Return to Transcripts main page

Anderson Cooper 360 Degrees

New U.S. Strikes After Trump Vowed to Hit Iran "Very Hard"; Hegseth: U.S. "Will be Busy Tonight" Striking Iranian Facilities; Trump on Maine Dem. Sen. Candidate Graham Platner: "He's a Thug"; White House Says UFC White House Event Will Cost More Than $60 Million; Bill Gates Testifies on Capitol Hill in Epstein Investigation; Gates Says He Had No Knowledge of Epstein's Crimes; Ambitious Plan for Triumphal Arch Construction in New Docs. Aired 8-9p ET

Aired June 10, 2026 - 20:00   ET

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

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

SHIMON PROKUPECZ, CNN SENIOR CRIME AND JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT (voice over): ...they won't tax local resources.

ROMAN PASEWICZ, PROVIDENT DATA CENTERS: We're developing a closed loop water system, so it conserves water. We believe we could develop them in a conscious way. Getting feedback from the community.

PROKUPECZ (voice over): Most here are like the Hubbards. They worry because the land is their life.

MR. HUBBARD: This is home, there's no amount of money that could get me to sell this. No amount of money.

PROKUPECZ: Shimon Prokupecz, CNN, Union, Missouri.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST: Thanks for joining us. Anderson starts now.

[20:00:37]

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST, "ANDERSON COOPER: 360": Good evening from the Newsroom. We begin tonight with American airstrikes on Iran, which the President just moments ago told a Fox correspondent, we will stop shortly. He said, again, according to Fox that Iran asked him to stop bombing. But he reportedly added, "We'll bomb the 'S' out of them tomorrow night," if Tehran does not sign a U.S. peace proposal.

Iranian state media, citing a senior official, denies that Tehran contacted the President. As for the strikes themselves, they came as no surprise. The President this morning said to expect them. And this afternoon at CENTCOM headquarters, Defense Secretary Hegseth was explicit.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) PETE HEGSETH, U.S. DEFENSE SECRETARY: CENTCOM, Central Command will be busy tonight because President Trump said we will be hitting Iran hard, and we will be because Iran has a chance to make a good deal, a great deal to codify what they said they've been willing to do, and they haven't been willing to do it.

So, as President Trump said, they've been tap-tap-tapping. You can see when someone is trying to tap-tap-tap on a deal. Instead, they're going to have tap-tap-tap bombs dropping on key facilities in Iran from the United States of America.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: Just moments after he said that the first reports started coming in from Iranian media of air defense activity in Tehran, explosions being heard elsewhere in the country, and about a half hour later, CENTCOM made the announcement online, saying, "U.S. Central Command forces began launching additional self-defense strikes today at 5:15 P.M. E.T. against multiple targets in Iran at the Commander- in-Chief's direction. The strikes are in response to Iran's unwarranted and continued aggression."

We do not yet know what precisely is being hit, nor the size and scope of the operation. But Iranian media is reporting explosions in Qeshm, Bandar Abbas and several other locations along the Persian Gulf.

Now, earlier today, the President said, "We hit them hard yesterday and will be hitting them hard again today." He also elaborated on his social media post this morning, in which he said Iran would have to, "pay the price" and, "for being slow to reach a peace deal." A deal he has been saying is close at hand for months now.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP (R) PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: We were really close to a deal, but they keep tapping us along. They keep playing us for suckers.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: Well, the President today also said this about what he suggested was a secret operation to spurt oil through the Strait of Hormuz.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: I can say it now, something you didn't know. You know, we've been taking out millions of barrels of oil. Nobody knows it. You know who doesn't know about it? Iran, until right now.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: Well, the President said the operation has safely escorted 200 commercial vessels through the Strait. Now, just for perspective, that's about a day and a half's worth of shipping traffic before the war, and shortly before air time, Iran's military said the Strait will be closed to all vessels, effective immediately.

Starting us off tonight, CNN chief White House correspondent and anchor of "The Source", Kaitlan Collins. So, what more do you know about the President's decision to order these strikes?

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN'S CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT AND THE ANCHOR OF "THE SOURCE": I mean, we're hearing two different things, Anderson, when it comes to why these strikes are being launched, which is today. It was the President saying that Iranian leadership was taking too long to come to a deal. Yesterday, they said it was because the Iranians had downed that Army Apache helicopter.

And so, I think in terms of where they are ultimately trying to get here, we know what the President wants, which is an agreement and a deal to his terms that he has demanded of the Iranians. But so far, they have not been able to get there. And so yesterday they were saying that the strikes were in self-defense. That is also what CENTCOM was saying tonight, when they confirmed shortly after 5:00 P.M. Eastern that, yes, more strikes were happening.

But as the President was saying to our friend, Trey Yingst over at Fox that this is in response to trying to get them to sign a deal, to come to an agreement with them, as he was also saying that the strikes will likely stop soon.

