, setting off fireworks and brandishing a rifle outside a federal building in lower Manhattan.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:21:14]
KING: New air strikes and counter-strikes underway between the United States and Iran. Nearly five months into a war, the President said would last just weeks, a war that two-thirds of Americans now call a war not worth fighting. With midterm elections just 15 weeks away, you see the polling right there on your screen. And though there doesn't seem any way out at the moment, our next guest wants the administration to find one. Posting over the weekend, "This senseless war should never have been started and it needs to end now."
That from the Maryland Democratic Senator, Chris Van Hollen, who joins us now, he's a member of the Foreign Relations Committee. Senator, thank you for your time tonight. The President says more assets are going into the region. We are now in the 10th wave, 10th consecutive day of strikes since the MOU. The ceasefire agreement collapsed. Do you know what the plan is?
SEN. CHRIS VAN HOLLEN (D-MD): There is no plan, John and the thing about this senseless war is that there never has been a plan. And when the President said the objective was one thing, one day he changed it to something else another day. And now we see more Americans killed, more Americans injured, more civilians, killed. The Strait of Hormuz is closed again. It's widening, as you reported, the Houthis are talking about closing the strait that goes into the Red Sea, and oil prices are going up and other prices are going to go up.
And so, you have the President, who promised the country he'd keep us out of war and bring down prices, doing just the opposite. When you're digging a hole, stop digging. That's what they should do.
KING: The way it normally works. You're on the Foreign Relations Committee is administration officials come up sometimes every couple of days. Maybe it's a week or two, depending on the urgency of the situation. You heard the President at the top of the program when he was asked, you said it was going to be a couple of weeks at the most. Why, he said, well, they had a plan and then they changed the plan and they're doing something else now. Are you getting any information from the Pentagon, from the White House? You may not like it. You may not agree with it, but are they giving you information, at least explaining what they're trying to do?
VAN HOLLEN: John, as you know, information has been very sparse. It took weeks and weeks into the war for this Republican-controlled Senate to even hold a hearing on the war. I will say that tomorrow I serve on the Appropriations Committee. We will have the Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth. He'll be in front of the committee, and you can be sure he'll be getting the kind of questions that were talking about right now.
What is the purpose of this war, and how are you going to end it again? They got us into this terrible mess. We've got to get out of it. I've also be pushing for another vote on war powers resolution, so we can at least begin to hold our Republican Senate colleagues accountable. They should have to tell their constituents and people in their states where they stand. As the President escalates this war again.
KING: There have been growing support for that, as you know, I understand your point about trying to bring it up again, but it is largely symbolic. The one-way congress could stop this is to cut off the funding. Most of the attention is on the House's side right now, as Speaker Johnson tries to get his narrow majority to pass this, but then that money would that would come back to the Senate, where the leadership. You're on the Democratic side, the Republican leadership says it wants to use, forgive me, America, a process called reconciliation, which means they can do it with a majority of Republicans.
Do you have any hope? I know it's about other spending bills, too, and that's usually how it happens. Well, I couldn't vote against it just for the war, Senator, because I had to vote for this, that and the other thing. But do you have any hope that you can get the two or three or four Republicans you would need to stop this?
VAN HOLLEN: Well, John, I do know in the Senate the idea of moving through this process you describe is reconciliation is something that a lot of Senator's don't want to do. Whether they end up doing that because the President insists on it, we'll see. But I, for one, am not going to vote for one penny for this illegal, senseless war. And that's why originally, the Pentagon and the President was talking about coming up with a supplemental.
I think they recognized they didn't get the votes; they didn't have the votes. And so, now they're looking for alternatives. But it's not a done deal, not by any means and as you say, at the end of the day, the real power of Congress has here is the power of the purse. And we should not be voting for more money for this illegal, senseless war.
[20:25:30]
KING: We had over the weekend, Friday into Saturday, the horrible strike in Jordan, which killed at least two U.S. Servicemen. Bahrain has been repelling missiles and drone strikes as well. You say you're not getting much conversation from the administration. What are your conversations with our allies in the region, Kuwait, Bahrain, Jordan and elsewhere who obviously are bearing the brunt of this?
