Return to Transcripts main page

Laura Coates Live

Tensions In The Middle East Continues; Ayatollah Threatens Israel; New York City Mayoral Candidate Arrested By Federal Agents At Immigration Court; MAGA World Feuds Over Israel-Iran Conflict. Aired 11p-12a ET

Aired June 17, 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]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

UNKNOWN (voice-over): This is CNN Breaking News.

LAURA COATES, CNN HOST AND SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Good evening. I'm Laura Coates. We begin with the breaking news on the sixth day of fighting between Israel and Iran. This is the crucial question tonight: Will the U.S. strike Iran directly? Sources tell CNN that President Trump is increasingly warming up to that idea, specifically whether to hit Iranian nuclear facilities in an attempt to prevent Iran from building a nuclear weapon. It's a decision with significant consequences for his presidency and, frankly, for the entire world.

Now, here is what we know: Trump met with his national security team in the Situation Room this very afternoon. It lasted more than an hour. Sources say that he spoke with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu before that meeting.

Take a look at Trump's social media posts. He said -- quote -- "We now have complete and total control of the skies over Iran." Now the keyword, we. He threatened Iran's supreme leader, saying he knows where he's hiding, but he won't be killed for now. And he wrote, unconditional surrender, all caps, with an exclamation mark.

Now up until the 24 hours, President Trump seemed to be more interested in making a deal. So, this seems like a shift in the other direction.

And tonight, "The New York Times" is reporting that Iran is preparing to retaliate if the United States joins the conflict. Now, U.S. officials tell the Times that Iran could strike U.S. bases in the Middle East. Israel is waiting to see whether the U.S. will actually help, and this is why it wants America to get involved.

Iran's secretive Fordow fuel enrichment plant, it's buried deep inside of a mountain, about 295 feet underground. Israel does not have the weapons needed to damage it, but the U.S. does. They're called bunker- buster bombs, and they can penetrate far into the Earth. But there's no guarantee they would actually destroy the plant.

I want to bring in Marc Caputo, senior politics reporter for Axios, who covers Trump. Marc, what are you hearing about how President Trump is even contemplating this enormous decision tonight?

MARC CAPUTO, SENIOR POLITICS REPORTER, AXIOS: He's certainly contemplating it, and the amount of interest that Trump has in launching a strike against Iran seems to have increased.

In an unofficial nonscientific survey that I kind of conducted through the day with various administration officials, let's say about half thought that a strike is more likely than unlikely, but the percentages vary. Other ones thought not. They did seem to believe, a majority of them, that the longer this goes on with the U.S. not striking Iran, the less likely it becomes.

But the reality is this is the Donald Trump administration. It revolves around him. He's the decider, and he makes snap decisions, and he makes them quickly. Right now, he hasn't made the decision, and everyone is just bracing for when that happens. Just what that looks like, no one really has a clue.

COATES: And Senator Lindsey Graham, who you know is very much pro- attacking Iran, says that he believes the president has to act soon. You've mentioned that he's at his own pace. Does the administration have the same level of urgency as others who are supportive of attacking Iran or is his timeline different for a different reason?

CAPUTO: Donald Trump responds to his own timeline. He creates his own weather patterns. It's, you know, a day ending in why, when Lindsey Graham wants to bomb Iran, so there's nothing sort of unique about that. There are other advocates, pro-Israel, anti-Iran advocates, who think that he should move more quickly. But Donald Trump still is holding out for a deal.

There are a number of people who still think, and I do think that this feeling is fading a bit, that the strikes on Iran by Israel did increase the likelihood of a deal happening. But, again, I think some of that sense is fading because the reality is Iran, like any country, is not happy at being attacked and it's striking back.

COATES: Netanyahu, as you know, has been calling for Iranians to stand up for their freedom, his phrasing, but essentially advocating for what appears to be a total regime change.

[23:05:02]

Has President Trump warmed to that idea?

CAPUTO: I can't answer that question. What I can say is the last time I spoke to a senior administration official about this yesterday, there was a feeling that Netanyahu and Israel want regime change more than the administration.

And Donald Trump did talk or did ask or did tell the Israelis not to take out the ayatollah in -- in Iran. And I think the phrase that they used was -- when I asked, well, why not take out the ayatollah in Trump's eyes? They said it's better to have the ayatollah you know than the ayatollah you don't know. But as you referenced earlier, Donald Trump was starting to tell or telegraph on Truth Social that they know where the ayatollah is and suggesting that the United States could decide to go along with this idea of taking him out, assassinating him, dropping a bomber or whatever the phrase is. But so far, that decision hasn't been made. So far, Donald Trump still wants to make a deal.