And so, it remains to be seen if what the President wants to do here, what he wants to have achieved here is done as a result of these strikes, because so far, Iran is saying that they will respond, that they'll retaliate. They're also saying the Strait of Hormuz is totally closed to any shipping vessels. That is something that CENTCOM is disputing tonight.

And so, it's still not clear exactly if this is going to end up in what the President is hoping with these strikes, which is getting Iran to sign a deal with him.

COOPER: And is there any effort on the part of the White House to try to tamp down any retaliation from Iran after the attacks and any attempt to control escalation? Because both the President and Secretary Hegseth suggested, there would not only be strikes tonight, but tomorrow if necessary.

COLLINS: Yes, and there might be, I mean, if Iran responds within a proportional measure in the view of the White House, I mean, that remains to be seen. But also, keep in mind they've been arguing that they're totally decimated in their capabilities.

Obviously, though, Iran is saying that they will respond here. And what stands out, also, Anderson, is just how publicly the President is telegraphing this. I mean, he said earlier today that these strikes were going to be happening hours before they actually did and before they commenced around 5:00 today. Hegseth also said the same. So, they're not really trying to catch the Iranians by surprise. They're publicly putting out there that these strikes are coming, as they are trying to get them to a deal and to come to the table on that.

[20:05:39]

COOPER: All right, Kaitlan Collins, thanks very much. We'll see you at the top of the hour for "The Source".

Joining us now is former assistant deputy secretary of defense for the Middle East, Dana Strohl. And here in the Newsroom. is former army captain and JAG officer, Margaret Donovan. Dana, both President Trump and Secretary Hegseth, they've explicitly said these strikes are intended to push Iran to agree to a peace deal that the President wants them to sign. Is that is this going to accomplish that?

DANA STROHL, FORMER ASSISTANT DEPUTY SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR THE MIDDLE EAST: Probably a couple hours of military strikes aren't going to fundamentally change this situation. Trump's team has staked out pretty maximalist positions in terms of what they want.

The Iranians are doing the same thing. The two sides were far apart yesterday. A couple hours of strikes tonight are probably not going to change their calculus much unless Trump is prepared for a sustained military campaign, which it's quite clear he's not. I don't see the Iranians rushing to the table after tonight.

COOPER: Margaret, the War Powers Resolution says 60 days unless Congress declares war. The President has to take troops out. The Trump administration has claimed 60-day window doesn't apply because this operation ended when the ceasefire began. Is that accurate?

MARGARET DONOVAN, FORMER ARMY CAPTAIN AND JAG OFFICER: That would not make any sense to me. I think that it's a legal fiction to say that the operation or that hostilities have ended because there was a ceasefire.

First of all, there was a blockade throughout the entire ceasefire and we have seen the United States use force against ships and third-party countries throughout that blockade. Second of all, is we've seen there has been --

COOPER: Why would the existence of a blockade during a ceasefire mean that it's not a ceasefire.

DONOVAN: Because a blockade is an act of war. It's only legal to employ one when you are actually at war. And it also authorizes the United States to use lethal force against both enemy ships and ships of third-party countries. So, it's a very serious act to set up. And so, to say that we're in a ceasefire means that we are truly in a ceasefire, and we are not conducting any active wars, including a blockade.

But also, you have these strikes, we had a downed aircraft yesterday that downed Apache, and we've had skirmishes here and there over the past, I don't know. Now, almost a month and a half since the May 1st, the first ceasefire declaration.

So, this war powers clock in my mind has been running since February 28th. And I think the administration knows it too and it seems like Congress is finally waking up to it. This whiplash that we're seeing, now, we're bombing to get a peace deal. And I'll let the irony of that sink in for a second. This whiplash that we're seeing of what we're bombing, why we're bombing.

This is exactly why the War Powers Resolution was enacted, because we should not just be letting one individual drag us into this haphazard war, with justifications changing every day. This should be justified through the people, through their elected representatives, through Congress.

That is the way the framers envisioned us entering war when they designed the constitution and put the declare war power clause within Article One of the legislators. So, the idea that we can keep going on with just a single person committing tens of thousands of U.S. Troops without any coherent plan, is really contrary to what the framers envisioned, and it should also be contrary to Congress.

COOPER: Dana, I mean, if the strikes are an attempt, at least in part, by the President, to show that the U.S. is in a strong position, which is true militarily. Is that actually borne out by the fuller set of facts as they relate to the negotiations? Clearly, Iran has been able to slow walk these talks for some time. I mean, this is, the President keeps saying this is on the cusp of happening. It has been months that he's been saying that.