VAN HOLLEN: Well, they're very worried, of course, John, because they become targets of the Iranian counterattacks. These are countries that in many, many cases have U.S. defenses. U.S. bases, and Iran's position is if the United States is going to attack us from these bases, we're going to counterattack against these U.S. bases in places like Jordan.
And, of course, these countries thought that, you know, America would be a great shield. What they didn't count on was a President who was going to start a war, not simply be there to help provide defenses against other aggressors.
And what happened was President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu started this war. And what we're doing is seeing the terrible consequences, both in terms of lives lost and, of course, the terrible economic impact on Americans here at home, but also throughout the Gulf Region.
I mean, think about tourism in that area. Think about the Jordanians who want people to come to the Gulf of Aqaba, all of that tourism is suppressed. The economies in that region are taking a hit. So, they're very worried about this war dragging on.
VAN HOLLEN: Senator Van Hollen, thank you for your time tonight. Obviously, well keep track of secretary Hegseth before the committee tomorrow. Appreciate your time, sir.
Up next, for us authorities name the man they say set a fire outside a Manhattan federal building equipped. Get this, they say with an air rifle, a hammer, two axes, three knives and a machete.
Also tonight, mega social media influencers, the Tate Brothers, now facing extradition on rape and human trafficking charges. They're now pleading for the Trump administration to intervene.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:31:42]
KING: The FBI says a 43-year-old Army veteran is in custody tonight accused of tossing an incendiary device at a federal building that houses offices for Immigration and Customs Enforcement here in New York City. Here is the moment authorities say Andrew Arrabaca doused an area with gasoline and ignited it with a firework. This was captured on video from across the street.
Then smoke filled the area and investigators say Arrabaca fired several airsoft rifle pellets at the building. According to the FBI at least three people were injured. They also say he had get this two axes, a hammer, a machete and three knives and a sign saying, "ICE Off Our Streets."
Joining us now to discuss, Retired FBI Special Agent Richard Kolko, Former NYPD Detective David Sarni. Richard, to you first, you're very familiar with that building, you know it well. What stands out when you hear the details and then see the images of this attack? What stands out to you?
RICHARD KOLKO, RETIRED FBI SPECIAL AGENT: Well I've walked into that door many times when I was assigned to the New York office. The roads blocked off, security is really tight around there. This person knew they were going to get caught, there was no question there. Just the cameras that are available, security there's two levels at the -- about 20 feet from the door and then at the door.
So once he walked up there, I'm kind of surprised he was able to get the fuel out and actually light it before somebody stopped him or accosted him there. But thankfully, he didn't get any closer and didn't cause any more damage. It'll be an interesting investigation.
I heard that he is talking, so that's helpful. These people always have some sort of grievance and he wants a chance to tell his story and he's going to get a chance.
KING: So David, we were talking before we came on camera, you know the security set up there pretty well yourself and obviously we see -- the pictures we see already. There are cameras all over the place there. So investigators have plenty to look at in terms of this scene. Tell us more about you know about the security set up there and then what happens now?
DAVID SARNI, FORMER NYPD DETECTIVE: Well, you have -- you also have law enforcement, NYPD personnel around there. You have federal agents and you also have private security for that facility. So we've had that. So you have the cameras that the NYPD has, that the feds have there. So you have all of that. That's going to work on on that scene and dealing with the investigation there.
Now you're talking about the investigation past that. You're going to deal with search warrants at his residence, at his car, anything with social media, they're going to extract. They're going to look at any electronic device, get search warrants for them, interviews of family, friends. What you're going to look for is not to see if this is just an individual event or was he aided and abetted by anybody outside of this moment in time that he was involved.
KING: And Richard, to that point, and you also mentioned you hear from your sources that he's talking. There's always a question, you know, how did he get that close? He obviously didn't get inside the building but there's always a question of, you know, was there something on social media that they could have seen beforehand? Are they scrubbing these kind of grievances?
