Return to Transcripts main page
Laura Coates Live
Trump Eyes Greenland; Immigration Agents Surge Minnesota Amid Widespread Fraud Scandal; Former Uvalde School Cop Adrian Gonzales Faces Trial; White House Rewrites January 6 History with Trolling Website. Aired 11p-12a ET
Aired January 06, 2026 - 23:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[23:00:00]
KMELE FOSTER, EDITOR-AT-LARGE, "TANGLE": Unbelievable.
ABBY PHILLIP, CNN HOST: I did -- I did look at this because you gave this answer. And I have to say you might be correct. Go ahead.
NEERA TANDEN, POLITICAL CONSULTANT, DEMOCRATIC THINK TANK, PRESIDENT AND CEO OF THE CENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS: I went with U2 War. I thought it was perforate for the times. I think it -- you know, we all learn from it these days.
PHILLIP: All right. Joe.
JOE BORELLI, FORMER REPUBLICAN LEADER, NEW YORK CITY COUNCIL: Snoop Doggy dog, doggy style.
(LAUGHTER)
I had that cover and that parental advisory from my mom every day like am I sticking in it under my bed.
PHILLIP: All right. Thank you very much. Thanks for watching "NewsNight." And "Laura Coates Live" starts right now.
LAURA COATES, CNN HOST: Tonight, is Greenland next? The White House considers taking it over by military force as suspicions arise about Trump's real motivation. I will tell you why this lawyer is questioning it all. Plus, immigration agents are surging into Minnesota amid a widespread fraud scandal. How is this state going to respond? We got the Minnesota attorney general as my guest. And the shocking delay in the trial of the first cop on the scene in the Uvalde School shooting. Why the defense is calling it now a trial by ambush. Tonight on "Laura Coates Live."
You know, everything a lot about Trump's bid for Greenland helps Maduro's case. Why? Motive. Now, technically, a prosecutor does not have to prove someone's motive to get a conviction, right? But in Maduro's case, his team is going to seize on Trump's mixed messaging. They want people to be asking whether Venezuela's oil is a windfall of the prosecution or was the end game of the prosecution. You know why that answer matters legally? Because it might just decide Maduro's fate. You know they're going to argue that his criminal indictment is a pretextual ruse.
If Trump's own words are exhibit A, is Greenland exhibit B? That vast, resource-rich land in the Arctic with a population of 57,000 people, a self-governed territory of our NATO ally, Denmark, yes, that one, Trump wants it. He says controlling it will allow the United States to deter adversaries in the Arctic.
And tonight, the White House isn't ruling out even using military action, saying the president and his team are discussing a range of options to pursue this important foreign policy goal. And, of course, utilizing the U.S. Military is always an option at the commander in chief's disposal. And that was all after White House aide Stephen Miller all but said Greenland was ripe for the taking. And no one would go to the mat (ph) to stop it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
STEPHEN MILLER, WHITE HOUSE DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF FOR POLICY: The United States is the power of NATO. For the United States to secure the Arctic region, to protect and defend NATO and NATO interests, obviously, Greenland should be part of the United States. There's no need to even think or talk about this in the context that you're asking of a military operation. Nobody is going to fight the United States militarily over the future of Greenland.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Well, Denmark ain't having it. Neither several other top NATO allies. They all put out a joint statement saying, "Greenland belongs to its people. It is for Denmark and Greenland, and them only, to decide on matters concerning Denmark and Greenland."
The pylon (ph) doesn't actually end on the other side of the Atlantic. You got several Republicans in Congress who also are not happy, one calling it an appalling way to treat a NATO member. And that might explain why Secretary of State Marco Rubio is making the rounds. A source saying that he told lawmakers Trump wants to buy -- keyword -- Greenland, downplaying any concerns about military intervention. But it begs that question. What's this really about? Trump says it's a national security issue.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: We need Greenland from a national security situation. It's so strategic. Right now, Greenland is covered with Russian and Chinese ships all over the place. We need Greenland from the standpoint of national security. And Denmark is not going to be able to do it, I can tell you.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Now, remember that pattern I mentioned? We've seen and been here before, haven't we? My exhibits look at Venezuela and the reasons that Trump gave before issuing the order to oust Nicolas Maduro.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) TRUMP: Number one, they have emptied their prisons into the United States of America. And the other thing, drugs. We have a lot of drugs coming in from Venezuela.
We'll see what happens with Venezuela. Venezuela has been very dangerous with drugs and with other things.
