Return to Transcripts main page
Anderson Cooper 360 Degrees
Supreme Court Blocks Obama's Immigration Plan; Trump Struggles to Explain Clinton Server Hack Claim; Clinton Knocks Trump's Scotland Trip; Sit-In Ends; Lawmakers Gets Personal In Plea For Gun Control; House Dems Vow To Continue Push For Gun Control; Police Van Driver Acquitted In Freddie Gray's Death. Aired 8-9p ET
Aired June 23, 2016 - 20:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[20:00:05] ANDERSON COOPER, CNN ANCHOR: And good evening. Thanks for joining us tonight. The lives of as many as five million people in this country are influx, thanks to a ruling of eight people on the actions of one.
The Supreme Court today down a justice since the death of Antonin Scalia deadlocking 4-4 on President Obama's immigration plan, letting an Appeals Court decision blocking the proposal stand. It's a major defeat for the White House and coming as it does in the middle of a presidential campaign, could pack a big political punch as well.
President Obama has weighed in, so have Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. So will our panel and so will the nation's Supreme Court watcher, our own Jeffrey Toobin. First, our chief political correspondent Dana Bash with the decision and the immediate impact.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
DANA BASH, CNN SENIOR CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Raw emotion outside the Supreme Court, as those gathered learned of the 4- 4 deadlock that effectively ends President Obama's executive order allowing some five million undocumented immigrants to stay legally.
JUAN-CARLOS RAMOS, IMMIGRANT: At any moment, at any time, I could be deported.
BASH: At the White House, the president made no attempt to hide his disappointment.
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We're going to have to make a decision about whether we are a people who tolerate a hypocrisy of the system, where the workers who pick our fruit or make our beds never have the chance to get right with the law.
BASH: The GOP House speaker called it a victory for the Constitution.
REP. PAUL RYAN (R), HOUSE SPEAKER: It's a win in our fight to restore the separation of powers. Presidents don't write laws. Congress writes laws.
BASH: The fact that the president tried to use his executive authority to go around the gridlocked Congress to allow some undocumented immigrants to stay legally united Republicans in opposition, even those for immigration reform.
REP. ADAM KINZINGER (R), ILLINOIS: I agree with the idea of immigration reform. I think it's something we need. I have been very outspoken about it. But it's something that has to be sustainable coming through the House of Representatives.
BASH: All this makes the red hot 2016 political issue of immigration even hotter. Donald Trump tweeting that, "The court kept us safe from executive amnesty for now, but Hillary Clinton has pledged to expand it, taking jobs from Hispanic and African-American workers."
And Hillary Clinton calling the decision, "a stark reminder of the harm Donald Trump would do to our families, our communities, and our country."
DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESUMPTIVE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Build that wall. Build that wall.
BASH: Trump rode to victory in the GOP primaries using opposition to illegal immigration to rally his base.
TRUMP: Who is going to pay for the wall? A hundred percent.
BASH: But now Clinton may get a political boost, thanks to angry Hispanic voters eager to help elect Democrats, especially in key swing states with large Hispanic populations like Florida, Nevada and Colorado.
A national poll last month showed Clinton at 62 and Trump at 23 percent with registered Latino voters nationwide, a political divide that the president is clearly even more eager now to make wider.
OBAMA: Pretending we can deport 11 million people or build a wall without spending tens of billions of dollars of taxpayer money is abetting what is really just factually incorrect. It's not going to work.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
COOPER: And Dana Bash joins us now. As you said, Secretary Clinton and Donald Trump already weighing in on this ruling. I mean, they are both going to try to use it to their political advantage between now and November.
BASH: No question and obviously it's much broader than this ruling. It's about the court itself. It really puts front and center for voters how much power the next president is going to have in picking who will fill the empty ninth seat on the Supreme Court. The GOP-led Senate they don't show any sign of giving President Obama's nominee a vote, so this immigration decision is just one example of how consequential the decisions are that are hanging in the balance until then, and these candidates, the political malpractice for both of them not to campaign hard on it, and I think same goes for voters not to take that into consideration. COOPER: Yes. Let's talk about the court.
Dana, thanks very much.
Let's be joined by CNN senior legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin. So for those who may not be fully up to speed on the ruling, can you just explain exactly who this affects and what the implications are going forward?
JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Well, there are two groups of people. The one group are the so-called dreamers. These are the -- they were kids, they were babies or very young when they were brought to this country illegally. They have grown up here, they are effectively have grown up as Americans. The other group, an even larger group, is the parents who came to this country illegally of American citizens. They came across the border unlawfully, had children while they were here who are American citizens. Roughly five million of them all together.
And what President Obama said was that -- in this executive order, he said with these groups I am going to set up a system where if they go through an appropriate background check, they are not going to be deported under any circumstances, they will be free to stay here and they will be able to get their work papers. They will be able to start getting jobs on the books.
