Return to Transcripts main page

The Lead with Jake Tapper

Comey Faces Charges Of False Statements And Obstruction; Trump: "Crooked Joe Biden Appointed Judge" Overseeing Comey Case; Dr. Oz Responds To Administration's Mixed Messaging On Tylenol; Hacker Uncovers Evidence Linking Tesla Autopilot Feature to 2019 Fatal Crash; North Carolina Residents Struggle To Recover From Hurricane Helene. Aired 5-6p ET

Aired September 26, 2025 - 17:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:00:17]

KASIE HUNT, CNN HOST: All right, thank you very much to my panel and thanks to you at home for watching. If you miss any of today's show, you can always catch up by listening to The Arenas podcast. Scan the QR code below. Follow along wherever you get your podcasts. You can follow us on X and Instagram at thearenacnn.

It is now time for "The Lead" with Jake Tapper. Hi, Jake.

JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: You just missed. I was doing a really good Al Pacino impression, but --

HUNT: Oh, come on.

TAPPER: No. Sorry.

HUNT: You can't have such a tease.

TAPPER: Sorry. Sorry. We're serious now. We're back to the news.

Thanks, Kasie. We'll see you back --

HUNT: Have a good show.

TAPPER: -- in "The Arena" next week.

JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: James Comey may be just the first. President Trump earlier today pledged, quote, "there will be others." The Lead starts right now.

This hour, brand new details on the actual evidence that led the Justice Department to seek an indictment against former FBI Director James Comey. What exactly is Comey is accused of having done? Who is the alleged person number three? Also, we're going to look at the pressure being put on the Biden appointed judge overseeing this case. Plus my conversation with the hacker behind a $243 million lawsuit against Tesla uncovering the truth about the car company's autopilot features in an accident. How this hacker says he found the data that Tesla claimed could not be recovered. And guess what, he found it in less than five minutes. And some major wins for Jimmy Kimmel today, first one, then the second local T.V. station group that kept the comedian off the air this week, both are now backtracking on that move.

Welcome to The Lead. I'm Jake Tapper. The lead tonight, President Trump's Department of Justice delivering an indictment of former FBI Director James Comey as promised and pushed by President Trump both on the campaign trail and then again last week when he fired then Acting U.S. Attorney Erik Siebert for not going after his political enemies. And also pushed in last Saturday's Truth Social post in which he told Attorney General Pam Bondi to go after Comey and other political rivals. The president this morning echoing that sentiment.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I think there'll be others. I mean, they're corrupt. Frankly, I hope there are others because you can't let this happen to a country.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Comey issued a statement on Instagram shortly after the grand jury delivered the two count charge for false statements he allegedly made to Congress and obstruction of justice.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JAMES COMEY, FORMER FBI DIRECTOR: I'm innocent, so let's have a trial.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: The charges relate to the following exchange from a September 30, 2020 Senate Judiciary Committee hearing when Senator Ted Cruz asked Comey if he stood by earlier testimony from 2017.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. TED CRUZ (R-TX): Have you ever authorized someone else at the FBI to be anonymous source in news reports about the Trump investigation or the Clinton administration? You responded again under oath, no.

COMEY: I can only speak to my testimony. I stand by what the testimony you summarized that I gave in May of 2017.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Now, this accusation from the Justice Department is that Comey did in fact authorize someone to talk to the press on his behalf. And there were, of course, as you may remember, any number of leaks from the FBI during that period of time. A source familiar with the indictment tells me that the charges relate to an FBI leak investigation that was called Arctic Haze. It dealt with leaks to journalists. For these four stories that appeared in print in April, May 2017 that contained classified information, the Justice Department says.

Those stories are, "New details emerge about 2014. Russian hack of the State Department. It was hand to hand combat" in the Washington Post. "Comey tried to shield the FBI from politics. Then he shaped an election" in the New York Times.

"How a dubious Russian document influencing the FB -- influence the FBI's handling of the Clinton probe" in the Washington Post. And "The Trump Russia story starts making sense" in the Wall Street Journal. So to whom is Comey alleged to have leaked this information? Who is he alleged to have authorized? The indictment says Comey, when he answered that question, quote, "knew he in fact had authorized Person 3 to serve as anonymous source in news reports."