[23:05:00]
Venezuela is sending us their gang members, their drug dealers and drugs. It's not acceptable.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Now, there's a key word that wasn't in any of that. A key word the president has been leaning into ever since Maduro was toppled.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: We got to have big investments by the oil companies to bring back the infrastructure. And the oil companies are ready to go. We need access to the oil and to other things in their country that allow us to rebuild their country. They took our oil away from us.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Oil. If you had any doubt, Trump is declaring tonight that Venezuela will fork over between 30 and 50 million barrels of oil to the United States, and that he will be in control of the money.
But yes, I have seen a map. Venezuela and Greenland. But just like Venezuela is sitting on large oil reserves, Greenland has a whole lot of treasure under its ice. Not just oil or black gold, Texas tea. Gas and rare earth minerals, which are hugely important for modern technology. And look, the administration can argue that resource domination is part of national security.
But Greenland is an entirely different story politically than Venezuela. And not just because it's a NATO ally. Trump is on the record separating Greenland's minerals from U.S. national security.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: We need Greenland for national security, not for minerals. We have so many sites for minerals and oil and everything. We have more oil than any other country in the world.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Did you catch that? He said we have so many sites for oil right before removing Maduro and taking control of the oil. If we can go from we've got plenty to I control the money in Venezuela, what's to stop him from doing the same over Greenland's minerals? I mean, my original point, Maduro's legal briefs are practically writing themselves, whether a judge listens. My first guest was briefed by top Trump administration officials on the Venezuela operation last night. I'm talking about ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, Congressman Adam Smith, who is with me now. Very glad you're here. I used the word "by." It was the word "by." And CNN learned that Marco Rubio told you yesterday's briefing that the goal is to actually buy Greenland, not use military invasion. Is that really what he said?
REP. ADAM SMITH (D-WA): Well, it's not what Trump has said. They've made offers around that before. But, look, you have to take a step back from all these. There are different strategic interests. And, by the way, we have a military base on Greenland, Denmark. Greenland, I visited that military base just a few months ago. If we want greater access to Greenland, there's no reason on earth that Denmark won't give it to us. So, why is Trump doing all of this threatening?
COATES: Why?
SMITH: At the end of the day, it's about power and control. Trump wants to be able to say, with the United States of America, we can do whatever we want. And in his mind, coercion is the path forward. And that is worrisome. He is coercing friends, allies, enemies, everyone he can possibly coerce and threaten. That's what he's doing. And his assumption is they will become afraid of us, and they'll do what we want. They do have other options.
COATES: Like what?
SMITH: Well, China, Russia telling us to just basically go to hell, that they're not going to work with us. And I always cite this example. The drug problem is a major problem. One of the biggest successes that we had with the drug problem was Plan Colombia, where we worked with the Colombian government back in, I want to say, late 90s, early 2000s, to combine forces, work together, and fight them. And it worked quite effectively.
Trump thinks that you can come in, punch everybody in the face, and just do what you want in part because that's his mode of operations just in general and in part because he views the world as the zero-sum game of dominance. He wants to dominate the Western Hemisphere. Threats are part of that.
COATES: I wonder if there is not enough contemplation about a longer end game. Do you really think that his whole goal is just to collect pieces on a puzzle and say I've got these or the idea of the rare earth minerals, the idea of natural resources, he would suggest it's about trying to promote national security? Is there any truth to that?
SMITH: Oh, certainly, sprinkled within this are some basic rational arguments. You cannot argue, first of all, that Chavez and Maduro destroyed the Venezuelan economy. They did. And they made it a very dangerous country, both in terms of the drugs, in terms of the migration. You can't argue with the fact that Greenland is a strategic asset for its mineral wealth, for its location, a whole bunch of different things. So, sprinkled within it, there are national security pieces. The problem for America is Trump's approach is going to get us to the opposite result. It's going to push people away from us. Our greatest strength internationally has been our partners and allies.
[23:10:00]
If you -- I was in China a couple months ago. In terms of how China views us, one of the things they see, they see that we have so many partners and allies, that that makes us stronger and them weaker. Trump is detonating all of those alliances.
And also, when it comes to Latin America and Venezuela, if we want to say Maduro is a terrible, awful guy, we're going to go in there, we're going to work with the Venezuelan people to improve the quality of their lives. That's one thing. But if we say, look, we're going to run your country and we want your oil, that reminds people of why they supported Chavez in the first place, because Chavez stood up and said, American imperialism is destroying us, and that met a lot of sympathetic ears in Venezuela and Latin America.
We do have a history in Cuba before Castro of exploiting the Cuban people in a way that gave rise to these movements that are terrible. Communism, socialism doesn't work. Never works. All right? But if we want to push people away from that, we have to show them a better way. And a better way isn't we're from America, we're going to coerce you to give us what we want and to hell with you. It's going to make us less safe, and we're not going to meet those national security objectives, in my opinion.
