Return to Transcripts main page

Anderson Cooper 360 Degrees

Supreme Court Expands Trump's Power To Fire Agency Heads; Officials: Middle East Envoy Steve Witkoff En Route To Doha; Trump And Lutnick's Sons To Profit From Critical Mining Deal; Trump And Lutnick's Sons To Profit From Critical Mining Deal; Nearly 350,000 Haitians In U.S. Poised To Lose Temporary Protected Status After Supreme Court Decision; White House Calls SCOTUS Immigration Decisions A "Tremendous Win"; Trump Dismisses Housing Affordability Bill As "A Yawn," Declines To Say If He'll Sign It; Official: At Least 1,719 Killed In Devastating Venezuela Earthquakes; Who Is Natalie Harp? Aired 8-9p ET

Aired June 29, 2026 - 20:00   ET

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

ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST: And before we go tonight, update on a guest who appeared on this program on Friday, Bryan Stern of Grey Bull Rescue misrepresented his location to us when he appeared on "Out Front" to talk about earthquake rescue efforts in Venezuela.

Grey Bull told us Stern was in Caracas for the live interview, but we have since learned he was not. Grey Bull says it currently, "maintains a presence throughout Venezuela."

Thanks so much for joining us on this evening.

AC 360 begins now.

[20:00:33]

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST: Good evening from the newsroom.

We begin with the Supreme Court overturning nearly a century of settled law and expanding this and every future president's power enormously. In a six-three decision, the court's conservative majority ruled that the President can fire what used to be considered independent government regulators for any reason, at any time.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REBECCA SLAUGHTER, FORMER FTC COMMISSIONER: It is the largest expansion of executive power in over a hundred years and that is exactly why we should be worried about it.

And so for working people who depend on agencies like the FTC and the other independent agencies, the Supreme Court has said, no, we will not have that independent check. You will not be watchdogs anymore. You will be lapdogs.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: That's Rebecca Slaughter talking to CNN's Erin Burnett. She was a Democratic appointee to the Federal Trade Commission until the President fired her.

Today's ruling paves the way for similar presidential firings at regulators and agencies up and down the government, touching virtually every aspect of American life from banking and mortgages to the environment to what we see on broadcast T.V.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: The president has the right to do this, and that has to do with a lot of agencies all throughout the system. So, it was -- it is considered, you know, the biggest of the group and I can understand that this has been going on for almost a hundred years, they have been waiting for this decision.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: Well, there was, however, one key exception today, the Federal Reserve, in a separate case, the court ruled that the President cannot fire Fed Governor Lisa Cook, at least not while she is still arguing her case.

The President, as you know, has accused her of mortgage fraud, tried to force her boss, Jerome Powell, from his job as Fed Chair, accusing him of mishandling renovations at the Central Bank.

Mr. Trump said the court today ruled on a "strictly procedural basis" and promised to take further action on Miss Cook. Now the court also rebuffed him on a case involving mail-in ballots, which has long been a focus of criticism by him. The court rejecting a challenge to state mail-in voting laws. By a five-four vote, the justices upheld Mississippi's five-day grace period for late-arriving ballots, and in a personal defeat for the President, the justices declined to review a $5 million civil judgment against him after a jury found he sexually abused and defamed writer E. Jean Carroll.

The President posted that he will continue the fight, though it is not clear how, he has already paid $5.5 million into a court-controlled account, which Miss Carroll is now entitled to collect.

He adds though, "This case is really against the United States of America and all it stands for." It not, however.

A decision in one case that will determine, though, a lot about who can be a citizen of the U.S. will be handed down tomorrow, Trump v Barbara.

The administration is seeking to end birthright citizenship, which has long been thought to be enshrined in the 14th Amendment.

So a lot to get to tonight on this. I want to start with CNN's chief White House correspondent, anchor of "The Source," Kaitlan Collins.

Kaitlan, certainly a lot for the President to be happy about in the court rulings on his power. Is it clear how and when he will put that expanded power to use? KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF CORRESPONDENT: Well, on Lisa Cook, I mean, the president is vowing in terms of that that he is still going to take the appropriate action, he says as he is moving forward. And so there is enough ambiguity in that ruling that came from the justices today, that I think it raises questions about what exactly the President has in store next year, and if they will continue fighting this battle, and so I am going to speak to Lisa Cook's attorney in the next hour about that.

But overall, the way The White House has been responding to this is mainly focusing on that mail-in ballot ruling that came down today, allowing that grace period for more than a dozen states, that if a ballot is marked by Election Day, that it can still be counted, even if it comes in five days later or so, depending on which state.

And the President was basically railing against that, Anderson, you know that he hates mail in voting. He has for years now and has tried to limit it or curtail it, even as Republicans have said, this is something that can actually help our party and be good for us.

