Return to Transcripts main page

NEW DAY

Names Released of Four Supreme Court Candidates; Race to Save Soccer Players Trapped in Thai Cave; Michael Cohen Speaking Out about Investigation; EPA Chief Faces Mounting Ethical Scandals. Aired 6- 6:30a ET

Aired July 3, 2018 - 06:00   ET

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


(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I interviewed four potential justices. They are outstanding people.

[05:59:27] UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If the president were playing smart politics, he would probably nominate a woman.

SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY), MINORITY LEADER (via phone): Another conservative ideologue to dial back the clock decades. This is an all-hands-on-deck moment.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: How many of you?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thirteen.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thirteen? Brilliant.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: After nine days all 12 missing Thai soccer players and their coach have been found alive.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This rescue has really only just begun.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ANNOUNCER: This is NEW DAY with Alisyn Camerota and John Berman.

BERMAN: Welcome to your viewers in the United States and all around the world. This is NEW DAY. It's Tuesday, July 3, Independence Day eve, 6 a.m. here in New York. John Avlon also with us this morning.

This is the starting line. They are naming names. We now know the identities of four federal judges interviewed by the president for the Supreme Court vacancy. CNN has learned that he met with three men and a woman. There's every reason to believe that all would vote to roll back abortion rights, and at least one has pretty clear views that a president should not be subject to criminal investigation. That's not uninteresting.

The president plans to announce his choice to replace the retiring Anthony Kennedy next Monday night in a primetime event. So if you're keeping score at home, the administration will tell us

how many judges the president met with but won't tell us how many children it still holds in custody, separated from their parents at the border by the U.S. government. Officials flat out refuse to release new numbers for how many of the 2,000-plus children have been reunified with their families. Think about that. What possible reason could they have to hide this from the public?

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: Meanwhile, President Trump delivering an ultimatum to America's NATO allies: Spend more on defense or else. "The New York Times" reports President Trump sent strongly-worded letters to the leaders of several countries, hinting at a change in U.S. military presence around the world if the countries do not pay up.

And it's a race against the clock to save these 12 young soccer players and their coach who have been trapped in a cave now for ten days in Thailand. Crews are also facing rising waters. They are some 3,000 feet below the surface as they try today to save these boys.

So we are all over the developments here. Let's begin our coverage, though, with CNN's Abby Phillip. She is live at the White House. What's the latest there, Abby?

ABBY PHILLIP, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, good morning, Alisyn.

The search for President Trump's next Supreme Court nominee is heating up. The president interviewing four candidates here at the White House yesterday in anticipation of an -- of an announcement just a week from now in primetime before the president leaves for Europe, where he's likely to meet with European leaders in what could be a contentious NATO summit.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

PHILLIP (voice-over): President Trump interviewing four prospective Supreme Court justices as aides say he's hoping to play up the drama of the selection process.

TRUMP: They are outstanding people. They are really incredible people in so many different ways, academically and every other way.

PHILLIP: CNN has learned that President Trump met with Amy Comey Barrett, Brett Kavanaugh, Raymond Kethledge and Amul Thapar for 45 minutes each on Monday. Sources say that, in recent days, the president has spent considerable time discussing the advantages of a female nominee, suggesting a choice like Barrett could appeal to critical Republicans Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski.

Barrett is a favorite of religious conservatives, and three Democrats voted to confirm her to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals just last year. But on Monday, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer slammed her possible appointment in a series of tweets, writing, "Judge Barrett has given every indication that she will be an activist judge. If chosen, she will be the deciding vote to overturn Roe v. Wade and to strike down preexisting conditions protections."

The White House continuing to dodge the abortion issue, although all of their candidates have been approved by the conservative Federalist Society.

SARAH SANDERS, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: The president is pro- life, but in terms of the process of selecting a Supreme Court nominee, as the president said last week, he's not going to discuss specific cases with those nominees.

PHILLIP: The president is planning to announce his nominee next Monday night in prime time, ahead of his trip to the NATO summit. "The New York Times" reports that last month President Trump sent, quote, "sharply-worded letters" to the leaders of several NATO allies, criticizing them for underspending on defense and warning that he may be considering a response, including adjusting America's military presence around the world. "The Times" reports that the letter to German Chancellor Angela Merkel was particularly pointed.

