Return to Transcripts main page
New Day
Why Does Clinton Score So Low On Trustworthiness?; Interview with Thomas Friedman; Clinton Vs. Trump: Whose Fibs Are Worse?; Trump University Legal Battle. Aired 7:30-8a ET
Aired June 02, 2016 - 07:30 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[07:30:00] ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: Honesty, it is not something that voters think Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump have as their strong suits. But in a new Quinnipiac poll, 44 percent say Trump is more trustworthy than Clinton. She is at 39 percent.
Still, our next guest believes Clinton is more honest than her rivals in this race. He's "New York Times" columnist, Thomas Friedman. He's the author of the book "Hot, Flat and Crowded". Tom, great to have you here in the studio with us.
THOMAS FRIEDMAN, NEW YORK TIMES COLUMNIST & AUTHOR, "HOT, FLAT AND CROWDED": Thanks so much.
CAMEROTA: Let me read a little portion of your new column in which you make the case for Hillary Clinton's honesty. You say, "Hillary's fibs or lack of candor are all about bad judgments she made on issues that will not impact the future of either my family or my country. Private email servers? Cattle futures? Goldman Sachs lectures? All really stupid, but my kids will not be harmed by those poor calls."
Oh boy, her critics will say that you're spinning. You call what she says fibs, untruths, prevarications and you call what her rivals say lies. Why?
FRIEDMAN: Well, it's very simple. Again, I'm really caring about what's going to affect me and my family. And her speaking to Goldman Sachs, even her, I'd say, really bad judgment around emails, is not going to, I think, affect me or my country.
But when someone comes out with an economic plan for my country's future that's going to drive up the deficit, according to nonpartisan economists, by $10 trillion over the next 10 years, that will -- our entire country will be paying for it if the only way we can afford is if we cut the defense budget, the research budget, and education budget.
Those are Burger King double whoppers that will affect the entire country.
CHRIS CUOMO, CNN ANCHOR: But, that --
FRIEDMAN: I'm not trying to diminish what she says or what she's done. She'll give bad judgment --
CAMEROTA: Because, you know, bad judgment also affects you and your future if she --
FRIEDMAN: Sure, absolutely.
CAMEROTA: -- if the president has bad judgment.
FRIEDMAN: What kind of bad judgment is not being able to do math? Ten trillion dollars, that's pretty bad judgment.
CUOMO: But Trump will say this. But Trump says this. One, it's just a first offer. It's a suggestion. When I get in there we'll make it work. So, let's talk about what we can look at to trust what will happen once we get in there.
Email is not a fib, it's not a small thing, it matters. That I.G. report is filled with things to discuss. The FBI investigation is ongoing. The Clinton Global Initiative has unspoken questions that she doesn't want to seem to get out there about. Benghazi looms large in terms of would Clinton put life on the line in a risky way.
None of those are small categories. All go to judgment and probably are a big chunk of her unfavorable. How can they be dismissed?
FRIEDMAN: They can't be dismissed. I think if you are concerned about Iraq, Benghazi, all those issues, Chris, you shouldn't vote for her. All I'm saying is when I weigh these things -- when I look at this news that Donald Trump who basically politically fact -- excuse me, fact-checking organization says three-quarters of the time he's not speaking the truth, that's a pretty bad batting average, you know.
But I don't even care about that. What I care about is what is your vision for the country, and if your plan is to come in and bust the budget, not just a little -- not just some extra -- if you're out there selling the American people a budget that is utterly unrealistic -- by the way, not just that.
If you're telling people Mexico's going to build a wall, they're going to pay for it. We're going to evict 11 million undocumented or illegal immigrants. These are giant whoppers. I'm not saying that Hillary is innocent of it. I'm saying if you're saying she's the only one untrustworthy here, well let's balance who's telling what. These are giant whoppers that will affect your kids.
CAMEROTA: But you're actually saying that they are -- her rivals are telling bigger whoppers.
FRIEDMAN: Yes.
CAMEROTA: And, of course, Sec. Clinton's critics always bring up Benghazi, as you know, and they say that that is an existential threat. That what happened there -- four Americans were killed, she said different stories at different times, but those were lies. How have you made peace with that if you don't think that that one was the whopper?
FRIEDMAN: Look, my view about Benghazi is very simple. If you have an American diplomat in a country that's highly unstable, often Benghazi, there's only one way that person can be protected and that is if the host government has security on the ground to protect them.