And what he seems to be using is this as fresh ammunition to try to push that election, change -- that election law change into place that he has been urging Republicans to pass, even though Senate Republicans have been telling the President they just simply don't have the votes to do that, and he has been putting an intense amount of pressure on House Speaker Mike Johnson and the Senate Majority Leader, John Thune, on both of these issues, particularly on John Thune, because he wants them to get rid of the filibuster so they don't need to get any more Republican votes; certainly not any Democratic votes to try to get that passed.

And he was using that moment today inside the Oval Office, as he was criticizing this to say this is a reason why we need more momentum to get this passed.

[20:05:10]

Now, whether or not that's going to happen, we don't know, but it is basically setting him up to be on a huge collision course with some of the most prominent members of his own party on this particular issue, and so it remains to be seen how that is handled going forward. But I think he kind of shed some light on that by saying this Affordable Housing Bill that he refused to sign last week over this, today, he said everything that is not the SAVE AMERICA Act, which is that election act, he says everything that's not that is a huge yawn to me, basically saying all of these other legislative priorities, they don't seem to count until we can get this passed.

COOPER: Kaitlan Collins, thanks very much. Kaitlan is going to talk to, as she said, Abbe Lowell, the attorney for Lisa Cook.

Joining me right now, Supreme Court biographer and former federal prosecutor, Jeffrey Toobin; here in the newsroom, former federal prosecutor and Columbia Law School lecturer, Berit Berger.

Jeff, we are going to get to the other rulings in a moment. But first, what stands out to you about the decision on the President's ability to fire officials at what has historically been independent government agencies?

JEFFREY TOOBIN, AUTHOR AND FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: This is just a major change in how the American government is organized. You know, since the progressive era and the New Deal, Congress has set up these independent agencies -- the Federal Trade Commission, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Federal Election Commission -- with the idea that they had a measure of independence from the president. The president could appoint certain members, but they did operate somewhat independently.

Basically, what the Supreme Court has now said is that there is only one president, and he has all the power that could conceivably be exercised by the Executive Branch.

There is no power sharing that is acceptable, except perhaps for the Federal Reserve. But the idea of independent federal agencies, which has been a part of American government for a hundred years or even more, that's just gone, and we are going to be feeling the effects of that, you know, for the foreseeable future.

COOPER: Berit, how big a deal do you think it is?

BERIT BERGER, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR AND COLUMBIA LAW SCHOOL LECTURER: This was a huge deal today. This was a big day for the Supreme Court.

So essentially today, they cast the final death knell on a case from the 1930s, this Humphrey's Executor. This was one of the seminal cases, every first year Law student learns about this case. And it is said that, you know, back in the time that FDR could not fire a member of the FTC without cause, they killed this, this is something that has been sort of slowly dying over the last decade, but its officially done now.

What we are left with now is this place where the President has the absolute power. Anyone who is one of -- a person working within the Executive Branch at these independent agencies, they now work for the President. The President can fire them at will.

And exactly as Jeff said, there is one important carve out and that's the Fed in a pair of sort of tandem rulings, Justice Roberts said that if it is the Federal Reserve, the President still needs to have cause in order to fire one of those --

COOPER: So, Jeff, are these then independent agencies any longer?

TOOBIN: No, I don't think they are, and the Supreme Court has been very clear in saying the federal government -- the Executive Branch is a unitary power. It is the unitary theory.

So anything that is in the federal government -- in the Executive Branch, whether it is the Justice Department or the State Department or these so-called independent agencies, it is all the same thing now. The President gets to fire anyone he wants at any point he feels like it and that's a big change.

Frankly, the decision on the Federal Reserve is simply bizarre. They sort of invent this distinction, basically because they think the Fed is so important that they want to preserve a measure of independence, but it is completely ideologically incoherent to separate the Federal Reserve.

But because the Fed is so important and the absence of it would probably cause a panic in the economy, John Roberts' opinion carves out the Federal Reserve, but logically, frankly, it doesn't make much sense.

COOPER: Berit, are you surprised that the Court did not pursue -- that Trump lost on the E. Jean Carroll case?

BERGER: I am not surprised at all. So remember, this was one where they were challenging the jury's verdict, where the jury awarded her $5 million for this assault in a department store dressing room. I am not surprised because the Supreme Court, you know, very often declines to hear cases like this where, you know, it is based on evidentiary rulings from a trial court.

These are things that the Supreme Court, you know, very frequently will say, we are not getting involved in this. This is not -- so we don't know what the vote was. There was no dissent on this.

[20:10:10]

We didn't get an opinion. They just declined to review this.

COOPER: Right. It was sexual abuse, not assault.

BERGER: Correct.

COOPER: That he was found guilty by the jury.

