Return to Transcripts main page

Anderson Cooper 360 Degrees

Trump In LA Area To Survey Wildfire Devastation; Interview Of Sen. Alex Padilla (D-CA); GOP Unsure If It Has The Votes To Confirm Hegseth; Hegseth Vote Imminent; 2 Republicans "No" Votes, 2 Uncertain; Sources: DHS Immigration Removal Operations Could Target Over 24 Cities; Former Proud Boys Leader Speaks To CNN After Trump Pardon; Judge Bars Oath Keepers Founder From Entering D.C.; Trump Orders Release Of Remaining Secret Files On JFK Assassination. Aired 8-9p ET

Aired January 24, 2025 - 20:00   ET

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


DAVID CULVER, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: We go into all of this and much more and show you some really unique aspects of life in China and just how large these creatures loom. I mean, if you think they draw big crowds here, wait until you see what it's like in China and that's this weekend on "The Whole Story" Operation Panda.

Kate, I think it's going to be an experience for most folks to take in to just realize that there is a beloved-ness about these creatures, not only here in the US, but really globally.

KATE BOLDUAN, CNN HOST: David, it's so great to see you, thank you so much.

They are just adorable, you can't deny it and a good way to end on a Friday.

Thanks so much for joining us everybody. AC360 starts now.

[20:00:36]

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST, "ANDERSON COOPER: 360": Tonight on 360, the president in California promises disaster relief, but puts two conditions on helping. One about election law, the other about water. We're keeping them honest.

Also, the vote for Pete Hegseth to become Defense Secretary is coming up tonight and there's new uncertainty among Republicans, if he has the votes he needs.

And later, what one of the January 6th ringleaders, Enrique Tarrio, told CNN's Laura Coates about retribution after he was freed by the president from a 22-year sentence for seditious conspiracy.

Good evening, thanks for joining us.

President Trump is in the Los Angeles area tonight witnessing firsthand the fire damage, enormous destruction and dislocation from the worst wildfires in generations. He arrived a little less than two hours ago, took a tour of one of the fire zones, and is being briefed by officials. He and the First Lady were greeted on arrival by the Governor of California, Gavin Newsom, whom he promised to work with, in his words, to get it done.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP (R) PRESIDENT-ELECT OF THE UNITED STATES: We want to get it fixed. We want to get the problem fixed, and there'll be some ways, but it's like you got hit by a bomb, right? If you think of it.

GAVIN NEWSOM, CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR: Yes.

TRUMP: I mean, nothing like this has happened and we're going to get it fixed, so well get it permanently fixed so it can't happen again, and again.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: Now, that's the sort of thing presidents say to governors after a natural disaster hits. What makes this time different is everything this president has said leading up to it. Most recently, earlier today when he laid out his conditions for federal disaster relief.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: I want the water to come down and come down to Los Angeles and also go out to all the farmland that's barren and dry.

I want voter ID for the people of California and they all want it. Right now, you don't have voter ID, people want to have voter identification. You want to have proof of citizenship.

Ideally, you have one day voting. But I just want voter ID as a start. And I want the water to be released, and they're going to get a lot of help from the US.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: Now, a lot of help, he says if those two conditions are met. Changing election law, which has been a focus of Trump's back to 2020 election but would seem to have little to do with disaster relief and water management choices, which he has repeatedly claimed were responsible for the scope of the disaster.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: We're going to, then go to Los Angeles and take a look at a fire that could have been put out if they left the water flow.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: He's also at times claimed that if this were done letting the water flow, in his words, the fires would not have happened at all.

Now, much of LA's water comes from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, which is pumped south through central valley farm country, through a mountain range, and into Southern California reservoirs.

The president, as you've heard, has been saying over and over again that not enough water was being pumped and that California governor was refusing to allow it to be pumped because he wanted instead to protect a small fish which swims in the Delta called the delta smelt.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: Think of a sink, but multiply it times many thousands of times the size of it is massive, and you turn it back toward Los Angeles. Why aren't they doing it? They either have a death wish, they're stupid, or there's something else going on that we don't understand.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: That was Trump on Tuesday. Here's what he posted nearly two weeks ago before on social media at the height of the fires when Altadena and the Palisades were on fire.

"Governor Newsom, excuse me, Governor Gavin 'New scum'," he said, "refused to sign the water restoration declaration put before him that would have allowed millions of gallons of water from excess rain and snow melt from the north to flow daily into many parts of California, including the areas that are currently burning in a virtually apocalyptic way."

He went on to say, "He wanted to protect an essentially worthless fish called a smelt, by giving it less water. It didn't work, but didn't care about the people of California."

Now, keeping them honest in order -- Governor Newsom did not sign a water restoration declaration because there was no such document for him to sign. A Trump transition official told CBS News that the president is actually referring to a 2019 proposed plan, which was actually started under the Obama administration from the Federal Bureau of Reclamation.

Now, second and most relevant, according to California officials, pumping more water would not have helped because LA area reservoirs were already full. The issue among several was getting enough water from reservoirs to city hydrants through a system that was not built to fight the kind of fires with these kind of wind speeds, which one US Forestry Service official called a, "99.99 ninth percentile event."

