Return to Transcripts main page

CNN NewsNight with Abby Phillip

Trump Posts New Warning for Iran, Not the Agreement We Have; Trump Blasts His MAGA Critics, Low I.Q., Failing, Losers; Trump Says He Asked Netanyahu to be Low-Key Amid Ceasefire. First Lady Melania Trump Denies Involvement with Jeffrey Epstein; Kara Swisher Hosts a New CNN Series on Longevity and Staying Healthy. Aired 10-11p ET

Aired April 09, 2026 - 22:00   ET

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

[22:00:00]

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ABBY PHILLIP, CNN ANCHOR (voice over): Tonight, the president on the war path against his own base and anyone asking questions about the war as he tries to engineer a win and an exit from Iran.

Plus, is Israel helping or hurting America's efforts in the region?

BENJAMIN NETANYAHU, ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER: There is no ceasefire in Lebanon.

PHILLIP: This as a majority of Americans now have a negative view of Israel.

And --

MELANIA TRUMP, U.S. FIRST LADY: To be clear, I never had a relationship with Epstein.

PHILLIP: -- what's behind the first lady's out of the blue formal statement, denying involvement with the sex trafficker?

Live at the table, Leigh McGowan, Peter Meijer, Neera Tanden, Noah Rothman, Margaret Donovan and Sarah Fischer.

Americans with different perspectives aren't talking to each other, but here, they do.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

PHILLIP (on camera): Good evening. I'm Abby Philip in New York.

Donald Trump's frustration appears to be boiling over tonight. He's lashing out at everyone, from Iran to his MAGA critics here at home.

Now, as for the ceasefire, the president is accusing Iran of doing dishonorable things and by holding up a big part of their apparent agreement, which would be opening the Strait of Hormuz. The waterway remains effectively closed with only a handful of ships being able to get through since the pause was announced.

And back here at home, Trump is unloading on Tucker Carlson, Megyn Kelly, Candace Owens, and Alex Jones, all of whom have criticized him and the war, calling them low I.Q. and stupid, nut jobs and troublemakers, Trump is claiming that their views are the opposite of MAGA or I wouldn't have won the presidential election in a landslide.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MEGYN KELLY, HOST, THE MEGYN KELLY SHOW: I don't know about you, but I am sick of this (BLEEP). I'm just -- I'm sick of it. Can't he just behave like a normal human? I mean, honestly, like the president -- like 3D chess, shut up. (BLEEP) shut up about that (BLEEP). You don't threaten to wipe out an entire civilization.

TUCKER CARLSON, CONSERVATIVE COMMENTATOR: It is vile on every level. There will be nothing like it. Open the F-ing strait. How dare you speak that way on Easter morning to the country? Who do you think you are?

ALEX JONES, HOST, INFOWARS: How do we 25th Amendment his ass? And if I was the Democrats, I'd stop poking Trump and messing with him. That only makes it worse, like you guys need to watch out. This isn't a guy acting like he's crazy. This is real.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIP: Owens called Trump a genocidal lunatic, and she called for the 25th Amendment to be invoked. She responded to Trump's post tonight by saying it may be time to put grandpa up in a home.

But remember, it wasn't too long ago that Trump used all of these controversial voices to help him get elected.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: I just mentioned a name of a woman who I saw the other night on television just ripped some poor idiot apart. Megyn Kelly is here and she's doing -- come up. Come up here, Megyn.

By the way, I'm having a great time up here. Are you having a good time? This guy, is he the greatest interviewer?

Candace Owens, I watched her and I saw her coming. I said, you know, I'm pretty good at star power. I look at, I say, that's a star.

I just want to finish by saying your reputation's amazing. I will not let you down. You'll be very, very impressed.

JONES: Donald Trump, let me say this. My audience, I'd say 90 percent supports you, okay? And you definitely have shown your knowledge of geopolitical systems.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIP: So, President Trump is really struggling right now, trying pretty aggressively to shape the narrative. He appears to be talking to Iran through Truth Social. Not sure why that conversation can't happen in private, and then he is knocking down his one-time allies and trying to pretend as if he didn't talk to Tucker Carlson maybe about six weeks ago, if the New York Times is to be believed.

NOAH ROTHMAN, SENIOR WRITER, NATIONAL REVIEW: Well, listen, I think that montage was extremely fair. The president and the people around him have a tendency to, you know, not apply a lot of discretion to the president's allies, regardless of who they are, what they say, and in this case, it has come back to bite them.

That said, I don't know who their constituencies are. We know who the president's constituencies are when it comes to this war. 80, 90 percent of Republican voters to say nothing of MAGA voters, self- described MAGA voters, support the war, whereas they do not.

[22:05:04]

Who are they siding with? They're siding with the president.

I think this ceasefire actually had some legitimacy to it. There was a value to seeing, well, Iran's position had softened. They were coming closer to us. Our position did not. We were conducting re-strikes on targets we had already hit. It was time to get a breather and see if the diplomatic process could work. It hasn't worked.