If we had had four more security agents there -- four more diplomatic security. If we had had 12 more, that's just 12 more people that would have been killed. Benghazi was a disaster waiting to happen.
CAMEROTA: And you don't think the shifting narrative afterwards as a lie?
FRIEDMAN: Oh, I do. Again, they're all prevarications, they're all fibs. I'm not even -- I'm not trying to defend those. I'm just saying that if you think she's the only one --
CUOMO: Are you avoiding that word?
FRIEDMAN: If you think she's the only one who's shading the truth here, not only is she not the only one, but these people over here -- the things that they are misleading you on are gigantic things. That speaks to --
CUOMO: This is a relative argument.
FRIEDMAN: Yes, I'm not saying -- you know what?
CUOMO: But here's the thing. You understand --
FRIEDMAN: I'm not going to defend her point of view.
[07:35:00] CUOMO: -- it's inherently frustrating when your best case is they're both liars -- he's a liar, too, and they're on bigger things -- I'm immediately unsatisfied, you know what I mean, in terms of assessing it.
FRIEDMAN: If you read the end of my column, Chris, as I --
CUOMO: Word for word.
FRIEDMAN: But, the point I was making is that I wish we had better choices, OK? And I'm not here to defend Hillary. If you read my column you know that --
CUOMO: Right.
FRIEDMAN: -- I could really write about any of these issues, but --
CUOMO: You're apportioning things.
FRIEDMAN: I'm just basically saying if trustworthiness is the issue, then let's look at the whole story.
CUOMO: But, here's the thing.
FRIEDMAN: You want somebody to defend her fibbing, call the Clinton camp.
CUOMO: That's true. We have them on all the time. The theme, though, is this. Clintons come first. If you go back until the 80's -- literally, most of us grew up in this business with this stuff. The theme is consistent. They get in trouble or there are allegations, fair or unfair, right, wrong. They get vetted and somehow it's that what they did after whatever this was is what caused the problem.
FRIEDMAN: Correct. Let me just respond to that, please.
CUOMO: You know what I'm referring to.
FRIEDMAN: Oh, absolutely, but I want to tell you what I'm referring to. I'm referring to the fact we're about to have an election that is going to determine all three branches of government, OK? This is a huge moment. I wish we had better choices, we don't. We've got these three choices, and given these three choices you're going to have to make a choice.
And I'm going to make the choice, OK, over the person I think is the most practical unifier, number one. And whose lying, whatever you want to call it, I think, is less significant or is of equal proportion to the other two. And where it comes down for me in the country, I'm going to go there.
That's all I'm saying here. I'm not here to defend her in the least. I'm actually defending my country, OK? I've got to make a choice, all right? The people I've wanted to run, they're not on the menu, OK? This is the menu. This is a critical time. You've got to make this choice.
CAMEROTA: Right.
FRIEDMAN: Who's lying, OK, do you care about most? I happen to care about huge lies about the future of my country rather than lies that are about someone else's judgment. If you come out in another place, God bless you, no problem. Don't vote for her. Vote for Bernie Sanders or vote for Donald Trump.
CAMEROTA: Well, let's talk about Bernie Sanders because most people do not identify him as being a big old liar and untrustworthy. Yet, you say here in your column, "I think the ideology Bernie is selling is fanciful, but underlying it is a moral critique of modern capitalism that has merit and deserves to be heard. But Bernie is not being truthful about the costs."
That's a scene of omission that you're talking about there. Where are they lies that's he told that you think are the big whoppers?
FRIEDMAN: Well, he's got an economic plan out there that he thinks the country can possibly afford or pay for without huge --
CAMEROTA: Free college.
FRIEDMAN: Free college, free --
CAMEROTA: Universal health care.
FRIEDMAN: Yes. CUOMO: Single-payer health care.
FRIEDMAN: Yes, it's single-payer health care. Family leave. We are talking about gigantic change in our economy that could only be paid for by radical reductions in our defense budget, education, and research, and would leave a debt burden on our kids that would be absolutely onerous for a generation. So what do you call that?
CAMEROTA: You're saying he hasn't spelled that out.
FRIEDMAN: I'm saying other people have spelled that out and he's still out there selling it. They're all out there selling nonsense. My only question is whose nonsense do you think is most dangerous?
CUOMO: How'd we get her?
FRIEDMAN: All right?
