Return to Transcripts main page

Laura Coates Live

Trump Breaks Silence On Recession Fears; Judge Rules Against Trump In Battle With Law Firms; Trump To Mark Army's Birthday, And His, With A Military Parade; Trump Signs Order To End Federal Funding For PBS And NPR; Man Lets Hundreds Of Snakes Bite Him To Create Antivenom. Aired 11p-12a ET

Aired May 02, 2025 - 23:00   ET

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

[23:00:00]

TARAJI P. HENSON, AWARD-WINNING ACTRESS, MENTAL HEALTH ADVOCATE: I just met incredible new people there. The people there are beautiful. They pray over everything. The food, they always make offerings. And, I mean, you see them all in the street. And it just keeps you connected to why we're here. You know? We're here. Humans need humans. We need each other. And I just felt so welcome there.

ABBY PHILLIP, CNN ANCHOR AND SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Taraji, thank you so much for joining us. I'm excited for everybody to see this new episode of "My Happy Place." It airs on Sunday at 10 p.m. Eastern and Pacific right here on CNN.

And thank you so much for watching "NewsNight." We'll see you tomorrow morning at 10 a.m. with our conversation show "Table for Five." "Laura Coates Live" starts right now.

LAURA COATES, CNN HOST AND SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Well, tonight, is the economy wheel of fortune spinning towards or away from a recession? And did the president just tip his hand on where he thinks it might land? Plus, what would Mr. Rogers have to say about the order to cut funding for PBS? Well, his nephew will join me tonight. And it sounds like a superhero movie, I'm about to tell you. A man who let snakes bite him for years now has blood that scientists say could provide an anti-venom for the entire world. You're going to meet this man tonight on "Laura Coates Live."

All right, so, if you're confused about where our economy is headed and whether President Trump's trade war is about to deal some blunt force trauma, you're not alone. You got that report on Tuesday showing the U.S. economy shrinking in the first quarter. But then today, the job number is actually for April came in stronger than expected. And to that, you add this fact, the markets are up after tanking on Trump's big tariff reveal. And now, tonight, the president looking into his crystal ball and saying he's okay if the economy goes south for a brief period.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KRISTEN WELKER, NBC NEWS WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Is it okay in the short term to have a recession? DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Look, yes. Everything is okay. What we are -- I said, this is a transition period. I think we're going to do fantastically.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: He is awesome. Okay. So, not the most clear crystal ball reading or maybe it's really a magic eight ball popping up. Cannot predict now. CNN's own economic fortune teller says Wall Street is reading good news in the stars without the data to back it up.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RICHARD QUEST, CNN INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR, CNN BUSINESS EDITOR-AT-LARGE: The reality is the -- we have -- we are not seeing yet the data from the tariffs. Until we see that, it's well premature to suggest that sort of -- it is smooth economic sailing ahead. The stock market is -- is rallying on a hope and a prayer that the worst won't happen.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Well, that hope and a prayer may be coming from this, a statement from China's commerce ministry saying it's evaluating messages from the United States about starting trade talks. "The Wall Street Journal" is also reporting China is weighing how to address Trump's concerns over fentanyl, potentially opening a door to negotiations.

The opening for an off ramp is very different than actually taking an off ramp. No trade deals have been announced despite Trump claiming that he has made 200 of them. The market recovery, it may not last if he can't notch a win.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DAN IVES, GLOBAL HEAD OF TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH, WEDBUSH SECURITIES: The market has been up because Wall Street knows they're going to have to ultimately take steps back, get deals done.

UNKNOWN (voice-over): Yeah.

IVES: And no one wants a recession. The market is telling -- trying and telling all the advisers, whether it's India, you got to get deals on the table now.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: And here's the reality: The clock, it is ticking.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GENE SEROKA, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, PORT OF LOS ANGELES: Retailers are telling me that they've got about four to six weeks of normal inventory levels remaining. And that's with the big guys who brought a lot of extra product in to pad those and bring the cost down. So, four to six weeks left. Then after that, if no trade accord or framework is reached, you'll likely see spot shortages. And for those products in demand, the prices will go up.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Price hikes, shortages, and that may just be the start of it. Well, tonight, the footwear industry is telling Trump he's got an emergency on his hands. It is pleading to the White House in a public letter, writing, hundreds of businesses face the prospect of closure. Tens of thousands of jobs are at stake.

