Return to Transcripts main page

Laura Coates Live

FBI Arrests Judge For Allegedly Helping Immigrant Avoid Arrest; Trade War Enters Bizarre He Said, Xi Said Stage; Alleged George Santos's Victim Speaks Out; Thousands To Attend Funeral For Pope Francis. Aired 11p-12a ET

Aired April 25, 2025 - 23:00   ET

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

ABBY PHILLIP, CNN HOST: "The Whole Story with Anderson Cooper," it airs this Sunday night at 8 p.m. on CNN.

Thank you very much for everyone joining tonight and watching "NewsNight." You can catch me any time on your favorite social media X, Instagram and TikTok. "Laura Coates Live" starts right now.

LAURA COATES, CNN HOST: Do you know how the Trump administration promised to go after anyone who stood in the way of his immigration crackdown? Well, tonight, they're going after a judge in Wisconsin.

FBI Director Kash Patel is putting out this picture showing the arrest of Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge Hannah Dugan. He writes, no one is above the law. Now the FBI alleges that she helped an undocumented immigrant evade arrest at the courthouse.

Attorney General Pam Bondi, well, she's outraged.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PAM BONDI, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL: Shame on her. It was a domestic violence case, of all cases, and she's protecting a criminal defendant over victims of crime.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Well, Judge Dugan now faces two charges. One for obstruction, the other for concealing an individual from arrest.

Now the FBI says that individual is Eduardo Flores-Ruiz. He's an immigrant from Mexico facing domestic violence charges. Now this allegedly all unfolded actually a week ago. A federal agent showed up at the Milwaukee Courthouse to arrest Flores-Ruiz at his hearing.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WHITNEY WILD, CNN LAW ENFORCEMENT CORRESPONDENT: When Judge Dugan learned that there were multiple federal agents who were there to arrest him on an administrative warrant, she became very upset. In fact, at one point, she pulled some of these agents aside. She arranged for a call with the chief judge, where the chief judge insisted to these federal agents that they must only arrest him in a public area of the court. (END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Judge Dugan went back into the courtroom allegedly, and the charging documents say that Flores-Ruiz, his attorney, then moved toward the courtroom door that led into a public area of the courthouse.

Now the FBI alleges that this happened next, though, saying -- quote -- "The courtroom deputy then saw Judge Dugan get up and heard Judge Dugan say something like, 'wait, come with me.' Despite having been advised of the administrative warrant for the arrest of Flores-Ruiz, Judge Dugan then escorted Flores-Ruiz and his counsel out of the courtroom through the jury door, which leads to then a nonpublic area of the courthouse. Flores-Ruiz then left the courthouse and was arrested after a foot chase."

CNN has obtained a statement released on Judge Dugan's behalf and it says, Judge Hannah C. Dugan has committed herself to the rule of law and the principles of due process for her entire career as a lawyer and a judge. Judge Dugan will defend herself vigorously and looks forward to being exonerated.

Now that's the legal side of all this, but can't be about the politics, can you? Because the administration is front and center in spotlighting the case. You saw the image of Dugan's arrest released by the FBI director, Kash Patel. Now he also posted about the case before the charges were even unsealed, only to delete it and then repost it later. And the attorney general, Pam Bondi, says that Judge Dugan, well, she's just the start.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BONDI: I think some of these judges think they are beyond and above the law, and they are not. And we're sending a very strong message today. If you are harboring a fugitive, we don't care who you are. If you are helping hide one, if you are giving a TDA member guns, anyone who is illegally in this country, we will come after you and we will prosecute you. We will find you.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: But on the other side, it's a very different message. Here's one Wisconsin Democrat who personally worked with Judge Dugan.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RYAN CLANCY, MEMBER, WISCONSIN STATE ASSEMBLY: This is really just an attack on the judicial system, which is historically a check and balance on unobstructed executive power. That's what we're seeing from the Trump administration.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: With me now, Milwaukee's mayor, Cavalier Johnson. Glad to have you here, mayor. I have to ask you because you held a press conference today, and you said that Judge Dugan's arrest has a chilling effect. Can you explain what you mean?

MAYOR CAVALIER JOHNSON, MILWAUKEE, WISCONSIN: Hi, Laura. Nice to see you again. And, yes, I do believe that the -- the arrest of Judge Dugan has a chilling effect on individuals who otherwise would be going to the Milwaukee County Courthouse to partake in regular courthouse judicial proceedings.

I'm talking about individuals who are victims of crime. I'm talking about individuals who witness crime. Those folks, who then after seeing an elected judge be arrested in the courthouse, not being willing then to go to court.

