Return to Transcripts main page

Laura Coates Live

DOJ Nears James Comey Charging Decision; Political Blame Game Over ICE Facility Sniper Attack; Jimmy Kimmel Brings in Huge Ratings in T.V. Return; Laura Coates Interviews Arizona Representative-elect Adelita Grijalva. Aired 11p-12a ET

Aired September 24, 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)

ABBY PHILLIP, CNN ANCHOR AND SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: A quick programming note. This Sunday, CNN looks at Jimmy Kimmel's suspension and return to late night. Is it a free speech victory or is the fight just getting started? "The Whole Story with Anderson Cooper" airs Sunday at 9 p.m. right here on CNN.

And thank you very much for watching "NewsNight." "Laura Coates Live" starts right now.

LAURA COATES, CNN HOST AND SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Tonight, Comey, Comey, Comey. When it comes to the former FBI director, will an indictment be -- from the DOJ be telling President Trump, your wish is my command? Plus, another tragic shooting. In a new blame game, a gunman attacks a Dallas ICE facility and leaves behind an anti-ICE message on a familiar surface. And I guess Jimmy Kimmel is right about one thing. The attempt to cancel him from low ratings backfired bigly as the return racks up the views and fires up the MAGA commentators. All tonight on "Laura Coates Live.

So, you've heard during the 2024 campaign, you've heard during the past several months, during the first couple months of the second term, probably the first term, and you've heard it even more in the last week. The president vowing revenge on his political enemies.

Well, tonight, you got to scroll back up the top of the list to find this one's name, former FBI director, James Comey. Source is telling us the DOJ is nearing a decision over whether to bring perjury charges against him. Perjury for what, you ask? We're hearing federal prosecutors are digging into whether Comey lied to Congress during his testimony in September 2020 about that Russia investigation. And here's a part of a key exchange with Senator Ted Cruz.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. TED CRUZ (R-TX): On May 3rd, 2017, in this committee, Chairman Grassley asked you point blank -- quote -- "Have you ever been an anonymous source in news reports about matters relating to the Trump investigation or the Clinton investigation?" You responded under oath -- quote -- "Never." Mr. McCabe, who works for you, has publicly and repeatedly stated that

he leaked information to "The Wall Street Journal" and that you were directly aware of it and that you directly authorized it. Now, what Mr. McCabe is saying and what you testified to this committee cannot both be true. One or the other is false. Who's telling the truth?

JAMES COMEY, FORMER DIRECTOR, FBI: I can only speak to my testimony. I stand by the testimony you summarized that I gave in May of 2017.

CRUZ: Your testimony is you've never authorized anyone to leak. And Mr. McCabe, if he says contrary, is not telling the truth. Is that correct?

COMEY: Again, I'm not going to characterize Andy's testimony, but mine is the same today.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Now, the date here is very important. That was September 30th, 2020. This Tuesday, exactly five years since that date, is also when the federal limitations for charging Comey will expire. So that means the DOJ has only six days to bring that indictment.

We'll enter Lindsey Halligan, the new U.S. attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia. That's the office that's looking into Comey, by the way. And she's a Trump loyalist through and through, and also was one of his personal lawyers. Even though she is leading a storied prosecutor's office, she has zero experience as a prosecutor. But she is an attorney. And it's who she is taking over for that is giving people pause.

Remember Erik Siebert who had spent years prosecuting in that very office and held the job -- the top job there? That is until he was forced out just last week. Why? And, by the way, Trump made clear he was no fan, wanted him gone. Why? Well, because Siebert had yet to bring charges against Comey, and he rejected the president's allegations against another nemesis, New York A.G. Letitia James, because he didn't have the sufficient evidence to do so, apparently, which brings us to the day after Siebert was ousted.

Trump attacked on social media, Truth Social. And can you guess who he urged the attorney general, Pam Bondi, to prosecute? James Comey and Letitia James along with Senator Adam Schiff.

So, you're playing a little bit of game of connect the dots. You've got Trump pushing for charges against Comey, you got a new Trump- approved prosecutor in V.A. overseeing the investigation, and you got a deadline to bring in that indictment by next Tuesday. Well, welcome to Washington. Can I take your coat?

[23:04:57]

With me now, journalist and historian Garrett Graff, CNN senior political commentator Adam Kinzinger, former congressman and former Trump attorney, Jim Trusty. Glad to have all of you here. I want to begin with you, Jim, because the president was unequivocal over the weekend. He wrote that, "We can't delay any longer. It's killing our reputation and credibility. Justice must be served now." Now, those two words, reputation and credibility, one could argue that the president making these statements would do exactly that to the DOJ by essentially putting a thumb on the scale to suggest this is what I want, make it happen.

