Return to Transcripts main page
Anderson Cooper 360 Degrees
Platner Speaks At Maine Get Out The Vote Rally As He Faces Controversies; DOJ Sends Prosecutor To Observe L.A. Ballot Counting; Experience Not Required; WSJ: Trump Wants Acting DNI Pick To Begin Process Of Firing Employees; Sources: New Acting DNI Didn't Have Security Clearance Before Job; Report: Ballroom Donors Given More Than $50B In Federal Contracts; Japanese Volunteers Now Searching Mountains For Missing American; Social Psychologist Jonathan Haidt On Why You Should Be A Techno-Skeptic. Aired 8-9p ET
Aired June 05, 2026 - 20:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
TOM FOREMAN CNN CORRESPONDENT: But here is the thing, Erin. Just like Donald Trump, what Hunter Biden is doing is turning his sometimes- notorious behavior into notoriety, which has real currency in the world of politics these days or as the kids say, "that's cash money" -- Erin.
ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST: Tom foreman, thank you very much. It is really something to see. And thanks so much for joining all of us on this Friday. AC360 begins now.
[20:00:25]
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST, "ANDERSON COOPER: 360": Good evening, from the Newsroom, two big stories top the broadcast tonight. For the first time since Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche refuse to say in writing the President's so called weaponization fund with many on Capitol Hill, were calling it a slush fund, was truly dead. The Justice Department, in a new court filing, has done just that, they put it on paper.
We begin, though, with Maine Democratic Senate hopeful, Graham Platner, who is speaking tonight at this get-out the vote rally in Bar Harbor. He's now, about a day out from the latest negative headline, there has been a string of them from his Nazi themed tattoo to his extramarital sexting to deleted Reddit post slamming police and people in rural areas.
The latest, being yesterday's piece in "The New York Times" headlined several women who dated Graham Platner recall unsettling behavior. The article went on to say that three women described, "volatile and toxic relationships that were unsettling and at times emotionally wrenching."
Mr. Platner could be charming and charismatic, they recalled in interviews, but also demeaning to women. And, in at least one case, even physically threatening. He drank heavily and was regularly unfaithful. One woman, who says she dated Platner from about 2013 to 2015, says. He twisted her arm once during an argument, then pushed her into a bedroom, holding the door shut and telling her she says not to come out until she was calm.
"The Times" says she was quick to note the Platner never hit or punched her. Platner addressed the multiple controversies he's facing when he addressed supporters on stage just about 15 minutes ago.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GRAHAM PLATNER (D), MAINE SENATORIAL CANDIDATE: When hurtful things I said on the internet a decade ago came out into the public as I shared my personal journey through PTSD and darkness of recovery and accountability and growth, Maine had my back.
(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)
PLATNER: Now, as every single piece of that past and journey gets dug up, litigated, and weaponized, you have my back.
(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: Well, "The Times" piece also mentions that some of the women questioned Platner's insistence that he did not know that his tattoo was a Nazi symbol until it came up in the campaign. One woman even said he taught her the German name for it, years earlier, Totenkopf, which means "Deaths Head," which dates back to the Prussian military but was adopted by the S.S. during the Nazi's reign.
The question, though, will it be too much for Maine voters in the upcoming primary and in November, if, as expected. Graham Platner faces incumbent Susan Collins. The race has national implications regarding the balance of power in the U.S. Senate. More now from CNN's Danny Freeman.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BONNIE DEPP, MAINE DEMOCRAT: Either get it all out there or shut up, one of the two.
DANNY FREEMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice over): For many Maine Democratic voters we spoke with, they said they're frustrated with Democratic Senate candidate Graham Platner, who they feel could give them their best shot at defeating longtime Republican Senator Susan Collins and help pave the way for Democrats to retake control of the Senate.
FREEMAN (on camera): Are you considering holding your breath and voting for him?
DEPP: I've got until Tuesday to decide, but I'm pretty sure I'll vote for him. I don't think a lot of this crap is anybody else's business.
FREEMAN (voice over): For some Democrats, they're willing to look past the interpersonal stories.
ZOO CAIN, MAINE DEMOCRAT: I'm not really interested in the guy's foibles. You know, I'm interested in his vision and what he has to say. And I love what he has to say. So yes, it's been definitely difficult because everybody is piling on this guy.
FREEMAN (voice over): But others did not buy Platner's tattoo explanation.
SANDRA BRADEN, MAINE DEMOCRAT: He's an intelligent man. Of course, he knew about it. I don't blame him for denying it, but --
FREEMAN (on camera): But that's still not enough not to vote for him. You're still going to vote for him, likely?
BRADEN: I'm going to vote for him, yes, but I don't like it. I'm not in favor of all that (bleep).
FREEMAN (voice over): Still, for some, the drip, drip, drip has left voters confused.
