Return to Transcripts main page
Laura Coates Live
Trump Breaks Silence On Alleged Epstein Letter; Judge Blocks Trump's Bid To Fire Fed Governor Lisa Cook; New Video Stuns UFO Hearing. Aired 11p-12a ET
Aired September 09, 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 AND SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Not me. The president breaks his silence on the letter he says he never wrote to Jeffrey Epstein. The denials are heading into double down territory.
Plus, the breaking news tonight, a federal judge blocks Trump's attempt to remove embattled Fed Governor Lisa Cook and says she must be reinstated, at least for now.
And later, America's UFO mystery just got a whole lot stranger with a never-before-seen video that stunned a congressional hearing.
Tonight on "Laura Coates Live."
All right, so the day started with President Trump declaring the Jeffrey Epstein fallout dead issue. He insisted he doesn't comment on things that are dead issue, which brings us to the how the day ended. That so-called dead issue, yeah, it's got a very strong pulse.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNKNOWN (voice-over): Did you sign the Jeffrey Epstein birthday letter that --
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: That's not my signature. And it's not the way I speak. And anybody that has covered me for a long time know that's not my language. It's nonsense. And, frankly, you're wasting your time.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: That's President Trump before heading into Joe's Seafood. Apparently, his first time dining out here in Washington, D.C. during his second term. It's supposed to show that crime in Washington is down.
But the Epstein saga? It might as well have been a guest at the table because it's certainly the Washington elephant in the room. Forget sparkling or still. Reporters were always going to ask about this. That letter in Epstein's birthday book, released by the House Oversight Committee, that bears a signature with Trump's name. And that's not all he was pressed on.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNKNOWN (voice-over): Will you meet with Epstein victims? Do you plan to meet with --
TRUMP: I don't know. Nobody suggested that. Certainly, uh -- certainly, I don't like that whole situation with respect to anybody being abused or hurt. But I haven't -- I haven't even thought about that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Well, some of the survivors at a rally last week suggested you meet with him. But -- okay. Up until that dinner, Trump was actually radio silent about the letter's release. Instead, the White House had been in front of it all day, claiming he had nothing to do with it and pointing the finger at Democrats.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Why are the Democrats all of a sudden caring about this? It's because they are desperately trying to concoct a hoax to smear the president of the United States.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: A hoax. Can we get some specifics on that? Which -- which part is the hoax? The abuse itself? The documents? Maggie Haberman of "The New York Times", well, she asked about the specifics.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MAGGIE HABERMAN, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT FOR THE NEW YORK TIMES: What exactly is the hoax? I'm just trying to understand what's fake. What's fake is not the documents?
LEAVITT: The hoax is the Democrats pretending to care about victims of crime when they do not care about victims of crime, when they have done nothing to solve crimes, when they have done nothing to lock up child pedophiles and child rapists across the country, and when they are now using victims as political props to try and, again, smear the president of the United States and drag on this bad story about him.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Well, the story is about the Epstein victims, who see themselves as survivors, who have every right to be heard, not dismissed as political props or pawns, and they know what happened to them is not a hoax. But on Capitol Hill, Trump's allies swell the closing ranks, backing his denial and openly questioning whether the letter is even real.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. JAMES COMER (R-KY): The president says he did not sign it. So, I take the president's word.
REP. JIM JORDAN (R-OH): I trust what the president said. And the Oversight Committee is looking into it.
UNKNOWN (voice-over): Mr. Speaker, do you think the Trump birthday note to Epstein is real?
MIKE JOHNSON, SPEAKER OF THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES: I don't. They say it's not.
REP. TIM BURCHETT (R-TN): It has been there for four years. And now, it has just come out. I just don't buy it.
MANU RAJU, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: So, you think, really, someone might have just forged this somehow and --
BURCHETT: Yeah. I mean, somehow, it's so easy to do. I just -- I just don't buy any of it right now.
RAJU: Have you seen that letter?
REP. ERIC BURLISON (R-MO): I've not, but I would love to see it, like, matched with his handwriting.
RAJU: Yeah. There's a letter --
BURLISON: It just seems really, really wild. Yeah, I don't want to see that.
(LAUGHTER)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Let's talk with Democratic congressman from New York, Dan Goldman. Congressman, welcome back. The president you heard declaring tonight that Epstein's birthday letter is -- his words -- nonsense. He's just saying that it's not his letter, didn't sign it. Yet the House Oversight chair, James Comer, believing that it was forged and the committee won't look into it. Um, are you surprised by the denial?
