Return to Transcripts main page

Laura Coates Live

Trump-Putin End Summit With Talk Of Progress But No Deal; "Laura Coates Live" Answers Viewers' Questions. Aired 11p-12a ET

Aired August 15, 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)

LAURA COATES, CNN HOST: Good evening. We are around the world tonight. I'm Laura Coates right here in Washington, D.C. along with Jim Sciutto in Anchorage, Alaska.

No deal until there is a deal. That's the word from President Trump after welcoming Vladimir Putin on American soil. It's his first visit here in a decade. The Russian leader got the red carpet treatment and entourage, not the figurative red carpet, the actual red carpet. He rode with Trump in The Beast, the president's armored limo, a rare chance for a one-on-one moment. They had a meeting with top advisors that lasted nearly three hours. And then Trump announced this at a joint news conference.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: We had an extremely productive meeting, and many points were agreed to. There are just a very few that are left. Some are not that significant. One is probably the most significant. But we have a very good chance of getting there. We didn't get there, but we have a very good chance of getting there.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: What does that all mean? Trump spoke for all of about three minutes. And when he was done, he did something even more unusual. Meet and take questions. Even though world leaders, including the leader of the country invaded by Putin more than three years ago, surely must have plenty of questions for both. But no questions. He shook Putin's hand, and they both walked off.

So, what did they agree to? What is the one most significant sticking point? Well, Trump is refusing to say. We do know there is no ceasefire in Ukraine, even though Trump said before the summit he wouldn't be happy if Putin didn't agree to one. So, of course, what is next? Well, Trump says that he's calling Ukrainian President Zelenskyy and NATO leaders. And before he left Alaska, he appeared to hint at what he thinks any deal might come down to.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) TRUMP: Now, it's really up to President Zelenskyy to get it done. And I would also say the European nations, they have to get involved a little bit. But it's up to President Zelenskyy. I think we -- we are -- and if they'd like, I'll be at that next meeting. They're going to set up a meeting now between President Zelenskyy and President Putin, and myself, I guess.

SEAN HANNITY, FOX NEWS HOST: What's your advice, based on today, when you talk to Vladimir Zelenskyy? What's your advice to --

TRUMP: Make a deal.

HANNITY: Make the deal.

TRUMP: Got to make a deal. Yeah.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Jim, I want to start with you on just what that deal might look like because Putin, he actually warned Kyiv. He warned the E.U. not to throw a wrench in whatever this agreement was. And Trump says that Zelenskyy got to make a deal. I'm wondering, is it even realistic for these world leaders to take a wait and see approach and not know all of the specifics?

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Listen, why is it up to Zelenskyy to make a deal? President Trump said he was going to make the deal. Right? He said he was going to solve it in 24 hours going back to the campaign.

But prior to the summit, he was meeting Putin expressly to make a deal with Putin, and didn't make that deal. And, in fact, by President Trump's own marker of success, the summit was a failure because Trump said, going into the summit, he wanted a ceasefire, as he has demanded for months from Putin, but Putin hasn't delivered, and Trump left the summit without a ceasefire. So, by Trump's own definition of what would constitute a success, this summit was a failure.

And now, Trump is moving the goalposts to say -- after saying he was going to make a deal, make peace, that it was going to be easy for him, etcetera. Now, it is up to Zelenskyy. It certainly doesn't make sense by even the way Trump himself was describing it prior to this summit.

And then from Putin's perspective, Trump has once again punted on the severe consequences Trump himself vowed, threatened prior to this summit if Putin didn't agree to that ceasefire.

And now, he told Hannity, well, I don't have to think about that now maybe for two or three more weeks, which has been, as you know, Laura, the language Trump has used repeatedly over the last several months. You know, in one or two or three weeks, I'm going to impose these sanctions, that's my deadline, and yet the deadline has moved again.

[23:05:02]

I just don't know what -- what the president received in return for that warm welcome, red carpet welcome that he gave the Russian leader.

COATES: It was quite the welcome. But it also begs the question when they say, don't throw a wrench into the plans. It almost suggests that the decisions have already been made. And I don't want you to muck it up somehow, which is exactly counter to what President Zelenskyy obviously feels his agency ought to entitle him to as the president of the country that has been invaded.