We know we're in a very heated environment right now. He had ICE off the streets at some of the reporting sites. We're in a very heated environment about that. What are investigators trying to figure out? Obviously, they're trying to know why was he there? Did he act alone? What else are they looking for?
KOLKO: Well they're going to see how he got there. I find it unusual. This is the first time he walked down to 26th bed. I'm going to guess they're going to look at if he's got a cell phone, see if he's been in the area before, ridden the train down there. Any of the cameras picked him up in a day, a week, a month before.
And they're going to look as you said for any co-conspirators but also any maybe just confidants. People he told that he was going to do this that should have and could have picked up the phone and called the law enforcement said hey this guy is a hazard or is a danger.
[20:35:05]
I frankly can't believe he wasn't shot. If he actually took out these airsoft rifles and pointed them at people. I've seen them. Some of them look very real. I am just surprised that either the federal police or the contract police did not shoot this person.
So at the end of the day, he's lucky he's still alive. And as far as the investigators concerned, good for them because they'll be able to find out more about why he did this. And then are there other people planning on doing this kind of thing. We know that ICE facilities throughout the country have had very violent protests and maybe people other planning are talking about this online and see if anybody else is thinking of doing the same thing.
KING: David, I assume you agree with Richard here. I've had to know the likelihood of getting caught if not shot was pretty high given the security around that building. When you're building a profile building a list and you see that, you know, machetes, the rifle, what does that tell you?
SARNI: Well, pretty much from what he said, and I believe I was listening to the press conference, he wanted to cause as much damage and injury to as many people as he could. This is a person regardless of how you feel there's protocols, policies, advice, he was looking to injure people he's never met, kill people he's never met for whatever idea or ideology he has. That's the reality of this.
And, you know, you could protest, you could be angry about it, but now you've gone to the extreme and this is something we have to really be mindful of the way in which the volatility, the name-calling, the demonization of what federal agents are sworn to do and that's the issue at hand is we have to really tamp it down.
It's not just coming from one area or one side of the story it's coming from the middle of the ground too where politicians are talking about this and demonizing it constantly. They're doing their job, that's what they're doing. And if you keep doing this to them, what do you have expectations?
You won't let the police stop the protests in front or at least keep a separation and this is what you have and this is where you see the volatility has grown exponentially with individuals who now want to go out there and push their agenda. And they want to be like the, you know, save the world. What they're doing is criminal and this is -- what this is, this is a criminal.
KING: David Sarni, Richard Kolko, gentlemen appreciate your time. Thank you.
Up next for us, new details on the ICE agent involved in that deadly shooting last week in Maine. Plus, he just got it so why is the President now saying the new Qatari gifted Air Force One needs some upgrades?
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:41:44]
KING: Anti-ICE protesters you see them there taking to the streets of Maine over the weekend as we're learning more and more about the background of an ICE officer connected to the shooting death of a 25- year-old Colombian man. That incident occurred just one week ago and remains under investigation. But the new information is raising serious questions about ICE's hiring and vetting practices under President Trump.
CNN's Priscilla Alvarez has more.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
CROWD: ICE out now! PRISCILLA ALVAREZ, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Demands for reform at the Department of Homeland Security are growing louder as more details emerge about the ICE officer connected to the fatal shooting of 25-year-old Johan Sebastian Duran Guerrero in Maine. Senator Angus King leading the charge along with 38 other lawmakers calling the recent shootings in Biddeford, Maine and Houston, Texas among other incidents, quote, "completely unacceptable" in a letter addressed to DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin and requesting there be immediate independent and transparent investigations.
As questions still surround the circumstances of last week's shooting in Maine, CNN is learning more about the ICE agent connected to the incident. David Brouillette once told a court that he suffered lingering cognitive issues after sustaining a serious head injury during a firefighting training course, according to a lawsuit filed in late 2023. Those problems, according to Brouillette, resulted from a steel I-beam falling on his head.
He sued the Maine Community College system which administered the course. In the lawsuit, he said, he was still significantly impaired in his activities and in his daily living. He was working as an ICE officer just over two years later and was among the officers on the scene in Biddeford, Maine last Monday according to two of his ex-wives who reviewed photos of the incident.
