Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

Trump Purges Key Officials at DHS; Attorney General to Testify Today on Capitol Hill; Israelis Head to Polls to Elect New Government. Aired 6-6:30a ET

Aired April 09, 2019 - 06:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JIM ACOSTA, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: A full-scale purge. The president has fired the Secret Service director.

[05:59:29] UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The president is removing people, because they refuse to violate the law.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He's been undermined. It's not surprising loyalty would become verification.

MANU RAJU, CNN SENIOR CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: All eyes on Bill Barr as he comes to Capitol Hill. Democratic members plan to ask about the Mueller report.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What's on everybody's mind is how much is he going to redact?

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN CHIEF LEGAL ANALYST: Barr can duck. He'll say, "We're still evaluating."

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Get the shot, end of regulation. Virginia with the all-time turnaround title.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ANNOUNCER: This is NEW DAY with Alisyn Camerota and John Berman.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: The show is starting.

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: Just a few wardrobe adjustments, and we're ready.

BERMAN: Welcome, everyone. To our viewers in the United States and all around the world, this is NEW DAY. It's Tuesday, April 9, 6 a.m. here in New York. You just saw it there at the end of the open. Virginia didn't lose. They did not lose.

CAMEROTA: Is that the headline?

BERMAN: Everyone thought Virginia was going to lose. You know why? Because that's what they do when they get to the tournament. But they didn't. They ended up getting all the way to the finals and winning it in overtime. So congratulations to the Cavaliers. No one thought you could do it, including me.

All right. This morning, near unprecedented upheaval in the Trump administration, specifically the Department of Homeland Security and any agency that handles immigration.

You can see the gravity and chaos in the situation by the quotes coming from inside the administration itself and the president's own party. One senior White House official calls it a near systematic purge. A senior administration official tells Jake Tapper the president just wants to separate families. He ordered the closure of the border at El Paso and even personally told border agents to ignore the law.

And a day after forcing Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen to resign, more officials are almost certainly on the way out as soon as today.

White House adviser and anti-immigration hawk Stephen Miller seems to be consolidating power, which is making senior Republicans none too happy. In an extraordinary statement to the "The New York Times," Senator Chuck Grassley said of the White House on immigration, "They haven't accomplished a whole lot, so they need to find some way to make themselves look important."

CAMEROTA: And in just hours, Attorney General William Barr will be in the hot seat on Capitol Hill. House Democrats are expected to grill Barr over the Mueller report. He will surely be asked about his four- page summary of the special counsel's report, that some on Mueller's team say does not adequately portray their findings.

Let's start with CNN's Joe Johns. He is live for us at the White House. Another busy day in Washington -- Joe.

JOE JOHNS, CNN SENIOR WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT: That's right, Alisyn. We've certainly got a lot going on here at the White House.

Now, what appears to be a wave of people exiting the Homeland Security Department as the president, essentially, moves in a different direction.

But in an administration where we've come to expect this kind of upheaval, what seems to be most remarkable is the back story. The reporting from my colleagues right here at CNN that the president may have been giving his subordinates orders to violate or disobey the law.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JOHNS (voice-over): One official calls it a near systematic purge at the Department of Homeland Security. Secret Service director Randolph Alles ousted by President Trump a day after he forced Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen to resign.

The official tells CNN two other top officials are likely headed out soon. The moves angering the most senior Republican in the Senate. Chuck Grassley expressing his concerns to "The Washington Post": "The president has to have some stability. He's pulling the rug out from the very people that are trying to help him."

Stephen Miller, the president's hardline senior advisor, influenced at least some of the changes.

REP. KATHLEEN RICE (D-NY): How about Stephen Miller asked him to appoint him as the secretary of DHS? Let him explain to the American people why he wants to go back to ripping babies out of their mothers' arms. Own it.

JOHNS: The change is a clear sign the president intends to intensify his anti-immigrant policies. CNN has learned that the White House now wants to force migrants at the border into a binary choice: stay together in detention or be separated from their kids.

The zero-tolerance policy that resulted in mass separations last year was roundly criticized, but CNN has learned in recent months President Trump has been pushing to resume and expand the policy, even for legal asylum seekers, believing it deters migrants.

