Return to Transcripts main page
Anderson Cooper 360 Degrees
Trump's Latest Disclosure Details Crypto, Royalties Windfall; Trump Reports $526M From Crypto Token Sales; Supreme Court Upholds Birthright Citizenship In Loss For Trump; Trump Calls On Congress To End Birthright Citizenship After U.S. Supreme Court Loss; Supreme Court Lifts Watergate-Era Caps On Campaign Spending; Washington Post: Trump Is Using A $500M No-Bid Contract To Build His White House Ballroom; Manhunt Underway After Bomb Attack Wounds Ukrainian-Born Tycoon; Sources: Taylor Swift And Travis Kelce Expected To Hold Wedding Celebration This Week At Madison Square Garden. Aired 8-9p ET
Aired June 30, 2026 - 20:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
(REP. MIKE LAWLER AND REP. JAMIE RASKIN CLASH IN EXPLOSIVE EXCHANGE)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST: Order was not restored while they stormed out of the hearing room. Thanks so much for joining U.S. AC360 starts now.
[20:00:44]
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST, "ANDERSON COOPER: 360": Good evening from the Newsroom, we begin tonight with breaking news on how much wealthier the President just got in his first year in the Oval Office. The numbers come from a new federal financial filing just out, more than 900 pages long and the details are stunning. Both CNN and "The New York Times" are breaking it down right now.
According to "The Times," the windfall amounts to about $1.4 billion from the Trump family's cryptocurrency business alone. And of that amount, hundreds of millions, according to this filing, are from the meme coin he issued shortly before taking office, and other digital tokens that the family firm World Liberty Financial sold.
Now, just two days into office, the President was asked about the money he was already bringing in.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REPORTER: Do you intend to continue selling products that benefit yourself personally while you're President?
DONALD TRUMP (R) PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Well, I don't know if it benefited. I don't know how, where it is. I don't know much about it other I launched it. I heard it was very successful. I haven't checked it. Where is it today?
REPORTER: You made a lot of money, sir. TRUMP: How much?
REPORTER: Several billion dollars, it seems like in the last several days.
TRUMP: Several billion, that's peanuts for these guys.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: Several weeks ago, a separate analysis by Reuters found that the Trump family has generated at least $2.3 billion from their crypto ventures so far. While investors have lost about the same amount. Some of that today's filings reveal, were not just from selling crypto itself, but also a portion of the company to foreign investors. Quoting from "The New York Times" now, one of his biggest hauls in 2025," this is the President, "came when an investment firm tied to the United Arab Emirates bought nearly half of the Trump family's main crypto company, World Liberty Financial, a transaction that blurred the line between foreign policy and private enterprise.
A short time later, you'll recall, the Emiratis struck a deal with the administration to acquire cutting edge computer chips used in artificial intelligence. But it's not just that the Trump family has also been cutting licensing deals for everything from rebranded cell phones to golden sneakers, coins, fragrances and raking in a lot of money from that as well.
The President also reported nearly $440,000.00 in gifts that he received over his first year in office as CEOs and foreign leaders and others have sought to win his favor. The White House has denied the President's conflicted by his financial interests, emphasizing he's not actively involved in managing his businesses or investments. Excuse me.
Joining me now for more on this, "New York Times" investigative reporter, Eric Lipton. He's covered the Trump family finances and business operations for a decade. Eric, is it possible to overstate how norm shattering this is?
ERIC LIPTON, INVESTIGATIVE REPORTER "THE NEW YORK TIMES": I mean, we've been hearing from historians, lawyers, former government officials, both Democrats and Republicans, that there really is no precedent for what we're seeing with President Trump and just the amount of money that he's made while in office and in in kinds of areas that are directly relating to policies that he's setting. So, it really is hard to overstate just how unusual and how historic this is.
COOPER: I mean, the United Arab Emirates bought half of this company and this is a company that Steve Witkoff and his sons, Witkoff, who is involved in negotiations in the Middle East regarding Iran and all these other countries like the United Arab Emirates and Qatar, which has ones who gave the President the plane. That's a $400 million plane, that's now going to be used as Air Force One or gave it to officially, I guess, to the U.S. or for the President's use later for his library. It's just, it's incredible. I mean, the idea that the guys negotiating
stuff, his family own part of this business, that the UAE now owns half of as well.
LIPTON: Yes, again, it just, you know, Jimmy Carter gave up his peanut farm when he became President. I mean, that's the kind of, you know, everything that's the parallel that we to some extent have. And with the case of the United Arab Emirates, we're talking about billions of dollars of financial ties between the UAE and the Trump family at the same time as he is negotiating, sharing some of the most advanced technologies humans have ever created and these A.I. chips with the UAE. And despite concerns that perhaps they might inappropriately share them with China.
Similarly, you know, the United States is now, there's a war in the Middle East that and the UAE is a key player. And there's enormous implications in foreign policy that is mixed up with the personal financial interest of the President. And this really, it's just something we've never seen before.