JOHN BOLTON, NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR: If you think Russia is a threat, ask yourself this question: Why is Germany spending less than 1.2 percent of its GNP? So when people talk about undermining the NATO alliance, you should look at those who are carrying out steps that make NATO less effective militarily.

PHILLIP: The president stoking tension with America's allies as the controversy over his immigration policies continues to heat up. Senate Democrats demanding answers about the thousands of migrant children who the administration separated from their families.

SCHUMER: Pick on immigrants. Just demonize them is just one of the worst things I have ever seen in America.

PHILLIP: The government refusing to provide updated information, despite having just one week to reunify all children under the age of 5, according to a federal court order.

[06:05:00] President Trump continuing to try to shift the focus toward a push by some Democrats to abolish ICE. The official White House Twitter feed going so far as to target some Senate Democrats by name.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

PHILLIP: Well, President Trump is expected to continue the search for the Supreme Court justice here at the White House this morning before leaving for West Virginia for his fifth trip to that state since he was elected president. The president is leaving there tonight for a salute to service dinner, Alisyn and John.

BERMAN: All right. Abby Phillip for us at the White House. Abby, thanks so much.

Let's bring in CNN political analyst Brian Karem and CNN political commentator Errol Louis. Errol, as we said, every reason to believe that each one of these four

people, and the two or three people the president will meet today, will vote to roll back abortion rights. We've been talking a lot about that.

But one thing I think people have been talking a little bit less about is, you know, the president faces some very proximate, perhaps, you know, imminent legal issues having to do with investigations surrounding him. And Brett Kavanaugh, who's one of the people on that list, who did work for Ken Starr and the independent counsel investigation, has pretty defined views on whether or not a president should be investigated.

Let me read you something he wrote. It says, "Criminal investigations targeted at or revolving around a president are inevitably politicized by both their supporters and critics, as I have written before. No attorney general or special counsel will have the necessary credibility to avoid the inevitable charges that he is politically motivated, whether in favor of president or against him, depending on the individual leading the investigation and the results." He wrote that in 2009.

If you're the president thinking, "Hey, may not be bad to have someone who doesn't think a president should be investigated on the Supreme Court."

ERROL LOUIS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Sure. That, of course, is leaping ahead, because there are no actual charges against the president or really, frankly, anybody around him when it comes to the specific issues that could be at play here.

We also don't really know whether or not this is going to be something that the Democrats choose to put forward as a main argument. Because again, you know, we're -- we're kind of a long way away. We haven't even heard executive privilege invoked by this White House.

I mean, the president gets up and tweets "witch hunt" every few hours, you know, but that's not the same as saying, "I hereby invoke executive privilege. I want to go back to the precedents from the Nixon administration."

BRIAN KAREM, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: He wants to avoid that.

LOUIS: "I want to go back and take another look at Clinton v. Jones. I want to sort of establish that the president cannot, in fact, be criminally prosecuted."

BERMAN: The minute, though -- the minute, though, he says, "I'm not going to meet with -- I'm not going to meet with the special counsel," the minute the special counsel puts out a subpoena, that's when it's on a highway to the Supreme Court.

KAREM: He's already deflecting on that. I mean, he's already -- he doesn't want to invoke executive privilege. He wants to not have to invoke executive privilege. So this -- the side show that we're seeing now in the -- I mean, it's

just another reality show for him, but he's -- he's way ahead of that. He's deflecting it before it ever gets to him.

Fact of the matter is there are people that are close to him that have been under indictment. The witch hunt rings false, because he has sanctioned 13 Russians that were indicted in this "witch hunt." So that's all deflection from what's actually going on.

And Kavanaugh is just one of the guys to be considered. I think the fact that he has a chance to look at a woman in the Supreme Court is probably very significant.

CAMEROTA: Yes.

KAREM: But there's one real significant moment that happened -- well, two significant moments that happened in yesterday's weekly "daily briefing" that we should discuss. And one is, they wouldn't even answer my question about the 2,000 kids that have been -- they don't even want to touch that issue.

But when it comes to the issue of the Supreme Court justice, there was a moment where Sarah Huckabee Sanders came out and would not even confirm what the president's policy is, saying she didn't want to get into it. And that's exactly why we're there is to discuss policy. And the policy of this president has been to nominate people that are pro-life. In other words, would roll back Roe v. Wade if given the chance.

