Return to Transcripts main page

Early Start with Rahel Solomon

Former FBI Director Charged With Threatening Trump; King Charles Delivers Historic Address To U.S. Congress; Trump Tells Iran To "Get Their Act Together" In New Post. Aired 5-5:30a ET

Aired April 29, 2026 - 05:00   ET

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

[05:00:24]

BRIAN ABEL, CNN ANCHOR: Good morning and welcome to our viewers joining us from the United States and all round the world. I'm Brian Abel. Thank you so much for being with us. It is Wednesday, April 29th, 5:00 a.m. here in Washington.

And straight ahead on EARLY START.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

EVAN PEREZ, CNN SENIOR U.S. JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: The Justice Department announced indictment against James Comey, the former FBI director.

TODD BLANCHE, ACTING ATTORNEY GENERAL: You are not allowed to threaten the president of the United States of America.

MAX FOSTER, CNN ROYAL CORRESPONDENT: A quite unexpected speech from a British monarch to both chambers of the U.S. Congress.

KING CHARLES III, UNITED KINGDOM: America's words carry weight and meaning. The actions of this great nation matter even more.

HADAS GOLD, CNN MEDIA CORRESPONDENT: Elon Musk warned a jury here in Oakland, California, that A.I. could kill us all, and he wanted to avoid a terminator style outcome for all of humanity.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(MUSIC)

ABEL: We begin with a criminal indictment over seashells. Former FBI Director James Comey is facing two charges. Making a threat against the president and transmitting a threat in interstate commerce. Both carry a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison.

The case stems from this social media post showing seashells on a beach, spelling out "86 47". The Justice Department says 86 is a threat to kill Donald Trump, the 47th president.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) BLANCHE: His alleged conduct is the same kind of conduct that we will never tolerate, and that we will always investigate and prosecute. You are not allowed to threaten the president of the United States of America. That's not my decision. That's Congress's decision, in a statute that they passed that we charge multiple times a year.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ABEL: This isn't the first time the Justice Department has indicted Comey since President Trump returned to the White House. A judge dismissed a separate case last year, accusing Comey of lying to Congress.

We have more now from CNN senior U.S. justice correspondent Evan Perez.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

EVAN PEREZ, CNN SR. U.S. JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: This all rises from a post on Instagram that Comey made back in May of last year, where he showed a picture of some shells that were arranged with the numbers 86 47.

Now, the Justice Department, the president and some of his allies have insisted that that constituted a threat against the president of the United States. 86, in some contexts, can mean removing something. They say that that constitutes a threat against the President of the United States. And then 47, of course, refers to the fact that the President Trump is the 47th President in U.S. history.

Now, Comey denies this. After he made the post, he said he learned that that was being taken as a threat. So he removed it and he apologized and after these charges were announced, he responded here.

JAMES COMEY, FORMER FBI DIRECTOR: Well, they're back, this time about a picture of seashells on a North Carolina beach a year ago. And this won't be the end of it.

But nothing has changed with me. I'm still innocent, I'm still not afraid, and I still believe in the independent federal judiciary. So let's go.

PEREZ: Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche at a press conference here, the Justice Department insisted that this case is being handled just as any other would. We do know that the grand jury issued an arrest warrant for James Comey. We anticipate that there's negotiations going on between Comey's lawyers and the U.S. government for him to turn himself in in the coming days.

One of the issues here is that this charge is being brought in North Carolina. Comey lives here in the Washington, D.C. area.

So the question is whether he is going to be arrested. At this point, his legal team is trying to make those arrangements with the U.S. Marshals Service.

Evan Perez, CNN, Justice Department.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ABEL: All right. Let's bring in retired FBI supervisory special agent Richard Kolko.

Thank you for being with us, Richard.