Joining me now is Justin Wolfers. He is a professor of economics and public policy at the University of Michigan. Just the voice we need tonight to explain it all. Justin, welcome back. So, I want to get into this short-term recession phenomenon. Is a short-term recession okay as President Trump seems to intimate?

[23:05:02]

JUSTIN WOLFERS, PROFESSOR OF ECONOMICS AND PUBLIC POLICY, UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: No. We call them a recession because they're bad. We're against them. Look, a recession means that we make less stuff. But more importantly, it means that people lose work. When people lose work, they -- they lose income, they lose a sense of self-esteem, they lose connection with one of society's most important institutions.

We have very careful studies of this. It leads to depression, it leads to suicide, it leads people to never work in the same industry again. It harms their earnings for the rest of their lives. This is something we want to avoid.

COATES: I'm imagining the domino effect and collateral damage of what you described as well, even beyond that ominous warning. And -- and the president says that some people on Wall Street say that we're going to have the greatest economy in history, and that this is what he calls a transition period. Do you think that we're in a transition period, Justin?

WOLFERS: Mate, that's just a man saying words.

(LAUGHTER)

Yet we're in a transition period. We had a pretty strong economy throughout the entire post-COVID recovery. He took over. He upset markets, he upset small business, he upset big business, he upset trading partners, he upset allies. No one knows what's about to happen.

And so, we're all sitting nervously, wondering how do you run a U.S. economy when we don't have access to inputs from the rest of the world. None of us really know. It could be a recession. It might not be. But gee, there's a lot to be nervous about.

COATES: Help us digest today's jobs numbers. It was higher than expected. Some positive signs, frankly, after a real instability, real uncertainty. But what do you say to people who may -- who many point to today's numbers as a way to suggest that, look, the jobs numbers are this, so everything is fine? WOLFERS: Right. So, look, there's two hypotheses about the world. One

is the U.S. economy is going to keep on keeping on. That might be the White House's view. There's another view which is we just clove it with a baseball bat and everything is going to fall to pieces.

Either way, either of those stories tells you that the job market was probably still in very good shape in early April. So, therefore, when we see numbers saying that the job market was still in very good shape in early April, it doesn't tell us which of these two stories is right.

Remember, Liberation Day, the day he took a baseball bat to the global economy was April 2. A lot of these numbers are actually measuring employment at businesses before April 2. So, we just haven't found out yet. Patience.

COATES: Patience is running out for a lot of people who are wondering, whether on Main Street or even to Wall Street, what will happen in the long run. And then you have reporting from CNN that China is now open to trade talks with the United States. And "The Wall Street Journal" says that Beijing is actually weighing a fentanyl offer to the United States to even start those trade talks. So, is the China deal, is that the whole ball game, or could some other deals with other countries calm some of the recession forecasts?

WOLFERS: Look, the three biggest trading partners that matter for the United States are the U.S. -- sorry -- Canada, Mexico, and China. The tariff with China is so high, it effectively cut us off. That causes immense havoc for supply chains. It means, for instance, if you want to retool your factory, you no longer have the option of importing equipment from China. It's a major equipment manufacturer. If your office needs new computers, that might be more expensive and so on.

Look, the approach we've taken to China here, I'll tell you the truth, reminds me when I was a 14-year-old boy. When I was 14, there was a girl I liked, and what does a 14-year-old do when there's a girl he likes? He doesn't pick up the phone and call her. During recess, he runs over and punches her, and hopes she notices him.

Well, that's what we've done. You didn't need to impose a 145% tariff to get President Xi to take a phone call from the most powerful man in the world. He probably would have taken the call even without a trade war. Instead, our president has gone and punched the girl, and he's hoping she calls back.

COATES: Well, I've been a 14-year-old girl, and I would've sledged (ph) you, partner. Justin Wolfers --

(LAUGHTER)

-- nice talking to you. Thank you.

WOLFERS: Thanks, Laura.

COATES: I want to bring in political strategist and CEO of Rilax Strategies, Rina Shah, also Republican strategist Lance Trover. I'm going to ask both of you all to not pull any punches or throw them tonight. Thank you very much.

Lance, I'll begin with you, because Trump says the economy will be -- will be okay if there is a short-term recession. You've heard what Justin had to say. Will Americans be okay, you think, American voters in particular, with the idea of a short-term pain?