SCIUTTO: Yeah. You know, I don't understand because he didn't specify what that monkey wrench is to throw into the works. It's possible he was referring to both Ukrainian and European, frankly, insistence on some security guarantees for Ukraine going forward. There has been some discussion of a European-led force in Ukraine to help deter a further Russian invasion down the line.

But it's hard to understand how that would be a monkey wrench given that's a quite reasonable demand for the country that has been invaded twice by Russia over the course of the past 10 years.

So, it's -- it's just a -- and again, I'm not using my measures of success for this summit. I'm using Trump's measures of success as expressed by him prior to the meeting here in Ukraine. But now, we have whole new definition of success going forward. He seems to be shifting the onus on to the Ukrainian -- the Ukrainian president.

COATES: Jim, thank you. Stand by. We've got so much more to talk with you about --

SCIUTTO: Yeah.

COATES: -- as well. I want to bring in former Democratic congressman and assistant secretary of state for the Obama administration, Tom Malinowski. Also, former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, William Taylor, former deputy Pentagon press secretary for the Biden administration, Sabrina Singh, and director of Defense and Foreign Policy Studies at the Cato Institute, Justin Logan. Glad to have all of you here.

I want to begin with this though because, you know, Ambassador Taylor, Jim has mentioned the idea of Trump failing on his own terms, but he's calling this essentially a 10. And remember, he spent so much time over the past week or so managing, if not drastically lowering expectations, and even talking about a second meeting. How do you view this particular summit?

AMB. WILLIAM TAYLOR, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO UKRAINE: Laura, I would say that it could have been worse, it could have been better.

COATES: For who and for what?

TAYLOR: So, it could have been worse. If there had been a Yalta, where they got together and kind of divided things up, you know, the two presidents get -- divide up Europe and divide -- divide up Ukraine, that's -- that's Yalta. They didn't do that, apparently. It -- it turned out it's not a Munich. They didn't -- Trump did not sell out Ukraine. So, that's the good news, those two things didn't happen. The bad news is he didn't get a ceasefire. And Jim is exactly right. This is what Trump said he was after. It was a ceasefire. He's going be angry, he's not going be happy if he didn't get a ceasefire. Well, he didn't get a ceasefire, apparently.

Now, there was never going to be a ceasefire deal, but there could have been an agreement if -- if Trump had put pressure on Putin. And he still might. If Trump had put pressure on Putin to come to the table on a ceasefire, then that could have set the stage for a meeting with Zelenskyy.

COATES: But congressman, he did put pressure on Putin before this meeting. He talked about severe sanctions. And I see your cocked head. You're not buying even the question on the premise of it. But last week, he was talking tough, he was giving deadlines. In fact, he had this to say about severe consequences if what did not happen happened. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: Because of what happened today, I think I don't have to think about that. Now, I may have to think about it in two weeks or three weeks or something. But we don't have to think about that right now. I think, you know, the meeting went very well.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: This is what he said tonight when he was asked about the idea of these severe consequences. So, is he moving the goalpost indefinitely and essentially just giving up on all the tough talk?

TOM MALINOWSKI, FORMER NEW JERSEY REPRESENTATIVE: Well, first of all, Putin doesn't care what you say, he only cares about what you do. And last week was a second when it looked like maybe Trump was prepared to do something. He imposed the tariffs on India. It looked like he was trying to put together a package of -- basically, pressure on Russian energy sales to other countries, a very complicated effort that if done right over weeks, over months, could potentially have put enough pressure on Putin to stop this war.

But then like a second after he said he was going to do that, he invites the guy to Alaska with the red carpet treatment. J.D. Vance goes on T.V. and says, we're not going to provide another penny of aid to Ukraine. And Putin is like, well, okay, this is great, there's actually no real pressure on me, I'm being given the status that I've not been given by any American president for almost 20 years, and so why not come and troll the Americans, which they did in a number of ways?

[23:10:10]

You know, the foreign minister wearing a USSR sweater, which Putin obviously would have approved. And then he repeats exactly the same demands on Ukraine, to give up land that Ukraine currently possesses, that Ukrainians died to defend as a condition just for a ceasefire.

COATES: But do you see --

MALINOWSKI: So --

COATES: -- what Putin did as trolling the United States?

