Return to Transcripts main page
Laura Coates Live
Biden Says Goodbye And Warns America; Pam Bondi Grilled At Confirmation Hearing; Hostage Families Cling To Hope After Ceasefire Deal; The Clock Ticks For TikTok; Laura Coates Interviews Homeless Altadena Couple. Aired 11p-12a ET
Aired January 15, 2025 - 23:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[23:00:00]
DEREK SHAFFER, ATTORNEY: Not in that sense, but in the sense you have sexual wellness posts about women recovering from hysterectomies and how they can enjoy sex, that's on -- on there.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ABBY PHILLIP, CNN ANCHOR AND SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Ana?
(LAUGHTER)
ANA NAVARRO, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: No puedo -- I don't understand.
(LAUGHTER)
I really don't know why you're making me think of Alito. God knows --
UNKNOWN: (INAUDIBLE) call on you.
(CROSSTALK)
NAVARRO: Now I understand why his wife is hanging --
KEVIN O'LEARY, CHAIRMAN, O'LEARY VENTURES: If you are 16 --
NAVARRO: -- flags upside down.
O'LEARY: -- and your mother caught you with a Playboy, I'm only reading the articles, mom.
PHILLIP: I'm reading about -- I'm reading William F. Buckley.
O'LEARY: That's it.
PHILLIP: Also, a little scary for those of us who know the technology is going to come before the court a lot. Everyone, thank you very much. Thanks for watching "NewsNight." "Laura Coates Live" starts right now.
LAURA COATES, CNN HOST AND SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Well, tonight, President Biden says goodbye from the Oval Office and takes a shot at the likes of Elon Musk as he delivers a new warning to America.
Plus, Pam Bondi on a glide path that seems to be the next attorney general, but not before some pretty thorny exchanges between her and others about the way she'll lead the department.
And the clock ticks for TikTok. But new tonight, Donald Trump may be thinking of a way he could save it. Could it work? Tonight, on "Laura Coates Live."
Well, President Joe Biden tonight had his last chance to speak to the American public in a major way before he leaves office. It was a prime time, Oval Office swan song. And while Biden said he remains optimistic about America, he also delivered a warning, one that we really haven't heard from him before, at least not like this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Today, an oligarchy is taking shape in America of extreme wealth, power and influence that literally threatens our entire democracy, our basic rights and freedoms, and a fair shot for everyone to get ahead.
Americans are being buried under an avalanche of misinformation and disinformation, enabling the abuse of power. The free press is crumbling. Editors are disappearing. Social media is giving up on fact checking. The truth is smothered by lies told for power and for profit.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Well, if you're expecting some sort of subtlety there, Joe Biden did not deliver that. Now, he mentioned no one by name, of course, but it's hard not to think about the billionaires like Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg.
Musk spent at least what, a quarter of a billion dollars to help elect Trump. Zuckerberg just announced that Meta is, in fact, ditching the very fact checking that Biden mentioned. Both are going to attend Trump's inauguration, along with Jeff Bezos and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman.
Now, Biden's warning about what he called the tech industrial complex took up a lot of his speech. He did take a few indirect digs at his successor, also his predecessor, America, but ultimately wished him success.
Biden also touted many of his own accomplishments, getting America through the pandemic, creating jobs, lowering prescription drug prices and costs. But the reality is, right now, most Americans are not happy with how his presidency went, at least according to a new CNN poll, that shows 61% of Americans actually view it as a failure, which means Biden is leaving office with his approval rating matching the lowest of his presidency. One of his advisors telling CNN, we lost the narrative. Well, time will tell if the narrative changes.
Issues that dogged his administration could be seen very differently later on with maybe the benefit of hindsight or historical review like the Israel-Hamas war perhaps. Today, he announced a hostage and ceasefire deal in that conflict that could start getting at least some hostages home as early as this coming Sunday. Now, Trump went on True Social, saying it only happened because of his election win. Well, here was Biden's take on that.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BIDEN: Thank you.
UNKNOWN (voice-over): Who does the history books credit for this, Mr. President? You or Trump?
BIDEN: Is that a joke?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Don't sound like the question was, but sources telling CNN, the Biden team and the Trump team both worked together behind the scenes to get this done. One administration official is telling us that the operation and the cooperation was -- quote -- "almost unprecedented." Even Biden himself alluded to it in his speech tonight when he said -- quote -- "That's how it should be, working together as Americans."
Joining me now CNN analyst and New York Times White House correspondent, Zolan Kanno-Youngs, former State Department spokesperson for the Obama administration, Nayyera Haq, and Republican strategist Brad Todd, who has done some work for hostage families and APEC. Thank you all for being here tonight.
It is a very momentous occasion. It is in progress. People are hopeful that this will be the change and people will actually be able to go home at the very least.
