Return to Transcripts main page
Laura Coates Live
Shutdown Fight Turns Ugly As Trump Posts Racist A.I. Video; Chilling Conversation With Michigan Church Suspect Revealed; Inside Trump's New Peace Plan For Gaza; Trump Suggests DOJ Should Investigate Christopher Wray. Aired 11p-12a ET
Aired September 29, 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]
ABBY PHILLIP, CNN ANCHOR AND SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: The Post reports that the leaders are critical of some of the abrupt changes that he outlined, and that includes moving troops back to the United States to focus on homeland defense. The tone of the document is also reportedly more partisan than previous ones, saying the Biden administration hurt the military.
Thank you very much for watching "NewsNight." You can catch me any time on your favorite social media X, Instagram, and TikTok. "Laura Coates Live" starts right now.
LAURA COATES, CNN HOST AND SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Tonight, countdown to one of America's least favorite and most dysfunctional pastimes, a government shutdown. Do you have any hope for a deal? Well, I have an absurd and racist A.I.-generated video posted by the president you're going to wish you didn't see. Plus, why did a former Marine attacked and burned down a Michigan church? I learn from and hear from one of the last people to speak to the suspect as he lets us in on the revealing and chilling confrontation he had just a few days before the assault. And later, President Trump's new plan to end the war in Gaza and what he says will happen if Hamas doesn't back it. Tonight on "Laura Coates Live."
All right, everyone, wait for it!
(CLOCK TICKING)
You hear that? That is the sound of the clock ticking away with less than 25 hours to go until a government shutdown. I know, I know, it sounds like deja vu. How many times have we been here before, you're asking. And Laura, they say this every time. And at the very last minute, someone blinks and that headline turns to crisis averted. Drama for the sake of drama.
Well, this time feels different. Why? Because there's no sign of compromise anywhere inside. Not even if you squint, not even through binoculars. No compromise in sight. Both sides are digging in. And the vibes, well, they just ain't no good.
The administration is threatening mass layoffs of federal workers if the shutdown happens. So, Democratic and Republican leaders met with President Trump at the White House this evening to try and move things forward. And let me tell you, it did not take long to see how it all went. Neither side looked happy when they walked out to address the media. And Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries, well, they had plenty to say.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY): Their bill has not one iota of Democratic input. That is never how we've done this before.
REP. HAKEEM JEFFRIES (D-NY): Democrats are fighting to protect the healthcare of the American people. And we are not going to support a partisan Republican spending bill that continues to gut the healthcare of everyday Americans. Period. Full stop.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: As in the shutdown might stop the government. The Democrats want significant changes to healthcare, including reversing the cuts to Medicaid Republicans passed in their one big beautiful bill. The GOP isn't budging, and they're staying on message.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
J.D. VANCE, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: We're not going to let you take the people's government hostage, and then give -- give everything you want. And that's really the state of the negotiation.
SEN. JOHN THUNE (R-SD): This is purely and simply hostage taking on the behalf -- on behalf of the Democrats.
RUSSELL VOUGHT, DIRECTOR, OFFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET: This is hostage taking. It is not something that we are going to accept.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: I think the theme was hostage taking. Vice President J.D. Vance is outright predicting a shutdown. But compare what he's saying now to a shutdown fight just last year when the shoe was on the other foot.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VANCE: You don't use your policy disagreements as leverage to not pay our troops, to not have essential services of government actually function. You don't say the fact that you disagree about a particular tax provision is an excuse for shutting down the people's government and all the essential services that come along with it.
Why shouldn't we be trying to force this government shutdown fight to get something out of it that's good for the American people? Like why have a government if it's not a functioning government?
(END VIDEO CLIP) COATES: So, what changed? I mean, it wouldn't be the first time that a politician has gone full 180, right? Welcome to Washington, D.C. or any other state, frankly, even if D.C. is not a state. You follow me.
But what's different is whose -- who is using the leverage. Last year, Vance saw a potential shutdown as an opportunity to fix his priorities. Now the Democrats using to fix their priorities. The theme, what was it? Hostage taking.
But the question for all of you, how do you see it? How will American voters see it? Both parties seem very willing to gamble. That public opinion will blame the other side, the other person on one side of the aisle.
[23:05:01]
Well, we'll all knew -- know soon enough. But behind the scenes, Democrats see a glimmer of hope. They think Trump may be willing to negotiate on healthcare, even if it means shutting down the government first.
With me now, former Republican Congressman Charlie Dent, former Trump campaign adviser Bryan Lanza, and former senior White House aide to President Biden, Daniel Koh.
All right, congressman, I'm turning to you. We've been here before. We've seen this kind of movie. It normally ends in oh, it's over, it's averted. Now, it feels a little more inevitable. Do you agree?