[23:04:58]

And when folks who witness crime, folks who are victims of crime, when they don't go to the courthouse, when they don't participate in judicial proceedings, it makes our communities less safe. That is what the message is.

And the -- the -- the heavy-handed approach of the Trump administration has been trying to employ here with immigration enforcement has had that effect on my community here in Milwaukee, and I don't want to see that continue to happen here.

COATES: I certainly can understand the chilling effect that you describe. Somebody is less inclined to maybe even report a crime, let alone actually testify with or without a subpoena.

But then there is the other side of the issue, mayor, where someone would say, well, if this person is not legally supposed to be in the country, what recourse ought ICE or others to have in order to make sure that they are removed?

JOHNSON: So, there are ways to make an arrest such as the arrest that happened to Judge Dugan. She's not -- it's not as if she's a flight risk. She's an elected official. I mean, she was arrested in the courthouse. Usually, in a case like this, an indictment would be made, an appearance in court would be made. There's not an arrest that's made in the -- the show that happened. There was this large law enforcement presence in the courthouse.

And it was basically showboating from the Trump administration to show that, hey, you know, we're, you know, these big tough guys, and we're going to take on anybody that does this. But that's one thing. There's a consequence to doing it that way though because it does send that chilling effect to folks who otherwise would be coming for regular court proceedings. That's what I'm concerned about.

And in Milwaukee, over the course of the last number of years, we've seen successful reductions in crime, successful reductions in homicides, successful reductions in nonfatal shootings and the like. All these crimes that are identified by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, we've seen reductions, and I want to see that continue. It's going to make our work on the ground in communities, in Wisconsin across the United States harder when the FBI and the Trump administration are taking the actions that they are. COATES: What do you say -

JOHNSON: -- going to participate in --

COATES: Excuse me. What do you say to Attorney General Pam Bondi, who seemed intimate (ph) because the person who was the subject of that warrant is accused of domestic violence and battery? Does that make a difference to you about the fact that this person was involved in the judge's alleged decision to have him not go through that front door?

JOHNSON: Let me tell you, as mayor, I have said consistently since I've been in this job that I want every individual that causes death, harm or destruction in Milwaukee to be held to account. That's what I'm saying. I want for individuals in our community to be able to go to the courthouse, to be able to hold individuals accountable when they create community harm. I want that to happen.

The problem here with the Trump administration's approach to this, the FBI's approach to this, is that it's going to discourage those very same people from going to the courthouse and holding those individuals accountable.

And I don't want see that in Milwaukee. I want to make sure that our community is safer and safer. But these actions send us to the opposite direction. That's wrong for Milwaukee and it's wrong for communities across this country.

COATES: Mayor Cavalier Johnson, thank you so much for joining us.

JOHNSON: Thank you.

COATES: I want to continue our conversation with retired California superior court judge, LaDoris Cordell, and CNN national security analyst and former DHS assistant secretary, Juliette Kayyem. Thank you to you both.

Somehow, this story, I think, was anticipated at some point given how everything was unfolding in our nation. And judge, I want to ask you about this because the indictment alleges that Judge Dugan escorted Flores-Ruiz -- quote -- "through a door -- through a jury door to avoid his arrest." Is that an unusual step by a judge? What would you have done?

LADORIS CORDELL, RETIRED CALIFORNIA SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE: Well, thank you for -- for having me on. What the judge did, in my view, was absolutely nothing illegal, and I would have done the same thing if I were in her place.

And here's why I say that. The affidavit supporting her arrest says that there was -- ICE had an administrative warrant. And -- and so, an administrative warrant is not a warrant within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution because an ICE warrant is not supported by a showing of probable cause of a criminal offense.

An ICE warrant is not issued by a court, a judge or a magistrate. So, an ICE warrant does not grant an immigration enforcement officer any special power to compel anybody in the courthouse to cooperate with the request.

So, when Judge Dugan, and she clearly in the affidavit said, you don't have a judicially issued warrant, this is an ICE warrant, she had no obligation to obey it, to abide it. She didn't obstruct or interfere with anybody. So --

COATES: Well, judge, let me ask you --

CORDELL: -- it is unfortunate that Pam Bondi --

COATES: Excuse me, your honor. I do want to -- I want you to finish your point, but I -- so, if that's the case, right, she --

CORDELL: Yes.

COATES: -- understands full, as you do, of course, the idea of having some matters litigated in front of a judge or discussed later on.

[23:10:02]

CORDELL: Uh-hmm.

COATES: Would it have been more prudent? And again, these are all allegations. Nothing is proven. But assuming the allegations are true, would it have been more judicially prudent for her to have argued this after the fact as opposed to ushering him to a different location?