JUSTIN LOGAN, DIRECTOR OF DEFENSE AND FOREIGN POLICY, CATO INSTITUTE: Putin trolls. He does. We all have to --

COATES: -- do that now?

LOGAN: Yeah. Well, certainly, the sweatshirt worn by Lavrov (ph) was unnecessary, somewhat gratuitous. But I think we're missing something important here, which is that I -- I -- I think if any of us had to bet the kids' college fund on Trump or any notional U.S. president, having a lever that it could use to get Putin to agree to a ceasefire with no conditions is just not true. We've spent hundreds of billions of dollars aiding this war and keeping this war going for more than three years, and the battlefield is tilted down against Ukraine as it is.

So, I think we're in a real dilemma in the sense that we -- there's no evidence that we have a lever chasing around Russian oil in tankers. You know, India can't buy it now, so China will buy it. Oil sanctions do not have a happy track record because they're so easy to get around. So, I just think we're all groping around for some sort of magic wand that can change this thing, and I don't think one exists.

COATES: Is that the president who is treating it as an exercise in futility? Is he missing the mark then because what you described is just that?

LOGAN: The problem is he's sort of acting as though he might have a magic wand, although I believe he knows that he doesn't have one. But the important thing is that Vladimir Putin believes that he doesn't have one. And that's the problem.

Putin right now is winning on the battlefield. I say that with great remorse and I don't like it, but it's the fact. And so, Putin has an incentive structure that says, if I continue fighting, I have a pretty good shot of getting everything that I want, so why stop? And that's the sort of loggerheads at which we find ourselves.

SABRINA SINGH, FORMER DEPUTY PENTAGON PRESS SECRETARY: I think, just to push back on that, I think one important takeaway from this meeting today is that the diplomatic isolation has ended for Putin by inviting him to the United States for this meeting. I think --

COATES: What does that mean for him, to have that over?

SINGH: Well, it's exactly what he wanted. It's exactly what he wanted to be able to come back on the world stage in the manner that he came back on the world stage, that -- in this red carpet rollout. I mean, Donald Trump clapping for him as he's walking down. That is the photo- op that he was hoping to achieve, and he got it.

But to push back on your point, I mean, yes, Russia continues and has made gain throughout the year, but you have to remember that it is this administration that put a pause on sending weapons to Ukraine, critical weapons, during a very intense time in the war. They also cut off some intelligence sharing. And that did have impacts on the battlefield.

LOGAN: You don't think that's why they're losing the war, though?

SINGH: I do not. That's why --

LOGAN: Okay.

SINGH: -- they're losing the war. But I do think that that absolutely had an impact, and that's something that, you know, during the Biden administration that I served under, we continue to send and arm the Ukrainians because we believe that it is in the best interest of the Ukrainians to continue to fight this war and continue to be effective. And we've seen that in their drone capabilities and being able to conduct these long-range strikes.

COATES: Talk to me about the leverage angle here. We heard Putin say today that the war in Ukraine actually would have been avoided, which is, frankly, mute to his ears, and feeds the statements that Donald Trump on the campaign trail and in the White House has said -- that had Trump been in office, he would not have invaded Ukraine, essentially. Trump has been essentially beating his chest on this very issue. What does that statement do to the future of diplomacy and conversations with Zelenskyy?

TAYLOR: Well, we know why President Putin invaded Ukraine, first in 2014, and then big time in 2022, is because he would try to -- he always has wanted to control Ukraine. He tried it politically. He tried to set up these little, uh, statements, Donbas, Donetsk, and Luhansk. That didn't work. So, he beat off Crimea. And then Donbas, he sent his troops into there. He wants to control. It had nothing to do with who is in the White House.

COATES: But wait, if that was the reason, if he wouldn't have invaded it because of who is in the White House, why wouldn't he end it because who is now in the White House? It doesn't -- doesn't track logically to think about that.

But, you know, Putin proposed Moscow next as a meeting site. Trump acknowledged, which he would get a lot of pushback and some flacks for that if that were the case. But what did that signal to you, that Putin essentially felt comfortable enough to say, hey, why don't you come over to my place next time, which is Moscow?

MALINOWSKI: Yeah. It's Trump's reaction that concerns me.

[23:15:01]

Look, I'm a Democrat --

COATES: He had paused.

MALINOWSKI: Hmm. COATES: We don't see it.