[23:05:00]
Biden, though, was warning Americans about an oligarchy and the power or the concentration of power. This is his last farewell address for the nation. Were you surprised that he was focused on that in part?
ZOLAN KANNO-YOUNGS, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT FOR THE NEW YORK TIMES: Yeah, I was. This speech, in a way, was a departure from other major speeches that we've seen the president give, which recently have really been focused on sort of describing his legislative achievements that he has long felt he has not gotten credit for.
That wasn't the case with this speech. It wasn't just tucking through the different things that he did in his presidency. It wasn't just an effort to define his legacy as a president. It really was more so a warning to defend the democratic institutions that he has spent now decades working and believing in. It was almost twofold, one to describe how he views the American experiment and then also describing the stakes of that American experiment.
NAYYERA HAQ, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST, FORMER STATE DEPARTMENT SPOKESPERSON FOR THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION: Presidents make different choices about their farewell speeches. And to go back to the first one, Washington, who decided not to run for a third term, he also issued three very stark warnings to the American public about how they should proceed in this democracy.
And that's some of the function of how Biden chose to approach this speech. If it's -- it may be right on substance, it may not resonate now, it may -- he didn't win despite having felt and thought these things. But 50 years, 60 years later, will people look back on this as a sign of, okay, in the end, this president did understand the forces that were surrounding the country and challenged the country? He just was not reelected to do anything about it.
COATES: The big force he mentions is social media, which for many presidents would not have been the focus, but he is talking about combating misinformation at a time when, frankly, people are siloed, they're getting information from non-traditional media sources. And he mentions the absence of fact checking, specifically. That might resonate for people even more immediately.
BRAD TODD, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: I don't know. Joe Biden, we know his presidency and his administration coerced and bullied social media companies to change the flow of information.
COATES: Zuckerberg indicated something like that.
TODD: He's just mad that he didn't get his way anymore. He wants a government where you read and see the things that he wants you to read and see. But, you know, the thing I thought was missing most in the speech was contrition. We alluded to the fact that Joe Biden's approval rating is 38. Some polls have it at 36. You'd never know that from listening to it.
He never said, I'll let you down, I know I didn't succeed, I know you're disappointed in me. He also didn't talk about immigration, the issue that probably played more into his defeat than anything. We didn't hear one word.
I find it funny that after four years in office, Joe Biden thinks he did nothing wrong and did no failure. I expected tonight to hear a little bit more of that, sort of a healing bridge speech.
COATES: Did you really -- I mean, I hear -- I hear the point of why you thought you should hear it, but did you really expect Biden to suggest contrition after --
TODD: He --
COATES: He was comparing himself to his, as he would say, the alternative.
TODD: When he ran, he was going to be the healer, he was going to return to normalcy, he was going to -- he was not good. He was trying to be a counter position to what he saw as a divisive partisan administration from Trump. And he's going out the divider. HAQ: This is what he did at the end of the speech, right? That was that missing piece of this is what America is supposed to be. It's about having a fair level playing field. I think he called it an even playing field. That's the promise of America. And that in all the campaign and all the other rhetoric, we just hadn't heard that very direct statement of the American promise. So, I found it to be very welcome.
But the idea that a president should take his last big speech in the White House and apologize, you know, there's -- that's just -- no president does that.
TODD: You got to start where the audience is, though. The audience is very down on Joe Biden. He has to accept that.
KANNO-YOUNGS: I did find it striking though that -- look, Joe Biden, when he came into office, did pledge and promise to bring back a sense of normalcy in government. He's an institutionalist. He has defended these institutions. He had promised to bridge and unite a divided a country.
Four years later, he centered his farewell speech on now saying that there are systematic changes needed on those very democratic institutions. Somebody who came in pledging normalcy and almost, in effect, pledging the status quo as well for government process is now saying that the Supreme Court needs term limits.
COATES: Uh-hmm.
KANNO-YOUNGS: There needs to be a constitutional amendment as well to prevent a president from being immune from crimes, being accused of crimes. I mean, that should also be noted just, you know, four years later, somebody who really throughout their life centered their political identity on defending --
COATES: But the connective tissue on that point -- I want to play for everyone -- I want you to respond to this, Nayyera, as well. But there is a connective tissue. He's -- he's -- without saying it, he's talking about a particular person who was very disruptive to the norms, I think, he was talking about, whether the Supreme Court involved in all. Here's what he had to say about a reference to maybe an unmistakable person.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BIDEN: We need to amend the Constitution to make clear that no president, no president is immune from crimes that he or she commits while in office.
[23:10:00]
President's power is not limited. It's not absolute. And it shouldn't be.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: I wonder who he's talking about.