STROHL: Well, I think there's a few different things going on here. First, yesterday, clearly, U.S. Forces in the Middle East are at risk. We had a U.S. military helicopter downed by an Iranian drone. So, the naval blockade is putting our military forces at risk every single day and the rest of the region is at risk. The Iranians, despite all of the claims of how much of their missile infrastructure has been set back, the drone infrastructure, the military industrial complex, clearly, they can still get off a lot of ballistic missiles and drones.

They sent over 20 of them toward Israel a couple days ago, attacked U.S. military bases in Jordan, Kuwait and Bahrain, yesterday. So, the military reality is that our forces aren't leaving anytime soon. They're quite at risk, as well as U.S. allies and partners across the Middle East.

COOPER: You know, Margaret, probably some people listening to the everything you just said might kind of say, well, look, this is war. So, what if it doesn't, it's not on a contract. it's not, it doesn't pertain to the legal niceties of the way somethings supposed to be done. Why does that matter?

DONOVAN: Because we live in a rules-based order. And we decided this. The United States has actually been a leader in many of the international agreements that we have disregarded under Secretary Hegseth and President Trump's leadership here. So, it really does matter.

And by the way, there's a human aspect to this, too. Like I said earlier, and as Dana just referred to, there are tens of thousands of soldiers deployed overseas. They have been gone. They missed Easter morning. They're missing summer vacations with their families. There is a human element to that, and we cannot forget that. That is why it is so important that this is an informed decision that is made with the consent of the people, through their elected representatives when we commit to this level of hostilities.

[20:10:41]

COOPER: Dana, is what we are seeing partly just a result of going into this without having really a plan long term. I mean, it seems very clear the administration maybe urged on by Israel, thought this would be wrapped up pretty quickly, which is inexplicable, given that Iran is obviously a complex enemy.

STROHL: Well, first, saying that Israel dragged the United States into this, I think really lets President Trump off the hook. He's clearly the decider here. And his explanations have varied over the course of this entire thing. In January, it was to protect the Iranian people from the regime. Then it was to change the regime. Then it was to eliminate the nuclear program. Then it was to eliminate the ballistic missile program. And those objectives have changed over time.

So, I think the big problem here is that there never was a strategy. Theres just a series of tactics, just a series of operations. And to Margaret's point, the problem now is we're just talking about a few hours of military strikes, what the American people deserve and frankly, what our military forces deserve is a strategy, an actual, articulated, achievable end state of we're going to do here.

And if the idea is a negotiated outcome, getting to some agreement where the Strait of Hormuz can be opened, the people of the region aren't at risk. And our U.S. Military isn't stuck in what right now is creeping toward an endless forever war of continuous military commitments. And we actually need to have a strategy that's more than just military strikes.

COOPER: Dana Strohl, I appreciate it, Margaret Donovan as well, thanks so much.

Just ahead tonight, what Microsoft founder, Bill Gates, told Congress today about his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein.

And next, the President's new attack on Maine Senate Candidate Graham Platner, raising questions about Platner's behavior, but also calling attention to his own.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: And they're trying to make excuses for him. I mean, he's worse than any human being that's ever run for office, probably.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:17:03]

COOPER: When we left you last night, Maine Democrat Graham Platner was just starting to celebrate his Senate Primary victory. It came, as you know, in spite of a number of scandals over, among other things, extramarital, sexting, ex-girlfriends, alleging mistreatment and that Nazi tattoo. None of it apparently was too much for Maine voters, Maine Democrats. All of it, though, will be opposition fodder in his general election campaign against Susan Collins. And today, the President got a head start on that.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: I watched that thug that's up in Maine. He's a thug, and they're trying to make excuses for him. I mean, he's worse than any human being that's ever run for office, probably. But this is a thug. He's a cheap, no-good person because he's just an outright pig. He's like a pig; I watched him a couple of times. He's like a pig.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: Donald Trump rooting around for just the right insult. His first term adviser, Kellyanne Conway, she had a different take. Here's what she said about Platner last night.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KELLYANNE CONWAY, FORMER COUNSELOR TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: What else do you need? Is there a magic number in this candelabra that would make you stop? Would it have to do with Nazis or putting upon women, perhaps underage women, but definitely women, not your wife of two years. Would it be that you're lying about that you're insulting heroes? That you're not, he's not even fit to lick their combat boots.

So, I'd ask the Democrats, is power really worth that to you?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: Those are all good questions. What else do you need? How many scandals putting upon women that are not your wife lying, insulting heroes? Is power really worth that to you? Valid questions that Kellyanne Conway, supporter of Donald Trump, who helped run his first campaign, is asking not to herself while looking in the mirror.

Joining us now is CNN political commentator Bakari Sellers and David Urban, also political journalist, Tara Palmeri, host of the "Tara Palmeri Show" podcast.

So, Tara, Platner says he's changed. These controversies are in his past, although some are more recent than others. Do you think that's going to be enough for independents and moderate Democrats who might not be as down on Susan Collins as Platner's progressive base?

