Return to Transcripts main page

Erin Burnett Outfront

Trump Rages Over Mail Ballots Ruling Amid His Baseless Fraud Claims; Trump Calls Housing Affordability Bill "Big Yawn", Pushes Bill Election Bill; Democratic Nominee's Deleted Posts Reveal Favorable References To Communism; Death Toll Surges Past 1,700 Amid Frantic Search For Survivors. Aired 7-8p ET

Aired June 29, 2026 - 19:00   ET

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

[19:00:22]

ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST: OUTFRONT next:

Breaking news on the Supreme Court ruling that Trump is furious about behind closed doors, as the person at the center of another ruling today joins me live for a primetime exclusive.

Plus, yawn. That's Trump's word for the housing bill that both parties just passed a bipartisan deal. Is he trying to sabotage the success of the GOP?

And new details about the little-known company trying to save the reflecting pool. Do they get special treatment from the White House?

Let's go OUTFRONT.

(MUSIC)

BURNETT: And good evening. I'm Erin Burnett.

And OUTFRONT tonight, a crushing blow for Trump at the Supreme Court. In a major loss for the president, the Supreme Court today shutting down his efforts to meddle in the upcoming election. Two of the conservative justices joining the liberal justices to allow states to continue counting mail-in ballots that are postmarked by election day.

Trump did not take it well.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The mail-in ballot ruling, which was a little bit surprising, gives people more time to vote illegally, let's say. I think it was very detrimental to honest elections.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BURNETT: Now, of course, There's no evidence of widespread fraud when it comes to mail-in ballots. And frankly, sometimes it's frustrating to even have to say it that way. They've looked and looked and looked. There hasn't been fraud in a widespread basis in mail-in ballots. But Trump has voted by mail the last time he voted, frankly, in

Florida back in March for a special election. It's not the only time either.

And this is not the only defeat that Trump suffered at the Supreme Court today. The justices declined to hear Trump's appeal in the civil case, which found him liable for the sexual abuse and defamation of writer E. Jean Carroll, which means that Trump still has to pay Carroll $5 million in damages. Now, those were two stinging defeats. So, Trump today did cling to one victory, which does give him even more power.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: The Slaughter case was the big case today. That was really a big case. It gives me the right, and not me, it gives a president the right to do what the president should have, the right to do. And it's very interesting. It's a big ruling.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BURNETT: So, at the heart of this ruling is Trump's firing of Rebecca Slaughter without cause. She's one of the only Democrats on the Federal Trade Commission. And then she sued Trump.

Now, Trump won, which is something he is not going to let anyone forget, he said today. Today's historic Slaughter decision by the Supreme Court is the greatest increase in presidential power in the past 100 years, such a monumental ruling at such an important time.

Now, Rebecca Slaughter is going to be our guest in just a moment. But as Slaughter will tell us tonight, the FTC is supposed to be an independent agency that protects Americans against harmful business practices. And Trump did not seem to want Democrats on that commission, so he fired Slaughter along with another Democrat.

Meanwhile, the titans of the business world and the media world, the very people that the FTC is supposed to be policing to make sure that they are protecting consumers' best interests? Well, the CEOs of Apple, Meta, Alphabet were all front and center at Trump's inauguration.

Mark Zuckerberg attended the UFC fights on Trump's birthday earlier this month. Tim Cook went to China with Trump, and their companies donated to his ballroom.

So, this decision from the Supreme Court does empower Trump to squash dissent when he wants to, which, of course, could open the door to potential corruption. That is the very thing Trump's critics are claiming after "The New York Times" reported on a billion-dollar mining deal between Trump and Kazakhstan. According to "The New York Times", the deal gives a little-known American company access to one of the world's largest untapped reserves of tungsten.

Tungsten is a metal the United States desperately needs for the production of missile warheads, fighter jets, computer chips, and other critical goods. And here's the twist. Investors in the deal reportedly have ties to Trump's sons, Eric and Donald Jr., along with Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick's sons.

So, Trump's sons stand to profit from that deal. And obviously, there is a whole lot more where that came from.

Kristen Holmes is OUTFRONT live outside the White House to begin our coverage tonight.

And, Kristen, Trump is talking up his one big win from the Supreme Court today. But as you've been talking to your sources, you've been learning, I understand, that he is incredibly angry tonight about another ruling from the court.

Well, he's completely livid over the mail-in ballot ruling. And, of course, part of this is the justices who decided to rule against him or this case. Just a reminder, this, of course, was the Republican National Committee challenging a Mississippi law that allowed voting to be counted or votes to be counted that were mail-in ballots that came in after election day.