There's also the court's, Jeff, the decision that upholds the ability of states to count ballots that arrive after Election Day. Obviously, the President has been fuming about this for a long time, still today, very much so.

Do you think this is the last word on vote by mail?

TOOBIN: Oh, by no means. I mean, mostly what the court said was this was a state matter. So this fight is going to go state by state. And, you know, the red states are restricting voting in all sorts of different ways. President Trump is going to continue to try to restrict voting. He wants to pass this so-called SAVE AMERICA Bill, which would change voter registration in the whole country.

But even independent of that, he is trying to use the Postal Service to restrict mail-in voting. So this fight about mail-in voting and the right to vote generally is going to continue up to and including the midterm elections in November.

COOPER: Jeff, how do you think the court is going to rule on birthright citizenship?

TOOBIN: I just have to believe they are going to vote to uphold birthright citizenship. You know, this is -- this has been the law of the land for a hundred years, and unlike the Federal Trade Commission decision, there isn't a lot of history building up to this.

This case, as far as the Supreme Court came out of the blue and also the 14th Amendment uses the word "born." Born in the in the united states -- and even though it is modified by a subsequent phrase, born means born. And I don't think the Supreme Court is going to, you know, open this particular can of worms.

COOPER: Berit, do you agree?

BERGER: I agree.

TOOBIN: Long before, Anderson.

COOPER: Yes.

BERGER: I agree, the question will be like what the actual vote is. This is one that it really should be a unanimous decision. I doubt it will be. But based on everything that Jeff said, the actual text of the Constitution, this is one that really should be a unanimous decision.

COOPER: Berit Berger, thank you; Jeff Toobin as well.

Coming up next, after several days of shooting, we've just learned that one of the President's envoys is now enroute to Qatar for a new round of talks with Iran, the breaking news on that and what it could mean when we come back.

And later, "The New York Times" with new reporting on a $1.6 billion, federally financed mining deal, the U.S. has now signed with Kazakhstan, which stands to benefit Don, Jr. and Eric Trump and the Commerce Secretary's two sons as well. Details on that ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:17:16 ]

COOPER: Take a look at CENTCOM footage of U.S. strikes on targets in Iran over the weekend, capping off several days of back and forth attacks by the two sides. Tonight, though, it appears there could be going back to the negotiating table.

Just before air time, two administration officials told us that Envoy, Steve Witkoff is enroute to Qatar. Not yet clear, though, whether Jared Kushner is traveling with him.

The President foreshadowed the news this morning, posting in all caps, "IRAN HAS REQUESTED A MEETING. IT WILL TAKE PLACE TOMORROW IN DOHA." This was followed by a denial from Tehran that any talks were in the coming days going to take place. Then, late this afternoon, the President again said the talks were on. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: Meeting in Doha is going to be a perhaps important, perhaps not. We are going to find out. But we are winning militarily -- almost won militarily, I would say. And it is really very simple, it is the denuclearization of Iran. We don't want them to have a nuclear weapon, and they're not going to have a nuclear weapon. They've agreed to that in all fairness.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: About an hour later, Iran's president weighed in online, quoting him now, "Mutual understanding is a two-way street. If the American side adheres to the agreement, we will also fulfill our commitments." He continues, 'Our approach to unreasonable saber rattling and baseless threats is to rely on rationality and human dignity in decision making, and to defend decisively and fearlessly when it comes time to act."

He made no mention of meetings tomorrow.

Joining me here in the newsroom, CNN global affairs analyst, Karim Sadjadpour.

So, Karim, what do you make of -- I mean, do you think anything is going to come from these talks with Steve Witkoff?

KARIM SADJADPOUR, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: I am skeptical, Anderson. I do think the most important discipline to understand this war is not political science, it is really psychology.

Trying to get inside the heads of Iranian officials and President Trump. From Iran's vantage point, it is a regime which is very overconfident right now, it believes that it prevailed in this war. It doesn't show any indication that it is prepared to offer meaningful compromises on the nuclear issue, on missiles, on proxies.

In fact, it is demanding that it control the Strait of Hormuz. It wants veto power over Lebanon, and then that takes us to President Trump's psychology. And when I speak to folks who are in daily contact with the President, they will give you different opinions on where the President is at.

Some will say that, well, if the Iranians don't show any signs of compromise two months from now, the President is prepared to go back to either a naval blockade or military action. But others will say, no, he is done with this war. He wants to move on.

COOPER: Before announcing the talks, the President suggested online that Iran may, in his words, never learn. He said then the U.S. would "Be forced to militarily complete the job." He went on to say, "If that happens, the Islamic Republic of Iran will no longer exist."

I mean, the President has made these kind of threats endlessly.

[20:20:09] At this point, how seriously do you think the Iranian regime actually takes this kind of rhetoric?