CORDELL: So, here's the problem with that. The courthouse and the courtrooms, in my view, they're -- they're sanctuaries. In that, everyone who was charged with a criminal offense is guaranteed due process.

If she had gone along with the program and adhere to an administrative warrant that has no real legal enforcement, then there is no guarantee that that young man would have disappeared, would have been denied due process. There's plenty of examples of that under this administration. So, no, no, absolutely not. She protested and said, this is not a judicial warrant, and she didn't have to follow it. So, in my view, she didn't obstruct anything.

COATES: Juliette, let me bring you into this because, obviously, Mayor Johnson says the incident has a chilling effect on the judicial system. You have a law enforcement perspective, and I want to get into specifically what judge is talking -- Judge Cordell is talking about, this idea of the distinction between the administrative and a judicial warrant. Should that have been the consideration of this judge?

JULIETTE KAYYEM, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: So, from the affidavit, it's hard to tell what triggered her concern. And I -- I -- I'm going to be honest here. The affidavit, taken as it is, would make you wonder, and it just honestly would make you wonder what her behavior was like. That's fine. I mean, it's going to be litigated.

The more important part of this, the reason why we should be concerned, is not whether the FBI or the DOJ is going to prove a case against her. She could very well be exonerated. It's the performative nature of everything that led up to that.

This -- you cannot treat today as just a case because there are cases in which DOJ has gone after judges who have done things illegally and -- and even helped unlawful immigrants. Those cases do exist.

What the problem is, as we're showing here, is the arrest in the courtroom, the -- the tweets, the performative aspects of it that are consistent with the tax on the law firms, Elon Musk putting pictures of judges, it's a -- it's a performative hostility towards the rule of law.

COATES: Well, Juliette, on that point --

KAYYEM: Even if --

COATES: Excuse me. On that point, though, if -- if an arrest in a courthouse is performative, then do you agree that an ICE arrest in a courthouse is equally performative?

KAYYEM: So -- so there's two parts to this. So, the ICE used to be -- so we have to remember, why are we at this moment? Because the Trump administration always wants us to be at this moment. So there used to be areas that would be called, you know, sensitive locations, normally hospitals, religious institutions and schools where there was just sort of a social contract that we're not going to do it there.

In most instances, court houses were divided in between the public space because criminals sometimes are undocumented, as we know, and the space where justice is served, the courtroom. And that distinction is important because of what happened, because you don't want judges sitting on cases where they have to deliver due process to be in the middle of whether this person should be deported or taken in by ICE.

So, the judge rightfully sorts of knowing -- Judge Dugan, rightfully sort of knowing the rules, tries to find the chief judge of the court, the administrator of court conduct. That doesn't work out, and then the rest of the day unfolds. So -- so whatever she did, I think, is the -- the Trump administration put this front and center because they wanted the performance, they wanted the tweets.

COATES: Chief Judge Cordell, on that point, let me ask you, obviously, there is a political backdrop from which both of you speak. We obviously understand the context of El Salvador and a Maryland man being wrongfully deported, according to the administration, and this back and forth. But should this Milwaukee Judge be taking that national consideration into context when she is deciding whether or not to allow the ICE agents to put this person into custody? Should that be the consideration?

CORDELL: So, here's -- here's -- to answer your question, if any judge allows ICE with administrative warrants or not to come into the courthouse and to roam the courthouse halls, then any defendant has -- it's a no win for any defendant. So, a defendant has to go to state court because if the defendant doesn't show up for the hearing, an arrest warrant issue.

COATES: Right

CORDELL: They have to go.

[23:14:57]

But if they go and there's ICE walking around, then they're going to get picked up. So, they would stay home. But then if they stay home, then they're violating a state court order to show up in court. You can't have it both ways. This is a no win for defendants. It's a no win for state court judges.

They did this to embarrass the judge and to try to frighten other state court judges. And I say state court, I am waiting to see if ICE would dare march into a federal judge's courtroom to grab a defendant. It's not going to happen.

COATES: Juliette --

CORDELL: They are picking on the state court judges. In my view, it's just not going to happen.

COATES: Well, Juliette, on that point --

CORDELL: So --

COATES: Excuse me. I'm sorry, your honor. I -- I always -- I always feel like the little prosecutor in me is like, oh, no, I interrupted a judge. Excuse me. Give me one second.

(LAUGHTER)

But, Juliette, let me bring you into that point because the obvious argument that the administration is raising is that, no, they're not trying to embarrass the judge, and no, they're not trying to chill a witness or victim of a crime's desire to come forward, they are trying to ensure that those who should be here lawfully remain and those who are not are deported. Is that enough to tilt the balance of the scale in favor of having done this?