CUOMO: How did we get here?
FRIEDMAN: How did we get here? Oh, man, that's a --
CUOMO: Because look at the firsts that we're dealing with. You've never had, if it's Clinton and Trump -- you've never had unfavorables like this coming out of convention.
FRIEDMAN: Well, how do you --
CUOMO: You've never had one guy being on trial for fraud, the other one with the FBI looking at them.
FRIEDMAN: Right, but you know, Chris, we have an environment now -- when you -- when the media -- all of us, OK? It's so noisy out there. When you pound on someone Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi, OK, or any of these issues, over time it all just seeps in, all right? It's so incredibly noisy out there now.
Look, we have to look at this situation. We have a man running for president who when he tells the truth it's breaking news. That's called Donald Trump, OK? We have a guy out there who just this week insulted a federal judge who was overseeing a case he is involved in. Referred to him as a Mexican, as if that should be an insult.
We have a guy who is talking every day in this country in ways you wouldn't want your 5-year-old kid to talk. That's the choice we have. I'm not here to defend Hillary Clinton, OK? If I were nominating, I'd be nominating someone else, but we've got to make a choice.
And I think if you make a choice for this kind of man who is speaking this way, the impact on the country -- do you realize the impact the president has in the language we use around the country? How people respond to that? How people mimic that? If you give an OK to racist talk --
CUOMO: Tom, nobody hears it more than we do.
FRIEDMAN: Yes, exactly.
CUOMO: How it's echoed --
CAMEROTA: What's interesting is that the way his supporters see it is that somebody's finally telling the truth. They're dispensing a political correctness. They're calling it like it is.
FRIEDMAN: Yes.
CAMEROTA: They're saying things that sure, they might be insulting but they're not spinning it. They're telling the truth. That's how his supporters see it. And what do you say -- because what you're talking about is tone. You don't like the tone where's he's talking --
[07:40:00] FRIEDMAN: I don't like the tone and the substance, I mean, of what he's saying.
CAMEROTA: Right. You see it is a combo. But what you've cited, in terms of what he's saying, he hurls insults that they might be the truth.
FRIEDMAN: Look, telling it like it is -- you want to tell it like it is? Is it -- does anyone here believe, please raise your hand, that Mexico is going to build a wall on this border? Does anyone believe that we can carpet-bomb ISIS out of existence? That all that's missing is a few extra bombs? Is that really telling it like it is? Yes, it sounds like straight talk. It's full of testosterone. That's all it is.
I heard your previous discussion all about how Obama is weak, you know. Look, we're in a world today -- if I were running for president and someone said how do you respond when the phone rings at 3:00 a.m. in the morning? You know what my answer is? Don't answer it.
That's what my answer is because we have never been in a world, since I've been covering foreign policy -- 35 years -- that is as messy as it is now. And why is it so messy? Because we have gone from having to manage strengths -- the strength of our opponents, the strength of our country -- to managing weakness.
And managing weakness, OK -- weakness in allies, weakness in America, and weakness in countries that are falling apart where the only option you have is nation building and to rebuild them, that is hell on wheels. I wouldn't want to be running foreign policy today on any decision.
So to come in now, like you're Trump, and saying all that's missing is a little testosterone -- someone who has the balls to take down ISIS -- well, I'll tell you what happens if we take down ISIS tomorrow. Very simple. We have to go door to door in Mosul, after we ravaged in that, then we own Mosul. Why? Because the Iraqis can't agree on who should control Mosul the morning after.
So, for the third time, invade Iraq, then they couldn't agree. Do the search, then they couldn't agree. Take Mosul, then they couldn't agree. Look, these are incredibly messy situations and if you treat them as if it's just a testosterone issue -- he's telling it like it is -- well, you'll get what you deserve.
CAMEROTA: One of the complications with covering Donald Trump is that he changes what he says. So, for instance, he will say yes, maybe it's time for Japan to defend itself. Maybe they should have nuclear weapons. I'll play it for you and then we can talk about what he's said in the past 24 hours. Listen to this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESUMPTIVE PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE: They said I want Japan to nuke. I want Japan to get nuclear weapons. Give me a break.
North Korea has nukes. Japan has a problem with that. I mean, they have a big problem with that. Maybe they would, in fact, be better off if they defend themselves from North Korea.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: With nukes?
