Return to Transcripts main page

Laura Coates Live

Trumps' Deadline Looms; U.S. Airman Rescued from Iranian Territory; Artemis II Makes History. Aired 11p-12a ET

Aired April 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]

ABBY PHILLIP, CNN HOST: The question is, is it really wise for this administration to basically put another religion in opposition to the religious fanatics that we're fighting? This is not a religious war. It's a -- it's a war against, you know, a butchers and authoritarians. It's not a war of one faith --

MOYNIHAN: I mean, it's an -- it's an Islamic regime.

PHILLIP: But it's not a war of one faith against another. It's not that. We know that, right?

MOYNIHAN: No, it's not, but I think it's fair to say that we are a Christian nation based on Christian ideals. And you mentioned from the beginning, there's --

BOOT: We're not --

MOYNIHAN: -- George Washington praying at Valley Forge. That's one of --

SIMMONS: We're a nation that is majority Christian. We're not a Christian nation.

PHILLIP: All right.

MOYNIHAN: It's a federal secular government and it's okay to celebrate our heritage.

PHILLIP: We wrapped against the top of the hour, guys. Everyone, thank you -- thank you so much for being here. Thanks for watching "NewsNight." "Laura Coates Live" takes it right now.

LAURA COATES, CNN HOST: Tonight, President Trump's newest Iran deadline ticks that much closer. But is this one actually set in stone? Plus, the unbelievably brave and daring rescue of a downed airman. How the United States pulled off a high-stakes mission that rescued a missing service member from the Iranian mountains. And get your Pink Floyd playlist ready. The Artemis II astronauts get a glimpse of the dark side of the moon and a phone call from a special guest. Tonight on "Laura Coates Live."

Well, my opening statement tonight, President Trump has set a deadline for Iran that's just 21 hours away. Now, this one seems to be entirely self-imposed. I talked about how he's negotiating on multiple fronts with Iran, with the markets. But the negotiator that seems to matter most, at least right now, is the one he seems to be having with himself because it's not at all clear which way he is going to go, whether he will attack Iranian infrastructure tomorrow night if Strait of Hormuz is not reopened or if he will pull back at the last minute. Now, at the White House today, he tried to occupy every position in the same news conference. First, the threats.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: The entire country could be taken out in one night, and that night might be tomorrow night. We're giving them -- we're giving them until tomorrow, 8 o'clock Eastern time. And after that, they're going to have no bridges, they're going have no power plants. Stone Ages, yes.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: And then, the reluctance.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: The last thing we want to do is start with power plants, which are among the most expensive thing, and bridges. Do I want to destroy their infrastructure? No. It will take them a hundred years to rebuild. Right now, if we left today, it would take them 20 years to rebuild their country, and it would never be as good as it was.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Now, don't forget the possibility of a deal.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: I can tell you that we have an active, willing participant on the other side. They would like to be able to make a deal. We have to have a deal that's acceptable to me, and part of that deal is going to be we want free traffic of oil and everything else.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: But we've already won, anyway.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: We're the winner. We won. OK? They are militarily defeated.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: And since he says we've won, he's floating the idea of just taking Iran's oil.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: To the -- to the winner belong the spoils. Go the spoils. And I've said, why don't we use it? To the victor go the spoils. And we don't have that. We haven't had that in this country probably in a hundred years.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: And that loops us right back to the threats because Iran is not signaling it's going to give up that leverage or reopen the strait, at least not publicly. And it has rejected the latest ceasefire proposal.

Look, this has been the rhythm of this war from the beginning. The escalation, the walk backs, the talk of a deal. Is he building the plane as he is flying it or is his unpredictability an asset? Well, if you ask him, he insists it's all part of a plan.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: Somebody said, oh, he doesn't have a plan. I have the best plan of all, but I'm not going to tell you what my plan is. You know, they want me to say, here's my plan, we're going to attack at 9:47 in the morning, and then we're going to do this, and then we're going to -- every -- every single thing has been thought out by all of us. But I can't reveal the plan to the media.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: He can't reveal it. We might have a better idea at, well, midnight tomorrow, because if the strait isn't reopened, that's when Trump says every power plant in Iran will be, in his words, burning and exploding, never to be used again.

I want to bring in now CNN political and national security analyst David Sanger.