[20:05:07] What today's decision did, it didn't undo his ability to keep them from being deported, that's really a core executive function. But that whole plan to give them work papers, that's all out the window so if any of these five million want to keep working in the United States, they're going to have to do it off the books illegally.
COOPER: So -- but the ruling was just as much about presidential authority and executive action as it was about the specifics in the president's plan, right?
TOOBIN: That's right. In fact that's what the core of it was about. It was not -- what the lower court said was not that this -- these citizens could never have these rights. They said if they are to be granted these rights it has to be done through an act of Congress, it can't be done through executive authority alone.
Other courts ultimately might disagree about that, but the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, certainly one of the most conservative in the country, ruled against the president, and because this was a 4-4 decision, there's no decision from the Supreme Court. This was a one- sentence order. But this law is now -- the law of Fifth Circuit is now affirmed and there's really no time for the president to try to go back and do this again.
COOPER: All right, Jeff, stick around for the conversation. Want to bring in our panel. Hillary Clinton supporter, former Bill Clinton adviser Richard Socarides, 2008 senior campaign adviser Maria Cardona, chief political analyst Gloria Borger, Trump supporter Kayleigh McEnany, conservative Trump critic Tara Setmayer, and Trump New York campaign co-chair Joseph Borelli.
Gloria, let's start with you. I mean, politically speaking both sides as we said to Dana, are going to be using this moving forward.
GLORIA BORGER, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL ANALYST: They are. And it's hard to say right now who would benefit the most from it. Two things really important here. The Obama legacy is on the line, immigration reform, and this movement that he had on these executive orders is a big part of his legacy and that's been defeated in the court. So it's going to be a big issue in this campaign.
The other one is it puts the Supreme Court front and center again. People now know the stakes. And so the question is who benefits? It gives Trump the opportunity to hit on his best issue, which is building the wall and immigration, it's what attracted people to his campaign. And it gives Hillary Clinton an opportunity to consolidate voters in those states.
COOPER: Right.
BORGER: Like Florida and Nevada and Colorado.
COOPER: Richard, I mean, you know, Hillary Clinton is already saying this is -- or Democrats are saying this is a prime example why you need a full Supreme Court. But had Justice Scalia been on the court, it wouldn't have just been a tied thing. He would have ruled against.
BORGER: Yes.
RICHARD SOCARIDES, CLINTON SUPPORTER: Well, we don't actually know what that decision would be because he wasn't there. He is not with us.
(CROSSTALK)
SOCARIDES: No, I think the important thing to remember is that this was a procedural decision and not substantive decision on the merits. It was tied 4-4 so that the lower court was affirmed. But it has no presidential value. And so the Supreme Court didn't really rule, they actually decided on a procedural issue not to rule.
But I do think -- I do agree with Jeff and with Gloria that it makes the issue of the Supreme Court -- puts the issue of the Supreme Court front and center and shows why the Congress should move, should still move on the nomination of Merrick Garland that President Obama put forward.
But more importantly it shows that -- I mean, if you're a voter who wants to send the country back 100 years in terms of judicial progress, I mean, if you want no women's right to choose, if you want no gay marriage, if you want unlimited campaign, corporate campaign contributions, you want to appoint judges Donald Trump says he will appoint and send the country back 100 years, the choice is clear. You can vote for Trump but the stakes are very high.
COOPER: But, Kayleigh, doesn't it make a good argument for Trump who can now just say well, look, if you vote for Hillary Clinton, you're voting for President Obama's immigration policy which -- which the court has struck down.
KAYLEIGH MCENANY, TRUMP SUPPORTER: It makes a very strong argument for Donald Trump. And not only that, he can expand beyond immigration and get into the Constitution. There are a lot of Americans who have been very frustrated with this president's view of executive power. He, himself, the president himself said 22 times I do not have the power by basically -- by denying deportations to change the law.
He said in fact that Univision town hall, I cannot support deportations through executive order. In fact to do so would not conform with my appropriate role as president. That is a strong statement. He said that 22 times at Paul Ryan's count. And they you have this decision that came out today, basically affirming what President Obama had been saying all along. Not only that, just quickly, you had a federal judge that was appointed by Obama this week strike down fracking orders from the administration, saying it exceeded the bounds of the Constitution. Sp this is a huge argument for Donald Trump. It brings a whole new talking point to the campaign.
COOPER: So, Maria, what is your response to that?
MARIA CORDONA, HILLARY CLINTON SUPPORTER: Well, a couple of things. To clarify when he said those words about that he did not have the power, he was talking about the 11 million to 12 million undocumented immigrants, that he could not shield all of them.
[20:10:03] And that still continues to be the case. The executive action that he put forward did not shield the 11 million to 12 million undocumented immigrants. It was up to five million.
MCENANY: Five million.