HAQ: I don't know. It could be somebody that the Supreme Court just gave, you know, quite a few waivers to. And that's ultimately where I think progressive left -- left Biden, because earlier in his administration, they had asked for institutional reform. They said that the Supreme Court was a challenge. Supreme Court reform got turned into a long report. The George Floyd Justice and Policing Act, the filibuster never got busted for that.
So that's where he started losing a big part of his base early on and now has come to recognize some of the systemic challenges that many Americans are feeling, and he's leaving it as his own farewell warning to the country.
TODD: You don't hear Joe Biden or Democrats talking about getting rid of the filibuster now. That's a systemic change that they no longer think is necessary now that the Republicans have a majority in the U.S. Senate, which tells you this was all about partisanship.
I think we give Joe Biden way too much of a pass as a defender of institutions. He's the partisan in chief. He wants what's good for Democrats, and he always has.
HAQ: The irony being that most Democrats wanted Merrick Garland to exercise more power, right? The idea -- I would say Biden is less the partisan and more the norm. I wanted to norm my way back to calm in America. And we are in clearly a time where people are demanding dramatic change, whether it be systemic or partisan. And the normalcy wasn't going to bring people back together.
And that said, given the accusations and the convictions against the sitting president and what we've seen elsewhere in the world, how people have reacted to insurrections --
COATES: Uh-hmm.
HAQ: -- it is not with a multi-year investigation process. It is accountability immediately.
COATES: Partisanship, I mean, certainly, is a hallmark in Washington, D.C. and the post-Watergate world in particular. But Zolan, they have -- Republicans have a trifecta.
KANNO-YOUNGS: Uh-hmm.
COATES: And frankly, as much as you'd like to exercise some bipartisanship, they may not have to in the traditional sense. How is that going to -- how do you think that impacted his address and his warning?
KANNO-YOUNGS: Well, I'm sure -- I mean, I think he is looking at the horizon and sees big changes coming. I think he -- you know, the President Biden as well as the people around him believe that the president-elect means a lot of what he says on the campaign, that he's going to bring massive changes as far as immigration. I think that he talked about a fear also, and he's mentioning it in his farewell address today, for institutions like the Justice Department, the courts, the press as well. So, in a way, this warning came.
But I think your point is also important, you know. Just how much weight and how impactful is a warning when you're on your way out? You know, President Biden, in a way, did center his presidency and will always be linked to Trump. The goal for him was to defeat Trump. He did it once. His aides often said throughout the four years that he was the only one that could do it, and he did not do it.
And now, as you leave office, right, this warning, too many of his supporters will, you know, come at a time where the person that you are warning against is about to take power.
HAQ: If you look at legacies of different presidents, right, Jimmy Carter, having just passed, was deeply unpopular when he served, you know, finished his one term in office. And 50 years later, we look at his foreign policy and national security accomplishments.
COATES: Well, they say that the successor is a direct reflection of how the people viewed the current president. This might be a big indication of what goes from here. Thank you all so much.
Well, President Biden was stressing tonight, the existential threat of climate change has never been clearer. It's a quote. More than a week, a week after the most destructive fires in Southern California history are continuing to burn, the winds are dying down, at least for now. And local officials say the danger, however, is not yet over.
I want to go to CNN's Bill Weir who is in Palisades. Bill, as you have surveyed much of the destruction today, you actually came across a kind of an unusual site. There was a home that seemed to be totally untouched by these fires. Why was this home spared, you think?
BILL WEIR, CNN CHIEF CLIMATE CORRESPONDENT: Well, that was the question that picked our interest. This home behind me went viral on Reddit and other social media channels because it looks like it was just shop for Architectural Digest and every other house on the street has turned to ash.
So, I reached out to the architect of Santa Monica, a guy named Greg Chasen, who says it was a mixture of luck and design. The other neighboring lot on that side, the windward side, is vacant, so they didn't have a burning home on both sides of them. But he also credits the tempered glass windows, the steel roof, the walls that are designed to burn for an hour, the fire smart landscaping, no combustible plants, a lot of pea gravel instead of grass in the front yard there.
[23:14:57]
And then he has this concrete wall instead of a picket fence which protected his house from a burning car. You can see how the aluminum melted. That's like twelve hundred degrees. I talked to Greg about that. He said one part of the plan. But in the end, they're still glad they had it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) GREG CHASEN, SANTA MONICA ARCHITECT: Obviously, it wasn't there because we thought a car was going to be burning next door. But it was a big help in this case. And I think everyone needs to be concerned about the flammability of the fences around their property, a lack of roof vents. We have a fully insulated building envelope without any eaves. That reduced the number of vulnerable areas.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WEIR: There's going to be so much rebuilding, Laura, going forward here. There is so much need. There was a housing crisis before the fires, as you know. But now, you got to figure, people are thinking about shelter in the age of climate change in Southern California in a whole new way. They pay a premium for some of these features here. Hopefully, the prices come down as more people adopt these ideas. The insurance companies, in fact, may make it mandatory going forward.
