Return to Transcripts main page

Laura Coates Live

Is Trump Really Still Obsessed With The 2020 Election?; ICE Backs Down; Blanche To Face GOP Skeptics In Confirmation Hearing. Aired 11p-12a ET

Aired July 14, 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]

SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, FORMER SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH, SALEM RADIO HOST: I mean, we talk about the big issues here.

ABBY PHILLIP, CNN ANCHOR AND SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: No, I'm talking about -- They're talking about Trump's address. Why can't it be about making the lives of the American people better as opposed to his election hobby horses?

JENNINGS: Are we carrying it, by the way?

PHILLIP: I don't know the answer to that.

ASHLEY ALLISON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Don't pivot.

JENNINGS: I'm asking.

PHILLIP: Why can't it be about making America -- Why can't it be about the things that matters?

JENNINGS: It does matter according to polls to a lot of Americans.

PHILLIP: All right. We'll see about that. Next for us.

Thank you for watching "Newsnight." Don't forget, you can stream our show, "Confessions and Obsessions," anytime on the CNN app. "Laura Coates Live" is right now.

LAURA COATES, CNN HOST AND SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Tonight, is Trump really still obsessed with the 2020 election? Yes. And Democrats are urgently warning people about his upcoming speech. One of the federal election commissioners he recently fired joins me tonight. Plus, ICE cracks under pressure. Kind of. The agency now pausing traffic stops after two deadly shootings. But how long will it really last? And later, if Trump is so sure Todd Blanche will be confirmed as the attorney general, then why is the president putting new pressure on Republicans just hours before his confirmation hearing? We'll get into it tonight on "Laura Coates Live."

My opening statement tonight, watch what President Trump does, not just what President Trump says. And that's never been more important to keep in mind than right now because he's teasing a huge announcement in a primetime address this coming Thursday over a grievance he just can't let go.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: It's really, really big news. And our country has to shape up. What we're going to be talking about Thursday is it doesn't get bigger because without free and fair elections, you don't have a country.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Now, look, we don't specifically know what this really big news is going to be. Sources tell us it will focus on voting machine security and efforts by foreign nationals to influence elections. But it doesn't take much to figure out where this could be headed. And I can tell you, the president has been railing against the 2020 election since, well, frankly, since even before the 2020 election. And this year, he has been ramping up his promises that something is about to come out.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: It was a rigged election. Everybody now knows that. They found out. People will soon be prosecuted for what they did.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: The election was rigged. We know who rigged the election.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: We have things that you won't believe. When we release the full files, you're not going to believe how crooked the second, the 2020 election, was.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Now, to be absolutely clear, we have seen no evidence of any widespread election fraud from the 2020 election. That is despite numerous state audits, recounts, and legal fights. His own former attorney general, Bill Bar, said he found no fraud that would have changed the result. So here we are, six years out from that election. Remember what I said, watch what he does because Trump isn't just talking about it anymore, he has actually been trying to take an action.

Exhibit A, DOJ requests for unredacted voter rolls from virtually every state. Now, most have said no. And so far, the courts have sided with the states. Exhibit B, the president last week fired the remaining members of the bipartisan federal agency that helps distribute congressionally appropriated funds, supports states running their elections, and certifies voting machines. One of those commissioners will be here tonight. Exhibit C, Tulsi Gabbard, Trump's former director of National Intelligence. Remember this? It's from when she was in Georgia this very year during an FBI raid on an election office. She also got voting machines from Puerto Rico. But the flaws they found, they were already known. And we've seen no evidence that they were hacked. Exhibit D, Bill Pulte, Trump's acting DNI, who the president instructed to declassify almost everything. And just listen to what else Trump said about him.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: He's a very smart guy, and he may find out some things about the rigged elections, etcetera, etcetera. I think he'd like to do it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: And you can't ignore the timing of all of this. Trump wants to pass a bill that would overhaul elections, but he doesn't have the votes to pass it. On top of that, the midterms are quickly approaching, something Georgia Senator Jon Ossoff was quick to point out.