MALINOWSKI: Look, I'm a Democrat, obviously. I can be partisan. There are times when I enjoy watching Donald Trump make a fool of himself. But not here, not when the stakes are this high for American security, for American prestige. Ukrainians dying, not just on the battlefield, but children and ambulance drivers. There was an ambulance driver who was killed today by a Russian strike.

I actually want, on this occasion, I want Donald Trump to get his damn Nobel Peace Prize and succeed in ending this war. And to see how easy it is for Putin to manipulate Trump psychologically by doing these obvious things -- oh, sir, you know, you won overwhelmingly in 2020 and, of course, I wouldn't have invaded Ukraine if you were president -- that -- that -- that -- those simple, obvious efforts of flattery work so well --

SINGH: Well, he's the best intelligence officer, too. I mean, he's one of the best intelligence officers that -- and is very good at manipulation. And that's what Putin is playing to. He's playing to Donald Trump's ego, and he's quite successful at it.

I think also, just to add to your point, I mean, we didn't see anything that Trump would promise Ukraine. We saw no security guarantees for Ukraine. We saw no additional promises of commitments to Ukraine. And that's why Ukraine and the European leaders are concerned about, especially about that one-on-one meeting happened, which obviously happened in the presidential motorcade, but there was that three plus three that ended up happening at the end, which is a good thing.

COATES: Stand by, everyone. We have a lot more to talk about. It's not time for us to end our conversation. But it is morning in Kyiv. How do the people of Ukraine feel about the summit? Acceptable or skeptical? The question now, what will their president, President Zelenskyy, do next? We are live in Ukraine with fresh reaction next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:20:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COATES: President Trump says it's now up to Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelenskyy to get any deal done. That will be a tough choice for him to make. Why? Because the harsh realities of Russia's three- and-a-half-year war are not slowing. Russian missiles and drones hit Ukrainian cities for hours right up to the moment Trump and Putin met on that tarmac. At least one person was killed. And moments after the talks began, Russia's defense ministry said it shot down Ukrainian drones over southern Russia.

Joining me now is CNN senior international correspondent Ben Wedeman live in Kiev. Ben, Trump says striking a deal is up to Zelenskyy. He even says there will be soon a meeting between Zelenskyy and Putin. So how is Ukraine reacting to these talks? BEN WEDEMAN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: By and large, the reaction, Laura, has not been positive to these talks. In fact, one Ukrainian journalist on social media said, remarking on this summit, that there are hundred compliments to Putin, a red carpet, jet fighters in the sky, and nothing in the end, so we're preparing for more shelling. And, in fact, within the last 40 minutes, we've heard that there have been air raid sirens in the southern city of Zaporizhzhia. And so, the war has not come to an end. The hostilities continue.

One Ukrainian M.P. noted that it wasn't the worst outcome considering the other alternatives to the whole spectacle. But, by and large, Ukrainians who -- of course, it was the middle of the night when this joint statement was made but, by and large, the reaction has not been positive. The feeling is yet again, the onus has been put on Ukraine by President Trump, even though it is Ukraine that was the country in February of 2022 that was invaded by Russia and not the opposite.

I think people were somewhat disturbed by sort of the warm atmosphere between Trump and Putin or at least the warmth coming from Trump to Putin. Putin was pretty much standard in terms of his poker face. But Trump really seemed rather effusive in his compliments of President Putin, calling him a strong guy, that he's tough as hell, that it was a warm meeting.

So, the signals coming out of the Alaska summit are not going to be encouraging people when it comes to hopes for a ceasefire, a truce, some sort of cessation to this three-and-a-half-year war that has left this country really struggling at the moment in the absence of a strong supporter in Washington.

COATES: Ben Wedeman, thank you so much. Jim?

SCIUTTO: Thank you so much, Laura Coates. I'm joined now by a member of the Ukrainian Parliament, Kira Rudik. Kira, good to talk to you again. Thanks for taking the time this morning, your time.

KIRA RUDIK, MEMBER, UKRAINIAN PARLIAMENT: Hello, Jim, and thank you so much for having me.

SCIUTTO: So, first question. Here we are after all the buildup, all the fanfare, all the promises from Trump leading up to this, the red carpet welcome.

[23:25:02]

What was it all for? From your perspective, what was gained from this summit?