COATES: I'm sure there's a backlog in trying to get this sort of plan and, of course, the permitting process to get it all done. Bill Weir, thank you so much.
Still ahead, Pam Bondi fielding questions about everything from Jack Smith to pardons and a whole lot of questions. There've been a lot of questions about Kash Patel. So, what exactly did we learn about the kind of A.G. that she will be? We'll talk about it next.
And later, much more on the ceasefire deal to get hostages home and the unprecedented cooperation to get it all done.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:20:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: All right, so truth be told. Some of Trump's cabinet picks are going to have some tough votes. But perhaps not Pam Bondi. She had her confirmation hearing today, and it's almost certain that she'll have some pretty smooth sailing in trying to get that nomination confirmed and become the next attorney general.
Let's examine some of the pressing questions that Democrats did, in fact, have for Bondi today, shall we? First up, election interference.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. MAZIE HIRONO (D-HI): So, I want to ask you a factual question. Who won the 2020 presidential election?
PAM BONDI, ATTORNEY GENERAL NOMINEE, FORMER FLORIDA ATTORNEY GENERAL: Joe Biden is the president of the United States.
HIRONO: Ms. Bondi, is Jack Smith one of those bad prosecutors that you will prosecute as A.G.?
BONDI: Senator, you hesitated a bit when I said the bad ones. Every decision will be made --
(CROSSTALK)
HIRONO: -- the eyes of the beholder. I'm just asking whether you would consider Jack Smith --
BONDI: Senator --
HIRONO: -- to be one of the people. How about Liz Cheney?
BONDI: Senator --
HIRONO: How about Merrick Garland?
BONDI: I am not going to answer hypotheticals. No one has been prejudged nor will anyone be prejudged.
Senator, as I said, the pardons are at the direction of the president. We will look and we will advise. I will look at every case, on a case --
REP. ADAM SCHIFF (D-CA): So, you'll look --
BONDI: Let me finish, on a case by case basis.
SCHIFF: Okay, okay, good. Let me --
BONDI: And I abhor violence to police officers.
SEN. CHRIS COONS (D-DE): What would you do if your career DOJ prosecutors came to you with a case to prosecute, grounded in the facts and law, but the White House directs you to drop the case?
BONDI: Senator, if I thought that would happen, I would not be sitting here today.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: With me sitting here today, Dave Aronberg, former state attorney for Palm Beach County, Florida, of course, who worked with Bondi during her time as the Florida attorney general. He'll be testifying at day two of Bondi's hearing tomorrow. Also, here, Harry Litman, former federal prosecutor and deputy assistant attorney general. And also, Brad Todd is back with us as well.
All right, let me begin with you here, Harry, on this point, because she did not give a yes or no answer to the question of who won the election. That ruffled some feathers in that room. Why did she go that route?
HARRY LITMAN, FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY, FORMER DEPUTY ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL: Well, we know why she went that route. She was a non- controversial nominee, and she's going to get by, anyway.
But look, she wants to be the top federal law enforcement officer in the country. This is a factual question, as Hirono said, that really -- it's not a straight question. It goes directly to our qualifications. Still matters for the cases she'll have. This is the Senate. And besides being snarky on a lot of occasions, you understand some of her answers.
But this, I think, is really disqualifying. You have to be able to answer yes or no questions. You think about previous controversial nominees, they answer the questions. They don't -- they don't try to evade them from the Senate. And, of course, this matter. This is not the stray thing. She needs to be able because she has a history of election denialism. She needs to make that clear. She refused to, mainly because she knew she would get through, anyway.
COATES: Can she compartmentalize this point? I mean, one thing that was said consistently, it wasn't about her qualifications or her credentials, but her ability to say no and push back on a president who has a history of putting his thumb on the scale with his AGs. But on this issue, can she compartmentalize and still be qualified for this office?
DAVE ARONBERG, STATE ATTORNEY, PALM BEACH COUNTY: I think so, Laura, because when she was out doing political rhetoric, saying let's prosecute the prosecutors or doing a press conference with Rudy Giuliani, that was in a different role. That was a role as an advocate.
This is the chief law enforcement officer of the United States. And as someone who has worked with her, I've seen her as a chief law enforcement officer of Florida. So, she can do that. She knows the difference in the roles. And I thought she did pretty well today. She never used the F word, fraud, when it came to the election.
[23:25:00]
She said she saw some things. She went about as far as anyone could go who would be appointed by Donald Trump. She said she accepted the election results. So, I know, I hear what Harry is saying. It's a fact. There was no widespread election fraud. But Donald Trump was never going to nominate someone for attorney general who was going to contradict him on that.