CAMEROTA: Yes.

KAREM: She would not address that issue, saying that she did not want to talk about that issue, which is very indicative of the fact that this administration is going to go after someone who will be an activist judge who will roll back Roe v. Wade. It's just more blue smoke and mirrors to keep you from looking at that very specific issue.

And let's quit pretending it's about anything else. The dancing around in this administration: "It's not about that. It's not about that." It is about that. And that's exactly what they don't want you to look at.

JOHN AVLON, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Right.

KAREM: And the bottom line is, is that's exactly going to be the measuring stick by which they decide who they're going to nominate.

AVLON: Well, the president has been clear about that during the campaign.

KAREM: Yes.

AVLON: This is part of the kabuki of every nomination. Even during the election campaign --

KAREM: You're right.

AVLON: -- we saw Mitch McConnell say over and over, "It's not about social issues." They always run and say it's not about social issues, and then the judicial confirmations begin.

KAREM: You're absolutely right.

AVLON: What I think's significant is, you know, in the case of Judge Barrett, you've got someone who is somebody who is deeply motivated by their faith, very admirable human being by many accounts, mother of seven children, former Notre Dame professor.

[06:10:04] And I think Democrats need to be careful, as they did during her, you know, circuit confirmation, in going after her faith too hard. Because you don't want to be perceived --

KAREM: Right.

AVLON: -- as having an anti-Catholic bias. That would be wrong on several levels. And indeed, she did get three Democratic votes including Tim Kaine.

BERMAN: A devout Catholic himself.

AVLON: Exactly right. Sort of a St. Francis Catholic. In the case of Kavanaugh and executive privilege -- sorry, I jumped that, didn't I?

KAREM: I like that. Sorry.

AVLON: I meant Pope Francis. I meant Pope Francis.

KAREM: I like that.

AVLON: Pope Francis, to be clear.

In the case of Kavanaugh, you know, what's really interesting is this is a guy who served on Ken Starr's committee that investigated Bill Clinton but seems to emerged from that with a very skeptical view about these attacks on the presidency and a very expansive view of presidential privilege. And that could be very appealing to this president.

KAREM: It is -- it will be appealing to the president as he tries to deflect. Look, this is Trump the destroyer in action. I mean, this is the man who wants to tear down --

BERMAN: Well, let me just say -- let me just say, whatever you say about President Trump, I do not think this list is very different than you would have seen under a President Rubio, a President Cruz or a President Romney.

KAREM: Now you're just trying to make me nauseous.

BERMAN: No, but Brian, it's all seriousness here.

KAREM: It's true.

BERMAN: You could say President Trump is doing whatever he's doing, but this is a very traditional predictable, conservative list of judges.

KAREM: It is. And -- but what you have to look at is that, one, as John was talking about the things that will -- that Trump will want to use to his benefit, whereas Rubio or someone else would -- would make a choice based on -- on social issues. This -- Trump is going to make a decision based on how it affects Trump. At the end of the day.

CAMEROTA: But I do want to get back -- I do want to get back to the Roe v. Wade argument. Because it sounds like, Errol, from our reporting people in the room have said that the president has become quite enamored of the idea of nominating a woman. He said things like, "Can you imagine that?" Well, there are other women, actually, on the Supreme Court. I mean, the president seems to not realize that, but what I think that he's --

BERMAN: They also make up more than half the population. Can you imagine that?

CAMEROTA: Can you imagine that? But I think that what he's focused on is thinking that Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins would be so swayed by gender politics or the idea of nominating a woman they would overlook the idea of Roe v. Wade going away.

LOUIS: That will make the -- that will make the confirmation hearings especially important, to see how she sort of walks that very fine line between being who she is and having the ideological and religious commitments that she professes, as well as trying to make it through this political process.

Now, I mean, let's be clear, Roe v. Wade is extremely popular. It polls in the high 60s, and it has for the last 15 years.

KAREM: Seventies, yes.

CAMEROTA: Yes.

LOUIS: The American public likes the idea of sticking with this precedent. We've heard Murkowski and Collins say the same thing.

CAMEROTA: Doesn't want it overturned. You're right. We have that, 68 or 70 percent.

AVLON: Yes, it's actually -- the poll's remarkable. The Kaiser Foundation poll that I think -- I believe Errol is referring to, 67 percent of Americans say they do not want Roe to be overturned.