COATES: Well, you raised that tension of paternalism or spreading democracy. That's always the tension there. But I have to ask you about the news tonight because the president did announce that Venezuela will be turning over 30 to 50 million of barrels of oil to the United States. I read somewhere -- I think we -- you know, that's not a huge amount in terms of the amount that we actually use, about 20 million a day at some point over the last several months.
But I do wonder about this idea, that it could raise for the United States nearly $3 billion if it could find buyers. Does that somehow end justify the means to you?
SMITH: Absolutely not, because what that means -- what Trump's plan here is, OK, so, he took out Maduro, but he didn't replace the government. Everything about Maduro is still there. The vice president, his vice president, stepped up, became president. So, Trump's idea is with Maduro out, he can work with supporters of Chavez and Maduro better than he could work with Maduro. And I gather that's what this is. Now, we haven't seen any details. What does this mean? Where is it coming from? Is it actually going to happen?
COATES: Is it part of the reserves, the traveling?
SMITH: Right.
COATES: How long? SMITH: But the Venezuelan government right now, today, even as Maduro sits in a jail cell in New York, in New Jersey or wherever the hell he is, is no better off than they were before Maduro left. Now, the promise, what Rubio will tell you is, well, we've got people we can work with now, and we're going to make this happen.
COATES: Is that what he told you?
SMITH: Yes. That is basically the argument, is that they feel like they can work with the vice president, they can work with the vice president's brother and somebody else to get a better deal. But the basic problems of Venezuela's economy are still there. And let's keep in mind, we still have a blockade on their oil, a country that is desperately poor. That's why millions of people are leaving it.
COATES: So, what will the impact of these barrels being turned over? Will that impact the blockade, the embargo in some way?
SMITH: They haven't said. I mean, maybe, but they haven't said. All they have said is the blockade remains in place.
COATES: So, obviously, between the two of us, me a journalist, you a member of Congress, I'd like you to have the answer and know what's going to happen. Are they going to envelop, invite Congress into the conversation or are they going to continue to let you know on a need to know basis? Because, obviously, every time the president says national security, the Supreme Court has said they get deference. Are you out of the equation?
SMITH: Of the many problems with what Trump is doing here, the lack of transparency is certainly --
COATES: Of course.
SMITH: We don't know. You know, I mean --
COATES: So, what can Congress do about it?
SMITH: We can press them for answers, which we have done. And the Republican majority has been reluctant to help us in that. We need to have a hearing in front of the Armed Services Committee to explain all of these. Thus far, we haven't had that set. We need to be able to ask them questions.
They're doing a full House briefing tomorrow, but that's just the secretary of state pontificating on and on and on and on and on, and then like two random members of Congress getting to ask questions. They need to appear before the committees of jurisdiction and allow us to question them about where this is going because it all seems like it's sort of being made up as they go along.
That's dangerous, particularly when you combine it with what we talked about earlier, about how Trump is alienating all partners and allies and thinking that coercion, force, and threats are the only tool that we have in our toolbox. I think that limited toolbox is going to undermine U.S. national security interests, the very national security interests that he's claiming that he's trying to pursue.
COATES: Did you guys trust when Rubio gave the briefing? Would you satisfy what he said?
SMITH: Well, I mean, it's hard because a lot of times, Rubio says, I don't know. We asked him about the pardon of the Honduran president.
COATES: Right.
SMITH: He was like, wow, you know, I wasn't really in the loop on that. He's the secretary of state. He's in the middle of all these policy decisions. It's supposed to be all about drugs. You've got a former president of Honduras convicted. Not indicted like Maduro, but convicted of trafficking tens of billions of -- whatever the amount of cocaine was. And Rubio is like, I don't know, I wasn't in that meeting. We asked him about Greenland and got the same sort of response, which is, not my thing.
[23:15:00]
So, you know, he's not really engaging with us. I mean, I don't know if he's out of the loop or he's just not being honest with us. It is quite possible that Trump does sort of make this up as he goes along, but we're not getting the transparent answers.
And, by the way, when I say we, the American people. That's who we represent. It's not a matter of, oh, members of Congress are upset that they're not being included. We represent the American people. We are supposed to be their voice. We are supposed to exercise oversight of the executive branch. And the Trump administration isn't allowing us to do that. And the Republicans in Congress are abdicating their responsibilities.
COATES: Congressman Adam Smith, thank you for joining.
SMITH: Thanks, Laura. Appreciate the chance.