[23:05:00]

He has covered five American presidents in more than four decades at "The New York Times" and the author of "New Cold Wars" out in paperback tomorrow. Also here, former Black Hawk pilot and senior director of Military and Political Power at the Foundation for Defense of Democracy, Brad Bowman. He also served as national security advisor to the members of the Senate armed services and foreign relations committees. Glad to have both of you here.

Just trying to unpack all that's gone on. I mean, David, the president has set and then changed deadlines for the reopening of the strait. And I mean not just once, but multiple times he has done so. So, is the 8 p.m. deadline tomorrow, is it set in a kind of stone or is this somehow the president's plan? What are you hearing from White House sources?

DAVID SANGER, CNN POLITICAL AND NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST, WHITE HOUSE NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT FOR THE NEW YORK TIMES: Laura, I think many in the White House aren't certain whether it's said or not. I'm not sure if the president does. But what we've learned about Donald Trump is these get imposed and, as you suggested at the beginning, they moved very quickly. In fact, the Iranians who have been running this kind of mocking tweets on X after he came out with the 8 p.m., one in the social media post over the weekend said, you know, we're busy at 8 but, you know, could -- would 4 work for you? You know, maybe 1 o'clock. So, they're getting across the thought that these don't count for much. But behind --

COATES: What's the consequence of that, though?

SANGER: Well, behind the timing is, I think, the question that that series that you just ran really raises, which is, is there really a strategy here? He says he has planned for everything. Clearly, they hadn't planned for the cutoff of the Strait of Hormuz or had they, we would have had forces there to prevent it. Clearly, they had not planned for a war that was going to go on at this length, and you can tell that by the number of reinforcements they're bringing in.

I think the bigger question is, clearly, they hadn't planned for what would happen if they had to begin to think about wiping out civilian infrastructure. It was pretty striking to watch the president just sort of blow past my colleague's question about whether or not any of this constitutes war crimes and so forth.

COATES: Yes. Let's talk about that, Brad, because the president repeated threats to strike civilian infrastructure. We're talking about bridges, power plants, et cetera. And he brushed off those strikes that could constitute, some believe, war crimes.

Senator Elissa Slotkin can put it this way: When the smoke clears, it will be our service members -- not President Trump or Secretary Hegseth -- who could have to live with the consequences, specifically legal and mortal danger.

Tell me how you see it because I have heard from some strategists who look at the issue and say, there can be some instances when you can bomb what would be used as a civilian structure. But it's a case-by- case basis. It's not a blanket assertion and decision to do so without thinking through whether it is used by civilians or commandeered by your opponent.

BRAD BOWMAN, SENIOR DIRECTOR OF CENTER ON MILITARY AND POLITICAL POWER AT FOUNDATION FOR DEFENSE OF DEMOCRACIES, FORMER BLACK HAWK PILOT: I think you phrased it well. I don't pretend to be a military lawyer and you are a lawyer, but I did graduate from West Point and teach at West Point, and there, we teach some basic things, some principle base things that there's a difference between combatants and non- combatants, there's a difference between military and civilian, and it's good to be strong but it's better to be good, and good nations don't deliberately hurt civilians.

And if you hit nuclear power plants, you're going to deprive neo NATO wars of energy that they need, you're going to deprive Iranians of clean water, you're going to hurt them. We claim to be on the side of the Iranian people.

So, this will be counterproductive. This will turn Iranians against America. It will help the regime in their political warfare campaign where they're trying to dupe Iranians and they're believing that we're the villains instead of them.

COATES: And retaliation.

BOWMAN: That's right. And it's going to turn Americans and international community against this war effort where we may need to do things against this regime. So, I think it won't achieve the president's objective and it will do great damage. And, you know, as a general rule of thumb, if what you're doing sounds a little bit like Vladimir Putin, stop and don't do it.

COATES: Are these considerations one that are pressing on the mind of the president?

SANGER: You know, it didn't seem that they were in the way that he answered the questions. He was asked at one point earlier in the day during the egg roll ceremony, Easter egg roll ceremony at the White House, about war crimes. And he said, well, you know what's a war crime? It's Iran trying to get a nuclear weapon.

Well, certainly, no one wants to see Iran get a nuclear weapon. And there have been efforts over the past 20 years, many of which have failed, in order to stop the progress of that. But others had succeeded. But rather than take on the question of whether or not, the question Brad just raised, whether or not you want to have Americans doing this, he sorts of went straight past it and did not discuss the principles that the United States wants to follow.