TARA PALMERI, HOST OF THE "TARA PALMERI SHOW" PODCAST: Yes, I mean, right now he's basically in a tie and we know that time is the worst thing in a political campaign. So, we could be getting even more scandals to come because as we've seen, this is a pattern and this is a recent pattern. So, there are likely more people to come out and there's going to be a lot of money, millions of dollars spent on amplifying all of the character flaws and things that he's done and said in his past, which are, frankly quite disturbing.

But I think the problem is, is that Democrats just didn't present the voters of Maine with a strong bench. The alternative to Graham Platner was the governor, a woman who has won two terms against Republican in a purple state. But she's 78 years old, and they're coming off a scandal about with a President who was too old. And they thought that this would be an appropriate person. This is a person that the establishment, Chuck Schumer backed.

And then you had the other side, you have the Progressives, and they did what President Trump does. They went out on central casting, and they found Graham Platner, who is in, you know, an oyster shucker with a farm. And he's a Marine and he's burly and he has this great, you know, feeling of authenticity. But ultimately, he was a character.

And when you strip down the character, they are just like actors at the end of the day. And that's where the flaws are right now. And so now, Democrats are in this pickle where they've got to present this guy, and they have been the ones that have been running on, you know, the belief that character accountability standards matter. And they are the great contrast to Donald Trump, who ironically says, this is the worst person who has ever run for office.

[20:20:46]

And, you know, how can they make that argument, you know, backing James Talarico, a preacher in Texas, when against Ken Paxton, a guy who's, you know, been convicted, impeached, his wife is divorcing him on biblical grounds. How can they back, you know, James Talarico, in contrast to Paxton in Texas, in that Senate race and have Platner you know, who is not a reputable person? They're giving up their higher ground for this.

COOPER: David, isn't the President of the United States, I mean, obviously, there's the sort of hypocrisy of some of these criticisms and questions coming from him, but isn't he doing Platner a favor by targeting him? Isn't that what Democrats in Maine want?

DAVID URBAN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Anderson, if I were the President, if I you know, if he's listening, I'd advise him to just kind of just be silent on this one, right. Graham Platner is in deep enough quicksand as it stands right now. As Tara correctly points out, he is none of those things. He's not authentic in the least bit. He is lied about basically everything in his life. Look, Anderson, you know, I'm a veteran. I've been diagnosed with PTSD myself.

I resent Graham Platner using his diagnosis as an excuse, as some sort of crutch for all the vile and awful things that he's done. I don't know any veteran's PTSD or not that that have done the same kind of things that he has. He's, you know, he was on Kik. I don't know if any of our viewers really pay attention to what Kik is. I had to go Google it to see what it was, but it's primarily known for a site that used for grooming young children.

P-Hustle, he's in a towel, shirtless with his Totenkopf tattoo on there, fantasizing about raping intruders, but not in a gay way. He's offended Jews. He's offended women, he's offended the gay community, he's offended veterans. I'm not quite sure who's left to offend.

COOPER: Bakari, what do you make of it?

BAKARI SELLERS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: No, I mean, the bar is in hell and the bar is in hell because of Donald Trump. I mean, he's somebody who has, you know, five children by three baby mamas who slept with a porn star while his wife was pregnant. The list goes on and on and on. We can talk about what he said on the bus, on, I guess, "Inside Edition" or whatever it was. When he said that you would grab women by the you know what?

But I want to answer Tara's question directly. She asked, how can Democrats do X, Y, Z? And the answer is quite simple. A woman born today has less reproductive rights than her grandmother. I mean, that's a fact. And so, when you talk about this is the question about power, is the question about somebody like Susan Collins, who votes 95 percent with the -- with Donald Trump or somebody who will not.

I mean, Democrats are in a position where we will take the best of the worst. And that's a terrible commentary on where we are. Do I wish Graham Platner was a part of my party? Probably not, but do I want to be a party with Nazi sympathizers? Definitely not. Do I want to, but that's not the question now. And I wish we lived this utopia.

URBAN: But Bakari, you have your chance, you have your chance right now.

SELLERS: The chance right now is that I don't want Graham Platner to be my nominee. That is completely honest and unfiltered.

URBAN: Great, I love it.

SELLERS: However, I think Graham Platner will be a better senator than Susan Collins. This is a choice. It's binary, like we're talking about.

COOPER: Tara, first of all -- guys, stop, I want to bring Tara in, first of all, Tara, Ken Paxton was not convicted of a crime. He was indicted, not convicted. He was impeached but acquitted. I just want to get that out for the record. But I mean, Platner did rise. I mean, he was not the sort of anointed candidate in the State of Maine. There's clearly an appeal he has for voters there. Do you think that is strong enough that it will weather whatever may come ahead for him?