A senior official adding, "He just wants to separate families." Adding, "The president refuses to understand that the Department of Homeland Security is constrained by the laws."

In a meeting with top officials two weeks ago, a source present at the meeting tells CNN the president was, quote, "ranting and raving" and ordered top aides to close the port of El Paso, Texas. Secretary Nielsen warning the move would be dangerous. Two sources in the room say the president responded, "I don't care."

(END VIDEOTAPE)

JOHNS: Meanwhile, a federal judge in California has moved to block the Trump policy of returning some asylum seekers to Mexico. The president, of course, has objected to that.

The president is expected today to meet with the president of Egypt, which on any other day might be the big headline. However, a lot of eyes here at the White House will be on the hearing on Capitol Hill, where the attorney general is testifying -- Alisyn.

CAMEROTA: Joe, thank you very much for all of that.

Joining us now is CNN political analyst Seung Min Kim. She interviewed Senator Chuck Grassley about the DHS purge for "The Washington Post."

Seung Min, that is a fascinating interview that you did with Senator Grassley. So he expressed deep concerns to you about this purge. What did he say?

[06:05:06] SEUNG MIN KIM, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Exactly. Well, a lot of it does come from the fact that some of the people on the target list for this DHS purge actually worked for him.

Director Francis Cissna, who leads the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Agency, had been detailed to the Senate Judiciary Committee when Grassley was the chairman, before he came to his current job. And there have been other names at USCIS who have been floated as potential targets that had worked for Grassley for a very long time.

So he knows these people very well. He knows their abilities and what they're able to do at the agency. So he was very concerned that these people could be on their way out.

He said, these are the people -- he told me the point that he was trying to make to the administration, to the president, is that "These are the exact people who are trying to accomplish your immigration agenda. They're in position to do that. There is no reason to eliminate them just because some other -- some other policies aren't working. And these are the people who you need in place. And you can't pull the rug out from under them."

CAMEROTA: I mean, it also seemed to concern him that he tried to communicate with chief of staff Mick Mulvaney about this, who didn't seem familiar with these folks.

But I also want to say, about Stephen Miller, he expressed criticism of this top White House aide. And let me read what you write in your piece. What Grassley told you is, quote, "'I think it would be hard for him to demonstrate he's accomplished anything for the president,' Grassley said. When asked to elaborate, the Senator chuckled and added, quote, 'It's pretty hard to elaborate on it when there hasn't been any accomplishments.'"

I mean, he couldn't put a finer point on how he feels about Stephen Miller.

KIM: Exactly. I mean, Grassley is a blunt person. He will tell you what he thinks. But obviously, a lot of this comes from the reporting by CNN, "The Washington Post," and others, about Miller's influence in at least some of these departures that we've seen since late last week.

Obviously, had a role in kind of the abrupt departure, or the abrupt pulled nomination of Ron Vitiello over at Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Obviously, he is one of the forces in the administration that's been pushing for a tougher direction.

But, once word got out that he may be -- he may be eyeing Director Cissna for a potential departure, I mean, that appeared to be too far over the line for Senator Grassley and was really blunt with me. I mean, I asked him three times versions of that question. You see two of the answers there. And, you know, what do you mean by this? And he was pretty clear that was the point he wanted to convey.

CAMEROTA: I mean, it also sounds like, from all of the reporting over the past 24 hours, Stephen Miller worked to undermine Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen, and Stephen Miller won. I mean, he's on the ascent now, as is his world view.

KIM: And clearly. I mean, we have reporting recently that in a recent Oval Office meeting, the president kind of looked around and said -- and pointed to Stephen Miller and said he's kind of now the point person in charge of immigration initiatives. Presumably, that also means nominations and the personnel at these key agencies that are overlooking these policies.

But what you're seeing right now from the president, from the rest of the administration, is a real frustration, kind of throwing what sticks -- or throwing everything at the wall and see what sticks in terms of containing this -- containing this crisis at the border.

But what you're seeing internally from Nielsen and others is that they're trying to make the case that they are constrained, that the administration is constrained by laws. And obviously, it's unclear that the president is getting that message.