WOODY HAYWARD, MAINE DEMOCRAT: I don't know if it's misinformation or disinformation, right. Like, I don't know. Do we do any of us really know what's going to be or what kind of character he has? Don't know, unproven, unproven. So, is it the devil that we have or the or the devil that we don't know yet?
FREEMAN (voice over): According to a pair of recent polls conducted before the latest allegations, a head-to-head matchup between Platner and Senator Collins appears competitive, one with no clear leader and the other showing Platner with an advantage.
While Platner is the clear favorite to win the Democratic nomination on Tuesday, another high-profile candidate's name is still on the ballot.
Governor Janet Mills suspended her campaign back in April, but a source now tells CNN she's been getting encouragement to reenter the primary.
Beth Dindas, a Mills supporter from the start thinks it's likely too late.
[20:05:23]
BETH DINDAS, MAINE DEMOCRAT: I think that ultimately, unfortunately, we're going to lose this race again and we're going to have six more years of Susan Collins, who has let down the people of Maine time after time.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
COOPER: Danny Freeman joins us now from Portland. So, other than a post on social media reminding voters she's still on the ballot, has there been any sign that Governor Mills is going to resume campaigning?
FREEMAN: Yes, Anderson, as of this point, no. But again, a source close to the governor explicitly said that many people have been reaching out, encouraging to her, to more formally restart her campaigning. But, Anderson, the primary is just a few days away. And as you saw, the top, Platner has not stopped campaigning, actually sounding defiant in Bar Harbor this evening.
And the other problem is, as you heard from our piece, even many of those Democrats who are frustrated with Platner in the state still plan on voting for him -- Anderson.
COOPER: Danny Freeman in Portland, thanks very much.
Joining me now, former DNC Communications Director, Xochitl Hinojosa, former senior adviser to President Obama, David Axelrod, and CNN political director David Chalian. Xochitl how damaged is Platner candidacy going forward, do you think even if he wins the primary on Tuesday?
XOCHITL HINOJOSA, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, I think that it raises serious questions about trust and about just who he is. I think the fact that he hasn't necessarily been honest about some of the allegations that have been out there, he has doubted some of "The New York Times" reporting when "The New York Times" reporting seems pretty solid at this point. I think that will definitely hurt him with voters in Maine. Ultimately, what people in D.C. are saying about him does not matter at the end of the day.
He had a rally there. It was crowded. It sounded like people in Maine were standing by him. And there are still some people who are, you know, have their doubts. But whether or not that it is enough for them to not vote for him, to vote for Mills, to potentially vote for Susan Collins in the general election. That remains to be seen. There's been a lot of talk about Mills and whether or not she should reenter the race, whether or not is it too late to do a switch?
We've seen what happens when Democrats switch out their candidates at the end of the day, it never works. I am not sure that that is a solution. I think at the end of the day, Graham Platner will be the Democratic nominee in Maine, and National Democrats will need to figure out whether or not that race is still going to be closed, and whether they should still invest in it. But as of right now, it sounds like some Mainers are still sticking with him. It will be interesting to see whether or not he can overcome that in November.
COOPER: David Axelrod, I mean, do you think in a, you know, in a world where we have seen, you know, President Trump now for on the on the stage for so long that this has the same effect it might have had in past elections?
DAVID AXELROD, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yes, that's an interesting question and it's one that everybody's asking. What is clear is that people have really, really deep concerns, Anderson, right now about their lives, particularly about the economy. They believe the system is rigged against them. Platner burst on the scene last summer as kind of an everyman, working guy who was very much after that and very much challenging politics as usual and a corrupt, rigged system that many people in Maine perceive. And the question is, do they accept this and value, you know, his offer relative to their lives more than they do his own personal foibles.
I will say this, when you offer yourself as, not a politician, as usual, as someone apart from politics, then don't react to these stories in a very political way. When the story broke about him sexting some women while he was married, his first reaction was to lash out at the news organizations. And the woman who was in his campaign who revealed the story for spreading something that was not true and it turns out it was true that these things did happen. And he ended up, kind of, acknowledging that last night on T.V. his wife did.
And when you are not straightforward, he survived the first wave of negative stories, because he was candid about his struggles years ago. These were some things that happened later. And they were inconvenient for his story. And so, he did what politicians do, and he tried to deny it. He did what President Trump has done and denied stories that were true.
And I think people, I think that's unsettling to people and makes them wonder what's coming. But bottom line, Susan Collins has a 36 percent approval rating in the state. She's been there five terms. She's a Republican in a state that Democrats have won in presidential elections. Last election by seven points, Kamala Harris.
So, he can survive. But I don't know if he can if brick after brick after brick is, is added to the slope.
[20:10:40]
COOPER: David Chalian, when asked about this "New York Times" story on Platner, a Democratic Senator, Elissa Slotkin said, "I look forward to the day when I'm not answering every single week a question about bad behavior by another dude."