CARDONA: That's what he -- but when he said those words, he meant the whole lot of undocumented immigrants, number one. Number two, I want to clarify something just for our viewers. This decision today does not impact the 2012 executive action that he put forth just on the dreamers. So I just want to make sure that that is clear. But moving forward this gives the Democrats and Hillary Clinton a huge tool to continue to focus on the message that, look, Democrats are the ones who have the interest at heart of the Latino community, and moreover, I think it also gives an opportunity to explain to Latinos and others, whom, you know, the whole court thing is really an inside Washington thing. This puts it in a very tangible manner as to how it affects people's lives.
COOPER: Tara, what do you think of it?
TARA SETMAYER, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I spent seven years on Capitol Hill. And during that time we had the last major immigration debate in 2007 or so. That's when the fence was passed. Even in 2006 under the Bush administration, there was issues with Republicans and Bush being very liberal on the immigration issue. This is something that has been going on for years and it's not going
to change tomorrow. But the important part, though, is the fact that the presidential overreach and separation of powers issue is an important one. Barack Obama has abused this time and time again, not only on the issues that Kayleigh enumerated, but the National Labor Relations Board, which is a 9-0 decision. That was a straight rebuke of Obama's executive overreach and several other cases.
So this is important because moving forward for the next president, if you are allowed to just say, well, the hell with Congress, we don't care about them, we're going to write our own laws, it is OK when you like it, and when you don't like it, you have to be able to have balance here. And for people like me who are concerned about Donald Trump and some of the things that he has said, that he's going to build a wall, he's going to, you know, make these trade deals, he's going to do all of these things.
Well, that's concerning because we criticized Barack Obama for being an authoritarian from the Oval Office and Donald Trump sounds an awful like that, too.
COOPER: Joe, do you worry at all as a Trump supporter that this allows Democrats to continue to go after Donald Trump as somebody who is anti-Latino maybe?
JOHN JAY LAVALLE, TRUMP SUPPORTER: I think -- no matter what. But what it does is, well, for all that's been made over Trump not being able to unite factions of the Republican Party, now you see a clear unification between congressional Republicans. I mean, this justifies what Mitch McConnell has been saying about not confirming Merrick Garland. This is what would happen. This decision would have been different.
I think it actually has a positive impact on Trump, as Gloria said. This allows him to continue to focus on an issue he's great at. It creates essentially a binary condition where you're either for a controlled form of legal immigration like Donald Trump is or you're for amnesty. I mean this would -- President Obama, I read the decision by Fifth Circuit. It basically creates a class of people that he's just unilaterally given amnesty to because they have a child.
(CROSSTALK)
COOPER: Let Jeff weigh in. Just legally, Jeffrey, is there anything you take issue with here so far?
JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Well, I mean, it is true that the court has decided that the president exceeded his authority. But I think sometimes we talk about this issue in abstractions. You know, I did a piece for the "New Yorker" about this where I spent a lot of time with a family in Columbus, Ohio. The family had immigrated illegally from Mexico. The father ran a food truck more than 12 hours a day. The mother cleaned houses. The two kids were American citizens, one of whom had cancer. I mean, the question is, what happens to them? Do they get thrown out
of the country? Do the parents get thrown out? The kids have to stay -- I mean, United States should decide this question.
(CROSSTALK)
TOOBIN: And those people are -- you know, they're real people.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: But Congress --
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes. That's Congress. Not the president.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: But Congress won't.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes.
SOCARIDES: Let just say that I think that it's interesting that both Democrats and Republicans seem be content to let this election battle -- the election be fought around issues of immigration. I mean, obviously we Democrats think we have the much better argument. But to say, to suggest that Donald Trump supports legal immigration and President Obama supports illegal immigration.
LAVALLE: He supports it. Every time. Over and again.
SOCARIDES: I mean, he is the guy --
(CROSSTALK)
COOPER: Let him finish.
SOCARIDES: He is the guy who's trying to build a wall. He is the guy who's trying to bar an entire group of people because of their religion. I mean, that is hardly the American spirit.
LAVALLE: The hypocrisy of --
COOPER: Let him respond.
LAVALLE: In 2004 President Bush deported 200,000 people. We now deport double that under Barack Obama. So it's just a selective outrage of the left that actually unites Republicans. And I'm just happy to point out that hypocrisy.
BORGER: Well, but now you have two political parties who are at completely extremes. You have one party for mass deportation and you have another party --
LAVALLE: Obama party. Obamacare.
BORGER: And you have another -- no, that would be Donald. And then you have another party that says the Democrats that say no deportation. Going further than President Obama, I -- you know, I would add. And this is going to once again, given this ruling today, it's going to wind up in Congress again. And what are they going to do about it? [20:15:04] COOPER: Let's -- let's take a break here. We got a lot
more to talk about the next two hours.
Donald Trump gets questioned on one of his big attack lines, see if he brings evidence to back it up. And these latest moves on both sides. The ads she just unloaded on him, Hillary Clinton. His business trip in the middle of the campaign and a big move he made to bring reluctant donors on board.