COATES: Still ahead tonight, the COVID money fraud scandal in Minnesota that's not going anywhere. And now, Minnesota is facing an unprecedented surge of immigration agents and also punishment. So, what's the facts? What are the fictional elements? I'll talk to the attorney general of Minnesota, former Congressman Keith Ellison, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: Tonight, the Twin Cities is in the spotlight.
[23:19:58]
DHS launching, and this is their words, the largest immigration operation ever. Secretary Kristi Noem joining 2,000 federal agents on the ground on the heels of a sprawling fraud scandal in Minnesota, resulting in Governor Tim Walz -- his decision to abandon his re- election bid. Now, here's what the DHS secretary alleges the immigration crackdown has uncovered so far.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KRISTI NOEM, UNITED STATES SECRETARY OF HOMELAND SECURITY: The amount of fraud in Minnesota is unprecedented. What we're finding is not only people who've come into this country illegally, but they've perpetuated crimes on people, then they've stolen the American citizens' money, and they've put it in their own pockets, and then the pockets of other individuals. We searched the last 48 hours. We've arrested hundreds and hundreds of dangerous criminals off the streets in Minnesota and people that are a part of this fraud scheme.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: She went on to claim that fraud whistleblowers were --- quote -- "ignored or bullied into silence by state officials." Here to respond to the administration, Minnesota's attorney general, Keith Ellison. Glad to have you here, general. I am curious, given a lot of the statements that have been made.
Let me start here, though. Seventy-eight people have been charged, 57 have been convicted. This has been years of investigation and prosecutions. Yet Republicans are accusing you and the governor of being asleep at the wheel or even dare I say complicit. What is your reaction to those statements?
KEITH ELLISON, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MINNESOTA: Well, I have one word to say about it, and that is politics. They view this as something they think can benefit them in a campaign. And so, they're working it to the maximum that they can. It's as simple as that.
I'll just remind you of Benghazi. You all would remember listening to Senate and House Republicans go on about how big the Benghazi scandal, it was so terrible, and they grilled at the time Secretary Clinton over this issue. And then when a reporter like yourself said, what came out of that? You spent a lot of money, what came out of it? And their answer was, we reduced Hillary Clinton's popularity in public opinion polls. That was their answer.
But I'm telling you, this is similar to that. Fraud is not a problem. Of course, it is a problem. And, of course, we have to prosecute it. And, of course, we have been prosecuting it.
COATES: Have you done enough, general, to do so? I mean, one of the claims is that there have been hundreds of millions of dollars. But now, there are some estimates that there could be $9 billion or more. And Noem was just suggesting they took hundreds of people off the street who were involved in fraud. Are you confident your office has done enough?
ELLISON: Of course, we've done enough, and we're doing more every single day. This is a political matter. This is not a serious thing. And I tell you one reason why you know, because I introduced a bill last session to increase our Medicaid fraud unit and to increase certain procedural mechanisms to be more effective in prosecuting fraud. I couldn't get any Republican support for that. What they want is an issue. They don't want to solve fraud. Now, fraud is something that I'm serious about, which is why I prosecuted and convicted over 300 people for Medicaid fraud since I've been the attorney general. We're serious about convicting people for stealing money that is going or supposed to go to poor people. It's a serious issue. But we're not getting serious partnership. What we're getting is political theater like you just saw with the homeland security Director.
And, look, this issue of people being unauthorized immigrants and fraud is something they desperately are trying to link. But the reality is they're running around Minnesota, scaring people to death who have nothing to do with any of these Medicaid cases.
The case that you're talking about where 78 people have been charged and 50 some convicted, that case has nothing to do with the Latin American community members who are being literally terrorized in their neighborhoods, afraid to go to the store, afraid to go to their jobs, afraid to just move around and do their lives because of this. And so, it is deeply political.
It is -- they're not stepping up to the plate to help us solve the problem. But there is a problem, and we're all working to do it. Are we doing enough? Whoever it is, right? As long as there's -- we have a Medicaid fraud unit that prosecutes people for this every single day. We are given cases where there's suspected fraud. We complete the investigation. We do the prosecution. We're winning our cases.
[23:25:00]
We're prosecuting our cases. We're getting convictions. I think what we need is Republicans who are willing to partner to do front end so that people can be better in the beginning, so that we can have better solutions from the front to the back. What we're getting is political theater. We're not getting any help. And this is something that should not be politicized.
COATES: Well --
ELLISON: If it's a problem, we should do it together.
