Return to Transcripts main page
Laura Coates Live
Sean "Diddy" Combs Charged With Sex Trafficking And Racketeering; Harris Slams "Hateful Rhetoric" In Lengthy Interview; Laura Coates Interviews Former CIA Officer Robert Baer; Laura Coates Interviews Authors Kate Conger And Ryan Mac. Aired 11p-12a ET
Aired September 17, 2024 - 23:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[23:00:00]
BRYAN LANZA, FORMER DEPUTY COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR FOR TRUMP 2016 CAMPAIGN, SENIOR ADVISER FOR TRUMP 2024 CAMPAIGN: My hot take is that the food banks wouldn't be -- wouldn't be surprised that on election day those precincts went Republican.
ABBY PHILLIP, CNN ANCHOR AND SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Leading indicator, perhaps? We'll see. Ashley?
ASHLEY ALLISON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: This has nothing to do with politics. But give us introverts a break, okay?
(LAUGHTER)
PHILLIP: Amen.
ALLISON: I'm over all of you, all right? I'm an introvert. I'm overwhelmed with people right now. I've met my capacity in election time, like you have to go to every event, every gala. Just give us a weekend off, people, please.
PHILLIP: Yes. You know what? Cancelled plans are no plans are good plans. Everyone, thank you very much. And thank you for watching "NewsNight: State of the Race." "Laura Coates Live" starts right now.
LAURA COATES, CNN HOST AND SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Tonight, inside the indictment that landed Diddy behind bars. The charges, the evidence, and a whole lot of people on edge for what might happen next. Tonight on "Laura Coates Live."
The man known as Sean "Diddy" Combs built a business empire off his music and also his name. But tonight, he's sitting behind bars in Brooklyn accused of running a very different kind of empire. The rapper is now in a special housing unit for inmates who require additional protection. This after being denied bail on the three federal charges against him.
Now he pleaded not guilty during his first court appearance today, but what he's facing is incredibly serious. The charges include racketeering, conspiracy, sex trafficking, and transportation to engage in prostitution. Now the first two carry a maximum sentence of life in prison, and a sex trafficking conviction is a minimum 15-year sentence.
Now the details in the indictment, they are staggering. One phrase that stands out, Combs Enterprise. Enterprise, meaning a group of people organized for the purpose of committing crimes. In shorthand, right, organized crime. Now prosecutors alleged that Diddy was the leader of that criminal enterprise which consisted of security and household staff, personal assistants, high-ranking supervisors, and other close associates. Prosecutors mentioned the criminal enterprise something like 38 times in a 14-page indictment. And as its leader, Diddy is accused of things like this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DAMIAN WILLIAMS, U.S. ATTORNEY, SDNY: Between at least 2008 and the present, Combs abused, threatened, and coerced victims to fulfill his sexual desires, protect his reputation, and conceal his conduct. Sean Combs led and participated in a racketeering conspiracy that used the business empire he controlled to carry out criminal activity, including sex trafficking, forced labor, kidnapping, arson, bribery, and the obstruction of justice.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Since at least 2008. That's 16 years. Charging documents, they explain exactly what it all looked like. And I want to warn you, if you're reading this indictment, the allegations are disturbing. They are shocking. They are degrading. The allegations tell a story of abuse and coercion, and that appears to be just the start of it.
The prosecutors say that Diddy held what he called freak offs. These are drug-fueled and abusive sex performances arranged and also directed by Sean Combs. They allegedly happen regularly. They would last multiple days.
Sex workers were brought in from other states and even other countries. Now the victims were given drugs to keep them obedient and compliant. Just think of those two words, obedient and compliant. Drugs like ketamine and ecstasy and GHB. They were often electronically recorded. And the encounters were often so intense that his victims got IV fluids to recover. Some took days or even weeks to heal, to heal. And if one of those victims didn't do what he wanted, well, prosecutors say that this happened.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
WILLIAMS: When Combs didn't get his way, he was violent. And he subjected victims to physical, emotional, and verbal abuse so that they would participate in the freak offs. And that Combs hit, kicked, threw objects at, and dragged victims at times by their hair.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: That prosecutor points out what happened to Cassie Ventura in 2016 as but an example. Recall that CNN obtained video of that incident earlier this year, showing Combs beating his then-girlfriend at a Los Angeles hotel. Now, it's clear Cassie is not named in the indictment, but a huge question is lingering for so many.
[23:04:57]
Would we even be here now if she had not come forward with her own civil lawsuit in November of last year? It seemed to open the floodgates in many ways, leading to at least nine other lawsuits against him, most directly accusing him of sexual assault.