And later, making a stand on gun control by taking a seat on the House floor. We'll talk to one of the Democrat lawmakers who staged the sit-in which ended today as well as a Republican who says this is about politics, not gun violence.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COOPER: Welcome back. There's breaking news tonight as Donald Trump takes time off from his campaign reboot for a business trip to his golf property in Scotland. Earlier today he sat down with NBC News' Lester Holt who asked him about a wildly disputed claim he made about Hillary Clinton in a speech yesterday. He asked for evidence.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LESTER HOLT, NBC NEWS: You also made the claim that her e-mail, personal email server had been hacked probably by foreign governments, suggesting that --
TRUMP: You don't know that it hasn't been.
HOLT: But wait a minute, suggesting that she would be compromised as president. What evidence do you have?
TRUMP: Well, first of all, she shouldn't have had a personal server, OK. She shouldn't have it. It's illegal. What she did is illegal. Now she might not be judged that way because, you know, we have a rigged system. But what she did is illegal. She shouldn't had a personal server.
HOLT: But is there any evidence that it was hacked other than routine --
[20:20:01] TRUMP: I think I read that and I heard it and somebody --
HOLT: Where?
TRUMP: -- also gave me that information. I will report back to you.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: Now you whatever you may think about Donald Trump, Secretary Clinton , the whole e-mail affair, Trump's answer is similar to his promise that his investigators in Hawaii were digging up evidence that President Obama wasn't born there, he never got back to us or anyone frankly else on that. Hillary Clinton has, however, just taken a shot at him online with a new ad slamming his Scotland trip. More on that and the rest of the day in the politics from our Phil Mattingly.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
TRUMP: Hillary Clinton, and as you know, she -- most people know, she's a world class liar.
PHIL MATTINGLY, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Fresh off his most scathing attack on Hillary, the best fundraising stretch of his campaign, and an internal shakeup well-received inside an increasingly uneasy party.
REP. KEVIN CRAMER (R), NORTH DAKOTA: Yesterday's speech went a long ways to reigniting the members, as well as the party faithful. Yesterday's speech was very important in making that pivot.
MATTINGLY: Donald Trump is leaving the country, heading to Scotland, not to meet with world leaders or burnish his foreign policy credentials. Instead, it's for the reopening of a golf course, Trump's Turnberry Resort. Of course, Trump, in a 2014 interview with "Golf Digest," called it, quote, "super trophy" and one of the great pieces of art, an unorthodox move again raising questions inside the GOP, yet another sign that this isn't a traditional campaign and Trump is far from a traditional candidate.
Trump's trip coming as a new CNN/ORC poll finds that nearly 70 percent of voters surveyed stay Trump should step down from his role atop the Trump Organization as he runs for president. And the reception in Scotland will be far from celebratory. Residents, angered by Trump's bare-knuckle business strategy, protesting his visit, even flying Mexican flags to mock his arrival.
The Clinton campaign also hitting Trump ahead of the trip with a new Web video tonight. But for Trump, the visit underscores an asset viewed by aides as central to the campaign, his business empire.
TRUMP: I built an amazing business that I love.
MATTINGLY: And it comes as his campaign tries to turn a corner, leading a week plague by an anemic fundraising report by raising more than $11 million since Tuesday, according to campaign officials.
Trump's top campaign aide, Paul Manafort, also mounting a detailed and organized delegate operation designed to undercut any efforts to oust Trump at the convention.
With Trump today floating the unorthodox possibility of naming his cabinet during the campaign.
TRUMP: I think I might be inclined to do that. I don't think that's that unusual, though. That's been done before, hasn't it, Hugh?
HUGH HEWITT, THE HUGH HEWITT SHOW: No, I don't think ever -- we've ever had a cabinet member named. There was a hint that Colin Powell was going to be W's secretary of state. But it was just a hint. I mean, if you appear with these guys --
TRUMP: Well, did they wait until after the election and then --
HEWITT: Yes.
TRUMP? Really?
HEWITT: Yes.
MATTINGLY: All as Hillary Clinton continues to mount attacks on Trump's business resume.
HILLARY CLINTON (D), PRESUMPTIVE PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE: You might think that because he has spent his life as a businessman, he'd be better prepared to handle the economy. Well, it turns out he's dangerous there, too.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
COOPER: And Phil joins us now.
So Trump announced today that he would, quote, "fully extinguish" the $54 million loan that he made to his campaign. What does that mean exactly?
MATTINGLY: Well, it means, Donald Trump can no longer reimburse himself. Now while he said throughout the campaign up to this point that he was self-funding, they were loans and had Donald Trump raised enough money to max that amount of loans, he was well within his rights to pay himself back. Now he is not doing that, he is extinguishing those loans. And here's why that's important, Anderson.
Republican National Committee donors, the biggest donors in the party, made it very clear if they were going to jump on board to the Trump campaign and give millions to support his efforts, they needed assurances that he will never use that money to pay himself back behind closed doors. That was crucial to the negotiations over the joint fundraising agreement that Trump and the RNC reached. Donald Trump now making good on the promise not to ever reimburse himself -- Anderson.