KAYYEM: No. I mean, look, they -- they always put up these false sorts of choices. There's no Democrat -- there's no law-abiding Democrat who would say they want unlawful immigrants who commit crimes to stick around this country. But we also have rules and laws called -- and some of them are called due process that we -- we now know that the administration is defying. We know the American public is not happy about that just based on recent polling.

So, the -- the idea that it's either, you know, get the guy and throw him into a van or let him run free and kill a bunch of people, it's just -- that's just a dichotomy that the Republicans -- that the Trump administration wants people to believe because they can't believe that there are law-abiding Democrats even who -- who approve of the rule of law and also criminal prosecutions. It seems -- that seems inconceivable to them. So, at this stage, look, they wanted this, and so they're going to have to face it in the sense that now they have to prove the case. And in the meanwhile, we ignore the performative nature of it because that's what they want.

COATES: Judge Cordell, Juliette, this is not the end of this discussion. Thank you both.

CORDELL: Yeah. Thank you.

KAYYEM: Thank you.

COATES: It's near impossible, right, to try to strip the politics out of this arrest. Democrats tonight are warning the line has been crossed. But is this a hill they plan to die on? And might new polling impact how Republicans react? We're going to debate about that next.

Plus, new signs that patience on the trade war is running out after President Trump makes several wild claims, several more wild claims that just don't seem to add up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:20:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BONDI: If you are destroying evidence, if you are obstructing justice when you have victims sitting in a courtroom of domestic violence, and you're escorting a criminal defendant out a backdoor, it will not be tolerated, and it is a crime in the United States of America. Doesn't matter who you are.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Attorney General Pam Bondi warning judges who crossed the Trump administration -- quote -- "We will prosecute you, we will find you." Some American citizens showing their disagreement, gathering outside the Milwaukee County Courthouse in protest of the arrest of Wisconsin Judge Hannah Dugan.

Joining me now, former Obama White House senior director Nayyera Haq and CNN political commentator David Urban.

David, you heard the attorney general, Pam Bondi, and she has been attacking what she has called deranged judges. You saw the FBI director, Kash Patel, posting that photograph of her being arrested. We don't actually know her side of the story and, obviously, the lawyers within us reserve judgment. But should the administration reserve judgment

DAVID URBAN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, FORMER TRUMP CAMPAIGN SENIOR ADVISER: I think, look, in this case, I -- I -- I have a hard time finding any sympathy. Right? This is -- this is a gentleman here we're talking about who is in -- who broke two laws.

He came to the country illegally, crossed the border illegally, then he's in court for spousal abuse, for abusing his wife or his partner. I'm not sure who he abused, but presumably a woman. And -- and they're protesting outside the courthouse like he's some sort of hero. This guy is not a hero. He's a criminal. Of course, he's -- he's presumed innocent until he's found --

COATES: Of course.

URBAN: But -- but -- but he's in court for -- for abusing a woman, theoretically, I'm guessing. Right? That's why he's there. Not a man.

COATES: Well, there are two very different --

URBAN: Domestic violence.

COATES: You can't abuse a man. I know that.

URBAN: I understand. But I'm saying -- so I'm assuming that he has abused a woman in this case. And the judge in this case decides -- she sees the ICE agents in the back of the courtroom, and she makes decision right there that I'm going to break the law, I'm going to let him sneak out the back door to avoid these agents. And that's just wrong.

Look, if you want to -- if you want to protest, if you want to have -- write an op-ed in the -- in the -- in the paper about how bad it was or protest, that's fine, but you can't break the law.

NAYYERA HAQ, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST, FORMER OBAMA WHITE HOUSE SENIOR DIRECTOR: Here's what's interesting --

URBAN: You just can't break it. It doesn't make it right.

COATES: Nayyera?

HAQ: Here's what interesting about the -- the facts in the case and what's -- what's in the -- the statements, is that the -- as this guy, who was supposed to be arrested, goes down the elevator, there's a DEA agent with him in the elevator, and then he goes out the public exit, which is where the agents find him and arrest him. So, I I'm having a hard time to understand why this was such a -- this has been blown up to such a degree.

COATES: I just want to make sure on the facts, as we know them. There was a foot chase that occurred, apparently. But the idea of him not going into a public area, instead one that was reserved for the jury to go out of is the crux of the issue.

[23:24:59]

But I think you pinned on a very important point, and that is we don't know all the facts of this case, and people have very strong opinions because of the political discussions that are happening on the backdrop of it. This is one case, but it represents others and, of course, this tension between what Democrats and Republicans feel about the way the administration is handling it.