[23:10:03]

Now, my test for this as a reporter is, if Vladimir Putin was doing it, if Xi Jinping was doing it, if almost any other leader in the world was doing it, how would we write about it? How would we think about it? It was four years ago that the government of the United States was collecting this kind of evidence about the first attacks in Ukraine for a possible prosecution of Putin or his deputies.

COATES: Yes. Well, I wonder in terms of some of the things the president has said about the idea of what you have described as well. He spoke about the Iranian people being -- quote -- "willing to suffer for eventual freedom." The strikes on the infrastructure, as you described, the imposition, the pain, the suffering that would surely ensue, on the one hand, I wonder about people's understanding of whether this is what happens in a war versus what you're talking about, what ought to happen under the rules of engagement. But do you think the strikes on infrastructure would actually push the regime to surrender given enough time?

BOWMAN: I have no evidence that that would be the case, and that's why I said a moment ago that I don't think they'll accomplish the president's objective. I understand that he wants the strait open. That's an American national security interest, an economic interest, and global interest to have that be the case. But what evidence is there that doing this will achieve that effect? I don't see that evidence. It simply will turn more Iranians against us. It will turn international community opinion against the United States. It will sour further American popular opinion.

And the very radical Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, are they going to be deterred by this? They're going to be more determined than ever to put forward their terrorist activities that they've been doing since 1979.

COATES: You know, you're right about that in part, the idea of the length of time it would take to exert the sufficient level of pressure for them to buckle, and it does not comport with the timeline that Trump has said it will take to complete this war.

But I want to ask you because the president has publicly mused about taking control of Iran's oil. In 2016, then presidential candidate Donald Trump explained why the United States should have taken Iraq's oil. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: If we would have taken the oil, you wouldn't have ISIS because ISIS formed with the power and the wealth of that oil. We go in, we spend $3 trillion, we lose thousands and thousands of lives, and then, Matt, what happens is we get nothing. You know, it used to be to the victor belong the spoils. Now, there was no victor there, believe me. There was no victor.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Well, even though Trump is not actually sure whether Americans will support an oil takeover, is he using that 2016 logic, do you think, as a means to prevent a new ISIS or is this the lens of a businessman?

SANGER: He said outright that he looked at this as a business deal. And then what did he go back to? The example of Venezuela, which I think, you know, drove this decision on Iran. My Times colleagues and I went in to go see him in early January, just the days after the Venezuela arrest of Maduro and so forth, which was a brilliantly executed operation. But at that moment, he was talking almost exclusively about getting access to Venezuelan oil. And he talked about it again today. He had not talked about it in the run-up to Venezuela.

What surprised me a little bit about the press conference was he was pretty explicit here. And obviously, the oil in Iran is the sovereign wealth of the Iranian people. And if they decided they wanted to have American help to go rebuild that, I could imagine very much that there are lots of opportunities for the U.S. here. That isn't sort of the way he's discussing it.

COATES: Really quickly. I just want ask you quickly. The president praised Gulf states for helping the United States. Did he put a target on their backs?

BOWMAN: I don't think you need to be Nostradamus to figure out how Iran will respond to some of these. They're going to respond by attacking our Gulf Arab partners and their infrastructure and their energy assets, and that will make the global economic crisis even worse.

COATES: A lot more to discuss. Thank you, gentlemen, so much. Up next, we've got more bravery.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: When you look at the amounts of bullets and everything else that they took, when you go into these areas, you don't come out like we came out.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Bravery, CIA deception, and a firefight on the way out. We'll take you inside the incredible rescue of the U.S. airman shot down behind enemy lines. And later, the president dials in to the Artemis II crew with a special message for the history-making astronauts. We'll have it for you tonight.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:15:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: It's a very dangerous mission. I just felt it was worth it. If you would have told me that we would have been successful, gotten both, and nobody was even essentially injured, I would have said that would be impossible.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: You know, it's the kind of mission you think only Hollywood could come up with. A U.S. F-15E jet was hit deep inside Iran. The pilot and its crewmate both eject. The pilot found quickly. But the other airman, an Air Force colonel, had one crucial objective, hide. The president says he was injured and was forced to treat his own wounds.

But he managed to climb some 7,000 feet above sea level in enemy territory, where he hid alone in the crevice of a mountain while transmitting his location. A 155 aircraft were mobilized for the mission, along with hundreds of personnel. And a deception campaign commenced.