COOPER: All right, Phil Mattingly. Phil, thanks very much.
We're back with our panel. Kayleigh, let's first talk about what he said to Lester Holt. Does it concern you at all, as a Trump supporter, that something he says in his speech, he doesn't know where he got it from and can't come up with any evidence for -- to back it up?
MCENANY: No, because these claims were not baseless. In fact a Romanian hacker Gucifer claims that he hacked Hillary Clinton server. Not only that the Associated Press reported on June 8th that in 2011 Hillary Clinton was forced off of her e-mails due to a hacking attack. The Associated Press also reported they had to unplug the server at one point during the hacking attack. That same article also said in 2014 the State Department's unclassified e-mail system was breached by hackers.
There's a lot of evidence out there that somebody perhaps got into it.
[20:25:00] COOPER: But does it worry you that Donald Trump can't say any of that?
MCENANY: No, that doesn't --
COOPER: He doesn't know that?
MCENANY: That doesn't worry me. He knows the conclusion. He doesn't need to have every single nit-picky detail. I am concerned about his grand vision for the country and I think it's the right one for the presidency.
COOPER: Tara?
SETMAYER: I think as a presidential candidate who's going to be in charge of top secret information, national security information, details matter, and so if he is going to make those accusations, he should really know where he got them from. You can't go around and say, well, I got them from the shows. I mean, yes, theirs is merit to what he said, but unfortunately you look at it and go, but where did he get it from?
It's like he's -- it's like, well, so I heard it from somewhere. That's not acceptable as a presidential candidate. You have to elevate the discussion here. And so there was another incident with Sidney Blumenthal's e-mail being hacked and he had e-mails with Hillary Clinton to her personal server which was another potential breach that came up as well. So there is merit to that.
COOPER: On the Scotland trip, I mean, the fact that at this point -- pivotal point in the campaign, I mean, I guess all points are pretty pivotal on this campaign, but at a very critical point he goes to Scotland. Does that concern you at all?
LAVALLE: No. Look, this is a trip that was announced a couple of days ago. And the important thing here is this is one of his son's major projects. It's a family business. This is his son Eric's major project. And you go and you support your kids. One of the best moments in the campaign for Donald Trump was actually
on a CNN set where he had his whole family around him and they portrayed themselves as a very -- a very, you know, united family. I think it was good.
COOPER: It was our family town hall.
LAVALLE: Right. You know, the other thing is, I find it ironic -- again just, like, call out this selective outrage of the left, but I find it very ironic that a lot of people on the Democratic side are suddenly concerned that someone is spending time on a golf course. Barack Obama spent -- 270 days on the golf course, 10 percent of the days he was president of the United States, he spent it on the golf course. That's the question we should ask.
COOPER: Let's talk to our Democrats over here.
(CROSSTALK)
COOPER: He is a businessman. That's what brought him on cable in the first place.
SOCARIDES: Yes. Absolutely.
COOPER: And he's got to do it.
SOCARIDES: I think what this demonstrates is he is a businessman, and with Donald Trump, his businesses will always come first. Much the same way when that judge, when the federal judge threatened his business with that Trump University lawsuit, he went after him. I think nothing -- this proves that nothing will ever come between Donald Trump and a dollar and that he is self-dealing. And that this whole thing -- I mean, he is the one who said, I'll run for president and I'll make money on it.
And between the reimbursements to himself and his family, and -- and the way, the biggest expenditure in the last campaign report was on Trump.
COOPER: But -- I mean, let's just be fair here for a second. I mean, there's been a lot of presidents, Bill Clinton included, who didn't have any foreign policy experience. George W. Bush was a governor. I mean, just because he's going overseas and not meeting with world leaders, there's a lot of presidents who didn't have foreign policy experience.
CARDONA: Sure. Sure. But they also didn't go around saying that they knew more about ISIS than the generals did. So it's what he says and where he says he gets his information, from the Sunday shows, from the Internet, it just -- it goes to the lack of seriousness even of his wanting to understand the intricacies of foreign policy.
This trip I think should concern Republican donors, who by the way my understanding is that the campaign is paying for this, at a time when he has no infrastructure, he has no message, he is just now starting to raise money so he's way behind on that. He has no strategy.
COOPER: I would think you would be arguing that he should take more of these trips --
CARDONA: No, by all means, I was going to end this by saying I absolutely condone this trip 100 percent. But the other thing that it does is that as we start finding out what his business is in this -- in Scotland, and specifically with this golf resort, the way that he conducted business is similar to the way that he conducted his businesses here and see how he will conduct the economy, which is he essentially rolls everybody, using the equivalent of eminent domain, exactly, a lot of protests are going to go on.
The neighbors in that resort hate him. They don't want him there. And I think all of that is going to continue to underscore the Clinton message.