JAMES TRUSTY, FORMER CHIEF OF DOJ ORGANIZED CRIME AND GANG SECTION, FORMER TRUMP ATTORNEY: Well, look, there's -- you know, it's a shock that President Trump would have an opinion about people that used to weaponize -- COATES: Shocking.

TRUSTY: -- DOJ against him. But, look, the beauty of what we're talking about when it comes down to Comey is that there is a track record that's undeniable. I mean, this is a guy that had two very adverse, uh, OIG, inspector general reports against him, including one about this issue. This is a guy who hired a friend to leak law enforcement sensitive information to "The New York Times," and that has been admitted in the inspector general process.

So, to turn around and say this guy doesn't leak stuff, as he's trying to say, while he parries with Andy McCabe's credibility, is kind of absurd. You know, we know what this is, this false statement. And it's not clear to me that all of the lines that you're connecting are clear. I've heard that Siebert didn't have heartburn about Comey. He had heartburn about a no-loss mortgage fraud case with James, which should ring familiar from what James did.

COATES: Well, he had -- well, to just -- to bring that point home, there are sources saying that he had less grievances about bringing a case against Comey. But, ultimately, he still did not do so. And so, there's still that question, congressman, about the why now. I mean, six days before the presentation is run. Let me just say that.

The OIG reports, they've been out for a lot longer than the past six days. And you have to wonder, obviously, talking about perjury becomes a game of semantics. You've got to be very precise in building your case as to what was said, the intimations and beyond. But you've actually said that if DOJ is now in the business of holding accountable everyone who has been dishonest in front of Congress, that's all they would be doing. Is that enough to excuse if there is there there?

ADAM KINZINGER, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, FORMER ILLINOIS REPRESENTATIVE: I'm not excusing that. It's just like -- look, the question of, is this politically motivated? Of course. Everybody knows this. Everybody knows, you know, Donald Trump did his big tweet. They put a new person in charge that will run the indictment. They're rushing to get it done, you know, before the statute of limitation runs out. And prior, DOJ didn't do it. Now, the response will be, well, that was a Democratic DOJ.

COATES: Uh-hmm. KINZINGER: And it wasn't that long ago that I remember nobody even thinking about the DOJ in terms of Republican or Democrat. So, you can argue that the Democrats politicized it. I don't agree, but fine. Certainly, the Republicans are politicizing it now.

And I think what to me is pitiful is just a 79-year-old man that won the presidency again, right? Like proved all his detractors wrong. One again is obsessed, obsessed with a guy that 10 years ago, you know, did something against him.

By the way, let's remember, Donald Trump is president because of James Comey. James Comey is the one that reopened the Clinton investigation last two weeks, and you saw her numbers drop.

So, I don't know. Like, for me, I think we all know that this is political. And secondly, I just -- if he wasn't president, I'd actually feel really sad for Donald Trump for just this obsession he has that burns him up when there's a war in Ukraine and lot of other things going on.

COATES: Well, Garrett, let me bring you in here because the testimony they're focusing on is -- what? Five years old. And again, the limitation period is there such that you can bring cases within that period of time.

But even though the president has been outspoken against Comey and there is a political motivation that appears to leap off of a Truth Social page, could there be some there there such that someone would say, well, two things can be true, it could be political and there could also have been an alleged crime to indict?

GARRETT GRAFF, JOURNALIST, HISTORIAN, AUTHOR: Possibly. That does not seem to be the case here at all. It seems that this is a case that plenty of people have actually looked at for criminal liability before and have decided against, including during the Durham investigation, which was under the last Trump administration, and including looking at Andy McCabe's testimony where Trump decided not to bring charges.

The Trump DOJ last time around decided not to bring charges. Um, a guy named Bill Barr who has no compunction about politicizing and overtly putting his thumb on the scale in political investigations there in that last administration.

So, I think that this is a situation where we need to stay focused on the fact that we do not want to live in a country where the president of the United States is declaring who he wants criminally prosecuted and then continually firing the government investigators and prosecutors until he finds someone willing to bring a charge however weak it might be.

[23:10:10]

COATES: Let me bring you on that, Jim, because I think it is an important point to raise. And let's talk about, really, the prosecutorial -- prosecutorial issues that would be at play. A defense counsel worth their salt is going to point to a statement from the president of United States and make the very claims that are being raised here about politics, the prosecution. They're going to bring up the idea of an eye for an eye, not actually proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Tell me what the president's words and statements might do if there were a case.