[23:20:00]

Now, the goal? To get Iran to look the other way. Just listen to how the CIA director described it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOHN RATCLIFFE, DIRECTOR, CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE: A daunting challenge comparable to hunting for a single grain of sand in the middle of a desert. (END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: I'm joined now by retired Navy SEAL, Dan O'Shea, along with retired Air Force major, Brian "Maddog" Maddocks, who flew U-2 spy plane missions over Iraq and Afghanistan. Glad to have both of you here. I mean, nothing short of extraordinary to hear that phrase, Dan. I mean, a grain of sand in the sand. I mean, unbelievable, in the desert. The mission included SEAL Team Six, Delta Force Commandos, a misinformation campaign. Can't explain just how difficult it is to execute this kind of rescue.

DAN O'SHEA, RETIRED NAVY SEAL: Well, it is truly a testament to the capability of the U.S. Military today. It's so ironic that Special Operations Command, which was largely involved in the forefront, not only the Air Force, Special Operations pilots, the planes, Army aviators in the Special Operations community and then, of course, our Special Operations operators, including apparently SEALs, Rangers, Delta, and we know pararescuemen, which is what they live for, but the entire package, which included interagency coordination, critical deceptive role played by the CIA getting the distraction of the Iranians who were looking for them, they put out a $50,000 or 50 euro reward for this downed pilot or downed weapon assistance officer.

So, truly an all-hands effort, did take a considerable amount of aircraft to pull this off. But the fact that we got both these pilots back at the start of Good Friday and back on Easter Sunday, it's just truly an amazing, you know, (INAUDIBLE) and an incredible operation across all services.

COATES: So true to think about that. I mean, Major Maddocks, the colonel, I mean, climbed some 7,000 feet while injured? That's no easy feat, as you possibly can understand. I mean, listen to what the Joint Chiefs chairman, Dan Caine, said earlier about this pilot and the other rescue pilot. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEN. DAN CAINE, CHAIRMAN, JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF: The single most important contributor to a successful rescue operation is the spirit of attack inside the heart of that downed aviator. Their will to survive, their will to evade, their will to recover is everything. In this case, the back seater's absolute commitment to surviving made much of our efforts possible.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Talk to me about the training that would go into knowing what to do to keep that spirit of survival in moments like this.

MAJ. BRIAN "MADDOG" MADDOCKS, RETIRED MAJOR, U.S. AIR FORCE: Absolutely. We all go through that. All aviators, you know, of course, go through what's called serial training or survival evasion, resistance, and escape. And it's as realistic as it can get. It's the worst two weeks of your life, but it's also the best two weeks of your life if you ever find yourself in a situation like both the pilot and the WSO did in this case. Again, it's awful, but it's beautiful at the same time.

COATES: Dan, the administration officials have repeatedly touted this deception campaign that they employed to point the Iranians away from the pilot's location. The CIA was involved. They started rumors in Iran. The military flew in seven different locations. I mean, is this military playbook?

O'SHEA: Well, listen.

MADDOCKS: I would -- I would say yes --

O'SHEA: As my counterpart who is a pilot knows -- I'm sorry. I'm just saying, as my counterpart knows, every time these guys fly anywhere in the world, they have a mission standing by. There are pararescuemen every time aviators are flying anywhere, standing by to recover. It's part of the mission planning. But this was just taken on an entirely new scale.

Again, it goes back to Operation Eagle Claw almost 50 years ago that did end in disaster of Desert One. We were trying to launch a mission. We didn't have that joint capability. And out of the ashes of Desert One rose up special operations command, including the aviation component. And so, that's the difference in 50 years that showed just how far we've come in our personal recovery, combat search and rescue mission capabilities.

And that pilot knew, he had the training, as my counterpart said about his SERE training --

COATES: Right.

O'SHEA: -- he knew what to do, to evade, and he knew that we were coming -- going to be coming for him and bring him home. We do not leave a man behind --

COATES: Yes.

O'SHEA: -- and this mission absolutely proved it.

COATES: Major Maddocks, I want to hear your response to that. And thank God that no one was left behind here. The president did say that not everybody was on board with the operation, although I'm sure everyone wanted to rescue a service member.

[23:25:02]

Point -- you know, full stop. But the operation was extremely --

MADDOCKS: Full stop.

COATES: -- extremely big in terms of the number of people who were involved, the number of assets that would have been used, the equipment as well. Talk to me about that sort of cost-benefit discussion that would have had to have happened to execute this.