Prosecutors accused Diddy of obstructing justice after Cassie's lawsuit, arguing he reached out to victims and witnesses to feed them false narratives. He even allegedly contacted one witness just last week, right after singer Dawn Richard filed her lawsuit against him. That seems to fit with the allegations that are laid out in the indictment and how he threatened anyone trying to speak out.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
WILLIAMS: He used the embarrassing and sensitive recordings he made of the freak offs as collateral against the victims. And the indictment alleges that he maintained control over the victims in several ways, including by giving them drugs, by giving and threatening to take away financial support or housing, by promising them career opportunities, by monitoring their whereabouts, and even by dictating their physical appearance.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Now, Diddy gets a presumption of innocence, right? In a court of law in this country. He is denying all of this. And we're getting a hint of what his defense actually may look like. His attorney is claiming the indictment stems from just one victim, Cassie Ventura. Here's what he told CNN a short time ago about that now infamous 2016 video.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MARC AGNIFILO, ATTORNEY FOR SEAN "DIDDY" COMBS: There was no criminal investigation. This was just a matter of personal embarrassment because he and the person in the video were in the midst of a 10-year relationship that was difficult at times, that was toxic at times, but it was mutually so. And this whole notion that Mr. Combs is forcing drugs on someone is just nonsensical, and it's going to prove to not be true.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: The video was about embarrassment? Hmm, maybe time for a new eye exam for me. Diddy will be back in court tomorrow appealing the decision to deny him bail. Joining me to unpack this disturbing case and what is going to come next, John Miller, CNN chief law enforcement intelligence analyst, and Nadia Shahada, a former federal prosecutor who worked on the R. Kelly case leading to his conviction on sex crimes. Glad to have both of you here.
Look, everyone has been talking about this, frankly, since that video came out, certainly since he was arrested last night, John. And now, he has been ordered to stay in jail until the trial at this point in time. And this is in spite of him proposing home detention and a $50 million bond. Why did this judge decide to keep him in jail pending?
JOHN MILLER, CNN CHIEF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND INTELLIGENCE ANALYST: So, this was the federal magistrate who, as you know, as a former federal prosecutor, would handle what we would call the arraignment stage, the initial appearance. And her opinion was that the record that's established in the RICO charges is one about contacting witnesses, threatening witnesses, holding sway over people. And the resources he has, the kind of person who could have -- could put up $15 million -- $50 million bond package includes private planes and so on.
The counter argument was, from Marc Agnifilo, the lawyer, he turned his passports into me, he came to New York with his entire family to support him in order to surrender for these charges. That makes him the opposite of a flight risk, and that argument didn't play with the magistrate.
Now, tomorrow, they will be back in federal court appealing that decision to Judge Carter, who is going to be the trial judge and will have the ultimate responsibility to supervise the trial and conditions, who may overrule that or may stick with it.
COATES: Yeah. I mean, Nadia, most people think about that phrase, flight risk, and think about somebody, you know, being held, pending the actual trial. But there's also more to the calculation, right? Can the conduct that's being alleged, could it still possibly occur while there is supervision happening? That seems to be one of the concerns of the magistrate judge, that it's not just about leaving the country, it's about engaging in behavior that is even alleged in this that could not be monitored.
NADIA SHIHATA, PROSECUTOR: Absolutely. I think the defense attorney did a good job of kind of mitigating the flight risk. But I think the real concern here is there's a serious risk of obstruction of justice as the prosecutors argued and, in fact, charged in the indictment. So, there's a real concern and the judge was convinced by this that Mr. Combs would try to intimidate witnesses, influence witnesses, and I think that was probably what held sway over the judge in this case.
COATES: It might be counterintuitive to people that when you have a presumption of innocence, you can still be held, pending the trial.
[23:10:01]
If the allegations are just allegations, why should that have sway?
SHIHATA: Well, there are standards that a judge has to apply for dangerousness. The prosecution has to prove that the defendant is a danger to the community by clear and convincing evidence and for flight risk by a preponderance of the evidence, so more likely than not.
COATES: Hmm.
SHIHATA: It may seem unfair, but this happens every day in courtrooms throughout the country.
COATES: An important point because people might think this is only because of the celebrity status of this particular person. But really, it's much more common to have certain bail conditions similarly. But given his status, John, what are you hearing about the detention and conditions he will be facing while he is held?
MILLER: Well, he was processed this morning, fingerprinted, photographed, brought to the court, and then sent to -- well, before that, sent to pretrial services. Imagine this conversation, right? This conversation happens hundreds of times a day in the federal courthouse. What's your name? What do you do for a living? Where do you live? How many properties do you own? How much money do you have: That's where the pretrial services investigator probably starts to hear the kinds of things that they don't often hear there.