REP. DANIEL GOLDMAN (D-NY): I'm not surprised by it, but I'm kind of dumbfounded by it. Uh, you know, as a prosecutor, we would have, uh, handwriting comparisons. And oftentimes, there was the question of whether you want to get a handwriting expert or not. And often, we didn't get it, and we just said to the jury, you can look with your own eyes and look at that signature and see the -- how it compares to others.
[23:05:05]
Now, of course, it is just his first name, but there are many, many other signatures of Donald Trump's first name that look almost identical to that, and it certainly resembles his normal signature. It's also -- we know that he was very close to Jeffrey Epstein and there's really no doubt that this is an authentic document that he's trying to deny. And, Laura, the reason he's trying to deny it is really important because when you combine this birthday card with Donald Trump's statement a year before that he likes Jeffrey Epstein and he and Jeffrey Epstein both like beautiful girls, Jeffrey Epstein likes them -- quote -- "on the younger side," between these two documents, in Donald Trump's own words, you have proof that he knew or was involved in Jeffrey Epstein's underage sex scheme, and that's why he's running away from it.
And it is critical to understand why this is so important. This is not reporting. This is not Democrats making anything up. This is a letter from Donald Trump and a statement from Donald Trump that indicates very clearly that he knew that Jeffrey Epstein was involved with underage girls.
COATES: Congressman, some would argue that that's a bridge too far, connecting those dots, the idea of referencing to younger women, and then being explicitly aware of an underage sex trafficking ring. Do you have additional information where the average voter, the average American, the average person would be able to connect those dots more clearly than really the scribbling of a picture and the letter?
GOLDMAN: No, I -- I very intentionally didn't say underage sex trafficking ring. I said that Donald Trump is knowledge -- knew -- at a minimum, knew, uh, if not involved with, that Jeffrey Epstein was engaging in, uh, underage -- in sexual activity with underage girls because when you put those two things together, there's no other conclusion that a logical person could reach.
And now, you have Mike Johnson, the speaker, first saying that he was an FBI informant trying to -- uh, trying to turn against Jeffrey Epstein and go to the FBI about this case --
COATES: Hmm.
GOLDMAN: -- now backing that up. But again, FBI informants can only inform the FBI if they know about some wrongdoing. So, if he is an FBI informant, if he did report this tip to the FBI, whatever it is, he had to know about it, and that's why he is trying so hard, Laura, to keep these files sealed and to deny what the obvious, obvious truth is.
COATES: In an instant, I'm even more curious about the testimony of Acosta and others, to talk about the sweetheart deal and what was known in that full FBI file and beyond.
But I want to turn for a moment to what has just come out this evening, congressman. A federal judge tonight ruling that the Trump administration cannot fire Lisa Cook from the Federal Reserve as the Board of Governors member because there are concerns about due process and whether you can fire someone for cause for behavior that allegedly happened before they were even a member on that Board of Governors.
The judge wrote this: She is likely to succeed on her claim that the purported removal deprived her of procedural rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. Now, you know this is an injunction territory, not a final part of the
case. And so, it might make its way and take away the word white might (ph). It will go to the Supreme Court eventually, I'm sure. What is your reaction to this ruling tonight?
GOLDMAN: Well, my reaction is like every other lower court order that has found Donald Trump's actions to be illegal. Uh, it will have to go up through the shadow docket, to the Supreme Court, the emergency docket.
And what the Supreme Court has been doing is without any explanation, without any legal analysis, uh, without any oral argument. It has been undoing, overruling these temporary injunctions by lower courts and allowing Donald Trump and the Trump administration to continue doing the lawless activity that the lower courts painstakingly analyzed and found to be improper.
And that's incredibly dangerous because -- just think about the idea. If things keep going forward that are illegal, if Lisa Cook is ultimately allowed to be fired temporarily, until the Supreme Court rules on the merits and then they would put her back in the position --
COATES: Hmm.
GOLDMAN: -- months down the road, this is a -- a really, really sneaky way by the Supreme Court of allowing Donald Trump to effectively execute his unconstitutional and lawless policies without actually having to find the legal basis for them.
[23:10:11]
And so, obviously, this is the right legal outcome that this court found --
COATES: Uh-hmm.
GOLDMAN: -- but I'm highly skeptical that it's going to survive the Supreme Court. And we have to understand that the Supreme Court has turned into an activist court, using the shadow docket without any explanation to overrule lower courts and allow Donald Trump to continue his lawless and unconstitutional, uh, policies and agenda, uh, with almost -- with no consequences because ultimately, once it's allowed, it doesn't -- you can't put the toothpaste back in the tube.