A reservoir serving Pacific Palisades that had been drained for repairs to its cover, as you probably know, for almost a year, it's not clear why repairs on the cover should have taken so long given the weather conditions, the lack of rain and everybody knew this was incredibly dry season that should certainly be looked into.

[20:05:22]

Governor Newsom, on the day the city was on fire on Wednesday, seemed to indicate -- on the eighth, seem to indicate he thought it was a local official problem, and that it was the local officials who needed to answer for the hydrants losing pressure. But days later, he then ordered an independent investigation over that empty reservoir, saying, "We need answers to how that happened."

So there's that. There are also questions surrounding budget cuts to the LA Fire Department. We've been reporting on questions surrounding the lack of evacuation warnings that some people they experienced, but more water from the north doesn't seem to be top of the list, at least for California officials who have every reason to want the problem fixed.

By the same token, it's hard to see what voter ID has to do with the disaster relief needs of Southern Californians, except for how it factors into the president's longtime focus on the 2020 election and perhaps how the president's long standing antipathy toward California's governor in the state play in the mix.

These are pictures of the 2018 fires there. Last fall, two former senior Trump aides told POLITICO that then-President Trump refused to give California disaster aid until he was told how many people there voted for him.

Again, the president is in Pacific Palisades at a firehouse there. We'll monitor what he's saying and bring you any news that he makes.

More now on all of this from CNN chief White House correspondent and anchor of "The Source," Kaitlan Collins, also in Los Angeles, CNN's Nick Watt.

So, Kaitlan, was the president's suggestion of conditioning disaster aid to California, adopting a voter ID Law, as well as what he calls the release of water or letting the water flow. Was that planned by the White House, or was that a kind of off the cuff comment?

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT AND ANCHOR OF "THE SOURCE": It may not be like a planned policy announcement, Anderson, in the terms of he came out and said it at a microphone in front of a lectern and had it prepared on paper. But certainly this is something Trump has been talking about for days now.

He's been going after local officials in California. He's been going after the governor for their policies, blaming them primarily for what happened here and just how devastating and widespread these fires were.

Of course, we've seen local officials push back on that and say, yes, the management could have been better, but a lot of this was just unprecedented and something that they had never seen before.

And what I thought was so fascinating during this was the White House did not know that Governor Newsom was going to come and greet President Trump when he got off Air Force One and descended those stairs.

Newsom was not listed on a sheet that the White House sent out before. Typically, they do this on a presidential trip. You know who's going to greet him. And instead, we saw Trump and Newsom handshaking, as you can see here. Clearly, Newsom delivering some kind of message to Trump. And then just a few moments later, they came over and spoke to reporters. Trump said nice things about Governor Newsom, someone that he has been referring to as "New Scum" in recent days and someone who has been in return, criticizing his executive order that he signed regarding the 14th Amendment.

And then just now, in this briefing, they were having -- Governor Newsom, I should note, is not there. But Trump said very positive things about them and said that they had a good conversation.

So, it is a remarkable side by side of what we hear from Trump when he is in the White House on Truth Social, and what he says when he is side by side with Governor Newsom, who the White House did not know until they were flying to LA that he was going to be there waiting on the tarmac to greet him.

COOPER: It is -- that is a fascinating detail, Nick, what more can you tell us about President Trump's tour of the devastated areas?

NICK WATT, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: You know, Anderson, if you look at this tour in isolation, you would think it was a very standard presidential tour of a disaster zone. But then, of course, we know what's been going on in the background.

We know that on Air Force One, on the way to Los Angeles, the president's press secretary was again calling the governor "new scum" and saying that, you know, he'd done great harm to the people of his state.

And, you know, Governor Newsom aides have been telling us over the past few days that, you know, they feel like they've been fighting two wars, one against the fire and one against the deluge of BS, they say, that's coming from the president and many other people.

What is clear from President Trump's demeanor is he is clearly moved by having actually seen what you and I saw here as the fires happened and the aftermath. You know, he mentioned some of the chimneys are even down. Melania Trump, the First Lady, of course, is with him. They had a walk and talk with people in the Palisades.

One of those people was heard to say, you know, we feel let down by local leadership. And, you know, in this meeting now, you know, the president is sitting in front of a banner that says, you know, "We're in this together." He's surrounded by bipartisan lawmakers. I saw him shake the hand of Chief Crowley, the LA Fire Chief, who's come under some criticism. And it seemed to me that the president said to her, good job.

So, it's all very convivial, all very supportive. He's talking about commiserating now and coming back to celebrate. But then, of course, the president went into his idea of, as you just laid out, that, you know, the water from up north should be coming down. And President Trump said he's going to sign an executive order to make sure that happens.

So, right now, they are having a bipartisan meeting. Brad Sherman, who's a local congressman. One of the first things he asked was, you know, Mr. President, you're like a tariff. How about dropping tariffs on building materials? That was also talk about trying to shorten the permit period.

So, it all seems like all these levels of government are cooperating. But then we know what's been going on in the background, particularly between the president and the governor. So, it's difficult to sort of square that.