But if you look at the justices who voted against Donald Trump and the Republican National Committee, one of them sticks out in particular, and that is Amy Coney Barrett, who President Trump himself appointed to the bench and has been growing increasingly frustrated.

[19:05:09]

We've reported multiple times that behind closed doors, he has slammed Amy Coney Barrett, saying that she has not stepped up, she has not done basically what he put her in place to do.

And this is also leading President Trump to become even more fixated on getting that Save America Act and that voting restriction bill through Congress. Now, we have heard from senators up and down that they just don't have the votes to get that through, that there just aren't enough Republicans that support it.

And now, we're hearing that they're putting a lot of pressure, the White House as well as Speaker Johnson on Thune to try to get this through whatever way he possibly can. You heard President Trump saying this is now more important than ever.

And I will tell you, Erin, in fact, I'm told by a White House official that President Trump is unlikely to sign that bipartisan housing bill. Just let it go into law. He's not going to veto it. But right now, he views that as a betrayal to his base if he were to actually sign it.

And so instead of that, because he's promised to have the Save America Act get through before he signs any major legislation. So, he's willing to potentially not sign this, again, very widely supported housing bill in order to try to push Save America Act.

BURNETT: Wow, which is incredible. Obviously, the whole signing ceremony was ready last week, as we know.

HOLMES: Right.

BURNETT: And then he suddenly decided not to sign it. And here we are again holding it hostage.

All right, Kristen, thank you very much from the White House.

And OUTFRONT now for an exclusive primetime interview, Rebecca Slaughter, the former FTC commissioner fired by Trump, who brought the Supreme Court case against him.

I appreciate your time, Rebecca. So how much power do you think that this ruling now gives Trump?

REBECCA KELLY SLAUGHTER, FORMER FTC COMMISSIONER AT CENTER OF SCOTUS CASE: A massive amount of power. I mean, the president said it himself. It is the largest expansion of executive power in over 100 years, and that is exactly why we should be worried about it.

BURNETT: So, you know, the court did hand Trump a number of defeats today, including a ruling, interestingly, that he can't fire Lisa Cook at the Fed. Why do you think your case, which obviously involved the FTC, is different?

SLAUGHTER: Well, I don't really think that it is different. I think it came out differently, and there were only two justices who ruled against me and for Governor Cook at the Fed. And I find it very hard to square those two decisions from any kind of rational, intelligible standpoint.

The only difference that I can. ascertain is that the Supreme Court and those two justices who switched the positions in those cases decided that there is a Wall Street exception. And that is exactly part of the problem. I mean, the FTC, it sounds like part of the alphabet soup of agencies, but it's the agency Congress set up to be bipartisan, multi-member, and independent in order for it to be able to check the most powerful corporations in the country and keep them from getting ahead by cheating and lying to the American people and enriching themselves at the people's expense.

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.

But for the Fed, which has some responsibility for Wall Street, the Supreme Court has said, OK, but you can stay as a watchdog. And I think that that's really problematic.

BURNETT: So Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the majority, and he wrote, Rebecca, in the ruling, and I quote him, "The president must have the assistance of officers he can trust. Although it is up to the Senate to decide whether to confirm those with whom the president would prefer to work, neither Congress nor the courts may saddle with him with those with whom he cannot work. Subordinates who exercise the president's power are subject to removal by him." And it continued.

But what do you make of that argument that Trump won the election, and he gets to pick anyone appointed and get rid of those he doesn't like?

SLAUGHTER: Yeah, so that's essentially the theory of the unitary executive. It's a theory to which Chief Justice Roberts has been an adherent for a very long time. But I think it is inconsistent with both the constitutional system of checks and balances, which says that the president shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed, not that he shall do whatever he wants as a matter of policy, He has to execute laws as passed by Congress, and those laws set up both the structure of these eight government agencies and give them substantive powers.

It's also inconsistent with the historical tradition of our country, dating all the way back to the founding. agencies and give them substantive powers. It's also inconsistent with the historical tradition of our country, dating all the way back to the founding, when the sinking fund, which Justice Sotomayor talked about in her dissent, had officers who could not be removed.

[19:10:05]

And the common thread in these agencies that Congress set up with these limited removal protections is that they are there to protect economic integrity, so that the same way independent directors on corporate boards keep a CEO from just giving out favors to friends at the expense of shareholders. These agencies were designed to protect American taxpayers and American people from crony capitalism.