[23:05:00]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. JON OSSOFF (D), GEORGIA: He is reheating debunked conspiracy theories and launching bizarre, new lies because he fears losing these midterm elections. Privately, most elected Republicans in this building think the president has lost it and is dooming them to dismal losses this fall.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Ossoff is one of the president's biggest critics. He's also up for re-election, so he has his own stake in this fight. He's raising a question hanging over a Thursday night. So, watch what Trump does. And ask yourself, is this about 2020 or about 2026?

Let's begin with Arizona's Democratic secretary of state, Adrian Fontes. Thank you, Secretary Fontes, for being here with us tonight. I mean, election workers in Georgia, election workers in Arizona, they faced real threats after the 2020 election. So, what does it mean for the people who actually run your elections if President Trump revives these claims in a primetime address, no less?

SEC. OF STATE ADRIAN FONTES (D), ARIZONA: Well, unfortunately, the president has a very broad reach and his audience takes him very seriously. And sadly, what we have seen is election officials leaving the profession. Over the last several years, we've seen threats. I have personally had colleagues who had their dogs poisoned. My own family has been threatened. I have been threatened.

But, you know, it's wholly and completely irresponsible of the chief executive of the United States of America to be ginning up this sort of divisiveness and this sort of bad acting based on a personal grievance. And it needs to stop for the folks who actually run our elections which, by the way, they do a really good job.

And I think if you look back at, you know, maybe 2024, didn't turn out too bad for him, essentially under the exact same rules with the exact same processes, almost all the exact same equipment and a lot of the same exact people running it. It's interesting to me that there might be issues in '26 or there were issues in '20, but when he won in 2024, everything seems to be going OK. So, I think we should take him for what it's worth.

COATES: You know, the safety concerns you described cannot be overstated. Just thinking about the people who sometimes volunteer, oftentimes signed up to participate in this way in our democracy, it is so essential. I've monitored many an election. It is so critical to have election workers. And to think about the threats that are hanging over their head or the cloud of doubt and credibility is unbelievable.

I mean, it also looks, as you know, like a full court press from the administration, from -- from Bill Pulte's appointment to the DOJ demanding voter rolls to the president's push for the SAVE Act. I mean, how do you, in your position, how do you combat this fraud narrative when it's coming from the president himself and you've got this sort of full court press that is watering these seeds?

FONTES: Well, we depend on the grit of the American election workers across the United States of America. Here in Arizona, we have a bottom-up system, for example. So, it's mostly the county reporters and the county boards of supervisors who are the elected officials that hire folks and they make things happen here in Arizona.

And so, we depend on that Democrats, Republicans alike to get the job done. We lean on the truth, we lean on our experience, we lean on each other, and we do everything that we can. But we also lean on history, and we lean on some very important things that I think folks need to realize.

One of the things that I think folks forget is that in 2021, on March 16th, both the Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security released a joint statement telling the world that there was no foreign interference in the technical aspects of our elections.

And on that same day, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence made five key findings public, declassified those findings. The first one was that there were no issues with any of the equipment, the tabulation, the people, any of that stuff. But the other four findings were interesting. One, the second finding was that Russia was anti-Biden, pro-Trump. The third finding was that Iran was pro-Trump, anti-Biden. And the fourth one was that China was thinking about interfering in kind of an influence campaign way, but they decided not to. And the fifth one, of course, was that Venezuela, Cuba, and Hezbollah also tried a little bit of influence campaigning.

The bottom line is this has been reviewed and reviewed and reviewed. We've had the audits, we've had the recounts, we've had all of this happening over and over.

[23:10:02] And this one person's grievance is the one thing that, apparently, a lot of folks can't get over because he can't get over it in spite of the good work, in spite of the good people. And to me, the biggest issue behind this is the confidence of our voters. They should be confident. And we really should have a partner, not an adversary, for the administration.

COATES: Secretary Adrian Fontes, thank you so much.

FONTES: Thank you.

COATES: With just months until the midterms and galvanized by the Supreme Court's expansion of executive power to remove agency heads willy at will, President Trump has moved to clean house at the Federal Election Assistance Commission, leaving the independent, bipartisan agency in a state of total uncertainty as he pushes to try to revamp the way elections are run.

My next guest is one of the four commissioners of the Election Assistance Commission that was pushed out last week by President Trump. Benjamin Hovland joins me now. Mr. Hovland, thank you so much for being here. When I heard this news, I immediately wanted to understand whether you had any notice of this firing. How did they do it?