COATES: Well, sometimes, that comes from a top down or whole of government approach. You know that the governor, Tim Walz, has decided not to run for reelection, abandoning his bid. Many linked it directly to what you're describing in terms of the discussions surrounding whether there has been enough done. You are the attorney general. You have been a member of Congress. Do you intend to seek an additional office, perhaps, for the governorship?
ELLISON: You know what? Tonight, I have nothing to announce, Laura. Thanks for the question. I really like the job that I'm doing. I like the work that I'm doing, holding people accountable, not just Medicaid fraud criminals, but also corporate fraud. We prosecute a lot of that. You know, as a matter of fact, I like the work that I'm doing, but I don't have any announcement to make tonight.
I'm looking at all the options. And I'm really just asking myself, how can I be as most effective to Minnesotans to help them afford their lives and live with dignity, safety, and respect? How could I be effective on issues of health care, issues of housing, issues of wages? These are the primary things that I'm weighing in my mind right now. So, we'll see. I'm going to let people know quickly what I'm going to do. But at this point, we are weighing all of our options.
COATES: Quickly, you say -- well, my show ends at midnight. Attorney General Keith Ellison, let me know by then. Thank you so much.
ELLISON: Will do.
(LAUGHTER)
COATES: My goodness, up next, you see that person right there? He is standing trial. The Uvalde School officer standing trial for alleged inaction. His trial is getting underway with dueling arguments and one very dramatic moment that actually has the jury staying home tomorrow. I've got CNN's Shimon Prokupecz, who has been there for it all, who will explain exactly what happened. Plus, insight from the only attorney who has defended this kind of case before in Parkland, Florida. That's next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:30:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: Major courtroom drama during the trial of a former officer charged over the slow response to the massacre at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas. Former officer Adrian Gonzales faces 29 counts of child endangerment or abandonment, accused of not racing into the school and classroom to stop the violence that killed 19 children and two adults. He has pleaded not guilty.
There's already a delay after day one of trial. The issue centers around testimony from a former teacher, Stephanie Hale. She shared information about where she saw the shooter that day. But the defense says those details were never shared with them.
And, you know, holding back evidence during the discovery phase is a major legal issue that -- well, it could lead to at least the request, if not granting, of a mistrial. Prosecutors say they, too, were actually caught off guard by the teacher's specific testimony. But the defense, they're not buying that.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JASON GOSS, DEFENSE ATTORNEY (voice-over): If this is the first time that I'm hearing of this, in a trial of this magnitude, is when she testified on the stand about it. And so, if she did report these things to the prosecution, we were entitled to that to prepare for this. And this is a trial by ambush.
(END VIDEO CLIP) COATES: I want to bring in CNN's Shimon Prokupecz, who is inside of court today and has broken a series of exclusive reporting on Uvalde since the very beginning of this tragedy. Shimon, OK, we know that there is no testimony happening tomorrow. But the prosecution, the defense, they are going to meet with one another instead. So, what does this mean for the case going forward?
SHIMON PROKUPECZ, CNN CRIME AND JUSTICE REPORTER: Well, we don't really know that that's it. It's certainly very concerning because, like you said, it does raise the possibility that there could be a mistrial here. And for family members, this is just devastating. Many of the family members have been traveling here for hours. There were victims, witnesses ready to take the stand. Some of them have been here since Sunday. Some of them were sitting in the courtroom waiting for this.
You know, I spoke to one of them, and they told me they're just -- they don't know what they're going to do. They're really, really worried. And that's certainly the concern here because now, many of them have to stay here and wait to figure out if they're going to have their moment to testify, to tell their story, to have some kind of accountability here.
COATES: The weight of this and the pursuit of justice is something that has been such emotionally taxing for everyone in that community. I know it has moved to different location, in Corpus Christi, as opposed to where it initially was. But it's such an unbelievable case right now.
I want to turn to the fact of -- the big question I always get when people are asking about this trial is, who and why this particular person and why not others? Because the only other person that is charged is the ex-police chief for the Uvalde School District, Pete Arredondo, somebody you chased down diligently at the very beginning. Nearly 400 officers responded. Waited 77 minutes to confront the shooter, though. So, why are Gonzales and Arredondo the only ones charged here?
PROKUPECZ: Yes, and that's a question that's going to be brought up a lot at this trial, to say that this officer was the person that's sort of being used as the scapegoat. And I think the best way to answer that is that he was the first officer on scene.
[23:35:01]
Adrian Gonzales was the first officer on scene. And in those first few minutes, the prosecutors are alleging that he had an opportunity to do something, and he didn't do it. And now, for Pete Arredondo, they're going to allege that he was the man in charge of the scene, and he should have done more to try and prevent and trying to get inside that classroom to rescue the kids or to kill the gunman.