And, you know, the President says it is not a conflict. But, you know, just about anyone else that looks at it seems to think that it is.
[20:05:34]
COOPER: Well, legally, he's not covered by federal conflict of interest laws, right?
LIPTON: That's right. The President and the Vice-President are the only two federal employees who are exempt from the criminal conflict of interest law, which prohibits federal employee from taking an action that could benefit themselves or their minor children. But he is actually exempt from the federal because he's President and his powers are so broad, he is exempt from that law. And, you know, the really, and the Supreme Court similarly has, you know, said that if Trump is taking official actions, then it really is hard to suggest that he's acting in a corrupt fashion.
So, you know, other than The Emoluments Act of the Constitution, which some parties tried to, you know, pursue court cases in his first term, there really isn't much that's left to try to limit his actions. I mean, it really is up to the public to decide if this is, you know, kind of behavior that they think is appropriate.
COOPER: You mentioned Jimmy Carter giving up his farm. I remember, I'm old enough to remember when I was a kid, but Billy Carter, his brother, marketed Billy Beer and people's heads exploded. I mean, that just seems. And that he was taking advantage of the President's fame to market this beer. It's, I mean, we've come a long way from that. Eric Lipton, appreciate it, "The Times" as the reporting, it's extraordinary.
Joining me now is CNN contributor Kara Swisher, host of "The On" and "Pivot" podcast. Former federal prosecutor Jeffrey Toobin, as well.
Karen, I mean, obviously, we know the President's been raking in a lot of money. It's amazing to see the details. Even those Bibles he's been hawking have brought in like $200,000.00 plus.
KARA SWISHER, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Yes, he's doing very well. The President's been very -- the presidency has been very good for his bottom line. And, you know, as I've always said, this is a coin operated presidency, really. And you just put money in and to give to him, and then he gives you other things. And this is exactly what's happening with the crypto stuff, which is he's getting a fee no matter what, even though the price, the value of the crypto has gone down, I don't know, 83 percent. So, everybody else loses. So, he's taking from the people who buy it. And at the same time, this deal with the UAE is just astonishing.
They're getting what they need for what is essentially I mean, they just, they're paying him in order to get something else. And so, he can do this all day long. They're doing it in Kazakhstan. "The New York Times" had a great piece about that. They're doing it all over the place no matter where they are.
COOPER: Right, we reported on that last night.
SWISHER: Yes, I mean it just goes on and on and on.
COOPER: Right, that's another deal that that they're making in Kazakhstan that the sons, from sons are involved with a whole bunch of other businesses related to it.
SWISHER: Well, everywhere. I mean, what they do is they go in advance of Trump showing up and do some kind of deal with whatever country. It doesn't matter. They go around from country to country shaking people down. This is, you know, this is very, it's a big, is what's happening here. And if you know where that term comes from, that's exactly what's happening here. He's getting a big for everything he does as President.
COOPER: Yes. it's a loan sharking term or mafia term too. Jeff, does all of this raise any legal concerns or just I mean, certainly ethical concerns, but he can do this, right?
JEFFREY TOOBIN, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: Well, the Supreme Court has said that any official action he takes may not be the subject of criminal charges. And it can even be investigated. And if we can just talk about crypto, you know, the regulation of crypto is one of the hottest issues being dealt with in the executive branch now.
So, he is in charge of regulating something that is putting literally billions of dollars in his pocket. But regulating crypto is an official action of the executive branch. So, under the decision of Trump v United States, he can do whatever he wants. He can open a lemonade stand on the front, on the front lawn of the white house and take public payments in return for regulatory changes. But because that's an official action, he's immune from prosecution.
Well, I mean, by that. I mean, that's such a ridiculous example. Like the next thing you're going to say is that he would be selling commemorative coins for a UFC fight on the front lawn of the White House. SWISHER: Yes.
TOOBIN: But that would never happen.
COOPER: That would never happen.
Kara, do other countries look at what the UAE is doing with the President's crypto? And look at what Qatar did with the jet and realize there is a very real way to put money in the pocket of the President of the United States. I mean, people who are looking for pardons certainly know there is an avenue to getting pardons this way as well.
[20:10:06]
SWISHER: And then there's the pardon. Then there's the pardon scam. That's the other thing that's going on that's happening where he's getting payments or things to his political committees and things like that. And of course, the tech people knew this right away. You put in 25 million or 200 million, you can have billions in contracts. This is just, this is a pay per play situation. And it's the question is, whether any, you can't do anything about it because no one ever imagined someone could be this, you know, greedy essentially on the public dole.
And so, we're all paying for it. Just like you said, everything was, in the East Wing was going to be paid for by private donations. In fact, it's the public that's paying for that. it's the public who's paying for what's going on at the Kennedy Center and even the Reflecting Pool. This is all, you know, its coin operated is what does, he put money in and you get stuff you need out and everyone's on to it from the tech people to cut the Kazakhs to whoever it happens to be and that's what's happening here.