My same source familiar with the indictment told me that person number three is a man named Daniel Richman, a longtime Comey friend who's mentioned in FBI documents that were released in August related to the Arctic Haze investigation. The documents note that Richman, a Columbia Law School professor and at the time a special FBI employee designated by Comey, was the source for a New York Times reporter and quote, "After Comey was terminated by President Trump, Comey used Richman as a conduit to convey to the media memoranda of his meetings with President Trump." That's according to the FBI documents. And that quote, "Richman opined that Comey took comfort in the fact Richman had talked to the press about his feelings regarding Comey's handling and decision making on the midyear exam investigation. Richman claimed Comey never asked him to talk to the media."

[17:05:12]

The office for the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District declined to comment on our reporting, as did the attorney for Daniel Richman. CNN's Evan Perez and Jamie Gangel are here with me now.

And CNN, Evan, spoke to Comey in an exclusive interview back in May of this year for a CNN original series. Take a listen to just a little bit of what he had to say.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

COMEY: Yes, I'm still considered a villain in MAGA world. Hope I said that correctly. Although I've offended enough people in MAGA world, it doesn't matter at this point. I'm not sure exactly why that is. I -- I often joke I'm the relationship that Trump can't get over, wakes up in the middle of the night thinking about me and how I'm living my best life.

I think it has some combination of I really have had a happy, productive life since then and -- and that I spoke out about him and that despite their absolute best efforts, they were never able -- never able to get me.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: It didn't mean, Evan, that they weren't going to continue to try, of course. EVAN PEREZ, CNN SENIOR JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Absolutely. Look, I mean, there's a lot of things that we know about James Comey, including -- and there's a lot of hubris about the way he's approached things over the years. And he certainly has a lot of -- you know, he has a very strong belief in -- in his capabilities. He knows he can fend off a lot of things. What I think he didn't really account for is how much there would be an effort inside the Justice Department, new Justice Department this year to try to find a way to do this with the deadline that was fast approaching, which is approaching on -- on Tuesday, right, the expiration of the statute of limitations for this -- this allegation.

And look, if you look at the allegations and you look at these documents, Jake, you and I have been talking about this, you know, this was a makeable case. This is a case that a lot of aggressive prosecutors could have possibly brought. There are a lot of other things, though, that are around it. And what Comey is referring to is the president's obsession with him. And I think that's where the weakness of the case lies.

A lot of this -- the President's comments over the weekend, some of the comments today are only going to make this case much more difficult for the prosecutors who are going to have to bring this to trial. Look, the defense briefs are writing themselves --

TAPPER: Right.

PEREZ: -- Donald Trump is writing them for.

TAPPER: Jamie, Judge Michael Nachmanoff of the Eastern District of Virginia is going to oversee this case. Trump -- Trump quickly weighed in, he called him a "crooked Joe Biden appointed judge." That's kind. And you have some insight about this judge.

JAMIE GANGEL, CNN SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT: So I know Judge Nachmanoff. I -- I've spoken to him at length in the past. First of all, I think we should say this case was randomly assigned to him. That's --

TAPPER: Of course.

GANGEL: -- that's the way it works in the courthouse. He is smart, he is funny, he is cool and calm under pressure when you see him in the courtroom. But I think what may be most important is that he understands that he's under the microscope. He understands the pressure he's under. And he's not the first judge to have Donald Trump go after him.

So I think he is prepared for that. That said, retired Appellate Judge Michael Luttig, who was in the fourth district already has Judge Nachmanoff's back. He came out in response to Trump's comments today, and he told CNN, quote, "Judge Nachmanoff is beyond all reproach and he will be impervious to their unconscionable attacks and threats." Obviously, Judge Luttig is a Trump critic.

On a personal --

TAPPER: But a very, very conservative juror.

GANGEL: Very, very conservative.

TAPPER: Yes.

GANGEL: And let's remember, if you read about Judge Nachmanoff, he was a public defender. He was --

TAPPER: Yes.

GANGEL: -- the chief of that. So very different political, you know, corners. On a lighter note, I will tell you, Judge Nachmanoff is a Renaissance man. He is a voracious reader. He plays the bass guitar in a band.

He has coached volleyball. But most important, he has a full fourth degree black belt in karate --

TAPPER: Nice.

GANGEL: -- which I think may come in handy.

TAPPER: So in Comey's video that he posted online, he makes a point to say he's not afraid right now.

GANGEL: Right.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

COMEY: My family and I have known for years that there are costs to standing up to Donald Trump, but we couldn't imagine ourselves living any other way. We will not live on our knees, and you shouldn't either.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: What kind of impact is the Comey indictment and Comey's response having on other foes of President Trump who are hearing him today said that he's hoping that there are more people that are going to be charged.

GANGEL: Right. There is no question there's a chilling effect. What -- what Comey said was, you know, very courageous and he stood up.