Somebody of his resources, his wealth, his accustomedness to opulence, at the end of that hearing, was taken by U.S. Marshals to the Metropolitan Detention Center on the Brooklyn waterfront, taken to the SHU or the Special Housing Unit, and basically kept away from other prisoners because of his notoriety and the notoriety of the case, and that's where he's sleeping tonight.
He'll wake up at 6 a.m. tomorrow, be transported back to the court where his attorneys will remake this argument to Judge Carter, and hoping that in the presumption of innocence, his prior service as a public defender, he might consider this differently, but we'll have to see what happens.
COATES: You know, we're also waiting because, you know, Nadia, he is the only one charged in this actual indictment. Things change all the time. It is either superseding or they might have more information. It has been months since that raid on his home. Obviously, a grand jury has returned this indictment.
But one thing I found interesting in the indictment is that -- is that members and associates of the Combs Enterprise enabled Combs's control over victims by following his directions regarding financial payments to victims, advancing or suppressing the victims career opportunities, and acquiring the controlled substances Combs used to keep the victims compliant."
It is essentially like a crime syndicate. And I do wonder, could additional people face charges or is this telling you a roadmap for cooperators?
SHIHATA: Certainly, additional people could be charged. It's also possible that additional people have already been charged, pled guilty, and are cooperating in the case. The fact that it's a racketeering indictment that relies on an enterprise, though, doesn't necessarily mean that there will be additional people charged. In the R. Kelly case, for example, we had very similar charges, and we never ended up indicting people within -- additional people within the same indictment, racketeer.
COATES: How does this case compare? Obviously, there are going to be factual distinctions. When you look at the allegations alleged in this case and the familiar indictment now of the R. Kelly scenario, are you seeing parallels and similarities?
SHIHATA: There are certainly parallels in these cases. Obviously, the conduct in each case is somewhat different, but there is this idea of a superstar using the employees and entourage at his disposal to facilitate really serious sexual violence crimes and to use coercion and control of victims to coerce them into engaging in sexual activity that they otherwise would not have.
COATES: This is going to be a really telling hearing tomorrow to see how the rest of this case is going to go with that judge who's now going to oversee this case making the ultimate decision. John, Nadia --
MILLER: I would also say that Nadia is being far too modest here.
COATES: Uh-hmm.
MILLER: The R. Kelly case, the investigation by HSI, the prosecution as a RICO case, was an unusual federal prosecution with an unusual structure and really became the model not just for the P Diddy investigation but likely for the Southern District and how they put this together. So, this is -- this is, I think, the prosecutor who pioneered this and we're seeing chapter two with another defendant.
COATES: Well, we'll see if the lessons learned undermine or help the defense, that they're able to see this as well. Thank you both so much.
While the indictment lists just one victim, several women have come forward in recent months to say they, too, were victimized by Diddy. Several people, frankly. That includes singer Aubrey O'Day from the group Danny Decayne which Diddy helped to create.
[23:14:59]
She says that she was fired from the group for refusing to fulfill Diddy's non-music requests. O'Day writing on X -- quote -- "The purpose of justice is to provide an ending and allow us the space to create a new chapter. Women never get this. I feel validated." And earlier today, I spoke to rapper and actor Eve for an upcoming interview we're going to play for you about her thoughts on Diddy's arrest.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
EVE, RAPPER, SINGER, ACTRESS: It's one of those things where you never ever, ever want to see anything like this, of someone that you've known and seen throughout my whole career, obviously. Of course, it's shocking and sad. You're sad from it because, you know, we don't always know all the parts of people.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Well, my next guest has been covering Diddy and the hip-hop industry for nearly three decades. Kierna Mayo is the former editor- in-chief of Ebony magazine and current editor of One World. Kierna, thank you so much for joining. You and I have had conversations about this in the past, about what could be, about the impact on from the culture to what criminal prosecution might be looming. And here we are. Rumors have been swirling for years about Diddy's alleged crimes. What was your first reaction to these actual criminal and federal charges, and the details against Diddy?
KIERNA MAYO, CULTURAL COMMENTATOR, EXECUTIVE EDITOR OF ONE WORLD, FORMER EDITOR-IN-CHIEF OF EBONY MAGAZINE: Hi, Laura. Thank you so much for having me. It sucks to always be talking about this particular thing. But you know what? My first thought was, oh, this is why the raids. Oh, now it all makes sense. Initially, when those raids happened, you almost couldn't imagine that the crimes would fit that aggressive way that they went into his homes.
COATES: Hmm.