COOPER: Gloria -- BORGER: Look, this is his son's business. He is doing this, I think
we could argue and you make a good point that this is not exactly what he ought to be doing while his campaign is in some disarray. I think the difference between Donald Trump and other candidates who as you point out didn't know about foreign policy is that Bill Clinton and George W. Bush had well formed foreign policy positions -- and let's put immigration aside -- which they didn't change or take back or look at again during the middle of the campaign.
For example, the -- you know, the question of the ban, the temporary ban on Muslims which he said this is absolutely going to happen, and then he said maybe it was a suggestion. I think they had kind of well-formed platforms and I think what we see with Trump is that it keeps evolving. And I know Kayleigh would argue that might be a good thing, but if you are running for president, you might think well, maybe you ought to be meeting with the president of Israel or you may be ought to be meeting with other foreign leaders.
COOPER: All right.
BORGER: Rather than on the golf course.
COOPER: Let's take another quick break. After vowing no bill, no break, House Democrats ended their sit-in over gun control legislation. I'll talk to a pair of House members on opposite sides of the debate about what if anything actually was accomplished and what happens next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:30:00] COOPER: After vowing no bill, no break, House Democrats ended their sit-in over down control legislation. I'll talk to pair of House members on opposite sides of the debate about what if anything actually was accomplished and what happens next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COOPER: The Democrats vowed they wouldn't budge from the House floor until hell froze over. But today, after 25 hours, they ended their sit-in over gun control legislation. More than 170 Democrats took part of the protest led by Representative John Lewis, who of course is the civil rights hero.
Overnight, House Speaker Paul Ryan seized control long enough to muscle through an appropriations bill without debate. He then declared the House adjourned, it's after the 4th of July holiday. Now throughout the night, Democrats gave speeches, one that made the most headlines was made by Representative Debbie Dingell of Michigan.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. DEBBIE DINGELL, (D) MICHIGAN: I lived in a house with a man that should not have had access to a gun.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes. DINGELL: I know what it's like to see a gun pointed at you, and wonder if you are going to live. And I know what it's like to hide in a closet and pray to God do not let anything happen to me.
[20:35:04] UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You hear.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Hear, hear.
DINGELL: And we have never will not -- we don't talk about it.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yeah.
DINGELL: We don't want to say it happens in all kinds of households, and we still live in a society where we will let convicted felon who was stalking somebody of domestic abuse still own a gun.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: Representative Debbie Dingell joins me with republican representative Sean Duffy of Wisconsin. Welcome to both of you. Congresswoman Dingell, we just heard obviously an issue, a very personal for you. I wonder this sit-in, how much did it accomplish, do you think? I mean if all it did was draw attention to the issue, is that enough for you?
DINGELL: Well no, it is not enough, but by drawing attention to it, having people talk about it from one of the country to another hopefully as members of Congress of both parties go home, they'll talk to going to talk to their elected representatives how they want to see change. We know what polling shows, 92 percent of the American people want background checks, 85 percent want no fly, no buy.
So, what we are trying to do is not -- I was convinced this week that nothing would ever change, we have the same old canned talking points and nobody would care, nothing would happen. Today or the last 48 hours, a lot of attention got brought in the country. And look, we're here we're talking about it tonight.
COOPERL: Congressman Duffy, I mean Speaker Ryan basically said it undermined the House of Representatives as an institution. Do agree with him?
REP. SEAN DUFFY, (R) WISCONSIN: Absolutely I think Saul Alinsky would have been proud at the Democrats who took over the House floor last night and our founders were rolling in their graves. Listen my heart goes out to Debbie and her story when she was a young girl -- what happened to her. I was a prosecutor for 10 years, I prosecuted those kinds of cases, prosecuting her -- guys like her father.
But, what concerns me, Anderson, is the tragedy in Orlando which is about Islamic radical terrorism, has been morphed into a greater gun debate Democrats have been working on for 10 years.
And, so Debbie and her friends on the floor we're talking only about guns. We never hold need a holistic approach about if we going to keep America safe, what do we have to do in Congress, how do you partner with the president to actually accomplish that safety for American citizens.
But if you only talk about guns on the floor, not how to fix the FBI as they can have the tools and resources available to go after bad guys, only Barack Obama who refuses to use radical Islamic terrorism or white washes the 911 transcript Mateen made the night of this horrible attack, these are real problems and we are not going to finger on what's wrong and who is inspiring these agents of that.
COOPER: Congresswoman is what happened in Orlando in this debate just about Islamic terrorism?
GINGELL: No for me it is two different things. And by the way I share people's concerns about the no fly list and civil rights. But I want I represent many of the Muslims that are good Americans, by the way. We have to be careful to not take paint brushes and tar and feather an entire religion. We did that in the history of the world only in the last century, and it is not the right thing to do. But what we're trying to say is let's have the discussion. Please come to the table and have the discussion. That's what we're trying to do.