TRUSTY: Yeah, very little, actually. I mean, the reality is the president is allowed to have an opinion. He has -- there hasn't even been an indictment yet. But once --

COATES: There might not be.

TRUSTY: There might not be. But once there -- let's assume there is going to be one. The defense attorneys are going to be sitting down saying, what can we do in terms of these types of comments? They make a motion to change venue. That's really that or selective enforcement.

But they're going to have a real hard time establishing a pattern of similarly situated defendants who weren't treated the same. I guess they can look at Andy McCabe who had a criminal referral for five false statements from OPR where the D.C. U.S. Attorney's Office, not Bill Barr, the D.C. U.S. Attorney's Office walked away from it, and then the Biden civil people gave him his cufflinks and his job back and said, here's a check, fill in the number.

So, yeah, there's a lot of politics floating around here. But at end of the day, when you talk about litigation, Comey's case is actually fairly simple. He either lied about authorizing leaks or he didn't. And it looks like there's a good chance the grand jury has some locked-in testimony to go with the OPR testimony --

COATES: Hmm.

TRUSTY: -- that he was absolutely a civ (ph) that was constantly leaking, particularly when poor James Comey was worried about his job. You know, for a big guy, tall guy, he's a small man. You know, looked no further than the 86-47 stuff that he pulled. So, he is a very intemperate, thin-skinned guy that's facing a charge that is serious, but probably not like a lock-him-up serious-type charge. And I guess probably President Trump's only wish is that arrogance was a charge they could put on Comey as well.

COATES: Ooh, if that were -- if arrogance were a charge, maybe a lot of --

TRUSTY: A lot of people --

COATES: I mean --

TRUSTY: A lot of politicians will be in jail.

COATES: -- about that. But -- but what's your reaction to that? Not the arrogance part, congressman. But what's your reaction to the idea of James Comey in his statements before Congress? He -- we heard what he had to say. I'm assuming that's part of what they're basing on with Ted Cruz. His statements, I feel people have room for interpretation. KINZINGER: Yeah. I mean, I'm not going to defend what he did say. I -- you know, I don't know how this case is going to go. Um, I just think when you pick selective enforcement, it's pretty obvious. Maybe selective enforcement is fine and legal and maybe, you know, yes, Donald Trump can have an opinion. He also is the head of the Justice Department, though. So, yeah, I don't know. But I do think -- look, we need to be very clear. People lie in front of Congress all the time --

COATES: Which is not a good thing.

KINZINGER: -- and it's not excusable. Right. And so, I think we'll see what they present as evidence here. I think it's going to be hard. I'm not the lawyer. You guys are the lawyers. You understand this better than I do. But I think it's hard to prove intent in a perjury case. And I think that's going to be the difficulty.

But the thing is Donald Trump's interest isn't necessarily in convictions. It's in indictments. It's in inconvenience. He buried people in lawsuits his entire life. We as Republicans actually used to be against frivolous lawsuits. Now, we're the party of frivolous lawsuits. So, he uses the legal system to inconvenience people and make them stand down. You know, most people aren't intimidated by that, but some are.

COATES: A judge last week railed against that very thing. We'll see what happens. Thank you, everyone.

The other huge story tonight, the investigation into that deadly attack at an ICE facility in Dallas. It began when a sniper opened fire from a nearby rooftop. One detainee was killed and others -- two others are in critical condition. No law enforcement officers were hurt. DHS Secretary Kristi Noem says the gunman ultimately killed himself.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GOV. KRISTI NOEM (R-SD): We know that there were bullet holes all over the building, it wasn't just targeted at one specific area or through a window, that he showered the building with bullets and was very much focused on hitting anyone that he could inside and making sure that they were victims of his attack.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: And the FBI director released this. The kind of image that's becoming all too familiar and all too haunting. Bullets with messages written on them. One has anti-ICE scrawled in blue ink. Sources say the suspect was a 29-year-old man who lived in a Dallas suburb. And records show that he voted in the democratic primary in March 2020. He hasn't voted since. The ICE director says he was known to law enforcement. The investigation still has a lot of ground to uncover.

But President Trump is pointing the finger.

[23:15:00] He says -- quote -- "This violence is the result of the radical left Democrats constantly demonizing law enforcement." And he is demanding Democrats stop this rhetoric against ICE.

Joining me now, former Minneapolis police chief, Medaria Arradondo, and criminologist Casey Jordan. Thank you both for being here, although the three of us have spoken far too often about violence in this country and political violence seems to be the most frequent of our conversations, sadly.