COATES: We have seen from this court the idea of precedent not necessarily meaning much in the long run in some areas. I'll be curious to see how they ultimately rule on the issue of cause and just cause.
But let me ask you about what's happening, a hop, skip, and a jump from the Supreme Court. I'm talking about Capitol Hill, your neck in the woods. The clock is ticking again, congressman, to dodge yet another government shutdown, this time the end of this month. The White House, I understand, they want to kick the can down the road and have that deadline be January 31st. An arbitrary date, it seems. What's behind that? Do you think that particular four-month pun? And what are you going to do about it?
GOLDMAN: Well, I think the White House continues. We're on a -- we're on a continuing resolution right now. We haven't passed an appropriations bill --
COATES: Uh-hmm.
GOLDMAN: -- uh, in -- in well over a year. And that's to the White House's advantage because a continuing resolution is much less restrictive on how the executive branch can use the money.
And so, what we are seeing is Russ Vought, the Office of Management and Budget director, and Donald Trump, um, effectively overruling Congress, which has the power of the purse, by impounding, which just basically means freezing or not spending money that has already been appropriated, or rescinding money, that we saw the $9 billion earlier this summer. We now have a pocket rescissions package of $5 billion.
Let me ask you a question and the viewers. Why would the Democrats agree to a compromise deal if Donald Trump is just going to undo the deal and do whatever he wants?
COATES: Hmm.
GOLDMAN: So, we will need much better assurances and strong certainty that whatever the Senate Democrats end up voting on --
COATES: Uh-hmm.
GOLDMAN: -- which is necessary in order to pass this, uh, will be the law of the land and Congress's -- Congress's determination will control, not Donald Trump's.
COATES: I know a rhetorical question when I hear one. Thank you, congressman.
GOLDMAN: Thank you.
COATES: Well, the economy is not heading in the right direction. Newly revised data by the Bureau of Labor Statistics showing the labor market added far fewer jobs than even previously thought. A sharp drop of over 900,000 payrolls in 2024 and early 2025. Signaling what? Well, the economy is on shakier footing than realized.
But wait, there's more. New census data revealing that the financial situation of most families across the country stayed where they were right before the pandemic. That is except for the top 10% who magically saw their household income increase last year. But if that wasn't enough, JPMorgan, Jamie Dimon, he's worrying about the R-word.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JAMIE DIMON, CEO, JPMORGAN CHASE: I think the economy is weakening. You know, whether that is on the way to recession or just weakening, I don't know.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: I want to bring in John Avlon, host of the "How to Fix It" podcast on "The Bulwark," also former Democratic candidate for Congress, and T.W. Arrighi, former senior communications aide to Senator Lindsey Graham. Good to have both of here with me today. Good to see you. T.W., let me ask you. I mean, nearly a million fewer jobs and you've got Jamie Dimon teetering around this R-word. Can Americans stomach a recession?
T.W. ARRIGHI, VICE PRESIDENT OF PUSH DIGITAL GROUP: Well, it's worse than that if you add on the two years previous, which were 818,000 and 306,000, that gets rid of a ton of the Biden job growth. Remember, this past revision only included about two months of the Trump term. So, you can't really call it --
COATES: John is already smiling at that.
ARRIGHI: Yok knew it was coming.
(CROSSTALK)
JOHN AVLON, CHAIRMAN OF CITIZENS UNION OF NEW YORK, PODCAST HOST: When do you believe the BLS data?
ARRIGHI: Well, this is -- this is the problem. So that was the biggest drop since the 2009 economic crisis, which means one of two things. Either the economy is as bad as it was in the financial crisis of 2008, 2009, or there's something seriously wrong with BLS.
[23:15:00]
I don't know. Maybe it's one of the two. But I do know a couple of things. What does that mean if that data is so off? What does that mean that our policies would have been if we had the real data? Would rates be lower? Would our economic posture be different? Those are the things, I think, the Americans are curious about. These are massive revisions. They're not tiny.
COATES: Why do you --
ARRIGHI: It adds to --
COATES: -- why do you just trust the BLS data? Because, obviously, it's not mandatory to actually return the information back. It's electronic.
ARRIGHI: Sure, but --
COATES: You know that. There can be idea of reporting issues. But it sounds like there's a larger issue he's addressing. Why are you smiling?
AVLON: Well, look, there's nothing funny about an economy that's dead in the water. And those are the words of Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a former Bush economic advisor. The economy is in trouble. It's not just Jamie Dimon. It's -- the manufacturing number is going down. That's despite Trump's tariff policies that are supposed to revive American manufacturing. We've got the specter of A.I., which could have a real impact on unemployment.