BENJAMIN HOVLAND, FIRED COMMISSIONER, ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION: Email. It was about a two-sentence email. That was it.

COATES: Did you have any inkling this might happen?

HOVLAND: There had been the Supreme Court decision in the slaughter case. That had provided some inclination that something might be coming. But other than that, no. No notification, no notice or -- simply the email.

COATES: You know, the commission has a very important role. Obviously, it helps distributing congressionally-appropriated funds. It can certify voting systems. It has a role in an appeal process if somebody were to take issue as a vendor of the certification of what's being done. But there are those who argue this will have no impact, not having any commissioners. Tell me the truth. What would be the impact of having people like yourself or no commissioners heading this organization?

HOVLAND: Yes. So, the commissioner's role is really to lead the agency, to provide that direction. And then certainly, as we finalize things like voting system certification, that requires a quorum.

One of the things that I really think about is the origins of this commission were the Help America Vote Act of 2002, which was Congress's response to the contentious 2000 election, the Bush v. Gore election. And Congress created this bill, the Help America Vote Act, and the agency to support election officials, to help avoid situations like that. And so, when you take away that tool, when you take away that extra support for election officials, undoubtedly, it will have an impact. COATES: Of course, it will impact possibly people's belief in the credibility of the system. Do you see this as sowing further division or politicizing what, as you say, after HAVA, was intended to level a playing field and give transparency and comfort?

HOVLAND: I think one of the big things about the agency was it was created as an independent bipartisan agency. And again, we were two Democrats and two Republicans, for most of my seven-and-a-half-year tenure, working together, finding common ground, thinking about how we could serve election officials and, ultimately, voters.

And again, I think that Congress set the agency up in this manner to again ensure that we could come together and agree on the basic ground rules of how our elections should run and try to improve them for everyone, not Republicans or Democrats, but all Americans.

COATES: I mean, every state has the power to govern their own elections and how they're run. This commission's job, in part, was to make sure that there were resources available and sort of daylight among the different states. But can the commission -- can the actual EAC function without the commissioners now, knowing that that won't be available without any commissioners, no one there to set the policy or even establish changes? Now what?

HOVLAND: It's a great question. And, you know, we put together an amazing team. There's a great staff that's still at the agency, and they'll continue the work as long as they're able to do that. But, again, that future direction or responding to the challenges, you know, what we've seen in the last several years is so many new challenges coming to the election administration space, things that were unimaginable at the time HAVA passed.

And so, a lot of what my colleagues and I did were hear from election officials around the country directly and help take the agency's relatively, you know, limited resources and channel those as effectively as possible in order to support those election officials. And so, so much of what our role was, was really that listening part and then thinking about how the agency could most effectively address those emerging challenges.

[23:14:58]

COATES: Without commissioners, will the November elections be impacted, the funding or otherwise?

HOVLAND: You know, I think the biggest thing for November, you know, so much of the work that we would be doing as commissioners would be in the longer term. In the short term, again, I think the agency is well positioned with a great team in place to support state and local officials who ultimately run our elections. And I think when Americans are looking at this and thinking about or feeling concerned about it, certainly that's valid.

COATES: You clearly are dedicated to the work you've done. Will you try to oppose this legally? HOVLAND: We'll see. I know that, you know, it's a little bit early for me to figure out that next step. What I can say is that it has been really a privilege to serve in this role, again, to have that front row seat.

COATES: But you don't think you were fired for cause?

HOVLAND: Certainly not.

COATES: So, the idea that you're no longer going to have that privilege, doesn't it bother you?

HOVLAND: Absolutely. You know, again, if I had the opportunity, I would certainly continue in this role. But I'm thankful for the time that I had in it.

COATES: Thank you for joining us.

HOVLAND: Thank you.

COATES: Remember, you are a part of this show, and we want to hear from you. Just text us your questions, your comments at 818-972-7272. We'll answer them later this hour. Make sure you give me a first name and your city or state. I want to know who I'm talking to.