[17:10:00]

But the reality is, people know even if the charges that Trump might bring against them are not rock solid, it will make their life miserable. They may end up paying hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal bills, this will consume their lives. So several people that I know just said, am I next? They're worried.

TAPPER: Yes.

PEREZ: And there's also the concern about this -- this order to investigate people for domestic terrorism just because they're opponents of the president. That's another aspect that I think goes beyond this indictment.

TAPPER: Well, and we should also note that a lot of these charges were looked into by plenty of conservative prosecutors, including Durham and Barr --

GANGEL: Right.

TAPPER: -- and Siebert, and they didn't think it was worth bringing. Although obviously others disagree.

Jamie Gangel and Evan Perez, thanks so much.

Was there a rush to charge Comey as many of President Trump's critics suspect? We're going to get into that. Plus, Dr. Mehmet Oz will be here in his role as health official with the Trump administration. We're going to talk to him about Tylenol and autism and Americans food source. We'll get into all of it. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:15:04]

TAPPER: Does this quote sound familiar? Quote, "He has refused his assent to laws, obstructed the administration of justice, made judges dependent on his will alone, erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms officers to harass our people," unquote. Does that ring a bell? It's from the litany of complaints against King George III from the Declaration of Independence.

Anyway, as an entirely separate matter, today's law and justice lead is about the Department of Justice appearing -- apparently bowing to the will of President Trump, indicting one of his political enemies, former FBI Director James Comey, with many, many more to come. Here to discuss what we're seeing is former Department of Justice Pardon Attorney Liz Oyer, who was fired by the Trump Justice Department in March.

Well, first of all, as an attorney, what do you make of this case that we've seen we -- the details are sketched scarce, but of what we've seen about the charges against Comey?

LIZ OYER, FORMER U.S. PARDON ATTORNEY: This is everything that Donald Trump has been doing from day one with the Justice Department coming to fruition for him. He has systematically installed political leadership in the department who essentially view themselves as his personal lawyers. Most of them were his personal lawyers previously. He has fired and reassigned and removed career experts who could stand in the way of his political agenda. He has removed incredibly important institutional safeguards around ethics, transparency, and professional responsibility, all so that he could create this moment where he can bend the justice system to his political will and use it as a tool to seek revenge against his enemies.

He also uses it to reward his friends. But the focus today is on the enemies like James Comey. And in this case, we're really seeing the tip of the iceberg. Donald Trump has made it clear that James Comey is the first, not the last time he's going to do this.

TAPPER: Do you think the president knew the specifics of the charges in the -- in the indictment? When on Saturday, he went on Truth Social and told his attorney general she needed to bring charges against Comey and -- and two others. He had just fired the acting U.S. attorney, Erik Siebert, a conservative prosecutor, had worked his way up through the ranks and he was recommending, you need to install my personal attorney, Lindsey Halligan. Do you think he had any idea what the -- what the actual charges were when he said that Comey and the others were "guilty as hell," quote, unquote? OYER: No, that's not how Donald Trump operates. He starts with a

target, and then he looks for charges that could be built to indict that person. That's what he's asked his prosecutors to do here. That's the exact opposite of how the Justice Department is supposed to work. But Donald Trump doesn't really care at all what the charges are.

He just wants to see James Comey go through the ordeal of a federal prosecution and in Donald Trump's view, hopefully spent -- spend some time in jail.

TAPPER: So, you know people, lawyers there at the Justice Department, and I assume there are still hundreds if not thousands of good, hardworking government lawyers there to protect the American people, stop crime and the like. What is it like for them?

OYER: There are lots of good people still there, but it is becoming harder and more -- more untenable every single day for those people to stay. The leadership of the department is putting lawyers in a position where they have to choose between upholding their professional duties as a lawyer and to the Constitution and pleasing their boss, the attorney general, and Donald Trump. And that is an untenable situation to be put in day after day after day. So people are making very hard choices about whether they can do more good by staying or by leaving.

TAPPER: We hear a lot from Republicans and from President Trump about the justice system being weaponized under Biden. The attorney general of New York, the Manhattan District Attorney bringing charges against Trump. There was a special counsel bringing charges against Trump, even if one were to say that that was weaponization of the Justice Department and probably you would take issue with that, how does this compare?

OYER: It's completely different. Under the last administration, and by the way, I was not a political appointee, I was a career, so I actually served in the beginning of the Trump administration before I was fired.

TAPPER: Right.

OYER: There was a very intentional, very strict separation between the Department of Justice and the White House under President Biden, much like under all of his predecessors.