COOPER: Now, let me ask about that Congressman Duffy. One of your colleagues, Representative Jolly, who is joining me in the next hour, he's actually introduced legislation he thinks is a good compromise, he is actually mandating the government to have a due process hearing if an individual is unable to purchase a firearm because of being on a no fly list.
So if somebody is on the no fly list, they get turned down, they get 30 days and which time they get to have an actual hearing so their due process rights are addressed. Do you see that as something you can get behind?
DUFFY: There's a number of finer points to get through, but yes, as long as the government has burden to prove someone on the list should be on the list and you don't take guns from law abiding American citizens. But we also, Anderson, have to be careful because the FBI has said if you get this wrong, you can have would be terrorists try to buy a gun. If they're denied, they're being watched. If not denied, they're free to act without interference from the FBI.
So it takes time to work together. And Debbie last night said we have to get people out of the corner, come in the middle, have a conversation. We're taking over the House floor and only talking about gun control which they have been talking about for years doesn't bring people together.
COOPER: So how do you ...
DUFFY: I think Debbie and I could sit down and say, "How do you have a conversation specifically getting guns away from terrorists?"
COOPER: How do you resolve that issue that you raise that if would be terrorist if it would terrorist somebody is on the list goes to buy a gun they realize they get rejected that they're being watched. I mean how do you resolve that? DUFFY: We have to work with the FBI on that. And we have to do finer points that we have to get right. I don't know the answer tonight. But there's a number of different avenues to get to to actually accomplish that goal.
[20:40:02] But if you have a mentality that says I'm going to use whether San Bernardino, I'm going to use Orlando to advance my gun control agenda, and this is only phase one of that agenda, it is hard to get by them if Republicans.
But if you want to talk about taking guns away from terrorists, talk about the FBI, talk about Barack Obama getting as energetic talking about ISIS as when he talks about the NRA, we can find a common ground and work together.
COOPER: So congressman do you believe to, when the congressman is saying you're using this tragedy and others for gun control agenda.
DINGELL: You know, I disagree with that and I'm not a very complicated person when it comes to on that because I do respect the second amendment rights, but I know that there are people in this country that have access to guns that shouldn't mental health is one. I share your goal making sure terrorists don't have access to guns, which is why they going to get the list to be an accurate list. We should be making convicted felons don't have access to guns.
I want to work with you to get that. I think that everybody has been -- we're tired of mass shootings. What also bothers me is that we don't talk about what's happening every day, the kind of violence that we're sort of it's normal, when you look at what happen in Chicago or Baltimore or what's happening in homes every day with domestic abuse. So I want to have the discussion. Go ahead.
DUFF: I think, Debbie, and you and I could sit down and talk but you have to get beyond guns. This is a larger discussion and what we have to
DINGELL: I agree.
DUFFL: ... we have to protect people's rights. And so, when we look at health care -- I'm sorry -- mental health, it is the government's burden to show there's a mental defect or disability. When someone is convicted of a crime, a felony or their domestic abuse, there are ways someone that due process to take away their rights.
You can't just have some unknowing board without any known criteria, without any way to get someone off, decide whether their second amendment rights are taken away.
COOPER: OK.
DINGELL: I agree.
DUFF: We talk about this a lot. We have a lot of folks who are high profile who have been on the list, members of Congress that take a year to get off. If you're a guy in middle America in Wisconsin and you are a member of Congress, you can't get off the list. But I think we can find common ground on this one that work together to deal with terrorists and access to guns but also try to get a structure together to defeat ISIS, defeat radical Islamic terror and keep America safe.
DINGELL: We agree.
COOPER: I appreciate the comments and I appreciate we'll see if you get together on this. Representative Dingell and Duffy, thank you very much.
Just ahead there's no doubt before we start a moment just to witness on the House floor with dramatic moments. It does pay on comparison to full on brawls that erupting other countries when law makers disagree I show you in some other places how violent things get.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:46:35] COOPER: There's no question the 25 hour sit-in on the house floor was unprecedented of this country. House Speaker Paul Ryan has been blasting Democrats for the disruption they caused.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. PAUL RYAN, (R) HOUSE SPEAKER: This is the people's house, this is Congress, the House of Representatives. Oldest democracy in the world and they're sending it into chaos.
I don't think this should be a very proud moment for democracy or for the people who staged these stunts.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: Again, as we said earlier, Speaker Ryan himself bypassed House protocol when he pushed through that appropriations bill overnight with no debate. As for chaos, let's get some perspective here.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: Rolling while legislating is not uncommon in many parts of the world.
Just last month, multiple fist fights broke out during a contentious meeting of the Turkish Parliament, ruling party members in the pro- quarters opposition came to blows over a bill allowing some members of parliament, which included leading members of the opposition party, to be investigated for link to terrorism.
Those not directly involved in the fighting flung bottles of water at their opponents across the table. Several lawmakers were reportedly injured.