One of them, Ashley Brouillette, says she spoke with him.
ASHLEY BROUILLETTE, EX-WIFE OF DAVID BROUILLETTE: Then I asked him if it was him, if he was the one that did it. He said, yes, it was me.
Ashley Brouillette CNN has not independently confirmed whether David Brouillette fatally shot Duran Guerrero. Federal officials have not publicly identified who shot him. The Department of Homeland Security said the officer used deadly force because he was, quote, "fearing for public safety."
Brouillette previously served in the Army, was employed as a state correctional officer and as a police officer for the Department of Veterans Affairs according to records. Other court records illustrate a history of alleged abuse against his ex-wives.
BROUILLETTE: He has always displayed violent behavior, very angry person and I've said for years that it's only a matter of time before he hurts anybody.
ALVAREZ (voice-over): In court records Brouillette has denied and disputed abuse allegations. A search of a Maine criminal records database showed no evidence that he has ever been charged with or convicted of a crime. Brouillette has not responded to several requests for comment.
Last year as ICE was ramping up its hiring spree, the agency specifically sought out military veterans and former and current law enforcement officers. It's unclear exactly how much or what type of training Brouillette received from ICE or whether additional vetting was done. For now, Mullin has said that any officers involved in the recent fatal shootings would be placed on administrative leave while investigations are ongoing.
MARKWAYNE MULLIN, HOMELAND SECURITY SECRETARY: When there's a shooting involved, standard practice is that individual goes on administrative leave while the investigation is going through.
ALVAREZ (voice-over): In the meantime, the group of senators called on DHS to issue all ICE agents body-worn cameras by the end of this month, wear gear that clearly labels them as ICE, and answer questions about vetting procedures for new recruits.
Priscilla Alvarez, CNN, Washington.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
[20:45:09]
KING: For more now, I'm joined by John Sandweg, he served as acting ICE director during the Obama administration. John, thank you for your time tonight.
You heard Priscilla's report there. From your background and experience, what specific questions would you have about this particular officer and about what happened in Maine in terms of training, vetting, et cetera?
JOHN SANDWEG, FORMER ACTING DIRECTOR, U.S. IMMIGRATION & CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT: Yes, John, what I'd like to know is what did ICE know about his background and when did they know it in terms of when he went out on duty. John, this is the background checks that ICE historically conducts. So not like the background checks you know for me and my law firm or you at CNN, right?
These are typically in-depth background checks that include interviews, in-person interviews of your friends, your neighbors, your prior employers. And the idea is to try to make sure that you have that suitability as the word is used right. That good character, that trustworthiness necessary to be a federal law enforcement officer.
It is very difficult given all the reporting that's coming out now about this individual to see a scenario where that person could be hired as a federal agent. I'm not saying it's impossible but it's very difficult to see that. It really raises questions that in this crazy push that the administration is on to rapidly grow ICE. Have we also -- you know, we've heard about them cutting corners on training but we also cut corners on that vetting before we bring those individuals or select those individuals to be ICE agents.
KING: Well, that's an interesting point you make in the sense that, number one, did you have these challenges when you were there? You know, you have an applications come in, you got jobs to fill, you're trying to get there, people serve in the military, maybe you try to give them a little grace here and there. It's like, how do you draw the line, and do you think they've just made it easier now than when you were doing it?
SANDWEG: I can't tell you, John. We didn't have these problems here, but remember, you know, until really this administration, there have been times where ICE has grown a little bit in the past. But this administration is trying to double the size of the agency.
And so what concerns me is during, you know, my time at ICE and really during the last, you know, decade or so, when ICE is only hiring let's say 200 to 400 individuals a year backfilling those vacancies that they have. The vetting office and the personal security division that was in charge of doing these background checks was equipped to handle that volume of individuals.