MADDOCKS: Yes. I don't know that there is a cost-benefit discussion. You know, we've all talked about around this table and during the press conference today, there is an ethos of no man left behind. In fact, earlier in my career, you mentioned that I flew the U-2, I also flew the HC-130, which you saw drag in the helicopters and air refueling earlier in the mission, as well as the F-15E Strike Eagle, a Strike Eagle pilot as well, and yes, when you're on one end of it, when you're on the -- when you're on the survivor end of it, you know -- you know your guys are coming for you. So, you know you have to evade, survive long enough for them to find you, which they will.

And when you're on the rescue side of it, it's -- it's -- there is no give, there is no stop. Dan said earlier that it's what the pararescuemen live for, and they absolutely do. That is their -- that's their role in life. So, there is no man left behind.

And when you're in that survivor situation, you know they're coming for you. You just have to -- you just have to find a good place to hide, which the colonel obviously did, and go through your training, go through your radio training, transmit what you're supposed to transmit, and you know that's going to happen, you know they're going to get you.

COATES: So powerful. Dan O'Shea, Major "Maddog" Maddocks, thank you both. Still ahead, my next guest says the president has two choices when it comes to Iran and neither of them are good. Either he puts boots on the ground or Iran becomes a major world power. The war historian who has gamed out this scenario for the last two decades will join me to make his case. And does that Truth Social posts, F- bomb and all, actually mean anything in today's political climate? The panel will join me to debate, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:30:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COATES: Well, President Trump made it clear today, he wants a ceasefire deal that includes fully reopening the Strait of Hormuz. It's the critical chokepoint that Iran has effectively closed after striking dozens of oil tankers when the war started. That means only 20 percent of the global oil supply is virtually offline.

But Iran's oil continues to flow through the strait. After the U.S. lifted sanctions, Iran is making a profit as oil prices surge. Bloomberg reports Iran could be making $139 million a day from selling oil, except for $115 million before the war started.

Meanwhile, the rest of the globe is facing higher gas prices. And soon, prices could soar for things like groceries and fertilizer and cleaning products and paints, even pharmaceuticals because many of the chemicals used in these products, they're stuck in the Persian Gulf.

Those factors are why my next guest argues the war is turning Iran into a major power and leaving the United States with few options.

Political science professor Robert Pape from the University Chicago, he joins me now. He's also the director of the Chicago Project on Security and Threats. Professor, I'm so glad that you're here. Your piece, really compelling, very chilling for a variety of reasons because it comes down to, you say, the United States facing a choice. And it's a clear one, you say. Commit to a long-term effort to reclaim the Strait of Hormuz or accept a new global energy world order. What would that even look like and why are we headed there?

ROBERT PAPE, PROFESSOR OF POLITICAL SCIENCE AT UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO, DIRECTOR OF CHICAGO PROJECT ON SECURITY AND THREATS: Well, thank you very much for having me on again. The last time, we talked about the predictions I made a week before the first bomb fell where I explained the bombs would hit targets, kill leaders but not achieve the strategic outcome, not get the uranium, not topple the regime, and they would lash back, and they would take things like Hormuz. That has happened.

Now, what I'm doing is warning 38 days into the war, this has been a long -- already pretty long war, 38 days in, we're coming to an inflection point. We've already been through stage one and two of escalation trap. We're now getting trapped into a choice, and it's not a choice that we like, but it's also not going to be a choice we can avoid.

You see, the problem now is Iran is emerging with global power. There were three power centers before the Iran war, the United States, China, and Russia. Now, with 20 percent of the world's oil already dictating terms to India, Iraq, and even France for what will happen, they have to pay now and get approval and cooperation from Iran to pass through the strait.

This has much bigger geopolitical consequences in the coming months and the coming years. You see with this much power already and 20 percent of the world's oil, Iran is destined to make $100 billion this year. It could then start to really transition its uranium enrichment to those underground caves we can't get to where they have all the drones and fashion those nuclear weapons.

[23:35:03]

It could start to use parts of that $100 billion in those Chinese banks --

COATES: Yes.

PAPE: -- to start to really create political instability. This is an emerging power center, and either we're going to accept that or we're going to have to go forward with the worst war since the Vietnam War.