[20:10:44]

COOPER: Nick, let me ask you about this 2019 proposal, which is what the president keeps talking about, letting the water flow. My understanding is that was a proposal to kind of get water from the north to farmers in south of California, not necessarily feeding Los Angeles County itself, is that right?

WATT: Correct, and so, the Central Valley, which is sort of breadbasket of California, that's where there was a lot of push to get the water to go.

And, you know, Anderson, I've spoken to a lot of water and fire experts over the past couple of weeks. And they all tell me this smelt water from the north issue and the absolute problem that they had with the hydrants here in the Palisades, that those two issues are entirely separate, that the issue here in the Palisades was not that they didn't have enough water, you know, coming from the north. It was that, the municipal water system here, like pretty much everywhere else on earth, was just not equipped to deal with an inferno like we saw here.

And, you know, it's interesting, Anderson, this house behind me, the lady who used to live in this house, stopped by and we chatted for a good half hour, and she said to me, stop making this political. Stop making this about, you know, Newsom versus Trump. But unfortunately, over the past few days, it has been made political by the president and to a degree also by Governor Newsom.

You know, this lady was saying there are people in need, you know, why can't we just get on with it? And that's the feeling, I think, of a lot of people in California. Stop making this political, for goodness sake. There are people in need. Let's just work together, as we should, to make sure that people get all the help that they deserve.

COOPER: Well, Kaitlan, it will also be interesting to see, given the sort of convivial nature of his side by side with Governor Newsom there, whether that actually and what he saw, whether that actually impacts, you know, his talk about conditioning this on, you know, this water from the north, which again, is supposed to largely go for farmers and Voter ID Law.

COLLINS: But you know, what's fascinating, Anderson, is that is what President Trump said when he left the White House, that he was telling Betsy Klein at Joint Base Andrews as he was about to get on the plane to go to North Carolina and then go to LA, that yes, that he could see conditioning that aid on having voter ID and changing the water and whatnot.

He's at this bipartisan briefing, and I was going to be watching this very closely, because there's a lot of Democrats in the room who have been pretty critical of Trump at times.

Brad Sherman represents the 32nd District in California. He's a Democrat, and he just -- President Trump, to his credit, said anyone who wants to talk or give a statement can please speak up.

Congressman Brad Sherman spoke up and was essentially making the case that he doesn't like what Louisiana's abortion policy is. He doesn't agree with it. He thinks it's too restrictive, but he would never say to someone in Louisiana who experienced a disaster that they could not get federal aid because of that.

I think the phrase he was, was I'm not going to tell someone they have to sleep on their cousin's couch because I don't like their view on a woman's right to choose. And he was essentially making that argument to Trump that just because you don't like a state's policies, that the people who live in that state should not be punished, and certainly not when it comes to something like this.

It was a very fascinating back and forth between the two of them, to watch that play out, as that was the argument Trump made going there.

And I will say Nick Watt mentioned an executive order that President Trump plans to sign. I saw as we were waiting for the officials to come into this room, the staff secretary at the White House, Will Scharf, previously a personal attorney to Trump's, was in the room.

That is the person who brings the documents and handles all of those executive orders. So, it is notable that he is traveling with the president today.

COOPER: All right, Kaitlan, thank you. We'll see you at the top at nine on "The Source." Nick Watt, thank you as always.

Joining us now is California Democratic Senator Alex Padilla. Senator, what do you make of President Trump's talk of conditioning disaster aid on California, adopting a Voter ID Law? And, as he says, letting the water flow?

SEN. ALEX PADILLA (D-CA): I mean, its offensive. It's insulting. It's never been done before in the history of our country, as I think prior speakers have said.

Can you imagine if President Biden told the people of Florida, I'm not going to give you disaster relief unless you change your gun laws or Louisiana with your abortion laws. It's unconscionable.

From the point of view as a Southern Californian, because that's home for me, I know that we have been there for every other region in America in their time of crisis -- hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, whatever it is and it happens to be our time of crisis.

And we expect the federal government in our country to be there for us without conditions, without strings attached. So, to suggest that is unconscionable.

[20:15:16]

COOPER: This thing that he keeps, letting the water flow, getting more water from the north, originally, my understanding again, when this was sort of being brought up back in 2019 that it was largely an issue to try to get farmers more water, which is a real concern. Would it have -- would that water be also going to LA County, and would that be available for would that have made a difference?

PADILLA: Yes, look, Anderson, here's a truth that everybody needs to understand. The level of water flowing to Southern California from the north today is the exact same as it was during the first Trump administration.

What he's talking about is exactly that not getting more water from the north to the south, but redirecting water in California is complicated. You have different users, agriculture, municipalities, environmental protection, et cetera, and even within that number of water districts.

So, you can take away from one water district to try to please another. No. What we have in place right now through federal and state partnerships, is a great balance and we need to keep that balance, not undermine it because of, you know, some political support that the president is trying to please or placate.

COOPER: If the president decided, I mean, he has slim majorities in both the House and the Senate, if he wanted to condition the aid to California on voter ID or anything else, do you or the Democrats have much of any leverage to oppose it?