Up next, ICE pumps the brakes, at least for now. The agency deciding to pause traffic stops following two deadly shootings, at least in the last seven days. Will it be enough? And what about the body cameras? We have news on that tonight. We'll get to it with the former homeland security secretary, Jeh Johnson, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:20:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COATES: A day after ICE officers shot and killed a man in Maine, the agency is making a drastic change to its immigration crackdown. It's suspending traffic stops for now. The same type of stop ended yesterday with the death of a 26-year-old, Johan Sebastian Duran Guerrero. He was shot and killed in Biddeford after DHS says that agents tried to stop him in his car while searching for someone with a deportation order. Guerrero died six days after Lorenzo Salgado Araujo, who was shot and killed by an ICE agent in Houston. He, too, was inside of his car, a van, when an agent shot him. And according to ICE, neither men were the target of an operation.

For years, critics of ICE have blasted stops like the ones that ended with Araujo and Guerrero dead. After the shootings, even some Republicans, like Maine Senator Susan Collins, urged DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin to pause those stops. But that pause may only be temporary.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) TOM HOMAN, BORDER CZAR: It's not a policy change, it is a temporary pause. Look, last couple of shootings, ICE leadership along with DHS believe -- they want to look at these last couple incidents. And look, is there something that could have been done better? Is there any training that could be improved? Or simply is ICE doing their job and bad things happen when people don't comply with law enforcement officers?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Well, my next guest knows all about the Homeland Security Department. I want to bring in Jeh Johnson, former DHS secretary under President Obama. Mr. Secretary, thank you for being here. You just heard Tom Homan say the suspension of traffic stops by ICE will only be temporary to evaluate what has just taken place. Is that the right call?

JEH "JAY" JOHNSON, FORMER U.S. SECRETARY OF HOMELAND SECURITY UNDER PRESIDENT OBAMA: Thanks for having me, first of all. Tom Homan is a career law enforcement officer. In my opinion, he's a fine man. He used to work for me when I was secretary of DHS. In my judgment, there needs to be a wholesale, back-to-basics training of ICE enforcement and removal operations. It is an agency of government that, frankly, I don't recognize anymore. I believe that it has lost its way.

We need to have -- when you look at what happened in Minneapolis this past winter, the tragic killings of Alex Pretti and Renee Good, when you look at what happened in Maine, when you look at what happened in the last several hours, days in Texas, I see an agency that has significant problems and requires some real back-to-basic training, not just a temporary pause in vehicle stops.

The other problem I see is that, and this is most unfortunate, ICE, DHS lacks, at this point, with the public and the press, any credibility about the statements they issue about these incidents. Let's recall that after the killing of Renee Good, the secretary of DHS at the time branded it an act of domestic terrorism. The videos are released. No one can see an act of domestic terrorism in those videos.

I was struck by the statement that was issued about the killing in Maine, that the agents on the scene saw it as somehow a threat to public safety, not a threat to the agents themselves but a threat to public safety. What does that mean exactly? Does that mean that they were fearing that this individual might plow down innocent civilians? Does it mean that he ran a stop sign? Does it mean he ran a red light? What exactly does that mean? Basic training in law enforcement is --

COATES: Well, Mr. Secretary, I can tell you -- excuse me. I want to just -- on that point, I mean --

JOHNSON: Sure.

[23:25:00]

COATES: -- a lot of the issues of credibility, issuing statements that were already issued, might be resolved if, for example, body cameras were worn and people were able to see from themselves --

JOHNSON: Of course.

COATES: -- the perspectives of the officers. But we know the ICE officers in Maine, in Houston, they weren't wearing them. A spokesperson for ICE tells CNN they will ensure that all arresting teams have someone wearing a body camera and all field officers will get them in less than 60 days. But, I mean, that does nothing for the families of those who have already been killed, who are looking for answers --

JOHNSON: Of course.

COATES: -- and a community who wants to know whether de-escalation was warranted, necessary or this was somebody who went completely rogue and had an unprovoked killing.

JOHNSON: You know, one of the problems is even when there are videos, where there are cameras, and everybody has an iPhone on the street these days, ICE puts out these statements, DHS puts out these statements, that once the videos are released, are entirely at odds with what people can see with their own eyes. So, I go back to there's a basic credibility problem. Should there be body cams? Yes, absolutely, particularly for this very, very controversial agency that has already embarked on this very, very controversial mission.