MAYO: But now, when you read this indictment, there's no question that you had to go wherever he had properties. You had to go seize those guns. You had to go seize the drugs. I mean, it's just remarkable, the level that Diddy was operating at. It's -- it blows my mind. My first reaction was just -- I was stunned.
COATES: There are so many people across, you know, the music industry. Frankly, he has a business, he has businesses, his fashion, alcohol, beyond. So, he has, you know, a cross-section of business ties and colleagues and associates. And these charges are about things he has done, they say, since 2009. You were around Diddy during the 90s. You were at his parties. I'm not talking about these alleged parties, but parties that he threw back then. Can you give us some insight into what they were like and if you think that they have morphed and changed through the years?
MAYO: Oh, you know what's interesting? When you think about Diddy and this trajectory, this 20, 30 years of abuse and exploitation, the thing that was exploited the most was ambition, the ambition of young people.
COATES: Hmm.
MAYO: So, when we talk about these parties, you're talking about a crowd of kids who made it out of whatever town they were in, who took their little bit of talent or their huge amount of talent and hustled it to New York City, got close, got proximate to energy, excitement, things that were popping. You know, we were in spaces and it felt good. Make no mistakes about it, Diddy threw incredible parties. Everyone in the industry knew that. You wanted to be there. It was great to be seen there. But it was also a good time.
But it makes sense that parties and the nature of parties that he threw evolved because he needed to figure out a way to have a core operation that lured people in. It's sexy. It's fun. It's drug, sex, rock and roll. But in his case, minus the consent. And that consent piece is the biggest thing that we have to talk about because really -- I think about this in terms of a new generation, like what can we learn? What can we glean from this to stop it in the future?
COATES: Well, Kierna, two really important points at least that you made there. One is the idea of the alleged exploitation of people hoping to be close to power, close to opportunity, and then having it used to victimize them, according to these allegations. And the other aspect of it is just the sheer number of people who would have been at a party.
[23:19:55]
I have to wonder sometimes about the relative silence of people coming out to say what they saw, if anything, given, you know, we're in a world where guilty by association certainly is a fear for a number of people who don't want to be associated with what has happened.
But on this point, too, I mean, prosecutors are saying that he contacted an alleged witness more than 50 times, 5-0, in four days. He even reached out to a victim. What does that say about how Diddy operate? This is obviously the time, I think, he has already moved to New York knowing that he may, in fact, be arrested.
MAYO: Yeah. Coercion, power. The way this works is that people have access to you. People have access to not just your dreams, but to your front door, right? And so, it can become very threatening. And even when your physical safety isn't on the line, the cultural safety that people look for.
COATES: Hmm.
MAYO: If no one else is saying anything, why would I be the one to say something? For 10, 12, 15 years, those of us who worked in this business saw quite a bit. But again, this is pre-MeToo. We didn't have the language. There wasn't really a permission structure. That's a phrase that's being used a lot now in political circles.
But when we think about assault and when we think about power and fame and wealth, and how all these things kind of mix into this toxic stew, you really have to think about what young people in particular don't have. They're trying to get close to and puffy-hatted. All of that makes for an opportunity for you to be quiet, afraid, and complicit when it comes to keeping a big secret.
COATES: Hmm.
MAYO: So, it doesn't take everybody knowing all the parts, but many people knew pieces of the parts. I'm afraid and ashamed also to say that I'm part of a generation that allowed for an R. Kelly, that allowed for a P Diddy over many years. It's truly a reckoning, and we can only hope for more for the next generation.
COATES: Kierna, thank you so much for joining me and for saying what you've said. In a moment, I think of an industry that requires additional self-reflection. I know we talked about in the movie industry and Hollywood "Me Too." It is far more expansive and for the varieties that you spoke of. Thank you so much.
MAYO: Thank you, Laura.
COATES: Up next, Kamala Harris sits down for a 45-minute conversation and calls out, surprise, surprise, Donald Trump. Will it quiet the voices calling for her to do more unscripted interviews? Plus, thousands of pagers held by Iran-backed militants in Lebanon explode at the same time. Let's talk with a former CIA spy about how it may have been pulled off.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:25:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: It got to stop. Vice President Kamala Harris calling out former President Donald Trump today in a 45-minute interview with the National Association of Black Journalists for amplifying false rumors about Haitian migrants in Springfield, Ohio.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KAMALA HARRIS, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, U.S. PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: It's a crying shame. Literally. What's happening to those families, those children in that community. This is exhausting and it's harmful. And it's hateful and grounded in some age-old stuff that we should not have the tolerance for.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: I want to bring in senior political correspondent for Puck, Tara Palmieri, CNN political commentator Van Jones, and Republican strategist Joe Pinion here as well. I begin with you, Van. Look, she has been criticized for not giving enough interviews, that there is a risk of her going off the cuff. This is a 45-minute interview. She takes it right to Donald Trump. She talks about his history as well and renting or not renting to people of color as but an example. How effective was she?