CHARLIE DENT, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, FORMER PENNSYLVANIA REPRESENTATIVE: I do. It's one of those here we go again moments. You know, you saw the Vance clip.
COATES: Uh-hmm.
DENT: You know, consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds. But this -- what's happening here seems --
COATES: Is that the phrase? Okay.
DENT: That was -- I think that was -- Ralph Emerson came up with that one.
COATES: Okay.
DENT: I wish it was original. But the -- you know, but this feels like 2013 in reverse. Twelve years ago, at this time, it was Republicans who were insisting on defunding Obamacare, making healthcare the issue. Obamacare was particularly popular. And Republicans said, if, you know, you don't defund Obamacare, you know, we're going to shut down the government. I'm going to hold my breath, and I'm going to wait for you to turn blue.
COATES: Uh-hmm.
DENT: Well, it didn't work out well for Republicans in that shutdown. It's the reverse this time. It's the Democrats now who are insisting that they want healthcare provisions inserted into this bill. If we don't get that, then the government is going to shut down.
So, I think, right now, the Democrats have put themselves in a bit of a tough situation. I don't see their exit strategy because Thune is out there saying, this is a 50-day spending bill, and we'll talk about the Obama -- the ACA tax credits, you know, which don't expire till the end of the year.
So, I'm not so sure this is a smart play to shut it down. I think the Democrats, just like the Republicans did in 2013, they want to fight. Their base wants to fight, and they're getting their fight. Somebody got to point --
COATES: Their base wants to fight?
DANIEL KOH, FORMER WHITE HOUSE SENIOR AIDE TO PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN: They do want to fight. And it stuns me how much the Democrats are getting owned right now --
COATES: Hmm.
KOH: -- in communication and not fighting hard enough. Let me give you an example. Russ Vought rolled out a memo saying that any employee with discretionary funding could be subject to mass firing.
Let me give you an example of what they could have done to take away Donald Trump's leverage. Hey, do you like safe travel? Well, if you go to the airport, he could fire all the TSA security agents. And if you make it to the airplane, there'll be no air traffic controllers. And guess what? If the airplane crashes, the NTSB or the FBI won't be able to investigate it because they won't be there. And if you want to bring someone to justice, correctional officers won't exist. So, good luck trying to send them to the prison.
You would go all the way down the line on this. Cancer research, food inspectors, or even the Secret Service that surround Donald Trump all paid by those discretionary funds. There was absolutely no attempt by the Democrats to try to remove the leverage that the Republicans were putting forward. That's a huge missed opportunity. The base sees a lack of fight, and they're super annoyed by it.
COATES: Oh, wait. So, why -- what you're saying is a lack of fight. Maybe I'm being naive. I'm not naive. That's your clue. But let me ask you. Why would they do that? What is the -- what is it that they are lacking a strategy or they believe that the strategy they are taking right now will work?
KOH: Because they keep putting the Democrats in a corner. They say, if you shut the government down, this is going to happen.
COATES: I mean, Democrats, why aren't they doing what you're saying?
KOH: I don't know. And that's the pure -- that's the frustration of it. They are not poking holes in the argument that Donald Trump is saying, well, if this happens, here's what I'm going to do. They need to expose the absurdity of that and take the public opinion to their side. They're just letting Donald Trump do the net, even this ridiculous A.I.-generated --
COATES: Oh, wait. Let -- hold on. I want to play it.
KOH: Okay.
COATES: Hold on. I want to see you with this ridiculous and absurdity. Watch what words were put in the mouths of, say, two prominent Democrats.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SCHUMER (A.I.-GENERATED): Look, guys. There's no way to sugarcoat it. Nobody likes Democrats anymore. We have no voters left because of all of our woke trans bullshit. Not even Black people want to vote for us anymore. Even Latinos hate us.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Just to make that point, A.I.-generated video. The account, President Donald Trump. Bryan, I know you don't want me to ask you the why. But I asked him the why aren't Democrats doing what he thinks they should do. Why is that Republican doing what he is doing?
BRYAN LANZA, FORMER DEPUTY COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR FOR TRUMP 2016 CAMPAIGN: Yeah. First of all, I don't hate Latinos being a Republican. I love Latinos. Listen, I think Trump --
COATES: No, they're saying Democrats go that way.
LANZA: I mean, listen, I think their policies are the problem. Let's look at the C.R. that has been passed. This is a Democratic bill that was negotiated last year. This is a Democratic budget. This is a Democratic C.R. We're just asking to extend it. So, when you hear Schumer saying Democrats were not involved in this, the negotiation, it's their damn bill.