And actually, two new polls today show a majority of Americans disapprove of Donald Trump's handling of immigration, and about half say deportation efforts have gone too far. Nayyera, do you agree?

HAQ: Oh, I -- I do given that we're seeing a lot of the arrests being done, a lot of the -- it's a lot of pomp and circumstance, but we're not seeing the actual evidence and we're not seeing the numbers. All assessments, all discussions right now are that ICE is not meeting the benchmarks and the numbers that they were given by the president. So, we do see a lot of more performative law enforcement.

I find it fascinating that we're in this moment where, yes, there's a system of checks and balances, where there's rule of law, and there's law enforcement. President Trump likes to look at the enforcement piece and ignore many of the rules.

COATES: Well, you know, David, lawmakers from both sides, they have very strong opinions. Surprise, surprise on this particular issue. And they've been reacting very quickly. You have Congressman, Democrat, Greg Landsman saying -- quote -- "Republicans can no longer claim to be a party of law and order." Republican Congressman Troy Nehls is declaring "lock them up." Again, this has not been litigated yet.

But politically speaking, is there -- is there a risk in being very definitive about how this case should come out right now?

URBAN: Listen, I -- I think viscerally, people feel, especially because in this specific fact pattern. Right? This person was there for a bunch of parking tickets. It might be different. Right? But this person was there for spousal or domestic abuse.

COATES: That's Pam Bondi's point.

URBAN: Domestic abuse. Right? And so, that -- it's -- it's -- it's pretty -- I -- I think if you polled most Americans on the specific case, they would -- they would find it -- they'd say, go for it.

COATES: What about the fact that there's an allegation that this is performative, not in the sense of the numbers being lacked and then lacking for ICE, but instead this is a threat to judges who dare to challenge Donald Trump?

URBAN: Not so sure. There was a judge -- I'd say -- you know, there are a lot of -- there are a lot of police departments, right, that don't want to -- that are not helping ICE, that are going to look the other way and turn the other thing

So, I think it's a -- it's a -- it's a kind of a messaging moment for the Trump administration saying, look, we're serious about this. If you if you break the law, if you help continue to break the law, we're going to -- we're going to come after you as well. HAQ: Well, the Trump administration has made it very clear that they want to go after local officials who are not complying with their federal orders. So, there's that tension.

I find it very interesting that this is happening in Wisconsin. Right? A state that has been won by narrow margins, a state that just had a million dollars and more spent by Elon Musk, a White House employee, to try to sway, who would be getting a Supreme Court judge.

There are numerous cases right now going through Wisconsin State Court about how voting can be done, what counts and what doesn't count, absentee ballot. So, singling out or finding an example of a circuit court judge in Wisconsin, I don't think that's an accident.

COATES: Is it the end of it?

URBAN: I -- I don't know. We'll see. Right? If -- if -- if the lesson was learned. You know, there was the tweet from the -- was it the Costa Rican president, Colombian president that President Trump sent out with the FAFO tweet? Right?

COATES: Hmm.

URBAN: I think that if there continues to be more of this, I think you'll continue to see more of performative -- performative arrests like this where you continue to be less in teaching. Right? There's a teaching moment. Got kids. Right? This is a teaching moment, children. Pay attention. Right?

HAQ: I think the FAFO applies to the Trump administration as well.

(LAUGHTER)

Let's see who -- we'll see what happens in --

COATES: Cliffhanger on FAFO.

URBAN: Listen, I just think that you're -- you're correct. With the beginning of this administration, you know, when Trump first got elected, people were afraid there could be these mass deportations. Right? People are going to be shipped out in buses. And -- and there are 1.5 million people with adjudicated orders to be -- to be sent away right now, deported. And -- and I think the -- the DHS and ICE are having a tough time tracking those individuals down and getting them out quick enough. And so, I think the administration --

HAQ: Meanwhile, there's somebody sitting in El Salvador that we know, you know, shouldn't be there, and that's an easy enough one to resolve.

COATES: Hmm. I'll leave it there.

HAQ: Comply with the judge's order.

COATES: I'll leave it there, everyone. Nayyera, David, thank you both. Up next, how many trade deals does the president have waiting in the wings? Eighteen? None? 200? Well, the numbers, they keep changing, and there's still no clarity on any talks with China. It's he said, she said. And no one knows who's telling the truth. So, what is Trump going to do about it? Anthony Scaramucci is going to be standing by with the next move he thinks is about to happen.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:30:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COATES: So, what's the end game in Trump's trade war? For weeks, the president has been saying the goal is to foster fair trade by cutting deals. But today, the president had this to say when asked by "Time" magazine how he would consider the prospect of -- quote -- "20% or 30% or even 50% tariffs in a year from now." By the way, Trump responded with two words, total victory.