Over the course of the last 48 hours, this has become a unilateral ceasefire. If the president allows that to stand, it is a huge embarrassment for him, for the nation, and a sacrifice of American hegemony. That'll frustrate the podcasters. I don't think he cares.

PHILLIP: But, I mean, you seem to be kind of actually making a bit of their point, which is that where we are right now is not great. I mean, we have a ceasefire that only one party is adhering to, which is us, the United States. Meanwhile, the Strait of Hormuz is closed. Meanwhile, Israel is continuing strikes in Lebanon. Meanwhile, Arab allies are also experiencing strikes. So, where does that really leave us in terms of real progress?

And, by the way, all the -- we have no idea what the points are, okay? They're ten points. Maybe they exist, maybe they don't. We don't know what they are, but they do seem pretty far apart in terms of what the United States wants and what Iran is willing to offer.

MARGARET DONOVAN, FORMER ARMY JAG: Yes, absolutely. Like it doesn't take an expert in contract law to know that both sides of an agreement need to have the same understanding of what the agreement is. And it doesn't seem like that's the case here, nor does the public, and so we're in this really interesting position where the win is some agreement with Iran that gives them way more leverage than they had at the beginning in terms of controlling the strait.

And I think what the administration is learning now is that firepower doesn't always win when you're fighting a war that is based and turns on geography of a region and diplomacy and things that gets solved without bombs, but actually with nuance and agreements and international relations. He's gutted a State Department that could help him with that. And I think he's just sort of disabled himself from being able to deal with it properly.

PHILLIP: What is -- I mean, do either of you think that there is a constituency or an explanation for why the Megyn Kellys and the Tucker Carlsons are willing to, if Noah is correct, sacrifice a portion of their audience with a message that maybe they don't want to hear?

NEERA TANDEN, PRESIDENT AND CEO, CENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS: I mean, maybe they took the president at his word when he campaigned against doing, you know, wars in the Middle East. I mean, his entire criticism of George Bush was a failed war in the Middle East and how it was a waste of American prestige and how it was -- essentially, you know, we sacrificed our soldiers for nothing and we ended up losing American dignity and respect in the global order. That was -- you know, it's not what I said. It's what Donald Trump said in -- to gain power in the Republican Party.

And, I mean, I am not a fan of any of the people who are criticizing him, but I think maybe what United Tucker Carlson and Megyn Kelly and Alex Jones, you know, people I vehemently disagree with, is that they actually took the president his word, and they're just another group of people who've been suckered by this guy who lied to them to their face.

LEIGH MCGOWAN, PODCAST HOST, POLITICSGIRL: I don't think they've been suckered. No, I mean, my is that like Megyn's saying, I'm sick of this. Why can't he just act like a normal human? And I'm like, he can't act like a normal human. That's why so many of us worked against him being elected, because we knew that he would have an itchy trigger finger if you gave him a big red button to push. We knew that he was erratic. We knew that he would be not right for this role, which is why so many of us worked not have him elected.

So, she either didn't realize, these people either didn't realize that he was crazy and dangerous, which most of us did, or they didn't care. And now all of a sudden they're like, oh, hold on, if he actually nukes 90 million people, there's going to be blow back on us, and this is crazy and he can't do it. But we've been saying this for forever.

TANDEN: I know. But I think everybody who took him at his word made a mistake. I agree. I thought he was -- would do terrible things like this. But I'm just saying when you're asking, why would they possibly, you know, take him on because it could hurt them? It's like let's imagine that they actually think he was like not lying to his face. Well, through --

PHILLIP: I can't get into their heads, but I just -- I want to -- I do want to play this Tucker Carlson bite from 2024, December 2024, because it's about who he thinks Trump is, and I'm sure plenty of people at this table might disagree with his read-on it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CARLSON: I would say Trump voters, like Trump himself, are really forgiving people. They don't seek revenge. They seek some measure of justice because the human heart longs for justice, but they don't seek to grind their enemies under their feet. That's what the left does.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PETER MEIJER, CO-FOUNDER AND HEAD OF STRATEGY, THE NEW INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION: A fair amount of projection maybe in there. And Tucker Carlson has done this game for years now, right? I mean, not only is this, I think, the fourth or fifth time he's proclaimed World War III was about to break out, but he tries to maintain this dialogue with the president thinking he can have influence.

And I actually think it's pretty admirable that the president is like, I have pretty hardcore beliefs on this. You talk about Iran. Donald Trump has been saying the same thing since the early 1980s, like he's a broken record when it comes to the threat that Iran posed.

[22:10:04]

And I guess I'm just the panel's pan gloss here because I think that things will work out fine. I trust the plan. That Truth Social post, no lies.