But Chief Arradondo, we are told that the acting ICE director says that agents are facing a 1000% increase in assaults right now. The threat landscape incredibly high. How daunting is that for officers right now?

MEDARIA ARRADONDO, FORMER MINNEAPOLIS POLICE CHIEF, AUTHOR: Yeah, Laura, thank you for having me. It's good to see you as well, Casey. It is daunting. As we know, Laura, that even from the beginning of this year, uh, Texas itself has had at least four, uh, incidents of violence either directed at their, uh, U.S. Customs and Immigration facilities or at least threats of violence.

You know, the Dallas P.D., um, they responded very quickly to this U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility before 7 a.m. this morning. Immediately, when they got on the scene, uh, they located the, uh, the shooter who was deceased, as Secretary Noem had mentioned, due to self-inflicted gunshot wound.

Uh, but, Laura, to your point, as more and more of these -- these measures of ICE being more proactive in cities across America, certainly, there has to be this collaboration with local law enforcement. We certainly know that the tenor -- the temperature, excuse me, in the country right now and in certain parts of the country towards federal agencies and federal officers is -- is very high right now.

And so, it -- it means that yes, that besides local law enforcement having to make sure that they're responding to their 911 calls, they also have to make sure that these -- you know, these are credible threats oftentimes to these facilities. This particular shooter, as you mentioned, authorities are naming Joshua John, he was known to authorities.

So, there's going to be a lot over the next coming days. I can guarantee you that local law enforcement and their federal partners are going to be doing evaluations, security and safety protocols around these facilities, how to better respond and prepare and look at long-term prevention. But this is concerning, absolutely.

COATES: And, of course, law enforcement were not the ones victimized in this particular shooting in terms of who was shot, which is also a question about how to keep those who are within the custody of law enforcement as well safe, which is the duty of care also owed to these individuals.

Casey, we bring you in here, Casey, because the gunmen left behind bullet casings that bore the phrase anti-ICE. And, as you know, shooters in recent high-profile shootings, including the Minneapolis school shooting, the Charlie Kirk shooting, United Healthcare CEO shooting, they have also allegedly engraved ammunition on weapons as well. What does that say to you? Copycat or more?

CASEY JORDAN, CRIMINOLOGIST, BEHAVIORAL ANALYST: Well, I don't love the word copycat because it makes it seem like they just like wake up one day and decide to emulate. But there's definitely an inspiration and a domino effect when these things happen. And when disturbed young minds out there, and I want to talk about that a little bit more in a minute, see this on the news and feel like this person is like them, the shooter, and they watch it in the news, and yeah, of course, there's a political aspect to saying anti-ICE --

COATES: Uh-hmm.

JORDAN: -- but I'd be very curious to find out whether or not this person had a personal beef with ICE. Did he have a friend or a coworker or a girlfriend who was deported? I mean, where did that come from? And I think we'll find out in the coming days. But the bigger trend is that in the last 20 years, well, in the 1980s, the average age of a mass shooter was 39.

COATES: Uh-hmm.

JORDAN: And then about 10 years ago, it went to about 29. And in the last five years, the average age of these mass shooters is 22.

COATES: Oh.

JORDAN: This kid is just falling right into that pattern. We have to look at what has been happening in the last five years, which we all know is a lot of political divisiveness, plus a generation of young people, especially young men, coming out of the pandemic feeling rudderless, lost, unemployed.

He had a criminal record for marijuana. Maybe he couldn't get a job. Did he ever have a girlfriend? He lived at home until a few months ago. Was he (INAUDIBLE) kid? What was going on in his life that made him decide to take his own life but make a statement on his way out of town? That's really the question.

COATES: And claim the life of one and hospitalized two others. The psychology of this, a guide for law enforcement to prevent. Chief Arradondo, Casey Jordan, thank you both.

[23:20:00]

Well, Republicans are blaming Democrats for the shooting and are now calling for Trump to declare some sort of national emergency. I'll give you details next. Plus, what Vice President Vance said today about Jimmy Kimmel that appears to totally ignore what his boss has been saying.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) COATES: A life lost, two others hospitalized. All detainees. Yet the all too familiar political blame game that follows a shooting or a tragedy is well underway tonight. This time, Republicans are pointing the finger at Democrats who are opposed to Donald Trump's immigration raids. They claim it's their words that are inspiring acts of violence, including the shooting we saw today on the ICE facility in Dallas.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

J.D. VANCE, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: What do you think is going to happen when Democratic politicians incur doxing, when they encourage us to unmask ICE enforcement officers?