TOOBIN: If I can just add one, one point of possible accountability, the Constitution is still in effect. And the Constitution defines impeachable offenses as treason, bribery, and other high crimes and misdemeanors. This looks an awful lot like bribery. UAE puts in money, gives them a plane, gets stuff in return. The crypto business --
COOPER: Yes, Qatar gave him plane, yes --
SWISHER: Qatar, was the plane, try to keep track of all the grift, essentially.
TOOBIN: UAE is the crypto, and you know, I don't think, I mean, certainly the Congress in its current state of Republican control is not going to do anything, but bribery is specifically mentioned in the Constitution. And this looks an awful lot like bribery.
COOPER: But, I mean, at the end of the term, you know, as Joe Biden pardoned his, you know, family members, they'll just pardon everybody, you know, retro-proactively. And there's nothing, you know, for people who think, well, afterward, they'll be investigations and the like, there can just be blanket pardons, right, Jeff? TOOBIN: I mean, the President has already said he's, I think he in
Maggie Haberman's new book, there's a line where he says, I'm going to pardon everyone who came within 25 feet of the Oval Office or some words to that effect, that he's pardoning everybody so that if there's a Democratic administration, they can prosecute anyone.
Whether he actually will do that, who knows? But it's just indicative of the fact that the lack of accountability that were seeing in the current administration is likely to continue regardless of who wins the next election.
COOPER: Kara Swisher, Jeff Toobin, thank you very much, appreciate it.
Coming up next, what, if any, political impact this may have with midterm elections fast approaching? We'll talk about that.
And later, a targeted bombing and attempted assassination, authorities say in Monaco, normally a peaceful haven for the very wealthy to park their yachts and their billions. Prosecutors say the man targeted a Ukrainian-born oligarch. We have details ahead.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:17:27]
COOPER: We're talking tonight about how the wealthiest man to ever become President is becoming far wealthier in his second term. That's what his new federal financial disclosures reveal.
It just came out right before air time, $1.4 billion from his family's crypto business alone. That's according to "The New York Times". That is just crypto, the figure doesn't include the 747 the Qataris gave the President, which is valued, I think, at like 400 something million, which he gets to keep when he leaves office, supposedly for his Presidential library. He takes it on the road for the first time tomorrow.
Here to talk about what, if any, impact this may have on voters. CNN, political commentators Kate Bedingfield and Brad Todd, also, journalists and "Lift Our Voices" co-founder Gretchen Carlson.
Gretchen, do you think the scale of this, which is just unprecedented, does have any impact? Do people care?
GRETCHEN CARLSON, JOURNALIST AND FOUNDER OF "LIFT OUR VOICES": Under normal circumstances, I would say absolutely, yes. But Trump, as we know, is the master of flooding the news market with hysteria. I mean, we're talking about the Iran war and is it really over or not? He wanted to take over Greenland. I mean, the list goes on and on where every day the average American just really can't keep up with all of the stories that went out, does the next one.
So, then you come along with something like this and people just don't have room in their psyche. I don't think to completely understand it -- number one.
And number two, care when they're still trying to figure out how to manage grocery prices and gas prices.
COOPER: Brad, I mean, you're a Republican. Do you have any concerns about the appropriateness of a sitting President enriching himself through industries he has influence over, which is basically everything, but particularly crypto? He would have to sign off on any U.S. law regulating crypto. Do you think people will start to care about this?
BRAD TODD, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, these things are always, you know, have a lot of entanglements and questions that that are raised because we have a citizen legislature in theory.
And, you know, I've watched, as I work campaigns around the country, I've watched swing voters in focus groups wrestle with this. And this is a thing swing voters don't like about Donald Trump. But they do like when they think he's fighting for them. And I think the burden is on the President in this year's campaigns to prove that he's fighting for the economic interests of people in the middle who maybe have misgivings about this.
Now, Trump's own base likes the fact that he's in business for himself. They like the fact that he's successful. They like the fact that he's not a professional politician, and this will not hurt him with his base, but with swing voters, he will have to prove that he's got more interested in your pocketbook than his own.
COOPER: But if I mean, Kate, if he's making, you know, $200 million in crypto, there's a lot of Americans who are, or other people around the world who are losing $200 million in crypto.
[20:20:05]
KATE BEDINGFIELD, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yes, and look, I actually, I think Brad touched on it on exactly why this this can be a problem for him and for the Republicans who are up in this midterm election in November if Democratic candidates drive this effectively. I mean, one of Trump's biggest political vulnerabilities with Independents, with swing voters, is that they think he's not focused on them.
They think he's not focused on their needs. They think he's not doing what he said he was going to do when he campaigned in 2024, which is to bring down prices. And so, I think for Republican candidates, particularly in marginal districts and in purple states, to have to answer for this, for what is clearly a grotesque misuse of public office, to enrich his family.