ROTHMAN: No, that's really fair. They have engaged a little bit of self-deception here because he's been consistent and, Neera, Democrats have been consistent about the extent to which they would apply force to Iran if it was approaching a nuclear threshold. Hillary Clinton said she would elevate strikes on Iran.

TANDEN: Sure. And you know what? Then how is it possible that Trump was not lying over the summer when he said he eliminated the nuclear program through the strikes? I mean, I do think it's important to ensure that they don't have a nuclear weapon, but, you know, Donald Trump told me they didn't have one. So, I think that application, I think Democrats and Republicans could think that, but then Donald Trump told us once again something that maybe now we shifted a few months later.

So, I guess my take on this is I think it is hard to understand how we get out of this war substantively. Let's put the politics aside. This war, at this moment, the Iranians have something they never had before this war, which is strategic control over the Strait of Hormuz and the capability to basically hold the global economy and American consumers hostage.

And you -- like it's possible we could get out of this, but it's hard to see from here because the ceasefire that we have is actually -- we see that they have continual control. He's yelling, he's upset about it, that we are not bombing, and they still have control.

MEIJER: They didn't gain that power. They've had that power. We're just seeing them willing to exercise it. And at any point this --

TANDEN: They would never really exercise --

(CROSSTALKS)

ROTHMAN: In 1997 and 1998, they shut down the strait. And we opened it up by force. So --

(CROSSTALKS)

TANDEN: This is a great decision. But right now, what is happening?

MEIJER: Right now, we have the dominant military in the region. We are able to call the shots on this, not on the reopening the Strait of Hormuz. We could do it if we still wanted to. It would take more blood and more treasure. But there is -- yes, you know, the ceasefire is fragile. It's a concept of a ceasefire, but the number one point is, okay, you got 10 points and then 15 points.

(CROSSTALKS)

TANDEN: This is exhausting.

MEIJER: The gaslighting is the fact that the U.S. is losing, that we're somehow defeated in all of this.

(CROSSTALKS)

MCGOWAN: We have spent $15 billion --

(CROSSTALKS)

PHILLIP: The counterpoint to what you're saying from The Wall Street Journal op-ed is that declaring victory is premature. They say Trump has achieved some of his war aims, but the Iranian regime remains a threat in the Strait of Hormuz, and the job is far from finished despite what he promised last week.

The unfortunate truth is that Trump put himself in this position. His inconsistent rhetoric on the war, claims a victory amid threats of unleashing hell and its end to Iran's civilization raised global fears and undermined support at home and abroad.

And Trump hated this op-ed so much that he sent out a Truth Social post saying the Journal is the worst and inaccurate. He said, there's nothing premature about this victory.

One of the reasons that I think people believe that they're declaring victory is because, literally, they were declaring victory yesterday and then the president last night, late last night, he says, in the meantime, while they're waiting for the Strait of Hormuz to be opened are great military is loading up and resting and looking forward actually to its next conquest. Is he just moving on to the next thing.

DONOVAN: This is totally mad. These are like the rantings of a mentally ill person. And so, you know, the idea that you have soldiers and American troops who are just sort of waiting for him to make a decision on his whim. If you had like an elderly neighbor that was posting those things, you would probably do a welfare check on them and say like, I hope you don't have access to weapons because you seem very unwell. And this is the commander-in-chief. And so I just -- I really think the absence, the silence of one part of Congress on what he's doing, I mean, that's just -- it's catastrophic for the American public. I just can't believe it's happened.

PHILLIP: Have you rationalized this?

ROTHMAN: It's extremely undesirable to have a president who is an unreliable narrator in a time of war. However, this isn't new. This is how the guy talks. He speaks in superlatives. He says --

PHILLIP: We didn't say it was new. She's just arguing that it's not good.

ROTHMAN: But -- yes. And, again, I'm going to seed every criticism of the president in this moment, but I would also contend that if you listen to what the brass is saying in the Pentagon, if you listen to Marco Rubio, even J.D. Vance --

MCGOWAN: You mean the brass that hasn't been fired? Because the brass that would tell us the opposite would be the ones that hired and fired by the Pentagon, like it's all become ridiculous, right? We can no longer -- at the end of this, we have lost the narrative.

PHILLIP: Okay. Let me let Noah finish.

ROTHMAN: You are advancing in narrative. No one has lost this narrative. The narrative is that the United States and Israel executed 1,300 strikes, annihilated the defense industrial base of Iran, reduced its Air Force Navy to rubble and it de-severed the central nervous system of this regime over the course of hours.

And we're subsequently seeing brain death on the field and these autonomous commanders who are firing willy-nilly at Gulf targets.

[22:15:04]

You can excuse that. What the command -- what remains of the command has done is to attempt to extort shipping in the straight, violating whatever terms of the ceasefire exists. The president cannot let that stand.

He might want to move on. I'm sure he does. But American prestige and most importantly, his administration's initiatives are at issue here. I don't think he'll abandon them.

PHILLIP: I don't know that's an accurate assessment of what's going on the ground.