PADILLA: Look, here's why I'm hopeful. First of all, when we first went to President Biden, who was quick to lend significant federal support, what a contrast here. The pitch and the thank you letter was bipartisan. Even California House Republicans knew that this -- the disaster declaration and the immediate relief was necessary and should not be conditioned.

I'm hopeful that despite the president's political rhetoric and attacks, that people like Senator Rick Scott, former governor of Florida, who knows what it is to deal with the disaster. Senator Thom Tillis from North Carolina, whose state recently has been ravaged by hurricanes. They've come out in support of this notion that we should not condition aid.

So, those Republicans that know better need to stay strong. They need to stand up to Trump.

COOPER: I talked to you on that Wednesday, the eighth, on the streets in Altadena, a street that was burning and had just burned down around us. Is there, I mean, does somebody local state authorities need to be held accountable? I mean, is there an investigation that needs to be done, should be done about, you know, hydrant concerns, talk about delayed evacuation orders. The reservoir that was empty for repairs because of a cover, the concern over bird droppings, criticisms around brush clearing. I mean, does this -- do answers need to be to be had?

PADILLA: Yes, I mean, after every big disaster, there's always a look back. What happened, what was the cause of these multiple fires are all underway? What went right? What went wrong? What could have been gone better, so that were better prepared for the next time? So, that's natural.

Of course, we should try to learn from this. But to again suggest that this water from the north -- that's not what happened here. The analogy I've shared often is when you're in the shower, at least in a in a modest home and somebody flushes the toilet, you're going to feel it. Maybe the temperature drops, but at least temporarily, there's a slight loss in pressure.

The fire hydrant system in any major city in America is made to address a fire here, a fire there, not thousands and thousands of homes being burnt at the same time, with countless firefighters plugging into all these hydrants.

Of course, the pressure is going to be impacted. Of course you're going to go through the water a little bit more quickly. That's what we're dealing with here, not whether water is flowing from one part of California to another. So the president needs to get his facts straight.

COOPER: Senator Padilla, I appreciate your time, thank you.

PADILLA: Thank you, Anderson.

COOPER: Coming up next, the vote that he and his Senate colleagues are getting ready to take tonight on defense secretary nominee Pete Hegseth. We've got new reporting on fresh doubts among some Republicans about Hegseth's chances.

Also tonight, our Ed Lavandera on a new wave of deportations specifically involving US military aircrafts.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:23:26]

COOPER: Take a look at the Capitol tonight, we're just minutes away now. Defense Secretary nominee Pete Hegseth will get his Senate votes. Starting around just right before nine o'clock, I think, until recently, it seemed a foregone conclusion.

Now, perhaps somewhat less so. CNN's Manu Raju is at the Capitol with the latest for us. So how does GOP leadership think the vote is going to go tonight?

MANU RAJU, CNN SENIOR CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: There's high anxiety in the Capitol, Anderson. No doubt about it, because already this was a close vote, 51-49 was the vote yesterday to advance this nomination. But there are two Republican senators who are uncertain how they would vote. And if they vote no, that will be enough to tank this nomination. Those two Republican senators, the former Senate Republican leader, current Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnell, has not said how he would vote. And Senator Thom Tillis, someone who has not said also how he'll ultimately come down and is someone who were watching very, very closely.

We do know that the senate majority leader, John Thune, has spoken to him several times over the course of the day, Anderson, and we also are expecting the possibility of Republicans needing JD Vance to come in and break a tie, which would only be the second time in history a vice president was needed to do so for a Cabinet nominee.

But if he does go down, Anderson, it would be the first time since 1989 that the Senate has rejected a Cabinet nominee, that for John Tower, for Secretary of Defense, who also faced similar allegations as Hegseth has faced over womanizing and excessive drinking. Of course, Hegseth has denied those allegations -- Anderson.

COOPER: And Manu, is there any sense of what, if anything, changed in the past 24 hours? I mean, when you spoke to Senator Tillis yesterday, he appeared to be on track to vote for Hegseth.

RAJU: Yes, he has not said. In fact, they have been radio silent about where he is on this critical nomination. When I asked him yesterday about his view, Senator Tillis indicated that he was reviewing all of these past allegations and was trying to see if anything could corroborate them.

[20:25:19]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. THOM TILLIS (R-NC): I have tried to and continue to track down before his confirmation vote any sort of lead with people that would speak to me, and they all had one thing in common up to this point, and none of them could provide me with firsthand, corroborated testimony that I could point to.

So now, I have to go through, and am going through this last allegation. But unless I can point to specific, firsthand corroborated testimony, I'm not going to cave to pressure. I'm going to vote for his confirmation. If the information comes out, this material we should know over the next 24 hours.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: And he said we should know within the next 24 hours. So, the question is, is there any new information that has come out? The only real key piece of information over the past day has been the revelation that Pete Hegseth paid $50,000.00 to an accuser of sexual assault, that during that 2017 incident that Hegseth has denied assaulting that woman but we have learned that dollar amount of this nondisclosure agreement that he signed with this accuser.

It's unclear, Anderson, if that is weighing in on this or what else Tillis is considering. But he is also, Anderson, up for reelection in 2026. And undoubtedly, if he votes against this nominee, he'll draw Donald Trump's ire ahead of a potential primary.