(CROSSTALK)
LANZA: Yeah, but -- but -- but Schumer is saying, we were excluded from this process. It is physically their bill. They negotiated every item in this last year. We passed a C.R. This is nothing but politics. It has blown up in their face. The Dems have to appease the crazy liberal base that demands some type of fight. But they're fighting on the wrong issues.
[23:10:00]
You know, they're trying to use this fight. The fight they need to win is they need to win the immigration fight. They need to win the economic fight. Instead, they're trying to fight this C.R. fight that they have no real win to, and -- and Trump just boxed them in. We're going to have the shutdown. I think it's pretty clear we're going to have the shutdown. I don't know when it ends. COATES: Well, the DOGE cuts were quite severe. You add that on to potential mass layoffs in the federal government. And then you point to the point that he was -- Dan was talking about in terms of being able to bring home the point if Democrats were voicing that, about continuing and following that thread of the chaos that could ensue. Mass firings, DOGE, what can Republicans say about that?
DENT: Well, that's the Republican vulnerabilities. As said, I think Democrats --
COATES: That's a huge vulnerability.
DENT: Yeah. The Democrats are making the policy demand. Usually, the side that makes the policy demand gets blamed for this. But if Russ Vought at OMB engages in mass firings, then I think this can blow back hard on Republicans and probably none more than the Republican gubernatorial candidate in Virginia. This shutdown, if there's a winner out of this, it's probably going to be Spanberger. I think it's going to help her margin even more so --
COATES: Because of -- because some of the federal employees --
DENT: So many are out of Virginia.
COATES: -- come from Virginia.
DENT: Yeah.
COATES: -- Maryland, D.C., and Indiana.
DENT: Yeah. So -- but I do think cuts, you know, these -- these wild cuts that have been discussed by the OMB director could really harm Republicans in this fight, and they could end up accepting -- being blamed for that aspect of this. So, I think that would be an overreach. And if I were a House Republican right now or a congressional Republican, I'd say they ought to refrain from going down that road of mass firing.
COATES: So, talking about Obamacare, you mentioned that point, and I want you to bring into this as well. This is a huge sticking point, the healthcare prices. You know that the Obamacare subsidies are said to expire -- what? End of this year. Speaker Johnson is saying, we'll get to it, you know, to the end of the year. But why not now?
LANZA: That's not how government works.
COATES: Well, that's the facts --
LANZA: Yeah. The government waits till the last minute so they have maximum leverage. I mean, if you have something there, what we've seen over the years, is government wants to bring these big items at the last second so they get a maximum leverage to pass other things that don't usually correspond to that.
So, I have no problem. The American people have no problem waiting for the end of the year for the solution. But what they don't want is they don't want the government to shut down today unnecessarily. And that's what the Democrats are making the choice of.
COATES: Do you think the government --
LANZA: They're choosing this fight --
COATES: Finish your point.
LANZA: They're choosing this particular moment that doesn't even have to happen. We could easily have another fight like this in December. Instead, they want to do it now because they have to do something to appeal to their crazy radical base. The AOCs, the Mamdanis of the Socialist Party, they want blood, they want some type of fight, and this is the only fight that's on the horizon.
KOH: I think Democrats are speaking about the right issues in the wrong way. So, they talk a lot about healthcare. Healthcare is going to go up. They don't humanize what that exactly means. Right?
And so, you think about what Elissa Slotkin has been saying in Michigan. She says, if you are a couple making $82,000 in Grand Rapids, Michigan, you will see a $10,000 increase in your Affordable Care Act premiums. Right? You have to humanize the number. If you just start talking in high-level policies, it's hard for people to feel the tangibility of that.
That's what Democrats need to do over and over. They need to be holding signs saying how much it goes up. They need to be wearing pins showing the dollar signs of what people are going to be paying in their healthcare. That makes a difference rather than this gesticulation, no disrespect, the acronym CRs, whatever. People don't understand what that means.
COATES: But --
KOH: It's on Democrats to humanize.
COATES: I hear you. But do you think that where things are today, signs and pins is going to be enough to butt-trust the credibility of Democrats in -- on Capitol Hill?
KOH: I think -- I think this A.I.-generated video is actually a really important thing. It was blatantly racist. It shouldn't have been put out. Donald Trump knew exactly -- it was insidious. He knew exactly what he was doing because the message was not about the sombrero, the mustache, it was about this false narrative that Democrats only care about healthcare for undocumented immigrants. They say it must be more disrespectful phrase. Right? And millions and millions of people are going to see that video and it will perpetuate a false rumor.