TAPPER: Yes, Biden and his -- and his accolades hated Merrick Garland. OYER: That's right. There -- there was a lot of conflict between the White House and the department. And there were not these types of back channel agreements and communications happening between the leadership in the White House and the leadership of the Department of Justice. It's totally different than anything that we have seen since Watergate.

TAPPER: Liz Oyer, thank you so much. Appreciate your time.

OYER: Thank you, Jake.

TAPPER: President Trump repeatedly told Americans, don't take Tylenol, don't take Tylenol, don't take Tylenol. But that is not what we heard from the actual experts in his administration. Dr. Mehmet Oz is going to come onto the show and talk to us about what Americans really need to know.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:24:10]

TAPPER: In our Health Lead, it's not just pregnant women affected by the Trump administration's seemingly conflicting guidance on ties between Tylenol and autism. One pediatrician at Columbia University tells CNN that a mother sat in his office sobbing this week wondering if the Tylenol she took because of debilitating headaches while pregnant caused her child's autism. Joining us now is Dr. Mehmet Oz. He is the administrator for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

It's so good to have you. Thank you, sir. So on Monday, President Trump at that press conference said nearly a dozen times, don't take Tylenol, don't take Tylenol. In a letter to physicians, though, the Food and Drug Administration said that a causal relationship between taking Tylenol by pregnant mothers and autism has not been firmly established. The HHS says doctors should use their best judgment. So why did the president say don't take Tylenol, they -- don't take Tylenol when it seems as though that's not the exact specific recommendation?

[17:25:03]

DR. MEHMET OZ, ADMINISTRATOR, CENTERS FOR MEDICARE AND MEDICADE SERVICES: In his opening comments, and I was there witnessing it as you've shown --

TAPPER: Yes.

OZ: -- he very clearly said, that if you've got a high fever or other conditions, your doctor would recommend you take Tylenol for, take it. And I'll make this super clear for everybody because of what the FDA said, what our fact sheet said, what our op-ed said --

TAPPER: Yes.

OZ: -- subsequent to the press conference, I mean, released as we are finishing the press conference, all emphasize the same reality. As we find new information about problems like autism, our policy is going to be release it. Now, it'll take us at least five more years, Jake, to figure out for sure if there's a causal relationship between Tylenol and autism, we may never know it for sure. Even the company acknowledges that we don't know for sure what happens when we take medications during pregnancy. That's why there's almost no medications that you would take for a high fever if you were pregnant.

And we want people to take Tylenol in that setting. But there is a large number of people, I argue the majority of consumption of acetaminophen, which is the chemical in Tylenol, are taken by women who don't realize that we don't have that level of security around its safety and they have a minor ache and pain or they have a low grade temperature, which by themselves may not be a problem anyway, and they just pop the pill because they think it's not a problem.

And when we began to realize it was a signal, and that's what we were doing, researching as much as we could all the sources, causes potentially of autism, we thought we should reveal that. And the president felt passionately, in fact, he kept saying even one more day wasted before we tell American mothers to be thoughtful and cautious about Tylenol is wasted. The other thing we talked about, which was also critical to me, is a treatment, if you happen to have a child who had an autism spectrum disorder diagnosis, which is a medications prescription called Leucovorin.

And this is really important, Jake, because we have been understanding more and more about why children develop this problem, which is I -- I think pretty clearly not genetic. A fivefold increase in the incidence of autism in a quarter century, it's not from your genes, they don't change that back.

TAPPER: Well, in the -- in the -- in diagnosis of it, I mean, part of the reason, I'm not saying all of the reason, but part of the reason there's been increased diagnosis is because medical understanding of autism has increased. So there's more understanding and so more diagnosis.

OZ: Without question. But -- but in addition, look at someone my age, our age, Bobby -- Secretary Kennedy's age, we don't have a lot of people in our lives, our age who are on the autism spectrum.

TAPPER: Well, we maybe don't have many -- people who were diagnosed on the autism.

OZ: But think about it right now, if you look around at your friend group or people you grew up with, just think back in time, how many people who are -- I'm 65 this year, I don't remember ever meeting a child when I was a kid who was on the spectrum. How many --

TAPPER: But this wasn't the -- there just wasn't the same understanding of it.

OZ: Agreed. But even so, if you look around, you see children who have autism in many different settings --

TAPPER: Right.