But it's an open question about whether Netanyahu really wants to and whether Netanyahu is just sort of completely off the chain and going to do what he wants to do.

COATES: There's a big divergence of opinions as well on -- on what Trump should do among MAGA supporters, MAGA influencers. Listen to a bit of this Tucker Carlson-Senator Ted Cruz convo.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TUCKER CARLSON, CONSERVATIVE POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, FORMER FOX NEWS HOST: You don't know anything about the country.

SEN. TED CRUZ (R-TX): I didn't say I don't know anything about Iran.

CARLSON: Okay. What's the ethnic mix of Iran?

CRUZ: They are Persians and predominantly Shia.

CARLSON: What percent?

CRUZ: Okay. This is --

CARLSON: No. It's not even -- you don't know anything about Iran! So --

CRUZ: Okay. I am not the Tucker Carlson expert on Iran.

CARLSON: You're a senator whose calling for the overthrow of the government and you don't know anything about the country.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: I mean, this is a pretty intense debate and quite a moment to see play out. Is there intensity matching what's happening inside, say, the White House?

CAPUTO: I don't think to that degree. I mean, there are some voices who are, well, less hawkish. Tulsi Gabbard, the director of National Intelligence, is chief among them. J.D. Vance has also been a little less hawkish.

But the reality is, in order to get in the White House to become a secretary, to become part of the administration for Donald Trump, is to always follow his lead even when his lead changes. So, when Donald Trump decides to move ahead with this, you're going to hear all of his secretaries supported, at least in the short term, at least as it's sort of been sketched out to me so far, but there's not a very clear sign of what that sketch looks like. COATES: Marc Caputo, a lot of unanswered questions around the world tonight --

CAPUTO: Yes.

COATES: -- waiting to see what's going to happen. Thank you so much.

CAPUTO: Thank you.

COATES: With me now, CNN military analyst, retired Air Force colonel, Cedric Leighton, international affairs analyst Bobby Ghosh, and director of policy and research for 'The Soufan Group," Colin Clarke. Thank you all.

Colin, let me begin with you. There are a lot of signs that indicate that Trump is certainly leaning towards some sort of action, but no final decision has actually been made. What would that action look like and would it actually be inevitable that the U.S. might take an action against Iran?

COLIN CLARKE, DIRECTOR OF POLICY AND RESEARCH, THE SOUFAN GROUP: Well, thanks for having me. If the U.S. does get involved with delivering the bunker-busters at Fordow, at that point, it's in for a penny, in for a pound. The U.S. essentially signs off on the Israeli campaign. What the end game there is still unclear, but it's likely cosigning on regime change.

And if you can think of an example where that has worked in the last 20 years, I'd love to hear it because I certainly haven't seen it. It would be committing the United States to, you know, essentially whatever Israel is going to do under Netanyahu. It also opens the United States up to retaliation from the Iranians.

COATES: As they've indicated, as much particularly on U.S. bases in the Middle East. Former intelligence, you know, briefer for President Trump during his first term, Beth Sanner, Colonel Leighton, had this to say if the U.S. were to intervene. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BETH SANNER, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST, FORMER INTELLIGENCE BRIEFER FOR PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: Once you set these things in motion, no one is going to be in control of it, and there will be no ability to control it. And so, thinking these things through at this point and not acting precipitously with the American role, I think, is very important at this stage. I would let the Israelis see what they can do first.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Colonel Leighton, can Israeli forces go at it alone?

CEDRIC LEIGHTON, CNN MILITARY ANALYST, RETIRED AIR FORCE COLONEL: Well, they can do certain things, Laura. But as far as actually destroying Iran's nuclear capability, the answer is no. They can't do that by themselves. They would need the bunker-buster bombs that we've talked about, really massive coordinates penetrator, the GBU-57. That would be the kind of weapon that would be needed to go after a place like Fordow.

[23:10:00]

It's not just Fordow. There are, you know, more than a dozen other sites that the Iranians have. That concern themselves with not only uranium enrichment, but storage of nuclear materials. They have all kinds of different aspects to their program, which has been built up over really several decades right now.

So, this is definitely something where they couldn't do it alone, they would need help to do it, and that's, I think, why they're asking for it.

COATES: Well, Bobby, let me turn to you on this because President Trump very publicly suggested that he could, if he wanted to, assassinate Iran's supreme leader, but said that he would not. Is that just bluster or might there be some real calculation happening behind the scenes?

BOBBY GHOSH, INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: Well, when it comes from President Trump, it tends to be bluster, but there have been certainly suggestions from many folks in Israel that that is something that might be contemplated. And, you know, there -- there is always a risk when you decapitate a state, that you don't -- you can't really predict what comes next.