VAN JONES, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I think she was great and more, more, more. I think, honestly, the polls show the more you see Kamala, the more people like Kamala. I think that she did a great job of unifying our party. She got a lot of people excited. And then other people, she is not close to deal with yet.
And so, when you hear from her, she's not some crazy radical person, she's somebody who has obvious empathy, she is standing for everyday folks, and we just need to see more of her. I want to see that every day.
COATES: You're nodding and you're like cocking your head like no.
(LAUGHTER)
TARA PALMERI, SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT, PUCK: No, I agree.
COATES: You agree? PALMERI: I totally agree with you because I hear it. Even from people in my family are saying, what is she going to be like? What is Kamala Harris going to be like as a president? What is her administration going to look like? And we really don't know. It has been a lot of canned quotes. And she did a great job. She's very strong. She has shown that she's a top shelf candidate. Let her be one. Let her go out there and talk to regular voters, and actually just show what she's like on the cuff. How will she answer a non-problem conversation? How will she just be around other leaders like herself?
And I think voters just need to get a reason to go out and vote for her. And right now, they know their known quantity, which is Donald Trump, but they know what they're getting with him, right? And that was a time of like decent economic, you know, prospects, a lot of drama. But they just aren't sure. And I think right now, they just have to fill in the pieces. And right now, they're thinking maybe more Biden. But they don't know enough about Kamala, so that's why the press strategy needs to be more aggressive and needs to involve more regular people.
JOE PINION, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST, NEW YORK GOP SURROGATE, FORMER SENATE CANDIDATE: Look, I'll just say this. I think the tell is that it appears that the people closest to Kamala Harris do not trust Kamala Harris. And I think that irrespective of what Democrats want to say about her as a candidate, the truth is in the pudding, the fact that they have effectively hidden her from view.
And so, yes, I think that at the end of the day, there are a great many Americans who have decided that they do not want Donald Trump and they are just looking for some reason, any reason, to vote for Kamala Harris. I think, for me, the issue is she does not appear able to give them that reason.
[23:29:58]
And I think part of that problem is because of this juxtaposition between the Kamala Harris that has been for the better part of the last 20 years in public view and the Kamala Harris she is planning to be when she becomes president, whether we're talking about climate change, whether we're talking about just any of the regular policies that people care about.
COATES: You see that disconnect between her ability, previous and now?
JONES: Well, I think a lot of things. First, the Republican Party loves to jump up and down this pogo stick of like three months when Kamala kind of took a walk on the left. But Kamala is not a leftist. She's just not. I voted for Kamala Harris for district attorney, attorney general, vice president, then vote for her for president. Kamala Harris is a pragmatist. She is a pragmatist. And that's why I think they need to get her out there more.
The whole Democratic Party went on some weird stuff in 2020. People were talking about all kinds of stuff that now makes no sense. People talking about defunding the police, all kinds of stuff. The Democrats woke up with a hangover and ran to Biden. Don't forget, we got off of that Pogo stick with Biden in 2020. Republicans want to keep talking about stuff we haven't talked about in four years. Kamala Harris has spent four years being an able, strong backup for Biden. Now, she needs to step forward and let us know who she is.
COATES: Well, you know, Republicans on that point, that Republicans could also say that, you know, there is not the allowance to forget four years ago as well. And they criticize Democrats for holding on to statements that were made in the past, even though they have been doubling down on a few.
Before you come into this, Joe, I do want to play for you what was asked of Hillary Clinton because we know -- and this is Kara Swisher, our colleague, had her on her podcast today. And she asked her whether Harris, in this quest to be more known to the public, to people to understand her more, whether she needs to put out more policy for undecided voters. Listen to what Hillary Clinton had to say.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HILLARY CLINTON, FORMER U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE (voice-over): She does not have to do it, Kara. I'm going to just cut to the chase. In fact, she has put out policies on her campaign website.
KARA SWISHER, CNN CONTRIBUTOR (voice-over): Uh-hmm.
CLINTON (voice-over): Anybody who's truly interested can go read about them. It's a double standard that is partly because they are still getting to know her. But also because they're still grappling with the idea like, 'oh, am I really going to vote for a woman to be president and commander-in-chief?'
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Is that what it is?