LANCE TROVER, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: Yes. I -- look, I -- go back to his analogy of punching the 14-year-old. The difference here is China is our biggest foe. We're not seeking them out. We don't want to have a relationship like that with China. We're not looking to be boyfriend and girlfriend with China. We were talking about they are our biggest economic and our biggest foe on the national stage with national security.

[23:10:02]

So that -- I -- I understand what he's saying, but this is worth to remember: They have been stealing our intellectual property to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars. We have a trade imbalance of them to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars.

We have to do something to right the ship here, and I think that's what the president has been trying to do. And I -- at least he's being honest with folks, saying, yeah, we're in a transition period, there will be a tough time.

And I will just point on a political aspect of this. There's an interesting poll from Emerson this week, and CNN had a similar one that said, just a couple weeks ago, 95% of voters wouldn't change their vote from Donald Trump. And so, while we may have some uncertainty, that tells me that voters still give him a little bit of leeway despite his ebb and flow in his approval rating.

COATES: So, does the jobs report, you think, Rena, give him a buffer of sorts and some maybe more runway?

RINA SHAH, CEO OF RILAX STRATEGIES, POLITICAL STRATEGIST: Yeah, without a doubt. I mean, it's better than expected. Economists had said 130,000 jobs. He has added nearly 180,000 jobs. Unemployment number has remained unchanged. That to me signals good things. And now, he has unveiled his spending budget proposal.

COATES: Big, beautiful budget proposal, by the way.

SHAH: The big, beautiful budget for 2026. Tell me what you want President Trump, and I know what he wants. He wants more defense spending, and I don't like that. But he also wants big slash to non- defense spending.

So, I'm not sure this administration can do as well as can be -- as should be expected because right now, they're sorting. It seems like with all the junk that has been thrown at them, how dare you with these toxic tariffs, you're barreling us towards a recession, everything seems to sort of be okay. And again, this boost from the jobs report tells us that he's got a lot of runway. But at the end of the day, where are we sitting at in August? That's what I'm wondering about right now. How are Americans going to feel the burn on their purse? Young moms like me, who rely on cheap accessible goods that have traditionally been made in China for our children, for ourselves? We are used for convenience in society.

But when you look at what the Chinese want, they want respect from us, and I don't think they deserve it. Because guess what? Whatever impact they think they're going to have on our GDP, we're going to have five times worse on theirs. The numbers just show it.

COATES: That's what, certainly, Trump is banking on and the conversations and the leverage game that's happening with China.

TROVER: Laura, our economy is much stronger than theirs.

COATES: Right.

TROVER: I mean, there have already been reports coming out of the struggles that they're having just by the tariffs that have been put on already.

COATES: Well, I want to get to this idea of this big, beautiful budget proposal. You know some key Republicans are already pouring cold water on it. For example, Susan Collins, Senator Susan Collins saying that she has serious objections while other Republicans are instead cheering the $1 trillion in cuts on housing assistance, on health care, education.

Democrats, though, have a very different view. They're calling it -- heartless is the word choice we're using.

How is the White House going to pitch this?

TROVER: Well, I think Susan Collins's issue among others is that there should be more defense spending. I think that's what --

(LAUGHTER)

No. I think she and Mitch McConnell and others want more defense spending because they don't like that it's even a trillion dollars. I -- I view this type of stuff as a negotiation. That's what -- this is the president's proposal. It's going to go before Congress.

Here's what I do know: No matter what happens, there won't be one single democratic vote put on it just like there won't be on the reconciliation bill for tax -- tax cuts. So, that's where Mike Johnson, who has a very stellar record so far, is going to have to come forward and -- and -- and put it through, which I think he will.

COATES: There are some inconsistencies happening, as often is the case in big, beautiful bills like this. I mean, they've got enormous cuts to education, expected on the campaign talked about, health programs. Also, the Chronic Disease Center will be impacted. We remember RFK, Jr. speaking about the -- the necessity on the campaign trail even before he was obviously sworn into his post. Is this going to be an inconsistency that is going to harm the potential for this to pass?

SHAH: I worry about that. That's probably the most consistent worry that I have because when you talk about what we saw and what they unveiled today --

COATES: Uh-hmm.

SHAH: -- cutting spending levels by a $163 billion, that's without a doubt going to shake how we know the federal government serve us. What are our necessities? Again, as a -- as a society that has come out of the pandemic, half a decade out, we know that public health matters. How is RFK, Jr. going to address this if we're not talking about the federal level having the money it needs to take down to the states?