Donald Trump's approval on the economy right now is just over 30%. Uh, this is the area that is supposedly his strongest suit. And he is -- it is his economy now. And we are heading into rough waters. And his tariff policies are a disaster. And things are likely to get worse.
COATES: What do you say to the idea that the Biden data was also wrong? It seemed like the idea of philonomics really was a thing, that people were being told that the data was --
AVLON: The Biden session.
COATES: Yeah, the Biden session, et cetera. If it happens under one administration and another, how do the American voters look at this?
AVLON: Look, first of all, we should be able to look at data and have the same conclusions no matter who's president.
ARRIGHI: Agreed.
COATES: Of course.
AVLON: The revisions always occur. We know, for example, that inflation made people feel even in a recovery that they weren't getting ahead. And fundamentally, the driving issue driving our politics is rightful frustration about a middle-class squeeze that has been going on for decades. The American dream seems to be slipping away.
And the underlying economics of this administration and our time are not successfully building out the middle to where they need to be and deserve to be so people can work hard, play by the rules, and get ahead. And that's not happening under this economy. In fact, it's likely to get worse.
ARRIGHI: Well, when you have a revision of almost a million jobs, that is a deep concern for any administration. Secondly, we were fed this B.S. line of Bidenomics for years. That was garbage. The economy did not increase. It did not get better. We had a president who was asleep at the wheel. Secondly --
COATES: So, what will this president do about it?
ARRIGHI: Hold on a second.
COATES: Hold on. My question is -- I hear you.
ARRIGHI: Yeah.
COATES: But what will this president do about it?
ARRIGHI: I'm going to tell you right now. He just prevented the largest tax cut on the American people ever. He got rid of taxes on Social Security, rid of taxes on tips. He's readjusting the global trade environment to make it fair for American consumers. We had a budget surplus in the month of June for the first time in five plus years. It's real progress.
COATES: Is that enough?
AVLON: It's not at all because those tariffs are actually going to create a recessionary environment, squeezing small businesses, squeezing the middle class. And keep a look at energy prices. Take a look at healthcare prices. Take a look at housing and how that's continuing to be out of people's reach. We need to make sure this economy works for folks in the middle of our economy. It's not. And the tariff and trade policies are going to have disastrous effects down the road.
ARRIGHI: There is no doubt, John, I will concede the point, that there is no doubt that people -- that a lot of manufacturing companies are waiting to see what happens. But we are not seeing mass layoffs. We are just seeing a pause in hiring. And every economist thinks that.
COATES: I will end on a concession. How wonderful is that? John, T.W., both, thank you so much.
Breaking news tonight, a potential major escalation in Europe. Poland says it has shot down drones that crossed into its airspace during a Russian attack on Ukraine. We'll add the details next. Plus, new friction between President Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu as the White House fumes over Israel's strike on Hamas and Qatar. Did the move just set back any attempt of a deal? Ned Price is standing by to discuss all of this right now.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:20:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: Breaking tonight, Poland is saying they have shot down drones that violated their airspace during a Russian attack on Ukraine. CNN has not been able to confirm the reports of drones nor is it clear how many there may have been. Secretary Rubio did confirm that he has been briefed on the situation. Poland is a NATO country. Any sort of attack on a NATO country by Russia would be considered a major provocation for Europe.
With me now, Ned Price, former State Department spokesperson under the Biden administration. Ned, this news coming in hot off the press. What is your assessment of these reports that we're seeing about drones being shot down over Poland?
NED PRICE, FORMER SENIOR OFFICIAL AT CIA: Laura, as you said, this is an unfolding situation, so I don't want to get too far ahead of things. Multiple credible accounts suggest these are Russian Shahed drones. The Polish leadership have said they've engaged them kinetically.
I think the best-case scenario is that these are Russian drones that were intended for attack against Ukraine. They went astray, perhaps because of jamming or another form of electronic warfare.
But we do have to consider more sinister explanations, and I think it is not impossible that this is Russian testing NATO's resolve and NATO's defenses.
Look, we had a very similar incident in late 2022 when we had a concern that a Russian missile had struck Poland. President Biden then almost immediately convened his G7 counterparts. They shared intelligence, they formulated a response, and they really exhibited that resolved.
We haven't seen anything like that here from the American administration, whether Secretary Rubio, who said he has been briefed, or certainly not President Trump.
[23:25:03]
If this is Russia testing NATO, testing Poland, and that remains a very big if --
COATES: Uh-hmm.
PRICE: -- but if that is the case, my concern here is that they could see weakness.