COOPER: All right, Manu Raju, thank you.

We also have breaking news now from CNN's Josh Campbell. He reports that Homeland Security deportation efforts could target more than two dozen cities, according to a source familiar with the plans. That news comes just hours after federal law enforcement began using military aircraft for deportation flights, and while deportations are not new, the use of C-17s and C-130 transports is -- CNN's Ed Lavandera has more. He joins us from El Paso, Texas. So, what more are you learning about this military action at the border?

ED LAVANDERA, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, four of these military planes have been sent to -- two in San Diego, two in El Paso. We know one of those flights was -- took a group of about 75 to 80 Guatemalan citizens who had recently crossed the border here in the El Paso area and were repatriated back to Guatemala earlier today.

But as you point out, there's important context here. Over the last few days, the Trump administration has been touting the numbers of people that have been deported since they took office this week. It's important to point out that so far, those numbers are not much different than what we've seen in recent months in the last year or so, immigrant advocates have been saying that so far, not much has changed.

And those flights, we should also point out, for context, that even though its new, that military flights or aircraft are being used to carry out these deportations, there have been deportation flights that have gone on for years all across the US southern border -- Anderson.

COOPER: Well, first of all, I'm curious how much of this is to just have the visuals of military aircraft being used, which sends a message to people in countries in Latin America and South America about the seriousness of this administration. What's the latest you're hearing about possible ICE raids nationwide?

LAVANDERA: Yes, I think you know a lot of that, and pardon the train that is blowing right past us here as we stand near the border wall is, and there's a lot of that happening right now with --

COOPER: I hope you're not on the tracks there --

LAVANDERA: I'm not sure if you can hear me.

COOPER: It sounds like you are pretty close.

LAVANDERA: Apologies, Anderson. If you can't hear me --

COOPER: All right, we'll check back in if you want to talk more about that. In the Hegseth vote, joining us now is former Minnesota Republican Governor Tim Pawlenty, who hopefully is not near a railroad track, no, he's not. Also, Democratic strategist Alicia Johnson and journalist and "Lift Our Voices" co-founder Gretchen Carlson. Gretchen, are you surprised by this sort of 11th hour uncertainty? Hard to tell how real it may be. We heard Thom Tillis there saying he's looking for evidence but hasn't really found anything.

GRETCHEN CARLSON, JOURNALIST AND "LIFT OUR VOICES" CO-FOUNDER: Yes, we thought it was a done deal after the procedural vote yesterday, with only two Republicans saying no. But you know, it started percolating earlier this morning that there was maybe some consternation amongst Republican Senators, others who are voting yes.

And it's just sort of been building throughout the day. I mean, there's sort of this feeling now that it may not happen. And exactly what Manu was saying is that Thom Tillis and McConnell are the two that might actually end up voting no.

You know, listening to Thom Tillis and how he was saying how he's looking at all the evidence and he wants to talk to first party people. You see, this is what I think all senators should have been doing from the beginning. Like, to just come out and say, I'm automatically supporting this person with all these allegations. That is not true conviction. And actually, you have a senator like Thom Tillis, who's taking the time to actually say, no, I'm going to look into all of this. That's what the people vote their elected officials to do.

[20:30:11]

COOPER: Governor Pawlenty, I mean, do you -- what do you make of this apparent uncertainty among GOP? I mean, do you think it's really uncertainty? Do you think McConnell, Tillis would join Senators Murkowski and Collins?

TIM PAWLENTY (R), FORMER MINNESOTA GOVERNOR: Well listening carefully to Senator Tillis's words that we all just heard, he said if he doesn't find firsthand corroboration --

COOPER: Right.

PAWLENTY: -- of these allegations, he's going to vote for Hegseth and that was statements made late today. And I doubt he's going to find that corroboration tonight. And if they go forward with the vote, my prediction to you is he's going to vote for Hegseth.

And, by the way, I think this situation is partly a referendum on Hegseth, but it's partly a referendum on Donald Trump. And the Republican Party has been taken over by Trump and he's calling the question. And he -- Tillis is up for re-election next year in North Carolina. And that is no easy path for him if he's got Donald Trump trying to take him out.

COOPER: Alencia, how much political capital does President Trump have on the line with this nomination?

ALENCIA JOHNSON, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Listen, it's interesting because I actually will agree with the governor and what he said and that a lot of this is about Donald Trump's politics and the party that has been taken over by Donald Trump.

And so, as much as we would think that he has a lot of political capital on the line and that there's a risk with this nomination, we're not talking about any other president. We're talking about Donald Trump who will as the governor said, Tom Tillis is up for re- election, Donald Trump will make him a target. And we know how large and vast Donald Trump's face is.

And so it actually makes this an unfortunate situation for the Republicans who actually do want to stand up to him and not set this precedence that you just rammed through any nomination of someone who has a background like Hegseth.

COOPER: Gretchen, the images from the border, I mean, nobody should be surprised really by them given this is what President Trump campaigned on.

CARLSON: Yes.