This -- this education, this -- whether it be programmatic or just pure messaging, which -- talking about messaging for a second. The White House gets it wrong every day of the week. I really hope that they're more consistent in talking about their values, budgetary wise, in this next few weeks because I think they've really kind of screwed it with the tariffs these past few weeks.

COATES: Do you agree with that?

TROVER: What's that?

COATES: That the White House gets it wrong every day of the week on messaging?

TROVER: No. Absolutely. You -- you just said they were soaring.

SHAH: No. I mean, they're soaring by luck. By luck. But not because of what they're -- they're singing from the same song sheet from the White House or not.

TROVER: No. I -- I -- I think they're actually doing very well.

[23:15:00]

I mean, again, I think, yes, there's some uncertainty and that is reflected in -- the president's approval rating will ebb and flow. But I go back to what I said a while ago. Ninety-five percent of the people who voted for him wouldn't change their vote, and that to me says he has a pretty strong foundation.

SHAH: And to me, it says they're okay with the transition period, actually. So, I think -- I think most voters, even the jittery independents, are willing to give more time because coming out of -- seeing how bad he was in the initial messaging on tariffs, I think they sort of started to get it together a little bit, and he has become more consistent this week in messaging, sort of, hey, guys, stay with me, it's going to be a little painful. I don't know how long it'll last.

COATES: I don't either. We'll see. Rina, Lance, thank you both so much.

Still ahead tonight, a judge delivers a twin message, one to President Trump and one to the law firms who cave to his pressure. Her words and then major ruling that has legal community wondering, what will Trump do now?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:20:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COATES: Another legal blow for President Trump and another scathing ruling. A federal judge saying late tonight, Trump's executive order targeting a law firm is unconstitutional. The executive order issued in March tried to seek retribution against the law firm Perkins Coie, who represented Trump's 2016 presidential opponent, Hillary Clinton.

The judge wrote, no American president has issued an executive order like the one at issue in this lawsuit. And like in the order to a Shakespearean character intent on being king who coined the phrase, the first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers, writing, with this executive order, the Trump administration is -- quote -- "sending a clear message: lawyers must stick to the party line, or else."

Joining me now is Mark Zaid, a national security attorney, who have had government employees and whistleblowers in the past and has been targeted by this very administration. Mark, good to see you, my friend. You've been targeted, as I've said, by the administration for clients you have represented. How do you feel tonight after seeing this ruling?

MARK ZAID, NATIONAL SECURITY ATTORNEY: Very vindicated, and I'm not surprised that the rule of law prevailed in this particular case. I mean, this was an incredibly overbroad executive order. Just to put it in context, all right, it -- it suspended -- I had my clearance revoked -- it suspended the clearances of everyone in the law firm regardless of what they might have ever worked on or not.

In fact, some of the lawyers who had their clearances sensibly suspended did not have a clearance because they were lawyers, they had it because they were in the military, in the guard, in the reserves. So, what did they do to -- to be punished in that way and to, of course, be banned from federal courts? I mean, it was obviously purely retaliatory and vindictive.

And one of the things the judge pointed out was, in fact, that the law firms who capitulated and took the deal, that all of a sudden, they went from being untrustworthy and a threat to national security but act because they made a deal with the administration. They can have their clearances back.

COATES: So, what should law firms be doing? Obviously, this judge gave a scathing rebuke. There's been a lot of opinions about this. You had Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, in fact, talking about more broadly, judges being targeted as well. What should law firms be doing in -- in light of what's happening

ZAID: They should be standing up for the rule of law. Right? We are not necessarily our clients. Look, there are lawyers on both sides, many sides of the ideological aisles --

COATES: Uh-hmm.

ZAID: -- who maybe do push particular causes because that's what they believe in. Most of us, I'm sure everyone is influenced in some way, but most of us were representing the client's interest. Right? I don't think the ACLU believed the Nazi propaganda that they -- clients were espousing back in Skokie, Illinois in the late 1970s. It was standing up for the rule of law.

And it very much was the quote from Shakespeare that Judge Howell mentioned, which I've mentioned on your show before, about Dick the Butcher, because the notion was we always think that this is a negative towards lawyer. It was a Shakespearean compliment because the lawyers were preventing an authoritarian dictator from coming into power because that's what we do.