OZ: -- with families. So I do think there's a real increase, not just a measured increase. But back to the Leucovorin story very briefly, we found the signal that we may understand better over time and again, it'll take five more years. But what advice do you give to mothers right now with a child with this diagnosis? If in fact a problem with their ability to folate, which is --

TAPPER: Yes.

OZ: -- folate, foliage, B vitamin, B9 --

TAPPER: Right.

OZ: -- if that leafy green vegetable vitamin can't get into your brain, turns out in some kids it's a problem.

TAPPER: But you would agree that don't take Tylenol is not the correct suggestion. It is, if you are a pregnant woman and you want to take Tylenol, talk to your doctor, right? OZ: That -- that was the first thing the president said. It's exactly what Secretary Kennedy said, what I said --

TAPPER: Yes, but then he said don't take Tylenol 11 times after that. But in any case, I do want to ask you about something else, OK, you're very involved in the Make America Healthy Again --

OZ: Yes. TAPPER: -- which explores the harmful impact of ultra-processed foods

and all the food that we eat that is chemicals and corn syrup and the like, what concrete steps, just -- and just so you know, I completely agree with you, 100 percent, what concrete steps are you and the administration going to take to challenge the food industry? Because I think that's where a lot of people who want this but are skeptical, like, but are they really willing to take on Archer Daniels Midland or Kellogg or whatever, because that -- you know, that's actually where there's a political risk.

OZ: The secretary is passionate about this issue, as am I. If you look at my portfolio, which is the insurance programs that --

TAPPER: Right.

OZ: -- our government provides to its citizens, the number one thing we can do is get folks to never get sick in the first place. The reason we cost twice as much per capita to take care of Americans is we're twice as sick. Our obesity rate is literally twice more than Europe. So we have got to figure out the cause, the root cause of these ailments or we're not going to be able to afford to take care of folks in the way we've gotten the customers. So we are serious about it.

As an example, we've got a food pyramid initiative that is aggressively moving forward, which you'll hear a lot more over the next month about. But -- but the ability to get states to take action is this -- is a wonderful opportunity that we had not actually taken advantage of in prior administrations. When a state says we want an exemption to be able to make healthy food part of the SNAP program, that waiver they're asking for frees them --

TAPPER: Yes.

OZ: -- to force food companies to provide better options. And guess what, if you're a CEO of one of those big companies you mentioned, providing a different solution to every state is a problem. And the secretary and the president endorses this, has gone out to governors and said, you guys be the king makers.

[17:30:00]

In fact, if I can brag on governors, the one big beautiful bill had a provision for the rural health transformation of America. It's a $50 billion investment, that 50 percent more money to all rural America for health care.

TAPPER: Right. Right.

OZ: That's purposely given by the Congress and by the president to the governors to make them the kings because they know their states. We want them to play an active role in the MAHA movement.

TAPPER: Well, I'll just say this and then I have to let you go because we're out of time, is that I think there's an only Nixon can go to China quality of what President Trump can do in terms of this. And there's a window. And I think a lot of people from all over the spectrum are behind you guys.

But it does require a little willingness to jawbone the food companies because the cheapest food is often the least healthy food. And that's why we have so many people wonder why do we have so many poor people that are fat because they're eating fast food? Because that's what they can afford.

OZ: The ultra-processed food is consumed more readily. It's less expensive. It's not real. It's designed for shelf life, not human life.

TAPPER: And it's also delicious because it's soaked in fat.

OZ: Addictive is why.

TAPPER: Addictive. Exactly right. Dr. Oz, always good to have you. Thanks so much.

OZ: Go Birds.

TAPPER: Go Birds and come back soon. We appreciate it. And our Tech Lead, Tesla's Autopilot features. The car company once said in a major lawsuit that it couldn't recover specific data from cars. We're going to talk to a hacker who found the data in less than five minutes.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:35:24]

TAPPER: Our Tech Lead now, are self-driving cars as safe as automakers insist they are? Today we're going to take a look at a lawsuit over a crash in 2019 that killed one woman and injured her boyfriend. Evidence surfaced that Tesla's Autopilot feature contributed to the deadly crash.

I spoke with the hacker who wants to remain anonymous, who brought the evidence to light after Tesla insisted that the data could not be recovered.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

TAPPER (voice-over): A hacker played a key role in uncovering evidence in a wrongful death case against Tesla after the electric car manufacturer inaccurately claimed crucial data was missing.

The case stems from a 2019 accident in Key Largo, Florida. A driver in a Tesla Model S ran a stop sign before slamming into an SUV parked behind street signs. 22-year-old Naibel Benavides Leon was killed. Her boyfriend Dylan Angelo was critically injured.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I don't know what happened. I ended up missing the turn. I was looking down.