And that very question that you bring up is already coming up here at this trial today. The defense attorney was making a point by asking one of the witnesses. You saw one of those officers, another officer by this door, right? And he was one of the first officers on scene, right? Yes. So, that is going to be a big question that's going to keep coming up at this trial.
COATES: I mean, it has been almost four years since this tragic shooting. And you know there is a huge desire to see some sort of accountability, justice for the lives that were lost in the community that has been just devastated.
And I should note, this community we're talking about extends beyond the borders of where Uvalde is. Everyone felt what happened in that community. But how is this specific community feeling tonight?
PROKUPECZ: Look, one of the things that I think people are feeling in this community, in the Uvalde community, and the victims, they have never had a lot of faith in the justice system, in the system at all. And today, certainly, they're feeling that again. They don't know what's going on. They're very worried by what happened in court today. And this is bringing back a lot of those feelings.
They don't -- they never had a lot of faith in this district attorney. They didn't have a lot of great things to necessarily talk to her about. They thought that the relationship was not great. They didn't have a lot of confidence in her ability to bring this case. Some didn't even want to cooperate with her.
And then seeing today -- I mean, whatever the outcome may be, there's going to be some kind of repercussion for this. You can't just not turn over evidence. And the judge is not going to ignore that. And so, that's going to raise a lot of concerns for them because they're really going to feel like they're not going to be able to get justice. I think it's just really concerning for how they're feeling.
COATES: Shimon, I know you'll continue to stay on top of all of this. Shimon Prokupecz, thank you so much.
You know, there's only one other case like this in America. Remember the case of Scot Peterson? That was a school resource officer at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida when a shooter opened fire and killed 17 people on Valentine's Day, in 2018. He was criticized for not confronting the shooter and staying outside the building for more than 45 minutes. But he was acquitted of child neglect charges in 2023.
His lawyer, Mark Eiglarsh, joins me now. Mark, thank you for being here. It occurs to me how uniquely positioned you are to sort of assess and evaluate even a case like the one we've been discussing in Uvalde because the families there, they want justice, like the families did in Parkland. But can you just define what that might look like when you know the legal cases at hand?
MARK EIGLARSH, LAWYER, DEFENDED OFFICER WHO FACED TRIAL FOR PARKLAND SHOOTING: OK. Well, justice is not making decision to prosecute someone based on politics, and I think that that's what they did with Scot Peterson, my client, and that's what they're doing here.
If you look at the very unique facts of the case of the Uvalde prosecution, he's not being prosecuted for not going in, He's being prosecuted exclusively for the one minute that they claim he should have stopped the shooter from going inside.
Factually, though, he couldn't have. He was on one side of the building when the shooter went in on the other side. He never saw the shooter before the shooter then got into the building.
So, the similarities between this case and mine is that prosecutors are motivated by politics. You have parents who suffered the worst tragedy. I'm a father of three. They are living my nightmare. And with that comes pressure on prosecutors to bring charges against decent officers who are doing the best they can with the limited information that they have. And I'll tell you this, you do not do justice for the victims by doing an injustice against decent honorable officers.
COATES: Well, one thing the defense is arguing, in addition to what you just said about why it was so important for them to talk about what direction this shooter came in from, was the arguments you raised. But also, they're arguing that he never saw the shooter, he didn't work at Robb Elementary, and he wasn't equipped to confront him. And he is claiming essentially that he is a scapegoat.
[23:40:00]
Now, how might that play among jurors?
EIGLARSH: Yes.
COATES: Because, obviously, and you noted some differences in your own case, but how does that strategy work with jurors when you know the community feels a visceral reaction to what has unfolded?
EIGLARSH: Oh, it's the most difficult case I've ever had to try in my 33-year career. It's extremely difficult. I've been speaking with defense counsel and offering my assistance because it truly is unfair. You've got a judge who is going to allow these jurors to see autopsy photos of dead children in a case where the defense is conceding that they died? What value is that? What about the prejudicial effect?
COATES: I thought, though, Mark, the judge was going to say --
EIGLARSH: So, yes, you got a lot working against you.
COATES: Excuse me. I thought the judge was going to revisit that issue at a later time, whether they would see it. And they also are not able to refer to them as victims, obviously, because it would denote that the person on trial was the one who actually murdered them. But I hear your point about --
EIGLARSH: Yes.
COATES: -- the terminology being used. But this strikes me as a case that could be won or lost in jury selection. I mean, it has only been a day. It only lasted a day for the jury selection. But 100 potential jurors, a 100 were excused. What does that tell you even though you were moved to Corpus Christi?