COATES: So, because of all this leverage, I mean, Iran has said that it will continue to impose even fees that ship -- others that pass through. Now, Trump has pushed back on that with this idea. Listen to what it is.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNKNOWN (voice-over): Mr. President, are you allowed to -- are you willing to end this conflict with Iran charging tolls for passage through the strait?

TRUMP: Us charging tolls?

UNKNOWN (voice-over): Iran.

TRUMP: What about us charging tolls?

UNKNOWN (voice-over): Is that something you're considering?

TRUMP: I'd rather do that than let them have them, right? Why shouldn't we? We're the winner. We won. OK? They are militarily defeated. The only thing they have is the psychology of, oh, we're going to drop a couple of mines in the water. All right? No. I mean, we have a concept where we'll charge tolls. OK?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: You write about being more than the psychology of dropping mines. I mean, the idea that they have been able to control that strait without physical control. What do you make of his concept to even charge tolls? Is that something that would be viable in putting their thumb on the scale for Iran to listen?

PAPE: It is not in the realm of reality, Laura. And I don't say that will -- I'm not somebody who just says that Trump is delusional and so forth. But what he just described is not on planet Earth. Right now, he has lost control over who ships oil through the Persian Gulf. The UAE is shipping zero oil, zero gas through the Persian Gulf. The Saudis are zero. Kuwait, zero. This is wrecking their economies. They're losing 20 and 30 percent of their GDP over a year.

The idea that he can just decide he's going to charge a toll to someone, anyone, he is -- this is just not it. This is a fantasy. This is not real. And the reality is Iran is controlling in a very selective way exactly which ships pass. Kuwait tried to run the blockade two days ago, hit. France kowtowed to Iran, they go through.

So, what you are seeing is power being exerted by Iran in a far more global way with impact. And this will get worse. This will accumulate. And Trump is asserting he can do this. He has lost power every hour that he started to bomb 38 days ago. And now, I see no reality. And it's a question of even his grip on reality to make a statement like that.

COATES: Professor Robert Pape, thank you.

PAPE: Thank you.

COATES: Well, we got to talk about President Trump's Easter message to Iran and the world. And you've seen it by now. Quote -- "Tuesday will be Power Plant Day, and Bridge Day, all wrapped up in one, in Iran. There will be nothing like it. Open the bleep strait, you crazy bastards, or you'll be living in hell." That's the president posted at 8.03 a.m. Eastern morning. Now, there has been plenty of criticism. But the president is standing by his wartime Easter message.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNKNOWN (voice-over): Why did you use such vulgar language in that Truth Social post?

TRUMP: Only to make my point. I think you've heard it before.

UNKNOWN: What is your response to critics who say that it your mental health that should perhaps be examined as this war continues?

TRUMP: Well, I haven't heard that. But if that's the case, you're going to have to have more people like me because our country was being ripped off on trade, on everything for many years until I came along.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: I'm going to bring in our political panel tonight, CNN political commentators Karen Finney and Shermichael Singleton. Let's begin here because, Shermichael, former congresswoman, Marjorie Taylor Greene, whose seat is up for election tomorrow, we should point out, said that Trump has -- quote -- "gone insane." Why do you he sent this kind of message? Is it playing to his base? Is it somehow a message that's not to reflect desperation but the irritation of more to come?

SHERMICHAEL SINGLETON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: I'm certain the president is irritated. I would have presumed he thought this would have been a much quicker process similar to Venezuela. We are over a month. Maybe we're looking at two months.

COATES: So, why show -- is there a risk to showing that irritation as a sigh of weakness?

SINGLETON: No, I don't think so. I don't think it's going to really move the needle in terms of the Iranian regime, as your interview with the professor dictated.

[23:40:03]

I read his article. And I think the professor made a lot of very clear points in terms of the power dynamics here. And if you look at it from Iran's perspective, you look at some of the president's statements, maybe you view it as bluster, but you know you can have a real impact on the insurers who insure the ships that go through that route, you know that you can bring to stand still the economies in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, etcetera. So, while the U.S. is dropping millions, hundreds of millions of dollars-worth of munitions, they have drones at $50,000 to build, you blow up a ship here and there. That's enough to completely freak out a lot of nations.

And so, I think, from our perspective, the only way you can probably open this thing up is by having boots on the ground. And politically, my question becomes, what is the appetite for that not only with independents but also within our own party where you are seeing some fractured from the MAGA base, the sort of more moderate mainstream Republicans? COATES: Shermichael, it's fascinating the word bastard wasn't used, effing wasn't used. I mean, he articulated a position. You would think maybe a commander-in-chief may have done so, but he did not.