Democrats need to continue to beat the drum on communication about the thousands of dollars that this will affect individual families. It is about communication and beating that drum. Democrats do a terrible job at communication. Republicans own Democrats over and over again, especially in independent media and online. We have a huge gap to fill, and we need to close it as fast as we can. COATES: So, just to be clear, the Democrats' plan does not provide free healthcare for undocumented immigrants. They are largely prohibited from federal programming for healthcare programs. There are some exceptions that, I think, people are trying to reference.
But is this a little message simply, I'm going to have this music playing of a mariachi band in the background and that I'm hoping people will assume that everything the Democrats are doing relates to undocumented persons? Is that the only game plan?
LANZA: No. Listen, there are components to this. This -- you know, the Democrats asking for or wanting some funding for illegal aliens. That's their choice and that's the prerogative. But that's also their priority. The American people have a different priority. They voted a different priority with President Trump. The Democrats still seem to be stuck with sort of the -- the priority of illegal aliens.
[23:15:00]
I think that's a mistake. I think it's a winning issue of Republicans. Voters have been very clear what they want with illegal aliens. They don't want them getting these benefits. They want the border securities. So, I think it's a safe fight for President Trump. I think he's going to excel at it.
COATES: But if they want all those things, and I understand that Republican voters, as you're saying, do, shutting down the government, mass layoffs, doesn't that undermine the objectives that are part and parcel to a functioning government? I mean, we can't have both.
DENT: Of course. And the real tragedy in all this is that this government is operating on a continuing resolution for this entire fiscal year, which ends tomorrow. That is failure. I was on the Appropriations Committee. If you have to run the government like that, you are failing. It's hard to run the Department of Defense this way. And we're talking about doing another year-long continuing resolution for the next year. The government can't function. It's absurd.
And, by the way, if I were a Democrat right now, I would be making an argument to the Republicans and to Trump that when we negotiate a bipartisan bill, we enact the law. And then the White House decides they're not going to spend money for programs that Congress has appropriated money for? Why would we enter into a negotiation with you? And someday, the shoe will be on the left foot.
And if there's a Democratic president with a Democratic Congress, are they going cancel spending negotiated that Republicans put in, say, for the Defense Department or for border security? That is what's -- terrible precedents have been set. So, I don't know how we get out of this.
COATES: Congress, two left feet. Thank you, everyone. Up next, imagine that you're running for a local office, you're canvassing at a voter's home, only to hear that voter begin to rant angrily about the church of Latter-day Saints. And then, imagine waking up just days later to find out a church had been brutally attacked. My next guest doesn't have to imagine it because he says exactly what happened to him. He'll share the details of the conversation he had next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:20:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: Tonight, investigators are racing to determine what motivated the latest act of mass violence in this country. The target? The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in the small town of Grand Blanc Township, Michigan. Four people killed, eight others injured.
Police say the attacker rammed his truck into the chapel, began shooting, and then set the building on fire during Sunday services. Police shot and killed the attacker, 40-year-old Marine and Iraq war vet Thomas Sanford, who also went by Jake. He's seen here wearing a Trump 2020 shirt. But law enforcement has not said anything about his politics or his motive.
The White House called Sanford -- quote -- "an individual who hated people of the Mormon faith" -- unquote. His family is cooperating with investigators. Sources telling CNN affiliate WXYZ in Detroit -- quote -- "We are beside ourselves." But Sanford's neighbors say they had a bizarre encounter with him just 48 hours before the attack.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNKNOWN: We started to cross, and the truck, like, gunned its engine and came at us. And I, like, blocked my daughter. And we jumped back, and then the window rolled down, and it was Jake. He was laughing. He's, like, oh, got you, guys, you know? And --
UNKNOWN: Was that normal behavior for him?
UNKNOWN: I mean, he'd never pretended to run us over before. So, no. I mean, no, that wasn't normal behavior.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Joining me now is Kris Johns, city council candidate in nearby Burton, Michigan where the shooter lived. Kris actually spoke to Thomas Sanford just days before the attack at the LDS Church. Kris, thank you for being here. I couldn't believe it when I saw this. You were canvassing when you met Sanford, and he began talking to you first about guns and religion before bringing up the LDS Church. What did he say about the church and his views of it?
KRIS JOHNS, CITY COUNCIL CANDIDATE: Well, thank you. The very first thing he asked me was, what do know about Mormons? And I do have a very loose relationship. My cousin played football at BYU. I have a good friend in Orem, Utah who is at local leadership level. So, I have a general understanding of the church of LDS. And within minutes of our conversation, the very first question is, what do know about Mormons? And I responded. And then each additional question was more pointed and direct.
COATES: What was your impression when you heard him asking?