TRUMP: Maybe they would be better off. Including with nukes, yes. Including with nukes.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CAMEROTA: OK, so we played that in reverse. So he said maybe they would be better off defending themselves with nukes, and then yesterday he said come on, they claim that I said I want Japan to have nukes. I never said that. You know, we're in this place in time where politicians evolve on things. That's another euphemism. But it's hard to -- you have to give it to somebody if somebody's changed their position. What are we to say?
FRIEDMAN: Look, I've changed my position. We all change our positions. I tend not to change every position every other day, and that's what we're dealing with here. I don't envy you or your jobs having to do this. I get to opine about, OK?
But the fact is we have someone running for president who, in my experience, has done the least amount of homework -- serious deep thinking and study on the biggest issues facing the country. And one of the reasons -- one of the manifestations of that is precisely this. He'll blurt something out and then someone comes along and says, you like, like Korea and Japan, and then you get the opposite.
Well, that's a manifestation of someone who hasn't done the original homework in the most minimum way. So if you want someone like that for president you're going to get, I think, someone who is deeply unstable on major issues.
CUOMO: Here's what we've learned sitting at this table. Donald Trump is the face of America's frustration, their fear, and their anger. And with those emotions also goes along a different analysis of behavior. You don't hold yourself to the same standards of what you say, and how consistent it is, and how correct it is, or how right it is. They reject the status quo. Hillary Clinton checks every -- FRIEDMAN: I disagree with you a little there.
CUOMO: -- box for someone who is tired of politicians who say one thing and do nothing.
FRIEDMAN: No question. No question, Chris. I think what you're seeing here, though, isn't just people who are angry. I think they're bored and they're cynical. They're cynical that Washington can do anything, that government even matters. So what the hell, let's have a reality T.V. character.
I think that's as much going on as the other. I think people are bored and they're cynical, and that's a tragic problem and it's a product not only of Obama over the last few years -- the last eight years -- it's also a product of a party that spent the last eight years trying to make government in Washington not work so Obama would fail.
[07:45:00] And after a while, people think the whole thing doesn't matter. By the way, money and politics, thanks to our Supreme Court, is out of all control and so people just say it doesn't matter. Let's have fun. He's incredibly entertaining.
CAMEROTA: I see it differently. I think that people are sick of being promised things. Voters that I've talked to on the voter panels, particularly the Trump supporter panels -- they say they've been promised things by their politicians six ways to Sunday and then the politicians get to Washington and they betray them.
FRIEDMAN: Sure.
CAMEROTA: And like, for --
FRIEDMAN: That's where the cynicism comes in.
CAMEROTA: Sure, but like say, with Obamacare --
CUOMO: That's also called practicality.
CAMEROTA: That they promise them they're going to vote against it. They promise them it's never going to pass, and then it does.
FRIEDMAN: Right.
CAMEROTA: And so, that's not -- I mean, cynical is one way to see it but in others ways I'm going to take back my power. I'm going to vote for somebody who I think keeps his word and is going to do what he promises. And that's why we're all here talking about this.
FRIEDMAN: I think he keeps his word. He does keep his word. His word just changes every 15 minutes.
CAMEROTA: That's -- therein lies the problem --
FRIEDMAN: So, which word? Which word is he keeping?
CAMEROTA: -- with all these people.
CUOMO: Well, you remember, the bar's low though, Tom, because they're used to that from the system already. Let me ask you something. Having had the benefit of getting to travel a lot and understand the world from abroad, as well as from within, do you see any resonance or echo of your concerns about Trump anywhere else?
FRIEDMAN: Well, I think what's going on globally, Chris, is what I'm writing a book about right now, is that basically we're in the middle of, I think, an incredible inflection point around technology, around climate, around globalization. And I think it's actually changing everything. I think it's blowing up weak countries. I think that's what you're seeing around the world. And it's blowing the politics of strong countries, including our D.C. and Europe as well.
Why is that? I think we're in the middle of three accelerations at the same time. One is in Moore's law and technology. We see how quickly everything is changing now. One is in globalization and how interdependent the world's getting. One is in climate.
Our politics is set up -- our two parties -- to respond to the new deal in the industrial revolution. Now, where I would give Trump credit is that he's basically remade the Republican Party. He's basically saying our platforms can no longer respond to the world at large. I don't think he's got the right counter-responses. I think we're in the beginning, though, of the complete remaking of our two parties.