CAMEROTA: Seung Min Kim, thank you very much for sharing your great reporting with us this morning -- John.

BERMAN: All right. In just a few hours, Attorney General William Barr will face lawmakers on Capitol Hill. This is a huge moment for him in Congress. The first time he'll face questions at all since the Mueller report was completed, and the first time since members of the Mueller team started telling people that Barr's summary did not adequately portray their findings and that their conclusions were worse for the president than Barr led on.

CNN's Sunlen Serfaty live in Capitol Hill. And Sunlen, you know, Democrats have had this date circled on their calendar.

SUNLEN SERFATY, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: That's right, John. This is such a big moment today.

The attorney general is actually on the Hill to testify about something entirely different, the Department of Justice's budget. But this comes right in the middle of the intense battle between the attorney general and Capitol Hill over access to the Mueller report.

This just gives Democrats a huge opportunity today that they've already signaled that they are going to run with to ratchet up the pressure, to get the full report and the underlying evidence.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

SERFATY (voice-over): With the Mueller report still private, the attorney general goes before the public. In just hours, William Barr begins two days of testify before appropriations subcommittees in the House and Senate.

Today's hearing is Democrats' first chance to grill Barr since his four-page memo about Mueller's nearly 400-page report.

REP. MATT CARTWRIGHT (D-PA): We're going to know a lot more about Mr. Barr's thinking process and why he did what he did and why he didn't do more.

I hope that he takes a very sparing approach to his redactions, because he knows that everybody is going to want to know what's behind the black ink.

[06:10:07] SERFATY: House Appropriations Chairwoman Nita Lowey planning to call Barr's handling of Mueller's report unacceptable, saying it seems to cherry-pick to draw the most favorable conclusion possible for the president.

And Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Jose Serrano planning to address reports that several of Mueller's investigators felt Barr's summary, quote, "understates the level of malfeasance by the president and his advisers." Barr's memo said Mueller could not establish conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia and could not make a final determination about obstruction of justice.

SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY): There is no good reason not to make the report public.

REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA): There's an easy answer to this. Release the Mueller report as soon as possible.

SERFATY: Since Mueller ended his nearly two-year-long investigation last month, Democrats have been pushing to get the full report. The Justice Department says Barr will release a redacted version by mid- April. Barr has promised to be as transparent as he can.

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): When his report comes to you, will you share it with us as much as possible?

WILLIAM BARR, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL: Consistent with regulations and the law, yes.

SERFATY: The Tjerryhe attorney general will also face the House Judiciary Committee May 2. But for Chairman Jerry Nadler, hearing from Barr is not enough. He wants to talk to Mueller.

REP. JERRY NADLER (D-NY): We'll probably want to call Mueller to discuss it.

Reading the report and the underlying evidence will give us more information as to what questions we should ask Mueller or any of the other people who work with him.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SERFATY: Chairman Nadler has not spoken to Barr since the committee voted to authorize a subpoena last week for the full report and, of course, the underlying evidence. Now, there has, of course, not issued the subpoena yet but says he will do it soon, unless Barr provides what they've demanded -- John.

BERMAN: All right. Sunlen Serfaty for us up on Capitol Hill. Thank you, Sunlen. Want to bring in CNN political analyst David Gregory.

David, the miracle of timing. This is an Appropriations Committee hearing, the kind that are normally supposed to be boring. This will not be boring. I mean, this is the first time Barr will testify since he got the report at all and, notably, the first time, just five days ago, that everyone started reporting that Mueller's team is upset, because they think Barr is not adequately portraying the findings in their summary.

DAVID GREGORY, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Right. So you've got the specter of the attorney general inserting himself into the conclusion of this two-year investigation. And on what basis? I mean, that's what I want to know. That is what is so fascinating.

To figure out why on the big question, aside from what Mueller concluded, that there was no conspiracy, which is very important, that there was interference by the Russians but there was no nexus with the Trump campaign. That was a huge question that Mueller answered, according to Barr.