But if they make that case effectively, not just to say he's corrupt, because we've certainly seen that those corruption allegations don't necessarily stick to him politically the way they stick to others. But if they make that argument by saying, look, he's focused on his own enrichment and he's not focused on you. He's not doing what he said he was going to do when he when you elected him, when you voted for him and we need a change in direction, that is a very effective political argument. And that's where I think Democrats can really use this in November. COOPER: Yes, and, Gretchen, as you said, the "The New York Times"
reporting that the UAE, the United Arab Emirates bought half, essentially half of an investment firm or an investment firm tied to the UAE, bought half of the Trump family's crypto company, which Steve Witkoff's kids also are involved, as are the Presidents some of the Presidents kids.
CARLSON: Seems to be massive conflicts of interest, is what you're saying. I mean, it's interesting that they didn't invest in his watches because that was only 4.7 million or the Bibles, which were 208 K.
I mean, this massive amount of wealth from the crypto. Here's the thing. The UAE and the United States have a storied history of being friends and allies, right? They buy tons of U.S. military equipment from the United States.
COOPER: This is the Bible that netted him more than $200,000.00, the Lee Greenwood Bible.
CARLSON: Yes, exactly. Well, he wouldn't have been so rich just on the Bible, so, it's the crypto.
COOPER: I heard the Bible is helped at this.
CARLSON: But the UAE is a massive investor in the U.S. economy. So, all of this looks to be fine for now. But my goodness, the world does not operate on just keeping that sort of in the back of your mind. Like they may not be friends the next time around, right?
COOPER: Yes, I mean, Brad, should the U.S., should the President's family be in business with the United Arab Emirates, and giving deals to the United Arab Emirates regarding access to A.I.
TODD: Look, I'm not crazy about the administration's wide-open policy on crypto. And I think there are questions. I don't like the fact that they sell perfume either, you know, so like, there's there are all these things are things that are going to receive a lot, a lot of criticism and certainly deals with the UAE, a nation that is friendlier right now, but not has not always been friendly or going to be criticized.
But look, on a policy level, this is a bipartisan thing. Kirsten Gillibrand is his is his biggest ally on crypto and she's a Democrat from New York, Ruben Gallego, who got elected with the help of the crypto industry, has also been fully with the President on this issue. So, we're doing, we're learning new boundaries on this all the time. And I suspect the President is going to touch the hot stove here on a few places.
COOPER: Kate, President Trump has been very effective in the past, turning accusations against him into accusations against his perceived political enemies or changing the news cycle entirely as Gretchen was pointing out. Do you expect that, that is what we will see?
BEDINGFIELD: He'll certainly try. No, no question about it. I mean, again, I think this is going to be a little bit on Democrats to run on this effectively, to make the case, to continue to put this in front of swing voters. Because, you know, I think Gretchen's absolutely right.
Of course, there are going to be, you know, 150 different things thrown at the wall to try to change the topic and keep people from focusing on this. But, you know, one of the fundamental electoral dynamics that were looking at going into November is Democratic voters, the Democratic base is incredibly motivated.
The Republican motivated to vote the Republican base, not so much. We're seeing a massive enthusiasm gap and if Democrats can effectively use this to dissuade independents and swing voters who are already having misgivings about the Trump presidency and further depress Republican turnout, the Republicans kind of look at this and go, you know, I love Trump. I don't love this. I don't know that I'm going to, like, crawl over broken glass to vote for the Republican he's telling me to vote for in my district. That that I think can be effective.
So yes, of course, Trump's going to try to change the subject, but it's on Democrats to keep driving the message here.
COOPER: It still just boggles my mind that the President is soon going to be flying around in an Air Force One, which was given by Qatar. It's worth hundreds of millions of dollars, 400 something plus millions of dollars that he gets to keep after he leaves officially for his Presidential library. This is the plane which he was showing off. It's incredible, I mean, that he's literally riding around in a plane they gave him.
CARLSON: Yes, nobody seemed to care. Yes, nobody seemed to, I mean, a couple of people brought it up at the time, but nobody in Congress stopped this from happening. I mean, look, the rules of the game have completely changed. That's the understatement of the century with this second term of President Trump and I just go back to what I originally said. I think there's so much other crises going on that whether or not this resonates, you know, look, Democrats, to Kate's point, can talk about the economy without this story because people are still going to vote with their pocketbooks, this may amplify that.
The one other thing is a caveat ill just say is that he owns he owes E. Jean Carroll $5 million, according to the Supreme Court yesterday. So, we now know he definitely has it.
[20:25:46]
COOPER: And that money is actually already been put aside.
CARLSON: Hopefully.
COOPER: Yes, Kate Bedingfield, appreciate it. Brad Todd, Gretchen Carlson, thank you.