ROTHMAN: In what regard?

PHILLIP: In a sense that it's just the last gasps of the IRGC. We're also hearing from the foreign minister, we're hearing from the head of parliament and they're all saying the same message, which is that they believe that the United States made a deal with them that they're reneging on. They are -- they have their backs up going into these negotiations in Pakistan tomorrow.

The hardline is not just coming from random commanders on the field. It's also coming from the negotiators that we are at the table with. MEIJER: But the other -- if you just look at the timeline when the ceasefire went into effect, and when missiles and Shahed drones kept raining down on our Gulf allies, like, yes, they want to shift all blame to what Netanyahu's doing in Southern Lebanon and make that the reason why, you know, they're continuing the fire. But what Noah was saying about these rogue commanders, because their command and control infrastructure has been decimated, like this is where it's not, oh, the guns all fall silent at 1:00 P.M.

PHILLIP: Okay. But, honestly, like --

TANDEN: How do you say they're decimated? I mean, this is the thing that I think is odd.

MEIJER: By the numbers. I mean, decimated would be one out ten, and they're probably seven out of ten.

TANDEN: But this administration has said we've completely decimated their military, yet they have been able to strike our airplanes. We have taken our airplanes down, and they are attacking other countries and their facilities who are so concerned about it. They're concerned about their capability to take down their desalinization plants.

So, this idea -- I guess my take here is it cannot be the case that we've completely destroyed their military and they still have the ability to hurt our forces.

(CROSSTALKS)

ROTHMAN: Yes, nobody said the threat level is zero. What they did was they shot down one plane and they established a forward operating base in their country.

PHILLIP: We've got to move on.

Next for us, the president tells Israel to tone down their attacks as new polls show Americans' views of Israel have hit new lows.

Plus, what is behind Melania Trump's sudden and out of the blue formal statement denying ties to Jeffrey Epstein? We'll discuss.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[22:20:00]

PHILLIP: Tonight, is Israel an obstacle to Donald Trump's exit strategy? For a second day, Israel launched another fresh round of strikes against Hezbollah and Lebanon to which the Iranian-backed terror group responded. Lebanon's Health Ministry says that more than 300 people have been killed and hundreds more wounded.

The question of whether Lebanon was part of the ceasefire agreement with Iran remains unclear. Iran says it was, but the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, disagrees.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) NETANYAHU: I want to tell you there is no ceasefire in Lebanon. We are continuing to strike Hezbollah with force and we will not stop until we restore your security.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIP: An Israeli and U.S. official tells CNN that talks between Israel and Lebanon are expected to begin at the State Department, but two Lebanese officials say they haven't been invited to those talks, with one saying there would be, quote, no negotiations under fire.

President Trump tonight telling NBC, quote, I spoke with Bibi and he's going to low key it. I just think that they have to be sort of a little more low key. Adding that he thinks Israel is scaling back its operation in Lebanon.

But Iran's parliament speaker says that it's clear Lebanon was covered under the ceasefire deal, warning that time is running out.

This is what we were just discussing. I mean, the rhetoric on the Iranian side in response to this confusion, which, frankly, under normal circumstances, should not have happened. This confusion is central now to whether or not the two sides think they can trust each other. And I also wonder, Margaret, if you think that there is evidence here that Israel has different objectives than the United States in this moment.

DONOVAN: Yes. So, I think it exactly back to the point that we were talking about, this seems like a pretty crucial part of the deal to all parties of the conflict. So, the idea that they have polar opposite understandings of it tells you that this is not an effective deal. The dealmaker-in-chief did not succeed here.

And the other piece of that is though, I would never say let's trust the Iranians at their word, it is logical for them to think that if their backed Hezbollah groups in Lebanon are being attacked, they would, of course, want them to be part of this package deal.

And I think that the question on, you know, what is Israel's goal here, it's really difficult to answer. Is this an extension of October 7th? Is this linked to the Iran nuclear program? We don't really have a full understanding of that, and that's mostly a result of, as I have said before, this was a surprise war that we all just woke up and learned in one day with no information, no background, no Congressional approval for. And so this is what you get. This is the level of confusion that you get when you don't have a properly contemplated use of force.

PHILLIP: And we are here, according to the reporting, largely because Netanyahu pitched Trump on a war, and I was listening to John Kerry, who was involved in previous negotiations with Israel tonight, and he said, look, he pitched Bush, he pitched Obama, he pitched -- we actually have that clip actually.

[22:25:01]

Let's go ahead and listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOHN KERRY, FORMER SECRETARY OF STATE: Well, I was part of the -- any number of conversations with Prime Minister Netanyahu, conversations that took things in other countries.

JEN PSAKI, MS NOW HOST: But him pitching the U.S. to strike Iran.