But on this next question of, did the president seek to interfere in this investigation, why, first of all, did Mueller stop short of making a conclusion. And then why is it that Barr felt, without any investigation on his part whatsoever, that he could come in at the 11th hour and draw that conclusion and say that there was no obstruction, after he'd written a memo before he ever got this job, saying the president could never be charged with obstruction of justice because all of those decisions would be within his executive power. There's a lot you want to ask him, just starting there.

BERMAN: Yes. Very specific questions, too.

No. 1, did Robert Mueller ask you to come to a prosecutorial conclusion in your summary, yes or no? That's a simple question, which I imagine Barr will answer. Yes or no.

Or how much is Robert Mueller helping you now with the redactions in this report, which by the way, you will release in the next couple days?

GREGORY: And Mueller, we know in his court filings, has redacted a lot of material up till now. So you can imagine getting a redacted report based on, whether it's grand jury testimony, ongoing investigations, peripheral investigations, intelligence information, which is relatively straightforward, although we know how zealous intelligence agencies can be with redactions and keeping material classified that could be so watered-down that Congress would not be satisfied. Then they could press and they could sue, and this could go to the courts about how much of this information they could ultimately get.

But here, of course, is the rub in all of this. There is a compelling interest by the public, No. 1. Two, by Congress, which has, as part of its own job description, to find out whether there was obstruction of justice, whether there was an abuse of power by the president. They're the ones who have to make this determination.

So it wasn't just Barr though, right? We know Rod Rosenstein, who was overseeing the investigation, according to Barr, agreed with him that there shouldn't be obstruction. Certainly, you'd want to know more about that and how they reached that conclusion. But this tension between the idea that, well, nobody was charged, so

we shouldn't see this information, Congress still has a unique role to play here.

BERMAN: Absolutely. And the questions will be expansive today. I'm very curious how far Barr goes in his actions. David Gregory, thanks. Stick around.

GREGORY: Sure.

[06:15:02] BERMAN: We'll talk to you again in a little bit -- Alisyn.

CAMEROTA: OK, John. At this hour, Israelis are heading to the polls to elect a new government. Prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu facing the toughest challenge of his political career while trying to fend off multiple corruption probes.

CNN's Oren Liebermann is live in Jerusalem with more. What's the scene there, Oren?

OREN LIEBERMANN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Alisyn, we're at one of hundreds of polling places across the country. This one here in Jerusalem, and there are, of course, political parties trying to rally voters in the final minutes, the final hours of this campaign.

One of the ultra-orthodox parties is over here to my shoulder. There are, of course, signs here for Prime Minister Netanyahu's Likud Party. Both Netanyahu and his rival, his former chief of staff, Benny Gantz, have mounted a furious finish to this campaign.

The last round of election polls released on Friday shows this to be a very close race between Netanyahu and Gantz. And they're both working to get out all of those last votes to the last possible seconds.

In fact, Netanyahu made an appearance at a market yesterday, saying he's behind. Now, the polls show this as very close, but he wants to play that underdog card. It worked for him very well in 2015. It was a very good get-out-the-vote move for him, and he's surged into the lead. It seems to be what he's trying again here, as well as social media to try to get out his vote. But he knows what he's up against. A party that has been polling ahead most of the race, including into the election weekend and onto this election day, this Tuesday here.

So what happens from now? Well, we're about halfway through the voting day, a little less perhaps. In eight and a half hours, the polls will close. There has been a steady trickle here behind me. The Central Elections Committee says numbers are down about 2 percent, but there's plenty of time to make that number up. John, at 10 p.m. local, the polls close. We get our first look at the exit polls, and then actually results start coming in. And we'll see who's really in the lead here.

BERMAN: All right. Oren Lieberman, for us, it will be a long day and long night for you. Thank you for being with us this morning.

So yes, Virginia, there a national champion. The University of Virginia celebrating its first ever national basketball title. Andy Scholes has more on the overtime thriller live from Minneapolis.

Andy, some of us thought it would never happen for Virginia.

ANDY SCHOLES, CNN SPORTS: John, this was one of the best championship games, I mean, we've ever seen. It was just emotional swing after emotional swing. And in the end, Virginia getting redemption.