BURNETT: All right, Rebecca, thank you very much. I appreciate your time tonight.

And I want to go straight to Ty Cobb, former Trump White House lawyer.

So, Ty, a lot to talk about here. Obviously, what Rebecca's talking about, there was a significant win for Trump and his efforts to expand executive power. He did, though, suffer today a number of losses at the Supreme Court, including his attempt to overturn the ruling against him in the E. Jean Carroll case, where a federal jury in New York had found the president liable for sexually abusing and defaming Carroll.

And Trump responded today on social media saying, I will continue the fight. against this weaponization and lawfare case against me, including the ridiculous claim of defamation with all my power and strength. This case is really against the United States of America and all it stands for and should never be allowed to happen to another president.

Can he do anything more about this?

TY COBB, FORMER TRUMP WHITE HOUSE LAWYER: Nothing. You know, he's going to write a, you know, $5.8 million check, have to supplement the 5.5 that's already being held by the court, and E. Jean Carroll will cash that check sometime in recent -- and sometime in the near future.

With regard to the -- her claims, keep in mind that this is one of 27 women over the course of the last three decades who's come forward with accusations against the president for sexual misconduct. You know, this is one of three women that he has lied openly about you know, just since -- just since his presidency.

You know, and Karen McDougal and Stormy Daniels, who were at the heart of his 34 criminal felony convictions, he denied having relationships with him. He denied having anything to do with her, said she wasn't his type, said other things about her that were defamatory. The jury didn't have any difficulty with that. And he lost $5 million in the first trial, under Joe Tacopina, who I think did an excellent job, compared to Alina Habba, who ended up losing $83 million.

BURNETT: So, what about the mail-in ballot case? I mean, that was significant. And you heard Kristen Holmes reporting, right, that he is really upset about that.

Then there's the Lisa Cook case, which he also took a hit in from the Fed. She obviously was the Fed governor. So, do you read anything into these losses by Trump at the Supreme Court? Where obviously, let's just state the obvious here, Ty. This is a Supreme Court where he thinks he stacked it with people who were going to rule in his favor. And FTC ruling aside, which was obviously very significant, they did rule in his favor. These other very, very monumental cases, they did not.

COBB: Right. Trump views this very transactionally. They're his people. They should vote his way. I mean, that's his view of the world. But, you know, these people, they're there to call balls and strike. As Chief Justice Roberts said at his hearing, he did that today.

I think he tried very desperately, if you look at the alignment of all these different opinions, to hold the center of the court. He was in the majority in the Cook case. He was in the majority in the Mississippi ballot case.

Amy Coney Barrett, who wrote the Mississippi ballot case, is a conservative. She is a strong conservative, but she's also an intellectually honest person, and she wrote the decision in the way that she actually believes.

I know they're livid about that. I know Steve Bannon, one of Trump's advisors, convicted felon, and Epstein confidante, has trashed her today, and that Trump is livid. But the reality is, she did her job, and she should be proud of that.

So, I think these are very, very significant decisions. I think the Cook case is very much different than Ms. Slaughter's case. I commend Ms. Slaughter for her service to the country. But I think on constitutional grounds that the cases are very distinct, and the enabling legislation for the Fed has that for-cause provision that Justice Roberts relied upon.

BURNETT: So, we're hours away, possibly, from birthright citizenship. What do you expect there?

I expect that, given the rulings today, particularly the ruling on the Mississippi voting case, I would expect that Trump will be rebuked again on birthright citizenship by the court. It could be -- it could be unanimous, it should be unanimous, it's really an obvious decision.

But, you know, given the tone of some of the conservative opinions, particularly Justice Alito, you know, he and Thomas may rule against him.

[19:15:03]

I do think that -- I do think that the government will likely win the two transgender sports cases, where different states have tried to eliminate, you know, trans athletes from women's sports. And -- but I -- so I think there'll be a little bit of a, you know, some for Trump, some for some for the people tomorrow. But on birthright citizenship, which I think is at the fundamental core of what it is to be an American, I think that the country will be proud tomorrow of the Supreme Court.

BURNETT: All right. Well, we shall see. And, Ty, thank you very much.

And next, so what does Trump really think about that major bipartisan bill to address affordability?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: To me, compared to the Save America Act, just about everything is a big yawn.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BURNETT: Plus, our KFILE just uncovering deleted posts from a Democratic socialist who defeated a powerful incumbent. She frequently referenced communism, but then later deleted the account. Of course, KFILE found it, and you'll see everything she had to say.