And -- and the examples that we've seen in the neighborhood of Iran, so Iraq is a -- is a very good example, do not give us a lot of room for optimism that the next guy in charge is necessarily going to be more amenable to some sort of a peace deal. There's just as much likelihood that something more radical, more militant might take the place of the existing regime.

So, you set aside what Trump says and pay closer attention what the Israelis are saying because to take out the leader of the Islamic Republic, you would need Israeli intelligence and Israeli operations to put -- put that together.

I'm -- I'm sure that that is a scenario that Israelis have contemplated, but the fact that they haven't executed on it yet suggests that they're not 100% sure about the sense of doing it that way.

COATES: Colonel Leighton, I mean, 'The New York Times' is reporting that Iran is preparing to strike U.S. bases in the Middle East should the U.S. join Israel's war against Iran. Can you tell me how vulnerable these U.S. installations might really be?

LEIGHTON: Well, it depends on the installation, but some of them are definitely within the crosshairs of Iranian proxies. So, of course, you're looking at the remnants of what we have in Iraq. You're looking at what we have in places like Qatar, the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait among others. Of course, Bahrain, the headquarters of the fifth fleet. So, there are certain aspects of this where you can tell that, you know, from a physical sense, the base would be vulnerable to, you know, some kind of sabotage, and the Iranians have practiced going after these bases.

So, you know, the short answer is these bases are potentially vulnerable, and we have increased -- the U.S. forces in the region have increased their force protection efforts to keep them safe.

COATES: Colin, President Trump insists that Iran was one -- was on the verge of obtaining a nuclear weapon when Israel struck in recent days. Colin, is that the main reason for this sense of urgency or is there more to it than that?

CLARKE: Well, we just don't know. There has been a discrepancy between what Tulsi Gabbard said and what the Israelis are saying. I'm sure everybody has seen the clips of Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu talking about Iran being on the verge of developing a nuclear weapon going back many years, you know.

And so, I think, you know, the inner workings and the politics are something that we'll learn likely in the coming weeks and months. We're now on the precipice of U.S. involvement in war in the Middle East, which is the exact issue that President Trump campaigned, saying he was not going to --

COATES: Hmm.

CLARKE: -- sign on to. So, I think there's a lot of -- you know, there's a lot of fissures within Trump's base right now and there's also a lot of pressure building on the president from Iran hawks for him to do something against what people are saying in his ear is the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism.

COATES: Bobby, I mean, destabilizing Iran's mysterious, heavily- guarded Fordow facility is a -- is a key objective. But is there a high risk of nuclear radiation incident, and who would be responsible for that?

GHOSH: Well, nuclear scientists are reassuring us that there would not be a major fallout along the lines, that we -- we see it in fiction or -- or like the major nuclear explosion in the Soviet Union before the collapse of the Soviet Union.

So, the -- the suggestion is that most of the damage and most of the leaks of chemical reactions would likely take place very close to the facility. So, Iranians living close to these facilities would be the ones at greatest risk.

[23:14:58]

Even the -- the -- the head of the United Nations nuclear watchdog, the IAEA, has been trying to reassure everyone that there is not that kind of a risk.

But, you know, it is a nuclear facility and there are all kinds of risks. And just because Iranians themselves may be at the greatest risk doesn't mean that that is any less a concern for the international community.

COATES: Thank you so much, everyone. We have much more on the breaking news ahead. A reporter in Tel Aviv standing by with the latest as Israel and Iran are trading missile strikes and evacuation warnings.

Plus, the ayatollah tonight issuing his first defiant warning since President Trump demanded his unconditional surrender. So, is his back against the wall? And what do the Iranian people want in this moment? My next guest has spent decades reporting on the country, and I'll ask her, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:20:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

(SOUND OF INTERCEPTORS)

COATES: That's the skies over Tel Aviv earlier in the night. Israeli air defense is firing off interceptors to take down Iranian missiles. The two countries have been trading attacks for six days now.

I want to bring in 'Wall Street Journal' reporter, Anat Peled. She's up about 20 miles outside of Tel Aviv. Anat, Iran has been firing missiles at Israel throughout the night. Most have been intercepted. This has been going on for days. What has it been like on the ground?

ANAT PELED, REPORTER, WALL STREET JOURNAL: Yeah. So, overnight, we had two barrages around 12:30 a.m., 1:30 a.m. We had others during the day. And, you know, we had Israelis running to shelters across the country. Some people have them in their homes. A lot of, you know, businesses are shut down.