How much of a drag or distraction could Platner be for other Democrats on the ballot this fall, because they're making the case that they deserve to win back control of the Senate, which naturally begs the question of whether they think Platner is the kind of colleague they want.
DAVID CHALIAN, CNN POLITICAL DIRECTOR: Right, I mean, that was such an instructive answer when Elissa Slotkin was asked about that, because it was not the full embrace of Graham Platner as let's all get on board and move ahead full steam with this. But the reason we're even talking about this, Anderson, is because battle for control of the United States' Senate, which party controls it for the final, you know, stretch of Donald Trump's term here may hinge on the Maine Senate Race.
And so, this is what's putting Democrats in such an awkward position. And that's why you saw that from Elissa Slotkin. But you see other Democrats who have been with Graham Platner, Bernie Sanders still sticking with him. Ro Khanna appearing with him tonight at this event in Bar Harbor. They're not trying, they're not looking to give an inch here on this race.
And so, I think you have, Democrats are currently in a bind because it's not somebody given everything we've now learned about him, that would sort of be, fit the mold of a vetted candidate you'd want in a battleground race.
And yet, as David just was pointing out, Susan Collins is vulnerable here. And this is the horse that they're riding. And so, that means the next five months here are going to be really interesting because Graham Platner is selling a candidacy. This is the change you need. And now Maine voters might be turning that into a question mark. Is this the change we need? That's not sort of the question he wants going into the fall.
COOPER: Well, Xochitl, the other question is, you know, if there's five months left in a general to a general election, does anything else come out and, you know, is it going to be a more of a drip, drip, drip?
HINOJOSA: I think that's what Democrats are worried about. And I think that that's also why you didn't see a lot of Democratic Senators and others go to the meeting with him. I think people are worried that more will come out. Will they have to defend it? What will happen? Is this a seat that we invest a lot of money in, and then we potentially lose because something comes out at the 11th hour?
I think these are all questions that Democrats are worried about, and I will say that they're having conversations in Democratic circles after the Swalwell matter, which, again, that was involving a California governor. Again, you know, there is no reason to believe that there is going to be a Republican that wins that seat. It's likely to be Democratic, and it's not control of the Senate.
But I think there is a general concern like Slotkin was kind of saying, people are tired of answering for men, and they're not only tired of answering for men, but people want their candidates vetted. And as we are looking towards 2028, I think this will be a big question in the Democratic Party is, have you been vetted? Have you, you know, had a tough race in a purple state?
And those are the types of things that Democrats will want, because I don't think that we can risk losing any more seats, any more elections because of someone's past or because they're not truthful. And they decided to run even though they have had a checkered history.
So, this will be a big question for Democrats as we go into 2028 as well.
COOPER: Although, David, I mean, certainly, David Axelrod, I mean, certainly, you know, so many Democrats have been talking for years about getting candidates who are more relatable, getting candidates who don't come from the traditional, you know, pipeline of, you know, of past histories and schooling and the like, there's risks with that if people have lived real messy lives.
AXELROD: No, there's no doubt about it, particularly someone who's done four tours of duty in Iraq and Afghanistan. Let's be clear about one thing, though, Anderson. He was not the candidate of the Washington Democrats. They did not want Graham Platner, Chuck Schumer talked the governor into entering the race.
It's voters in Maine who decided that Graham Platner should be the candidate because they did relate to him and they felt like he understood their problems. He's done 80 town halls around the state and people feel like they got to know him and more importantly, that he listened and got to know them and that they shared an understanding of what the problems were.
So, you know, an old politician who you may remember and others may not, but Gary Hart, who ran for President in the 1980s, once told me, just remember, Washington's always the last to get the news and there is an element of that here.
I have concerns, I don't think we should have no limits to what we're willing to tolerate. And I think even in a seat that might decide control of the Senate, I don't think we should make excuses for people's behavior. And he needs to be open about, if there's other stuff out there, let's hear it, like that lady said in the setup piece. But at the end of the day, Graham Platner talking to people's real concerns and problems in the state in a way that they don't think politicians normally do.
That's a great -- that is a great advantage for him.
[20:15:59]
COOPER: Yes, and the other Gary Hart lesson, of course, don't pose in front of a boat called the monkey business, if my memory serves me correct. David Axelrod --
AXELROD: That may be appropriate here, too, I don't know.
COOPER: Yes, David Axelrod, David Chalian, thanks so much. Xochitl Hinojosa, as well, thank you.
Breaking news now in the California Governor's Race, CNN can now project Democrat Xavier Becerra will advance to the November general election. Becerra is a former attorney general of California, served as Health and Human Services Secretary in the Biden administration. Still unclear who he will face in November. Presumably, it will be either Republican Steve Hilton or Democrat Tom Steyer.