PINION: People aren't grappling with whether they are willing to vote for a woman. They're grappling with whether or not they even know who this particular woman running for president is. And so, I think, again, yes, there are plenty of things you can say about Kamala Harris to her benefit.
I believe the Republicans have made a mistake in not pointing out the fact that she is the most consequential vice president, certainly of my lifetime, and I think of modern times. The fact that she has cast so many tie-breaking votes. The fact that if you're looking at what she has done with Joe Biden as the partner, because she wants to claim all of the mantle as being that partner. So, they have been the one that have been against the permanent reforms that have made it more difficult for us to get the chance.
JONES: You go do the whole list. Go ahead.
PINION: I don't -- I don't -- I don't -- look, again --
JONES: You say I'm speaking. Go ahead. (LAUGHTER)
COATES: But it was almost arm wrestling. Now, Tara, while they work it out, you give me your answer.
PALMERI: Well, I was going to say -- I mean, it was found out that on her -- on her website, when it came to policy, it was literally a copy and paste of Joe Biden's policy. So that's -- that wasn't the best, first of all, if you're trying to separate yourself from Joe Biden, which she really didn't do during the debate. And I think a lot of people wanted to see her separate herself from Joe Biden because being the incumbent in these times is not always the best thing, right?
But I also think it does -- the Republicans have big disservice to try to downplay Kamala Harris and her skills. She clearly has shown that she has strong political skills. And every time they mock her and say that she can't handle it, they're really -- they keep getting proven wrong over and over and over again. I do think that these Democrats around her are skittish and they want to run out the clock, and I think that's a disservice to her as well.
JONES: I think that's right because I don't think it's about policy. I think when people say policy, they mean something else. They mean --
COATES: What do they mean?
JONES: They mean, how is my life going to get better? What's she going to do for me? That's what they really mean. And so, when we say, oh, policy, our tax rate is going to be -- we talk all kind of crazy stuff that doesn't help anybody. I think we need to see Kamala Harris in living rooms with regular people. I think we need to see her in barber shops with everyday people. Just Beyonce stuff, putting her on stage, like we've done enough of that.
I think people need to get a sense. I feel like this woman gets me. I feel like she is going to do stuff to help me. And I think that that's what's missing. And once that's there, policy, people came and followed by. I came and followed policy. I went to law school. People need to feel like she is with them.
PINION: I just respectfully will say that I think that would be a fair assessment if she had gone through the same gauntlet that every other candidate that typically runs for president has gone through. I think there's a reason why we make running for president damn near impossible. It's because the job itself is nearly impossible.
And so I think the combination of the fact, whether you agree with it or not, that in the 11th hour, that in this historic event that Joe Biden was pushed aside, right, that broke everyone's heart, broke your heart, broke somebody's heart because of the person that he was, then I think that she does have a higher obligation, whether Hillary Clinton believes she should do it or not, to speak on those specific issues.
JONES: I think -- I think -- I think that you're right.
[23:35:00]
I won't disagree with you that she is undefined from policy point of view, but I don't think that's what's really missing for people. In terms of people who would cross and vote for her --
PINION: I would simply say that --
JONES: -- I think people need to be more comfortable with who she is and where she's standing.
PALMERI: She needs to talk like a person and not keep using the same lines over and over again.
PINION: It was from 2016 --
PALMIERI: That's the thing.
COATES: I'll talk like a person right now and just say that Van Jones is not wearing just one but two mood rings.
(LAUGHTER)
JONES: Are you jealous?
COATES: No, because the color is turning -- it's a color of happy and in love.
(LAUGHTER)
I don't know. I got it. So, during the break, I'm going to ask the questions about why that is. We'll talk about policy later, but two mood rings, America. Two.
JONES: When we get back.
COATES: When we get back. But it might be -- we'll come back to this. There's more to talk about.
JONES: You never know. You never know.
COATES: Look, it might be one of the most extraordinary espionage operations in recent history. Not even James Bond could have pulled this off. Israel reportedly detonating hundreds of Hezbollah's pagers at the same time. How? Former CIA agent Bob Baer has a theory. He's going to share with us, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:40:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: Now you'd think that what I'm about to tell you would be straight out of a spy movie. I mean the story, so jaw-dropping, it's hard to believe it's actually real. But it is real. Nine people were killed, 2,800 people wounded when thousands of pagers, the rural beepers, went off simultaneously, detonated on the bodies of Iran- backed Hezbollah militants, a group the U.S. designates as a terror organization. And here's one example in a market. I want to warn you, it is graphic.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
(BOOM)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Now, multiply what you just saw by thousands. Another explosion at a checkout counter. Men huddling, injured after an explosion in the street. Who could pull off this attack and how did they do it?