Brawling in South Korea's national assembly is routine. Members will often lock the doors and barricade them with furniture before votes.
Their political opponents have to physically tear down the doors in order to enter. It's not an easy task.
In 2011, a member of parliament opposed to a free trade deal with the United States even threw a canister of tear gas before the vote.
The chamber was briefly cleared as tear gas flooded the hall for the vote soon resumed and the bill was passed.
Ukraine supreme Rada has also seen in chair fights. In 2012, parliament members attacked each other over a bill giving the Russian language equals stature to Ukrainian in some parts of the country.
This fight broke out in the hall way as to opposing members slugged it out over a piece deal. In 2015, they brought an end to the conflict in Ukraine. The two members were suspended after the fight for five sessions.
Later that year, Ukraine's then prime minister was physically dragged from the microphone by an opponent causing a massive fist fight.
The Taiwanese parliament is notorious for fighting. These massive tussles are wrapped over of all kinds of issues from the budget to ties to China to military hardware purchases.
This parliament member brings a helmet to sessions to protect himself from the violence.
In Argentina in 2010, this legislature was unhappy with the state of the budget talks. Watch as she glares at an opposition member, the nods in satisfaction as she walks away.
Many of these fights are considered public relations spectacles in their home countries. But still, what's been described as chaos in the house floor in the U.S. seems pretty tame by comparison.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: Look around the world.
Just ahead, the votes are coming in across Great Britain on a question that could shake the entire global economy. Should the United Kingdom leave the European Union? Should it make it Brexit as it's called? The vote is closed. We've got the latest with that.
Also next, the officer accused of getting Freddie Gray a so called, rough ride in a police van who was facing the most serious charges in his death is found not guilty. The reason and reaction from Baltimore when we continue.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:53:52] COOPER: Well, not guilty on all charges, that's the decision today from a Baltimore judge for the third police officer to go on trial in the death of Freddie Gray.
The officer was the one who drove the van when Gray suffered his fatal spinal injuries when he faced the most serious charges. But the judge said prosecutors did not prove their case. And this raises questions about the remaining officers who are still to face trial. Miguel Marquez is in Baltimore tonight with more.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MIGUEL MARQUEZ, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT BASED IN NEW YORK: Protests and anger over yet another full acquittal of a Baltimore police officer connected to the death of Freddie Gray.
Above all, frustration that now possibly none of the six officers will be convicted of anything.
CARL DIX, PROTESTER: Not guilty on murder is essentially, you can kill this black guy and no one is going to be convicted for it.
MARQUEZ: Caesar Goodson, the driver of the prisoner van Gray rode in and a 16 year veteran of the Baltimore Police force faced seven charges ranging from second degree murder to reckless endangerment.
In a lengthy verdict from the bench, the judge said while mistakes may have been made, none of it amounted to criminal behavior.
[20:55:06] TESSA HILL-ASTON, BALTIMORE CITY NAACP: I'm disappointed. And I think that the rules and the law needs to be changed. Use of force, the police, bill of rights, all, everything is difficult because what the police did was actions but they're not criminal.
GENE RYAN, FRATERNAL ORDER OF POLICE: While we agree with the verdict in this case, we also suggest that Mrs. Mosby reconsider her malicious prosecution against the remaining four officers. We are more than certain that they too will be found to be without guilt.
MARQUEZ: The prosecution claimed Gray died from injuries sustained during a rough ride, but the judge ruled while everyone agrees Gray was injured in the van, it was not clear to officers he was in distress until the last stop when medical attention was sought.
BISHOP ANGEL NUNEZ, PASTOR, BILINGUAL CHRISTIAN CHURCH OF BALTIMORE: We all know what a rough ride is and if you got in a van and then when you got off you're in critical condition, ouch.
MARQUEZ: Caesar Goodson hugged his lawyers and shook hands with officer Edward Nero who was previously acquitted. The question now, will all officers connected to the death of Freddie Gray be acquitted or even tried?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think if ever there was a case where the prosecution threw there really the best they had at, it was this case. And so, the fact that they didn't get a conviction really I think is going to force them to reassess what they do in the future.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: Miguel joins us now. Any reaction from the community where Freddie Gray lived? MARQUEZ: I think that there is frustration that this has happened, but certainly sort of a resignation that it was probably bound to happen.
I remember asking people when Marilyn Mosby brought these charges a year ago what they thought and they sort of smile and say nothing's going to change in Baltimore. This is just the way it is. They will not be brought to justice.
The other side that we are hearing though is that people saying well, at least these charges have been brought. It has shined a light on the police department and their practices, and perhaps this is the beginning of change. Anderson.
COOPER: All right. Miguel Marquez, thanks very much. We'll have more on this case in the next hour of "360".
Also the U.S. Supreme Court delivering a huge blow to President Obama's immigration plan just as his dead lock and a 44 tied blocked his executive order.
The president has weighed in so Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, the latest on that.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