PALMERI: Well, yes, he had a great -- he had a great story and that's why these progressive operatives found him. Like they were literally looking for oyster shuckers from Maine. They liked his story. I mean, he's a veteran. Yes, he suffers from PTSD, but Americans love a redemption story. The problem is, is that the pattern is very recent.

But just to get back to Bakari's point about, you know, the better of two evils, this is a guy that you're about to unleash on Washington, which is a place that is just filled with temptation, right. I mean, you've got power, you've got young staffers, you've got lobbyists, you've got temptations, you have alcohol. He struggled with alcohol in the past, and were going to give him this position, a senator, a U.S. Senator, just because he's, you know, the lesser of two evils.

I mean, you're giving this man a lot of power to potentially harm future people. And he's already given a staffer an NDA for $15,000.00 which is another problem, the party still hasn't truly addressed with Eric Swalwell.

[20:25:51]

COOPER: Okay.

SELLERS: The problem, with that sentiment is this, that you are trying to predict who Graham Platner will be. There is a certain word that I love, which is grace, and Graham Platner has actually said that the person he used to be. I don't know if this is true or not, but let's take him for his word. The person he used to be is not who he is today. But what I can tell you is this. David can chuckle and I appreciate that because I love David with all my heart. However, I will take someone who is working on themselves daily more than I will take someone who votes for Donald Trump --

PALMERI: Right now.

COOPER: All right, David, final word for you.

URBAN: I was going to say, Bakari, you know, that would be nice if he hadn't lied about everything in his career to date. As Tara said, he's not an oyster shucker. He's a kid who went to prep school. He lied about how he got his down payment. He lied about, you know, his you know, he lied about everything in his career. He's not an oyster farmer, he's a hobbyist. His mother's his only client. The guy is a total fraud, a fake.

SELLERS: David, if you didn't support Donald Trump, like Donald Trump -- all right listen --

URBAN: Bakari, listen, I have come on this network --

SELLERS: -- this is, I'm bathing in milk chocolate, like the difference is --

URBAN: You know what, Bakari --

SELLERS: -- if you did not support Donald Trump, that is a fair statement to make. However, you're talking about someone who took the bar, who took the bar from what we expected, our political and public servants to be, to the depths of, you know what. And so now we are simply saying that I want universal health care. I want people to have an opportunity. I want a fair minimum wage. I want reproductive rights and if I have to take someone who is character and fundamentally flawed, as Graham Platner, who I wish was not my nominee, I will take him over Donald Trump sympathizer everyday--

URBAN: You know what, so, Bakari, when we had Roy Moore as a candidate, I came on this probably this show and said, boy, I can't support this guy. I can't do it. I wish he would do the same. It's not worth it, Bakari, it's not worth it that Faustian pact, okay, just give it up.

COOPER: All right, David Urban, Bakari Sellers, Tara Palmeri, appreciate it.

Up next, with the UFC Cage Match at the White House just days away, we're learning from court filings, new details including its cost more than $60 million.

And later, Microsoft co-founder philanthropist Bill Gates on Capitol Hill today to testify about his history with the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BILL GATES, MICROSOFT CO-FOUNDER: I'm glad to be here voluntarily to testify, to help with the committee's work.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:32:27]

COOPER: The UFC posted this photo today with the caption, "The Octagon has officially arrived to UFC White House." With the cage match just days away, we're learning new details through court documents filed today by the Trump administration regarding a lawsuit aimed at stopping the fight from happening. Crowd size has grown substantially. When the president announced the event, he predicted up to 25,000 people.

The new documents show roughly 125,000 guests are expected. The cost of the UFC fight and related events will run more than $60 million, according to the filings. UFC says it is footing the entire bill. A D.C. spokesperson told ESPN, the city will have to pay an estimate of $10 million to $12 million in supplemental security costs, which will be paid out of a federally appropriated fund for federal events.

Now, whatever your opinion of the ultimate fighting championship in this White House, the event is certainly first of its kind. The question, how did it all come together? Sara Sidner has more.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

SARA SIDNER, CNN ANCHOR & SENIOR NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): If you're wondering how Ultimate Fighting Championship ended up on the South Lawn of the White House, it comes down to two men and a two- decade-long relationship. President Donald Trump and UFC President and CEO, Dana White.

SIDNER: So, is it this relationship that landed you at the White House on the South Lawn, something that has never been done before?

DANA WHITE, PRESIDENT & CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, ULTIMATE FIGHTING CHAMPIONSHIP: Yeah, it's definitely that. What happened was, it started out as a business relationship with the first two fights that we did at the Taj Mahal. And then after that, it turned into a friendship because of the type of person that he is. SIDNER (voice-over): Their story goes back to 2001 when Donald Trump owned the Taj Mahal Casino in Atlantic City, New Jersey. Trump was the only one who would allow Dana White and his business partners a venue to hold UFC fights. At the time, no one wanted anything to do with ultimate fighting.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There may be some blood spilled. There may be some bones broken.