Well, CNN has learned that Israel is behind the attack. "The New York Times" reports Israel hid explosive material within a new batch of pagers. Now they say these pagers, ordered within recent months from a Taiwanese company, Gold Apollo, by Hezbollah, were tampered with before getting to Lebanon.
As little as one to two ounces of explosive materials was implanted next to the battery in each pager. A switch embedded that could be triggered remotely. And at 3:30 p.m. in Lebanon, those pagers received a message that looked like it was coming from Hezbollah leadership. That message, it activated the explosives.
I want to bring in Bob Baer, a former CIA officer. Bob, when I heard this story, I couldn't believe it was real. We know around 3,000 pagers were actually purchased from that Taiwanese company. And that company says the pagers were made by European distributor. But at some point, those pagers were obviously tampered with before they reached Lebanon. What kind of operation would it take to make all of this come together and happen?
ROBERT BAER, FORMER OFFICER, CIA: Well, for a start, the Israelis have no peer when it comes to this. They inserted themselves in the distribution network. They got every single phone, put high explosives in it, probably hidden, a mini detonator, and a signal that would set this thing off. It was encoded. It has to be encoded as well. And the phones, you know, if you've got 10 to 15 grams, I mean, the pager is way about the same. I mean, you can't tell. And it was just a matter of waiting until, politically, it's the right time to attack Hezbollah.
But keep in mind that Hezbollah has shifted away from cell phones. They know how dangerous they are. They can all be tracked to one-way pagers. These guys get a signal, they go make a phone call when they come in, and they're un-trackable. You can rig them with explosives.
COATES: I mean, just thinking about that and the amount of product that would be used and just thinking about that chain of custody from one entity to the next to be able to accomplish this, repackage, have it distributed still and none be the wiser, is really unbelievably significant. But we also know that these were all purchased, I mean, in recent months. Do you think that all of this planning would only take months?
BAER: Well, the Israelis are practiced at this. The famous case is 1996 when they killed the engineer with a cell phone, just a tiny amount of explosive put in the phone. He held it to his ear. It explodes. It blows half his head off. So, they're very good. They practiced this. And it's just a matter of having their agents on the ground, either in Europe or Taiwan, getting in the middle of the distribution network. And then, you know, a thousand phones, a bunch of techs, you can do it in a week.
COATES: It's pretty striking to think about this. And, of course, they made a big point of talking about that they were made by -- purchased from a Taiwanese company, made by a European distributor. Clearly, there are concerns about maybe either investigation, retaliation or otherwise along each step of this supply chain.
BAER: Well, I think Hezbollah better look at this as a serious threat, sloppy on their part that they didn't inspect these pages when they arrived. I mean, that would be standard, especially if they're coming from Europe or Taiwan because the Israelis are planted well across Europe and the Far East. So, I don't know what Hezbollah was thinking about.
[23:45:03]
But let's keep in mind that this is Hezbollah's major communication network now that they gave up cell phones and push-to-talk radios and the rest of it, which are all trackable. So how are they going to communicate in the future? And the real question is, is this a prelude, these pagers blowing up, to an Israeli incursion into Lebanon? And that's the big question in the Middle East today.
COATES: We have to have that answer. Bob Baer, thank you for joining.
BAER: Thank you.
COATES: Up next, is Elon Musk's X the internet's town square or a digital hellscape that might just influence his year's election? Well, the authors of a new book on the soon-to-be trillionaire share their reporting and their thoughts, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:49:57]
COATES: Elon Musk's near full turn to right wing wrecking ball was almost complete, a day after he wondered out loud to his nearly 200 million followers on X why -- quote -- "no one is even trying to assassinate Biden and Kamala" -- unquote. He responded to a tweet suggesting that if Kamala Harris and Tim Walz secure the presidency, their first move would be to ban X and arrest Elon Musk.
Musk's response, yep, the barrage of wild tweets is so beyond the pale, it's sometimes hard to keep track of. Remember, just last week, Taylor Swift endorsed Harris and Walz and signed off with "Childless Cat Lady." Musk responded to Swift, "I will give you a child." Let this sink in for a second. After all of this, the social media platform formerly known as Twitter, which he bought, by the way, for 44 billion bucks, it is financially flailing.
Fortune reporting since Musk's acquisition in 2022, the company's revenue is down 85% when adjusted for inflation. And the company's valuation will. Fidelity says it's now worth $11.8 billion. That's down 73% from Musk's purchasing price.
And I want to bring in two people who are familiar with Elon Musk, more so than most frankly, Kate Conger and Ryan Mac, and two "New York Times" tech reporters. They are out with a new book called "Character Limit: How Elon Musk Destroyed Twitter."