You may be wondering why key races in California have yet to be called, three days after election day. The state has long had a reputation for being slow to report the results. This is in part because significant number of the total votes come in as mail-in ballots are counted, provided by they provided they were postmarked by election day. That's according to the nonprofit, California Voter Foundation.
Governor Gavin Newsom has urged county election officials to speed up the counting, in part to avoid conspiracy theories, which gets me to the next point. We learned today that the Justice Department has sent one of its attorneys to Los Angeles to observe the ongoing ballot counting after Tuesday's primaries. Unclear if it's tied to this social media post. The Trump appointee
who leads the U.S. Attorney's office in Los Angeles, writing this morning that they have, "multiple election fraud investigations underway in coordination with the FBI."
For days now, the President has made claims of Democratic cheating without offering evidence. And he had this to say late this afternoon.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP (R) PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: You're going to be waiting weeks to get these votes, it's corrupt. Somebody said it's incompetent. I said, no, just the opposite. It's unbelievably competent. If you happen to be a Democrat politician, because with their policies, the only way they can get elected is to cheat.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: CNN's Evan Perez joins us now with more. So, is it clear what the DOJ is looking for?
EVAN PEREZ, CNN SENIOR JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: They say they're conducting fraud investigations, but we don't know if it's connected to this move today to send an assistant U.S. attorney to the ballot processing center to observe the counting that was happening today, Anderson.
We only know that they claim that they have these investigations ongoing. We've seen no public signs of it. But, you know, there is nothing wrong with a U.S. attorney going there that any anyone can come to the ballot processing center, they can get a walk through and observe from where the public stands. And so, we don't know whether anything that happened today furthered those investigations that Bill Essayli says that they have ongoing.
But to underline what you just pointed out, this is not uncommon in California for the for the county in Los Angeles and in California in general, to take some time in counting these votes, in part because of those, the big crush of mail-in ballots. And so, what we don't know yet, Anderson, is whether this goes beyond this, whether the federal government plans to ramp up any more pressure on Los Angeles and on California authorities as they try to get ahead of this.
COOPER: Well, separately, as we mentioned, DOJ has finally put into writing their nearly $1.8 billion so-called anti weaponization fund is, "not moving forward."
So now, that they've said that in a court filing, is that binding?
PEREZ: It is certainly binding for this fund. But we don't know what else the Justice Department plans to do. We've seen some hints of this that they have other plans to try to tackle this issue in other ways. For instance, earlier this week, the Senator, Lindsey Graham, put out a statement on social media raising the prospect that they could use the tort claims process, which is basically allowing people to file lawsuits. And then the Justice Department would then make agreements or settlements to pay them out.
That's another process that they could use to do this. And we saw Stan Woodward, who is the number three official at the Justice Department, saying, were on it in a tweet that he then deleted.
So, what we don't know is what other process they're going to try to achieve this. Because as you heard, despite what from, what we heard from the Acting Attorney General, Todd Blanche, you heard from the President saying that he still believes it's a great idea. He doesn't really seem to want to drop this, Anderson. And so, the question is, is there some other way that they plan to go at this very same result?
[20:20:36]
COOPER: Yes, and it's remarkable, Lindsey Graham doing that, given what he said, you know, the night, after the night of January 6th when he came back and, you know, essentially said how this was, he hated for it to end this way with President Trump and quite a reversal, Evan Perez.
PEREZ: And keep in mind, he also cooperated with the investigations that he now says were not warranted.
COOPER: Yes Incredible. Profiles of courage, Evan Perez, thanks. Coming up, an American college student on vacation with his family in Japan vanished one week ago. He will live to Japan for the latest on the search for him.
And according to a new report, President Trump said he'd like his new pick for acting director of National Intelligence, Bill Pulte, who has zero experience in National Security, to start the process of firing people. The agency charged with keeping America's safe.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:25:50]
COOPER: Keeping them honest, tonight new reporting on what the President plans to do with Bill Pulte, the man he just named to oversee the entire intelligence community, 18 federal intelligence agencies in all.
Pulte is the grandson of a home building tycoon and is now the top federal housing regulator. The President just this week named him as the new acting director of National Intelligence. He has no training or experience in intelligence or counterintelligence or National Security or military matters even.
No qualifications at all, at least as they are traditionally understood for this position. And that is not my take. Listen to these Republican Senators.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. JOHN CORNYN (R-TX): I see no evidence of any qualifications for that job. SEN. THOM TILLIS (R-NC): I think he's the worst form of sycophant and
advisor to the President.
REP. TODD YOUNG (R-IN): I'm waiting on the administration to explain to us credentials.