[23:25:03]

What do you think is going to happen? If you want to stop political violence, stop telling your supporters that everybody who disagrees with you is a Nazi.

CRUZ: Look, in America, we disagree. That's fine. That's the democratic process. But your political opponents are not Nazis. We need to learn to work together without demonizing each other, without attacking each other.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Joining me now to discuss, CNN political commentator Xochitl Hinojosa, and Rick Tyler who was a former spokesperson for Ted Cruz's presidential campaign. Welcome to you both. Rick, what's your reaction to hearing the vice president's words?

RICK TYLER, FORMER SPOKESPERSON FOR SENATOR TED CRUZ'S PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN, DIRECTOR OF ADVANCED SCHOOL OF POLITICS AT LEADERSHIP INSTITUTE: Well, look, they're all saying the right thing, but they all do it anyway, right? So, both sides -- like, how is it -- how is killing -- well, attempted killing of -- all things insane.

ICE is a law enforcement officer. I suppose since he was anti-ICE, he was supposed to -- he ends up shooting two detainees. It's obscene. And -- and then we got to turn it into a political Democrat, Republican hate fest, while they're saying, you know, we shouldn't talk like that and we should talk like that. But both sides do it, and we just, like, knock it off.

COATES: Voters interpret this how? Does it make them lean out of the process, go to one side or the other, or just self-reflection? Where do they go?

HINOJOSA: Well, I think that voters right now, they're sick of the political violence.

COATES: Uh-hmm.

HINOJOSA: I've seen online and some of the polling that has been out there, voters continue to say that they want their leader to talk and start talking about stopping political violence. They want our leaders to be more vocal about political violence regardless of who it is towards.

You know, the sad thing about all of this is there are immigrant families who woke up this -- you know, spent their days, got phone calls from the government or from someone saying that their loved ones have died. And I haven't heard federal officials or -- you know, I have not heard the administration talk about and pay their respects to the detainees and their families who lost their loved ones.

And the reality is -- is that whether it is detainee immigrants or whether it is ICE agents, whether it is a CDC that was shot at just a few months ago, FBI agents have seen sort of this across the board. We have seen an increase in threats and in actions and in violence against law enforcement, and it has to stop.

COATES: You know, there's a Quinnipiac poll that I think speaks volumes about where we are in terms of public reaction and perhaps the exhaustion, but also feelings about the state of affairs. Nearly 80% of voters think America is in a political crisis. Nearly 80%, Rick. Fifty-eight percent think it's not possible to lower the temperature. And then the former president, Bill Clinton, said this. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BILL CLINTON, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: You know, once you start dehumanizing people, once we take three-dimensional people and turn them into two-dimensional cartoons, it's hard to come back from that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Is he right, Rick?

TYLER: Of course, he's right.

COATES: So, what to do about it?

TYLER: You need leadership. We need people to point -- presidents and politicians are supposed to be bringing the country together. And that's how they used to win. Now, there has always been political division in the country. We've been divided since the founding. We're patriots and loyalists. We're the north and the douth. The Vietnam War divided us. We are still divided. It's not a surprise.

What happens is a leader can bring the country and remind us of what Lincoln called the better angels of our nature because we do have demons of our nature, and it's very easy for politicians to exploit that.

COATES: Uh-hmm.

TYLER: It's not sustainable over the long term because things start to get pretty dark and bloody. But you need a leader who is going to bring the country back together. We are always going to have disagreements. This disagreement about immigration is caused by politicians. It could be solved. ah You may not like all the solutions to it, but we have, in effect, invited people to come here because we pay them. There are ways to limit the way people get paid and why they should come here.

COATES: Hmm.

TYLER: We are -- we have always been an immigrant nation. The same lies are always told about immigrants. They were told about the Jews, the Germans, the Irish, every single generation. You're going to lose your culture, you're going to lose your job, you're going to get lower pay. And none of those things have happened ever. Not for -- not in one migration. The latest are the Muslims and the Central Americans.

And I don't think that we're going to be saying prayers to Mecca in Spanish any time soon because people assimilate into the culture.

COATES: Hmm.

TYLER: So, we don't worry about Italian Americans. I often ask people, what does Rudy Giuliani and Nancy Pelosi have in common? And no one ever says they're both Italian Americans. Their last name gives them away. But one day, it will be Rodriguez and Hernandez. What do they have in common? I don't know. They're both Hispanic. Oh, I didn't think of that --

COATES: Hmm.

TYLER: -- because they're Americans.

[23:30:00]

And so, they can solve this immigration problem. It's the will to solve it. And you do it by controlling how people get paid. It is not a lack of technology. It's a lack of political will.