Coming up, consequential rulings from the Supreme Court, including on the President's long-standing campaign to eliminate birthright citizenship. And happy news, Taylor Swift, Travis Kelce getting married at Madison
Square Garden. We have new details about their highly anticipated wedding celebration.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:30:20]
COOPER: Today began with breaking news. The Supreme Court is issuing its final opinions before adjourning for the summer. Each is consequential, but one goes straight to what the Constitution says about who is an American.
So even though there's plenty to discuss tonight about the 6-3 ruling that states may bar transgender athletes from girls and women's teams, and the one by the same margin lifting spending limits on political parties and candidates, we begin with the very last opinion the Court handed down today, rejecting the President's effort to end birthright citizenship, something he has long said the country needs to do.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Birthright citizenship, it's over.
Somebody comes over, walks across the line, has a baby, now we take care of the baby for the next 85 years.
We will end, finally, birthright citizenship. It's costing us so many billions of dollars.
My policy will choke off a major incentive for continued illegal immigration. We will restore sovereignty starting on day one.
Birthright, that's a big one. It's just absolutely ridiculous.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: So that's him on day one of his current term, signing an executive order which aimed to prevent children born here to undocumented immigrants and other foreign citizens from automatically gaining citizenship. When the high court took up the challenge to it, he became the first sitting President to attend oral arguments coming face to face with the three justices he put on the Court.
Today, by a 6-3 vote, the Court struck down that order. Conservative Chief Justice John Roberts, along with Trump-appointed justices Amy Coney Barrett and Brett Kavanaugh joined the Court's remaining three liberals in the ruling. Reaction on the left was largely relief, on the right, mostly the opposite.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. MIKE JOHNSON, HOUSE SPEAKER: I'm very disappointed in that outcome.
MARKWAYNE MULLIN, DHS SECRETARY: I adamantly disagree with the spirit of the 14th Amendment on what the Supreme Court ruled here.
REP. RANDY WEBER (R), TEXAS: The Supreme Court has gotten it wrong again.
STEVE BANNON, HOST, "BANNON'S WAR ROOM": You got the ultimate conclusion of the Bush era was this, Roberts. He gave it to you, baby, right between the eyes. How do you, like, suck on that?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: The President reacted online with sarcasm, posting, quote, "I would like to congratulate President Xi and the great country of China on their massive birthright citizenship win." Shortly before the ruling, he linked to an article suggesting that Congress could get around today's ruling by passing legislation similar to his executive order.
But it is hard to see how lawmakers might get around language in the 14th Amendment, which the majority, minus Justice Kavanaugh, reaffirmed. It reads, "All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside."
Now, again, Justice Kavanaugh did not join the majority in reaffirming this. He based his decision on existing federal law, meaning that when Chief Justice Roberts chose these words in today's majority opinion, he was writing for only five members of the nine member court who still believe that one of the pillars of the Constitution still applies the way it has for generations.
Quoting Justice Roberts, "Citizenship then and now was the right to have rights -- to freely participate in our political community. The framers of the 14th Amendment extended that promise to every free-born person in this land. We keep that promise today."
And though much of the conservative reaction to those words, as you saw, was negative, some was decidedly not.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HUGH HEWITT, HOST, "THE HUGH HEWITT SHOW": The Chief Justice has hit it out of the park on the birthright citizenship issue, and we finally have a decision that lays to rest this endless debate that text, history, and tradition, in fact, affirm if you're born in the United States, you're a citizen.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: Perspective now from two former federal prosecutors, Jeff Toobin is back. Joining us is Jessica Roth, professor at the Cardozo School of Law. Jeff, I know you and other legal experts expected the President to lose on birthright citizenship. Were you surprised at how the vote turned out?
TOOBIN: A lot, a lot. You know, this case looked to me and to a lot of people who follow the court like a slam dunk. And the constitutional issue, as you pointed out, Justice Kavanaugh was not with Chief Justice Roberts, so it was only five to four that the Constitution provides for birthright citizenship. That is a very narrow opinion.
Now, five votes is as good as nine. It's the law of the land. But the fact that four vote -- that there were not more votes for birthright citizenship is just another indication of how conservative this Supreme Court is.
COOPER: Jessica, Kavanaugh essentially argued that Congress could limit birthright citizenship. Congress could by statute. They just haven't yet. And therefore, the order from the President, the executive order is illegal. A new statute by Congress would still likely be ruled unconstitutional, though, under the current makeup.
[20:35:01]
JESSICA ROTH, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR, SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NY: That's absolutely right. Congress cannot override the Constitution. They'd have to pass a constitutional amendment. Supermajority in Congress that it'd have to be ratified by a supermajority of the states to amend the Constitution to basically say the 14th Amendment doesn't mean what the Supreme Court said in this opinion it means. So Congress cannot, absent a constitutional amendment, just on its own override what the Supreme Court said today.