RUDIK: That's a very good question. So, Putin, obviously, have won some time, President Trump has won a press conference, and Ukraine has got nothing. And, you know, there will be people here who will be waking up in Ukraine looking at this red carpet.

I'm remembering all the friends that I lost at this war. I'm seeing their faces. And seeing this red carpet is just a disgrace, honestly. And it's very triggering and very painful because I don't think it was absolutely necessary.

If there was a result for Ukraine, a ceasefire, something that President Trump was demanding from Putin for a very long time, then we would say, well, okay, whatever you have to do to get the job done. But the job was not done. The air raid sirens are going off in Ukrainian cities.

The ball right now seems to be yet again in Ukraine's court. However, we are the victim of this war, and we are pushed to constantly reminding the American president that we didn't start this war. We are the victims. And without the security guarantees, there is not too much to talk to Putin about.

SCIUTTO: Do you sense, and I think I have an idea given your answer just there, that President Trump, though he promised before this summit that he was going to find a way to end this war, at least get a ceasefire, but that President Trump is now saying, Ukraine, it's up to you, it's your problem now?

RUDIK: This is one of the worst outcomes that we were afraid of, that Putin will fool President Trump and pressure him into moving from his original position, which was to demand a ceasefire before any kind of talks.

We know from the front line that there is no ceasefire. We know from our cities that the air raid sirens are off. And we also know that President Trump said, well, now, it's up to Ukraine without the ceasefire. So, who won and who lost at this meeting? And unfortunately, it doesn't look good for the American president.

SCIUTTO: President Trump, when asked in an interview by Fox News after the summit, whether the severe consequences he had promised before the summit if Putin did not agree to a ceasefire were coming, Trump said, well, and I'm paraphrasing here, don't have to think about that now, we'll think about it in two or three weeks and, as you know, he said sanctions are coming in two or three weeks, multiple times over the course of the year. Did President Trump blink once again on sanctions?

RUDIK: Jim, this is the absolute worst approach in dealing with the aggressor, is to promise something to make a threat, and then just don't go ahead with it, because it creates this sense of appeasement. And if you look at the Russian media, they are laughing at it. They are openly laughing at the American president about his threats and inability to exercise on them.

And this is actually honestly painful because we are a democratic country, same as the United States, as Europeans. We treat you as our allies as we are. And it's painful when our allies are being laughed at by Russian media.

SCIUTTO: Well, Kira Rudik, given where you are in Kyiv and additional air raid warnings that we're hearing in the eastern part of Ukraine, thank you for joining, and I do hope that you remain safe tonight.

RUDIK: Thank you, Jim.

SCIUTTO: Laura, you hear it there from Kyiv, deep skepticism as to what this was all for her.

COATES: Painful and powerful to hear it right --

SCIUTTO: Yeah.

COATES: -- from a member of parliament there, what this looked like in the optics and how it really impacts them as well. Thank you so much, Jim. We will have much more ahead, including a closer look at the actual battlefield and the key areas that may factor into any future talks. Plus, how has Putin been able to keep recruiting all these soldiers? There are new details on that next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:30:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COATES: The war between Russia and Ukraine rages on tonight as today's summit between Trump and Putin ended with no ceasefire and no deal. The president said there was a sticking point between the two. But tonight, he is suggesting the source of disagreement was not land swapping. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HANNITY: It's kind of universal thinking, how this end. There's going to be some land swaps. There will be more Russian territory than there had been. And what Ukraine wants and needs desperately is our security measures that won't be NATO-related. If you have to look into your crystal ball, is that how it ends?

[23:35:00]

TRUMP: Well, I think those are points that we negotiated, and those are points that we largely have agreed on. Actually, I think we've agreed on a lot.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Let's get an update now on the current state of the war. Joining me now is CNN military analyst, retired Air Force colonel, Cedric Leighton. Colonel Leighton, can you walk us through the recent gains that Ukraine has made on the battlefield?

CEDRIC LEIGHTON, CNN MILITARY ANALYST, RETIRED AIR FORCE COLONEL: Yeah, absolutely, Laura. And, you know, one of the key things here is to really look at the map as we know it right now. So, when you see what Ukraine has done, they've basically taken over all of these areas. But it took them a long time to do this. They moved fast initially to retake some of these areas.