Why? Trump says -- quote -- "because the country will be making a fortune." And when "Time" asked Trump when those deals would be announced, his response was just, I've made 200 deals. They didn't reveal much about who these deals are with, just that we should expect to hear about them in three to four weeks.

With me now, former Trump White House communications director, Anthony Scaramucci. He is also the founder and managing partner of SkyBridge Capital.

[23:35:03]

Anthony, good to see you this Friday night. Look, Trump is claiming he has already made 200 deals. And today, he told reporters on Air Force One, it'll -- it's unlikely he'll grant another 90-day pause on reciprocal tariffs. So, how does the trade war end, and do you believe these 200 deals really are in the works?

ANTHONY SCARAMUCCI, AUTHOR, FOUNDER AND MANAGING PARTNER FOR SKYBRIDGE CAPITAL, FORMER WHITE HOUSE COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR: Well, I think the only reason why he said 200 deals, he was probably saying 400, and one of his aides said, you know, there's 190 countries in the U.N. So, you know, just say 10 more than actually exist. So, I -- yeah, of course, there's no deals getting done.

And just so people know, when you talk to former trade representatives or there's like a Mike Froman or just pick somebody, they'll tell you that a deal takes sometimes 18 months to do with one country. So, the notion that we would corral 70 or 80 countries and try to get trade deals done in a two, three-month period of time doesn't make any sense.

Moreover, our biggest trading partners have -- have stuck it back to the president. So, the Chinese are not even negotiating with them, won't come to the table. He says they are, but everybody in the media and everybody in China knows that they're not. And so, you're asking me how it's going to end. I think he has to capitulate and eventually will. I mean, you know, the good news for the markets, and I think the reason why there were some bullish activity this week, is that the system is holding. The Supreme Court held on the deportation. Jerome Powell held on, I'm not going anywhere, and Trump knows if he goes to fire him, he'll implode the market. So, I think this ends in tears for Donald Trump.

He'll -- he'll declare victory, Laura, but it ends nowhere near what he's saying to "Time" magazine. It'll -- it'll be probably where it started or there about, and people will be like, wow, that was a disaster. That hurt the credibility of the United States.

COATES: Well, if that's the case, that domino effect and collateral damage would hurt more than just maybe provoking the tears of Donald Trump. Today, though, Trump continued to claim that he has spoken to Chinese President Xi Jinping. And Beijing, as you know, is denying this and saying today -- quote -- "The United States should not confuse the public."

I actually want to read the exchange that Trump had with "Time" reporter, Scaramucci, on this because Trump was asked, will you call President Xi if he doesn't call you? Trump says, no. You won't? Nope. Has he called you yet? Yep. When did he call you? Trump says, he's called. I don't think it's a sign of weakness on his behalf. But would you think it's a sign of weakness if you called him? I don't.

I mean, this back and forth, why is Trump playing this game, according to Beijing? Is he jeopardizing potential negotiations?

SCARAMUCCI: I mean, it's just -- it's just insecurity. You know, he's -- he has overplayed his hand. He -- he's talking about having the cards and the chest and all this sort of stuff. He just overplayed his hand.

You know, at the at the end of the day, question is, can a 5,000-year civilization with that type of culture that has seen deprivation and starvation in the last 80 years outlast a president that has, I don't know, you tell me 19 months of the midterms, 18 months of the midterms? And the answer is they can and they will.

And I think that they'd handle themselves in a very even-tempered way. Moreover, they've gone to other trading partners of theirs and said, hey, knock it off, don't overly team with the United States.

Just imagine the loss of influence that the president has caused, not just in the trading system, but the soft power of the United States around the world. And again, don't go by me. Take a look at the bond market, you know. Take a look at where the tenure is on April 2nd or where it is today.

COATES: And by the way, look -- look at what billionaire Trump supporter and Citadel CEO Ken Griffin had to say. He follows your point. He gave a speech in Stanford. He said -- quote -- "He dreams of giving people their dignity back, and I applaud him for having that dream. But the dream is not going to come true. These jobs are not coming back to America."

You have other CEOs like Jamie Dimon who've also been critical of the policy and the idea of the overall credibility and brand of the United States and its markets.

Do you share their concern or even the fact that that might influence Trump to course correct?

SCARAMUCCI: Yeah, I share their concern, and I hope and pray that additional Fortune 50 and hedge fund managers continue to speak that concern and speak the truth. They've been -- they've been chilled out by what has happened to the law firms, and their boards are telling them not to say anything because you could end up getting into a big fight with the administration, and they can flex the government on you, which is obviously something the founders wouldn't have wanted.