COATES: This is just weeks after that face-to-face with our own President Donald Trump and, of course, Vladimir Putin. What is happening behind the scenes that you could anticipate knowing that this briefing has occurred with Marco Rubio, the secretary of state? Obviously, what would be the next steps to assess whether it is a benign or sinister explanation?
PRICE: Well, I suspect what's going on is a lot of exchange of information with our Polish ally, between and among other NATO allies, with Ukrainians as well, to determine if an ally has information to suggest that these drones were in fact jammed, were in fact subject to electronic warfare, or whether we have information that indicates that the Kremlin was up to something much more sinister here.
The intelligence is really going to be the key as to Moscow's intentions in this case. And the intentionality here will really be the difference between a crisis that NATO will have to confront or something that may well already have been resolved with Poland engaging these drones kinetically.
COATES: This is unfolding. We'll be prudent not to get ahead of our skis. You are correct, Ned.
Let's turn to another issue that's happening, another war zone, in fact. Israel launching a strike on Qatar earlier today. Israel says that it is targeting, and it did target, Hamas's top negotiator in the country. Hamas says that he was not killed. But Qatar has been a key mediator in ceasefire talks. And Qatar is a major U.S. ally in the region. Trump tonight said he's not happy with Israel. Are any prospects then of a ceasefire now in the rearview mirror? PRICE: Look, I think a ceasefire today is far less likely than it was before this operation. My worry, Laura, is that this was an operation not to bring about or even to hasten into the war but one that will only end up extending and perhaps intentionally so.
And now, look, that may seem counterproductive because, as we know, military often conduct what are known as decapitation strikes, going after the leadership of terrorist groups in order to finish them off.
But that's not what this was here. Here's why I say that. Hamas has long had this dual-headed structure, a hardcore military leadership inside Gaza, and this so-called political leadership based in Doha and more recently Turkey as well. That in the context of the negotiations to bring about and into this war has at times been far more pragmatic than the Gaza-based leadership.
And here's a key point, Laura. Just as this Doha-based group was targeted, they were discussing a ceasefire proposal that the Trump administration itself had put on the table. So, this raises a troubling question. Was Prime Minister Netanyahu attempting -- attempting to destroy not only Hamas's political wing, but the entirety of the diplomatic process and the feasibility of the diplomatic process going forward?
I think this strike, it seems, was a rare tactical failure on the part of the Israeli military. It seems, at least by various accounts, that they didn't get their intended targets. But even without taking these targets off the table, it is now far less likely that we'll be able to reach a ceasefire deal. Hamas will be emboldened. Qatar will have to reassess its role in the diplomatic negotiations. And my concern is that this war will continue rather than come to a quicker end.
COATES: Those consequences could very well be dire. Ned Price, thank you so much.
PRICE: Thanks, Laura.
COATES: Up next tonight --
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. AMY KLOBUCHAR (D-MN): Did Meta stop research projects into child safety? Do you believe because it didn't want to know the result?
JASON SATTIZAHN, WHISTLEBLOWER, FORMER META EMPLOYEE: Yes.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Senator Amy Klobuchar with me tonight on that troubling testimony from two former Meta employees. And later, a Hellfire missile hits a UAP and the thing just keeps on going like nothing happened. We have video that's now fueling all sorts of questions.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:30:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: All right, fellow parents, I need you to pay attention to what happened today. More ex-Meta employees are blowing the whistle on the company again. This time, and if you haven't heard of Horizon Worlds, lean in. It's a metaverse. And inside of it, the whistleblowers claim that Meta is prioritizing profits over the safety of kids who are being exposed to inappropriate and even graphic content.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CAYCE SAVAGE, WHISTLEBLOWER, FORMER META EMPLOYEE: Most importantly, Meta is aware that children are being harmed in V.R. I quickly became aware that it is not uncommon for children in V.R. to experience bullying, sexual assault, to be solicited for nude photographs and sexual acts by pedophiles, and to be regularly exposed to mature content like gambling and violence, and to participate in adult experiences like strip clubs and watching pornography with strangers.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: And the whistleblowers told the Senate Judiciary Committee that Meta chose to hide that data and shut down the research.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SATTIZAHN: This was crucial research because this was a largely untested technology. But I soon learned that Meta had no interest in V.R. safety unless it could drive interaction and thus profit.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[23:35:00]
COATES: A Meta spokesperson strongly denies the allegations, saying -- quote -- "The claims at the heart of this hearing are nonsense. They're based on selectively leaked internal documents that were picked specifically to craft a false narrative."
The Meta spokesperson adds it does research on youth safety and wellbeing online.
But "The Washington Post" reports that some Meta employees warned of issues as early as 2017. One writing in a document -- quote -- "We have a child problem and it's probably time to talk about it."