You know, analysts have pointed to a particular part of this indictment that says any reasonable person would see Comey's post as a serious threat to cause harm to the president. What do you agree his post meets that threshold. And if not, how did a grand jury approve this? Was it filled with unreasonable people

RICHARD KOLKO, RETIRED FBI SUPERVISORY SPECIAL AGENT: Well, you have to go to a -- when you say reasonable people, now you're talking about a jury and you have to convince them beyond a reasonable doubt that the former director of the FBI walking on the coastline there found these shells and constituted a threat.

[05:05:11]

Obviously, the threat has to have the ability and intent to do some -- some do that harm. I find that very difficult to believe. I'm not an attorney, so I understand that the prosecutors will come up with their case, but it's highly unlikely that -- I'm actually surprised that they were able to get this through a grand jury. We're not going to hear the questions that were asked of the grand jury. That's how that works.

But certainly, the prosecutors were able to get there in front of the 23 people, make their case, get the indictment approved. And that's where we find ourselves here now. But it's going to be a tough uphill climb and tough uphill case. And you're going to have First Amendment folks. And it's going to be very hard.

ABEL: You know, I know in your background, you've investigated threats of violence. You were working during 9/11 and all the aftermath after that, right?

There was a moment in that press conference where a reporter at the -- at the press conference of Acting A.G. Blanche, Mary Margaret with "Daily Wire", asked a pretty salient question that I want you to listen to, and then well talk about it a bit more on the other side.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REPORTER: Should we expect more indictments of this sort? For example, in 2020, Gretchen Whitmer did a tv hit with "86 45" on her desk in the background. Is that the kind of thing you would pursue?

BLANCHE: As far as other incidents of threats against the president of the United States? Those will be investigated. Every case is different. The facts are different. Who makes the threat matters. What the threat says matters.

(END VIDEO CLIP) A ABEL: Richard, I actually asked Governor Whitmer about it at the time in an interview when I worked back in Detroit. This was October 2020, and her response was 86 means reject anyone who works in the food industry, and I did, knows 86 means reject. And that's all. She rejected his rhetoric and policies, she said.

But the reporter's question really does get at this question of what kind of precedent this DOJ is setting. I did a search just about an hour ago for "86 47" on X, and here was one of the search returns I want to show you. Jake Posobiec, a prominent alt right political commentator in Turning Point USA contributor who posted in 2022, "86 46". So, should he be indicted too, for threatening to kill then President Joe Biden? Because that post is plain text, not seashells.

KOLKO: Well, there's certainly plenty of cases of that. You can buy the T-shirts online. You know, those are all considered threats. As an agent, you know, you would work with the U.S. attorneys and you would decide what cases you would bring to them, to present to them to see what would go forward.

And frankly, I find it hard to believe that this would have made it out of the squad area. As far as even calling down to the U.S. attorney's office to say that this is a threat against the president. And the threshold is just higher than that because you don't want it. You don't want to waste anybody's time. And you don't want to try and bring a case that you're going to lose.

The prosecutor's job is to win cases. Theyre going to have a tough time winning this case. If this ever does actually get into a courtroom.

ABEL: Do you -- do you see them going after other individuals that have made similar references, though?

KOLKO: No, I don't but as the acting attorney general said, there are threat cases against president all the time. And those do need to be investigated. Those do need to be prosecuted. We saw what just happened at the correspondents' dinner this last week. If there's an issue of a threat made online, then the Secret Service, the FBI or somebody better be knocking on that persons door to see what happened.

But that is -- that specific incident, that threat. And while we all know that there's bad blood between Director Comey and the President of United States, that's not at issue here. When you look at the two pages of this very thin indictment.

And then can that be -- can those charges be proven in a court of law? That's what has to be specifically looked at here. Was this -- was this a threat that that this man intended to carry out? And based on reading the two pages of the indictment, I find that very difficult to believe.

ABEL: All right, Richard Kolko, thank you for letting your expertise to us this morning. Appreciate you.

KOLKO: Thank you.