COOPER: And Jeff, in his dissent, Alito, Justice Alito wrote, quote, "If the 14th Amendment required these results, the country would have to live with them or amend the Constitution. But the 14th Amendment does not include the rule the court now imposes on the country. In my judgment, the court has made a mistake that will seriously affect the country's future." What do you make of that?
TOOBIN: Well, it's a strongly worded statement in a dissenting opinion, and it's a dissenting opinion, which means it's a protest, but it is a recognition that he lost the case. Justice Alito is usually in the majority in this -- on this court. I mean, he's the one who wrote the opinion overturning Roe v. Wade. He's the one who wrote the latest opinion gutting the Voting Rights Act.
He's usually with the majority. Here, he was a dissenter, and he's upset about that. But as we know, dissenting opinions do not have the force of law.
COOPER: Jessica, what other rulings today were particularly important to you?
ROTH: Well, this one obviously was the headline.
COOPER: Right.
ROTH: But the other decisions that were issued today were also significant. The one in the campaign finance context was very significant in terms of --
COOPER: Who was that decision? ROTH: That was the decision that basically held unconstitutional under the First Amendment restrictions that date back to the post-Nixon -- Watergate, post-Watergate era, restricting coordinated expenditures by political parties with particular candidates.
COOPER: So the results of that will be big money going -- it can go directly into campaigns.
ROTH: Well, big money already could go into the political -- the party's coffers. But there were restrictions on how that could be used in coordination with --
COOPER: With the candidates.
ROTH: -- candidates. And that restriction was ruled to be unconstitutional today.
COOPER: And Jeff, what are the rulings we've seen from the court this term due to balance the power between the three branches of government? We've seen them expand executive power while at the same time rolling back a lot of laws passed by Congress.
TOOBIN: Yes, I mean, the President lost two big cases this term. He lost birthright citizenship and his tariffs were overturned. But if you look at the full scope of the 75 or so cases, the Supreme Court decided, the President did very well.
The -- he -- his solicitor general won almost all the cases he argued, and particularly when it comes to the scope of executive power. The decision earlier this week, basically saying that the President could fire the heads -- the commissioners of the Federal Trade Commission. That's going to basically give the President more or less unlimited power to fire anyone in the executive branch for any reason.
Congress cannot impose conditions like firing someone only for good cause with every part of the executive branch except for the Federal Reserve, which was carved out in another opinion. This is a court that is very favorable to executive power, at least when there's a Republican President in office.
COOPER: Jeff Toobin, Jessica Roth, thanks so much. Appreciate it.
An international manhunt is underway after an alleged assassination attempt on a Ukrainian-born oligarch. A parcel bomb exploded. Three people were injured. Authorities are searching for a suspect and a motive. We'll show you more ahead.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:42:59]
COOPER: More breaking news tonight at The Washington Post's exclusive reporting that White House officials secretly awarded a no-bid contract worth up to $500 million for the construction of the East Wing ballroom. It's an unusual agreement that sidestepped typical contracting procedures designed to control costs. According to The Post, President Trump was directly involved in negotiating some of the costs for the project. This comes after recent reporting for The Post found that the project has grown to $600 million with half of that expected to be funded by taxpayers. The President has repeatedly said it is being funded by himself and donors.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: And I'm paying for it. I'm paying for it. The country is not --
We're donating a $400 million ballroom. Myself and donors are giving them free of charge for nothing.
We did this no charge to the taxpayer whatsoever.
Rich people and people are putting up the money. Zero taxpayer dollars.
We didn't ask for any tax money. We have no taxes, it's taxpayer free. We have no taxpayer putting up $0.10.
We're putting up $400 million to do the ballroom, section of the ballroom. We are putting that up privately.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: Washington Post Investigative Reporter Jonathan O'Connell is on the byline and obtained a copy of the no-bid agreement. He joins me now. So what do you find in your reporting about how this no-bid contract was awarded?
JONATHAN O'CONNELL, INVESTIGATIVE REPORTER, THE WASHINGTON POST: It's actually a very creative strategy, Anderson, although legally sort of dubious. There is this tiny office in the White House called the Executive Residence, and which is generally for small repairs to the White House, the President and his family's home, that portion of the White House, doing furnishings and interior changes.
And they've used this very tiny office to contract the entire demolition and construction of the East Wing, rather than using these agencies that have big contracting operations and are used to following and must follow, you know, competitive bidding. So they've used this tiny office that I had never heard of before we got into this and saw this contract to use -- to develop this large construction project. And because it's legally kind of questionable, they are now stuck. The construction has been paused.
COOPER: And you also report the President was directly involved in negotiating some of the costs for the project. How so?
[20:45:07]
O'CONNELL: Yes, we are still learning more about this for certain. But the specific part that he took an involvement in, according to the documents we've seen, is the price of concrete, because the general contractor used one of its own companies as a subsidiary. And according to the documents we've seen, the President himself helped negotiate what the price of the concrete would be.