COATES: Well, that's part of the concern, I think, that people have. And we know from confirmation hearings, people will say what they will say to make sure they've got that title in the end. She actually pushed back on that point when she was questioned and made a comment like, I don't have to say anything to you, I'm here to tell you my actual views on this. But should this be the sticking point it is for these senators?
TODD: Well, I will tell you, I think the best thing for the Republican Party, what could happen, is if the Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee got more air time. I thought Pam Bondi humiliated Senator Hirono. She noted that Senator Hirono was the only senator who wouldn't meet with her in advance. She only wanted to use her seven minutes of T.V. time to go viral on the internet. She didn't want to ask serious questions or she'd taken a meeting with Pam Bondi.
COATES: Well, Hirono, on that point, did suggest that she wanted her answers under oath. That was the distinction.
TODD: Every other senator asked questions in private and at length where they could discuss things at length, and then they use their seven minutes. It's just an insult to the entire process. But Senator Hirono is a hack, and she does this all the time.
I thought Pam Bondi was strong. I thought she didn't let Senator Padilla push her around. And when Chris Coons, the senator from Delaware, Democrat, engaged her responsibly, she engaged him intellectually. I thought she did a great job today. That's why she's going to be confirmed.
COATES: Well, you know, who is the --
LITMAN: That's not why she's going to be confirmed.
COATES: Oh.
LITMAN: She's going to be confirmed because she already had the votes. And I just think it's no --
TODD: She's going to get some Democrat votes.
LITMAN: Sure. And she had them already. But it's no credential that she was nasty to other senators. She wants to be the attorney general. She didn't give the Senate their condign role that they're supposed to have.
TODD: She wasn't nasty. She just didn't let the Democrat senators bully her.
LITMAN: She was nasty.
COATES: Well, let me ask you this question because the elephant in the room was Kash Patel.
LITMAN: Yeah.
COATES: I mean, certainly, Pam Bondi got her fair share of questions from the senators. But they were also largely concerned with Kash Patel. Also concerned with the fact that people that she has worked with in private counsel will be under her at the Department of Justice.
The emphasis on Kash Patel, knowing the role of the FBI director in relation to the DOJ, they are part of the investigative bodies that help to aid the prosecutors in their cases and investigations. Were they right to focus on how she'd work with somebody who, in a different role, has articulated things that run counter to what she expressed today?
ARONBERG: Sure, because even though she has the final say when it comes to prosecution, there's an old saying, you can beat the rap, but you can't beat the ride. So, Kash Patel could make things very difficult on individuals, even if Pam Bondi decides not to prosecute them. So, it's important to get her thoughts on the record. And she did go against some of the things that Kash Patel was saying, saying there will be no enemies list inside the Department of Justice. So, I thought she acted in a way that showed that she was above that, above the rhetoric, and was in the role of attorney general.
COATES: You've worked with her. You have praised for her as well. Do you have concerns that what she has shown you thus far could be compromised by the power dynamic of Trump and his attorney general?
ARONBERG: I really believe that even if Donald Trump asks her to do something that is illegal, that she won't go over the line. She'll still be tethered to the law. You know, the last time you saw attorney generals go beyond the law, like Mitchell and Nixon, he was imprisoned. You know, no one wants to be like Mike Nifong, the Duke lacrosse prosecutor. They're all building guardrails for an out of control prosecutor. There are building guardrails for an out-of- control prosecutor.
So, I think she will go close to the line because she is loyal to Trump, but I don't think she'll cross it. She's a 20-year prosecutor and knows the consequences when you go too far.
COATES: Well, we shall see. I mean, a lot of people who have asked for that role have auditioned on television in the past. Bill Barr, for example. They didn't like what it looked like inside. We'll see if she does. Thank you, everyone.
Up next, the agonizing wait for families of hostages held by Hamas. An American, Edan Alexander, is among them. But will this ceasefire deal help get him out? And if so, when? The congressman representing the family and their district, Josh Gottheimer, joins me next.
And later, TikTok is now days away from being banned. It's the 19th. But tonight, there may be new hope for those who try to save it.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:30:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: Tonight, a ceasefire deal in Gaza brings hope for families of the hostages that they may see their loved ones again. The agreement between Israel and Hamas is expected to start this Sunday and will include three stages.
Seven Americans are still being held in Gaza. Four of them are confirmed dead. Three of them are presumed to be alive, including New Jersey native, Edan Alexander. He is an IDF soldier who was stationed near Gaza when he was taken hostage on October 7th, 2023. Despite the deal, his family is still filled with anxiety.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ADI ALEXANDER, FATHER OF EDAN ALEXANDER: He's not on the humanitarian list, and these are the first to go. So, we have to sit tight and see what is exactly happening.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Joining me now, Congressman Josh Gottheimer, a Democrat from New Jersey. Congressman, thank you so much for being here today.
REP. JOSH GOTTHEIMER (D-NJ): Thanks for having me.