SADJADPOUR: As you said, Anderson, almost on a daily basis, the last four months he has been making these threats to end Iranian civilization, to destroy the regime and at this point, I don't really think it has any psychological impact on the regime.

It is true that, you know, Iran has been hurt badly militarily, but psychologically, they believe they have prevailed. They have survived, and for that reason, you know, they are entering these negotiations really offering many -- very little concessions and demanding a lot.

COOPER: And how much money does Iran stand to start to receive pretty quickly?

SADJADPOUR: It is an important question, Anderson. I think, we are talking about single digit billions in the immediate term. Some of their assets that have been unfrozen, but then when you consider now Iran being able to sell its oil and being able to repatriate its oil revenue, we are talking about tens of billions of dollars and that is an important point because historically, over the last 47 years, this is a regime which has really only compromised when it feels under existential economic pressure and it is offered a diplomatic exit.

So actually, the reduction of the economic pressure against it actually could make it far less likely that they feel compelled to compromise.

COOPER: Last week, Israel signed this trilateral agreement with Lebanon and the U.S. It calls for a partial Israeli withdrawal from Southern Lebanon. Do you think that agreement will be successful because the Lebanese piece of this for the Iranians certainly is a major component.

SADJADPOUR: You know, that deal, I think, is aspirational in that many Lebanese want to see their country no longer in a state of war. They don't want to have their politics dominated by an Iranian-backed militia, Lebanese Hezbollah.

But unfortunately, Lebanese Hezbollah still remains committed to its ideology. It has the resources and military backing of Iran, and they have veto power over something like this.

So, you know, unfortunately, I don't think it is going to be a game changer.

COOPER: Karim Sadjadpour, I really appreciate it.

Thanks very much, Karim.

Coming up next, new reporting on a deal with Kazakhstan, financed by the Trump administration to the tune of $1.6 billion. It turns out, the President's sons, Don, Jr. and Eric Trump, stand to profit from and they are not the only ones. We will tell you how and who, ahead. Also, the Supreme Court greenlit the deportation of hundreds of thousands of Haitians and others in this country under Temporary Protected Status. Look at how the ruling specifically affected Haitians living in Springfield, Ohio, about whom the President said this --

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: In Springfield, they are eating the dogs. The people that came in, they are eating the cats. They are eating -- they are eating the pets.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:27:22]

COOPER: "New York Times" Investigation found that the families of President Trump and the Commerce Secretary, Howard Lutnick, stand to profit from a $1.6 billion mining deal with Kazakhstan.

Last year, the President and Secretary Lutnick signed a deal with Kazakhstan that gave a little known American company access to one of the world's largest untapped reserves of tungsten, a critical metal needed to make missile warheads, fighter jets and computer chips.

Within weeks, the sons of both Trump and Lutnick also became financially connected to the deal. "The Times" is exclusively reporting one or both families now have financial ties to at least 14 companies involved in critical mining deals with the government.

Joining me now is "New York Times" investigative reporter, Eric Lipton, who is on the byline by that report.

So, Eric, can you just walk us through the key points of your reporting here?

ERIC LIPTON, "THE NEW YORK TIMES" INVESTIGATIVE REPORTER: Well, you know, we've already reported about how the Trump family moved into cryptocurrency and has made, you know, more than a billion dollars most likely. They separately are now working as a Defense contractor through Don, Jr. And here is a whole entire new landscape that the family is looking to make money and that is in the critical metals.

The United States is investing, you know, tens of billions of dollars to try to increase the supply of these metals because China is restricting access to them. They are very vital to the U.S. economy, and so it makes sense that this is something that was started in the Biden administration that this be done.

But at the same time as U.S. government is moving to put tens of billions of dollars into companies to help them, you know, build out new mines in the United States and around the world, the Trump sons have started to invest in the same sector, not only in the sector, but in some of the companies that the United States government is backing. And separately, the family of Howard Lutnick, the Commerce Secretary, is helping a bunch of these companies raise capital in the private sector.

So both of them are touching these deals. Now, the Lutnick family is not actually directly involved in the Kazakhstan deal, but they are helping one of the partners in the Kazakhstan deal raise more than $200 million in just around the same time as Dad Lutnick was helping negotiate something that was going to benefit the same businessman.

So you know what you're seeing are crossing of interest of the government actions and the family private interests, which is something we've seen a number of times in this administration, but it is quite unusual in American history.

COOPER: And there is an Australian born rabbi somehow the center of this according to your reporting.

LIPTON: That's right, so there is an Australian executive who is in the mining sector and he is the one that negotiated access in Kazakhstan to these deals, and he also was the co-founder of a separate company called USA Rare Earths and he is also a shareholder there that's also slated to get billions of dollars. And Lutnick went out of his way to try to get the Kazakhstan government to give this contract to his company.