ABEL: King Charles and Queen Camilla will head to New York this morning for day three of their first state visit to the U.S. They all tend a wreath laying ceremony at the National 9/11 Memorial and meet with first responders and families of the victims. On Tuesday, King Charles made history as the second British monarch to address a joint meeting of Congress. In that speech, he pushed back on several points of disagreement with the Trump administration, including offering praise to NATO. The king also attended a state dinner at the White House, where he spoke about the importance of America's leadership.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KING CHARLES: America's words carry weight and meaning as they have since independence. The actions of this great nation matter even more. Let our two countries rededicate ourselves to each other in the selfless service of our peoples, and of all the peoples of the world.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[05:10:08]

ABEL: CNN royal correspondent Max Foster is following the king's visit for us and has more on his address to Congress.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

MAX FOSTER, CNN ROYAL CORRESPONDENT: A quite unexpected speech from a British monarch to both chambers of the U.S. Congress. Normally, of course, you expect a monarch to stay out of politics altogether. But actually, if you watch this from a European point of view, it wouldn't have felt particularly political because issues such as the threat of climate change, defending Ukraine, defense of NATO, defense of the transatlantic alliance are all views -- mainstream views really from the U.K. and most of Europe. So, it wouldn't have felt political.

But if you're watching it from a U.S. perspective, then it did feel more political, because many of these issues are party political. Current issues in U.S. politics.

The king didn't cross any constitutional lines here. Yes, he does have to stay above the politics of his own country. But America isn't a country where he has subjects. He speaking to the American people. So, he had a free reign to speak more freely about American politics.

And it was interesting to see the king do that, because I can't imagine the queen, his mother, would have done so in the same way. She never expressed any sort of personal opinion. So, two very different approaches to monarchy here.

But I think the king certainly felt positive about the reaction that he got from congress because he was getting standing ovations. He sometimes got caught out by that. And a great achievement perhaps from this speech was that he seemed to unite a very divided congress.

So, he felt came away feeling very strong, didn't appear to have caused any offense to the president either, because even though many people feel as though many of these comments were quite pointed towards him, because later on we heard there was a great speech and perhaps he was even jealous of it.

So, an extraordinary day for the king, and actually quite a triumph from the British point of view.

Max Foster, CNN, the White House.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ABEL: And joining us now to discuss further, CNN royal historian Kate Williams, live from London.

And, Kate, 24 hours ago, when we were talking on this very show, you told me that King Charles has a repair job on his hands. So how successful was that repair?

KATE WILLIAMS, CNN ROYAL HISTORIAN: Yes, King Charles had a repair job on his hand. The special relationship was very battered, and King Charles himself had a difficult line to walk between repairing the special relationship, really being hospitable and friendly with President Trump. And also I felt he was going to try and put himself on the world stage in terms of a leading in unity and peace, and really, that speech has absolutely done that yesterday in Congress.

And also, his speech at the state banquet last night. I think it's going to go down as the greatest speech of Charles's career. I think he's really now put his monarchy on the map with that speech to congress, in which he talked about the, you know, the importance of there being checks and balances on executive power, how democracy was not the will of one, the importance of safeguarding nature.

And to me, as a historian watching this, when he talked about the Founding Fathers as rebels with a cause, I don't know what the Founding Fathers would think if they looked down and they saw King George III, who was the tyrant over America, that they had to break free of in the war of independence, King George III, five times great grandson, saying, that that democracy was so important and that democracy should be safeguarded.

So, absolutely fascinating. Extraordinary day, as Max was saying. And I don't know how much this is going to affect President Trump or indeed American politics, but the king has gone out there and put his point of view and that of the British government. And it is strongly, strongly pro-democracy, pro NATO. And indeed, we might say pro European.

ABEL: And that outlook is a little bit of what I want to talk about next, Kate. The king certainly, as you said, had a tightrope to walk in his speeches. Right. And there was also some outside developments in the lead up that maybe didn't help his cause.