COATES: This has been quite a day. The revelations that have occurred with the ceasefire and beyond, unbelievable and, well, a long time coming, frankly, for so many.
GOTTHEIMER: Long time.
[23:34:56]
COATES: You have -- have you heard from the parents of Edan Alexander, and how are they feeling tonight about the possibility that they could be reunited with their son?
GOTTHEIMER: Well, as you know, this overall is incredibly promising.
COATES: Uh-hmm.
GOTTHEIMER: We're not there yet.
COATES: Yeah.
GOTTHEIMER: Right? And there are phases here. Until the last hostages released, until the last American comes home, we won't be there. And, you know, I speak to the family regularly. They're just unbelievable people. They're from my district. They live in that Northern New Jersey. And they're incredibly strong. But I think, you know, we've been here before, where you seem like you get very close --
COATES: Hmm.
GOTTHEIMER: -- and something happens. It is often Hamas that pulls the rug out. And so, you know, until we're there, I think we got to keep focused on just making sure we move this forward.
COATES: It is very hard to have that cautious optimism and at the same time want so badly something to happen. I can only imagine. And you're right about the negotiations and the long process. There is thought that it was the combination of the Biden administration and the incoming administration working together to some degree to try to get where we are right now. Does that give you some level of hope about the prospects of Democrats and Republicans working together?
GOTTHEIMER: Listen, I think this is the way it should be. You've got it in outgoing administration that really built the structure for this deal over many months, working with international partners, and then now, of course, the president-elect working together with the incoming administration. They have now, by the way, for a while been working closely together. And I think that's a good thing, right? This should not be about credit. This should be about getting the hostages home, making sure we can get it, that this can come to an end.
Now, as you know, this is over several phases over the next six weeks. So, there's a lot that can happen here. We've got to make sure this proceed. And even Hamas leadership, I think, today said they'd do it again, right? And so, I think it's a question of whether they would do October 7th again, that they will not stop until there are no Israel and Jewish people, right?
So, you have to keep mindful that we've got to make sure that we protect American interests, our key ally as this process goes on. Of course, you know, continue to make sure we stop all terrorist activity and get humanitarian aid into the region, right?
COATES: Yeah.
GOTTHEIMER: So, a lot of goals while we're getting the hostages out here and, as you know, in these phases, continue. And then, of course, the last phase is reconstruction. What happens as Israel pulls out in phases out of Gaza?
COATES: Uh-hmm.
GOTTHEIMER: What will -- and then what will it look like afterwards, right? So, there's a lot of work to be done between now and over the next six weeks.
COATES: And, in fact, the bulk of that work will be under really the administration of Donald Trump.
GOTTHEIMER: Right.
COATES: Obviously, they've worked together. I assume you would think that they both deserve some level of -- I guess credit is the wrong word, but in the spirit of trying to figure out who has to carry the water now. Do you have confidence that Trump will be able to effectively govern and be at the helm for those next phases?
GOTTHEIMER: He has made it very clearly that he wants the hostages to be home, and that he wants to crush the terrorists. And I think that's all -- you know, I agree with that. And, by the way, again, when it comes to credit, everybody can get credit if this happens, right? The hostages get home. It's not about credit. It's about getting these families home, especially the Americans. It's making sure that Edan Alexander is home with his family and the other Americans are home.
COATES: You know, you're on the House Intelligence Committee, and there were some changes. Tonight, Speaker Mike Johnson actually removed Mike Turner as chairman. And then you have your fellow Democrat, Jim Himes, who hinted that the move could be to appease the incoming president, Donald Trump. Johnson, of course, has denied that because it's an independent decision. Are you concerned that lawmakers are already coming under, perhaps, the fear of reprisal or trying to ingratiate themselves to him? GOTTHEIMER: Listen, I think Mike Turner is deeply respected by Democrats and Republicans on the committee and has -- and led in a way that really brings people together. The Intelligence Committee is not a very partisan place. It's a place where we go and do our work to protect America's national security and work with the Intelligence Community.
And I think whoever comes next, whoever the speaker decides to appoint, I hope continues that spirit, it's very, very important, and not -- doesn't bow. We have a responsibility as Congress to oversee the Intelligence Community. That's the responsibility. That's a very solemn and important responsibility, and to be briefed regularly. And we want to make sure you keep that separation of powers. It's very important overall.
I think as Congress goes forward, we have a job to do. And part of our independent job in the Constitution is to be a check on the administration. I hope that leadership in the House and the speaker and others remember that, how important that is.
COATES: Thank you so much for joining us today, congressman.
GOTTHEIMER: Thanks for having me.
COATES: Still ahead, does Donald Trump have an ace up his sleeve to save TikTok?
[23:39:58]
Details of the new decision he is now considering and the major invite he's reportedly extending to TikTok CEO.