KERRY: Yes. He wanted us to strike. He came to President Obama. He made a presentation to ask to strike. President Obama refused. President Biden refused. President Bush refused. The only president who has agreed to this obviously is President Trump.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIP: So, under those circumstances, I mean, I think this is a unique situation that Trump has put the United States in at a time when -- this is kind of shocking. I mean, after October 7th, there was so much goodwill toward Israel after what they faced. But now, today, the unfavorable view of Israel is that 60 percent of American adults nationwide, according to Pew, that is significantly worse than it was just a few years ago, just four years ago.

So, I think Americans are starting to wonder whether or not all of this is in our best interest.

MEIJER: Oh, I think the we will know six months from now, a year from now, 18 months from now. I mean if you look at that timeline in Israel's approving post-October 7th, you look at America standing in the world post-9/11. Once you start to react to an attack that you have been -- that has been inflicted upon you, people don't like that. They like the idea of somebody bearing that wound and not trying to make justice for it, not trying to go after those perpetrators. That is just a cold heart fact that we have seen time and again.

MCGOWAN: But who is running America's foreign policy?

PHILLIP: But our response to 9/11 was popular at the time when we did it. It actually was popular.

TANDEN: The Afghan War? Yes.

PHILLIP: Yes.

TANDEN: That was popular.

PHILLIP: I mean, so that's different from where we stand right now. I think that people are questioning whether this is just never ending conflict that Trump kind of sleepwalked into, effectively.

TANDEN: I mean, I think the most dangerous part of this, honestly, is The New York Times reporting that Netanyahu, Prime Minister Netanyahu said this basically gave Trump this perception in contrast to our own intelligence community that this would be one and done, the regime would collapse, they would not take the Strait of Hormuz, and our own intelligence community said that's a fantasy. And Trump went -- I mean, I think the challenge here is that it seems that President Trump ignored his own advice for at least some contrary recommendations from his own intelligence community and went on basically the recommendation of Bibi Netanyahu.

And I think over the long-term, if it is -- if this war is not successful and we have a strategic failure in the Middle East of this war, I think this will be a profound problem for the relationship because of what Netanyahu has done.

PHILLIP: Let me just play real quick. This is Megyn Kelly talking about this, the Situation Room meeting in which Trump was sold on this war and the atmospherics of it. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KELLY: What led Trump, what, at 79 years old to sit in there in that Situation Room when Bibi Netanyahu was seated as an equal?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes.

KELLY: Trump didn't even sit at the head of the table. Trump sat at the side of the table and Bibi was across from him as an equal in the American Situation Room. What led him to sit there and buy what that guy was selling, hook, line, and sinker, when every other president was able to see through that liar?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIP: Is there -- she's implying there's a judgment issue here. Do you think that there's reason to believe that?

ROTHMAN: I'm not going to respond to that. I'm going to respond to Secretary Kerry. He's right that the Israelis did approach American administration subsequently, one after the other and said the Iran threat is metastasizing, and they did nothing about it. In fact, they restrained Israel to the degree that we had October 7th. On October 7th, Israel said, I'm not going to be restrained anymore.

Likewise, we had Iran develop a ballistic missile program that was prohibited and a uranium enrichment program that had gotten to 60 percent uranium. So, yes, all of that did happen over the course of several administrations that did nothing about it. And Secretary Kerry is saying, well, that was the correct course. It got us to here. The successive events got to the point --

(CROSSTALKS)

MCGOWAN: There was the Obama deal in the middle there.

PHILLIP: There was a deal that happened.

MCGOWAN: So, Obama signed a deal which Trump ripped up that limited their uranium enrichment, that said no nuclear weapons, would allow international inspectors to ensure their compliance.

ROTHMAN: It would have expired --

MCGOWAN: Can you actually just let me speak for like one freaking second, bro? Thank you so much. There was a deal. And Trump came in and said, I can get a better deal. And he ripped it up and he didn't get a better deal. And then he went into that country at the request of another country's leader and he spent $50 billion and killed thousands of civilians, and at least 13 American soldiers and hundreds of American soldiers are injured.

[22:30:08]

We've hurt our bases, we've hurt our radar. People hate America now. We had a President say that we're going to destroy an entire civilization. That's like if I came home and I held a gun to my wife's head, and I said, for 13 hours, I'm going to say, I'm going to kill you, I'm going to blow your brains out. Just kidding.

We'll talk about it again in two weeks. That does not make you a good negotiator. That doesn't make you a good guy.

It makes you psychotic, and he's the leader of the free world, and everyone knows that now. So no, this is not some winning strategy that Trump came in after years of being begged to help with Iran. This is not what's happening.

NOAH ROTHMAN, "NATIONAL REVIEW" SENIOR WRITER: The JCPOA did not touch ballistic missiles, and it allowed for a legitimized--

MCGOWAN: You know where we're at right now. It's not good.

ABBY PHILLIP, CNN ANCHOR: Listen, Noah, I mean--

ROTHMAN: The Iran nuclear deal legitimized at 2025, the nuclear enrichment program, it expired at that point.