COATES: I want to highlight what was said by this judge, who had opinions of the law firms that Trump was targeting. She writes, those who stood up in court will be the models lauded when this period of American history is written. That's obviously her view, and many people are looking at this issue and the capitulation you talk about.

But sometimes, those who stand up, as you well know, in the practice you're in and the world we live in, face consequences. What will they be here?

ZAID: Look, well, standing up -- I -- I mean, I've already started to suffer the consequences.

COATES: Uh-hmm.

ZAID: There are certain clients I can no longer represent because of a lack of clearance. I would normally represent covert case officers at the CIA who have nothing to do with politics. It's just dealing with personnel employment issues.

COATES: And, Mark, just -- just to be clear for everyone, your lack of a clearance means that you cannot review documents or review material that would be helpful in either their litigation or in defending or being a proactive litigate in the matter. Right? That's the crux of why it means something.

ZAID: Right.

[23:24:58]

I mean, a decade ago, I represented multiple CIA --

COATES: Uh-hmm.

ZAID: -- employees who were in Benghazi when the ambassador was murdered. And right, this was a huge Republican talking point, blaming Hillary Clinton. Well, I represented those individuals who were in the movie, in the book "Thirteen Hours." I represented them through all sorts of classified hearings. I worked alongside of Devin Nunes, the then congressman who is now running Trump's Truth Social media enterprises. I was working as a lawyer representing these individuals to protect their interests as lawful whistleblowers.

It didn't make a difference what the politics was. As the Republicans attacked Hillary Clinton, I -- you know, I stood there and I just made sure that my client stuck to the facts because that's -- that's what the case was about.

COATES: Will this judge make clear what they believe the case is about? I wonder what the Supreme Court or other courts will find as well. Mark Zaid, thank you so much.

ZAID: Thank you.

COATES: Well, the military -- military parade to honor the Army is on. The White House confirming that today. And yes, it falls on the same day as President Trump's birthday. The question tonight, what about the cost? Is this how the men and women of the Army want to be honored? Retired Lieutenant General Russel Honore standing by, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:30:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COATES: Apparently, no one is going to rein on Trump's parade. The White House confirming it is planning the biggest parade to commemorate the Army's 200th birthday. It also coincides with the president's 79th birthday.

You remember Trump was captivated by the pomp and circumstance of the 2017 Bastille Day military parade in France, prompting him to float the idea of a grand parade in this country during his first term. But his dream was nixed after the hefty price tag of $92 million.

The AP reports next month's event may involve over 6,000 soldiers, at least 50 helicopters, 150 vehicles, seven vans, and even a couple thousand civilians.

With me now, retired Lieutenant General Russel Honore. General, thank you for being with us this evening. In this event, it could cost tens of millions. Now, doing the math, there have been $160 billion worth of cuts in the layoffs of FEMA and Veterans Affairs and HUD to name a few. Should this parade be a priority to them?

RUSSEL HONORE, RETIRED LIEUTENANT GENERAL, AUTHOR: Well, Laura, let me put it this way. When it comes to parades, there's a little Army joke. You asked the private, what would he like as a four-day pass? When he asked the senior general, what would he like would be a big parade with the troops marching and the bands playing. When he asked the sergeant, the sergeant said, shoot me first because I don't want to be in any damn parade.

COATES: Hmm.

HONORE: This is -- and when General Eisenhower was asked about having national military parades, he said, oh, no, we don't do that in the United States Army. They do that in the Soviet Army. For us to do that, it would be a sign of weakness. It's not a sign of strength. We don't do that in United States Army.

COATES: Do you see it as a sign of weakness?

HONORE: I see it as an exploitation of the coincidence that -- on the Army's 250th birthday, which was to be a modest celebration in Washington, probably being involved in the old Guard and maybe the Army skydivers jumping in, and some activities on the mall and some recruiting stations along the way.

Now, it has turned in to an orchestrated event led by the White House that is coincidental with the president's birthday. And he wants to optimize this. As you stated earlier, the president is enthused about having this military parade. He tried to do it in his first time in the Pentagon, and everybody talked him down from doing it.

But he's hell bent on having a military parade, it is coincidental on his birthday, and the White House is now pitching this as a presidential birthday military parade similar to what they do in North Korea --

COATES: Hmm.

HONORE: -- honoring on this day or what they do in Russia on May Day, which will happen next week on the 8th of May in Russia.