JOHNS: I could understand that this is a person who had had an interaction with the LDS Church. I mean, where we live, while there are LDS temples nearby, there's not a large population. And so, it's one of these things where -- you know, unlike Utah, where we live in mid-Michigan, to know the level of detail, he was aware of the LDS Church, he really had to either studied it or been in close proximity to it.
COATES: And you didn't suspect anything violent would happen. Right? Why?
JOHNS: Not at all. I mean, what I saw is a person who was calm and collected. And, you know, I mentioned this before. I'm running to be a city councilman. I mean, if there was anything that would have endangered any resident of both, whether it be Burton or even the greater area, I would have made a phone call. There was nothing that was indicative of anger or a potential violent act.
And he was a person who truly, I think, had a very personal interaction with the LDS Church that was negative. And what caused to do what he did on Sunday, we'll never know. But nothing he said during our brief conversation was indicative of violence.
COATES: Did he describe to you some personal negative interaction or you're just assuming as much?
JOHNS: He didn't say a specific piece, but he just was asking questions, and his kind of responses back to his own questions were just very negative regarding the church of Latter-day Saints.
[23:25:08]
He had just made statements in regarding to -- you know, he was asking questions about church leaders and the history and, you know, the books of the Mormon Bible that are in addition to, you know, the traditional Bible, and he just expresses his pleasure at that. And ultimately, one of his final statements to me were that Mormons are the antichrist, and he said that several times.
COATES: My God. And this was about a week before the attack. You're canvassing, you're running for office, but what was your reaction when you heard that the person you had spoken to was the culprit?
JOHNS: It was surreal because during our time, you know, I had -- my daughter was with me. We canvass together. We drive from house to house. And, again, this is -- we've never had any -- we've had conversation indoors, but nothing violent, nothing indicative of this.
And so, to see the person that you had -- I think are generally positive comment. You know, conversation with absent this discussion on religion, it was a shock to see him. And again, the name of the person who voted at the house was not the same name. So, I didn't make the connection. And it wasn't until I saw a photo that I was 100% certain that that person was Thomas Sanford. COATES: How is your community coping with this? I mean, it's unbelievably heartbreaking. It's tragic to the nth degree. What is the community feeling tonight?
JOHNS: Ultimately shock. I mean, these are -- we've, unfortunately, heard of so many incidents that have happened in other states and other towns. And to have something that, as a crow flies, is less than five miles away from where I'm at right now, it's truly very saddening.
And a lot of times, this person that I spoke with one week ago, while angry, it was contained. It was -- he was -- I mean, on a scale of -- if 10 was an attack on a church, he was at a 1. He was less than a 1.
COATES: Hmm.
JOHNS: And the other piece I just want to stress is that there was no political discussion. We had -- there was no statements of violence. I mean, really out of a 20-minute conversation, while brief, we talked about a fair amount. And he talked a lot. He wanted to be heard, and I was listening. But within that, he made no comments about any political figures, past or present, or any current events, just -- he was -- he was very focused on the church of Latter-day Saints.
People want to be heard. And there was just something in this person's history that truly -- when I'm coming away from it, there was a personal held belief, there was a negative interaction that caused him to essentially turn his truck into a missile and destroy the church. And really, as of a week ago, he displayed none of the anger that he exhibited on Sunday morning.
COATES: Kris Johns, thank you.
JOHNS: Thank you.
COATES: I want to dig deeper into the investigation with two former FBI special agents, profiler Mary Ellen O'Toole and former FBI special agent and president of the Brunner Sierra Group, Daniel Brunner. Thank you both for being here.
I mean, Mary, unfortunately, Mary Ellen, we have spoken far too often recently about the violence that we are seeing. But, so far, the FBI, they aren't linking these alleged rants against the LDS Church to a specific motive. But as you heard Kris Johns say, he turned his truck into a missile. What might be the psychology behind someone who would do something like that?
MARY ELLEN O'TOOLE, FORMER SENIOR PROFILER AND SPECIAL AGENT, FBI: Well, when I hear the fact pattern, as it has been described, it really sounds like he would fall into the category. And I hate to use that word, category, but it's a phrase that I use to describe the behavior of someone who acts like this, a mission-oriented offender.
And that means someone who kind of crafts or designs the attack almost like a military mission where anything -- anything goes, but they will finish this attack and nothing will get in the way. And if it means, at the end, they will die, that's fine. And other people will die and be hurt. That's the intent, is to kill or injure as many people as possible.
So, when I see that mission-oriented offender kind of behavior, it really suggests to me, again, what -- what one of the motives might be. And I think once the FBI is finished, that they will identify multiple motives. We always did in the FBI. There was never one reason why they behaved like this. But I think one of them is going to be to hurt and murder as many people as possible.