What's striking is that, it's actually -- if you break it down bipartisan, this is not weighted towards Democrats. Seventy-three percent of independents don't want to see it overturned, and 43 percent of Republicans, who are almost, apparently, almost entirely unrepresented in the -- in Congress. KAREM: Well, one thing you want to get back to, what -- Alisyn, what

you were talking about in the Roe v. Wade argument and nominating a woman. Part of Trump's being enamored with the idea of nominating a woman is that many are saying this is the year of the woman. So he's -- and this election, midterm election, will be determined by women.

So it's also a political effort, an astute one, you might say, of -- of diverting attention, or at least taking the venom out of that appeal for Democratic women saying, "Listen, I'm as progressive as anyone else. I nominated a woman."

BERMAN: Amy Comey Barrett and Joan Larson, who's the other woman who seems to be on the short list, they're Bbth appeals court judges. They're both at the same level as all the other judges.

KAREM: They're qualified.

BERMAN: And they all have, you know, an academic record that I think a lot of people, conservative jurists, think is impressive.

I do want to say we're not going to have time to talk about it right now. But as far as we know, there's still 2,000 children separated from their parents by the U.S. government, and what is astounding is the government will not tell us how many have been reunified.

KAREM: They would not answer my question about it.

CAMEROTA: What if they don't know, because there's no process?

BERMAN: But then my point is either they don't know or they know and they're not telling us.

AVLON: Yes.

BERMAN: In either case, these are children that are separated by the U.S. government. They did this.

CAMEROTA: Yes, but I've also -- we've also heard that there's no tracking mechanism.

KAREM: There is none, you're right.

CAMEROTA: They may not know how to restore them. They have -- the clock is ticking. They have something like -- I don't know -- now 22 days or something to make this happen.

KAREM: They wouldn't even answer that question yesterday when I asked that question in the briefing room. They do not want to touch this issue.

As I said yesterday, in some cases the parents have been -- look, the U.S. government never had any intention of putting these families back together. So some of the parents are gone. Some of the kids, we don't know where they are. It's a mess.

AVLON: Toddlers living in terror. KAREM: And the U.S. government never had -- never had one intention of putting them back together.

[06:15:05] CAMEROTA: All right. Well, we're going to be addressing that in many of our guest segments. Gentlemen, thank you all very much.

Coming up in our next hour, we have former White House communications director Anthony Scaramucci. He has talked about how, you know, amoral that policy is, and he has some new information on that front.

BERMAN: All right. We have a remarkable story. This really is a race against time to save the 12 young soccer players and their coach. They have been found alive, but they're still trapped in a cave. They've been in that case for ten days. Rescuers are trying to figure out a way to get them out. We'll talk about the complications.

CNN's Anna Coren is live with the very latest in northeastern Thailand with the very latest -- Anna.

ANNA COREN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, John, that's right. We are at the staging area for this massive operation to try to rescue these 12 boys, age between 11 and 16, and their soccer coach, who's 25 years old.

Now, they are trapped in a cave system. I want to show you the entrance to the cave system. This is as far as we can get to it. But this is the entrance, and this is where divers, where cavers, where the military, where volunteers have all been heading down this path to the mouth of the cave. This is the only entrance so far to this giant labyrinth where the boys are.

But they located them last night. It was miraculous. People were in tears. This country is really just so relieved, considering so many people thought they had died.

But you talk about the challenges of getting them out. They are more than 3 kilometers in this flooded cave system. And there is talk by authorities that they may have to use scuba equipment to bring them out.

Now, initially, we thought that is going to be a logistical nightmare. Some of these boys can't swim. Just trying to breathe through scuba apparatus can be daunting at the best of times. And these kids have been in a cave for ten days. We know, however, they've managed to get water. They've been collecting water from the water that's been dripping down through the ceiling of the cave, a natural filtration process, but they haven't had any food. So they are weak. They are malnourished.

So food supplies got to them. A doctor has got to them. Navy SEALs are with them constantly, but now there is talk of trying to get them out through scuba breathing apparatus. Perhaps they put them on a stretcher. Perhaps they drag them out. We just don't know at this stage. Authorities here saying there is no time frame, but we have heard from

one of the boys, Alisyn, and he said to the Navy SEAL diver, "Can I get out today?" That is how anxious. That is just how desperate they are to be reunited with their families.