And breaking news, we've got new video of the devastating destruction in Venezuela as the death toll from the powerful earthquakes there is now at more than 1,700 people.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:20:48]

BURNETT: Breaking news, President Trump dismissing a major bipartisan housing affordability bill, the largest in decades as, in his words, a yawn.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REPORTER: Will you sign that housing bill?

TRUMP: I have not -- it hasn't been sent to me yet. It's coming, I understand. And then I'll make -- then I'll make a -- here's what I would like to say. Much more than a bill that -- big deal. It's a yawn.

Some people say it's wonderful. To me, compared to the Save America Act, just about everything is a big yawn.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BURNETT: Just about everything's a big yawn except for the Save America Act. So what is that act? Well, it's what he has called the election overhaul bill that senators in his own party have stood up to say they don't support. And he's insisted that it has to be passed before he'd sign the housing bill. That's what he said last week.

It seems his own press secretary, though, did not get the memo that the housing affordability bill is a, quote, "yawn" because, well, Karoline Leavitt, when there was a big signing party ready to sign it into law for Trump, called a, quote, "one of the most significant pieces of housing affordability legislation in American history," adding that this bipartisan bill includes policies long championed by the president.

OUTFRONT now, David Axelrod and Anthony Scaramucci, who's the author of the upcoming book, "All the Wrong Moves: How Three Catastrophic Decisions Led to the Rise of Trump".

All right. I appreciate both of you.

So, David, you know, Kristen Holmes is now reporting tonight, just a few moments ago, top of the show. She said Trump is now saying he may not even sign the affordable housing bill this week, calling it a yawn twice. Right. Saying that everything pretty much everything's a yawn compared to the Save America Act.

So, what do you even say to this?

DAVID AXELROD, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL ANALYST: Look, we've seen example after example of the president sort of minimizing affordability as an issue for Americans, and Americans elected him to work on this issue, and instead we get a war that people are deeply opposed to that has been kind of a disaster from the standpoint of his implementation.

And we get, you know, ballrooms and we get reflecting pools and we get you know, golf course tours on Sunday, and a president who seems more interested in creating monuments to himself than dealing with the fundamental problem that people elected him to do.

So, he is really damaging himself here. And you see it in his polling numbers. People do not believe that. He is focused on the things that are most important in their lives. And certainly, housing is one of them.

So, you know, this just adds to a litany of head-scratchers that have put him and his party in a big hole.

BURNETT: So, Anthony, can I just share some of that litany of head- scratchers? Because obviously, if you have a housing affordability bill, and housing has proven in election after election from coast to coast to be a central issue, and you've got a bipartisan bill, and you can own it, that's a good politics. But he is now not signing it because of this other thing. And the litany is, well, some other things that are pretty good soundbites if you are a Democrat, as an example, listen to these.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: The numbers were great. You know what I really love? I love the inflation.

The only thing that matters when I'm talking about Iran, they can't have a nuclear weapon. I don't think about Americans' financial situation, and I don't think about anybody.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BURNETT: So, Anthony, you know Trump and how he operates, okay? But what's going on? What gets the guy to go out and say, I don't think about anyone's financial situation, any American's financial situation, I don't care at all. I mean, what's going on?

ANTHONY SCRAMUCCI, FORMER TRUMP WHITE HOUSE COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR: Well, I think he was trying to channel like a Churchillian moment, but that was a huge, gigantic gap for him, and it exposed a seam where he really doesn't care. And so, it came across, he was trying to say, oh, I'm like Winston Churchill. I'm going to stay in the fight no matter what.

But it came across like who he really is, which is, oh, by the way, I really don't care about you, and I don't care about your . I'm going to stay in the fight no matter what. But it came across like who he really is, which is, oh, by the way, I really don't care about you, and I don't care about your financial situation.

[19:25:01]

And so, the Democrats are going to use that ad nauseam come the midterms. But the secondary factor here is the bipartisan thing he really doesn't like, because remember, to David's point, he's trying to expand his executive power, and he wants it to be all about him. What could be worse for him than a bipartisan bill? Of course, that's the worst possible thing, because he wants it to be all about himself, Erin, and that's the reason why he didn't sign it.

Now, remember, they didn't put it in front of them, and so the 10-day clock hasn't started yet. But my guess is he's going to get forced to sign it by the Republicans, because they need the bill. I would say both parties would like to go into the election with this sort of a bill as one of the things they stump on. And so, I predict that Trump will end up signing it despite the current complaining about it.