And despite the past probes, the whistleblowers claim that Meta hasn't changed.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SAVAGE: Meta has promised it would change. I am here to tell you today that Meta has changed, but for the worse.
(END VIDEO CLIP) COATES: Joining me now, Minnesota Democratic Senator Amy Klobuchar, who sits on the Judiciary Committee and is a ranking member of the Judiciary Tech Subcommittee. Senator, welcome. What we heard --
KLOBUCHAR: Thank you, Laura.
COATES: -- from the -- listen, it was quite disturbing.
KLOBUCHAR: It really was.
COATES: The idea of graphic content. What did you make of hearing about these revelations?
KLOBUCHAR: So, Senator Blackburn and I held this hearing together, and, um, she's a conservative Republican --
COATES: Uh-hmm.
KLOBUCHAR: -- and there is just growing support and concern, Democrats and Republicans, about what's going on here because basically, these families who lost their kids, that's not made up. We had two, um, family members that we met. One child had been cyber bullied for years --
COATES: Hmm.
KLOBUCHAR: -- and the other one was a victim of extortion for sexually, uh, explicit exchanges and was basically found out he wasn't really talking to a new girlfriend, he was talking to someone who was extorting him, and then he committed suicide.
And so, these are real things happening. And we found out that on some of these platforms within the metaverse, that there's like 80% kids and that Meta is aware of this. These whistleblowers were not just fly by night, work at the company for two months. They'd been there for four years, for six years. They were researchers. And they got to the bottom of what was going on here. And they felt their research was, of course, shelved. It was restricted and all kinds of things.
But the key thing is really, to me, two things. One is they know there's a bunch of kids --
COATES: Uh-hmm.
KLOBUCHAR: -- on these platforms. And secondly, that the metaverse converts to the real world, in that there are cases where an older man met a young girl, a 13-year-old on this. She doesn't know how old he is. She agrees to meet him in the real world, and she's kidnapped, and he's convicted of that crime.
COATES: I wonder the stage of the investigation. Obviously, the whistleblowers have come forward, had this hearing. You are probably continuing to look at revelations going from here.
But also, it's not the first time that we've heard about Meta having some inkling or not being naive to who their audience or their consumers are and the impact of them. Is there a fundamental mistrust issue now that can't even be course corrected?
KLOBUCHAR: There is. For years, these big tech companies have been saying, trust us, trust us, trust us.
COATES: Right.
KLOBUCHAR: And what we're seeing instead are horrific fake A.I. videos. A.I. has a lot of promise to solve diseases, don't get me wrong, but they're just refusing to say, put labels on things or to limit the audience of things or to help parents.
One mom told me that she had to rely on her 15-year-old to help her with her younger kid because she couldn't figure out how to get her off the platform, then the other -- then they find another platform. She said it was like a faucet in a sink that was overflowing, and she's just standing out there by herself with a mop.
And we have to do more than that. So, finally, Congress is kind of stepping up and this is just the beginning. But I -- for years, the companies have stopped us from putting these bills into law --
COATES: Uh-hmm.
KLOBUCHAR: -- and you're just seeing it getting worse and worse and worse.
COATES: Senator, when you think about some of the people who criticize, not necessarily the company, but they criticize parents, and they'll say, well, you as the parent have responsibility to be the true gatekeeper, you can only rely so much on Meta or other social media platforms to essentially regulate the content on your behalf. What do you say to those people who say, parents, this is your job?
KLOBUCHAR: I picture a child, you know, with a -- on their phone in their room at night. Where -- is the parent supposed to go in there? I picture them with the glasses on and the parents can't see what they're seeing. It is nearly impossible for a parent, who loves their child so much and wants the best, wants them to be doing their homework, to monitor all this.
That's why you see, um, schools now stepping in and say we're going to put the kids' phones in a place --
COATES: Right.
KLOBUCHAR: -- where they can access them if there's an emergency, but we're not going to have them in the classroom. I think that's a good idea. We are starting to see more and more people saying, wait a minute, this should be on the companies and not just the parents to figure this all out and which thing is going to pop up and ask them to do something.
[23:40:00]
We need a federal privacy law. And this is not to say these products haven't given us amazing things. COATES: Uh-hmm.
KLOBUCHAR: They have. But then, with that kind of responsibility and growth and expansion and profit comes some kind of obligation.
COATES: Thank you for joining.
KLOBUCHAR: It was great to be on, Laura.