It's sunset, and it would have legitimized their ability to break out with a physical device.

PHILLIP: I'm not disputing your right to not like the Iran nuclear deal. Trust me.

All I'm suggesting is that Trump got rid of it without putting anything in its place to contain the nuclear problem. So in the intervening time, Iran was basically free to do whatever they want, and that is what they did. And so at the end of the day, Trump could have said, I hate this Iran nuclear deal.

We need to replace it with something that is stronger and better. He didn't do that. He just said, it's over and done with.

ROTHMAN: I think it's a night hammer. We're weeks and months of negotiation. Negotiations that were going nowhere because Iran would not cede its--

PHILLIP: Sure, but that's because weeks and months of negotiation, like the Iran nuclear deal, which you hate, took 18 months. It's not going to happen overnight, and this administration's feeling

that you can just get this baked-in regime, 47 years in, to just turn on a dime in two weeks in negotiations. That doesn't make any sense, Noah.

They have a 30-second attack.

ROTHMAN: No, it does, because over the course of those 18 months, we were spun into a bad deal. So yes, if you were to get engaged with these people for a year and a half, you could end up with another bad deal.

NEERA TANDEN, FORMER DOMESTIC POLICY ADVISER DURING THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION: You know what's not in this 10-point plan? Any discussion of the nuclear material.

I think this is the real actual problem, which is no one here, the President doesn't even talk anymore about trying to get the nuclear material or keeping the nuclear material away.

ROTHMAN: The dust. Just talk about the dust.

PHILLIP: The problem might be even worse than that, because I think the real problem is that the Iranians think that they have a point on the nuclear program, and the Americans have a different view of what should happen to the nuclear program, and they are not anywhere near each other on that key issue.

So we'll see, negotiations kick off this weekend. We'll see how they do. Margaret Donovan, thank you very much for being with us for that.

Next for us, as Melania Trump surprises everyone with this out-of-the- blue denial about Jeffrey Epstein, we are now learning that there was a disagreement within her inner circle about giving that statement in the first place. We'll discuss.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[22:35:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

PHILLIP: A rare and extraordinary moment today from Melania Trump. The first lady is publicly distancing herself from Jeffrey Epstein and denying any ties connecting her to the convicted sex trafficker.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MELANIA TRUMP, FIRST LADY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: The lies linking me with the disgraceful Jeffrey Epstein need to end today. I never been friends with Epstein. Donald and I were invited to the same parties as Epstein from time to time, since overlapping in social circles is common in New York City and Palm Beach.

I am not Epstein's victim. Epstein did not introduce me to Donald Trump. (END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIP: Her comments are breathing fresh life into this whole Epstein saga, something that her husband, President Trump, would much rather all forget.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: I think it's really time for the country to get onto something else. Now that nothing came out about me, other than there was a conspiracy against me, literally, by Epstein and other people. But I think it's time now for the country to maybe get onto something else.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIP: According to an MS Now correspondent who spoke with the President, Trump said that he didn't know anything about the first lady's remarks before her appearance today, but a source tells CNN that Trump was aware that his wife planned to make today's statement.

CNN media analyst Sara Fisher is here with us at the table. Sara, everybody is scratching their head asking, why? Why today? Why at all? What's your sense of it?

SARA FISCHER, CNN MEDIA ANALYST AND "AXIOS" MEDIA CORRESPONDENT: Well, that's especially a poignant question, given the fact that it was starting to leave the news cycle for the first time in a long time, because we were talking so much about Iran, that for the first time, I didn't feel like Epstein was sucking up all the oxygen. So for her to come out right now is just bringing it back into the news cycle.

There's a couple of things. One, Melania Trump is dealing with some lawsuits pertaining to what she says is defamation around her past, and so that could be one of the reasons. But then two, I think she wants to make sure she's separating herself not just from the general public of people associated with Jeffrey Epstein and high power people, but a lot of people in the White House.

[22:40:06]

It's not just Donald Trump, it's Howard Lutnick. These are all people who've been associated. She wants to make sure that her name is clear.

I think the most interesting part of the statement was her calling for Congress to invite the victims of Epstein to testify and speak to them. To me, that suggests that she is taking this one step forward than probably even her husband would like. Remember, her husband was advocating to not even release the Epstein files at all until he lost that fight with Republicans.

PHILLIP: Some of the Epstein survivors put out a statement today saying, the survivors of Epstein have already shown extraordinary courage by coming forward, filing reports and giving testimony. Asking for more of them now is a deflection of responsibility, not justice. First Lady Melania Trump is now shifting the burden onto survivors under politicized conditions to protect those with power. Survivors have done their part. Now it's time for those in power to do theirs.

TANDEN: Yes, I mean, I think what should happen is that Melania Trump should tell her husband and others, number one, release all the files. Basic request, just release all the files. The victims have asked for that.