EIGLARSH: You're absolutely correct. You need to have jurors who come in there and say, I'm open, I'm not going to follow what the media has been reporting, I'm not going to allow sympathy to make my decision, I will do it exclusively based on the facts.
And what they're going to hear is that this is not an officer who drove away from the scene. He went towards the danger. He did make on an immediate radio call saying shots fired. He helped children out of the window. He got the master keys available. He got a map of the school. He did things.
And let me just tell you something. If he got it wrong, if he didn't do everything he was supposed to, OK, fire him, sue him in civil court, but that doesn't mean that you're at the level of criminal negligence. You can't have cops be held to the level of perfection. It is unfair.
COATES: Yet many will say they signed up for the job. They're held to a standard by what they have agreed to do.
EIGLARSH: Of course, they did.
COATES: And who other than the first responder should we look to respond first? What's your reaction?
EIGLARSH: They should definitely respond. But the similarity with Peterson and this case is, where do you go? Where do you go when you don't know precisely where to go? In this case, he didn't know. I want everyone to keep an open mind, listen to the testimony, go -- it's online. Listen to the opening statements, and you'll see that the facts are not as clear cut as everyone is making them out to be.
COATES: So much more in this trial. We're also streaming this trial live on Sirius -- CNN, excuse me, and what they're doing. Mark Eiglarsh, thank you so much.
EIGLARSH: Thanks for having me. I appreciate it.
COATES: Up next, what would have been unthinkable five years ago becomes reality? Supporters of the mob that stormed the Capitol, including some who were pardoned, rallying once again in Washington, D.C. as the White House rewrites what happened that day. Someone who was there and attacked himself, former D.C. police officer turned middle school teacher Nathan Tate, live with me for a very special conversation on the very personal and very powerful lesson that he now teaches in the classroom.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:45:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: Now, of all the days the White House could have picked up to troll Democrats, they chose today. What's today? Well, five years since a violent mob of Trump supporters stormed the Capitol to block the certification of Joe Biden's victory. And how does the White House choose to commemorate that? Well, by unveiling this page on the official White House website, giving a timeline with its own version of what went down on January 6th, one that blatantly, of course, downplays the violence, the chaos, and even the deaths that transpired as a result.
Case in point, calling these rioters -- quote -- "mere trespassers or peaceful protesters treated as insurrectionists by weaponized Biden DOJ." I'm quoting, by the way.
The website also accuses police of -- quote -- "deliberately escalating tensions." And other parts of the website repeated baseless lies, blaming people like Nancy Pelosi and Mike Pence for playing a role while continuing to push the lie that the 2020 election was stolen.
My next guest is a former D.C. police officer who was bear-sprayed, knocked to the ground by rioters outside the Capitol. He has since left the police force to pursue a career in teaching. Nathan Tate joins me now. Nathan, thank you for being here.
NATHAN TATE, FORMER D.C. POLICE OFFICER WHO DEFENDED CAPITOL ON JANUARY 6: Thank you for having me.
COATES: When I -- when I read about your experience, it was so compelling, I had to meet you and share it with the world because you lived through January 6th. And you used words such as living death, a lifelong scar for what that felt like to endure and to have it today. What goes through your head when you hear the White House or anyone else discussing January 6th in anything other than a factual, truthful light?
TATE: It's shocking and appalling just to -- just to hear the things that they say, the untruths. And to have the platforms that they have to share their lives about what took place that day is shocking.
COATES: You were so honored and served honorably to be an officer. You became part of your identity. You talk about it straightened your spine.
TATE: Yes.
COATES: You navigate the world differently.
TATE: Yes.
COATES: Do you feel, looking back at that time as an officer and on January 6th, that your opinion of what that means changes?
[23:50:01]
TATE: It changed at times. But it's more of me maintaining my integrity as a man, you know, and standing for truth.
COATES: What I was so intrigued by, because my kids are now in middle school, and one thing that I keep hearing about through their history teachers and schools is always about teaching them how to be discerning. In the world of A.I. and facts and lies, teaching kids how to understand what is true. But how do you teach that right now, given your experience as an officer on that day, and now with so many impressionable minds who are looking to you to tell them, what's real?
TATE: Well, I think, and being a father, I think what's more important is to allow them the opportunity to thank for themselves. Like you said, teaching them how to navigate through the lies, giving them all the facts, the primary sources and the secondary sources, and allowing them to discern through and figure out what that truth is for them.