COOPER: This is what many people wanted to see and now they're seeing it, even though, you know, crossings are lower compared to what they had been at the height of the Biden administration. But the images are the images.

CARLSON: Right. But, you know, the majority of Americans as we were leading up to the election, remember, the majority said they wanted mass deportations. And then one of the biggest messaging errors for Democrats after the loss with Kamala Harris was on immigration.

And you now have 12 battleground states where the senators there are now trying to reach out to the Republicans to say, hey, can we have a bipartisan deal on immigration again? And now the Republicans aren't saying, nope. We're not going to do it this time.

So, look, I think that the majority of Americans don't have a problem with what they're seeing happen at the border right now. Trump said he was going to do it and so far he has the American -- the majority of the American public behind him.

COOPER: Governor, what do you think of military involvement in immigration and border security? What impact do you think it's going to have obviously losing National Guard presence there a lot over the years?

PAWLENTY: Well, one of the main reasons that Donald Trump won this election is because the Democrats dramatically and belatedly underestimated the potency of the illegal immigration issue and Donald Trump promised to deal with it aggressively and boldly and he is.

And he's declared an emergency including security dimensions to that emergency which empowers him to deploy the military as you're seeing on these images. And I think as Gretchen just said, the book -- well, all the people who voted for him and many more are actually going to be not only comfortable with, I think, applauding these efforts because they are very, very frustrated with runaway out-of-control illegal immigration. COOPER: You know, Alencia, I mean there was this New York Times -- a recent poll from the New York Times, will put it up on the screen, of a majority of Americans approve of some of President Trump's actions and immigration of 63 percent supporting deporting undocumented migrants who entered the U.S. in the past four years.

55 percent supporting deportation of all immigrants living in the U.S. illegally. Do you think support stays that strong if people see deportations going into practice across the country, you know, in mass scale?

JOHNSON: Listen, I think when the imagery continues to be to be this inhumane, you might see that shift. And I want to be very clear. I think the other two guests have said that Democrats were not taking immigration seriously. But remember, there was a bipartisan piece of legislation up for people to vote on and Donald Trump while he was a candidate taped it.

And so both sides of the aisle understand that this is a serious issue. But I also think the majority of Americans as well as Democrats want to make sure that the conversation about immigration and what we are doing about it is humane.

And using these military airplanes to do this and showing this imagery is a little scary and I don't think all of the American people --

COOPER: But let just be -- let's be -- I mean, frank, yes, there was a push for a bipartisan border deal and that didn't happen and there was a push later on, there was a deal and it was killed by then-candidate Trump.

[20:35:00]

But Biden acted on the border just weeks before the first presidential debate by executive order and it had actually a very, you know, strong impact. That was something he could have done early on that they didn't do anything about. And it was done just for the debate.

JOHNSON: Well, I hear you on the timing. I think that was clearly a time when President Biden realized I'm not going to get this through Congress and let me figure out other ways to ensure that I'm addressing the issue of immigration. And so I don't think it's fair to actually say that Democrats have been ignoring it or using it for political gain or anything like that.

But the hard part is doing this on their own and it's been a very partisan way to find a solution. And that's not going to work I think for the American people.

COOPER: Oh, we'll see. Governor Pawlenty, thank you. And Alencia Johnson, Gretchen Carlson as well.

Coming up, what convicted January 6 ringleader Enrique Tarrio told CNN's Laura Coates about wanting retribution after President Trump freed him from a 22-year sentence for seditious conspiracy. She joins us next. Also why a judge barred another ringleader Stewart Rhodes from Washington.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:40:13]

COOPER: In a new interview with CNN's Laura Coates, January 6 ringleader Enrique Tarrio talked about his demand for a, quote, "retribution." Tarrio leader of the far-right so-called Proud Boys was serving 22 years for a seditious conspiracy when the president pardoned him shortly after taking office.

Laura Coates joins me now. So, talk more about your conversation with Tarrio. What do you say?

LAURA COATES, CNN ANCHOR & CHIEF LEGAL ANALYST: It's really interesting one. I was wondering about his viewpoints on whether he was remorseful, whether he viewed the pardons given by Trump as something that were warranted or otherwise and how he saw himself in the general swath of people who were indeed given that form of clemency.

Listen to what he had to say about how he specifically is defining retribution, Anderson.

(BEGIN VIDEOCLIP)

ENRIQUE TARRIO, FORMER PROUD BOYS LEADER PARDONED BY TRUMP: So let's talk about what I -- what retribution is because I did -- in most interviews, I did clear up what I meant by retribution. I meant investigation. So, they need to be investigated. And if they did everything correct, and they did everything by the book, there shouldn't be anything for them to worry about.

COATES: Who's the vetted (ph)?

TARRIO: There shouldn't be -- and here, I want to be unequivocally clear that by no means am I asking for violent retribution to anybody. I don't condone any violence towards any elected official. Actually, I don't condone violence to any human being, but I do think that that it needs to be -- the process needs to be investigated.

COATES: And so, who would you be investigating? The prosecutors, the Attorney General? What does that look like?

TARRIO: I mean, I'm not in the legal field, but I think we should start from the top to the bottom. I think we should start with Merrick Garland. Move our way down to Matthew Graves. And specifically, in most of these J6 cases, some of the lead prosecutors in this case.