Number two, have Pam Bondi testify and not pull her testimony back. She was supposed to testify next week. All of a sudden, the administration has pulled that back.

And I think if she's willing to have the victims testify, they could have transparency and have that transparency start at home.

ROTHMAN: Conventional Democrats would love that.

PHILLIP: Do you think she should testify?

ROTHMAN: Yes, probably. But she doesn't want to. And congressional Republicans don't want her to. And congressional Republicans really don't want to dig into the Epstein stuff for the most part.

MCGOWAN: Why is that?

ROTHMAN: Because it's politically embarrassing for them, because they have a lot of, because there are Republicans and Donald Trump is on that list. A lot of Democrats are on that list as well.

MCGOWAN: So they don't want to go into it because it's a terrible, I know, and they testified.

ROTHMAN: Precisely. I mean, there is tit for tat here. And Melania is putting a lot of pressure on Republicans in ways that they probably don't want.

Trump said he had no idea that this was happening, which is kind of hard to believe. But given the text of this statement, you can kind of see it.

PHILLIP: Well, let me hit pause here. We'll resume on the other side of a quick break. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[22:45:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

PHILLIP: Let's continue this debate where we left off.

Melania Trump specifically also references a letter that is in the files between her and Ghislaine Maxwell. She says it was just a casual correspondence. So this is one of the reasons why she decided to speak out right now to squash some of the conversation about this. MCGOWAN: Yes. There was no reason for her to speak out right now. Absolutely zero reason.

No one was talking about it. There was no reason. In Melania's head, there's a reason.

And the question is, is it because something else is going to come out and she's trying to get ahead of it? Or is it because she's trying to distance herself from her husband because she knows something that she shouldn't know?

I don't know what it is. I would say thank you, Melania, for bringing it back into the zeitgeist, because I don't think it should have ever left. But I do think that the entire thing is about as seedy as it can possibly be.

And I think every single person that's connected to Melania has a deep set stake in the Epstein file. So for her to be like, it's just, you know, even the letter itself, she calls her G, a letter, and then she signs it, love Melania. And there's a lot of interest to action that you wouldn't have in just a casual correspondence with someone you didn't know.

FISCHER: Yes, I mean, it's true. They are talking about seeing each other and visiting each other when they're down in Palm Beach and et cetera. So it does feel a little bit more than casual.

We've seen a lot of people get taken down from emails that came over two decades ago between either them and Ghislaine or them and Jeffrey Epstein. I think about, you know, Casey Wasserman selling his age, big Hollywood agency. He's the chairman of L.A. 2028 and then so many more.

So, you know, she's watching these examples of powerful people, some of which have very close ties to the administration and the President, from emails sent over 20 years ago. And she's must be drawing a parallel saying, well, that's what happened to them. Like, to what extent am I going to be exposed to cancel culture?

One thing I'm watching with this, Abby, is, you know, Melania came out with her book in 2024, right before the election and said, I'm pro- choice. And it was a stark divide sort of the Republican and sort of her President's -- her husband's big position on it.

And this echoes similar to me, you know, her distancing herself from the President's policies in a very personal way. It's not something she does all the time, but she does it when it's politically convenient.

PHILLIP: That's such a good point because the key part about her at least presenting herself as if she is siding with the victims is in stark contrast to what her husband has said and done. He has never said anything in support of these victims.

He said a lot of things about Epstein. He has never said anything in support of these victims. Is it fair for her to do that publicly? Well, I mean, Donald Trump is her husband. Presumptively, she has some

influence.

PETER MEIJER (R), FORMER U.S. CONGRESSMAN, MICHIGAN: You're saying, I mean, if I'm reading the survivor's statement accurately, they don't feel like she's siding with them on this. And I will say opposites 100 percent.

PHILLIP: Yes, I think some people don't think it's genuine, I think is part of the problem.

MEIJER: But opposites definitely attract. I mean, Donald Trump is a guy like you never, we know way too much about what he's thinking at any one point in time.

Melania is very much an opaque figure. I mean, I think you're talking about this, the letter, the email from, it was from 2002. So almost 25 years ago, which again, if we're going off the timeline, like six years before the conviction and the allegation.

[22:50:10]

This is clearly something that impacts her quite severely. And I think she just wants to set the record straight, just like another defamation lawsuit, she's won.

PHILLIP: All right, everyone, thank you very much for being here.

Coming up, do you want to live forever? Kara Swisher is here to give us an inside look at her new series about health, tech and longevity. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[22:55:10]

PHILLIP: This weekend in an all new CNN original series, journalist Kara Swisher dives into the booming longevity industry, becoming both reporter and test subject as she meets Silicon Valley's power players and explores anti-aging, biotech, A.I., and so much more. Here's a preview of that.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KARA SWISHER, JOURNALIST: You're going to steal my face for face-off right now, aren't you? You're going to switch now. And then you're going to be me and then I'm going to be you. What's my favorite movie face-off?