SIDNER (voice-over): At one point, it had been banned in 36 states because it was a sickeningly brutal, no holds barred, no time limit beat down. At the time, Senator John McCain called it human cockfighting. White and his partners, though, had a plan. Regulate it, scale it and get some respect for the name.

[20:35:00]

WHITE: He saw the potential in the sport. We ended up doing a deal with him at the Trump Taj Mahal. He came to the first fight of the night and stayed till the last fight of the night.

SIDNER (voice-over): And Donald Trump has been attending ever since. By 2015, UFC's popularity had exploded, and so had Donald Trump's ambitions.

WHITE: He reached out to me and said, listen, if you don't want to do this, I completely understand. But I'm going to run for president and I would be honored if you would speak for me at the voting convention. And literally everybody told me, don't do it. Don't get into politics. And he's never going to win.

SIDNER: Why did you do it?

WHITE: Because I liked him as a person. And we created a friendship. It's the first time that Donald Trump had ever called me and said, hey, would you come speak for me?

SIDNER (voice-over): And he did.

WHITE: Tonight, I stand with Donald Trump.

SIDNER (voice-over): At the Republican convention in 2016.

WHITE: Good evening, ladies and gentlemen.

SIDNER (voice-over): And again in 2024.

JOE ROGAN, HOST OF "FROM THE JOE ROGAN EXPERIENCE" PODCAST: We're rolling. Good to see you.

Donald Trump, (R) president of the united states of America: Get going (ph).

ROGAN: Here we go.

(LAUGH) SIDNER (voice-over): White says it was his idea to introduce Trump to the world of podcasts, including one of the most popular podcasts in America, "The Joe Rogan Experience." White knew Rogan well. Rogan is an announcer for UFC.

SIDNER: Did you introduce him to sort of this manosphere? Sort of to go on podcasts as opposed to, you know, doing your typical interviews?

WHITE: Yeah. Well, I felt like that if the president stayed on Fox, he wasn't going to win. And, you know, every other network guy there was saying horrible things about him. So what I do know is he can sit on a three-hour podcast and be relatable to a lot of people.

SIDNER (voice-over): That move is credited with getting Trump a huge boost in the young male vote. Now, White is bringing UFC to the White House South Lawn. The whole thing is part of the 250th celebration of America's independence. But this spectacle is actually taking place a good two weeks before that on a curious date, June 14th, that's President Donald J. Trump's birthday.

TRUMP: I'm a big sports fan.

SIDNER (voice-over): White says the timing is sheer coincidence. But some see this as a gift to a president who loves to project power.

SIDNER: If you're a person who sort of studies history, you see sports has in time has been used by authoritarian governments like Mussolini, to show power, to show strength, to show control. Do you worry about the confluence of this sport in particular and the Trump administration sort of being intertwined?

WHITE: I don't think like that.

SIDNER: But people might say, look, Trump's using the same playbook as a Mussolini or a Putin. Putin's into judo, right? And he uses this as a way to show he's the strong man. He's the man. Do you see Trump using that same playbook or no?

WHITE: Well, Donald Trump is a very good friend of mine. I love that guy. Love him.

SIDNER: So you're not going to compare him to Mussolini is what you're saying?

(LAUGH)

WHITE: No. I'm saying -- but in politics, that's the way it has always worked. It's not just Trump. It's been like that since the beginning of time and it will be until the end of time. It's not just one guy or one administration. It's everybody. And yes, sports has been used politically forever.

SIDNER (voice-over): The cost? Dana White told me somewhere around $60 million. Who's paying for it? The UFC, White says. Why? Well, it's an opportunity, he says, like none other to be part of American history. (END VIDEOTAPE)

COOPER: Sara Sidner reporting. Just ahead, what new official documents reveal about the president's urge from a planned rush job to build it before his term ends, the complications it may present to air traffic nearby.

Also next, Bill Gates' testimony before the House Oversight Committee, what he said about his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:43:45]

COOPER: On Capitol Hill today, billionaire Bill Gates gave voluntary testimony behind closed doors about his ties to convicted sex offender, Jeffrey Epstein. Gates is referenced hundreds of times in the DOJ's Epstein files, which were released earlier this year. He's not been accused of any criminal wrongdoing, denies knowing about Epstein's crimes.

He told lawmakers today that meeting Epstein was a grave error in judgment. More now from Randi Kaye.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BILL GATES, MICROSOFT CO-FOUNDER: I'm glad to be here voluntarily to testify, to help with the committee's work.

RANDI KAYE, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Microsoft Co- Founder, Bill Gates told the House Oversight Committee he was introduced to Jeffrey Epstein in 2011 and that the late convicted sex offender promised he could raise billions of dollars for global health.