Because when you look at patriotism, patriotism could be viewed as many different things. Anybody could say something is a patriot act, right? They said what they did down at January 6th was a patriotic act. They said what the boss of Tea Party was, was a patriotic act. So, it really depends on how you view patriotism.
COATES: You showed your students your attack. You focused in -- you revealed that -- your face and you were one of the people attacked. How did they react?
TATE: They were shocked. The room got quiet. You know, they really focused in on me, though. My mental health and how I am. How do you feel today? One of the kids asked. How do you process everything now? I'm paraphrasing, of course, but they wanted to know how I was doing mentally and emotionally.
And I had to take a second to kind of process it myself because after January 6th, we had to go right back to work. So, it wasn't time for emotional processing or anything like that. It was go back to work. You know, like we're a machine, like we're just a badge number or a car number.
And that's how we ended up having to operate and deal to the point where I pushed my emotions off so much that when the child asked me that or the student asked me that, it was shocking to me, like I had to check myself, you know.
COATES: After all that time?
TATE: After all that time. I mean, even -- it seems like it was just yesterday. To be honest, it's like I'm looking at the calendar and looking at the dates, and they're like it's five years, and I'm like five years? It has been five years. It seems like it was just yesterday.
A little personal, but last night, my girlfriend let me know that I was fighting in my sleep, and she was like -- I told her -- I said, I didn't get a great rest last night. And she was like, yes, I could tell because you were tossing and turning and fighting in your sleep. And I was like, you think it was from the situation? And she was like, yes.
So, I mean, even until -- it's in your dreams. I didn't want to get up this morning and go and do what I had to do such as teaching, you know. But I had to get up and push through, you know. COATES: That's unbelievable, to think about all of that. And you were defending democracy.
TATE: One hundred percent.
COATES: Do the students understand that?
TATE: I make sure that that part right there is understood, you know. I was defending their democracy, you know, and their freedom, their freedom of speech, their freedom of thought, freedom to be who they want, you know. So --
COATES: Wow. What a teacher. Nathan Tate, thank you for sharing.
TATE: I appreciate you having me.
COATES: It's so important.
TATE: Thank you.
COATES: We'll be back with Elex Michaelson right after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:55:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: It's almost midnight here in the nation's capital, which is time to bring in our friend, Elex Michaelson, out in Los Angeles. Elex, good to see you. All right, the Golden State Warriors, the head coach, Steve Kerr, he was actually ejected from last night's game against the Clippers. And guess who just happened to be calling that game? Snoop Dogg. Watch.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SNOOP DOGG, RAPPER AND SINGER (voice-over): Oh, Steve is going to get thrown out! Get him out of there! Get him out of there! Back him up, back him up, G.P.! Back him up!
UNKNOWN (voice-over): He's already gone.
SNOOP DOGG: Steve is backing Inglewood right now. Inglewood! Get him, Steve! You're in Inglewood, Steve!
(LAUGHTER)
COATES: You're already giggling. I got to know (ph).
SNOOP DOGG: The Arizona Wildcat came out. Look at him!
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(LAUGHTER)
ELEX MICHAELSON, CNN ANCHOR AND CORRESPONDENT: Got some of the --
COATES: I got to say --
MICHAELSON: -- some of the D, O double G there.
COATES: I'm telling -- now, I want to know, should he actually become an NBA play by play commentator like full time Olympics, now this?
MICHAELSON: Well, he does -- he kind of does everything, right?
COATES: He does.
MICHAELSON: I mean, Snoop is one of the most universally accepted people in pretty much any single room that he walks into anywhere in the country. I don't know if NBC could afford him to be a full-time commentator.
(LAUGHTER)
We know he doesn't work for free. But it is certainly interesting to see the way that all the players reacted to him. Steph Curry clearly was very excited to see him. And, by the way, Steve Kerr is known for keeping things very calm.
COATES: Right.
MICHAELSON: That was very unusual for Steve Kerr to get -- you know, lose his cool like that. But it was interesting that it happened when Snoop was on the mic.
COATES: I mean, Draymond Green got up, went to the locker room, what, last week, and he still stayed calm, right? And now, you've got this. I mean, I don't know what -- I got to go back and watch the whole thing. But for tonight, I want to watch you. What's coming up?
MICHAELSON: We got a lot coming up, including all the big stories from Washington.
[23:59:57]
But here in Southern California, we're about to hit a big anniversary, the one-year anniversary of the wildfires. So, Rick Caruso and Lindsay Horvath will be among our guests live here in studio to talk about that. So, a lot going on. I can't believe it has been one year.
COATES: Unbelievable. Have a great show, Elex.
MICHAELSON: Thanks so much, Laura. Have a great night.