So, I think, you know, it's -- it has been stressful. Israeli air defenses are very effective. But I have visited the impact sites, some of the impact sites in the center of the country, and these are very heavy missiles, and they cause a lot of damage.

COATES: Can you describe some of what you've seen at these impact sites?

PELED: Yeah. I visited one site, about, you know, a few minutes walk from the U.S. consulate in Tel Aviv, and it was just destroyed. You know, residential buildings and a hotel. It just -- you know, you -- you just see everything. Destroyed debris, destroyed cars.

Yeah, I mean, I don't -- I talked also to, you know, a structural engineer yesterday, and he was saying that he doesn't remember seeing anything like this, you know, for -- for decades. This is just a different kind of impact. We don't see this kind of damage from, you know, from Hamas. COATES: You know, President Trump and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke on the phone today, and they've been pretty tight- lipped about what was discussed. Do you have a sense of how much pressure Netanyahu is placing on President Trump?

PELED: So, we know that Israeli officials are very optimistic and hopeful that Trump will join in. We don't know yet what Trump has decided. We know there are different kinds of, you know, advisors there. But, yeah, Israelis really, really want Trump to join in, and I'm -- I'm sure they're applying all the pressure they can.

COATES: Anat Peled, stay safe. Thank you for joining.

PELED: Thank you.

COATES: Iran's supreme leader is vowing a fierce response to Israel's attacks, posting on X -- quote -- 'We must give a strong response to the terrorist Zionist regime. We will show the Zionists no mercy.' Another post warned 'the battle begins' with this image attached to it.

All this coming as Trump appeared to directly threaten the ayatollah this morning, posting, 'We know exactly where the so-called supreme leader is hiding. He is an easy target, but is safe there. We're not going to take him out (kill), at least not for now.'

Israel's attacks on Iran are renewing conversations on the potential for regime change in the country, but Netanyahu directly calling on Iranians to -- quote -- 'stand up from an evil and oppressive regime.'

With me now discuss, contributing writer and columnist for 'The New Yorker,' Robin Wright. She has reported on Iran for decades and wrote this new piece titled, 'What is Israel's Endgame with Iran?'

Robin, welcome. What does it signal to you that Israel, the United states, they're now floating this idea of eliminating the ayatollah?

ROBIN WRIGHT, CONTRIBUTING WRITER AND COLUMNIST, THE NEW YORKER: Well, there's a distinct difference between Ayatollah Khamenei, the supreme leader, and the Iranian state, and there's a bit of flippancy when there's talk or chatter about eliminating the ayatollah.

Look, he has been in power 36 years, he's 86 years old, and Iranians have been preparing themselves for some time with kind of actuarial table of -- that he's not going to live forever and that a turnover at -- in the top job of the -- of the state will change in the not too distant future. So, I -- I don't think we should think that eliminating the ayatollah is automatically going to lead to regime change.

And the question, of course, is, when President Trump talks about unconditional surrender, is this the surrender of Iran's nuclear program? Is this getting the Iranians to concede on every aspect of its military program, including its missiles? So, again, the -- the endgame is a long way off.

[23:24:59]

And I think whether or not the U.S. engages militarily right now, the fact is there will be no military solution. And the U.S. will be, at the end of the day, the only party that can broker between Israel and Iran. And there has to be some kind of diplomacy to end the hostilities that, between Iran and Israel, have gone on in a shadow war for 40 years.

COATES: You know, one of the experts that you spoke to for your piece suggested -- quote -- 'Only a very small number of Iranians would embrace Netanyahu's calls for a regime change.' Do the Iranian people even want this?

WRIGHT: So, my sense has always been that the majority of Iranians today do not like the regime. But a political scientist, who I've had a running dialogue with for more than 30 years, suggests that even among the 80% who don't like the regime would prefer to see somebody else in power, do not like the idea of a foreign country coming in and dictating who its leadership should be and how it should be governed.

And so, this is where there'll be questions about, how does this unfold? Do we see in Iran what we saw in Iraq with a U.S. presence that led to the formation of ISIS?

And we have to be very careful about what happens next. There's so much focus on right now. And we know that the endgame, politically, diplomatically, is sometimes more important than what happens militarily in terms of stopping it.

COATES: Well, aside from military, in terms of what retaliation might look like, Robin, I mean, the Strait of Hormuz is a critical shipping lane. Do you think Iran would consider closing it as a response?

WRIGHT: Well, Iran has a little bit of economic leverage. Fifth of the world's oil energy supplies move through the Strait of Hormuz. And this is controlled by Iran. Every ship that goes through has to connect with the Iranian government. And so, it has that leverage. It also is the -- has the third largest energy resources in the world.

So, this is not a place like Gaza. This is a country that has rich resources and geostrategic position in the Middle East with some levers of control.