You remember, they were the joke of the tournament last year after becoming the first team ever to lose to a 16-seed. Well, that loss now a distant memory.

And this game against Texas Tech, an absolute nail biter. Under 45 seconds to go, Virginia was up by one. And Jarrett Culver going to get the layup to go to put Texas Tech up by one.

The Red Raiders were then up by three with just 15 seconds left. And the Cavaliers star, De'Andre Hunter, knocking down a clutch three to tie the game. And for the eighth time in championship game history, we would go to overtime.

In the extra period, Hunter again hitting a big three, as Virginia takes the lead. And they never give it back. Hunter scoring a career high 27 points in the game. Cavaliers win this one, 85-77. Just an incredible turnaround for the school.

Kyle Guy named the tournament's most outstanding player. And I caught up with him on the court after he helped cut down the nets.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SCHOLES: What's this feeling like, going from, you know, the joke of the tournament to champions?

KYLE GUY, FINAL FOUR MOST OUTSTANDING PLAYER: Yes. You know, to fight through that humiliation, that embarrassment that we felt, for the ultimate redemption story, like they're saying, you know, it feels great. And I'm so excited for this team, for my family, and for the -- you know, Charlottesville, the University of Virginia.

DE'ANDRE HUNTER, VIRGINIA GUARD: We lost in the first round of last year to a 16 seed, but we just won the national championship. So I mean, I don't feel like there's much people can say now.

GUY: We've been in their shoes, the way they're feeling right now, different types of ways. To be the first to do something in history on the bad side, and to come back next year and do it on the good side of history means everything.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHOLES: And the students in Charlottesville flooding the streets last night after the game to celebrate. Virginia, champions for the first time in their history.

And I'll tell you what, guys. The way this team didn't run from what happened last year, they continued to talk about it. Talk about the embarrassment, say how it brought them closer together. They used it as motivation. Well, it certainly worked, as now they are champions.

And you know, you don't want to talk about this game and not, you know, send our thoughts out to Texas Tech. Because those kids, they played their hearts out last night, and it was just one incredible championship game.

BERMAN: That game went on and on. It would not end.

And Andy, you were right. I was really interested to see how much that loss from last year was still in their minds, even after they won. In their interviews with you, that was really interesting.

SCHOLES: Yes, they never stopped talking about it, which I found fascinating. Because you know, John, in these instances, a lot of times we see teams say, "Oh, that was last year. We don't want to talk about it anymore." But not this Virginia team. Props to them for using it as motivation.

BERMAN: They are winners.

CAMEROTA: I mean, I also will say, I think that part of why it was in their mind was because Andy said, "How do you feel about not being a joke?" So I feel like Andy's questions didn't allow them to forget it.

[06:20:05] All right. Meanwhile, President Trump cleaning house. He's purging top immigration officials. What does this mean for his hardline anti-immigrant policies?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BERMAN: This morning, upheaval in the Trump administration: a systematic purge of officials in homeland security with the president pushing for the people who work for him to bend, if not break, the law, telling border agents to ignore judges. And one senior administration official tells Jake Tapper, "He just wants to separate families."

Let's bring back Seung Min Kim, David Gregory and Margaret Talev joins us, senior White House correspondent for Bloomberg News. And Margaret, I think it's really interesting, No. 1, the heads rolling in homeland security with more, perhaps, to come, but even more interesting, these leaks coming from inside about what the president has been pushing for.

Jake Tapper with remarkable reporting, that he told border agents to ignore judges. And people inside the administration say that the president just wants to separate families, going back to that policy which created so much controversy, bipartisan controversy last year.

MARGARET TALEV, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Yes, John, that's right. And, you know, when you have leaks like these, they come from sort of two categories that might seem at odds with one another. One category are the people inside who are actually very concerned about this and want people to know what's going on so they can try to stop it through Congress or public opinion. [06:25:07] And the other are the group inside the president's circle

who want this message out, want people to understand what he's trying to do, and are trying to message to the base that the president is going to stop at nothing, unless the courts force him to, to fulfill his campaign promises. And I think you're seeing a little bit of both right now.