TAPPER (voice-over): At the scene, the driver admitted he had been distracted on a call with an airline arranging travel while his Tesla was in autopilot. He dropped his phone and reached for it just before the crash.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I reached out, I didn't see it. And when I popped up and looked, I saw a black truck. It just happened so fast.

TAPPER (voice-over): The family settled their case against the driver. But their attorneys also sued Tesla, arguing the car company and its CEO overstated the capabilities of the car's Autopilot technology, which failed to prevent the crash.

ELON MUSK, FORMER SENIOR ADVISOR TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Model S and Model X at this point can drive autonomously with greater safety than a person right now.

BRETT SCHREIBER, ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFFS: What they have done is created a situation where drivers, unlike other auto manufacturers driving other autonomous vehicle systems, over trust the autopilot system and truly believe it is, as Tesla advertises, fully self- driving.

TAPPER (voice-over): But one key piece of evidence was missing. The vehicle's digital collision data, which could show exactly what was happening with the Tesla before the accident.

For years, Tesla claimed it couldn't be located and argued in court that the driver had time to react if he had been paying attention. So the family's lawyers brought in an outside expert, an independent hacker known online as Green. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I've been kind of extracting those videos for

multiple years.

TAPPER (voice-over): Within minutes, Green, who wants to remain anonymous, was able to extract the critical data from the Tesla's motherboard. He then deciphered it for trial.

TAPPER: How many minutes did it take you to find it?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: For me, it took less than five minutes once the data was copied. So that's just the data on the autopilot. Inside there was also a transmission record that showed that this data was transmitted to Tesla.

TAPPER (voice-over): The recovered data showed Tesla's autopilot system was engaged prior to the crash and detected several obstacles just before impact.

SCHREIBER: There was a failure of the vision system. It appreciated that there was an end of the road. It knew that it was approaching a T intersection. It saw my client's vehicle. It saw the pedestrian. It perceived, it predicted all of these things, and it did nothing.

TAPPER (voice-over): Tesla did not respond to a request from CNN for comment, but the company argued in court that it never intentionally withheld the data. The company just did not realize it had the information stored in its servers.

Tesla claimed the data actually proved their case, that the driver was not paying attention and manually sped up before the crash. So the autopilot technology was not to blame. The jury disagreed, finding Tesla 33 percent liable for the crash that took a young woman's life, awarding the families $243 million in damages.

Tesla has asked a federal court to throw out the verdict, order a new trial, or reduce the damages.

TAPPER: Was it rewarding being able to help a grieving family?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I'm glad I was able to get the data out for the people to hope he benefit. It doesn't bring the dead back, unfortunately. But as long as there's a positive outcome for them, I feel better about that.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

TAPPER: Joining us now to discuss is Missy Cummings. She's director of Mason Autonomy and Robotics at George Mason University. Missy, the verdict is not only a blow for Tesla, but really any company trying to convince folks that their autonomous vehicles are perfectly safe.

What was your reaction when you first heard about this case? Did you find it sketchy at all that Tesla initially claimed that they couldn't find the evidence that the hacker found quickly?

[17:40:04] MISSY CUMMINGS, GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY PROFESSOR: Yes, because the data that Tesla uses to populate the user interface on the inside of the car is also the same data that you can use to find out what the car sees when it goes into a situation. So I knew it was highly unlikely that they really could not retrieve the data.

TAPPER: You've now built much of your career on studying autopilot and self-driving features as you see this crash and others like it. Is there one main thing you would say to car drivers and carmakers as this technology continues to hit the roads?

CUMMINGS: I think one of the critical aspects of specifically Tesla technology is that they're relying on computer vision only, so they only have cameras trying to predict as their cars move into self- driving operations. And this is simply impossible. We teach students to never rely on a single set of sensor sense data.

And so I tell the public and I tell Tesla, you can't do it. Quit saying that you can do it and concentrate more on actually doing good engineering than doing good marketing.

TAPPER: Do you think today self-driving cars are safe?

CUMMINGS: I think actual self-driving cars like Waymo can be very safe in limited areas. Teslas are not self-driving, nor will they ever be under their current architecture.

TAPPER: Mr. Missy Cummings, thank you so much for your expertise. Great to have you on.

Some of the same top prosecutors leading the effort to charge James Comey once said about retaliatory politics. All sorts of interesting things. We're going to go into the archives and roll the tape, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:46:02]

TAPPER: And we're back with our Law and Justice Lead. The two charges against former FBI Director James Comey are on false statements and also obstruction of justice, tying back to his September 30, 2020 testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee and also the FBI's Arctic Haze leak investigation, a source tells me.