Like the leaked details of comments by the U.K.'s ambassador to the U.S., that its only Israel, maybe that has a special relationship with the U.S. now, or even during his trip when President Trump, excuse me, seemed to reveal a part of a private conversation with King Charles, where he allegedly agreed that Iran should never have a nuclear weapon.

Trump using that to further justify the war in Iran. So given all of that, and there were also still many moments of levity, like a joke about Britain's attempts to remodel the White House in 1814, when the White House was set on fire. But given all those circumstances around this, was the king able to bring Trump and the U.S. closer to the U.K.'s worldview and how will King Charles now be received back home?

WILLIAMS: That was totally, as you say, King Charles's aim here. It was his mission to bring the U.S. closer to the U.K.'s view of not just what the U.K. and the U.S. should be doing together, but Americas role in the world, particularly in terms of defending Ukraine.

[05:15:08]

Now, we saw standing ovations for what King Charles said about protecting Ukraine. It was really very successful in terms of its reception, how it will translate into policy as the next question. But certainly, I think this speech has gone down extraordinarily well in the U.K. and Europe. I've seen so many comments saying I didn't want King Charles to go. I thought he'd be used to endorse President Trump's vision. And I really feel that it was -- it was -- it was -- it was wrong to send him and plenty of people saying, I disagree with monarchy. I disagree with King Charles being even the king at all. But what I saw there was impressive.

And really, I think in the end, when you say, what is the point of monarchy? Why do we have it? This is monarchy justifying itself, saying it can go up there on the world stage. It can get this access to the world stage, and the king can put forward his points about peace, unity and protecting nature.

So I think certainly in terms of the special relationship, we've done a lot here. Trump was clearly thrilled to have the king there. There were all this pomp and circumstance yesterday, unprecedented in terms of a flyover over the White House and also the review of troops. And President Trump gave an incredibly complimentary speech to the king personally and to the United Kingdom. So, I think there's a lot of goodwill and friendship there in terms of the special relationship, but also the fact that King Charles has used the opportunity to talk about the concerns that are really worrying Europe at the moment. And he did that with a smile on his face and created a lot of, I think, support in Congress. That is really significant.

ABEL: We just have a few seconds left. But I know that there's still more on this trip. But where does the U.K.'s relationship with the U.S. go from here, in your estimation

WILLIAMS: I think the U.K. and the U.S.'s relationship, it's now between the politicians, it's now between Sir Keir Starmer and President Trump and the big what? The big question is that Charles didn't really talk about, apart from talking about conflict was the war in Iran. And this is what as you said, President Trump has said that Charles said is behind closed doors. He agrees with President Trump on.

Now, Keir Starmer does not agree with President Trump on the war in Iran. So, it doesn't necessarily matter what King Charles said or he didn't say, but certainly there's no I think there's no movement together on that front. But there may be movement together on other issues, such as tariffs such as Ukraine, such as the natural world, perhaps. But I certainly think in terms of Iran, U.K. and the U.S. are as far apart as they ever were.

ABEL: All right. Kate Williams, thank you for your time today. Appreciate you.

Still ahead, we go live to Jerusalem and Islamabad for the latest developments in the effort to end the U.S. and Israel's war with Iran.

Plus, Disney is wading into a legal battle following President Trump's feud with late night host Jimmy Kimmel. Still ahead, why the FCC is requesting early renewals for ABC licenses.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[05:22:34]

ABEL: Turning now to the Middle East and efforts to end the war in Iran. This morning, President Trump wrote on social media, "Iran can't get their act together. They don't know how to sign a non-nuclear deal. They better get smart soon. No more Mr. Nice Guy."

The post included an A.I.-generated photo of him with a gun and bombs exploding in the background, reminiscent of an Iron Man, a popular image.

Sources tell CNN that Iran is expected to submit a revised peace proposal after President Trump indicated he would not accept an earlier version. That version called for reopening the Strait of Hormuz and ending the war first, and discussing Tehran's nuclear program at a later stage.