CAMEROTA: David Gregory, one of the most bizarre things about hearing the president wants to bring back family separations is that he, from the reporting, thinks it works. That's not what the numbers suggest.

The evidence, the actual hard numbers, the real numbers, facts, suggested it did not work to cut down on any kind of border crossings or to act as a deterrent. I'll just throw them up so that everybody can see them. Here -- here it is.

They started in October 2017 quietly, secretly, separating families. They didn't announce it until April of 2018. But you can see the numbers fluctuate up and down.

And when they started it quietly, the two months after that, the numbers went up after that, and from that point on, they went up and down, up and down.

So whatever he thinks, I mean, if this is anything beyond just punitive, David -- and maybe it is just punitive, because Stephen Miller doesn't like immigrants -- but the numbers don't suggest this is a deterrent.

GREGORY: Well, there's a recklessness about their desire to deal with a real problem. You know? I mean, there's no discipline. There -- there is an impulsivity to the president and to Stephen Miller and others who say, "Well, we have this promise. We have to crack down on the borders. We've got to stop asylum seekers from flooding the border." And the numbers are up.

And those family members who were coming with children, it is up. And it's appalling because of the conditions they're exposing themselves to.

But you're right: the original proposition was, "Oh, yes, if we separate families, they won't keep coming." So imagine the desperation, imagine the circumstances that would compel families to think, "It's still worth it. We still have to try to get to America."

That's the problem here that goes beyond a president's desire to look tough against immigrants, and to appear as a nationalist before his political base. It's try to figure out a way to solve the problem.

And again, the opportunity to do that with Congress in a thoughtful way is still available. But instead, this -- I mean, we spend all this time talking about the Mueller administration. How about the president telling his advisers and firing people who say, "You know, Mr. President, we have to follow the law, whether you want it or not. That's what we have to do on the border." BERMAN: That is one of the most astounding things to try to imagine.

You were talking about imagining what these families are going through, David. Absolutely.

But imagine being a border agent in California last week, Seung Min, and being told by the president of the United States, "Ignore the judges. Ignore the judges. Ignore the law." The president telling someone who works in the government to ignore the law.

And their supervisors, apparently, according to Jake, had to go in after and say, "No, no, no, no, no. You -- don't listen to the president here. You follow the law."

KIM: Yes. The president and his advisers are really stretching the legal boundaries of what is possible in order to contain these numbers. And you just see that frustration boiling over in the policies that they're considering, clearly, with -- with the president's reported directive to the border agents.

Also, we're reporting that the administration is again, in terms of reconsidering the family separation policy, what the administration is calling a binary choice. Either choose to stay detained with your children longer or be separated from them.

I mean, that is -- that seems to be an impossible choice for these migrant families. And if that's instituted, I'd expect legal challenges, as well.

And that's why -- that's what we're seeing a lot with the purge of DHS officials that began late last week. There has been clear boiling frustration from the president, particularly since we saw the March numbers, how they topped 100,000 at the border in March. And kind of the administration's advisers really grappling for what to do here.

CAMEROTA: One of the very interesting things, Margaret -- and this comes from Seung Min's reporting -- is that Republicans are starting to speak out against the president's plans.

So John Cornyn, Senator Cornyn is speaking out, Senator Grassley. I'll just read a little snippet from him about how he feels about Stephen Miller and that gang that likes family separations. Chuck Grassley told Seung Min, "They haven't accomplished a whole lot, so they need to find some other way to make themselves look important."

TALEV: Ouch, yes.

CAMEROTA: I mean, that -- this is -- this is notable, I think, Margaret. Because you know, the fissures that -- between the -- in the Republican leadership, we don't see that often.

TALEV: Well, that's right. The president's pushing of the limit is kind of a constant stress test on his own party in Congress. And this is a good example of that.

And if you're looking at the people who have either already been pushed out or who, all of our reporting suggests are king of on the chopping block next, it's, you know, half a dozen or more officials who have a few things in common.

They worked for President Bush. Maybe they stayed through the Obama years. Or they were brought in or elevated by John Kelly or Kirstjen Nielsen.

[06:30:00]