But on top of that, everybody has an iPhone these days. So, no agent should ever think that they're not going to be filmed or caught on camera and that the government can just issue a statement and expect everybody to believe it.

COATES: So, what is your message to Democrats who say that ICE should be abolished?

JOHNSON: I am not in favor of abolishing the agency. We need to dramatically change the culture, change the policies, change the emphasis. And if those things don't change, you change the leaders. That's what elections are all about.

During the 1960s, the Vietnam War was highly controversial. More than half of America was against the Vietnam War. But very few people advocated abolishing the Department of Defense. So, there needs to be a radical change and shift in policy and emphasis and change in personnel if we can't change the policy.

I have been optimistic about the new secretary, Markwayne Mullin. I hope he is as troubled as I am about what we see, what we read about the agency under his command. And I hope he can turn things around.

COATES: Last question for you, secretary. Given that you believe that ICE officers should return to basic training, back to basic training on de-escalation and beyond given the recent events, do you believe that ICE operations should be halted until that training is complete?

JOHNSON: No, I'm not in favor of halting ICE operations in their entirety. I believe that there is a way to have a wholesale back-to- basics training, revamping of the culture, without shutting down the agency and its mission in its entirety.

COATES: Secretary Jeh Johnson, thank you.

JOHNSON: Thank you.

COATES: Up next, Epstein, prosecutions of Trump's enemies, the IRS settlement, the anti-weaponization fund, just some of the baggage that Todd Blanche is carrying in tomorrow's confirmation hearing to become attorney general. Can he talk his way out of the grilling he's about to face? His former colleague at SDNY, Congressman Dan Goldman, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:30:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COATES: So, how do you go from being the president's personal defense attorney to the nation's chief law enforcement officer? Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche will have to answer that exact question tomorrow as he seeks the Senate's approval to permanently run the Department of Justice.

But, as you know, that's just the tip of the iceberg because Blanche is walking into a room with a mountain of controversy dragging behind him. I'm talking about his highly scrutinized handling of the Epstein files, his ties to the controversial $1.8 billion taxpayer-funded weaponization fund. And while Blanche has privately admitted to senators this week that the fund was a mistake, he is still under fire for refusing to permanently shut it down in writing, not to mention the growing accusations that he is using the DOJ to investigate and prosecute the president's critics.

With me now, Democratic Congressman from New York, Dan Goldman, who, of course, is a member of the House judiciary and homeland security committees. Congressman, thank you for being here. I mean, you spent years as a federal prosecutor in the same department that Blanche now runs. If you were advising these senators who are going to question him tomorrow, what's the one thing they should focus on?

REP. DANIEL GOLDMAN (D-NY): Well, I would drill down on the Epstein files. I think it's really clear that Todd Blanche has orchestrated a massive cover-up of the Epstein files in violation of the Epstein Files Transparency Act.

[23:35:04]

He has tried to shut down other investigations related to the Epstein files. He has been acting as Donald Trump's personal lawyer in the official capacity of acting attorney general since he took that position and prior to that as deputy attorney general.

Of secondary importance, I would add that so much of what he is doing is a blatant violation of bar rules, of conflicts of interests, and ethics regulations because he represented Donald Trump in these January 6th cases. And he now is representing the government, which was opposite Donald Trump, and creating a slush fund, and doing all of these things based on his now official duties to oversee the Department of Justice, but it relates directly to the issues, the facts, the matters that he represented Donald Trump as his personal lawyer. That is a blatant ethics violation.

Unfortunately, shortly after Todd Blanche took over as deputy attorney general, former attorney general, Pam Bondi, fired the most senior ethics counsel in the Department of Justice who had been there for 37 years, and there does not appear to be anybody who is enforcing those rules and those laws.

I bring that up only because it's one of the many, many reasons why he should not be confirmed, but it probably does not hit the top 10 reasons that he'll be asked about tomorrow.

COATES: I mean, you heard a federal judge slamming him and others who represented the president and, of course, somehow facilitated what she called, and I'm paraphrasing here, the farce of the weaponization fund and this pseudo settlement of parties that were not even in conflict. I mean, outgoing Republican Senator Thom Tillis appears to be drawing a line in the sand on that fund. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. THOM TILLIS (R), NORTH CAROLINA: The underlying issue is the 1776 fund needs to go away.