So, he is benefiting from potentially as much as like $5 billion worth of U.S. assistance and you know, and his business partners include Donald Trump, Jr. and Eric Trump. So it is just -- you know, again, it is very unusual to see direct financial interest from the family of the President and from the Commerce Secretary that are intermixed with some of these enormous deals with taxpayer dollars on the line.

[20:30:27]

COOPER: At the end of the day, I mean, are there any limits to what they can do? I mean, is anybody going to -- yes, is there any oversight, any regulatory agency going to stop them?

LIPTON: I'm sure that there will be Democrats in Congress that will send letters asking for information about this, which will probably not be responded to. There's not going to be any investigation by the current administration. And it's -- none of this is actually necessarily explicitly illegal because Lutnick's two sons are adults and they have their own businesses.

And the President under law has no conflicts of interest. He's exempt from the criminal conflict of interest law. So, you know, there certainly is something that could be investigated to see whether or not there was inside information given to the Trump sons, you know, from the government or from someone in the government. And that would be inappropriate, but it's unclear if it would be explicitly illegal.

COOPER: And what does the White House said about your reporting?

LIPTON: They said that the President has no conflicts of interest and that his sons are businessmen who are entitled to pursue whatever business they want to, which is it's basically there's -- you know, they have rejected again and again and again. Every time, you know, we or other news organizations have written stories that examine these, the overlaps, they say that there are no conflicts. And that these are -- the President's sons are entitled to pursue whatever, you know, profits they want.

COOPER: Eric Lipton, I appreciate the reporting. Thank you.

Up next, a Supreme Court decision on temporary protected status now allows for the deportation of hundreds of thousands of Haitian immigrants and others from this country. We'll take you to Springfield, Ohio, where Haitians make up to a quarter of the population.

Later, she's with the President almost everywhere he goes, often with a printer handing him good news about himself. But who is this person, Natalie Harp? And how did she get there? And how close is her connection to the boss?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JONATHAN SWAN, AUTHOR, "REGIME CHANGE": She has written him numerous letters that she's left for him, including one that says you are all that matters to me or some version of that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:37:07]

COOPER: In another major victory for the President, his mass deportation pledge, another Supreme Court ruling recently found that the Trump administration could end temporary protected status or TPS for Syrian and Haitian immigrants. Roughly 350,000 Haitians living in the U.S. may be affected, and upwards of an estimated 15,000 of those Haitians live in Springfield, Ohio.

You may remember in the 2024 presidential debate that Kennedy-Trump singled out Haitian migrants in Springfield, claiming without evidence they were eating pets.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: In Springfield, they're eating the dogs, the people that came in. They're eating the cats. They're eating the pets of the people that live there. And this is what's happening in our country. And it's a shame.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: Well, CNN's Omar Jimenez spoke to members of the Haitian community back, in Springfield, in 2024, and he went back to get their reaction to the Supreme Court decision. Here's his report.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) OMAR JIMENEZ, CNN ANCHOR AND CORRESPONDENT: I've been here multiple times over the past two years and each time during a period of fear or uncertainty for the Haitian population here. And we're getting ready to meet with a man I first met a little bit more than a year ago. He's had a steady job throughout all of this, but is now among the many trying to figure out what he's going to do next.

Daniel, how's it going?

DANIEL AULA, HAITIAN SPRINGFIELD RESIDENT, ASYLUM SEEKER: Hey, Omar, how are you doing?

JIMENEZ: Yes. Doing OK?

DANIEL: Not too bad.

JIMENEZ (voice-over): Daniel Aula came to the U.S. from Haiti in 2022, running from what he says was a serious threat on his life. He had to leave behind his wife and daughter.

AULA: I have to protect my life, to save a life, to stay alive, to take care of my family.

JIMENEZ (voice-over): Since he's been in Springfield, he's worked steadily at a local metalworks manufacturer, building a life he fears he could soon lose.

JIMENEZ: Are you scared right now?

AULA: Very. I'm afraid they take me and go back in Haiti with me by force.

JIMENEZ (voice-over): He's not alone either. Viles Dorsainvil is the executive director of the local Haitian Support Center.

VILES DORSAINVIL, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, HAITIAN SUPPORT CENTER: Haitian Support Center.

JIMENEZ: We've just been trying to talk to him for a few minutes, and he's getting calls.

JIMENEZ (voice-over): He's helping manage the immigration paperwork for their attorneys.

JIMENEZ: What are you telling people who are calling in?

DORSAINVIL: We tell them that if they have children, choose a trustworthy person and give that person our attorney in case something happens to them.