But now we're asking them to vet what, 2,000-3,000 a year and this kind of push to hire 10,000 agents in a compressed 3.5 year time window. I don't know if they've changed the standard. I don't know if they're waiving or delaying things on vetting, or I don't know if they're just the offices are overwhelmed and they're not able to get these vetting, you know, done. I will tell you that this case but also some other reporting has raised serious questions about whether or not people are getting through that process who probably shouldn't.
KING: John Sandweg, thank you for your time. Obviously this conversation will continue. John, thank you.
President Trump says that new Qatari gifted Air Force One will soon be taken out of service for more upgrades. His latest comments appear to confirm security concerns with that $400 million jet despite weeks of White House denials. Here's what the President told reporters last night when he was asked about the plane's missile defense capabilities.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: It has a lot of capability but as I understand it in about a month or so, they're going to send it to have it be maxed out.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KING: Earlier this month you may recall, the President did not use the new Air Force One to deport the NATO summit in Turkey despite arriving there on that plane. The next day, the New York Times was first to report about security concerns involving that plane. Then The Time said four of its reporters were subpoenaed by the federal government.
The former FBI Director Andrew McCabe joins us now. Andrew, number one, just to the President there, the President more or less just said, right, am I reading this wrong, planes got security issues. They got to max it out?
ANDREW MCCABE, CNN SENIOR LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST: Yes, I mean, I think it's as often happens with this President, his current -- his most recent statement kind of obliterates the the statements we'd heard before it. It's I think -- that I take that as a public acknowledgement of the fact that the plane does not have the same level of safety and security features as the existing Air Force One fleet the, you know, the somewhat aged fleet and that's of course the reason that he had to switch to it to take it out of Turkey which is very close to the theater of war that we are currently engaged in.
So that I don't think comes as a surprise to anyone. The thing that shocked me about his statement regarding maxing the plane out with security features is this this idea that this -- that's going to be finished in a month. And, you know, for a variety of reasons, John, I find that incredibly hard to believe.
KING: Right. Obviously, he was on an overseas trip, he was very close to a war zone. So you can understand the call even though the White House might continue to issue subpoenas and say it didn't happen. You can understand the call made there.
But the President also flies, you know, Air Force One everywhere including over the United States. On 9/11, President George W. Bush spent most of the day on it. It's been 20 years but I remember when I covered the White House and spent a fair amount of time on Air Force One, they would show us some of the stuff and just tell us not to talk about it.
[20:50:01]
In terms of security capabilities then and now, where are we? And can you -- can this Qatari jet, can it be made as if it were, you know, one of the Boeing's made for the White House?
MCCABE: Yes, I mean, I think it -- you know, look anything can be done. The question is how long will it take and at what cost? Let's remember, it's a $400 million plane just as is was given to the President by the Qatari government. We were all told that it would cost the American taxpayers nothing and that's of course not the case.
The plane has got to have at least what the current Air Force One security features of those planes. There are industry and Pentagon experts who have publicly stated that that cost could go anywhere from $500 million to $2 billion and take up to two years to complete. So you're talking about a lot of retrofitting.
And in terms of the technology that that the current day, you know, the best of the best right today, very different than maybe what you were familiar with 20 years ago. Every year, we get more and more technology. Every year, we get more sophisticated about understanding cyber threats and understanding how to secure a massive basically flying computer from those sort of attackers who would disable it or, you know, cause some other sort of mischief.
In addition to all the traditional things that Air Force Ones typically have like the ability to repel or defend themselves against heat-seeking missiles and all sorts of air-to-air ordinance and things like that, it's got to be able to be refueled in midair so that a president on a very tough day like 9/11, which you and I remember well, can spend essentially the whole day in the flying White House and to be safe while doing so.
KING: Right. Yes or no, if you can. You had to deal a lot of sensitive national security leaks and investigations when you're at the FBI. If this one came across your desk, the details about this plane, the President not be to fly on it, would you subpoena reporters in The New York Times?
MCCABE: Well not a chance when I was in the FBI because the attorneys general I worked for specifically would not allow us to do such a thing. That policy was greatly expanded or liberalized I should say by Attorney General Bondi last year. So kind of put it back in the quiver so to speak.