But some of the things that they've been able to do in the various regions, let's take the eastern front, for example, they've been able to take some of these areas up here. However, they are in danger because these areas right here, in this area and this area on Pokrovsk, they are all being threatened by the Russians. So, when you hear about the Russian movement in these particular areas, the Ukrainian forces are basically in danger there.

Now, when you look at this part, this is the southern area of Ukraine, this area around Kherson, the Kakhovka Dam, the nuclear power plant, the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, all of these is under Russian control still.

Now, the Ukrainians were able, couple years ago, to capture the area around Kherson. That was a major element here. But the key thing here is that the Ukrainians have been able to move on some other fronts. For example, they were able to move into the Kursk region for a while. But they've lost that area as well. And that is something that becomes critical for the Ukrainians to maintain these particular areas.

COATES: So, when Trump suggests some sort of Russia-Ukraine peace deal involving land swapping, if that proposal really comes up, what does that landscape look like?

LEIGHTON: So, when you look at the pre-war map, Laura, there was only these territories that were under control of the Russians. But then, you look at what happened in 2022 when the Russians first invaded, they took all of these areas. They threatened Kyiv. They threatened Kharkiv.

But then, when you compare that with -- with what -- what we have now, you have Ukraine controlling all of these areas. But these areas right in this region, they would all be areas that become part of the areas that the Ukrainians would probably have to give up. And particularly, in the eastern front, they'd be going into these areas. This is what the Russians would be getting after, and that's what they want right now.

COATES: Original recruitment strategy seemed to be relying on a draft, enlisting convicts in jail. But now, they've expanded their push in Russia for more soldiers. How have they done that, and is it working?

LEIGHTON: So, one of the things they've done is they've done financial incentives. They've provided financial incentives. So, when you compare the average Russian monthly salary of $900 a month, the average Russian soldier actually gets a lot more than that. They get $2,450 a month in monthly salary. The signing bonus that they get is even more substantial, $30,000 in an economy like Russia's. That is a really, really big deal.

And, in addition to that, they get rewards for capturing a leopard tank, $12,000, destroying a helicopter, 2,400, if you destroy a high Mars launcher, 3,600, and if you win a medal, especially one for valor, $12,000. That's the kind of thing that they are getting. Those are the kinds of incentives that they are providing their soldiers.

COATES: Colonel Leighton, thank you so much.

LEIGHTON: You bet, Laura.

COATES: Up next, reaction from Congress as lawmakers try to figure out what today's summit might mean for the effort to give Ukraine more or less aid.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:40:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCIUTTO: President Trump is taking public heat tonight for, quite literally, rolling out the red carpet for the Russian president, Vladimir Putin. Tonight, one member of Congress is slamming Trump's grand, warm welcome, saying he gave the Russian leader -- quote -- "exactly what he wanted" and, as we know now, for not much in return.

Joining me now, Democratic Congressman Mike Quigley. He is the co- chair of the Congressional Ukraine Caucus. Congressman, thanks so much for taking time tonight.

REP. MIKE QUIGLEY (D-IL): Thank you. Good to be back.

SCIUTTO: So, President Trump, by his own definition of success, prior to today's meeting, failed. He said he was going to get a ceasefire here or expected to, and if not, he would impose severe consequences on Russia. But neither of those things happened. Was this summit a failure?

QUIGLEY: Well, look, I don't know if anybody had reasonable expectations. Why anyone was optimistic about this is simply beyond me. What has President Trump said or done that makes anyone think that he will stand up to Putin? What has Putin said or done that think -- makes anyone think that he would back down to Trump? I mean, it seemed preordained here.

The unfortunate surprise is, as you suggest, the red carpet treatment for a brutal war criminal, who instigated a war, a mass murder, you know, for -- I've been to Ukraine five times since the conflict started. I've sat on -- I've sat through meetings with those who have sat and occupied areas. I stood on the mass graves at Butcha and listened to parents talk about their kids being kidnapped by the Russians.

[23:45:03]

It's very hard to stomach that we would give someone like that a warm welcome in the United States.