SEN. KEVIN CRAMER (R-ND): Well, I think it's a funny pick, to say the least.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: Well, again, they're talking about someone who is stepping into a job that in other administrations, Republican and Democratic, including the first Trump administration, has been held by people with deep experience in the field. Senior military commanders, top diplomats, former heads of other intelligence agencies.
Dan Coats, the President's first term DNI, was a longtime member of the Senate Intelligence Committee. His mission, and that of every DNI before and since, has laid out on the agency's website. And I quote from it now, "The Director of National Intelligence serves as the head of the Intelligence Community, overseeing directing the implementation of the National Intelligence program budget and serving as the principal advisor to the President, the National Security council and the Homeland Security Council for Intelligence matters related to National Security."
Well, the office was set up to prevent another 9/11. So, the question is, why would the President appoint someone with no experience in intelligence to do this job?
Well, perhaps it's because Pulte has shown himself willing to go after the President's perceived enemies. Since taking the job, he's referred these four individuals, all targeted by the President, to the Justice Department for alleged mortgage and insurance fraud. So far, none has gotten anywhere significant charges in one against New York Attorney General Letitia James were dismissed.
Referrals made by Pulte against the California Senator Adam Schiff and Fed Governor Lisa Cook have not yielded any charges.
As for what the President wants Pulte to do, as DNI, well, he's made that pretty clear. He says the mission will be to fire people, shrink the office, and perhaps even make it go away entirely.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I've heard that's way too high for way too long. I wouldn't mind if he cut, I wouldn't mind that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: Well, he told "The Wall Street Journal" today. I'd like to see smaller, adding, I think smaller, adding, I think there are a lot of people in there that shouldn't be there. Now, to be clear, there are experts in the field across the political
spectrum who would agree, including some who question whether the office of DNI is needed at all.
Pulte would not have to go through Senate confirmation as the acting director. He can hold that title for 210 days, and the President hinted at another mission for Pulte as well.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: He's not going to be permanent because, you know, I don't think he'd want to be permanent. But he's a very smart guy and he may find out some things about the rigged elections, et cetera et cetera. I think he'd like to do it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: Well, this could be quite significant. The President appears to want Bill Pulte as acting DNI to back up his claims about fraud in the 2020 election, which have already been investigated and there's no evidence of widespread fraud. But he may also want Pulte to look at the 2024 election, because in that same photo op we just showed you, the President also floated the idea that he actually won all 50 states.
And for all we know, he may want Pulte to investigate his latest allegations about fraud in California voting. Now, Pulte, of course, has no expertise in election law, but that doesn't seem to matter. It certainly didn't stop Tulsi Gabbard, the DNI that he would be succeeding from showing up during an FBI search of a Fulton County, Georgia elections office earlier this year. That's her on the scene in connection with the 2020 election.
She said it was at the explicit request of the President. Now, it was unprecedented for DNI to do that. Now, it may be a big part of Pulte's way to please the President.
I want to bring in CNN chief law enforcement intelligence analyst, John Miller and retired Army Lieutenant General Karen Gibson, who previously served as former Deputy Director of National Intelligence.
So, John, I know you're not surprised to hear the President say Pulte would look into baseless claims of widespread election fraud. How do you see that playing out, especially given his mandate from the President to start firing people?
JOHN MILLER, CNN CHIEF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND INTELLIGENCE ANALYST: Well, 40 percent of the DNI staff are detailees, which means they already work at other agencies.
So, that would probably mean sending a lot of them back. But he also said some of the right people aren't in there. That sounds like an ideological judgment where they've done this kind of political cleansing of other agencies, where people who did analysis or worked on things prior that disagreed with the facts that the President put forth, or things that he claimed to be facts, might be the targets there.
[20:30:51]
So there's a lot of nervousness. But there's a bigger picture here. And the President said this as well. He said, you know, we want to get him in there to, I think his words were, he may find out some things about the rigged elections. Now, we don't know in that sentence is he talking about the former elections or elections to come, but we're headed for the midterms.
When you put a guy in there who has no intelligence background, as you've got about 200 days that he can stay in there as an interim, 210 days, and that covers the time that the midterms are coming up, that puts a presidential operative, basically, political operative, in a place where he could make all kinds of claims about election interference and so on.
Footnote here, there's an agency within the DNI called the FMIC, Foreign Malign Influence, and their mission is to study any attempts by foreign countries to attack critical infrastructure, mess around with election infrastructure, or anything else. Tulsi Gabbard basically dismantled that.
So here, you have a position where the machinery to prove or disprove it has basically been broken. And an operator who has proven, at least in the past, is willing to say almost anything or do almost anything for the President.
COOPER: General Gibson, I mean, I guess some people might think, well, OK, maybe having an outsider look at intelligence in a different way, there's some value in that. I mean, I'm trying to be generous here. As somebody who's spent a lot of time looking at intelligence and working intelligence with the military, what do you make of this?