COATES: But, general, what do you say to those -- I mean, obviously, the service of our men and women in uniform must be honored, must be revered. What do you say to those who say, okay, well, this is a coincidence, that it happens to be his birthday, we need to celebrate them regardless? Do you think that there is validity in that in this way?

HONORE: Oh, absolutely. Around the Army, on the 14th of June every year, we have some kind of ceremony, normally a key involvement in the commander, the oldest soldier and the youngest soldier in the unit. Marines do the similar thing. If it's a workday week, we'll pause for a minute, we have a barbecue for the troops. But that's about it.

We don't go around having military parade similar to what they do in Russia and North Korea, nor do we do what they did on Bastille Day, which was their way of celebrating a significant DNA history where the president got this idea that he wanted to have a military parade.

COATES: Yeah.

HONORE: But now, this has turned into be a birthday parade, which is contradictory to what we do in the Military.

[23:35:03]

We are not a self-serving organization. We are a fighting lethal force that's focused on being prepared and focused on readiness. But to bring 6,600 troops to Washington and 150 vehicles, this will be disruptive to readiness and lethality.

COATES: What message will this send to the rest of the world?

HONORE: The message it will send to American people, first of all, they're cutting $100 million out of the V.A., was one of the numbers I saw, the VA people to answer the phones to be cut.

And they had insulted the industry today, presented and say he's going to change Veterans Day to Victory Day. Veterans Day had been celebrated for years now and decades, focused on those who have served in the Military and destroyed our victory going back to World War I.

So, it's contradictory in this notion. And I hope the president backs down from this. And if there is a parade that is not called his birthday parade, this would be contradictory to the self-service and selfless service of our men and women around the world who are fighting in multiple fronts in the Middle East and in Africa and other places in the -- they are deployed around the world. This will send a bad message. Now, the president got to do this, make this a birthday party.

COATES: General Russel Honore. Thank you so much, Honore.

HONORE: God bless America and God bless our Army.

COATES: Indeed. Up next, President Trump telling PBS, no, I won't be your neighbor nor your bank. He's ordering funds to be cut off. You know, Mr. Rogers once rallied Congress to keep the funding way back in 1969. And tonight, his nephew is standing by to remind us of that very message.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:40:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

(MUSIC PLAYING)

COATES: That iconic tune from our childhood, it's still putting a smile on all of our faces all these many years later. Mr. Rogers was a staple on PBS for over 30 years, inviting us into his home, teaching kids and parents alike values like kindness and empathy and just being a good neighbor.

But tonight, the future is uncertain for the very network that brought us into Mr. Rogers's living room. President Trump signing an executive order demanding an end to all federal funding for both PBS and NPR, the country's two biggest public broadcasters, calling the networks a -- quote -- "giant scam and arms of the radical left Democrat Party."

Now, it's unclear if Trump can even do this. I mean, PBS, NPR, they are now both exploring legal actions and options. But it got us thinking. How would Mr. Rogers feel about it if he was still around? Well, here he is advocating for PBS funding on Capitol Hill back in 1969.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

FRED ROGERS, HOST, "MISTER ROGERS' NEIGHBORHOOD": I end the program by saying you've made this day a special day by just your being you. There's no person in the whole world like you, and I like you just the way you are. And I feel that if we in public television can only make it clear that feelings are mentionable and manageable, we will have done a great service.

UNKNOWN: I think it's wonderful. I think it's wonderful. Looks like you just earned the $20 million.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Joining me now is Mr. Rogers's nephew, Daniel Crozier. He's also a professor of music theory and composition at Rollins College. Daniel, so nice to see you. And you heard from your uncle just now, a very young uncle, making his case for PBS in that Senate hearing over 50 years ago. Do those words still resonate with you?

DANIEL CROZIER, NEPHEW OF FRED ROGERS: Absolutely. He would say the same thing now as he said then. I'm absolutely sure of it if he were with us. I wish he were.

COATES: Hmm. I think we all wish he were still here and imparting his wisdom to even this new generation as well. Why is it so important to continue funding at PBS, obviously, the -- the house of Mr. Rogers?

CROZIER: Yes. He -- well, his legacy is still alive and well at the Fred Rogers Company where they still produce Daniel Tiger's Neighborhood and a lot of other programs. But it's -- you know, the -- the same values then are enforced now. Things of such value are -- are presented by PBS that can't be at other networks because they aren't of commercial value. You know, it's a very special kind of thing, educational programming, the arts and history, all these things that PBS can offer that others can't.