So, if it wanted to do something really drastic, it could try to mind the Strait of Hormuz as it did during the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s. It could try to impede the flow of energy to the outside world and hope that the energy markets are so rattled that President Trump links first and moves in to say, okay, let's stop it.

COATES: Robin Wright, thank you for your expertise this evening.

WRIGHT: Thank you, Laura.

COATES: We have much more on Iran and Israel ahead. But, first, the shock arrest of New York City mayoral candidate Brad Lander. Federal agents handcuffing him at immigration court as he tried to walk a migrant out. Democrats, furious. Republicans calling it yet another stunt. So, what happened? Well, the man himself, comptroller Brad Lander, is in studio to answer all of our questions next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:30:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BRAD LANDER, NEW YORK CITY COMPTROLLER, NEW YORK CITY MAYORAL CANDIDATE: Can I see the warrant? I will let go when you show me the judicial warrant. Where is it?

UNKNOWN: Sir --

LANDER: Where is the warrant?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: President Trump's escalating immigration crackdown sparking another controversy with an elected Democrat. This time, it's one of New York City's top politicians and a candidate for mayor, comptroller Brad Lander.

He was trying to escort a migrant from federal court after his case was dismissed, linking arms with the man who immigration agents wanted to arrest. Lander demanded to see a warrant and refused to let go before federal officers arrested him and detained him for hours.

Lander joins a growing list of elected officials who have been arrested for trying to slow Trump's immigration crackdown. Federal agents arrested Newark Mayor Ras Baraka and New Jersey Congresswoman LaMonica McIver last month for blocking a detention center in New Jersey. McIver was indicted.

And on social media, McIver said Lander's arrest proves -- quote -- 'The administration will stop at nothing to intimidate those who dare to stand against their hateful agenda. This is a horrifying state of affairs for our country.'

Brad Lander was released earlier tonight, and he joins me now. Brad, this is pretty unbelievable to think about this happening. We saw this unfold. Tell me what happened. Why were you in the court to begin with?

LANDER: Yeah. So, this is the third week in a row that I've gone. About three weeks ago, Department of Homeland Security changed their practices. And now, when they -- quote, unquote -- 'dismiss cases,' they're stripping people of their asylum seeker status and making them subject to expedited removal. That had basically never happened before in New York City or anywhere other than the border.

So, this group, Friend of the Court Program, called Immigrant ARC, invited people to sit in and just observe, and then when people have that happen to them, just accompany them out of the building.

[23:35:063]

In the last two weeks, I was able to just accompany people who thought they might be arrested and detained right then, get in the elevator, go outside, and head back to their families. I worked with one. You know, one couple whose kids were not with them.

COATES: Hmm.

LANDER: They were afraid they were never going to see their kids again. But the (INAUDIBLE) today were able to get out of the building. Today was just trying to accompany Edgardo to the elevator and downstairs so that he could go back home when this happened.

COATES: Interesting. As you mentioned, you've done this before. And that was without incident, these last two weeks. What do you think changed today to have this attention? And they said -- DHS says that you were arrested for -- quote -- 'assaulting law enforcement and impeding a federal officer.' And the agency spokesperson called your actions today a political stunt. Listen to what they had to say.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRICIA MCLAUGHLIN, ASSISTANT SECRETARY, DHS: These guys want their 15 minutes of fame, and they want to do it off the backs of our ICE law enforcement officers. And we won't stand for it in this administration.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: What's your reaction?

LANDER: Well, first, anyone can see in the video that I pose no danger to anyone. And all I was trying to do was the things I had done the prior two weeks, just accompany people out to safety. That was my goal today. I sure did not go with any intention of -- of getting arrested. What I wanted was just to be able to accompany people.

I was able to accompany one family out of the building, a five-year- old, a four-year-old there back home tonight. That's what I wanted for Edgardo and everybody else.

And they're being denied their due process. They have shifted the ground, ripped the ground out from under these people who did everything right, who registered at the border, who showed up for their hearing, only to find that their opportunity to seek asylum and say I've got a credible fear of persecution is gone.

And if you don't give people clear due process, why would you expect them to show up for their court hearings in the future? We will all be worse off if we let them undermine the rule of law.

COATES: I understand that you are not now facing charges, but you are under investigation based on this detainment.

LANDER: That's right.

COATES: Are you concerned that you might be indicted?