BURNETT: Right, right, and, David, currently saying, according to Kristen's reporting, that he may delay it even more, waiting for the Save America Act.

So, he does seem much more focused on his Great American State Fair as well. You talk about the monuments, David. But right now, it's the Great American State Fair. It's running through mid-July in Washington, D.C. He posted, "Do you think people appreciate what a fantastic job we did

in building and operating the Great American State Fair at the National Mall, packed with happy people and everybody loving it? Ask yourself the simple question, in all caps, do you think that Obama, Obuma, or Sleepy Joe Biden could have done it? The answer is no."

OK, so let me just-- just to put out here, David, one more thing here, which is the images. Obviously, so far, attendance, it's such that the cameras have shown, does not seem to be overwhelmingly attended, shall we say. Those are all the booths on the side, and you can see the attendees. Daily Beast and Newsweek are both calling it empty.

So, what does all this mean to him, David? How meaningful is it when he sees those images without crowds?

Look, I think the thing that means something to him is he sees polls like the CNN poll a couple of weeks ago that said 57 percent of Americans have a favorable opinion of Barack Obama and 34 percent have a favorable opinion of Donald Trump. And there's plenty of other evidence that, you know, people are down on the president right now. And I think that is playing in his head, and you hear it in some of the things that he's saying.

But listen, we shouldn't We should tie all this together, because he has always believed from the very beginning -- what was the first thing we saw of him as president was him claiming that the crowd at his inauguration was the largest that we've ever seen, and he sent his press secretary out to do it.

And remember what Kellyanne Conway said when she was asked about -- when she would say, well, that's not a fact. She said, well, he has alternative facts.

The president believes -- and though Anthony's tenure as communications director was short, he probably has some sense of this -- the president believes that he can sell anything, that if you just say it enough, that people will believe it. He believes that if he tells people the economy is great, that they'll ignore the fundamental metrics in their own lives. He believes that he can claim a crowd as, you know, an event is the biggest ever when it's not the biggest ever.

And I think people are getting weary of that. But he also, by the way, claimed that he won an election that he lost. And now we are caught in this dilemma here where he, in order to deal with a problem that doesn't exist, fraud that he can't prove, that he wants to hold the entire workings of Congress up.

So, his problems are becoming our problems in a big way.

BURNETT: Anthony, How upsetting do you think it is for him to see the sparse attendance thus far at the Great American State Fair? Or do you actually think that they're able to put him in a bubble such that he doesn't actually see the truth at all?

SCARAMUCCI: I think he's in a bubble. I mean, I think that tweet was a little bit of an exaggeration, but I think they're telling him how great it is. I mean, you have Fox News hosts saying how crowded it is, and then it's like a joke because you look behind him, there's nobody there.

But, you know, there's two people on this television show that remember the bicentennial. Erin, I think you were too young for that, but David and I certainly do remember it. And this is a lost --

BURNETT: I'm about to show my baby blanket, by the way, Anthony, from that year. That was my birth year, yes, yes, July '76. So that's coming up next.

SCARAMUCCI: All right, but I'm just letting you know that this was a cultural moment missed. I remember as a kid seeing Operation Sail in New York Harbor, and I remember my parents being so excited about the Bicentennial.

And what he did here was, instead of making it about we the people, he made it about me the person.

[19:30:07]

And he's turned off, you know, he's got a 67 percent roughly disapproval rating. So, by making it about himself, our birthday party, America's birthday party, he's turned off roughly two thirds of the people. And you can see it reflected in the attendance on the mall.

BURNETT: Yeah, yeah. It's funny you say that because, I am going to show that baby blanket, but it is, anyone you talk to who was five years or older, in 1976 remembers it, because it was such an incredible occasion, right? And it feels different to so many this time.

Thank you both very much.

AXELROD: We also remember how President Ford conducted himself during that period, and he was a steward for the whole country. He was a trustee of our democracy, and he behaved that way. This is not what we're seeing now.

BURNETT: Right. He came after, of course, Nixon and all of that to think that the country came together at that time.

All right. Thank you both very much.

And next, the owner of the company responsible for renovating the reflecting pool speaks to CNN. Can he save the pool from the algae takeover?

Plus, exclusive reporting tonight from KFILE, revealing a Democratic Socialist. One of the most visible right now, who just scored a major victory, has a history of posting about communism and Marxist ideology, posts that she has since deleted. The KFILE found them, and you'll see them.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) [19:35:46]

BURNETT: Breaking news, President Trump threatening prison time for anyone damaging renovated sites in the nation's capital, writing, "Security is watching very carefully for the almost 70 other monuments, statues, and fountains that we renovated throughout Washington, D.C. If anyone attacks any of them, they get as much as 10 years in jail. In any event, go check it out. The reflecting pool is magnificent."