COATES: Daniel, I mean, officials say that this was a targeted act of violence. They add that they found improvised explosive devices at the church as well.
[23:29:58]
Daniel, what does that suggest to you about the level of planning and -- and how they might use this information to paint a picture of the planning, possibly the motive, and the why?
DANIEL BRUNNER, RETIRED FBI SUPERVISORY SPECIAL AGENT: Well, I think there's going to be a lot of questions to be asked and the investigation is going to take time to piece everything together. To me, based on what we're seeing, this absolutely is a domestic terrorism attack. It should be treated as terrorism attack.
And the domestic terrorism squad should be leading this investigation out of Michigan because he targeted, it appears to be, the Mormon church. And based on what we're hearing, especially from your previous guest, that this was ideologically-driven, that he had a mission against this church, against these people. So, this is -- would be a violation of federal laws and it would be classified as terrorism attack.
Everything is going to be dissected from this individual to figure out where he diverted from the normal course of life, where he began his pathway of violence --
COATES: Hmm.
BRUNNER: -- what created and sent him down this road where he believed only he could advance this, only he could justify the -- what the wrongs were against him, and he had to conduct this act of violence.
COATES: They're going to, of course, build a profile of him even though he is deceased if they believe it's a terrorism with an eye towards preventing future acts, Mary. And the shooter, as we have heard, an Iraq war veteran. He said that his son was born with a rare illness that caused part of his pancreas to be removed. Are these factors that an investigator would look at building a profile, even with his family and, of course, his career history?
O'TOOLE: Well, they'll look at all of the facts in his life. But what they'll really consider is, how did he respond to all the disappointments and the failures in life? How did he view them? Did he blame other people for what was happening to him? Did he find other people responsible for a life that was not as rewarding as it should have been? So, that is really the way that they'll look at it.
What has happened is important, but it's how he interprets it. So, oftentimes, with these kinds of offenders, you will find them blaming other people for what has happened to them in life, and that's one thing the FBI profilers will be looking for.
COATES: Mary Ellen O'Toole, Daniel Brunner, thank you. Such a tragedy. Thank you both. Up next, Donald Trump's new plan to end the war in Gaza, 20 points long. But with one point in particular that may be most important. We'll explain next. And later, FBI Director Kash Patel clarifies a conspiracy theory that he once stoked, that the president is now using to demand new investigations.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:35:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: The promise of a new Middle East is so clearly within our reach. This is the closest we've ever come to real peace. Not fake peace. Not political fool's peace.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: The closest we've ever come. That's how the president is describing what's arguably the most detailed proposal yet to end the war in Gaza, which he unveiled following his meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Netanyahu expressed his support for Trump's 20-point plan today.
What does it call for? Well, for starters, a release of all Israeli hostages in exchange for Palestinian prisoners, the demilitarization of Hamas and an end to its rule in Gaza, a withdrawal of Israeli troops in phases while they maintain a security perimeter, sending full humanitarian aid to Gaza immediately, and the creation of an international body to temporarily govern Gaza.
Now, Hamas will have to agree to all of these terms. And sources tell CNN that officials from Egypt and Qatar have briefed them on the plan. But earlier, Netanyahu and Trump sent this warning to Hamas should they choose to reject it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BENJAMIN NETANYAHU, PRIME MINISTER OF ISRAEL: If Hamas rejects your plan, Mr. President, or if they supposedly accept it and then -- then basically do everything to counter it, then Israel will finish the job by itself. This can be done the easy way or it can be done the hard way.
TRUMP: I have a feeling that we're going to have a positive answer. But if not, as you know, baby, you'd have our full backing to do what you would have to do.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Joining me now, former Middle East negotiator from State Department, Aaron David Miller. Aaron, I'm so glad that you're here because I want to know from your perspective, is this plan being put forward by the administration? Is it a realistic framework for peace?
AARON DAVID MILLER, FORMER STATE DEPARTMENT MIDDLE EAST NEGOTIATOR: Realistic framework for peace. Um, look, what's new here, Laura, I think, frankly, is that Donald Trump finally got Benjamin Netanyahu to say yes.
COATES: Hmm.
MILLER: And he got to say yes because this really, in many respects, is not a peace plan, it's an ultimatum, and because Benjamin Netanyahu cannot afford to say no to Donald Trump or to break with him because he needs Trump in order to secure his reelection. Election, I suspect, will -- will occur sometime early in the spring of 2026 or maybe the government will go to term in October.
So, you now have an Israeli yes in front of the entire world. Joe Biden had one in May of 2024 --
COATES: Uh-hmm.