LANDER: Well, look, I -- you know, so they did not bring charges today and the case is under review, but I'm much more concerned for Edgardo who tonight is in ICE detention in who knows where, who has no lawyer --

COATES: Because he never came --

LANDER: -- who has no due process. The person that they separated from me, yeah, they took him. He doesn't have a lawyer. He doesn't have any due process rights. We have no idea what state he's in. And that's happening to thousands of people. So, I am far more concerned about -- about Zeb (ph) and about Edgardo and the other people that we're talking about.

COATES: The current mayor, Mayor Eric Adams, who is running for reelection, you know, tonight suggested that your actions -- your actions are contributing to a climate of fear in this town. Listen to what he had to say.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MAYOR ERIC ADAMS, NEW YORK CITY, NEW YORK: One of the things that -- that I see is happening is that we're raising the noise. If all of us were saying the same thing, go to school, ICE is not in our schools, our children should be going to school, ICE is not raiding our houses of worship, they're not raiding our hospitals.

But when we're adding to the energy that everything is chaotic, everything is terrible, people start to feel that. And I'm telling people, don't live in fear.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: What's your reaction to that?

LANDER: I mean, Eric Adams is a shameful Donald Trump collaborator. In order to preserve his own skin for his crimes, he made a deal with Trump not to defend New York's immigrants.

So, all I did today was try to peacefully accompany a New Yorker, to make sure that his due process rights were protected. That, I think, is what is expected of all of us right now. It's got to be nonviolent. Of course, it got to be peaceful. We do not want to give Trump any excuse to do what he did in L.A., send in the National Guard.

But if Eric Adams is saying we ought to just let them take strip away people's due process rights, not honor their opportunity to seek asylum and let ICE agents wantonly and randomly detain them, he is bringing shame to the city that got the Statue of Liberty in its harbor, and that's why he's going to lose his reelection effort.

New York wants a mayor that will stand up and protect. Forty percent of New Yorkers are immigrants, and we are not going to forget that. COATES: Yeah. This is -- obviously, when you're walking someone out, it's case by case. What is the larger strategic plan that Democrats have to confront this issue?

LANDER: Well, look, what we could be doing right now, if we had a mayor who actually cared about protecting immigrant New Yorkers was say, in our schools, have the parent coordinators say, hey, can we connect you to a lawyer so you get legal advice to figure out, you know, when you're hearing is? What should you bring? Should you go with your family?

But we're not providing that in our schools or in our public hospitals or libraries or shelters because Eric Adams made this deal with Donald Trump.

[23:40:04]

So, yes, what Democrats should be doing is leading cities by saying, we are going to make sure we honor due process and provide resources for legal representation or at least pro se advice. Yeah, that's like the model of what I was doing today, but I'd like to do it a lot more as mayor.

COATES: Brad Lander, thank you so much.

LANDER: Thank you.

COATES: Ahead, could U.S. involvement in Iran put a dent in the MAGA movement? That's what one Trump friendly pollster is telling the president. Plus, how Vice President J.D. Vance is trying to do some damage control. We'll discuss next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:45:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COATES: As President Trump weighs a decision on whether to use military assets in Iran, he's receiving a ton of blowback from high- profile members of his own party, who were accusing the president of abandoning the America First principles that he ran on.

So just how big of a problem could this be for him politically? Well, our chief data analyst, Harry Enten, looked into all of this for us. Harry?

HARRY ENTEN, CNN SENIOR DATA REPORTER: Hey, Laura. President Donald Trump and the United States government are going to have to make some big decisions with concern to Iran.

But I think it's important to note that the Republican base of now versus yesteryear is considerably more dovish. It's considerably more dovish. What am I talking about here?

Well, let's take a look at this question, to limit the risk of Iran making nuclear arms. This is among Republicans and what they prefer. You can see only about a quarter, only about a quarter prefer military action to actually limit the risk of Iran making nuclear arms.

But what takes the cake? Well, you see here two-thirds of Republicans say a negotiated agreement. Sixty-four percent of Republicans prefer this option to limit the risk of Iran making nuclear arms.

Now, of course, Donald Trump has argued that Iran is -- quote, unquote -- or was -- quote, unquote -- 'very close to making a nuclear weapon.' Well, in that particular case, how do Republicans feel? I think it's important to note that 69% of Republicans actually would be okay, would support airstrikes if Iran is trying to make a nuclear weapon.

But here's what's important to note. Even in this case, more Americans -- excuse me, more Republicans prefer diplomacy as an option, prefer diplomacy as an option among Republicans.

Now, of course, there is one hypothetical that's floating out there, and I think it's important to put it to bed, at least with concern to American support for it. It's a big no, no. And that is the idea of sending in U.S. ground troops.

If Iran is trying to make a nuclear weapon, U.S. ground troops to stop Iran, this is a big loser. You can see it here. Sixty percent oppose the idea of sending in U.S. ground troops to destroy nuclear facilities in Iran compared to only 35% of Americans who support that idea.