Well, it comes as we're learning more about what was a very little- known company that is now trying to save the reflecting pool from an algae infestation.

Sunlen Serfaty is OUTFRONT.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

SUNLEN SERFATY, CNN WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): In the middle of the political tidal wave, this man is in charge of keeping water in the reflecting pool crystal clear.

CHAS ANTINONE JR., PRESIDENT & COO AT GREENWATER SERVICES: We've never done a pool, but the water is relatively the same as the water that you would see out in a regular lake somewhere, right? You're treating it for algae and bacteria.

SERFATY: How clean does President Trump want to get this project?

ANTINONE: I don't know the answer to that question yet, but since it was really blue last week. I think he liked that.

SERFATY (voice-over): In his first TV interview, Chas Antinone, the CEO of Greenwater Services, defended its patented ozone nanobubbler, a new technology that's costing $1.7 million, and that the Trump administration is building as the state-of-the-art fix for the algae- ridden pool.

ANTINONE: Ozone is 3,000 times faster and 50 times more powerful than chlorine, and it's able to stay in the water, travel through the water, find the toxins that it needs, that's why we're able to treat it from both ends and treat the whole pool.

SERFATY (voice-over): But the project has been plagued with other problems too, from the new blue bottom peeling up to Trump blaming without evidence left wing vandals.

TRUMP: The reflecting pool is so beautiful, they tried to destroy it.

SERFATY (voice-over): Prompting Trump to announce they'll need to drain the pool again.

TRUMP: We'll fix it right after the 4th of July.

SERFATY (voice-over): Meanwhile, the small Ohio company has been thrust into the national spotlight for their role. SERFATY: What's your understanding of why the original bloom happened?

ANTINONE: How it happened? I don't know. It could be -- someone could have come from the pipes. Could somebody have dumped some stuff in there? Anything's possible in the middle of the night.

SERFATY (voice-over): In April, the company was given a no bid contract from the Trump administration, bypassing a competitive bidding process. The company's co-owner is JJ Cafaro, a longtime supporter and donor to President Trump and neighbor living near his Mar-a-Lago club.

TRUMP: JJ Cafaro from Florida and from Cleveland. He's a man who made a lot of money in Cleveland, does a good job and a fantastic man.

SERFATY (voice-over): In 2001, Cafaro pleaded guilty to conspiracy to bribe Representative James Trafficant and separately pleaded guilty in 2010 for a campaign finance violation. The Interior Department says the White House was not involved in the selection process for any contract and did not weigh in on the company selected, full stop.

And the company has also tried to distance itself from Cafaro, saying he is an Ohio-based businessman who invested in the Ohio-based company after the owner showed him research on local Ohio bodies of water. A spokesperson for the company said he has no involvement in the day-to- day operations.

Earlier this month, Cafaro defended his company's technology, saying he believes the public scrutiny over the reflecting pool is from people who don't seem to like Trump.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SERFATY: And there's been some speculation that the Trump administration perhaps possibly added to the problems down here at the reflecting pool. There had been four temporary ozone nanobot blur machines that were seen in the reflecting pool behind me. But those were instructed by the National Park Service to be taken out for a 24- hour period in mid-June. And that was the same time that the president had hosted a big UFC photo op down here on the National Mall.

Now, meantime, the company has said that the permanent nano ozone technology is in place. It was actually installed off of the reflecting pool. You'll see in this area behind me, that is where the permanent machine is in place. And we got exclusive photos of that being installed -- Erin.

BURNETT: All right, Sunland, thank you very much along the mall.

OUTFRONT now, Jon Meacham, presidential historian, Pulitzer Prize- winning biographer, and author of his latest book, "American Struggle: Democracy, Dissent, and the Pursuit of a More Perfect Union".

So, Jon, this has gone from a routine renovation to allegations of criminal algae, fertilizer sabotage.

[19:40:08]

I mean, I don't even know what kind of a thriller it sounds like I'm talking about right now, box cutters, threats of a decade in prison.

Have you ever seen a president so fixated on something like this or on monuments to himself?

JON MEACHAM, PRESIDENTIAL HISTORIAN: No, and the answer to almost every question that begins in the last decade of have you ever seen is no. There's really not a precedent here in America. This is a kind of weaponized narcissism in many ways. It's a consuming narcissism. that the president is indulging in.