COATES: Xochitl, why is there no political will? It's not advantageous?

HINOJOSA: Well, I think -- right now, I think that our political system is broken. And I think that what is currently happening -- and I agree with your point about there needs to be leadership here.

And a lot of Republicans were saying on Sunday that, you know, Donald Trump did what he was going to do at the Charlie Kirk service. He does what Donald Trump does. This is what -- you know, he kind of goes off script. He's not really going to bring the country together. That's not kind of the person who he is. But, you know, that's -- that's the best he could do. We need better. We need our leaders to actually come out and speak out and -- and -- and bring the country together.

And it's crazy to me. I don't agree with Erika Kirk on almost anything. But what I did agree with her during that speech at the memorial service was she says we can't fight hate with hate. She talked a lot about the First Amendment. There were a lot of things that I think Republicans and Donald Trump could learn from her about her faith and about hate in this country and about allowing people to speak out. And I think all of MAGA and Trump can learn from her.

COATES: Xochitl, Rick, stand by. We got a lot more. Up next, blockbuster ratings for Jimmy Kimmel's return to late night as dozens of stations continue to boycott his show. Is there anything they can do or Disney can do to end it all? And later, inside the panic setting in among top Republicans and the White House as the push to release the Epstein files nears the finish line.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:35:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COATES: Jimmy Kimmel's return after his multi-day suspension from ABC was a ratings triumph for the late-night comic. "Jimmy Kimmel Live" racked up 6.3 million broadcast viewers, more than three times the show's typical viewership. And on YouTube, his monologue has been gaining more than a million views an hour. The ratings are notable since Kimmel's show did not air on local affiliates owned by Nexstar or Sinclair. But the response to Kimmel's monologue focusing heavily on free speech, well, that has received mixed reviews, particularly from the right.

Joining me now is Peter Kafka, chief correspondent for Business Insider, back with us as well, Xochitl Hinojosa and Rick Tyler. Peter, I'll begin with you. I mean, the ratings and online streams, they were very impressive and even record-breaking for the comedian. And again, notable, especially since he didn't air everywhere as he normally does in various markets. What are your thoughts on how this bounce back occurred?

PETER KAKFA, CHIEF CORRESPONDENT, BUSINESS INSIDER: Well, I don't think that's surprising at all. This is a national news story. It's a national news story that lasted a week, which is an eon in 2025 for people's attention span.

So, you've got the president of United States going directly at someone who's on broadcast T.V. Of course, you're going to tune in to watch that, whether it's on T.V. or on YouTube. I watched it live. I don't usually watch "Jimmy Kimmel Live," but there's a lot of people like me who wanted to see something they don't normally get to see and, of course, you're going to tune in to watch that.

COATES: Let me ask you, Xochitl, because there were many prominent MAGA supporters who have been very critical because he did not use the words, I apologize or I'm sorry. He did say something along the lines, it was never my intention to make light of a murder of a young man, which he got very emotional at that point in time. It just tells you that it's not over in terms of the criticism. Are those words necessary to try to bring the temperature down and would they ever come?

HINOJOSA: Well, I don't think that anything that Kimmel would say is going to actually please MAGA and Republicans. I think that they have wanted him off the air. They have wanted him -- they don't like his jokes. They don't like his criticism of Trump. We're living in a world now that if outlets are critical of the president, he is currently filing lawsuits against them.

COATES: Uh-hmm.

HINOJOSA: That and he's targeting them. And so that's the world we're currently living in. So, unless Jimmy Kimmel were to apologize to everybody and also start changing his tune, then maybe they would come around. But they're not going to. And he said -- he said as much in his show. He said, I'm not going to win a lot of people over, but what I will say is that I am committed to free speech. He talked a lot about the -- about -- about the Kirk family.

COATES: Yes.

HINOJOSA: And -- and I -- you know. And I think he was extremely respectful in that sense, and he did get emotional.

COATES: He also went after the FCC commissioner, Brendan Carr, which is probably not surprising given the chain reaction his own statements made. But I want you to listen to what Vice President J.D. Vance had to say today.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

VANCE: People will say as well, you know, didn't the FCC commissioner put a tweet out that said something bad? Well, compare that, the FCC commissioner making a joke on social media. What is the government action that the Trump administration has engaged in to kick Jimmy Kimmel or anybody else off the air? Zero. What government pressure have we brought to bear to tell people that they're not allowed to speak their mind? Zero. We believe in free speech in the Trump administration. We are fighting every single day to protect it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Rick, he seems to be ignoring the hard way or easy way that was said by Brendan Carr. He seems to be ignoring as well President Trump's post yesterday about possibly suing ABC, saying this might be the next lucrative venture for him.