Well, that's the point. Let's get to it as well. Kate, I'll begin with you. Look, Musk was warned early on that his tweets and everything else could actually hurt Twitter. You've seen the numbers we just talked about. Financially, it empirically is failing. But what was his goal in actually having it? Was it to be financially profitable or something else?
KATE CONGER, CO-AUTHOR, "CHARACTER LIMIT": I think Musk's goal with Twitter has always been more ideological than financial. And he said that from the outset of the deal. He said he didn't care if he made money or lost money, but he wanted to bring this vision of free speech to the platform. And, you know, he has certainly done that. He has not held back at all in the kinds of things that he posts, and he has been very unbridled in the kind of speech that he promotes on the platform as well.
COATES: Yet they do have these community standards. He has violated a number of them in his own posts and beyond. He has been called to task for that very point. But also, the success of X is tied in part to some of his other companies as well. He can't necessarily let it go down the tube entirely without compromising the financial success of other companies as well.
RYAN MAC, CO-AUTHOR, "CHARACTER LIMIT": He's still a businessman at the end of the day. He's the richest man with a net worth around $250 billion on any given day. But he runs Space X, runs Tesla and, you know, it takes a lot of money to run something like Twitter. He has more than a billion dollars a year in interest payments alone on the debt he raised to buy the company.
COATES: Hmm.
MAC: And, you know, that is financially impactful for anyone. You know, he has to cover that. And so, he has to run the company accordingly and just can't let it go down the drain.
COATES: I mean, when I hear these numbers, I think it's like Monopoly money at this point. I mean, if you're bordering on being a trillionaire, they're probably thinking, oh, I'm losing some money here and there. It's unfathomable to most people. But talk to me about the chaos that really did ensue when he actually did purchase it.
CONGER: It was, I think, beyond even our expectations after covering all of the chaos of the deal and his attempts to back out. He really, like you said earlier, came in with a wrecking ball and moved very quickly to lay off 75% of the staff and roll out a number of changes to the platform that allowed more misinformation to spread. And so, it has been very challenging for advertisers to want to spend their money there.
COATES: And he has also been spreading conspiracy theories. I mean, there's the Paul Pelosi conspiracy theory at one point in time. It also led to, I think, an engineer quitting and also telling off Elon Musk to his face, at the very least.
MAC: Yeah.
COATES: Tell me about that.
MAC: That was the opening of our book, and it was a data scientist who actually had a lot of faith in his takeover and wanted to give him a chance. And within days of taking over the company, he tweets out this conspiracy theory about Paul Pelosi and his attacker. You know, it was a jolted lover, is what he said. He eventually deleted it. But at that point in time, it was, you know, enough for that data scientist to understand that, you know, his ownership was not going to be for him, and he quit.
COATES: I mean, you're talking about individual employees, and you've got these, you know, obviously big advertisers. In one part, I mean, when he was talking about the great replacement theory, this was, to say the least, alienating to a number of advertisers and companies. And he also -- I mean, advertisers like Apple, I think, IBM, Disney, as just part of it. That's very consequential in the overall landscape, and yet he doesn't seem to care.
CONGER: No, and it's -- you know, the things that he posts are quite shocking. It's things that you would normally see on the fringe of the internet being brought into the mainstream on this massive account with a huge following. And he doesn't seem too concerned with the advertisers.
[23:55:01]
We've seen that a lot in our reporting on Musk. When he gets backed into a corner and challenged, he just doubles down and fights back.
COATES: You talk about free speech --
MAC: Uh-hmm.
COATES: -- and yet he has been criticized for suppressing some speech as well over the course of his, you know, ownership. Do you think that the free speech as an ideological endeavor is really what his goal was?
MAC: It was a great message to send to people when he took over the company. But he has an odd view of free speech. He's going to follow free speech according to the laws in a local area, which he technically hasn't done either. But I think of something like India, for example, where the government has ordered him to take down posts from the BBC, for example. And he has done that.
On the same, you know, on that same level, you know, he has taken or he hasn't complied with take down requests in Australia and Brazil, and he has had battles with those governments. So, it has been a very kind of pick and choose method, I guess, with him.
COATES: I mean, this book really illuminates some of the questions that are so looming for everyone, trying to understand him as a figure, as a personality, and him as this powerful person who, frankly, is getting contracts from the government worth billions of dollars. He can't be ignored, and this book explores just the why. Thank you so much to both of you.
CONGER: Thank you.
MAC: Thank you.
COATES: The book again is called "Character Limit," and I want to thank them for joining us today. And also, thank you all for watching. "Anderson Cooper 360" is next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