Up next, a UAP hit by a Hellfire missile in a dramatic new video that's fueling calls for the government to explain what exactly it knows. The Pentagon's former UFO hunter is standing by with his assessment next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:45:00]
COATES: A contentious hearing on Capitol Hill this morning raising brand-new questions tonight over what the government knows about Unidentified Aerial Phenomena, also known as UAPs.
The most shocking moment came when one lawmaker unveiled this never- before-seen footage captured by a drone off the coast of Yemen nearly a year ago. Now, if you look closely, you'll see the drone tracking this
unidentified orb right until another drone appears to shoot it with a missile. But even after it is hit, the object appears to be largely intact with some smaller objects that seem to be debris popping off. But the video continues, zooming out to show the object still flying in the air, undisturbed.
Now, to be clear, there is no indication of what this might be. The congressman who revealed the video, Eric Burlison, says the footage was received by an anonymous whistleblower and is under an independent review.
Joining me now is Lue Elizondo. He is the former director of a Pentagon program that studied UAPs. He's also the author of "Imminent: Inside the Pentagon's Hunt for UFOs." Lue, good to see you again. I mean, have you seen anything like this before?
LUIS ELIZONDO, FORMER DIRECTOR OF PENTAGON'S ADVANCED AEROSPACE THREAT IDENTIFICATION PROGRAM, AUTHOR: Laura, it's always good to see you. Thank you so much for having me. And, you know, it might be a surprise to some folks, but the answer is yes.
COATES: Hmm.
ELIZONDO: When I was at the Pentagon and my colleagues, we had lots and lots of videos, a treasure trove of videos that really showed some pretty remarkable things. And this is why I think it's important that Congress get engaged. I think it's important why the media gets engaged because I think the American people would be shocked to learn the type of videos and other types of -- other types of pictures, et cetera, and data and reports that we actually have as a government. COATES: Well, then, walk me through what you think is happening in this video and what stands out to you in particular.
ELIZONDO: Sure. Well, this is a video that is allegedly taken from an MQ9. Uh, these are the -- like a Predator drone that a lot of people are familiar with, and they are armed with a -- with the kinetic capability, meaning they're armed with a Hellfire missile.
Now, a Hellfire missile is a very sophisticated weapon platform. We use it in the prosecution of the global war on terror. And people might be more familiar with -- with the use for drone strikes. Um, it is a -- it is a very, very capable weapon system. And I will tell you, it is very, very unusual to see a Hellfire missile, in this case, bounce, if this is what we're looking at, off of something.
I think it's important to note that videos can be deceiving. There's a lot of videos out there that seem to be pretty amazing and really wind up having a prosaic explanation. However, this video does require more analysis. And if it turns out that this is something that is -- that is a hard object, something tangible, um, it would be very, very unusual if not, dare I say, almost impossible for a Hellfire missile to strike it and not completely destroy it or obliterate it. Think about this for a second, Laura.
COATES: Hmm.
ELIZONDO: Imagine if there was some sort of foreign adversary technology developed by the Russians or Chinese that have made our -- completely nullify our ability to use Hellfire missiles. That would be a technological leap and certainly a national security issue for our country.
COATES: Absolutely. I mean, the idea of it bouncing or not obliterating its actual goal is shocking for so many. And there were a number of former military personnel who were among those who testified today. I want you to hear what they had to say when they described the things they claimed to have seen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DYLAN BORELAND, U.S. AIR FORCE VETERAN: When I returned to my barracks on base and at approximately 01:30, I saw an approximately 100-foot equilateral triangle take off from near the NASA hangar on the base. The craft interfered with my telephone, it did not have any sound, and the material it was made of appeared fluid or dynamic.
CHIEF ALEXANDRO WIGGINS, U.S. NAVY: A self-luminous, tic-tac-shaped object emerged from the ocean before linking up with three other similar objects. The four then disappeared simultaneously with a high synchronized, near-instantaneous acceleration.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: What questions do you have after all you've seen, after hearing something like that? ELIZONDO: Well, Laura, the real question is -- I have is, why has it taken this long for our government to create whistleblower protections? I have to applaud this committee on increased transparency for UAP and also whistleblower protections.
I think -- you saw it yourself. It's a bipartisan effort. You have both liberals and conservatives walking shoulder-to-shoulder and all agreeing that we as a nation must do more to protect whistleblowers so this information can get to the right people.
[23:49:57]
In this case, certain committees of Congress and, frankly, the president and the National Security Council, which we know have been sequestered for decades, have this type of information.
COATES: Lue Elizondo, the things you must know. I'll have to pick your brain another day as well. Thank you.
ELIZONDO: Always an honor and privilege. Have a great night.