TYLER: Well, first, I don't think J.D. Vance is right. The FCC commissioner is not a comedian. He is not paid to go and make jokes. And when he speaks, he speaks for the administration.

[23:40:01]

He should be keenly aware of that. And he was responding directly to a criticism which -- which -- which, again, he claims was not funny. People are going to decide whether it was funny or not. But the government should not be deciding or writing the scripts for late- night comedians and forcing them on or off the air. I don't think we want to live in a country like that.

So, I think the most important thing Kimmel said was that his show wasn't important and he wasn't important. But the idea that he could do his show in a free country is important.

COATES: Hmm.

TYLER: And I think he nailed that. And I think that's what this amounts to. And I think this is really a watershed moment that we will look back on and say this is when there was an attempt to silence critics and this is when it stopped. And it was because -- and ABC failed here, clearly, I think, because, as I mentioned before, the people on the front lines of free speech are the ones who have to defend it. It is not the government that is going to protect your free speech.

COATES: Hmm.

TYLER: They're going to try to take it away. It is people on the front lines who say, the government, I like it, but this is free speech, and I don't -- I don't have to -- we don't have to like what Jimmy Kimmel says, but we should absolutely defend his right to say it.

COATES: Let's talk about the business side, Peter, because Nexstar said in a statement today -- it's talking to Disney. I'm not sure what's going to come about that. How long, do you think, the blackout from Nexstar or even Sinclair would last?

KAFKA: That's going to be a tricky part. You know, most people watching Nexstar and Sinclair stations are probably not going to loudly complain that they can't watch Jimmy Kimmel there. Like most people, they can watch it on YouTube, which is how most people watch that show.

Disney probably has the legal right to compel them to take that programming at some point. I cannot imagine that Disney wants to be in a legal fight with either of those broadcasters who, again, Commissioner Carr has praised specifically for their actions. He put out a tweet praising Nexstar when they took Kimmel off last week. And Carr has made a big point of saying, I think broadcast -- local broadcast owners should push back against media companies like Disney. So, he has been quite clear about what he wants them to do.

I don't think Disney wants this to be a head-on fight. I think they'd like to find some sort of amicable solution. But it could drag on for a while.

COATES: And, of course, you know, Nexstar and also the other entity, they certainly have an interest. Sinclair has an interest in pleasing the FCC. They want a particular deal done, which is why people look at the pressure on this.

Let's talk about the politics again, though, Xochitl, because today, a group of nine Democratic senators sent a letter to the FCC chair for his -- what they call purposeful assault on press freedom. And they're demanding that there's some clarity if the agency played any active role, not just a business decision of, say, ABC or Disney. Is that the smart move for Democrats? HINOJOSA: I think it is a smart move for Democrats. Democrats don't have a lot of control here. They aren't in control of the House or the Senate. But I do think that they need to -- they should be asking questions, and they should be trying to figure out what the role has been of the FCC.

And so, I do think that this is something that we -- Democrats can't just let this go, and they need to ensure accountability in some way -- one way or another. So, I do think they should be asking questions.

COATES: How about Republicans? Should they join in?

TYLER: Look, the FCC controls a broadcast network. We're not on broadcast, we're on cable. So, the FCC doesn't control CNN --

COATES: Uh-hmm.

TYLER: -- or the other cable networks. And media is converging. So, we're in this sort of age of transitions for media.

COATES: Uh-hmm.

TYLER: So, that's got to be -- that's got to be figured out because the government doesn't own the cable networks as a privately-owned, but they do own the spectrum, the airways, and that's the way it was done. But people are moving away from the airwaves. I have a 29-year- old daughter. I don't think she watched a day of broadcast television because we've never had it.

COATES: Hmm. How do you survive?

(LAUGHTER)

I mean, I'm -- there are still people like you. I love it. I love it. You obviously watch 11 p.m. weeknights. Thank you so much. Thank you, everyone. Listen, Democrats say that they finally have all the support that they need to force a vote on the Epstein files. It's all because of my next guest who just won her race in Arizona. Congresswoman-elect Adelita Grijalva is standing by to join me as we learn about a new pressure campaign underway from the White House and top Republicans to stop the vote. Details next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:45:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COATES: A key victory in Arizona could send a hotly contested discharge petition in Congress to release the Epstein files. Democrat Adelita Grijalva easily won her late father's congressional seat and has vowed to be the 218th signature on that discharge petition. But have they now moved the goalpost?