CUOMO: You think the world agrees with you? Do you think that there's a sense from leadership abroad that he's the danger that you predict he could be?
FRIEDMAN: Oh, Trump? Yes, I don't know that they have focused on it fully yet. I don't think they take him particularly seriously, and that's my point. Whatever they think, I don't really care. I got one country.
I have a friend from Zimbabwe who said to me once, you know, you Americans -- you kick this country around like it's a football. Well, it's not a football. It's a Faberge egg. We can drop it, we can break it. And I'm telling you, if we elect someone who is so fundamentally unqualified, who has so fundamentally done so little homework on the major issues of the day -- do I wish we had better choices?
You bet I wish, but we don't have better choices and we're going to have to choose between one of these three characters, and I'm going to choose the one who, in my view, is going to do the least damage and has the most potential for leading, I think, in an effective way.
That's all I'm saying, and if somebody has a fourth option I'm happy to listen to it. But we've got to make a choice and this is a critical time. We're in the middle of a gigantic inflection point right now, all right? And if we get this wrong we cannot afford eight years to ignore climate change, OK? To treat climate change as a Chinese plot, as Donald Trump said to us, OK? We cannot afford eight years to not have a proper education and infrastructure program, to waste money building a wall, OK, for ten gazillion dollars, or how many more. We have got to get this right. You can't just not govern the country as we've been doing for the last eight years.
CAMEROTA: Tom Friedman, "New York Times" columnist, great to hear your words in person, not just read them on the page.
FRIEDMAN: Thanks so much.
CAMEROTA: Thanks so much.
CUOMO: You should be here more --
FRIEDMAN: Anytime.
CUOMO: -- because these discussions come up, believe it or not, from time to time.
FRIEDMAN: I enjoyed it. I really appreciate it. Thanks for having me.
CUOMO: Thank you.
CAMEROTA: Let's get to Ana.
ANA CABRERA, CNN ANCHOR: Another important discussion this morning. Former Trump University workers are now speaking out and some of them claim that Trump's school was a lie, a fraud, a scheme to bilk people out of money. What do the former students think? We'll hear from two with very different opinions, still ahead.
[07:49:25]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[07:52:00] CUOMO: All right, we're going to talk about the fraud trial against the now-defunct "Trump University". I keep using quotes because the organization was told it couldn't call itself a university anymore, so that's why it's in quotes. So, we've got an attorney general after it and multiple class action lawsuits.
Documents, called playbooks, that contain the practices and priorities that were just released by one judge certainly raised questions, and this is about a lot of people and money. Between 2005 and 2010, the "University" enrolled more than 10,000 students and took in more than $40 million. Thousands of those former students are now suing, calling Trump deceptive and fraudulent.
Former employees say the goals were to "make money as quickly as possible, prey upon the elderly and uneducated" and, they allege, the instructors had "little to no experience". Trump, for his part, puts out different employees, but mainly students that say they had a good experience. He rejects the claims and refuses to give in. Take a listen. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: But I have a judge who's very, very unfair. He knows he's unfair, and I'll win the Trump University case. I could settle that case. I could have settled it, I just choose not to. In fact, when I ran they said why didn't you settle up that case? I don't want to settle the case.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: Now, two things that are important to note about this judge. One, he agreed with Trump's lawyers and continued the date for these lawsuits, so Trump got the ruling he wanted. Second, Trump nor his attorneys have ever moved to have this judge removed for any of the reasons that he just said on the podium.
Now, with that out of the way, let's discuss the experience with actual people who went to this school -- "Trump University" students. We have Jesus Castillo, who praises the program. Says it worked for him. And Bob Guillo, who says it didn't work him, he's suing.
Bob, what's the most important thing for people to know about your experience?
BOB GUILLO, FORMER TRUMP UNIVERSITY STUDENT, PART OF CLASS ACTION SUIT AGAINST TRUMP UNIVERSITY: OK, first of all, I worked for a service company for over 28 years and I knew that in order to file a document in the state of New York with the words university, college, or school, it had to be approved by the Department of Education.
I looked up on the Website of the Department of State and I found out that Trump University, LLC was a legitimate filed limited liability company. So, I figured hey, this is a real school.
I went to a 3-day seminar and it was headed by a man by the name of James Harris, who was probably the best motivational speaker I've ever heard of in my life. And, James Harris kept showing us the video that we just showed about Donald Trump. And Donald Trump said I personally interviewed all of these students and --
CUOMO: Instructors.