What amazes me here, John, is no one has identified what statement in The New York Times article they alleged to have been a leak that would require investigation. And without that sort of specificity, it's almost impossible for those reporters to understand how to defend themselves against this. It is by any measure an assault on the First Amendment.
KING: Andrew McCabe, thank you very much.
Coming up for us, the social media influencers, the Tate brothers appear in court. The charges they're facing and why they're asking for help now from the Trump administration.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:57:06]
KING: The first federal court appearance today for brothers and social media influences Andrew and Tristan Tate. They were arrested over the weekend in Miami and they face extradition to the United Kingdom where the pair are charged with more than 50 counts including rape, sex trafficking. They're also outspoken supporters of President Trump and now appear to be counting on that as they fight to stay in the country.
CNN's Randi Kaye has the details.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
RANDI KAYE, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The Tate brothers, Andrew and Tristan, are influencers known for their misogynistic content online.
ANDREW TATE, SOCIAL MEDIA INFLUENCER: I will state right now that I am absolutely sexist and I'm absolutely a misogynist.
KAYE (voice-over): U.S. marshals took them into custody Saturday outside a bare-knuckle boxing event. The arrest comes after U.K. investigators say four new victims came forward claiming rape, sexual assault, sex trafficking and possession of indecent images of a child. The U.K. Crown Prosecution Service and Bedfordshire Police say the Tate brothers now face a total of 59 charges between them.
The brothers are well-known and in some areas of the Internet celebrated for suggesting men own women.
A. TATE: I believe the woman is given to the man. I believe she's given away by the father. I believe she belongs to the man. I believe she belongs to the man in marriage. KAYE (voice-over): The brothers had been arrested in Romania in 2022 where they are facing charges of human trafficking and forming an organized criminal group to sexually exploit women. They have denied all charges.
So what were they doing in Miami? Last year after Romanian authorities lifted the travel restriction on the pair, they hopped on a private jet to Florida.
A. TATE: We live in a democratic society where it's innocent until proven guilty and I think my brother and I are largely misunderstood.
KAYE (voice-over): Despite all the controversy, their support online continues to grow. Young men and boys often follow them for their content promoting female submission and male dominance. Andrew Tate once argued women should bear responsibility for being sexually assaulted.
A. TATE: It's about the fact that she belongs to him and the intimate parts of her body belong to him.
KAYE (voice-over): The Tates are outspoken supporters of President Donald Trump and hold plenty of sway in the manosphere. Just two weeks before they were allowed to leave Romania, Andrew Tate posted this. "The Tates will be free. Trump is the President. The good old days are back."
The White House said the U.S. government played no direct role in bringing them to Florida. Romania's foreign minister also said he wasn't pressured. The Tates have repeatedly praised Trump and urged voters to support him and some members of Trump's family have shown support for the Tates.
In 2023, Donald Trump Jr. tweeted about Andrew Tate's house arrest in Romania calling it absolute insanity. Their defense lawyer reiterated his clients' innocence and said this is a case of free speech.
JOSEPH MCBRIDE, LAWYER FOR ANDREW AND TRISTAN TATE: When you drag somebody's name through the media, when you slander them, when you defame them, when you accuse them of heinous and terrible allegations, the process becomes the punishment until you can clear your name.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
KAYE (on-camera): And John, the court hearing today lasted just seven minutes. There's no cameras in court because it's federal court, so we don't have any video from there. But the Tate brothers are expected to remain in custody through at least Monday when the lawyers are back in court.
And according to their lawyer, they are being held in solitary confinement. And as you know, with this extradition process, it could last months depending on how many challenges there are and in the end it could actually be up to Secretary of State Marco Rubio to decide the fate whether or not the extradition will go ahead. And one important note as I mentioned, the Tate brothers are big Trump supporters. According to one source talking to CNN, they said that apparently people on their side the allies of the Tate brothers have been reaching out to people in Trump's orbit trying to gain support and find support and hopefully help them. But we are told that the President has no plans to intervene in this extradition process.
KING: Randi Kaye, thank you so much.
And the news continues. The Source starts now.