SCIUTTO: Yeah. President trump seemed to move the goalposts after the summit in an interview with fox news, saying that is now up to Ukraine to negotiate with Russia for a ceasefire and an end to this war. Is he, in effect, punting? I mean, prior to this summit, Trump said he was going to make peace, as he has been saying for months. In fact, he said, initially, he could end this war in 24 hours. Of course, that didn't happen. But is he now saying he's no longer in the business of seeking peace in Ukraine?

QUIGLEY: It appears to be the case. Look, this is a president who has never taken responsibility for anything, never been held accountable for anything. So, he's certainly not going to take blame for something that doesn't go well.

It's not that he doesn't have a lot of things that he can do. I think that he would get extraordinary support on the Republican side for a bill that's already proposed, a bipartisan bill to enhance sanctions there, including secondary sanctions.

There are a number of Republicans who are promoting his ability and supporting it to seize Russian assets here in the United States, you know, $5, $6 billion. There are 300 billion more Russian assets frozen in Europe that can be used to help in the war effort and to rebuild Ukraine afterwards.

And, of course, all he has to suggest is if he wants to do another military supplemental, the bill would pass. I'm sure the Republicans in the House and Senate would say just how high.

So, he has all the weapons he needs to do this. It's just his will to do it. And apparently, right now, he's just frustrated that things didn't go so well.

SCIUTTO: Well, that's another topic that the president seems to have moved the goalposts on because prior to the summit, he said he would impose severe consequences if there was no ceasefire. There was no ceasefire. But President Trump this evening, following the summit again in that interview with Fox News, said, well, we don't have to talk about severe consequences now, I'll talk about it again in two or three weeks, which is, course, a timeline he has set and blown through multiple times.

I mean, forgive me, but Congress has had this bipartisan support for sanctions bill for months now, but I haven't seen Republicans willing to act. Do you -- do you believe they will act now without explicit direction from President Trump?

QUIGLEY: The majority won't. I do want to, you know, acknowledge the fact that there are a handful of Republicans in particular, and you know who they are because they've been outspoken, who are willing to put themselves out on the line for this. Right? There are those who have put forward discharge petitions in the House to move forward with sanctions. Speaker Johnson changed the rules literally so we couldn't act on it until we come back after the August work period.

So, look, there's a handful out there. When the supplemental vote comes, maybe about half the Republicans vote for it. So, clearly, this is not the party of Reagan, this is the party of Trump, and we're seeing the results of that. The Reagan doctrine for all it was worth pushing back against Russian aggression is virtually dead even in the republican caucus.

SCIUTTO: And today, the Russian president walks away again, it seems, without any new consequences for his ongoing invasion of Ukraine. Congressman Mike Quigley, thanks so much for joining.

QUIGLEY: Thank you. Take care.

SCIUTTO: There you have it, Laura, another stinging review of this summit here in Anchorage between Trump and Putin.

COATES: I'm so glad you've been here. We look forward to hearing more from you because we'll see you back here for more live coverage from Anchorage at midnight, unpacking all that happened and what there still is to come. Thanks so much, Jim.

Up next, the panel is back to answer some of your questions on where talks go from here and to take on this idea from Hillary Clinton.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HILLARY CLINTON, FORMER U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE: If he could end it without putting Ukraine in a position where it had to concede its territory to the aggressor, had to, in a way, validate Putin's vision of greater Russia, but instead could really stand up to Putin, if we could pull that off, if President Trump were the architect of that, I'd nominate him for a Nobel Peace Prize.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[23:50:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COATES: Well, it has been quite the day. President Trump and Vladimir Putin meeting for nearly three hours in Alaska, resulting in no conclusive agreement on an end to the war in Ukraine.

We've been getting a ton of questions from all of you about it. So, it's time for "America Asks." The panel is back with me. Let's go to you first, Justin.

[23:55:00]

So, Larry asked this question: Does Trump really care about ending wars or is it more about his desire for a Nobel Peace Prize? What do you think?

LOGAN: Well, it's tough to say what's in the man's mind. I mean, if you look at his second inaugural address, he had what I thought was like a very elegant statement about how he would judge. He wanted to be a peace president. He would judge himself not just on the wars that they ended, but the wars that they never got into in the first place. So, on that basis, you would say he actually does want to be a peace president.

He certainly would like a Nobel Peace Prize. I think that's an open and shut argument. But he has been focused on, you know, some conflicts between Thailand and Cambodia, the little skirmish that happened between India and Pakistan earlier this year. And the wars that America is deeply involved in, Israel-Gaza, Ukraine-Russia, it turns out, are much more difficult to get a resolution to.