CAMEROTA: My gosh, Anna. What a herculean task lies ahead for these rescuers, and the clock is ticking. We're so happy that you're there. We'll be following this every minute of the morning. Thank you.

BERMAN: You know, we thought when we saw the pictures, "Oh, it's over."

CAMEROTA: "Oh, whew. They're out of the woods."

BERMAN: "They found them."

CAMEROTA: They're not out of the woods.

BERMAN: But the problem is they can get the rescuers, these Navy SEALS can get to them, but they can't get the kids out. These are narrow paths. Again, as Anna was saying, a lot of them can't swim. So how do you get children, who are malnourished, who haven't eaten for nine days, how do you get them to the point where they can get out safely?

CAMEROTA: Well, you strap them to a diver. I mean, you strap them -- look, I scuba dive.

BERMAN: It's not big enough.

CAMEROTA: And so if you put the mask on them and put the thing in their mouth and you strap them to a diver and -- oh, you're right.

BERMAN: The passageways aren't big enough. The tank's not big. So now what they're thinking about doing is getting them supplies so they could wait it out. And they're talking about months of supplies. I think that's on the extreme level right now, but really, they're talking about extreme measures.

CAMEROTA: All right. Well, we have one of the national experts in cave diving and rescues here with us to talk about what the next steps are.

Meanwhile, as you'll remember yesterday, Michael Cohen broke his silence about what it's been like for him to be investigated. This, of course, the president's personal attorney and fixer. Why he's breaking his silence next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[06:22:33] CAMEROTA: So friends of Donald Trump's long-time personal fixer, Michael Cohen, tell CNN that he is speaking out now, breaking his silence, to potentially justify flipping on the president if that scenario were to play out.

One friend told us, quote, "He knows a lot of things about the president, and he's not averse to talking in the right situation. If they want information on Trump, he's willing to give it," end quote.

Let's bring in CNN legal analysts Carrie Cordero and Laura Coates.

Laura, who is he sending that message to? Why can't -- I'm confused about this. Michael Cohen decided to break his silence with George Stephanopoulos. So it sounds like he is signaling that he's willing to cooperate. But why not just pick up the phone and tell the prosecutors, "By the way, I'm willing to cooperate"?

LAURA COATES, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: That's the million dollar question here, Alisyn. Because it would be much easier to do so. And a federal prosecutor is not inclined to have a cooperation agreement played out in front of millions of people on "Good Morning America," especially when you're able to have a direct line to them.

To me it seems as though he's trying to perhaps recast himself in the light as somebody who is a concerned citizen, somebody who's loyal to the country. And in that vein, if there is no cooperation agreement or a plea offered by the government or full immunity, then it casts the government in a suspicious light, to say, well, why won't they allow this person to speak freely? This must be in the same vain, perhaps, as a fishing expedition or one that's trying to just target him for no reason at all.

It also may be a signal to the president of the United States to say, "Listen, I'm willing to speak and put country over you," even the friend in Mr. Trump that he has been. And that may be what he's trying to do. Because New York law is very unique about presidential pardons.

BERMAN: We may be giving him too much credit here. It may be that he doesn't have a defined strategy or a specific message.

CAMEROTA: Yes, wanting to tell his own story.

BERMAN: It might be that he just feels as if the stories that have been in the media have been wrong, and he wants to go out there and tell it in his own way.

But Carrie, to the last point Laura was making there, if it's not a message to prosecutors that he's willing to deal, if it's a message to the president that "Hey, this is your last chance to help. Either pay my legal fees or pardon me prophylactically," you know, is that a message you think the president is likely to hear?

CARRIE CORDERO, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, he's probably hearing it, because we know that he is a consumer of television.

But the question is really what information of value does Michael Cohen have to provide to prosecutors? You know, right now, as far as we understand, the prosecution of him or the investigation of him pertains to things that were spun off of the major Russia investigation. So is now being handled by the Southern District of New York, maybe into his personal financial dealings.

[06:25:15] So we don't actually know, one, what potential crimes Michael Cohen might be charged with and, therefore, what criminal exposure he has.

And two, what information, potentially, about the president or the Trump Organization or the Trump campaign does Michael Cohen have that actually would be that much of interest to prosecutors?