The problem is, you know, he's living in a reality show. The problem is it's our reality. And I think as we approach this 250th weekend, I hope that we can remember what we need to return to, which is an actual engagement with the principles that the country has to be about giving as well as taking.

And this president is very much about taking.

BURNETT: So, you know, the 250th what we're just we're just a few days away now. You know, Jon, I was thinking about this the other day I was showing my kids my baby blanket, okay, because it was 1976.

MEACHAM: Right.

BURNETT: So there it is says born in 76 every baby at the hospital got one okay I still have mine it's actually kind of amazing it's a special thing I save it. But you know, now, when I talk about it with people that celebration was remembered as being universally joyful you know everybody remembers where they were and this one feels different to many Americans.

There's a new Gallup poll that saw that just 53 percent of Americans say they're very or extremely proud to be American. Ten years ago, that same poll said the number was 81 percent. My jaw drops when I see that. I mean, what do you see here? And is this really about Trump?

MEACHAM: I hate to say it, but I think it is. One of the issues we're going to face over the next two and a half years is Was this the age of Trump, or are we in an age of Trumpism? And on those three letters hangs a whole lot.

No president -- and President Trump would love to hear this -- no president has ever had the grip on the, if you will, the cultural mind-share of Americans. Of all the men who've held the office, no one has been as omnipresent in the culture and in the minds, both of his supporters and of his foes.

And I think part of the reason in '76 I was sort of a flag bearer in bicentennial parades and that kind of thing. Part of what was being celebrated then was what Gerald Ford said on the 9th of August. 1974, when he took over from Richard Nixon, and he said, "Our long national nightmare is over," which is a memorable line. The key part of that speech is, we have proven once again that we are

a government of laws and not of men. And what President Trump wants to do is this to be a government of a man. And I think that what his appeal is, is to tell people again, even those who support him, that there is so much to fear. They need him to stand in the breach.

And so that's not an elevating message, right? And that would not lead to pride. It leads to a kind of, if you will, kind of almost a controlled panic. It's a constant struggle, and I think a lot of people enjoy it, honestly.

BURNETT: You know, it's interesting we mentioned Gerald Ford in the context, though, of '76, right, that it was after Nixon and the long national nightmare is over because Nixon has been coming up recently. In fact, Vice President Vance recently celebrated Richard Nixon, and I wanted to play for you what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

J.D. VANCE, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I think that his historical legacy is enjoying a bit of a renaissance, but I think deservedly so. And by the way, if you look at the story of how the Deep State took down Richard Nixon, it's not all that different from what the same groups of people, the same institutions tried to do to Donald Trump in the first Trump administration. There is a parallel.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BURNETT: You know, I mean, Jon, what do you make of that? The comparison made by the sitting vice president, who, by the way, is going to be a frontrunner for the Republican nomination, but just -- you know, I mean, John, what do you make of that? The comparison made by the sitting vice president, who, by the way, is going to be a frontrunner for the Republican nomination, but just coming out and saying that with pride, deservedly so, a renaissance for Nixon.

[19:45:03]

MEACHAM: The irony of the analogy is that President Nixon was guilty -- you know, sometimes I hate to be flip about this, but, you know, witch hunts sometimes find witches. And so, the idea that somehow or another, this was that President Nixon is, if he was an innocent victim, then Donald Trump is an innocent victim. Actually, that analogy doesn't work.

The reason President Nixon left in August of '74 is the House was voting on -- getting ready to vote on articles of impeachment. The Supreme Court had ordered him, eight to nothing, to turn over tapes that showed he had instructed aides to use the CIA to stop the FBI from investigating a secret operation within the White House, funded by the White House, to spy on his political foes.

So, the other thing, just for what it's worth, Richard Nixon kind of was the deep state a little bit. He'd been in the House, he'd been in the Senate, he'd been vice president for eight years. He had very nearly won in 1960, very, very nearly, and had just been reelected in 1972 by one of the three of the largest landslides since World War II.

And so, the parallel is shaky at best.

BURNETT: All right. Jon Meacham, thank you very much, and happy Fourth.

MEACHAM: Thank you.

BURNETT: And next, quote, "They're communists." That's what Trump is saying about the Democratic Socialists who just won in New York. And our KFILE has just uncovered deleted posts from one of the most high- profile candidates who've frequently talked about communism.