LT. GEN. KAREN GIBSON (RET.), FORMER DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE: Well, I think it's fair to say that the Office of the Director of National Intelligence has not fully realized the vision that was laid out after 9/11. And there could be some legitimate analysis of the positions and how they support that very critical mission.
But if you're going to take a DOGE-like approach to just indiscriminately cutting folks, I think that's really dangerous. I mean, there's so much at stake when you consider the responsibilities of this office. And in terms of bringing in an outsider, I can imagine some scenarios in which someone might do well in this position.
They'd have to be incredibly smart. It's a very complex and dynamic environment. You're responsible for overseeing everything from highly technical collection in space to covert, sensitive operations, hostile territories to developing post-quantum cryptography.
You'd have to be really smart. You'd have to be willing to buckle up and learn and to rely on technical experts in the organization to advise you. I think we'd also want a really compelling leader who was collaborative, who was credible, and who was visionary. And finally, I'd say you'd need a lot of bureaucratic chops because you're going to oversee 18 very diverse agencies to include the most expensive, most technically complex agencies, intel agencies on the planet.
COOPER: And John, Pulte didn't have a security clearance before he was picked for this role. Is that unusual?
MILLER: Highly unusual. Now --
GIBSON: Certainly. I -- yes, probably unusual.
MILLER: -- the position, the law that creates the DNI says that the person must have a depth of experience in intelligence. But that's to be confirmed by the Senate. This interim appointment is basically kind of skirting that law. No DNI before Bill Pulte has ever approached that job without having a high level beyond top secret clearance.
COOPER: John Miller, General Gibson, thank you.
Up next, remember how President Trump said the ballroom would be paid for by private donations, wouldn't cost a cent for the American public? Well, the watchdog group found many have gotten federal contracts. People have donated. Many have gotten federal contracts worth more than $50 billion of taxpayer money.
And later, it's already morning in Japan, where the search for missing American college student enters its eighth day. We'll take you there live.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:39:12]
COOPER: The President's ballroom is back in the headlines tonight. According to a new report, an incredible report from the advocacy group Public Citizen, more than half of the publicly identified donors to the project have pulled in more than $50 billion in new or expanded federal contracts over just the last six months.
This is how the White House responded when we asked about the report, quoting now, "The same critics who are alleging fake conflicts of interests, would also complain if American taxpayers were footing the bill for these long-overdue renovations. The donors for the White House ballroom project represent a wide array of great American companies and generous individuals, all of whom are contributing to make the People's House better for generations to come."
Joining us now is Public Citizen's Jon Golinger. It's kind of a non- denial denial. I mean, they didn't actually address the -- what you have raised in this report. It's extraordinary. Just lay out these massive government contracts are going to raise in this report. It's extraordinary. Just lay out these massive government contracts are going to ballroom donors.
[20:40:10]
JON GOLINGER, DEMOCRACY ADVOCATE, PUBLIC CITIZEN: That's right. I mean, we found that the donations from these companies to the ballroom are no gift, they're a grift. And we looked at the 27 companies that have been identified as ballroom donors. The White House identified a chunk of them, but news reports had to dig out others. And we think there are more because they've kept a number of these donors.
COOPER: They're allowed to be anonymous.
GOLINGER: They're allowed under a secret contract that we sued and got from the government. They're allowed to remain anonymous. We actually don't know the full extent of how bad this is. But what we do know, we wanted to dig in on, and we found that of those 27 companies, more than half of them have received huge contracts in the last six months since they made their donations, since they were vetted at the White House in a banquet, totaling $50 billion.
And these are, you know, millions, hundreds of millions, in some cases many billions of dollars. These are tech companies. These are defense contractors. These are some of the big names that you know, and then there are probably some others that we don't. So it's literally pay and then play.
COOPER: And the idea that -- I mean, it's very hard. There's not like, are there paper trails to find? I mean, you were suing for lawsuits, but is a lot of this dealmaking just done verbally?
GOLINGER: Right. So, I mean, just like so much else about the Trump administration and in the corruption space, this has never happened before.
COOPER: Right.
GOLINGER: There's a reason that no president has asked big companies to give them money for a pet project and then doled out this hundreds of millions, if not billions of dollars, because at least it looks bad. And the American people need to trust their government for it to function. This falls apart when this happens.
There are paper trails. And we, in fact, we're digging -- we sued to get the secret arrangement of how the money, so it's not just that the money we know was given, but the money has flowed through a charity that we have no visibility into, into the Park Service, which is weird, and then back into the piggy bank of Donald Trump at the White House.
So we are uncovering how the money has flowed. There's a lot of people on those streams at these companies that know a lot. So we're starting to hear from some of them and get to learn more about how the money was asked for, whether deals were actually made. We don't know if they were, but they might have been.
COOPER: You've also learned about federal enforcement action that had been dropped against some of these companies.