COATES: You, too. Ahead, one pioneer's quest to change lives in the Bronx by providing safer maternal care for women. Today's Champion for Change next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: A look now at a series we call Champions for Change. And all this week, recognizing people who are quietly working behind the scenes, finding new ways to make life better for others.
Tonight, my colleague, Abby Phillip, introduces us to her champion, Myla Flores. Myla works in the Bronx where maternal mortality rates are significantly higher than the national average. But she hopes to change that by providing holistic support to women in her community.
[23:55:03]
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
UNKNOWN: Part of like my anxiety when I was pregnant was that there was no birth center that was close by.
ABBY PHILLIP, CNN ANCHOR: I didn't realize how much support I would need with breastfeeding after.
UNKNOWN: It's nice having a space to be able to let go.
MYLA FLORES, FOUNDER, THE BIRTHING PLACE FOUNDATION: One of the things I noticed about being a doula in the Bronx was that people didn't have access to the kind of care that they wanted.
PHILLIP: Myla Flores's journey to becoming a doula started when she was just 12 years old. Her teenage sister was pregnant, and they were so close that she was there for every step of the way.
FLORES: I was involved in the pregnancy, the labor. I had no idea at the time that great care was rare.
PHILLIP: Myla saw firsthand the disparities that play out all across the country. In the Bronx, the maternal mortality rates are significantly higher than they are in the rest of the United States. And so, she started The Birthing Place.
UNKNOWN: When I started coming here, it felt like I was getting personalized care and it was more like holistic.
UNKNOWN: I felt really grateful for the services here because it made it accessible.
FLORES: We're creating a mini version of a birth center. So, our clinic offers all of the services, just short of being able to catch babies and have people stay for a period after they've given birth.
So, I just place my palms here. Hold that for the whole length of the contraction.
PHILLIP: When you train doulas to provide culturally responsive care, how does that change the experience of childbirth for your community?
FLORES: It really helps people feel more seen and heard and connected.
PHILLIP: This is like a workout.
FLORES: Uh-hmm.
(LAUGHTER)
FLORES (voice-over): There are statistics that show that culturally- aligned care as well as access to midwives and doulas help reduce mortalities and morbidities and unnecessary interventions.
FLORES: It feels good even not pregnant, right?
PHILLIP: It feels so good.
(LAUGHTER)
I'm inspired by the work that Myla is doing because having a doula changed my childbirth experience. When I was pregnant with my daughter, that was the first time I learned that many Black and brown women were choosing that option to find safer, more supported birth options.
STEPHANIE VIDAL, NEW MOM: I think that women in the Bronx don't get the care that they deserve because it's expected that you will just take what you get, and that's it. You have no options.
FLORES: Hi!
VIDAL: Going to The Birthing Place for my prenatal care, I felt like I was being seen by people who look like me.
UNKNOWN: I'm just going to check your blood pressure really quick, okay?
VIDAL: Everybody needs a Myla. She's family forever.
PHILLIP (voice-over): They're also taking this wraparound care into the community using the Wombus.
FLORES: We're going to come in here and get some care.
UNKNOWN: We're able to have outreach opportunities where the doulas in the community can connect with the people seeking a range of support.
PHILLIP: You have big dreams for a birth center. What does the birth center look like for The Birthing Place?
FLORES: I want families to step into our future birth center and feel a sense of home, comfort, no judgment. All people deserve access to this kind of care.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
COATES: And Abby is with me now. Abby, what a champion she is. Where do plans for her birth center stand right now?
PHILLIP: Well, they are, Laura, in the process of acquiring a site. And Myla, just so you know, I mean, she has been working so hard on this for many years, not just on her plans for a birth center, but on New York State's laws and their regulations around birth centers in general. She has been trying to make this easier for anybody to open a birth center.
But they're hoping to break ground in 2026. And if they're successful, they would be the only birth center in the Bronx, the only place that women can go outside of a hospital and outside of their own homes to have a child.
So, for her, this would be an extraordinary moment for her. I mean, everything that she does right now is in service of trying to create everything up until the point, as she said, of catching babies. And she wants to be able to have a safe place for women to have more choices and more options in the Bronx, especially Black and brown women who, as we know, have some of the worst outcomes when it comes to maternal health.
COATES: This is so personal for you. I know this is such a champion. My husband is from the Bronx, so I'm all for it, Abby.
PHILLIP: Yeah.
COATES: Thank you so much.
PHILLIP: Thank you, Laura.
[00:00:00]
COATES: Be sure to tune in Saturday at 10 p.m. Eastern for the Champions for Change one-hour special. And hey, thank you all so much for watching. "Anderson Cooper 360" is next.