JIMENEZ: A lot of the Haitian population here came pretty suddenly over the last five years through a combination of immigration programs, but among them temporary protected status, along with just word of mouth from other U.S. communities. But as you might imagine, not everyone is happy about their presence here. JIMENEZ (voice-over): But economically, the city and Republican Governor Mike DeWine have pointed to the influx as one of the reasons the area has seen an economic revitalization. Since the Supreme Court decision, Dorsainvil says some people have been calling in to the community centers, taking a victory lap.

[20:40:05]

JIMENEZ: Are you nervous at all about what comes next here in Springfield?

DORSAINVIL: Basically, yes, because there is so much at stake.

JIMENEZ: So people are calling the community centers saying it's time for you to leave?

DORSAINVIL: To leave. And they -- they're not saying that in that beautiful words that we are using now. So they are using N-words to tell us to leave.

JIMENEZ: Are you afraid if you're sent back that you would be killed?

DORSAINVIL: Very afraid. If Haiti will be safe, it will be a good pleasure to go back on my account (ph).

JIMENEZ: Yes. But right now, that's just not --

DORSAINVIL: No. Right now, no.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

COOPER: And Omar joins me now. Is there a sense what would happen if the Haitian population there was mostly removed?

JIMENEZ (on-camera): Yes, I mean, from what we've heard from local and state officials really over the past year and a half, even from Republicans, is that the main impact would be an economic one. And the greater Springfield partnership, essentially the Chamber of Commerce, even made a point to emphasize in recent statements that Haitians pay taxes and reinvest into the economy.

But as I talked about here, the influx of Haitians really came as a shock over the past few years in terms of population growth, especially as the population here was declining and as business leaders were looking to fill worker demand. So on top of filling that demand, there were at times strained resources on health care, infrastructure, complaints documented by local and state officials over driving issues as well.

But bottom line, when you talk to any of the Haitians here about what they're going to do next, they just know they cannot go back to Haiti. And even just looking at the conditions there, the U.S. Embassy last week had to operate in reduced staffing because of security risks.

So what they're really trying to focus on now, and I was speaking to the executive director of Haitian Bridge Alliance about this over the weekend, they're really trying to rally members of Congress for any lasting change here in the absence of now these TPS protections. But that, of course, remains to be seen in, Anderson.

COOPER: Omar Jimenez, appreciate it. Thank you.

Joining me now, former Biden White House Press Secretary Karine Jean- Pierre, who's Haitian-American and CNN Political Commentator S.E. Cupp.

So, Karine, I know you have strong personal feelings, professionally, about the fate of Haitians living who have temporary protected status in the U.S. Where do you see this going?

KARINE JEAN-PIERRE, FORMER BIDEN WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Look, as you just stated, Anderson, this matter is incredibly personal to me, and so I own that. But what I want people to understand is that this ruling impacts millions of people who hold this status. It impacts their families. It impacts their close friends.

What this is going to do, it's going to be disastrous to people. It's going to be disastrous and needlessly harmful to Americans, because you're talking about communities that are going to be harmed by this, businesses that are going to be harmed by this.

If you think about the hundreds of thousands of people who hold the status, TPS status, and what they have to do to get that status, they have to register to the government. They have to pay fees. They pass background checks.

This is not something that they are causing harm to the country. This is actually something that's going to have the reverse. It's going to hurt us as a country.

And you hear these stories. These people come here, you know, immigrants come here because they want something better or they're fearful of what's back at home. And it is disastrous. It's going to hurt us. It's going to hurt our economy. It's going to make us weaker and poorer. And it is devastating to hear this is what the administration is focused on, an attack on legal immigration.

COOPER: S.E., do you think throwing Haitians or Syrians out of the country is at all politically problematic for the President? It doesn't feel like it.

S.E. CUPP, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yes. Let me say Karine makes all the right points and they're good points. And I'm incredibly sensitive and sympathetic to this population of people from Haitians to Syrians. I covered the Syrian war for all of its years and returning home for them would have meant certain death. And so they were very, very lucky to have this program in place.

On the raw politics of it, though, this is not the loser that I think a lot of Democrats think it is. And that's because when Biden ended Trump's remain in Mexico policy, right, when he came into office, a lot of people around the country felt the immediate effects of that. A lot of them were positive. Some of them were really negative. And as a lot of these asylum seeking migrants came into mostly liberal cities, right, because Governor Abbott was sending them intentionally to liberal cities, liberals saw the effects of this.

I remember covering a story in New York City where New York City public school parents were told their kids had to learn remote from home for a day or two because their public schools were going to be used to house migrants during a storm. Very compassionate, good thing to do. But these parents were pissed and they weren't Republicans, right? These are New York liberals who thought, well, this isn't right.