GOLINGER: That's right.
COOPER: After they donated. GOLINGER: That's right. So there's the money. And I would just add that in the last five and a half years, two-thirds of the companies got $338 billion. So this is a huge amount of money and a lot at stake. But you're right that the -- it's not just the actual cash for contracts, but most of the companies that we looked at also were either facing federal enforcement actions or had them dropped. And that's either labor violations, workplace safety violations.
A number of them want merger reviews or antitrust actions dropped. And those are things that if the federal government walks away, it costs the American people money, in some cases their lives.
COOPER: It's incredible. I mean, this is incredible. Like you hear about this in past generations and you think, oh, well, that doesn't happen anymore. And this seems so blatant.
GOLINGER: Right. And this one, you know, unfortunately, this happened in front of our eyes, at least the demolition of the East Wing, the demolition of the People's House. So -- but the corruptions happened underneath it.
Now, the administration has said that Trump, President Trump and his spokespeople have said from the beginning sidestepped the question and said it's a gift. But it costs the taxpayers so much more when companies can give millions and get billions back. That costs us real money. And this is something I think is going to be investigated and potentially prosecuted for a long time to come.
COOPER: Well, it's incredible work that you've done at Public Citizen. Thank you so much for talking about it.
GOLINGER: Thank you.
COOPER: Appreciate it.
GOLINGER: Thank you for having me.
COOPER: I will talk to "The Anxious Generation" author, Jonathan Haidt, about the damage cell phones are doing to kids development and what we can do to stop it.
Also up next, the latest on the search for a missing American college student who vanished one week ago in the mountains of Japan.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HANAKO MONTGOMERY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: So this is the type of trail that the Japanese police have been investigating to search for Weston. He's known as an avid hiker. So they think that maybe he might have disappeared into the woods when he went missing on May 29th.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:48:22] COOPER: More breaking news tonight. In Japan, police are getting help from volunteers in the search for American Weston Higginbotham, the missing Auburn University student who vanished a week ago in Kyoto. He was last seen on a path that led to a hiking trail in nearby mountains. Since last week, police officers, K-9s, helicopters all scour the mountainous terrain trying to find him.
Hanako Montgomery is on the ground with more.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
MONTGOMERY (voice-over): Deep in Japan's forests, a search is underway for Weston Higginbotham, a 20-year-old college student from Alabama who vanished during a family vacation.
MONTGOMERY: So this is the type of trail that the Japanese police have been investigating to search for Weston. He's known as an avid hiker, so they think that maybe he might have disappeared into the woods when he went missing on May 29th.
MONTGOMERY (voice-over): Police are relying on K-9 units to sniff out any trace of Weston. But the forest search ends, for now, with no answers. Just more anguish for a family still waiting for news.
NANCY HIGGINBOTHAM, SON DISAPPEARED IN JAPAN: There are so many --
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes.
HIGGINBOTHAM: -- possibilities that we have thought through, because as a, you know, as a parent, you don't want to think the worst and, you know, you keep seeing these sightings here and there. It's like, well, maybe, you know, I don't know. I don't know.
MONTGOMERY (voice-over): The day Weston disappeared, the Higginbothams were vacationing in Kyoto, Japan, a major tourist destination in one of the world's safest countries. But after a small disagreement with his mom, they agreed to give each other some space.
Nancy, his mother, tells me it's not unusual for Weston to clear his head in nature. But when he seemingly turned off his phone location, panic set in.
[20:50:04]
HIGGINBOTHAM: Well, it was scary, because that's not Weston. I mean, we're just -- we don't do that in our family. Even when we're mad, we don't do that in our family.
MONTGOMERY (voice-over): Since then, Nancy has posted daily appeals on social media, asking anyone with information to come forward.
HIGGINBOTHAM: He has a heart of gold, and we all want him to come back safely.
MONTGOMERY (voice-over): Since have answered her call, sharing Weston's photo and distributing flyers to help find him. MANAMI NAKAGAWA, VOLUNTEER DISTRIBUTING FLIERS (through translation): The search ends when people stop looking. For as long as it takes, I'll keep doing everything I can until he's found.
MONTGOMERY (voice-over): The police have told us that until they find Weston, they won't stop looking. And as the search continues, so does a mother's hope.
And today, the search is getting extra help. Citizen hikers are now heading to the mountains, after Higginbotham's family organized a search-and-rescue party of volunteers.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
MONTGOMERY (on-camera): And Anderson, we're still at the station where the Higginbothams have just departed to go search for their son. And when they left, they told us that they are extremely grateful for the outpour of support that they've been receiving from locals. They told us how one individual is shutting down his business for a week and traveling all the way from the capital, Tokyo, to come down to Kyoto to help them look for Weston.