CNN is reporting that top Republican -- top congressional Republicans and White House allies are working behind the scenes to prevent the vote. Republican Congressman Thomas Massie said in an event in Kentucky that now, they have enough figures to force this vote. There's pressure on his three Republican colleagues to pull their support.

Massie told Semafor that "Some of the powers that be in D.C. are in full panic right now. They asked some of my colleagues who are co- signers. And they actually threatened them politically, not physically."

[23:49:59]

Joining us now is Arizona Representative-elect Adelita Grijalva. Welcome. Glad to see you here. Congratulations on a hard-fought race. You've got your work ahead, as you can imagine. And I just want to take a second to welcome you to Washington, D.C. when you do come. But you said on Monday, the day before the election, that you would be the 218th signature that was needed for this discharge petition to actually release the Epstein files. How important is this issue for you?

ADELITA GRIJALVA, ARIZONA REPRESENTATIVE-ELECT: It's very important. One, there is an issue of transparency and promises made to the American people. But the other is that giving -- and more importantly, giving voice to the victims and holding the perpetrators accountable. That has not happened to date. And it is this reluctance from the Republican Party to have these files released to the public that is causing so much attention and focus on this issue specifically.

COATES: What do you say to the efforts being made to try to either prevent the vote from happening, to delay even maybe your swearing in or anything that might give a hurdle to be able to get that discharge petition?

GRIJALVA: Well, I am going to be in D.C. on Monday with the Democratic Caucus ready to work, ready to get sworn in, and I am available. It's very frustrating to me when we had a very recent election and swearing in just two weeks ago for Representative James Walkinshaw from -- and I think that he was elected on a Tuesday and sworn in 24 hours later without official results. And so, now, we're hearing that the rules might be changing for me.

COATES: Hmm.

GRIJALVA: And that's problematic for a number of people, especially for the thousands that elected me to be their voice in Congress.

COATES: Do you have a sense of when you would be sworn in if they're waiting for the official tally or otherwise? Have you been given a date range or a date certain?

GRIJALVA: You know, I really don't know. I can look -- I can -- I can sort of gauge from how long it took with the primary election --

COATES: Uh-hmm. GRIJALVA: -- for us to be -- and it was 17 days. We have six counties in Arizona C.D. 7, and every County Board of Supervisors needs to vote and approve the canvas, and then it goes to the secretary of state. And so, there is a process. But I am nearly 40 points ahead of my -- my nearest opponent. So, it is a very significant difference. And there is no recount that's going to be demanded in this case. The winner is clear.

COATES: Sounds like you want to be there and to get started in that sort of gamesmanship. I'm not sure how it would serve the people who want you to represent them in Arizona at the very least. You know, we're days away. You know, you're coming on Monday. We're days away from another prospective shutdown at the end of this month. And today, on Truth Social, President Trump decided that meeting with Democratic congressional leaders would not be helpful or productive.

What is your stance on whether or not Senate Democrats should hold out their support for a short-term funding bill to avert a shutdown?

GRIJALVA: My thought would be it would be incumbent upon him to find out why is it that Senate Democrats are holding back. And, really, what we're trying to do as a Democratic Party is prioritize health care, to give people what they need in order to make sure that they can have a quality of life that all of us want and not go into debt because they've lost their ACA and Medicare and Medicaid, and those cuts are going to be really devastating.

And so, I believe very strongly in an issue that everyone in the nation can understand and respect. And what the Democratic Party is doing is fighting for the people.

COATES: Congresswoman-elect, I have to ask you. When I read this fact, it took me aback for a second because I was shocked that it is taken until now. But I understand that you are the first Latina to represent the state of Arizona. You have shattered quite a barrier. What does that feel like?

GRIJALVA: We broke that glass ceiling together. And really what it means is, for so many young people in our communities that are also Mexican American, Chicana, to have somebody that they can look to say, you know, if she can do it, that girl from Tucson Southside, then I can do it, too. That is what we want. We want to have more representation of the people that are in our communities around tables of power and making decisions.

[23:55:00]

And that's going to be critically important. And so, I take that responsibility very seriously. I want to make sure, too, that I might be the first, but I absolutely will not be the last Latina from Arizona in office.

COATES: Congresswoman-elect Adelita Grijalva, thank you so much for joining.

GRIJALVA: Thank you for your time. I appreciate it. COATES: And thank you all for watching. "Anderson Cooper 360" is next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[00:00:00]

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST: Tonight on "360," we are just learning that President Trump could be close to getting both his wish and his repeated command, the prosecution of former FBI director --