KAREN FINNEY, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Especially at Easter morning.

COATES: He did not. And the thing is, I'm not a pearl-clutcher. I'm not going to suggest that, you know, these are the worst words I've ever heard in my life. I'm not. I wonder if Democrats will overplay their hand, though, and think to themselves, this is enough. The 25th Amendment has been called for already. We know that's not going to happen. It's either voluntary handing over or involuntary. You got to have the majority of your cabinet and the V.P. That's not going to happen. But describe to me why you think this is such a consequential statement he has made during a war.

FINNEY: Because 1,000 percent, he has just signaled to the Iranians that they've gotten under his skin. Because there was no way, never ever -- if you know anything about basic geopolitics, what happened in Venezuela was going to be a model for Iran, having traveled to the Middle East on several occasions and spoken with a number of experts. We have to remember, we think in decades, they think in hundreds of years. So, they're like, we'll wait you out for 100 years if we have to. They have a very different perspective about time.

COATES: So, 30 something days in under his skin is a sign to them of what?

FINNEY: It is a sign that all they have to do is just keep waiting him out and that they know they can control the dynamics through the Strait of Hormuz. And not to mention, within these various comments, he doesn't -- last week, he told us he didn't care about the Strait of Hormuz. We could end the war without dealing with the Strait of Hormuz. But then, clearly, he's upset about it. So, because he can't get his own message straight. And look, here's the other thing --

COATES: One thing -- I want to freeze it.

FINNEY: Yes.

COATES: He has been commenting today about the idea of his message may not be clear to the media, but he's not going to tell the media his plans. What's your reaction to that?

FINNEY: Yes. You know what? That's also not how grown-up diplomacy works because here's the thing. You're asking our allies to have to figure out and read the tea leaves of what he means when part of the reason that diplomacy and particularly in a time of war the words actually matter is because there is an understanding that without me having to tell you what I'm signaling, you understand what I'm signaling.

And so -- but I also think it's important that it also just shows he's so out of his depth. Like he's treating this like it's a real estate deal and it's not. We're talking about global economies. We're talking about hundreds of millions of lives that will be impacted. We're talking about very real consequences for everything he utters. And so -- and do you need to be vulgar? You don't is the other reality there.

COATES: Should he be held to a different standard? This is obviously, frankly, his tactics, his rhetoric known before he became a candidate, as a candidate, and elected twice.

SINGLETON: Yes.

COATES: Is it exactly where the war -- is it different and should it be?

SINGLETON: I don't think the vulgarity really matters. I think what matters --

COATES: Even in war time?

SINGLETON: No, I don't think it matters. I think what matters to the American people is quite simple. We're in this conflict. What is the prize? What is winning look like? When is this coming to an end? And if the president's onus or premise of his message is we have to open up the strait and, obviously, the regime is unwilling to negotiate --

FINNEY: But he has also said we don't have to open the strait in order to win.

SINGLETON: -- to negotiate with us, then I think the only alternative is to have boots on the ground. And the political question for that is, is there an appetite where Republicans can keep the House? What does this look like in terms of the Senate? You have a very tough race in Texas where up to $200 million may have to be spent.

COATES: What's answer? Is there an appetite?

SINGLETON: There isn't. There isn't an appetite. So, I think if you're advising the president, you're looking at the slew of races that the party has to try to maintain in the House, protect in the Senate, you're advising the president to try to find a conclusion to this as quickly as possible to move on, to focus on some of the economic issues that Karen just cited.

[23:45:00]

FINNEY: That was a very long answer. Very quickly, let me just say, the other danger for Trump is every moment he's talking about this and the possibility of boots on the ground, he's not talking about the American people or getting -- reigning in the economy.

COATES: I want to talk about Artemis. Karen, Shermichael, thank you both so much. Still ahead, President Trump calls deep into space to talk to the Artemis II crew as they break a record for all mankind. What he told them and what's in store for the astronauts now headed home.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

TRUMP (voice-over): Your mission paves the way for America's return to the lunar surface very soon. We're going all out. We're doing everything we can. We'll plant our flag once again. And this time, we won't just leave footprints, we'll establish a permanent presence on the moon and we'll push on to Mars.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: That was President Trump speaking with the Artemis II crew within the last hour.