Other individuals have been driving them around to different police precincts, offering translation support. And they are so grateful that all these individual strangers are helping them look for Weston, Anderson.
COOPER: We're wishing them the best. Hanako Montgomery, thank you.
Next, my conversation with the "Anxious Generation" author, Jonathan Haidt, about what technology is doing to our kids, and what we all can do about it.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:55:59]
COOPER: Social psychologist, professor, and author of "The Anxious Generation," Jonathan Haidt, has long been sounding the alarm of the negative impacts of social media and other rapidly advancing technology on kids and teenagers. His latest TED Talk was just released, where he's encouraging more techno-skepticism.
I spoke with him earlier.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: You give a TED Talk, you talk about three principles of what you call techno-skepticism. And they are protect brain development, prioritize people and books, not screens, and beware artificial relationships for minors. So talk about protecting brain development for kids.
JONATHAN HAIDT, AUTHOR, "THE ANXIOUS GENERATION": Sure. So human childhood is this really, really long affair compared to other animals. And puberty is a period of very rapid brain change. And the brain is rewiring from the child form to the adult form. And it's going to be driven by what the kid is doing and what is marked as prestigious around them. That's the human plan for puberty.
It's also exactly when we give kids social media, which is going to hijack that process, is going to train them to be on whatever this weird culture is, and is going to interfere with their ability to develop focus and executive function and concentration. So it's insane to give this technology before the end of puberty.
Really at 25 is when the brain is done, but sort of 12 to 16 is a really heavy period of brain rewiring. We should protect it.
COOPER: Prioritizing people and books, not screens. That seems, I mean, it's obvious but it's not what's happening to a lot of kids today.
HAIDT: That's right. So that rule is especially in education. There was an idea coming out of Silicon Valley that machines can do everything people can do, only better, more efficiently. But it turns out humans are ultra-social creatures.
We need relationships. We need to interact with people with bodies. I mean, just what you and I are doing right now, we're sort of aware of each other. Our bodies are responding in ways that don't happen on Zoom.
And so the rush to put computers on kids' desks, what we call one-to- one device policies, there was no evidence that was going to help. It seems to have really hurt education. Test scores were going up for 50 years until 2012, and then they start going down.
And so, we made an enormous mistake allowing the EdTech industry to come in and say, oh, give every kid computers, a tablet, an iPad, a Chromebook. And the results are devastating, and we need to stop.
COOPER: And this has happened around the world. I mean, you point out Sweden was an early adopter of let's get a laptop in front of every kid in every classroom.
HAIDT: Exactly. There were a few countries that were ahead of us. The Scandinavians were ahead of us. And in Scandinavia, they seemed to have a very good ability to sort of then study policies in reverse course. And there was a report from the Karolinska Institutet, their main research institute, saying, it appears that educational technologies impede education. They do not help it.
COOPER: The third point of being a techno-skeptic is beware of artificial relationships from minors.
HAIDT: That's right.
COOPER: Again, it seems --
HAIDT: Yes.
COOPER: -- very obvious, right. HAIDT: It seems obvious. That's right. So, you know, that saying fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. We got fooled by social media. We were told that it was going to help their social relationships. It didn't. It harmed them. It blocked real friendships.
COOPER: Anybody who -- I mean, any sentient being who spends time online scrolling --
HAIDT: Yes.
COOPER: -- you know you just feel bad.
HAIDT: That's right. That's right. So that was a huge mistake. We got fooled. With -- and the damage to kids' mental health and their relationships, their loneliness is unbelievable. Then we got fooled by EdTech.
They said, oh, this is the way of the future. Oh, your kids need it. Oh, they need it to be capable in the digital workplace, which is not true. Meaning, they're going to work with it in the future, but that doesn't mean they should have it when they're young.
It damages development. We need to protect kids in order to prepare them for a life online. But --
COOPER: There are some who would say, well, my 6-year-old being computer savvy, that's a huge advantage.
HAIDT: No, it's not.
COOPER: It's not.
HAIDT: It's not. We thought it was because in the 90s, kids who played with computers learned hardware, they learned to program --
COOPER: And, of course, you look at like Bill Gates and he started --
HAIDT: Exactly.
COOPER: -- tinkering with computers --
HAIDT: That's right. That's why we got fooled.
COOPER: -- and Stephen Hawking.
HAIDT: -- because that used to be true. But once they developed the attention economy and the business model of capturing attention, all of these devices and technologies are super easy to use. So your kid, you know, if you protect your kid from all this damage until they're, say, 16, and then they start using AI and AI companions and social media and all that, they're going to learn it in a few weeks, maybe a few months.
COOPER: Well, I love the work you're doing. Jonathan Haidt, thank you so much.
HAIDT: Thank you, Anderson.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: Well, that's it for us. The news continues. The Source starts now. Have a great weekend. I'll see you Monday.