But just look at capital flows, Laura. Look at the FTSE and the DAX. They're closer to recessions than us. That's the U.K. economy and the German economy.

[23:39:58]

And they're doing better than the U.S. stock market since -- quote, unquote -- "Liberation Day." So, yeah, we all -- we all know that it's wrong. There are guys inside the administration like Scott Bessent that know that it's wrong. In one of his last letters as a hedge fund manager, he talked about the destructive power of tariffs and trade barriers and how important it would be not to do that to the trading system. And so, he's there now trying to figure it out inside that vortex.

So, listen, it's not working. Everybody knows that it isn't working. It's raising the cost of capital, and it's making it very hard for businesses to predict what's going to happen.

And as you and I both know, because of what they're doing with ICE and all this other stuff, we've got tourism down as well. The airlines are saying that they can't give you visibility on the year --

COATES: Hmm.

SCARAMUCCI: -- and we're probably going to lose $90 billion in tourism.

COATES: Anthony Scaramucci, not the end of the conversation. Thank you so much.

SCARAMUCCI: Good to be here. Thank you.

COATES: Still ahead, sentencing day for George Santos and redemption day for some of his alleged victims. One of them decided to show up in court today to see the punishment firsthand. I wonder, was it enough for him? And what did he make of the tears that Santos shed in court? Well, he'll tell us next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) [23:45:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COATES: Well, tonight, a stunning conclusion to the saga of lies, deception, and fraud from former New York Congressman George Santos. A federal judge sentencing Santos to more than seven years in prison for charges of aggravated identity theft and wire fraud.

Prosecutors say he fraudulently took COVID-19 unemployment benefits, misused campaign funds, and lied about his personal finances. He pleaded guilty to the charges back in August, you recall, and was ordered to pay restitution of $373,000. Also, he was expelled from Congress over ethics violations.

Reports inside the courtroom today say Santos was sobbing during his sentencing, telling the judge he -- quote -- "betrayed the confidence entrusted in me. I cannot rewrite the past, but I can control the road ahead. I have tried my best."

My next guest is a Navy veteran who alleges that he was scammed by Santos, saying the former congressman stole money from a GoFundMe for his dying dog. George Santos denies those allegations.

Richard Osteff joins me now. Richard, welcome back. You were in the courtroom today. What was it like, and why was it so important for you to be here even though the case or the claims you have against him were not related to this one?

RICHARD OSTHOFF, DISABLED VET WHO SAYS GEORGE SANTOS SCAMMED HIM: Well, my dog meant so much to me, that I had to go there for her, to keep her name in his mind.

I had a golden opportunity today, even after the court session was done, out in the parking lot where all the press was gathered. His lawyer got into the car last, and they allowed me a couple of seconds to get my head right inside the door and tell him, you killed my dog, George. And I backed away, I was peaceful about it, and he looked me right in the eye when I said that.

And I don't want him to forget what he did to me. I'm one of many people that he's done this stuff to, and I'm very proud about being vocal about it.

COATES: What was your -- did he, first of all, react to you when you said that? And if you can go backwards a little bit in the courtroom, can you just describe what you saw when that sentence was handed down?

OSTHOFF: He made a statement before the sentence, few minutes before the judge actually made her closing remarks. And he was sobbing, blubbering. You almost -- it was probably about a minute, minute and a half long, his statements. I couldn't make out a word he said. I'm glad you guys just put it up on the chyron because I couldn't understand a word he said in the courtroom.

I don't mean to be mean about it, but seeing him finally feel a sense of loss, now he kind of might figure out what I felt and what all these other people that he screwed over felt. He just lost seven years of his life, and he was only expecting to lose two.

I think he learned something here. I really do. And it was really, really encouraging for me to watch, to see that. I was with a bunch of other victims in the courtroom, and we were all silently, like, looking at each other, clapping our hands and stomping our feet whenever the judge would make another dig at him. She excoriated him in her statement.

COATES: And what was his reaction to each -- each moment?

OSTHOFF: He had his head in his hands. And his -- his lawyer had his left hand on George's back, rubbing his back the whole time. George was crying the whole time that the judge was talking. And she didn't pull any punches. She let him have it.

And I've -- if it was anybody else that hadn't screwed me over and killed my best friend and my dog, I wouldn't have felt as good as I did. It was elating. I mean, to see him finally feel bad about something. And I'm sorry that it took a seven-year prison sentence and $580,000 coming out of his wallet for him to finally cry about something.