[23:40:01]
MILLER: -- with his proposal, which was ultimately backtracked and hit the trash can. The question now is will -- what will Hamas do? If they say no, I think the story line is going to be very clear. The president has essentially created a huge margin for Netanyahu to continue the war in Gaza City. Hamas will probably come back with a yes, but.
COATES: Hmm.
MILLER: And the yes, but will pose a certain dilemma for the president because what that will mean is that we are now entering a period -- the Middle East market is now open. Right? And there are going to be negotiations. And I think that's the other reality here.
And let's be clear, we're a long, long way from ending the war in Gaza. Every point in this plan if, in fact, Hamas engages on it, is going to have to be negotiated.
COATES: Hmm.
MILLER: Every comma, every semicolon, there's going to be pushback, there's going to be trouble getting from one phase to another. And we've seen this movie before in the two previous ceasefire agreements.
One last point. Donald Trump has now placed himself as the chairman of the board, the international, the peace board, which means he owns this. And frankly, Laura, it isn't going to work unless Trump devotes an enormous amount of time and creates a real strategy --
COATES: Hmm.
MILLER: -- to monitor it and to impose consequences if, in fact, parties don't discharge what they signed up.
COATES: Well, Aaron, let me ask you. You said that Hamas would likely be a yes, but. And I want to explore that because the plan, it explicitly states that Hamas would play no role in the governments of Gaza in any form. It calls for Hamas to fully disarm and accept less than a full withdrawal from the enclave. It will be allowed to maintain a security perimeter of presence until Gaza is deemed fully secure. So, if there is a yes, but with Hamas, is the but, I won't do any of those things or something else?
MILLER: Oh, the but is going to be about securing assurances that if - if Hamas accepts the proposal, the government of Israel will declare the war is over and withdraw its forces. The but is going to be about the number of Palestinian prisoners that Hamas wants both in terms of hardcore --
COATES: Uh-hmm.
MILLER: -- several hundred who have been accused of killing Israelis and the seventeen hundred that the Israelis picked up since October 7. The yes, but is going to be about the notion of disarmament. Hamas has very little leverage here. They only have the hostages.
And the fact that this plan calls for returning all of the hostages as the initial opening phase after the shooting stops to provide a margin of relative tranquility to implement the plan, hard for me to believe that they're going to give those hostages up because their leverage is going to be gone.
COATES: Sounds like there is ways to go before resolution is in the immediate future. Aaron David Miller, thank you for your expertise.
MILLER: Laura, thanks for having me.
COATES: Up next, Trump suggests there should be an investigation into former FBI Director Christopher Wray. We're learning the DOJ may already be looking into the bureau's leadership at that time when he was in charge. We've got details next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:45:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VANCE: Well, there's certainly going to be more indictments coming over the next three and a half years of the Trump administration. But we're always going to let the law drive this stuff and the facts of the case and not political motivations which, frankly, makes us so much different from the Biden administration.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Vice President J.D. Vance signaling more indictments ahead in the wake of former FBI Director James Comey's charges. This as President Trump set his eyes on another former FBI director, this time Christopher Wray. You'll recall he nominated him during his first term. He's now accusing the former bureau chief of lying about the FBI agents' presence during the January 6th Capitol riot.
That's not all. Two sources telling CNN the Department of Justice is conducting a national security probe around the FBI leadership when Christopher Wray was at the helm. The investigation is focusing on alleged destruction or mishandling of documents related to John Durham's special counsel investigation into the origins of the FBI's investigation of links between Russia and Trump 2016 campaign.
With me now, former federal prosecutor who worked on January 6 cases, Brendan Ballou, and former Homeland Security and Counterterrorism adviser to Vice President Mike Pence, Olivia Troye. Two experts on this, for sure. Olivia, let me get with you. The administration now investigating multiple leaders of the FBI. What -- what is the goal here?
OLIVIA TROYE, FORMER HOMELAND SECURITY AND COUNTERTERRORISM ADVISER TO VICE PRESIDENT MIKE PENCE: You know, I think, one, I think sending a chilling message to all the leaders of national security, that if you step out of line, if you're disloyal along the way or you're seen that way, that this is what's coming your way. So, stay in check. Right? I think this is part of it.
I think this is also part of a greater narrative for Donald Trump. I think this is all strategic. You know, whether it's based on facts or reality doesn't matter. It's a narrative that he is pushing out to the American public about what these people did. And it's all tied to Russia. Have you noticed that it goes back to Russia in 2016?
[23:49:57]
And I kind of want to sit down and be, like, Trump, we're in 2025. You are now back in office. Let it go. Get over it and actually focus on things that really matter to the American people today.