(END VIDEOCLIP)

COATES: Of course this is exactly why many were wondering about the type of preemptive pardons that might be handed down by Biden. And of course, his statement clarifying whether he intended violence through a statement retribution was top of mind given of course the events of January 6th and what he had been accused and convicted of having done.

COOPER: And what exactly is he accusing Merrick Garland and others of doing like the prosecutors actually just like doing their jobs in prosecuting crimes?

COATES: We made that exact point with him, Anderson, and he believes a huge miscarriage of justice took place precisely because of the fact that they did not change the venue outside of Washington, D.C. He pointed to the voting practices and behavior of who he believed was on the jury as an indication that he would not have gotten a fair trial.

But he also tried to make a distinction between why he felt Trump actually issued the pardons. It wasn't for innocence. It was because of that so-called miscarriage of justice and that people were entitled to have their trials elsewhere.

Of course, there wasn't much daylight in between the pardons given almost in a blanket style for those who committed violent acts and otherwise. But he saw that as the primary cause as to why people should look upon these pardons differently.

COOPER: All right, Laura, thanks very much. You can see the whole interview tonight, "Laura Coates Live" at 11:00 p.m. Eastern.

Up next, federal judge rules the founder of the so-called Oath Keepers is now barred from entering the U.S. Capitol or even D.C. And what we could learn more from newly declassified files on the assassination of JFK. Harry Enten joins us for that.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:47:36]

COOPER: The same day as the so-called Proud Boys leaders on a publicity tour, we learned that his fellow seditious conspiracy convict Stewart Rhodes is now barred from the nation's capital unless he has court authorization. Rhodes appeared at the Capitol complex earlier this week not long after President Trump commuted his 18-year sentence. The decision by a federal judge also applied to seven others from Rhodes so-called Oath Keeper group.

I'm joined now by Former Federal Judge Shira Scheindlin. So are you surprised by this order from the judge?

SHIRA SCHEINDLIN, FORMER U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE: I was a little surprised but I understood it.

COOPER: Yes.

SCHEINDLIN: I think that the judges in D.C. are frustrated. They're angry. They put a lot of time and effort into this and then was all wiped out.

COOPER: Yes.

SCHEINDLIN: So I think they thought of our -- at least Judge Mehta thought about it and said, do I have any jurisdiction left? And it seems to me it's an open question. I try to look at that.

COOPER: And what is -- I mean, you can borrow somebody from visiting someplace?

SCHEINDLIN: Oh, yes as a condition of supervised release, you can do a lot of things. And that's one of the things you can do. But the question is, does the court still have jurisdiction to change the conditions of supervised release? Is there still supervised release?

So when a judge issues a sentence, let's say me, so you give 18 years and then you say to be followed by three years of supervised release. And you set conditions for that release. So the question is, when the sentence is commuted, does it just end the jail term or does it also mean the supervised release is over?

COOPER: Because the interim U.S. attorney for D.C. also released statement saying --

SCHEINDLIN: Yes.

COOPER: -- if a judge decided that Jim Biden, General Mark Milley, or another individual were forbidden to visit America's capital -- even after receiving a last-minute preemptive pardon for the former president, I believe most Americans would object. The individuals referenced in our motion have had their sentences commuted, period, end of sentence."

SCHEINDLIN: Well, first of all, there was no sentence on Jim Biden and there's no sentence on Mark -- General Milley.

COOPER: Mark Milley.

SCHEINDLIN: Yes. So it's very, very different. They're not sentenced people. Here there was a sentence in place and it was commuted. Usually that would mean the sentence is commuted from prison to time served. So the issue that remains is, does the court of any jurisdiction left? And as I understand it, there's a split in the circuit courts on that very issue on the appellate courts.

COOPER: And if Rhodes was to violate the judge's order, what would happen?

SCHEINDLIN: Well, the judge could issue an order why he should not be held in civil contempt. The judge can't do criminal contempt because that would take a prosecutor. And the D.C. prosecutor is never going to do it if it's a Trump appointee. Doubtful.

[20:50:03]

So he could -- at most, he could do civil contempt and then there'd be a little trial and he could decide whether the guy is in civil contempt. And the punishment for civil contempt can include jail and fines. So I don't know if it would come to that.

But the real question first is, is the acting U.S. attorney right that the court has no further jurisdiction? And as I said, there seems to be a circuit split.

COOPER: What did you make of the pardons?

SCHEINDLIN: Oh, well, the pardons were too broad. He first said he would try to separate violent and not violent, but he did everybody. People who attacked police officers. I was surprised by that because he wants the support of law enforcement and claims to be a supporter of law enforcement.

COOPER: Pardons are also usually for people who have demonstrated once incarcerated a willingness to, you know, they have regret, willingness to serve others to -- there's clearly none of that in --

SCHEINDLIN: None of that.

COOPER: -- in that.

SCHEINDLIN: No.

COOPER: There's no --

SCHEINDLIN: But not all pardons, but require the person to say I'm sorry for what I did. But you're right, typically that would be part of it. But here, it was just everybody despite what they did, despite who they hurt, despite their actions --

COOPER: Yes.