MANU RAJU, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Could you vote against him if he does not handle that question appropriately tomorrow?

TILLIS: I've said that the 1776 fund has to be certainly and completely ended for me to feel comfortable with moving forward.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Blanche won't put that in writing. He has said that it is dead. The president not vacillating on this issue, of all of the controversies, and there are many surrounding Blanche. Why do you think the fund is the red line for Republicans?

GOLDMAN: I don't really know. I mean, there's so much egregious stuff that he has done, especially with the Epstein files, especially with weaponizing the government to go after the Southern Poverty Law Center, to go after James Comey again. I hope that is not the only thing that Senator Tillis hinges his vote on.

COATES: I want to turn to the growing crisis involving ICE, congressman, following the recent deadly shootings, not only in Maine, also in Texas. You've got Senator Susan Collins claiming that she personally called DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin and urged him to stop these traffic stops. You've got Border Czar Tom Homan saying this is just a pause, not a policy change. Do you think that DHS is trying to reform its tactics or is this just temporary political cover for very vulnerable Republicans?

GOLDMAN: It's obviously a political cover. Look, this is exactly what happened to Renee Good. This is how she was killed. An ICE officer unnecessarily and excessively fired into the front seat of her car as she was trying to drive away. This is not new. This is just a continuation of the ineptitude, the incompetence, and the brazen, outlandish conduct that ICE has been perpetrating on our country for a year and a half.

It is why ICE must be abolished, why we must entirely reform the Department of Homeland Security so that the ICE or the department does not have the power that it is abusing on a consistent basis, as it has done twice in the last week now.

COATES: Congressman, if ICE is abolished --

GOLDMAN: It should not require two murders.

COATES: I don't want to cut you off, but I think many people wonder this very notion. If ICE were to be abolished, what would be the appropriate mechanism to have effective border control or removal of people who are not authorized to be in the United States?

GOLDMAN: Well, that's something that we are having regular discussions about in the Homeland Security Committee because I think the Department of Homeland Security needs to be revamped broadly after 25 years.

[23:40:00]

And now that ICE is effectively the fifth largest military in the country, in the world rather, that was never its intention. And so, yes, of course, we need to have border enforcement, we need to have enforcement of our immigration laws. Nobody is saying that we should not have that. We just cannot tolerate anymore, Laura, the notion that, oh, whoops, we shouldn't have shot in a moving vehicle, too bad the person died. No, no, there need to be consequences.

COATES: Congressman Dan Goldman, thank you so much.

GOLDMAN: Thank you.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TREY YINGST, FOX NEWS CHIEF FOREIGN CORRESPONDENT: So, are you negotiating with the wrong people?

TRUMP: Well, now -- I don't want to negotiate now. I said, let's not negotiate.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: President Trump suggesting he's willing to abandon talks with Iran after yet another shift in his war. Is the president truly stuck this time around? The panel will debate it next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:45:00

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: We're going to hit them very hard tonight. We're going to hit them very hard tomorrow night. We're going to him them very hard the night after. And then, next week, it gets really bad for them because next week comes the power plants, next week comes the bridges.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: If you thought the whiplash over the Iran war was over, boy, were you wrong. Case in point, first, there was a ceasefire. Now, the president is boasting we're hitting Iran hard. A fourth straight night of strikes just concluded, according to CENTCOM. And the president, he's back to not ruling out troops on the ground.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

YINGST: Are you ruling out a ground campaign in a limited capacity?

TRUMP: I don't want to say that either. But I would say no if I thought it was appropriate. Sometimes, you need a ground campaign. But we have other people that will do the ground campaign for us.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: But the whiplash does not end there. The president just reinstated the U.S. blockade today. And yesterday, he announced a 20 percent reimbursement fee on cargo moving through that strait. Now, today, he says that that's no longer happening. And amid all this talk of a final deal being negotiated, apparently, that might not happen either.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: I said, you better make a deal, you're not going to have anything left.

YINGST: And you think they will?