But I think that is what is happening here. And I think they're going to continue to use it. They're pulling the thread. And I think you're going to see this tied to other people, whether it's, you know, Chris Wray, maybe next. When will the shoe drop then? And so, I think this is all part of one strategic thing going on in Donald Trump's head where he is still holding on to this vendetta against these people.
COATES: I mean, 2016, to point out -- I mean, Brendan, the president is accusing Christopher Wray of lying about FBI agents' presence at the Capitol on January 6th. I mean, you worked extensively on cases related to the Capitol riot. For the record, did the FBI secretly plant agents in the crowd as agitators, if you're aware? BRENDAN BALLOU, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: Absolutely not. So, what the president is referencing is a discredited theory that the FBI was somehow involved in organizing the January 6th riot. In fact, the statistic that he's talking about refers to the FBI agents that came to the Capitol after the riot began, after the riot that he started. So, he's really trying to completely turn the history of January 6 on its head.
And, you know, building off what Olivia was saying, he's doing it for a very specific reason, which is a narrative, which is that he can't admit that he tried to overturn the results of the 2020 election, and neither can his supporters in office. And so, they have to continue to push this lie that January 6 was anything other than what it was, which was an attack on democracy.
COATES: And yet, to both of your points, in terms of the moving on factor, I mean, Olivia, he won the re-election. He is now the president of the United States, again, for a second term. And yet, it appears that the vengeance campaign or the retribution, whatever phrase you want to use, is focused on the rear-view mirror where he need not look. I mean, he was successful at winning. Why do you think that he is so focused on the investigations per se? Is it the inconvenience? Is it the conviction? What does he want?
TROYE: I think it's a -- it's a number of things. I think it's yes, it's inconvenience. It's about, you know, hurting these people, destroying lives. I mean, this is what happens to people when these things -- it's not easy. Right? They do still have to defend themselves. It costs a lot of money.
And I do think it is part of his vengeful personality where he can't let things go. And he wants to see people hurt by this because he's still carrying that inside of him. But I also think that, looking forward, this is also undermining institutions along the way. Right?
And so, I think my concern here, looking at this and what he's doing, is he's chipping away and pushing these narratives, and it all goes back to his deep state views and the things that he has said to his supporters. That is one thing that I think about, too. And so, he's pushing, whether these are criminal charges, whether they actually come to fruition or not.
I think this is all part of planting seeds in the American people's minds about just like looking at leaders and saying, oh, we can't trust them. What does that mean going forward? What does it mean for future things? What does it mean for our elections?
COATES: Completely counterproductive, frankly, if you're trying to say that you can't trust leadership and you're the head leader of the United States government.
But Brendan, I mean, CNN has learned the Department of Justice is actively working to investigate the investigators, which Special Counsel John Durham already did. You've heard this phrase before. Only getting, by the way, one guilty plea from a lower-level lawyer for the FBI. So, do you expect investigators to find more? Will others be caught in the net?
BALLOU: It seems unlikely. You know, the strategy that this administration is pursuing is start with the people and work backwards to the crime, which is exactly the opposite of what you're supposed to do in law enforcement.
If there's any sort of hopeful message at the moment here, it's that as this administration is pursuing these highly-political investigations, these highly-political indictments, they're really struggling to get past the starting line here.
You know, there was reporting. As you know, James Comey was recently indicted. There was reporting that the grand jury barely had a majority to secure the indictment for that.
When you look at the cases that the U.S. attorney in the District of Columbia is pursuing, and they're actually failing to secure indictments entirely, um, you know, it suggests that in a world where the traditional guardrails for the rule of law are failing, jurors and grand jurors are really stepping up and doing the work that they need to do to protect democracy.
COATES: Olivia, I mean, there's still -- even without a conviction, the harassment can continue, bullying and intimidation. It's not just even the government sector. I mean, they are the private sector. There's bleed over in that space, too, about wanting people who've worked in the administration to be terminated because they had some rapport or place in the DOJ.
[23:55:04]
I mean, this has a devastating effect overall.
TROYE: It does. It has consequences for people's wellbeing, their resources, their financial wellbeing. But I think here, you know, when it comes to the attacks on people and what he's doing, the other thing to remember is that every time Donald Trump drops a name and every time a person's name is in focus, it brings a whole other layer of threats from individuals and the hatred online and the vitriol spins up again.
And I think that's something that we forget, that at the end of the day, when you strip apart, you know, the charges or whatever manufactured narrative is happening here, these are human beings with families, and the consequences extend way past that person, and how it trickles down to your circles, your friendship circles and everything that happens.
COATES: Such an important point. Well, we cannot forget. Brendan Ballou, Olivia Troye, thank you both. And thank you all for watching. I'll see you back here tomorrow night for special coverage as we head into this likely government shutdown. "Anderson Cooper 360" is next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