[07:55:00] GUILLO: Sorry, all of these instructors and they are experienced in real estate, and I listened to this for three days on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday. And at the end of the three days I said to myself, well, I said, based upon Trump's experience in real estate, the fact that he's a multibillionaire, it sounds like a good deal.
And James Harris was telling me guys, Donald Trump is a multibillionaire. He doesn't need your money. He's just being benevolent and offering this course to you guys so that you can become successful real estate investors, as he is.
CUOMO: So what was the bad side?
GUILLO: The bad side of it was that it was all scam, OK? CUOMO: How?
GUILLO: First of all, I got absolutely nothing out of the course in all of the four 3-day workshops that I attended because most of the stuff was available on the internet. The instructor would say if you want to know what your deductions are for the IRS as a business corporation, go to irs.gov. Hey, I knew that already.
CUOMO: All right, hold on one second. Jesus, you had a very different experience. Why do you believe that it was what you signed up for and worked for you?
JESUS CASTILLO, FORMER TRUMP UNIVERSITY STUDENT, HAD POSITIVE EXPERIENCE AT TRUMP UNIVERSITY: Well, I just had good results after the course. I took every single part of the course. I did the whole thing. I did the mentorship and I had actually a good follow-up after every deal that I did. And I actually -- I made my money back on my first deal right after I finished the whole course. I had a great experience.
CUOMO: You believe that the course taught you things that you were able to put into practice and made you money?
CASTILLO: Yes, and quickly, quickly. You, of course, have to do your homework. I mean, it's not going to -- the instructors weren't there to tell you well, you've got to do this and you've got to do that. They were only there to give you a guideline of the things that you can do to make deals, and how to structure a deal, and how you could work with multi-families to commercial property, with industrial properties.
Every single instructor that was there had an experience in the real field out there. I don't know anybody that had another experience but that was my experience and I'm really glad I went there.
CUOMO: So, why didn't you have an experience like Jesus? I know you guys didn't go to the same place at the same time and there's going to be a variability here of different instructors, but could this just be about your ability to put into practice the things the way Jesus did?
GUILLO: Absolutely not. All of the forms were generic forms. They were not fileable in New York State. I'm a resident of New York State. I'm going to buy and sell property in New York State. You have to have forms that are complying with the statute of New York State.
And every one of these 3-days workshops was just a scam to get you to pay more and more and more money. One of them was called the wealth preservation workshop. It was handled by "Trump's attorney", Mr. Childers, who comes from Little Rock, Arkansas, OK?
And he wanted to sell a package worth, Ibelieve, $10,000 to organize a corporation or a limited liability company, and I could do that myself. I didn't need him. And it was -- every one of these was an upsell to get you to pay more and more and more money. After the first day of the actual workshop after the seminar given by
James Harris, I knew that I was scammed and I started doing research. I filed a FOIA request with the Departmentof State, the attorney general, and the Department of Education of New York, and I saw that more story was not unique.
CUOMO: Well, that's what --
GUILLO: They were saying the same thing.
CUOMO: That's what the attorney general says, but the trial is going to have to play out. And Jesus, you had a very different experience and we want people to know that, too, as they follow this story along because there are plenty of people who say it was a success.
As we learn more about the trial, Jesus, we'll come back to you and see if it squares with your experience. Bob, you as well. Appreciate you setting the table for us. There's going to be many conversations about this as the litigation goes forward.
CASTILLO: Thank you.
CUOMO: This is one story in the news. There's a lot going on today. President Obama seems ready to hit the campaign trail and take on Trump. What will that mean? Let's get to it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: Hillary is a person with absolutely no natural talent.
CLINTON: Trump took advantage of vulnerable Americans.
TRUMP: These are crooked people.
CLINTON: He is trying to scam America.
OBAMA: He just says I'm going to negotiate a better deal. What magic wand do you have?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We have had an on-campus shooting. There are two deceased.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We have all the lights off. Our windows are blocked.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: One of the scariest half hours of my life.
[08:00:00] UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Our primary goal right now is to review all of our security procedures.
GREGG: My son fell in the zoo at the gorillas.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: He's dragging him from one end to the other. Oh my God.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: He's dragging my son, I can't watch this. UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I will never forget it, it was absolutely
horrific.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ANNOUNCER: This is NEW DAY with Chris Cuomo and Alisyn Camerota.