[20:45:02]

So my feelings about this program, you know, I could want to keep this program in place. You might want to close the borders. These are all just opinions. But when people start feeling the practical effects of them, the same thing happened on the right.

There were a lot of people, especially moderates in the middle and independents in the middle, who thought we want stronger borders. We want more border protection. We want to crack down on illegal immigration.

Well, then they saw the way Trump was doing it. He was militarizing our cities and snatching people off sidewalks. They said, well, I don't want it done that way.

COOPER: Yes.

CUPP: A lot of people said the same about about this asylum seeking program. So I just don't think it's going to have the political --

COOPER: Yes.

CUPP: -- impact that maybe Democrats are hoping it will.

COOPER: Karine, I want to ask you about this major bipartisan housing bill, which the President dismissed again today when asked about it. I just want to play that for our viewers.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Will you sign that housing bill?

TRUMP: I have that -- it hasn't been sent to me yet. It's coming. I understand. And then I'll make --

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Will you allow (ph)?

TRUMP: -- then I'll make it. Here's what I would like to say. Much more than a bill, that big deal. It's a yawn from -- because it's wonderful to me compared to the SAVE America Act. Just about everything is a big yawn.

(END VIDEO CLIP) COOPER: Why do you think the President is doing this? Why not take a win on a bipartisan law that actually takes aim at the affordability crisis in the country?

JEAN-PIERRE: And you just said it. Maybe he just doesn't understand that there's an affordability crisis in this country. And there is gases up. Food is up. And this is an opportunity for him to get a win.

Look, as you stated, this is a bill that was supported bipartisanly in a huge way. And he doesn't want to sign it. He calls it a yawn. And people are suffering out there.

COOPER: Yes.

JEAN-PIERRE: And, you know, this should send a -- really this should send a message to Republicans in Congress. They should be furious. And if there is any other example that shows them that he doesn't care about their reelection, we're here's one. Here's an example --

COOPER: Yes.

JEAN-PIERRE: -- that he does not care about their reelection. This is a win, a win.

COOPER: S.E., does it make sense to you that he's dismissing?

CUPP: No. I've never seen someone in politics go so far out of their way to deny a win to themselves and their own party. If he's trying to use the SAVE Act as a bargaining chip, he'd have to do it with Democrats holding it up. It's Republicans holding it up. He doesn't have Republican support for this.

So he's punishing his own party and himself for a bill that they won't even push through. It makes absolutely no sense. It's political malpractice.

COOPER: S.E. Cupp, Karine Jean-Pierre, appreciate it. Thank you.

The death toll in Venezuela continues to climb, now more than 1,700 dead. A search and rescue crews are desperately looking for survivors in dangerous conditions five days after the double quake hit. Amidst the grief and pain, there are signs of hope.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

(BABY CRYING)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: Sound of a miracle. This was the scene Saturday when a crew of U.S. international workers pulled a baby from the rubble. There was also this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

(CHEERING) (END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: A survivor rescued over the weekend. People saying, welcome Antonio.

Yesterday's CNN's crew witnessed this moment when a man was pulled from the ruins alive, carefully carried to an ambulance by a sea of first responders. And here, you see a mother and her baby just 18 days old, rescued after being trapped for about 30 hours. The AP reports that the baby and the mom are recovering now in the hospital.

Just before air, I spoke with Trey Espy from L.A. County Fire Department's urban search and rescue team who joined the operations in Venezuela the day after the quakes.

(BEGIN VIDEO TAPE)

COOPER: Trey, I understand your team has located a man who's alive at this point, trapped in what had been a parking garage. Can you just talk about what you are hearing, what that operation is?

TREY ESPY, ASSISTANT FIRE CHIEF, L.A. COUNTY FIRE DEPT.: Yes. So yesterday evening, we discovered that through locals that we had a gentleman trapped in a parking garage that was three stories down. And as we went over to rescue him, we can speak to him, we could not see him. And so our team started working on that site to affect that rescue.

COOPER: So how difficult is that? I mean, if he's three stories down, how much debris is there on top of him?

ESPY: So this is an eight-story commercial building. There's tons of steel and lots of concrete. And he was in a guard booth underneath that on that third floor where it had collapsed. And so there's tons of debris, steel and concrete around him. So it's going to take us -- it's going to take us hours to affect that rescue.

COOPER: Is that something you can do with, I mean, hand equipment kind of cutting through all those layers? Do you need to bring in cranes?

ESPY: Our team is very equipped. Our rescue team is very equipped with a lot of cutting and concrete breaking tools. And we have our search cameras and our listening devices. So we do really well at -- this is -- we work hard and train for this year round. And so our team is very quick to get get to this victim.