SCHEINDLIN: -- despite their violence. So I was quite surprised at the over breadth of it.

COOPER: Judge Shira Scheindlin, thank you so much. Appreciate it.

SCHEINDLIN: Thank you.

COOPER: Up next, what we might find out now that the president has OK'd the release of the remaining classified government documents about the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:55:33]

COOPER: Looking there at the Senate floor with the confirmation vote for Defense Secretary Nominee Pete Hegseth is expected to start at the top of the hour. Hegseth is there in a room nearby along with his family. Vice President Vance is reportedly on hand in case he's needed to break a tie. Two republican senators have said they will vote no, unclear about two others.

Now, President Trump's fulfillment of a campaign promise signing an executive order one of many for the declassification of all files relating to the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy, Senator Robert F. Kennedy, and the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. And afterwards, he had an aide give the pen he used to RFK Jr. -- RFK -- Kennedy Jr., son of the late RFK, nephew of the murder president who the president's picked to run Health And Human Services. Take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEOCLIP)

DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENT-ELECT OF THE UNITED STATES: That's a big one, huh? A lot of people are waiting for this for a long for years, for decades. And everything will be revealed. OK? Give that to RFK Jr.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, sir.

TRUMP: OK.

(END VIDEOCLIP)

COOPER: Well, we want to focus now on the JFK files, the national intelligence director and attorney general must have a plan within 15 days to release the files on his assassination, but it's unclear when they'll be made public. Tragic event in Dallas in 1963 shocked the nation.

Obviously, it's fueled a lot of conspiracy theories including whether President Kennedy was killed by a single gunman acting alone in the Texas school book depository.

Joining us with more, Senior -- CNN Senior Data Reporter Harry Enten. So, I mean, I -- there was a whole bunch of documents released already. How many documents are yet to be unsealed?

HARRY ENTEN, CNN SENIOR DATA REPORTER: Yes, only about 3,000 give or take. You ask different research experts, but you're right. There have already been millions, millions upon millions of documents that have already been released by the government with concern to the JFK assassination.

And I really do have to ask, like, what are folks really expecting from these files? Yes, we believe a lot of them are from the CIA, and we'll see exactly what they hold. But I really feel like this is like Geraldo Rivera going to Al Capone's basement.

COOPER: I was going to make an Al Capone's vault basements (ph).

ENTEN: I beat you to it.

COOPER: Yes.

ENTEN: I beat you to it. Two New Yorkers. I beat you to it.

COOPER: Yes.

ENTEN: And, you know, of course nothing was actually found there. I just feel like folks are letting themselves get blown, you know, sort of make their minds, go sort of crazy and they're just going to be let down at the end of the day. COOPER: What do most Americans think? I mean are there polls on the JFK assassination?

ENTEN: You know there are polls --

COOPER: Of course there are.

ENTEN: There are polls on everything. We've been through this over and over and over again. And what's so fascinating to me is that most Americans actually believe, you know, that there -- it wasn't just Lee Harvey Oswald acting alone. And we've seen this over and over and over again in the polls.

You see it right there, 65 percent say two or more people in a 2023 poll. That's actually up from 2013. And more than that, that number I've looked at it throughout the entire street in every single poll taken by Gallup, a plurality of Americans have always said it was two or more people.

And so I think this type of release by Donald Trump is trying to get at those folks. There are a lot of folks who have been waiting and waiting and waiting and waiting for it. But ultimately, at the end of the day, I do think that a lot of these folks are going to be let down.

COOPER: I mean, on the Martin Luther King Jr. documents, I mean, what's interesting about that is there was weaponization of the FBI against Dr. King.

ENTEN: Correct.

COOPER: I mean, and J. Edgar Hoover obviously had -- was legendary and, you know, using the FBI for his own ends. So that would be interesting to see sort of more documents on that. But if not Oswald on the Kennedy assassination, who do people believe was behind this?

ENTEN: Yes, this is where it sort of gets nutter butter to me. You know, if you look at who the conspiracy theorists believe, in fact, might have been involved, get this a rising percentage of them, say that they believe the United States government was involved.

Maybe it was the CIA, maybe it was Lyndon Baines Johnson. That number has climbed to nearly 40 percent of the conspiracy theorists believing that the United States government may in fact been involved in that assassination.

I find the entire thing to be sort of nutter butter because I just think that the, you know, we've had 60 plus years of this going down and nobody has proved anything beyond what the Warren Commission actually found.

COOPER: All right. Harry Enten, I know you'll be pouring through whatever documents --

ENTEN: Oh, you know me I'll be going through it, like nobody's business. COOPER: The Hegseth confirmation vote now underway.

Two Republicans, Lisa Murkowski, Susan Collins expected to vote no. We don't yet know about Senators Mitch McConnell and Tom Tillis. Tom Tillis did speak to Manu Raju earlier today and indicated if he found something new that might have impacted his vote, but it sounded like he was heading toward a confirming vote.

But again, we don't know for sure. That will be covered extensively by Kaitlan Collins at The Source which starts now.