UNKNOWN: So I'm going to come out 72. So let's look at eight different characterizations of the face, like U.V. damage, browns, reds, a bunch of the markers. And they'll give you a single number for your biological age.

Good job. You scored one year younger.

SWISHER: Well, actually, I'm 62, but so good.

UNKNOWN: Okay. That's amazing.

SWISHER: Yeah.

UNKNOWN: So your pores are fantastic. So you're in the 90th percentile.

SWISHER: I'm one scary.

He gets that he's a circus act and a freak show. And I like that about him. At the same time, it's vaguely sad.

I find it sad. I do.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PHILLIP: The Kara Swisher is here with me to discuss that. So Kara, I find that both horrifying and maybe a bit cool.

SWISHER: Yes.

PHILLIP: You know, that thing that you were doing, I'm not sure I would want to know, but there are a lot of things that you did that might have told you way more about yourself.

SWISHER: I did that for CNN. I had to take ketamine for CNN.

PHILLIP: Was there anything that you thought was actually useful?

SWISHER: A lot of it. That was the point. I was on a quest to sort of separate the nonsense from the useful stuff. And in the science department, all the stuff around GLP ones are really interesting and very promising around healthcare for everybody.

MRNA vaccines, obviously, despite all the polarization of them, gene editing, CRISPR, all kinds of things with A.I. and cancer research, incredible strides it's making around drug discovery. That's the science part.

In terms of the health part, most of the stuff you see online, and especially with what I call, you know, wellness grifters is all nonsense and expensive, but there's some basic things you could do that I was sort of seeking that are pretty much stuff your grandparents kind of do, walk after dinner, do some running, do some weight training.

PHILLIP: Wake up with the sun.

SWISHER: Right, exactly.

And you don't need all that stuff. And one of the things I wanted to get out of was sort of this narcissistic approach to health that has taken over with these bro wellness influencers kind of stuff.

PHILLIP: Yes, I mean, that is the reputation of this whole industry, at least right now, is that it's the longevity bros. And here you are, a woman.

SWISHER: Yes, I'm going to do it. I'm going to tell them they're wasting time.

PHILLIP: So did you find that there were gaps where you're like, this doesn't make sense for me? Or did you feel like maybe this is just something that isn't being marketed toward women?

SWISHER: Well, here's the thing. One thing is when men do it, it's body hacking. When women do it, it's body dysmorphia.

It's like the problem. And when men do it, it's cool, like protein maxing. They shouldn't do that.

By the way, you shouldn't eat as much protein as these bro grifters are telling you. That said, it's fine if you want. There's been this around forever, this kind of thing.

And so what was really important was to look at like red light. There's some indication, inflammation, but the promises people make and the costs they have are far too much.

Hyperbaric chambers, please don't do it unless you have the bends, Abby, okay? Or else you have a wound.

PHILLIP: I know a lot of people who do that stuff.

SWISHER: They should not. And it's expensive.

So they're buying, they're taking information and they're selling your health back to you. And it's mostly useless. Most of it is.

PHILLIP: Yes. So what's the bright side though? Do you feel like at the end of the day, this is going to get whittled down to the real stuff that will make people's lives better at the end of the day?

SWISHER: Well, two of the things. So what's the thing that will keep you living longest? The first thing is don't be poor.

I know it sounds crazy, but with obesity, with poverty, with homelessness, with lack of healthcare, it's a prescription for a shorter and more sick life, essentially. So if we could make improvements there, it would help all of us as a society in terms of cost.

PHILLIP: Or give more access to better care to poor people.

SWISHER: Well, universal healthcare. If we had universal healthcare, as most countries like ours do, we'd have a much healthier population. If everyone has a basic level of healthcare, it doesn't feel like they're going to be bankrupted if they get sick.

Preventative healthcare is something you don't see today, but it yields benefits when you're 70, and that's the kind of thing that people don't want to do. They want an elixir, they want a pill, they want an answer, and most of those things aren't going to help you. What's going to help you if you do things on a daily basis, a certain amount of exercise, a good amount of sleep, a good sort of Mediterranean type of diet, or there's a bunch of different ones.

But people don't want that because it's not today, but it's like savings. If you put a dollar in the bank and you do it every day, in the end you'll have a lot of money, but people want the fix now, and then they wait too late, and then they get sick.

[23:00:04]

PHILLIP: Yes, well, I can't wait to see all the things that you subjected yourself to.

SWISHER: Yes, you look very healthy.

PHILLIP: Thank you, I try.

SWISHER: What's your health act?

PHILLIP: I don't know. I haven't done any of these tests, so hopefully it's good. I don't know.

Kara, thank you very much. Great to see you.

The all-new CNN original series, "Kara Swisher Wants to Live Forever," premieres this Saturday, April 11th at 9:00 p.m. on CNN and the next day on the CNN app.

And thank you very much for watching "NewsNight." "Laura Coates Live" starts right now.