COATES: A really important distinction in the idea of how do you put a price tag or a value to be intangible and the invaluable that we see on programming that is found places like there.

[23:45:03]

It was your uncle's home for over three decades. What does that network mean to your family? And even broad broadly, how has it impacted your life?

CROZIER: Well, I teach at Uncle Fred's alma mater, Rollins College in Winter Park, Florida. And I play on his piano. And I'm so fortunate to be there every day with my students. And his values inform the way I teach, and they've brought up several generations of children. And we don't want to lose that now. It's really important.

He -- he concentrated on the affective development of children, where another program like "Sesame Street," you know, got children ready for kindergarten, you know, in the intellectual areas. But the areas that he focused on were so important ethically, morally.

COATES: Unbelievable to think about what we would do without that level of education and that kind of education. You yourself are an educator, as you mentioned. You know this administration is wanting to eliminate the Department of Education. And you think about these two points in tandem. Are you concerned about the impact this will have on your classroom, on students not just in where you are, but all around the country?

CROZIER: These are important issues right now. I think everyone is uneasy, waiting to see how things play out. We're going to keep doing our jobs to the best of our ability. And, you know, I have enthusiastic students here, and I'll do all I can to keep -- keep the flame alive here.

COATES: What do you --

CROZIER: Where Fred Rogers -- he is a very real presence in our lives here.

COATES: I was going to say, even though you are his nephew, that's not the only reason. I'm sure his lessons and his wisdom continue to resonate where you are and other places. It has been such an unbelievable scope and breadth of influence that your uncle has had.

And I -- I am curious, what you think Mr. Rogers, as we would know him, would say if he were still with us today?

CROZIER: I think he would make the same argument he made in 1969, and I think it would hold a lot of weight. It's very hard to say no to Fred Rogers. My mother could do it, and his wife could do it sometimes. But for everybody else, it was very hard. And he didn't ask that much, but when he asked you something, it was very important. And I think people would listen now.

COATES: Daniel Crozier, thank you for joining us.

CROZIER: Thank you.

COATES: Up next, it sounds like the plot of a Marvel film, a man lets venomous snakes bite him for years. I'm talking about hundreds of them. And what happened to his blood may now be able to save thousands of lives. It's an extraordinary story, and you'll meet the man, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:50:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

(SHOUT)

SAMUEL JACKSON, ACTOR: Enough is enough! I have had it with these mother (bleep) snakes on this mother (bleep) plane.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Did those movies ever give you the creeps? Well, fear not because we may be on the verge of quite a breakthrough. How? Well, you can start by thanking the man who has spent 18 years letting some of the deadliest snake species on the planet bite him. He injected himself with more than 650 doses of snake venom.

The video you're looking at, it is of Tom -- of Tim Friede. And as you can see, he's not exactly going Samuel Jackson on these guys. No. This passion project of his started when he was bitten by a snake at five years old. And now, scientists are saying that the antibodies in Friede's blood could potentially lead to a universal antivenom that could save thousands of lives each year.

Well, Tim Friede joins me now along with the scientist researching the potentially lifesaving capabilities of Tim's blood, Jacob Glanville, president and CEO of Centivax.

Tim, I -- I am just so intrigued by you and what you were doing. I mean, this is the stuff of science fiction movies. Tell me, what was your goal in actually starting to take the venom?

TIM FRIEDE, INJECTED HIMSELF HUNDREDS OF TIMES WITH SNAKE VENOM: Well, the main goal of -- first of all, thank you for having me -- us. The main goal was to beat snake bite death. I didn't want to die or use antivenom or lose a finger or miss work. So, I basically became the horse. I replaced the horse. And I used myself as an experiment, so I didn't have to use antivenom.

COATES: When you would do that -- I mean, I -- I can't imagine having a snake and be -- I'm afraid of them myself and having one of them bite, let alone micro-dosing in the way that you did. What was it like to have these snakes bite you, and how did it feel afterwards?

FRIEDE: Well, it's -- it's painful because venom is very inflammatory by nature. And, like, when you get a bee sting, you get one or two milligrams, but in the case of, like, a black mamba, you can get up to 200 to 300 milligrams of venom.