TRUMP: They should. I don't know if they will or not.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Joining me now, host of the podcast "No Lie," Brian Tyler Cohen. He's also the author of a brand-new book, "The Day After: How to Wield Power in a Post-Trump World." Also joining us is the president and executive director of "The Daily Signal," Rob Bluey. Glad to have both of you guys on.

I'll begin with you, Rob, because the American people, they see these headlines day in and day out. And it just seems that Trump is making it up as he goes along. Is there a coherent strategy, given the gravitas of war?

ROB BLUEY, PRESIDENT AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, THE DAILY SIGNAL: Well, I think that the president recognizes now, and maybe he did earlier and was willing to let negotiations play out, that if he's really going to make progress in Iran, he has to take out some of the infrastructure that you saw him talking about there, the bridges, the power plants, because that's going to send a message to the Iranian leadership, maybe that they will finally give up these attacks on ships passing through the strait.

But ultimately, Laura, this is going to come down to an issue of how Americans feel about their personal finances. And as I think they see the price of gasoline ticking up, it's going to make Republicans in Congress nervous. It's going to make a lot of people who are running for re-election this year a little bit anxious as those midterm elections approach.

COATES: And yet the president today said prices are coming way down, and we're doing a great job. Now, the dip in inflation he's referring to, that actually was based on the ceasefire that has now since ended. So, to that point, I mean, thinking about the president's words and what people actually feel about it, how do you bridge that gap?

BRIAN TYLER COHEN, PODCAST HOST, AUTHOR: You don't. And the reality is that it would be bad enough if he was just doing those things and sending costs higher as the result of this misguided war that he, by the way, swore would never happen.

But if you have a president who is insistent that nothing is wrong, that everything is great, everything is perfect, he's presiding the best that you've ever seen any president preside over any country, then Americans can't have any confidence that he's going to fix it. You can't fix a problem that you refuse to acknowledge even exists.

And so, if there are high gas prices right now, if there are high utility prices, high grocery prices, high health care prices, you name it, and you're upset with those prices, and Donald Trump is out here saying everything is perfect, you can't expect any of those prices to go down.

COATES: We got viewer questions. They want to weigh in. I've got Marie, who is a Republican from Newark, Ohio, and she asked this question. Do the president and Republicans believe that if a Republican fails to win an election, then the election was rigged? So, 2016 and 2024 were legit, but 2020 was a rigged election? What do you say?

BLUEY: Yes. Well, I think this is in reference to the president's speech on Thursday night. He has teased that he's going to be talking about election issues. I think he's probably going to focus his remarks on the Save America Act. He has made that a top legislative priority. Republicans in the House appear to be moving pieces of that through a third reconciliation bill.

Now, when it comes to the talk of this, we know that the president has doubts about that 2020 election. I don't think that's going to change, Laura. He's going to keep talking about it, whether or not we like it or not.

COATES: Well, whether it's true or not, which it's not. Michael from Minnesota asked this question. Why should we believe anything about potential election fraud, given it has been investigated by many independent and/or bipartisan groups and no major claims of widespread fraud were found? Almost feels rhetorical.

COHEN: It is. I mean, that is the answer to the question right there. There is no proof of widespread voter fraud. Republicans have been pointing to this boogeyman, and then using their own lies as justification that there is a general -- a large swath of the electorate that has -- that doesn't have confidence in the election.

[23:50:041]

So, it's basically this circular logic where they make up lies about the election, point to the fact that the general public, you know, has doubts about the election, and uses that as justification to continue perpetuating these election fraud lies.

There is no proof. There is no widespread proof of voter fraud. And until they come up with something, the reality is that we should recognize that all they're doing is engaging in this process to give them self-justification to undermine our faith in elections.

COATES: We'll see what happens on Thursday night. This next question appears to be related to the killings of people who were in their vehicles by ICE agents. Mike in North Carolina asked this question. What pisses people like me off is where is all of this outrage when an American is murdered by an illegal alien more times than I can count. Do you have a reaction?

BLUEY: Yes. I mean, I do think it's a point that you've heard certain conservatives and Republicans raise. I mean, there have been notable instances where that's played out over the course of just the last couple of years. And that's one of the reasons why I think a lot of people were motivated to put Donald Trump back in the White House. They saw what happened under the Biden administration when it came to illegal immigration and the lack of border security in this country. That was an animating issue for not just Republicans, but a lot of independent voters, too.