[20:50:17]

COOPER: I've seen your -- the L.A. team's work in Haiti back in the earthquake there during Katrina. I went out with a Virginia team in Waveland, Mississippi. I mean, the work you and all the teams do, it's just extraordinary. How long -- I mean, first of all, are there still aftershocks that you're feeling that are -- that kind of interrupt these rescue efforts?

ESPY: Yes, we had an aftershock of 5.0 this morning that we had to take a tactical pause so our team could reassess the situation, make sure it was safe to go back in. We're constantly looking for egress routes and safety zones and areas that we can shelter in, if need be, in some of these damaged buildings.

COOPER: How long can somebody survive in rubble like that?

ESPY: We think the survival rate is somewhere up around a week, depending on a lot of factors, if there is weather. We were in Turkey in 2023, where it was really cold. And so I think that brings -- we know that that brings the survival rate down.

In an area like here in Venezuela, it's warm, it's humid, and I think the survival rate is a little longer for those who are in tune, especially if they're not injured. If someone's injured, you know, that plays into it. If someone's not injured and they just simply are in tune and avoid space with the exception of food and water, those are the things that, you know, that could play into their survival.

COOPER: And how much longer will you be working on the ground there, do you know?

ESPY: We're going to be here. Typically, we are in country from anywhere from 10 to 14 days. But we'll be here as long as the Venezuelans need us. And we'll be here to keep working as long as we need to work.

COOPER: Yes. Well, it's really just extraordinary what your teams do and are able to do.

Trey Espy, thank you so much.

ESPY: Thank you. I appreciate your time.

(END VIDEO TAPE)

COOPER: Coming up, the White House aide you may not have heard of, but has enormous influence over what the President sees, especially about himself. Why Natalie Harp has earned the nickname by some, the human printer? That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:57:07]

COOPER: We're learning more about the White House aide who's garnered a lot of interest since details of her relationship with the President came to light in the new book, "Regime Change," by Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan. Her name is Natalie Harp. Her title, a special and executive assistant to the President.

He reportedly told the White House staff that she was, quote, "The only one who loved him as much as his wife and kids." Randi Kaye has more.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) NATALIE HARP, SPECIAL AND EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT: Good evening. I'm Natalie Harp, a formerly forgotten American from California.

RANDI KAYE, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Her name is Natalie Harp. She's a former host for the far right network One America News. And today, at just 34 years old, is considered one of President Donald Trump's closest personal assistants.

SWAN: She's just totally devoted to him. In Oval Office meetings, she sits on the chair, the side of the room with her laptop open.

KAYE (voice-over): Harp is known for toting around a portable printer and printing stacks of papers and positive press for President Trump on the spot. She's become known as the human printer.

SWAN: Trump basically just says, Natalie, get me this. Or he's, you know, Google this.

KAYE (voice-over): In their new book, "Regime Change," New York Times reporters Jonathan Swan and Maggie Haberman also report on letters that Harp has left for Trump. Swan described them as odd, adoring and intimate.

SWAN: She has written him numerous letters that she's left for him, including one that says, you are all that matters to me, or some version of that. Raised the eyebrows of the Secret Service during the campaign.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Months of minor up (ph).

SWAN: Some of these letters that were left in some of his private quarters.

KAYE (voice-over): According to "Regime Change," Trump's chief of staff, Susie Wiles, asked, "Where am I?" upon learning about the letters. Harp first connected with Trump during her battle with stage two bone cancer, thanking Trump publicly for saving her life by signing the Right to Try Act in 2019. She claims that allowed her to receive experimental cancer treatment.

HARP: I'd like to say I'm not dying from cancer anymore, thanks to President Trump. I'm living with cancer.

KAYE (voice-over): She shared her story and credited Trump again at the 2020 Republican National Convention.

HARP: I wouldn't be alive today if it wasn't for you. They didn't give me the right to try experimental treatments, Mr. President. You did. And without you, I'd have died waiting for them to be approved.

KAYE (voice-over): The Washington Post has raised questions about her claims. In "Regime Change," the authors report that Harp stays late into the night at the White House, when President Trump is often active on social media. MAGGIE HABERMAN, CO-AUTHOR, "REGIME CHANGE": Natalie Harp is one of the people who took over posting duties to the President's Truth Social post in this term, and that makes her fairly significant.

KAYE (voice-over): In May, the Wall Street Journal reported that Harp has frustrated some White House officials because she typically doesn't share draft posts with the chief of staff's office, communications aides, or national security officials. The paper also reported that Harp has told others she works for Trump and only listens to him.

Soon after Trump began his second term, according to the authors of "Regime Change," Trump told staffers that Harp was the only one who loved him as much as his wife and kids. "All of you will go off and make money," Trump said. "She'll never leave me."

Randi Kaye, CNN, Palm Beach County, Florida.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

COOPER: That's it for us. The news continues. The Source with Kaitlan Collins starts now.