Plus, what do the TikTok creators think about all this? A Texas rancher who has made quite the business for himself as "Cattle Guy" is live with us next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: In less than four days, one of the most popular social media apps in the entire world may be out of reach for Americans. You know, I'm talking about TikTok. It's at a drop off U.S. app stores this Sunday unless, of course, it sells itself to an American buyer or the Supreme Court blocks the law that will ban it.
[23:45:01]
It's not clear if either of those last-ditch options are actually going to happen. So, is it bye-bye to TikTok? Well, now there's a new wrinkle of sorts. Tonight, CNN is learning that Donald Trump is considering an executive order that would save it, which would allow more time to find a potential buyer. And that's not all. The New York Times is reporting that the CEO of TikTok will be attending Trump's inauguration.
But even if Trump succeeded with the executive order on even day one of his administration, it would be a day too late. Remember, the ban goes into effect on Sunday. Now, Congress passed this law with overwhelming bipartisan support. Many lawmakers think that China's government could manipulate content or get data from American users since TikTok is Chinese-owned. This is a case that has huge implications for national security and free speech and freedom of association and politics.
But it's also economic. A hundred and seventy million Americans use TikTok. According to the company, around seven million American small businesses are on it. They would lose $1 billion in revenue in just one month of a ban. As for the two million creators who use the app to make a living, they would suffer $300 million in total loss earnings in just a month.
One of those creators is Brian Firebaugh. He's a Texas cattle rancher with more than 450,000 followers and one heck of a beard. He's also one of several TikTokers suing the government over the law, arguing that it violates the First Amendment rights.
Brian joins me now. Brian, I know you're known as "Cattle Guy." It's good to see you tonight. Thank you for joining us. I have to ask you, if TikTok goes away for American users on Sunday, tell me how that would change your life.
BRIAN FIREBAUGH, TIKTOK CREATOR SUING OVER PENDING BAN: Honestly, as a first- generation rancher, it's almost crippling. TikTok is how I reach our customers. They're the customers that are buying our beef, that is basically putting the roof over our head. Those are the customers that are buying our cattle.
It's very, very hard as a first-generation business, just in general, just in your marketing aspects. And so, TikTok has been such a fantastic marketing platform for us as a first-generation ranch. And so, essentially, if you take it away, you've taken away our megaphone for reaching our customers.
COATES: Did you expect, when you first started using it, that it would have such an impact on your livelihood?
FIREBAUGH: Absolutely not. No. I originally started as just a way to kind of help advocate for agriculture. It's just a way to provide some education regarding, let's say, the Texas longhorn cattle out there because there's a lot of myths and such. And in the process of it, it just grew so much. That was the great thing about TikTok, is its algorithm.
So, we reached a lot of people that wanted to hear what it is that we had to say. And ultimately, at the end of the day, when we showed up at the farmers market and we said, hey, look, we're here, we had people driving in from out of the state to show up to a farmer's market to buy our beef, which was just absolutely incredible, and it was not expected.
COATES: You know, there's this balancing act at the Supreme Court. It says it's weighing. On the one hand, the government says that there are national security concerns with the app. On the other hand, they're saying, hey, there are other things you can use in social media. You could use those instead. How do you see this balance? Are you concerned at all about the government's thought that there really is a national security concern?
FIREBAUGH: No, because if it was truly a national security concern, let's face it, President Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris, and Donald Trump would not be actively campaigning on that out. Let's -- I mean, we need to be honest about this. And when we start looking at it, is this truly -- are we truly scared as the nation? Are we truly scared of our national security? I'm scared of our data security rights within our own country, within our own government.
COATES: Hmm.
FIREBAUGH: You know, you're telling me that you're just concerned about it going over to China. Well, hello. We are Americans. We get to choose where our data goes, as many Americans right now have chosen to go over to a Chinese app. We need to understand that we're going to give it to wherever we want it. The big thing, though, is truly -- Oh, go ahead. I'm sorry.
COATES: No, no, I want you to finish your point. It's an important one.
FIREBAUGH: Well, the thing for me is understanding it's -- I do not feel that this is truly a concern over our data security or our national security, but I believe that this is predominantly the federal government wanting to control the narrative. And if they can't control the narrative, they're just simply going to shut it down.
COATES: Brian Firebaugh, we're talking about days away from that happening.
[23:50:00]
Thank you so much for joining us and sharing your experience.
FIREBAUGH: Yes, ma'am. Thank you. It's an honor.
COATES: Up next, they have dedicated their lives to helping the homeless. But now, they are the ones without a home. And yet the work continues. The inspiring story of one Altadena couple's selfless dedication even now.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: They have spent their adult lives working to help the homeless. And now, they have lost their own home in the blaze that consumed much of the Altadena community. That's the story of the couple I'm about to speak to. You'd think they'd drop everything to get their own lives together. But that is not the case.