But again, President Donald Trump is going to make a case, potentially, the American people on what exactly the United States will, in fact, do with Iran. We'll wait and see whether these numbers change. But at this particular point, you can see it's quite an interesting and somewhat complex picture.

COATES: Harry, thank you so much.

Joining me now, author of 'The Red Letter' on Substack, Tara Palmeri, founder and CEO of Independent Veterans of America, Paul Rieckhoff, and Republican strategist Joe Pinion. Glad to have you all here.

I'll begin with you, Tara, because you saw those poll numbers from Harry, and there was also a top MAGA pollster. His name is Rich Baris. He posted this warning to Trump, saying -- quote -- 'If he pulls the trigger, it's all over MAGA.' Now, this is suggesting, of course, the Republicans might lose their majority in Congress for a decade.

So, I wonder how much of Trump's reaction and contemplation is factoring this in.

TARA PALMERI, SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT FOR PUCK, PODCAST HOST, AUTHOR: I think President Trump is realizing that MAGA is not that loyal to him, not as loyal as he thinks.

COATES: Really? PALMERI: Yeah. I mean, did you see that comment that he made to Michael Scherer of 'The Atlantic' this morning? He said, I made America First, I can decide what it means. To me, that means someone who is very reflexive, is in a defensive state, and he thinks he controls it. By the way, it was Reagan, I think, who came up with America First.

But you know what I'm saying? He thinks that he can decide what is America First, what is isolationist, what the -- he thinks he can decide what the policy is of MAGA, and they'll go along with him.

But they're showing that they're on the brink. They're they've had it. They are not happy with this. They're already coming off of being angry with him on going back and forth on his immigration policies over the past week.

As you saw, he was saying, you know, we'll make exceptions for farm workers, restaurant tours, hoteliers. They went crazy over that. He quickly reversed it. This is something he does. He sees the base react to his moments when he veers away from what they really want.

COATES: Uh-hmm.

PALMERI: And then he goes back to suit them. So, he's really controlled by them more than he thinks -- more than he tries to let on that he controls them.

COATES: Do you think that there is a loyalty issue if this is that red line?

JOE PINION, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST, NEW YORK GOP SURROGATE, FORMER SENATE CANDIDATE: Look, I -- I think the reality is that whether you hate him or love him, President Trump built the broadest coalition that we have seen in probably the better part of two decades with the Republican Party.

With that broad coalition comes challenges. One of those challenges becomes the issue of foreign policy, when you have people that were united behind Trump because they thought that he would be the end of the military industrial complex of forever wars.

And so, I do think that we do have a little bit of PTSD in the public square. When people hear things that reminisce of weapons of mass destruction, people's hackles go up.

[23:50:00]

But I do think there is a difference between war and conflict. I think we have to remember that in Iraq, the entirety of the actual military action to take Baghdad lasted less than 30 days. We were in the country for over eight years.

So, I think that's what President Trump is potentially trying to do, to draw that line to say, yes, we must support Israel in spite of the fact that the prime minister has gone and done things I basically implored him not to do. COATES: Hmm.

PINION: But is he able to navigate it in a way that appeases the base? I'm not entirely sure he will be able to. But, ultimately, a second term nonconsecutive president is elected because he's willing to do the things that he needs to do irrespective of the impact he's going to have on his legacy.

PALMERI: He can't --

COATES: Well, I got to hear from Paul on this. I see you --

PALMERI: Yeah.

COATES: -- bit on this point. I want to hear from a veteran.

PAUL RIECKHOFF, PODCAST HOST, FOUNDER AND CEO OF INDEPENDENT VETERANS OF AMERICA: Talk is easy. War is hard. And war is exceptionally unpopular across all American political affiliations Right? I think it's unpopular for MAGA. I think it's unpopular for most Americans.

And we know the history of foreign intervention. I was in Iraq. I -- I know what that was like. And it's very easy to talk about it. It's very easy to start it, it's very hard to finish it.

I think most Americans are pushing back on any kind of foreign intervention, especially when nukes are involved and especially when American troops could potentially be at risk.

But I think it's also important to underscore, they are already at risk. We've got 40,000 troops throughout the region who have been -- who have been getting hit by -- by Iranian proxies for years. Iranian proxies hit guys like me in Iraq when we were there.

So, this has been unfolding for a long time below the radar where most Americans haven't seen it. But now, it's escalating to the point where Trump, it seems to be, doesn't have to be advised on whether or not Israel is going to do things.