I want to bring in my legal experts, Mimi Rocah and Tom Dupree. And Tom, so President Trump said today that he's hoping there will be others charged. That's a quote. As in more of his political enemies. In that same Truth Social post he did last Saturday, he said that he hoped that Comey and Schiff and Letitia James would be -- would face charges.

One of his personal attorneys, Lindsey Halligan, said this on Fox News after the raid on Mar-a-Lago back in 2022. Take a list.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) LINDSEY HALLIGAN, ATTORNEY FOR PRESIDENT TRUMP: Is up to the sitting president to ensure that our criminal system does not unravel into retaliatory or political prosecutions of former presidents and other government officials.

END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: It's interesting that she said that because there was a conservative acting U.S. attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia who would not bring charges. Trump fired him a week ago, and now she is the compliant acting U.S. attorney who did bring charges.

TOM DUPREE, FORMER DEPUTY ASSITANT ATTORNEY GENERAL: How times change. And look at your question. Yes, I think this is the first in what no doubt is going to be a sequence of investigations and prosecutions of Trump's enemies. No question about that. He was very open about that during the campaign. He's been very open about that during his presidency.

And he could not possibly have been more open about that in that public tweet that he sent to the attorney general, Pam Bondi. I suspect that Comey was first in the queue because he had the misfortune to have the statute of limitations about to run.

So from the Justice Department --

TAPPER: Five years from that testimony expires.

DUPREE: Exactly right. The whole case turns into a pumpkin five years after he gave that testimony. So they had to file that indictment if they wanted to charge him on that basis, they had to file that in the next few days. So that's why we saw the 11th hour change in prosecutors in the Eastern District of Virginia. That's why 24 hours after Lindsey Halligan comes and takes the reins of the office, the indictment gets filed.

TAPPER: And, Mimi, I want to go back to something that now Attorney General Pam Bondi said during her confirmation hearing. She's talking to Senator Chris Coons, Democrat of Delaware.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. CHRIS COONS (D-DE): Can you clarify for me that in following ethics and the law, you'd be willing to resign if ordered to do something improper?

PAM BONDI, ATTORNEY GENERAL: Senator, I wouldn't work at a law firm. I wouldn't be a prosecutor. I wouldn't be attorney general if anyone asked me to do something improper, and I felt I had to carry that out, of course I would not do that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: It was reported earlier this week that she, Bondi, had concerns about the case. She has since denied that reporting. What are your thoughts as a prosecutor, former prosecutor, about her role in all this?

MIMI ROCAH, FORDHAM LAW ADJUNCT PROFESSOR: Well, I mean, I assume she would say there was nothing improper about this. The problem with that is that what the prosecution here is carrying out the desires, the order of President Trump. It is not about what the Department of Justice is supposed to be doing, which is seeking indictments only when the both the standard of evidence, the legal standard and the discretion warrants it.

None of that is present here. We know that because of all of the trained career prosecutors who essentially are telling us that by their resignations, by their refusal to go in the grand jury. Right. I mean, she, Halligan, ended up having to go in herself because clearly, apparently none of the career prosecutors are willing to do it. That speaks volumes.

And so what Bondi either doesn't get or is ignoring is that it is not proper, it is improper to simply follow the will of the president.

[17:50:05]

The desire of the president, when it is contrary to ethics, to law and to facts, which again, we've been told by these prosecutors. So, I think she has a very loose definition of what is improper and not improper based on her own political lens.

TAPPER: So Lindsey Halligan, Tom, she's never prosecuted a case before. She was an insurance attorney. Then she worked on Trump's defense for the Mar-a-Lago classified documents case. Then she came to the White House. She was doing stuff related to whether stuff at the Smithsonian was too woke. And now she has this case.

Here's what President Trump said about it this morning.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: We'll see. But it's a pretty easy case because look, he lied.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: A pretty easy case. So I'm looking at this case and I don't think it's a stupid invented case. I mean, I'm sure there's something here and there are, I'm sure attorneys out there who think this is a case that a prosecutor would bring.

But is this going to be an easy case, especially for somebody as under qualified for a prosecutor position as Lindsey Halligan?

DUPREE: I don't think it's an easy case. And there is a massive difference, a galaxy of difference, between the evidence sufficient to get an indictment from a grand jury and the evidence you need to prove criminality beyond a reasonable doubt.

TAPPER: Which includes intent. Right.