And Laura's absolutely right. The way to go about this, if he really wants to cooperate and he really has information of value, is to use -- go through the channel of his attorney to the prosecutors and the investigators.

AVLON: Yes, but I mean, I think we make a mistake sometimes, I think, to Berman's point, in attributing too much strategy. I think this is basically best understood as a cry for help.

He is communicating to Donald Trump through the medium of television and, by appealing to Trump's self-interest through the fear of flipping. He's going to get the president's attention that way, he knows. It speaks how distended Michael Cohen feels, I think, from the president, who has been his patron and, really, the core of his self- definition for a long time.

But there's no question, the keeper of secrets. He's got a lot of information that may be of interest to prosecutors.

CAMEROTA: Go ahead, Laura.

COATES: I was just going to say, that's a great point. But one thing to keep in mind here, you remember all the things he was saying. Some things were contradictory to what the president said. Things about the FBI, not wanting to disparage them or vilify them. Comments about the not wanting to call the overall investigation a "witch hunt."

So there are -- while there may be a cry for help, there's also some signaling, kind of ribbing him in the rib cage and saying to himself, "Well, I'm not on your team entirely about all the things that you've said."

CAMEROTA: We want to move on to the latest in the Scott Pruitt episode.

AVLON: Saga.

CAMEROTA: Called "As Scott Turns."

AVLON: That's the --

BERMAN: The magical suit of armor that Scott Pruitt wears.

CAMEROTA: Yes. And is -- it keeps having, you know, different chinks, but it never actually seems to hurt him.

Here's CNN reporting -- there's lots of reporting today. OK, so these are the headlines. "Whistleblower: EPA's Scott Pruitt kept secret calendars to hide controversial meetings he was having." "The Washington Post" says "Pruitt aides reveal new details on his spending and management at EPA." "New York Times," "Former EPA aide says Scott Pruitt asked her to help find work for his wife."

BERMAN: I want to know, this is just today.

AVLON: Just today.

BERMAN: This is just today.

CAMEROTA: We're not compiling months. This is -- these are today's headlines, Carrie. And so, Scott Pruitt is violating, it appears, all sorts of ethical boundaries, but legally, is there any way to get him out of his position?

CORDERO: Well, right now, it looks like there are multiple investigations of Scott Pruitt. So there are inspector generals' investigations of him, which potentially could find violations that either would be cause for removal or perhaps greater consequences. And there's a congressional investigation.

You know, a lot of times we talk about how dysfunctional Congress is and the lack of the Republican Congress to conduct oversight of this administration, but in this case, there really is an active and ,it looks like from the interviews that they're conducting, serious investigation of the activities that's going on.

I'll just say, as someone who worked for -- in the civil service for administrations of both parties, what I'm so surprised by is the reporting that so many staff members --

CAMEROTA: Yes.

CORDERO: -- seem to be willing to assist him in these efforts to violate, at the very least, rules and ethics guidelines. Why in the world they would want to put themselves in that position is really just confounding.

And there's just so many different things that it sounds like he's done, that at some point, one of these investigations is going to come to some kind of conclusion, and there will have to be some sort of consequence.

BERMAN: The CNN reporting, which we'll play again in a little bit, which is extraordinary, from Drew Griffin, there's actually a whistleblower who did work for Scott Pruitt, who says, essentially, that Pruitt was scrubbing his calendar to erase records of controversial meetings, Laura. That just seems to me that clearly Scott Pruitt knows he's got something to hide.

COATES: Well, you certainly know you have the intent to hide something when you're trying to scrub it from all the different meetings, and you actually have secretive sessions with members of your staff that are coordinating with you to ensure that things that make you look bad are not told to the public. Well, this is problematic because of course, he is a public servant. Although he serves at the pleasure of the president, that is in respect to public service.

CAMEROTA: Yes.

COATES: And so if there are certain things like a cardinal meeting he had with somebody who eventually came out and had some molestation charges or allegations against him, anywhere to meetings about his wife and trying to get jobs for her or franchises, et cetera. All of these things contribute to the cloud over the EPA and executive branch, to say that perhaps this idea of law and order and forcing the laws doesn't mean the same thing for every single cabinet member. This is further indication of that.

CAMEROTA: We're all paying his salary.

Laura Coates, Carrie Cordero, thank you both very much for all of the analysis.

So the clock is ticking right now in Thailand.