Gates has always denied any wrongdoing related to Epstein. Documents released by the Justice Department include several hundred references to Gates and reveal graphic, unverified allegations. Emails in the files detail meetings, meals, proposed phone calls, and attempts by Epstein to meet Gates.

I enjoyed the breakfast a lot, Gates wrote Epstein in December 2014. Last December, the House Oversight Committee also released this photo from Epstein's estate. That's Gates with a woman whose face has been redacted.

[20:45:00]

According to the documents, all the interactions with Gates occurred long after Epstein's 2008 conviction on prostitution-related charges. In February this year, Gates addressed the allegations.

GATES: You know, it's factually true that I was only at dinners. You know, I never went to the island. I never met any women. And so, you know, the more that comes out, the more clear it'll be that although the time was a mistake, it had nothing to do with that kind of behavior.

KAYE (voice-over): The documents released also included two draft emails Epstein appears to have written himself in July 2013. In them, Epstein seems to suggest he facilitated sexual encounters for Gates and helped Gates get medication to hide a sexually transmitted infection from his wife at the time, Melinda French Gates.

In this email, Epstein claimed he'd helped Gates get drugs in order to deal with consequences of sex with Russian girls and illicit trysts with married women.

GATES: Apparently, Jeffrey wrote an email to himself. That email was never sent. The email is, you know, false. So, I don't know what his thinking was there. It just reminds me, you know, every minute I spent with him, I regret and I, you know, apologize that I did that.

KAYE (voice-over): This other draft email alleges Gates had tears in his eyes as he asked Epstein to delete messages referencing an STD and explicit personal details about his penis. The allegations contained in draft email are unverified and uncorroborated. There is also no indication the message was ever sent to Gates. Bill Gates has not been accused of any criminal wrongdoing.

Gates shared his regrets about meeting Epstein with Anderson Cooper in 2021.

GATES: It was a huge mistake to spend time with him, to give him the credibility of, you know, being there.

KAYE (voice-over): In February, during an interview with NPR, Melinda French Gates addressed the issue.

MELINDA FRENCH GATES, PHILANTHROPIST: Just unbelievable sadness, unbelievable sadness. For me, it's personally hard whenever those details come up, right, because brings back memories of some very, very painful times in my marriage.

KAYE (voice-over): Today, in his opening statement to the committee, Gates said, I never witnessed nor had any indication that Epstein was engaged in ongoing criminal conduct. I never went to his island, his ranch or his Florida home, adding, I have never victimized anyone.

Gates also testified that his interactions with Epstein ended in December 2014.

Randy Kaye, CNN, Palm Beach County, Florida.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

COOPER: Joining me now is Democratic Congresswoman, Melanie Stansbury. She sits on the House Oversight Committee and questioned Bill Gates today. What stood out to you from his testimony?

REP. MELANIE STANSBURY, (D-NM) OVERSIGHT & GOVERNMENT REFORM COMMITTEE: You know, listen, I think one of the things that was most interesting about Mr. Gates' testimony is that he knew all about Jeffrey Epstein's reputation. He knew about his sexual misconduct. And not only did he eschew that relationship, he actually actively sought it out. And I think that was one of the more stunning revelations from today's testimony.

You know, I think many of us were under the impression that maybe Epstein had reached out to Mr. Gates, that he had sought that connection because of his scientific interest. But what Mr. Gates revealed today is that he actively sought to try to make connections to Jeffrey Epstein in order to woo donors to donate to his international global health work.

And so, I think it is very hard for many people to understand how one of the most wealthy and powerful and influential men on planet Earth actively sought out a relationship with a known pedophile in order to actively solicit donations to his global health work. And so it's very troubling.

COOPER: Do you think that's not the case? Do you think he had another agenda? Is that what you're saying?

STANSBURY: No, that's what Mr. Gates told us today in the interview, that he personally --

COOPER: I know, but --

STANSBURY: -- sought out that relationship.

COOPER: Do you believe that?

STANSBURY: Yeah. I mean, all I can say is that is what he revealed today during his testimony. But I think the broader point here is that many people want to know why were rich and powerful men especially, rich and powerful people in general, who understood the stakes and consequences of interacting with Jeffrey Epstein, actively engaging in relationships with him even after his initial sex offenses were prosecuted in the state of Florida?

And I think what the interview with Bill Gates revealed today is that many of those individuals, including Bill Gates himself, saw some sort of advantage of forming a relationship with Mr. Epstein because of the immense amount of wealth that he had access to, and that there were many people who were willing to look the other way, including Mr. Gates himself.

COOPER: Did Gates say anything about Epstein possibly using knowledge of Gates' extramarital affairs as a form of leverage or pressure?

[20:50:00]

Because we should say again, Gates has not been accused of any criminal activity in connection with Epstein. He says his extramarital affairs had nothing to do with Epstein.