[23:55:00]

So, it really overloads your system. So, it's very inflammatory. That makes it difficult, but it's still very doable.

COATES: So, walk me through. And this is -- this is a classic "do not try this at home" moment for people out there.

FRIEDE: Yeah. COATES: Walk me through this process of how exactly you would dose.

FRIEDE: What I do is I drive venom out very specifically, right to the microgram. And I have a lot of notes and Excel files where I hit these particular windows to where I know I can boost up before a bite. I don't just take the bite because that can kill you. I properly boost up and methodically take notes and weigh the venoms out very specifically. It's very important to do.

My goal is always to do six milligrams. I can achieve the highest tighter level possible, IgG. And that's exactly how I did it. I've used pure venom, too. But I like to dry it out for the stability reasons. So --

COATES: I can't imagine, and yet what you are doing and the imagination and the notetaking and the methodical approach. Jacob, you say that Tim's blood could potentially be lifesaving now. How?

JACOB GLANVILLE, CEO AND PRESIDENT, CENTIVAX: Yeah. So, there are, you know, 650 different species of venomous snake around the world. And snake antivenom hasn't really changed much in the last 125 years. It's made by injecting horses with a bunch of venom, and then you take the horse's serum, and that's basically antivenom.

And so, I work in the area of universal vaccines. And in the process of doing this in 2017, I wondered whether, what if we could get broadly this kind -- same kind of biology that creates universal vaccines, what if we could apply that to antivenom?

And I started reading about these incredible stories of this guy with this astonishing immune history of all these snake bites. And I felt that if anybody had created universal immunity, the antibodies that could recognize the shared parts of the toxins of all snakes, it would be Tim Friede. And so, I managed to contact him and we began a research study together.

COATES: And what's the timeline for developing something like this? I mean, to go from, you know, obviously his blood to then being able to develop this universal antivenom?

GLANVILLE: So, what we published today in cell was that we took two of Tim's antibodies, each one knocked out an entire class of toxins shared by 300 species of snakes, half of all snakes. And that and a third compound, we showed that it was able to protect against 19 different very diverse species of these neurotoxic snakes, the World Health Organization's category one and category two snakes, the most -- most medically significant snakes. That -- that is a proof of concept of a product.

Now, to go forward, there's some research we would still like to do. We need to manufacture it. And in about two years, we could initiate a phase one clinical study pending financial support. After that, it would be about three more years of clinical studies, and then it could reach commercialization.

COATES: I mean, Tim, I have to wonder, with -- with all that you've done and the exposure, I mean, has it taken a physiological toll on your body? I know you don't do this any longer, I think, after, I think, 2018. Had some pretty close calls. But what is this do to you long term? Do you know?

FRIEDE: Well, a lot of it is psychology. You really can't have a weak nerve. You really have to go into it hardcore. I call it saddle time. And the reason I get bit so many times is to get comfortable with it. And one of the reasons I took Black Mamba and Taipan bites back to back is I became more comfortable with it.

I had to live really closely to it. I just didn't want to inject once in a while or get bit once every couple years. It became a lifestyle for me. And it's an addiction as far as -- I know I'm -- I'm helping humanity. I know I'm helping somebody 8,000 miles away I can't talk to. And that makes me feel really, really good, that everything I did was in vain. You know, no pun intended.

(LAUGHTER)

Yeah, I had to do it.

COATES: You still -- do you still -- you don't still do this, though.

FRIEDE: No. I retired from it in December of 2018. I needed a break and just step back from it. It was a long 18 years of intensity, and I just needed to spend more time with my family and my kids, and just sit back and realize that Centivax, Jake, had my blood. So, my job was complete. Do I miss it? Yes.

COATES: You miss it. I -- look, this -- we need to talk for a lot longer to you, Tim Friede, to understand the psychology of all that you have done.

(LAUGHTER)

But you know what? If it works, wow! What an accomplishment. Tim Friede, Jacob Glanville, thank you so much.

FRIEDE: Thank you. I appreciate it.

GLANVILLE: Thank you for having us.

COATES: Well, talk about the year of the snake. Before we go, be sure to check out "The Whole Story" this weekend. Nick Paton Walsh visits the Amazon to witness how technology is changing some of its most remote communities.

[00:00:02]

Well, it airs Sunday night at 8:00, only on CNN.

Well, thank you all for watching. "Anderson Cooper 360" is next.