And the death toll soaring in Venezuela, now, tragically, more than 1,700, but we have some new miracles to share with you.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:51:14]

BURNETT: Tonight, K-File exclusively uncovering deleted social media posts from Democratic congressional nominee Darializa Avila Chevalier's old X account, including favorable references to communism, Marxist ideology, and authoritarian communist figures. The post's surfacing as President Trump takes aim at Avila Chevalier and other Democratic Socialist candidates nominated in last week's New York primary elections. He's calling them communists.

And Trump was just asked if he's concerned about, quote, more socialist candidates running for office nationwide, and he responded with this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: It's not socialism. It's really communism. They use the word social Democrat because it sounds so nice, but It's really communism. I think it's the biggest threat to our nation. There is, maybe since our founding, that includes World War I, World War II, September 11th.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BURNETT: Avila Vallier declined to directly answer when asked about Trump calling her a communist. Here's what she recently told MS NOW.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DARIALIZA AVILA CHEVALIER (D), NEW YORK CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: You know, I think that is -- that framing is one that I've -- I've been very proud to be able to say I don't respond to, one in which I have been very intentional to say I won't be reactive.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BURNETT: CNN's Andrew Kaczynski of KFILE joins me now.

So, Andrew, you found a whole lot of things in her past that may say what she feels. What did you find?

ANDREW KACZYNSKI, CNN FILE SENIOR EDITOR: Well, Erin, we reviewed hundreds of archived posts and reposts from her deleted X account between 2020 and 2022. And what stood out to us is how frequently they referenced communism, Marxist ideology, and communist figures. This all comes after our previous reporting, where we found that she had deleted posts that advocated abolishing police, prisons, borders, seizing private property, and nationalizing major industries.

Take a look at some of what she deleted. Now, in 2020, for example, her bio included the phrase, you can see it there in the corner, how communists of you. One archived retweet that we found called "Karl Marx's Capital" an essential must-read.

Another retweet of hers complained that public libraries didn't carry enough Marxist literature by Lenin and other revolutionary writers. There was a separate retweet of a communist identifying account that criticized a bookstore's banned books for not displaying the complete works of J.V. Stalin, that is the longtime repressive Soviet dictator.

Another archive retweet quoted Assata Shakur, that's the former Black Liberation Army member convicted in the murder of a New Jersey state trooper before escaping prison and then fleeing to Cuba, saying she preferred, quote, "Ho Chi Minh, Kim Il-sung, Che, Fidel, before studying Marx and Lenin because of their contributions to the revolutionary struggle, saying they were too great to ignore even though they were, quote, 'white dudes'."

Now, in one post of her own, she wrote that while most of the political theory that she had read was communist, she wrote that the pyromania associated with anarchism is very intriguing to me, ending the post with two laughing emojis.

Now, that and all we found, you can read on CNN.com. There were other tweets as well, and that was just a sampling of them.

BURNETT: Yeah, just a sampling. And I hope everyone will go, because you've done such an exhaustive job there investigating this, Andrew. What is Avila Chevalier saying now?

KACZYNSKI: So, we reached out to her. We didn't hear back. She did respond to her request for comment on those previous posts that we found on her deleted account. And she said those posts reflected who she was years ago, even though they were from just over six years ago.

[19:55:00]

And she said she's grown considerably since then, but she didn't articulate where/if her views had changed -- Erin.

All right, Andrew Kaczynski, KFILE, thank you very much. So important to find all of that so everyone can know. And of course, please go online to read the full story with so many more posts as Andrew uncovered.

Next, new video just in of the devastation after the deadly earthquakes in Venezuela.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BURNETT: Breaking news, new drone footage just into CNN tonight showing unimaginable devastation in Venezuela after the earthquakes. The death toll known is now more than 1,700 people, but search and rescue teams are still finding miracles.

Today, a 21-year-old man was rescued after being trapped for more than 100 hours. A rescue that took nearly two days to pull off. Over the weekend, a mother and her 18-day-old baby were pulled out alive.

It's incredible as thousands of rescuers are working desperately around the clock in hopes of finding others five days after the earthquakes.

And before we go tonight, an update on a guest who appeared on this program on Friday, working desperately around the clock in hopes of finding others five days after the earthquakes.

And before we go tonight, an update on a guest who appeared on this program on Friday. Brian Stern of Greybull Rescue misrepresented his location to us when he appeared on OUTFRONT to talk about earthquake rescue efforts in Venezuela. Greybull told us Stern was in Caracas for the live interview, but we have since learned he was not. Greybull says it currently, quote, "maintains a presence throughout Venezuela".

Thanks so much for joining us on this evening.

"AC360" begins now.