STANSBURY: Yeah, so I mean, his testimony today in front of the Oversight Committee was that Mr. Epstein did not arrange any of his relationships with the women that he had extramarital affairs with. But he does claim that Mr. Epstein learned of his extramarital affairs through a common associate of his, who was a scientist who was working as an advisor for Mr. Epstein and also working under the auspices of Mr. Gates, and so that he was trying to use that as some sort of blackmail or leverage.

But one of the issues with the fact that the Republicans are holding these interviews, not as depositions, not under oath, is that we have to take the witness' word for it and basically, take their testimony as it's coming in. And so that is what he presented today in front of the committee, and that's what he testified.

COOPER: The New York Times published a remarkable new reporting on how the Epstein files essentially paralyzed the White House. There's a lot to unpack in the article and a lot more than we have time for right now. But it essentially detailed how the president's inner circle struggled to try to handle the Epstein saga as if it were a national security-level crisis, including strategizing in the Situation Room. I'm wondering what your reaction was to that.

STANSBURY: Well, I think this is President Trump's Watergate moment. This New York Times article is absolutely explosive. It documents months-long saga in which the highest-level officials, including the president, the vice president, the chief of staff, the head of the FBI, the head of the Department of Justice, Todd Blanche, and the senior communications officials, colluded inside the Situation Room essentially to break the law, to defy congressional subpoenas, and to bury the Epstein case and the investigation into it.

I believe that this ultimately could be part of what takes Donald Trump down because it is very clear that they intended to break the law and that they used the White House grounds to strategize to do that with the highest-level officials. Many of those officials testified in front of Congress under oath during that time and lied directly to Congress about what they knew about this case.

COOPER: Congresswoman Stansbury, I really appreciate your time tonight. Thank you.

STANSBURY: Thank you.

COOPER: Up next, how the National Park Service hopes to get the president's proposed 250-foot-tall arch built near the entrance to Arlington National Cemetery for his second term romance (ph).

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:56:55]

COOPER: We have new information tonight on the intensive effort the Trump administration foresees for getting the president's proposed 250-foot-tall Triumphal Arch, as it's called, built near Arlington National Cemetery before the end of his second term. Details are laid out in documents from the National Park Service. They include the possible use of a crane taller than the U.S. Capitol at a site which is not far from Reagan National Airport. Meantime, still in the backdrop, a lawsuit from Vietnam veterans who call the project appalling and wrong. They argue the arch needs congressional approval to be built. CNN's Sunlen Serfaty joins us now with more on the construction plan.

So this is an exceptionally fast timeline. What else have you learned from these documents?

SUNLEN SERFATY, CNN WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT: Anderson, it truly is a very fast timeline and really speaks to how desperate President Trump is to get this project on the ground and completed by the end of his term in office. These new documents provide a lot of new detail and a really aggressive timeline for how quickly they want the work to be done once they get the official green light.

The administration, they say in these documents, wants work to be done 20 hours a day by two crews working 10-hour shifts every day, year round, for two to three years to ultimately get this arch done. That is their projection for when they would like it finished. And the documents really lay out how this construction will occur in multiple phases.

They first, of course, excavate the ground, then lay the foundation. And after eight months of work, that's when they will start constructing the primary structure. And that's when they will bring in, as you said, these massive 300-plus-foot cranes that are needed, of course, to construct and help build something that is 250 feet itself.

After 16 months, they'll put in the granite panels that will go on top of the concrete of the arch. And two years, that's when they have set -- two years into construction, that's when they would like the sculptures on top added.

And then it's all landscaping and final details from then on out. But, again, this is not formally approved yet. And it certainly is facing legal challenges by that Vietnam veterans group. So, as of now, this is a very aggressive timeline. But we will see, when and if it gets underway, you know, how quickly this will get done, potentially before he leaves office.

COOPER: And it's close to Reagan National Airport. Has the FAA weighed in on this?

SERFATY: Yeah, this is a huge point here. The arch is so close. It's less than two miles from DCA, that airport, just shortly distance away. And it's already a very complicated corridor there. So, first and foremost, there are many pilots groups saying this is a complicated corridor. How are you going to put a 250-foot arch there? Now, the administration was required to ask the FAA to study that.

They have just in the last week put out their preliminary findings saying that it does not pose any risk to air travel, given the fact that it's so high and so close to the airport. But they did recommend adding -- the administration adding red obstruction lights. That is not their final report. They will release another one. [21:00:00]

But multiple sources also point out, and it's revealed in these documents, Anderson, that not only are you having the arch 250 feet, but now, you're adding cranes to build it during that time of construction. So many more questions about the height of the arch and certainly, the duration of this construction project.

COOPER: Yeah. Sunlen Serfaty, thanks so much. That's it for us. "The Source with Kaitlan Collins" starts now. See you tomorrow.