DUPREE: So it does. Absolutely. Especially in a false statement case or a perjury case. Prosecutors will tell you those cases may look temptingly easy, but they're not, in fact, because a defendant in a false statement case can always claim it was a mere failure of recollection. It was an inadvertent misstatement. They can claim that, well, the other witness just had a different recollection of events. It can be very difficult to prove a deliberate, willful knowing.

And so that's what I think these prosecutors are going to come up against. And unless they have some sort of corroborating evidence other than apparently Andrew McCabe's testimony, it's going to be a difficult road.

TAPPER: All right, Mimi Rocah and Tom Dupree, thanks so much. Coming up next, the tough road to rebuild in western North Carolina.

ISABEL ROSALES, CNN CORRESPONDENT: A year after Hurricane Helene and this home in western North Carolina still looks like this. I'm Isabel Rosales and I'll bring you the story of recovery, live.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:56:25]

TAPPER: In our National Lead this week marks one year since Hurricane Helene brought death and destruction across six states, including and perhaps especially North Carolina. It has been a grueling recovery process for thousands of North Carolinians, especially in Asheville, a city which thrives on tourism.

But several determined business owners working to bounce back are delivering a message to CNN's Isabel Rosales. We are back open for business.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ROSALES: It's not often you get to see the remnants of a storm like this a year later.

AMY CANTRELL, CO-DIRECTOR, BELOVED ASHVILLE: Yes. So this is one of the houses that you can still walk inside. It's really frozen in time.

ROSALES (voice-over): Among the damp wood and abandoned belongings, a visceral reminder of what Helene took in minutes. These walls mark the survival of a family, but the loss of a place they once called their little Eden.

CANTRELL: The water was pouring in and going higher and so they feared for their lives that they might drown. And so he grabbed a flashlight and a putty knife and he started hacking through the ceiling right here.

ROSALES (voice-over): Recovery is far from over. In hard hit Swannanoa just outside Asheville. With many families still struggling in mountain country.

ROSALES: A year later, what is the need here in this community? CANTRELL: The need is vast. You know, we still have people that are in

temporary shelter and many people lost their jobs. Businesses were gone. They kind of went through.

ROSALES (voice-over): Amy Cantrell and Ponkho Bermejo tell me there's a full blown housing crisis. With tens of thousands of people still displaced. BeLoved Asheville is among the nonprofits racing to close that gap, building 120 homes and counting just a few feet from where the Mills family home drifted.

CANTRELL: They said it felt like they were inside a boat.

ROSALES (voice-over): Off its foundation.

CANTRELL: You know, they're just floating inside.

ROSALES (voice-over): Their house rests their new Eden built above the waterline of Helene.

PONKHO BERMEJO, CO-DIRECTOR, BELOVED ASHVILLE: And we are in a deep connection now in these Appalachian mountains and we are stronger than ever.

We got some pretty serious --

ROSALES (voice-over): From the heart of Biltmore Village in Asheville --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: How do we fix this?

ROSALES (voice-over): -- Joe Scully --

UNIDENATIFIED MALE: Where's the wall?

ROSALES: -- has been documenting the tireless comeback story of corner kitchen. 10 months, more than 300 days through the seasons until this moment.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Open after 10 months closed.

ROSALES (voice-over): The hometown restaurant, now a welcome home back.

JOE SCULLY, HEAD CHEF AND CO-OWNER, THE CORNER KITCHEN: And then when we actually started to get like people in who's actually a little scary.

ROSALES (voice-over): Yes, you got the jitters?

SCULLY: A little.

ROSALES (voice-over): This fall, the stakes are higher than ever as visitors pour into high country to take in the changing foliage. In western North Carolina, the next few months could make or break a small business. SCULLY: It's a possible reality that people will not be able to make

it if they don't have the guests and the tourists to come for this next three month period.

ROSALES (voice-over): A chamber of commerce survey of mostly small businesses found 90 percent of respondents project a revenue loss and nearly 45 percent report a moderate to significant risk of closure.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Could be two chicken salads all day.

ROSALES (voice-over): The Corner Kitchen back from the brink and buzzing with sound. And this stark reminder of just how high the flood waters climbed.

ROSALES: Why we're building a place that's flooded before.

SCULLY: It's too precious not to try.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ROSALES: There's events throughout the community throughout this weekend to mark this anniversary for this community is it -- it is a time of reflection, reflection for what they have lost and also a time, Jake, of celebration for the progress that they have made here.

[18:00:03]

But with that, there is also a heightened sense of awareness.