This happened four or five days after the invasion of Iran. So obviously, it was a priority for him because he spent personal time doing it.
COOPER: He was negotiating the price of the concrete after the -- after which invasion?
O'CONNELL: Of Iran, the same week.
COOPER: Wow. Has the White House responded to your reporting?
O'CONNELL: They've answered some questions, not a lot of them. They don't question any of the facts in our reporting at all. It's mostly a defense of these procedures that are used to get things going quickly. I mean, President Trump does want to see lots of projects around the nation's capital happen quickly.
And you've seen on a lot of these examples, including this arch that he's trying to build, Lafayette Square in front of the White House and the East Wing, that he's willing to sort of put his foot on the gas pedal and try to get things going as quickly as possible. Now, he's gotten tripped up on the courts a bunch of times. The Kennedy Center is a good example of that.
But he wants to move quickly. And this is an example of that, where he is using this obscure contracting operation in order to quickly pick a contractor and get work going as quickly as possible.
COOPER: The whole idea, though, of having bids, I mean, you know, it's pretty obvious it's to get good quality work at a good price and have competing bids. And the other company doesn't know what other companies are bidding. That's how work is normally done.
He wants to rush it. And we've seen the results with the reflecting pool and others where it ends up kind of breaking down.
O'CONNELL: Yes. I mean, anybody who's done -- has any work done on their house. Generally, you probably talked to more than one general contractor or contractor about how much the work might cost. And if you're going to demolish part of your house, you might also have a plan for what you'll be replaced with, a plan that is approved and maybe is finalized. That's not the case here.
And also, it's not, as the President said in the clip that you just showed, it's -- a lot of it is not his money. I mean, tens of millions of dollars of taxpayer money is already being spent on this. And clearly making sure that the cost was as low as possible and the government and taxpayers got the best service as possible is not a priority here.
Otherwise, you would have used one of these normal contracting vehicles to go out and solicit the best price you could get and get the best service you could get. And in this case, the administration is not doing that. They're going as fast as they can, should I get their approvals.
COOPER: Yes. Jonathan O'Connell, fascinating reporting. Appreciate it. Thank you.
O'CONNELL: Yes. Thank you, Anderson.
COOPER: This was the scene in Monaco after authorities say would-be assassin detonated a parcel bomb in an apartment building. The intended target was a Ukrainian-born business tycoon, they say. That's according to CNN's French affiliate BFMTV. The three people were injured, all survived.
Now an international manhunt is underway. Melissa Bell has more.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
MELISSA BELL, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Police are now on the hunt for a man they say planted a parcel bomb outside this high-end residential building in Monaco. Police say his apparent target, 58-year-old Vadym Iermolaiev, a Ukrainian-born oligarch who renounced his Ukrainian citizenship in 2019 for tax reasons and moved to Monaco, according to French affiliate BFMTV.
The motive of the attempted assassination remains unclear. The Monaco prosecutor general has ruled out terrorism for now.
STEPHANE THIBAULT, MONACO PROSECUTOR (through translation): We have not apprehended him, but, in coordination with French authorities, we are pursuing him in order to identify and apprehend him, I hope, rapidly. Given the means that we are deploying, I hope this could happen quite quickly.
BELL: Details are emerging about Vadym Iermolaiev. He made his fortune mainly in real estate in the post-Soviet transition period, and then gave up his Ukrainian citizenship in 2019, telling the press that it was for tax reasons that he'd chosen to become a Cypriot national.
He was then sanctioned by Kyiv in 2023 over allegations that he'd done business in Russian-occupied Crimea, allegations that he denied.
BELL (voice-over): The small city-state of Monaco itself is still in shock.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE (through translation): I went out onto the terrace. There were people screaming and running. Then the ambulance arrived, and I didn't know what it was because there was no smoke or fire, so I wasn't sure. But I knew there had been an explosion because it was really loud. The whole building shook a bit. The windows, everything.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE (through translation): I went outside for some fresh air and heard a sound, like a clap of thunder. I didn't realize what it was. Yes, it's unsettling. Anywhere, it's unsettling, that's for sure, especially since we aren't used to this sort of thing in Monaco.
BELL (voice-over): A city better known for its wealth than for its crime rate.
Melissa Bell, CNN, Paris.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
[20:50:03]
COOPER: I want to get more perspective from CNN Chief Law Enforcement Intelligence Analyst, John Miller. It's fascinating that this took place in Monaco, which is very safe. I mean, it's -- and it's tiny.
JOHN MILLER, CNN CHIEF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND INTELLIGENCE ANALYST: Yes, it's the size of New York's Central Park --
COOPER: Yes.
MILLER: -- with, you know, a population of 38,000. But when you look at this particular crime, this was not a drive-by shooting. You know if you go by the accounts of witnesses and what the video cameras picked up, you have an individual who approaches the building with a backpack, puts the backpack down.