We're reaching a new normal where our allies don't necessarily have to get American permission, don't have to get the commander-in-chief sign off. I think Israel is going forward regardless of whether or not they have Trump's support.

COATES: Let me ask you about what Vice President Vance had to say on this issue, you guys, too, because he released a pretty lengthy post on X. It was this morning. And he defended the president, saying -- quote -- 'I can assure you that he is only interested in using the American military to accomplish the American people's goals. Whatever he does, that is his focus.'

So, thinking about the idea of the promise of peace, stability, America First, and reverence to our troops in particular, is that going to quell that concern about getting in and being able to leave or intervention? RIECKHOFF: That sounds like political word salad. I mean, that doesn't sound like anything. I don't think it's going to make anybody feel better. Maybe it'll, you know, deepen his loyalty to Trump somehow, but that's not going to help this situation. Trump is going to have to make strategic decisions about what he does.

I think the Iranians do want our firepower. I think they do want our air assets, they do want our bombs. And if they can get that without the baggage and chaos of Trump, where he's talking junk on X when really what we need to be doing is, you know, talking softly and carrying a big stick, that generally works better in the world stage, in situations like this.

I think Netanyahu is trying to have a little bit of both to achieve his objectives while Israel and Tel Aviv continue to get hit with missiles on a daily basis.

PALMERI: I think also, like, we have to look at J.D. Vance and where he stands in all of this. J.D. Vance is setting himself up for -- to be the successor to President Trump. J.D. Vance is the carrier of the MAGA stick. Like, he is the one who has long been saying, you know, America -- American isolationism, America First. He has been hard line on it. And that's why the base loves him, that's why MAGA loves him.

COATES: But does Trump listen to him?

PALMERI: No, but he's got to defend Trump, and he also has to make sure he doesn't get dragged down by this administration and end up leaving a very unpopular administration that went into another war, and then he's stuck like Kamala and having to run on his record.

COATES: Who is Trump listening to in this space?

PALMERI: No one. I mean --

(LAUGHTER)

RIECKHOFF: Vance is in a unique position also because he's a post-9/11 combat vet himself.

COATES: Right.

RIECKHOFF: This is where he could have an oversized influence. Same thing with Tulsi Gabbard. Same thing with Pete Hegseth. These are folks who've been involved in foreign wars since 9/11 and couldn't be in a unique position to advise him appropriately on how to attack this situation or not.

PINION: I'll -- I'll simply say this: I think President Trump probably more so than anyone, probably arguably since Lincoln has assembled a team of rivals. Right? Whatever you think of the people personally, they are young, they are ambitious --

COATES: Their eyebrows went up.

(LAUGHTER) PINION: Well, I think --

RIECKHOFF: A team of rivals?

PINION: I think -- well, I think -- I think they would look at themselves as a team of rivals. Young people who all think they're going to have a bright future in politics. And so, I think that if you look at it from that perspective, trying to wrangle all of these people that have their own opinions are trying to effectively make sure that they, too, can get into the news cycle.

President Trump has to remember he was elected to lead the movement. It's his objective to make sure that he can connect that thread and make sure that the America First movement actually gets done, not making sure that we're doing the bidding of Israel.

PALMERI: I mean, he just wiped out his entire national security team based on Laura Loomer's advice that that there were a bunch of neocons around him. They fired Mike Waltz not just because of Signalgate, but because of the fear that he was a neocon. Marco Rubio for so long has had to kiss the ring and spend time with Steve Bannon to prove that he is not a neocon.

[23:55:01]

Like, this is the one mark you can have on yourself on MAGA that disqualifies you from any future in the MAGA base.

PINION: Well, look, I just think quickly here that if you just look at the entire board here and, obviously, we're talking about Israel and Iran, but we're mostly talking about Israel and Iran because Israel has pushed the envelope here. I think what President Trump was trying to do was connect that threat --

RIECKHOFF: (INAUDIBLE).

PINION: Well, that as well, but I do think that you look at what President Trump has been trying to do with -- we have Iranian fleets that are carrying Russian oil. We have all of these issues where the Chinese Communist Party is underwriting the actions of the ayatollah, underwriting the actions of the Taliban.

COATES: Hmm.

PINION: So, all of these things are connected. I believe that from negotiations with Putin to negotiations with Israel, there was an attempt to try to rein that in. I believe the Israel conflict in many ways now is undermining what had been, in some ways, a well-designed --

COATES: Well, I certainly hope for the safety of the troops. They've been threatened by the ayatollah and, of course, the safety of the American people abroad as well.

Thank you, everyone.

RIECKHOFF: Thank you.

COATES: Thank you all for watching. Erica Hill picks up CNN's breaking news coverage of the tensions in the Middle East in just a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)