On Tuesday, President Trump appeared to break protocol during a state dinner for King Charles. He suggested the British monarch agreed with him that Iran should not have a nuclear weapon. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: And we're doing very well. We have militarily defeated that particular opponent, and we're never going to let that opponent ever. Charles agrees with me even more than I do. We're never going to let that opponent have a nuclear weapon.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ABEL: CNN's Nic Robertson is standing by for us in Islamabad, Pakistan.

But first, let's go to Oren Liebermann, live from Jerusalem. And, Oren, there's so much talk about how the U.S. feels about any

Iran proposal. We haven't really heard much about how Israel feels about a proposal. But given the special relationship, we imagine it's lock and step.

OREN LIEBERMANN, CNN JERUSALEM BUREAU CHIEF: Well, Israel has been remarkably quiet when it comes to how it feels about the ongoing negotiations between the U.S. and Iran. Certainly, it's watching them very closely, but it also realizes Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu realizes that Trump is going to make his own decision. Israel will influence that as it can. Netanyahu, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Trump have obviously spoken many, many times, and they will continue to do so.

But in the end, this is up to Trump and Israel will have to sort of figure out how to work around that. So, we're waiting to see where these negotiations go. And that's, again, something Israel is watching very closely. Meanwhile, Israel is fully ready to resume the war in Iran, as there is, frankly, much of an ongoing conflict between Israel and Hezbollah, despite a ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon.

[05:25:00]

ABEL: Okay, Oren. Thank you. Appreciate that insight.

Let's go now to our Nic Robertson in Islamabad, where mediators are expecting to receive Iran's revised proposal any day now -- Nic.

NIC ROBERTSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL DIPLOMATIC EDITOR: They are. And I think the concern of mediators is going to be that the -- what -- how President Trump might sort of handle any sort of pauses in the -- in the talks process. You know, there have been signaling yesterday from President Trump that he said, you know, the Iranians have asked us to -- the Iranians have asked us to open the Strait of Hormuz, where they try to figure out their leadership.

And I think that was a sort of a hint there to what Secretary of State Marco Rubio had also talked about the night before, about concerns about the ayatollah, about concerns about getting messages to and from him who controls him. Does he have access to the to the mediators that are sort of the negotiators are coming here and dealing with Pakistan.

That seems to be an open question at the moment. And the concern has always been that if there are delays whereby the Iranians are very slow to get a response and there is pressure on them to get a response at the moment, and that pressure is to get a response in the coming couple of days. The concern was always going to be that President Trump would start to sort of double down, that he would, you know, begin to voice his concerns and his agitation about a failure of Iran to come up with a new position. And I think this this seems to be embodied in what we've seen in his latest truth social post, "No more Mr. Nice Guy". He has said that before, but I think that signals his frustrations.

And again, the key thing on his mind is, we heard him reference that the banquet at the White House last night saying that King Charles was in even more agreement than he was that Iran should not have a nuclear weapon. So, I think the president very clearly signaling that's the core issue. Iran needs to move on that issue above whatever else is going to happen. People have talked about a deal where you just have a partial deal shift, the nuclear issue off separately, and later that clearly at the moment seems to be the pressure point on Iran to signal that they may have movement there.

And it's not clear that's going to come. I think there is genuine concern at the moment that the IRGC, the hardliners in Iran, have the upper hand. And therefore, the talks may drag out in many ways. We're entering a sort of a talks process more akin to what we've seen from Iran in the past.

And President Trump is clearly saying he's not going to get involved in a drawn-out process. The answer needs to come quickly.

ABEL: And at the same time, we've heard the "No more Mr. Nice Guy" threat before. And here we are today still. So, we will see exactly what this proposal offers.

Nic Robertson for us in Islamabad, thank you.

Still to come, an update on the U.S. soldier accused of misusing classified information to secure a massive payday.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)