COATES: I mean, there is outrage when somebody is murdered, period. You see coverage of it. It's why we cover it. We know that. But this has also been part of the conversation. What do you say?

COHEN: I agree. I mean, to claim that people are not concerned with this issue when -- I mean, if you've watched the news, it's something that's covered on a nightly basis all across the country all the time. And so, you know, people can be selectively outraged about certain things that they don't think are happening. But, look, there is no shortage of coverage on television about this happening.

COATES: We'll see what happens on Thursday. Thank you for the viewer questions, everyone. Rob, thank you. And, of course, Brian, stick around because up next, the question that is asked all the time, how can Democrats win in the post-Trump era? Well, Brian wrote an entire book that he thinks reveals that answer. We're going to talk about it next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:55:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COATES: There's a new book out right now with a tough message -- there is a new book out right now with a tough message for Democrats: If you retake power after Trump's presidency, politics as usual won't cut it. Well, the book lays out a new playbook for how the party should govern after Trump leaves office. It's called "The Day After: How to Wield Power in a Post-Trump World." And the author, Brian Tyler Cohen, is back with me now to discuss.

Brian, it's a really interesting read and very thought-provoking. You argue in the book -- quote -- "Surely the biggest lesson of the Biden presidency had been to extinguish the naive belief that once there was a Democratic president again, the world would just revert back to normal." Tell me why.

COHEN: Well, look, I mean, that was a response to Trump 1.0, that what we needed in that moment was a return to normalcy. And, frankly, if you look at the moment that we're in right now, clearly, it didn't work. Having a return to normalcy in the Biden era did not usher in, you know, a sense of calm. It didn't usher in a return to our institutions, deference to our institutions and norms. It ushered in a moment of chaos.

And so, I think what people are hungry for and what they've told us by virtue of electing Trump and are now electing a raft of Democratic candidates across the country who are showing a willingness to fight is that we don't want to see a deference to the usual norms and traditions and institutions that have really, you know, governed our party for so long.

COATES: What's interesting about that is the book is essentially a blueprint for how Democrats should prioritize the different issues once Trump does leave office. And you call for things like expanding the Supreme Court and an FDR-style approach, of course, to climate change. You talk about ending the filibuster. Why do you believe those are winning issues for Democrats?

COHEN: Because the incrementalism that we have seen from the Democratic Party, this sense that we can just get caught trying, it's just not enough for people who told us how they feel when they voted for somebody like Donald Trump a second time because he promised to tear down our system of government. And, at this point, if we don't start to learn these lessons, we're doomed to repeat the failures of the past.

And so, you know, we do need big swings to fix a lot of the issues that we're contending with right now. you know, on the economy, for example, that has caused so many Americans to basically lose faith in the government's ability to work for it. Forty percent of Americans can't afford $400 emergency.

And so, if you think that you can just get back into office and settle for some incremental approach, then I think you're going to continue to lose people who are going to continue to become disaffected and disillusioned in politics.

COATES: Republicans will likely seize on that and try to suggest -- that this suggests even more left, more radical Democrats. Could it backfire?

COHEN: Look, I think not doing something for fear of Republicans abusing their power, my answer to that would be they're abusing their power right now. And so, what do we have to lose? We're watching a Republican administration really just destroy every facet of government. He doesn't think the rules apply to him. He is, you know, eviscerating the emoluments clause. He's making money, hand over fist, basically using our foreign policy as a way to line his own pockets and build up his real estate portfolio.

There are so many instances in which they try to elevate up to the Supreme Court these issues where it would be in stark defiance to the plain text of the Constitution, this idea that Trump could undermine birthright citizenship.

And so, on issue after issue after issue, they're already abusing their power.

[00:00:00]

And so, we can either do nothing and entrench the status quo or we can actually fight fire with fire.

COATES: Interesting. The book, again, called "The Day After: How to Wield Power in a Post-Trump World," written by our guest, Brian Tyler Cohen.

Hey, thank you all so much for watching. "The Story Is with Elex Michaelson" is up next.