He may remove a package from that, and then when the victim is leaving with the other two people, the device goes off. That is highly suggestive of a remote control. Meaning --
COOPER: Someone was watching, they knew.
MILLER: Someone was watching, and they waited for him to leave to press that button. That takes that to the level of a very sophisticated crime. Unlikely that it's terrorism. You have somebody who is a former Ukrainian who switched his citizenship to being a Cypriot.
But most of his wealth and property came out of Crimea, which came under Russian control, where it probably wasn't convenient to be a Ukrainian oligarch. And then there's all the other possibilities. His son was indicted in a major fraud case that allegedly cost victims millions of dollars. He got out of jail.
So if you're the police in Monaco or the police in France where this individual ran over the border and is being sought, you're really -- before you can get to whodunit, you've got to get to -- you've got to sort through all of the possible motives, which at this point, there's more than a few.
COOPER: How much planning and expertise would have to go into something like this?
MILLER: Well, to put together a device, a bombing, you know, you can go online and find out how to make a rudimentary bomb. To do one with a remote control requires a little electrical knowledge, some ability to figure out transmitters and not have a signal come in by accident that blows you up with your bomb. So that's a high level.
It also requires some pre-operational surveillance, which is if I put that package there at a certain time, is that the time he usually comes out? Is there a call that went into him saying, you know, there's a package to pick up or something that brought him out? But with also with those other people. So --
COOPER: Also, would other people in the building see a package outside and pick it up themselves and bring it in or?
MILLER: Well, and this happened very shortly after the package was placed. So, it suggests and this isn't the --
COOPER: And personally the schedule.
MILLER: Exactly. That somebody had been watching before that day, which may be easier for police and that they can go back over video and see, is there someone in the background on both days?
COOPER: So do they know the identity of the person or they just have video of the person leaving, heading to France?
MILLER: They have video of an individual running away. He appears to have something in his left hand. He appears to have a strap over his shoulder, which may be that backpack. That could be a phone or it could be the transmitter that set off the bomb.
But it's unknown to me. And I've been looking at what we could find out about the investigation today from foreign partners, whether they have an identified subject or they're looking to figure out who's the man in the picture.
COOPER: Yes. It's fascinating.
John Miller, thanks very much.
Coming up, a new reporting that Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce will have a wedding celebration in Madison Square Garden this week, according to sources. What exactly that means? Well, let's try to find out ahead.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:57:39]
COOPER: Sources tell CNN the wedding celebration for Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce is expected to take place at Madison Square Garden this week. Swift was spotted courtside at the same arena just weeks ago to watch the Knicks play in the NBA Finals. Her wedding has been the focus, obviously, of much speculation ever since the couple announced their engagement with this post on Instagram last August, reading, "Your English teacher and your gym teacher are getting married."
CNN's Gloria Pazmino joins me now with detail. So your sources are describing a multi-day event. What do you know?
GLORIA PAZMINO, CNN CORRESPONDENT: That's right, Anderson. You know, as you said, there's been so much speculation since the engagement in August. Where is this wedding going to be? Who was going to get to attend? Would we get to see it?
But many clues have emerged over the past few days that the location is right here in the heart of Manhattan, inside Madison Square Garden, the world's most famous arena, where Swift has performed eight times. Now, here's what we know. The celebrations are going to start on Thursday with what sources are describing to us as a rehearsal that will include about 100 people.
Then the big celebration is scheduled for Friday, and it's going to start on Friday afternoon with a cocktail party, as any good wedding does. That is expected to include about 1,000 people, and it is expected to go late, very late, into Saturday morning at 4:00 a.m.
Now, throughout the day here at the Garden, we have seen a lot of activity, equipment being moved in and out of loading docks, and one specially telling clue, Anderson, a worker in a Taylor Swift Carpenters T-shirt. Now, I do think it's worth sort of a warning.
You know, this is Taylor Swift that we're talking about here. So all these clues, Easter eggs, you know, breadcrumbs perhaps meant to throw us off the scent, it's been done before. But for now, our sources familiar with the plans tell us this is happening Thursday and Friday.
The last point I'll make, Anderson, is that this is happening over July 4th weekend, the nation's 250th birthday, during what could be a historic heatwave here in New York City inside a very famous venue on a very busy intersection of New York. You know, the Garden right on top of Penn Station, and of course, the World Cup is underway. So this stretch of New York City is likely to be a very busy place, even more than usual --
COOPER: Yes.
PAZMINO: -- over the next few days. Anderson?
COOPER: Well, Friday night, Andy Cohen and I are doing the ball drop in Times Square, counting down to July 4th from like 8:00 to 12:30 at night. So we'll be covering whatever's going on in Madison Square Garden as well as probably on Saturday as well when we celebrate July 4th all day and all night on CNN.
Gloria Pazmino, thanks so much.
The news continues. The source with Kaitlan Collins starts now.