The Ruffins are social workers. Their clients, the homeless of Skid Row, people who most society tries to avoid. Not the Ruffins.
[23:55:00] They went straight back to work, helping those who need it most. Anthony Ruffin telling the L.A. Times, "I got my own problems, but I'm fortunate. So many of the people down there on Skid Row are dealing with addiction and homelessness and don't have some of the resources I have. I mean, I got a motel room right now, and they don't have that."
An incredible act at a time when Anthony is mourning his own home. And it wasn't just any home. The home was purchased back in the 1970s by a Black man, Carl Williams (ph), who found certain neighborhoods in L.A. were off limits to Black people, but not the west side of Altadena. Williams raised his family there with his wife Myrtle (ph), eventually selling the home to his stepson, Anthony Ruffin.
Ruffin told the L.A. Times he worked two jobs to keep the property, knowing how much it meant to his family. And now, it is gone.
Anthony Ruffin and Jonni Miller join me now. Thank you both for being here. Your story is so powerful and moving to me. I'm so glad that both of you are here to share it because Anthony, you are face to face with homeless individuals every single day, and I wonder now, did it ever occur or do you ever think that you might end up in that same situation?
ANTHONY RUFFIN, ADVOCATE FOR THE HOMELESS WHO LOST HIS OWN HOME IN L.A. WILDFIRES: Well, I always knew that I was a sickness or tragedy away from being homeless myself. So that's why I give to the homeless population the way I give to the homeless population, because I understand that people are just a paycheck away or a crisis away from being homeless themselves. And they need somebody there to help them guide them through the process. So, I'm there all the time to help with that process.
COATES: I mean, the strength that you have to devoting yourself and you, where you speak reminds you of that phrase, but for the grace of God go I, knowing how vulnerable so many people are not only in this economy, but in life.
And you have been devoting yourself to others. Even when you have just lost so much, you're still out there. What has continued to motivate you to do that?
RUFFIN: Well, I have people that I'm working with, that I have appointments for housing and stuff like that. That needs to happen. Although I am homeless and in between housing right now, my situation is temporary, but their situation is permanent. And it depended on me to come through and keep my word and do what I say I'm going to do. And that's what I do because I'm a beacon of hope for people. I want to continue to be that beacon of hope for people.
COATES: Jonni, just hearing what he has to say, this is so inspiring to think about. And just to a man of his word, when many would understand for both of you to stop at a time like this. And yet you keep going. And Jonni, you were able to save your dog and one of your cats. But you also lost another cat and two chickens to the fire. Can you describe what else you have lost? JONNI MILLER, ADVOCATE FOR THE HOMELESS WHO LOST HER OWN HOME IN L.A. WILDFIRES: I lost a lot of family heirlooms that I feel like my family entrusted me to take care of and pass on. And I feel like I've let my family down. I lost a ring. That was my grandmother's, that my grandfather had given her as an anniversary gift. And they're all sentimental things but they're things that I can't replace. And so that's what I feel I've lost. And I miss our other cat very, very much because it was such a fun cat, very interesting cat.
COATES: Jonni, that makes me -- my heart hurt to think, but you should know, of course, you are the culmination of all of that legacy. And I hope you don't forget and lose sight of what is important. I know it's hard in these times, Anthony, to think about what you've lost physically, but could you help and share with the world right now the history of your home and why it has been so special to both of you and, of course, your family?
RUFFIN: Oh, my father, I call him my father, bought that home in 1972, with a bunch of other African Americans on that side of the town. I've been living in that home since 1978.
COATES: Hmm.
RUFFIN: A lot of my cousins lived in that two-bedroom house, sleeping in bunk beds and us up under bunk beds, and it was love up in that house. Um, my father worked really, really hard and sacrificed a lot.
[23:59:58]
My mom worked hard and sacrificed a lot, cleaned homes and everything else, sacrificed so we could have somewhere to be, in a safe neighborhood. And it was a neighborhood of people that cared about people. The Leeds around the corner, the Phillips is on a corner, the Wallaces, the graves down the street, Robert across the street. Lilly and Steve down the street.
And I could walk down to these people's house today and get something to eat if I wanted to. They watched -- they raised me and watched me grow up in that neighborhood. And being in that neighborhood when I was younger, to walk around and eat fruits from every tree that I wanted to --
COATES: Wow.
RUFFIN: -- it was just a great place to be and it still is a great place to be where I can sit back and somebody will be riding a horse down the street. They'll let you jump on a horse and ride the horse with them for a little while.
(LAUGHTER)
It's just that type of place up there. And it's a beautiful place to be.
COATES: Well, Anthony Ruffin, Jonni Miller, it's no wonder that a great place to be had such great people there as well, like yourselves. Thank you so much.
And thank you all for watching. More coverage after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