And I don't even think those tears were real. I think he finally just figures he's getting punished, and that's what he's crying about in the courtroom. It's not because he hurt anybody. He doesn't care. He -- I don't think he remembers me. That's why I come to these events, all of his appearances, so that he'll see my face and he'll hear me. I've been to every one of his court appearances, and I have made myself heard.

COATES: Richard Osthoff, you have tonight as well. Thank you.

OSTHOFF: Thank you so much for this opportunity.

COATES: Still ahead, sunrise is nearing in Vatican City, head of Pope Francis's funeral. And tonight, we're going to take you there as we hear from a filmmaker who spent years documenting the pope, seeing him in a way, well, few others have. His reflections on the man and the solemn tradition we're about to witness, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:50:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COATES: Just a few hours, the world will turn to Vatican City for the funeral of Pope Francis. Officials expecting more than 250,000 people to come together in remembrance of the people's pope. A 70 heads of state and government are expected to attend, including President Trump and first lady Melania Trump, former President Joe Biden and his wife, Dr. Jill Biden.

[23:54:58] But hundreds of thousands of members of the public will join the ceremony, and CNN has spotted people already in line overnight hoping to attend.

Here to celebrate the legacy of Pope Francis is Evgeny Afineevsky. He is the director of the documentary "Francesco." Evgeny, thank you for being with us as we are awaiting this unbelievable ceremony to unfold. The world is about to mourn Pope Francis and continue. You've been invited to the funeral, I understand. Will you be attending?

EVGENY AFINEEVSKY, DIRECTOR, "FRANCESCO": No, I'm just still trying to protest the wars.

COATES: Hmm.

AFINEEVSKY: So, I'm intending not to attend the funeral. I spent last three hours before the casket was closed. I was sitting next to his casket yesterday until the basilica was closed and until the casket was closed.

COATES: Can you just describe some of these very special moments that you have had with someone that was so close to you? I saw that he -- even your son feels close to him.

AFINEEVSKY: You know, for the seven and a half years, even more, he'd been a part of my journey. He inspired me. He taught me a lot of things. He allowed me to be by his side and tell the stories that he wanted to bring to the world, bring spotlight to the issues that we as humans created in this world.

You know what? These stories are nonstop going in my mind, from the surprise birthday cake on the premiere of my movie when my birthday actually -- was my actual birthday and it was in pandemic to an amazing moment that I -- I forever will cherish.

COATES: You know, I had a chance to speak with Enes Kanter Freedom about how the pope inspired him with his humility, Evgeny, his -- his message of unity. He himself is not Catholic and neither of you, I should add, but there was something about Pope Francis that enabled him to just transcend beyond religious boundaries and inspire people of all faiths, wasn't there?

AFINEEVSKY: You know, it's -- it's hard to explain him today, in the past, because for me, he's still in the present. He's somebody who will always allow you to go first out of the room and switch light after you. He will always try to unite people who are fighting. He did so much behind the scenes for Ukrainian people. He did so much spotlight on the issues that even not Catholic issues because he was caring about people. He was against labels and frames around the people.

I remember how he said to me, Evgeny, people -- every person have the right, equal right, so we need to respect that. And it's -- it's all coming today as the mix of emotions for me, personally, because I lost somebody who was a mentor, staring about every human being no matter what color of skin, no matter what religious beliefs. And here, you see in front of you a Jew boy.

COATES: You know, in your documentary, you -- you point out not only some of the things you've spoken about, but how he really believed, you say, in the equality of people. He came out in support of same sex couples, for example. That was a really big deal in the time that he did and continues to be in his faith and in his position. What did that mean to you?

AFINEEVSKY: No. He said to me, who am I to judge? And it is, I think, somewhere in the Bible. It's written on the Bible, I think. It's -- it's his words. And he said, no matter of sexuality of the people, of their racial, of their color of the skin, of their beliefs, we need to respect everybody. And for me, this was very cherishable moments because, you know what? He wanted to welcome everybody to the church.

And yesterday, spending three last hours with him, I saw how many young people, younger generation, was going and passing next to his casket. And it was amazing to see this, that he brought back universal church no matter of -- from which parts of the world these people, no matter what religion they practice, but he tried to bring the bridges between people together, he tried to welcome everybody, and that was what remarkable with this Pope.

[00:00:00]

COATES: Evgeny, I know --

AFINEEVSKY: (INAUDIBLE).

COATES: Evgeny, I feel the deep love and respect that you had for the Pope, and I thank you for sharing with us this evening.

AFINEEVSKY: Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you.

COATES: Thank you all for watching. The funeral of Pope Francis begins at 3 a.m. Eastern, but CNN's coverage, well, that continues right now.