COATES: Congressman, you know, Hillary Clinton, as you heard, said that she would give him or nominate a Nobel Peace Prize for Trump if certain conditions were met. Now, Hannity asked Trump about that very moment. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: If she said that, that's very nice. I really appreciate it, too, actually.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: This is my question. I'm a viewer of this show as well. What do you make of the fact that there is this back and forth between these two in particular and the conditions that she is essentially saying?

MALINOWSKI: Well, I think she's being just as smart as Putin in manipulating him, actually. And again, it comes back to the fact that even those of us who don't wish Trump well politically really do want him to succeed because we want this war to end. We want American interests to be protected. We don't want Russia to win.

And so, everybody, Ukrainians, Americans are doing this. They're trying to find some way to manipulate Trump into using American strength to get to the right outcome. And so, we've -- and we've been successful enough that he hasn't totally sold Ukraine out. But yet, somehow, he's incapable of getting angry with Putin. Right?

Like, he'll get angry at Denmark, he'll get angry at Canada, he'll get angry at our democratic allies, and yet even when Putin spits in his face, as he did in Alaska, he's still incapable of doing that, and we haven't cracked the code of how to change that aspect of Trump's personality.

COATES: Let's go to another viewer question out there because Nancy is asking this question: Why was Putin, a former KGB operative, allowed into a U.S. military location? Is that not rather risky in and of itself? Sabrina, what do you think?

SINGH: So, military installations can take incredible measures to protect sensitive equipment, sensitive capabilities that we have there. So, I have absolute confidence in our military and our men and women in uniform that they took the precautions needed. And you saw some of those F-35s that were out there. They had some of that red blocking on there. They're sensitive information that you just don't want, frankly, filmed and you don't need someone like Vladimir Putin to see.

I think, again, the takeaway here is that, for me at least, is that he came to the United States, welcomed to a military base. That sends an incredible message. So yes, our capabilities are safe and secure, we can make room secure for visiting delegations, but the biggest takeaway here is that he came to the United States and really had the red carpet treatment for him.

COATES: Got a question for you, Ambassador Taylor. Manny is asking this question: Do the Russian people really know the number of soldiers killed in the war? TAYLOR: They don't. They know what -- what Putin and the Kremlin wants them to know. They've got full control. The Kremlin has full control over what the Russian people hear and see.

Now, that said, there are a million Russian soldiers that are either dead or wounded so badly they had to go off. Those million families know. Those million families have gone to graves or to the hospitals, and they know. And that is simmering. That is simmering, Laura.

COATES: What can they do about it?

TAYLOR: Nothing they can do about it at this point. Nothing they can do because the oppression, the control that Putin has, the Kremlin has over the Russian society is so heavy. It's comparable to the worst of Soviet times.

COATES: Justin, let me ask you this question. We've got one more coming in, and that is, what concession should both parties make to end this war? In fact, why don't we do a quick rapid fire and each of you give your impact? Quick.

LOGAN: Do we have two hours to answer that question?

(LAUGHTER)

No, I mean, I think, you know, they're talking about land swaps here. The unfortunate reality is that I think the Zelenskyy incursion into Kursk that took place earlier was intended as a lever to say, oh, we'll give back some Russian territory that we hold, except they don't hold the territory anymore.

So, I'm afraid at this point that the military balance has tipped so dramatically. I don't have a lot of hope for a sort of salutary development. There was an opportunity.

[23:59:58]

Mark Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in the fall of 2022, said now is the time to negotiate, and he was sort of hooted down as an appeaser in Neville Chamberlain and things when, in fact, that was probably the high water point for Ukraine militarily.

SINGH: I will say that we always talk about what Ukraine needs to give up and the concessions Ukraine needs to make from this administration and from Russia. But what is Ukraine going to get? Can they get membership to NATO? What are the security guarantees? I think that is something that we could focus on to potentially bring a deal and bring a diplomatic solution here.

COATES: I want to hear more from Jim Sciutto on this. We'll pick up our coverage right after a quick break. Thank you all for watching. And of course, my panel here as well. We've got live coverage on the Trump-Putin summit out of Anchorage, Alaska right now.