[23:50:00]

He also congratulated the crew and invited them to the White House. A very well-deserved congrats after a historic day, a day that saw this crew going further into space than any human ever has, observing parts of the moon no one ever has, and telling the world what they saw.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JEREMY HANSEN, CANADIAN SPACE AGENCY ASTRONAUT, ARTEMIS II FLIGHT MISSION SPECIALIST: The gravitational pull of the Earth has had a profound effect on the near side of the moon, changing all those dark mares, those dark patches of the moon you see from Earth. It's very different on the far side. While you see some small patches of those mares in deep craters, it's very much absent on that side.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Today was the sixth day of a 10-day mission. The crew is now headed back to Earth. Something tells us their time in space will never be eclipsed. So, I want to talk about that. Here with me is a former NASA chief astronaut, Robert "Hoot" Gibson. He's also the author of "Space Ace: A Combat Pilot's Journey from Vietnam to Space." Hoot, I'm so glad you're here. I mean, the president making it clear tonight that his mission for NASA and U.S. spaceflight is to establish a presence on the moon and eventually go to Mars. So, how is Artemis II making that even closer to reality?

ROBERT "HOOT" GIBSON, FORMER CHIEF ASTRONAUT AT NASA, AUTHOR: Well, great question. It's an important step. It's a big important step. You know, we had Artemis I which verified that indeed the Space Launch System rocket, the SLS rocket Artemis program has the power and the ability to take us there. But now, we're doing it with a crew.

And we've seen that we learned some things about the vehicle that we didn't know before. And that always happens in a flight test of an aircraft or a spacecraft. And so, we are learning what it is to operate the Orion vehicle with crew on board. And that's an important step leading into, of course, the next couple of Artemis missions and that establishment of a base on the moon.

COATES: You heard what astronaut Jeremy Hansen had to say about the far side of the moon. His observations about Earth's gravity and how it had an impact on the side that we are able to see, those craters and beyond versus on the other side, what does that tell you?

GIBSON: It tells us -- it tells us that we really need more observation of the moon itself up close like they've been doing because the side of the moon that faces us is the side that's always facing us. And so, what's on the other side of it is more difficult to study and to ascertain. And these are some of the things that we're going to be accomplishing with the Artemis program.

COATES: The crew spent about 40, 45 minutes tonight without communication to Earth. Now, that was planned, they knew it was going to happen, a known factor of being on that far side of the moon. Listen to Victor Glover describe how that felt.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

VICTOR GLOVER, ASTRONAUT, NASA: I said a little prayer. But then I had to keep rolling. I was actually recording scientific observations of the far side of the moon. You know, that is actually the time when we were the farthest and the closest to the moon. And so, we were really able to make some of our most detailed observations of the far side of the moon up close. And so, we were busy up here working really hard. And I must say, it was actually quite nice.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: No rest for the weary. I see. But that little prayer, that staying focused, the observations, I mean, tell me what you think those 40 minutes without contact with the Earth, what must that have been like to have that special time, these astronauts, four of them, and the moon?

GIBSON: When you have the kind of confidence in your vehicle and in your mission and in everyone that participates and helps this mission flow forward, you're not really going to get too awfully worried. In fact, we had places over the Earth in the Space Shuttle program around the Indian Ocean where we were out of contact with mission control.

And the other thing to keep in mind, too, is that the crews trained to be autonomous. Now, we want to have mission control with us. But if we don't have them, we've trained to be able to handle anything that we're going to encounter without mission control. And so, sometimes -- sometimes, it's a good break to not have them bothering us constantly.

COATES: I think there are so many parents out there who were thinking, is there a way for you to bottle that 40 minutes of peace? It goes in the long run. Hoot Gibson, thank you so much.

GIBSON: Thank you, Laura.

COATES: Up next, the breaking news out of Indianapolis, where a new NCAA champion has just been crowned.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:55:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) UNKNOWN (voice-over): And it's over! Hail to the champions! Hail to Michigan. For the first time in 37 years, the Wolverines win the national title.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: We have a brand-new NCAA men's basketball champion. The Michigan Wolverines beat UConn by just six points to take home their first March Madness title since 1989. Now, for context, that 37-year drought is the longest any program has waited between first and second titles. This was Coach Dusty May's second season leading Michigan. He's now just the fifth coach in the NCAA history to win the tournament in their first two seasons. Congratulations to the players and the Wolverines.

Thank you all for watching. "The Story Is with Elex Michaelson" starts right now.