Return to Transcripts main page
The Lead with Jake Tapper
Trump: I've Been Very Disappointed With President Putin; Trump Defends Bondi Amid Epstein Files Backlash; 75-Plus Former Judges Urge Senate Committee To Reject Trump Nominee; Inflation Spikes In June With Some Prices Rising From Tariffs; CNN Inside Chinese Tech Firm Where Robots Play Sports. Aired 6-7p ET
Aired July 15, 2025 - 18:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[18:00:00]
JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: Welcome to The Lead. I'm Jake Tapper.
This hour, the strategy Democrats are trying right now to try to force the Trump administration to release information and files on convicted and now dead pedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
[18:00:05]
Will it work?
Plus, House Speaker Mike Johnson appearing to break with President Trump on the issue calling for Justice Department transparency on the scandal.
Also opening statements in the trial of the Colorado dentist accused of killing his wife by poisoning her protein shake. Why prosecutors say he did it, and the pushback we heard today from the defense.
Also, the global tech race, CNN's rare access to a laboratory in China. See the wild things that these robots can do and what it might tell us about the future of A.I.
The Lead tonight, President Trump today still expressing his reservation and frustration with Russian president Vladimir Putin just one day after announcing a new plan to get U.S. weapons to Ukrainian troops using NATO and NATO allies, and warning Putin he has 50 days to make a ceasefire deal or face a second round of punishing tariffs.
CNN's Chief White Correspondent and Anchor Kaitlan Collins is live for us at the White House. Kaitlan?
KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Jake. And I should note the president lashed out at a reporter when they asked him why he is giving President Putin another 50 days here as they're seeking to bring this war to an end, or he says that Russia is going to face some heavy sanctions here. The president did not like that question and also said that he believes that the 50-day timeline is actually not that long after all, it's a sentiment that we've heard echoed by Republicans in Congress as well who have been trying to push their own sanctions bill to the president's desk eventually. But, Jake, he did make some news on Russia and amid some reporting that he had asked President Zelenskyy during their last phone call if Ukraine would have the ability to be able to hit Moscow or St. Petersburg if they had long range missiles. The White House did not deny that the president actually brought that up to Zelenskyy, but said that he was merely asking the question, not saying that it was something that he should be talking about.
And then the president himself took questions from reporters on this as he was leaving the White House to go to Pennsylvania earlier where he said he does not believe and is not considering giving Ukraine long range missiles and also said he does not think President Zelenskyy should try to hit Moscow either.
He did though, Jake, make clear his frustration with President Putin and as they're in this dynamic and waiting for these next 50 days to play out, and this is what he told us.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: Well, we're going to see what happens with President Putin. So far, I've been very disappointed with President Putin. I've solved a lot of wars in the last three months but I haven't gotten this one yet.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: That is his frustration, Jake, in terms of not being able to bring this conflict to an end, something that he initially promised to do on day one in office.
And I should note, I've been talking to officials here at the White House, and that frustration that you're hearing him air out publicly as he's kind of been building to for the last several weeks is a sentiment that he has been reflecting in private for quite some time, and now is clearly doing so publicly.
The question, of course, is how the Russian leader is going to respond and whether or not that 50-day deadline is going to have to be met and if the president follows through on it.
TAPPER: Kaitlan Collins at the White House, thanks so much. And don't miss Kaitlan on her show, The Source with Kaitlan Collins. That's tonight and every weeknight at 9:00 Eastern only on CNN.
Let's go right to CNN's Matthew Chance in Moscow. And, Matthew, you say that this 50-day window is essentially a green light for Putin. Explain.
MATTHEW CHANCE, CNN CHIEF GLOBAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Yes. Well, despite what President Trump says about the length of that time being significant, it does provide a sort of quite a lengthy period in which the Kremlin can continue to pursue its military tactics in Ukraine without facing any immediate consequences or any further consequences. It won't until after that 50-day period is over that it faces tariffs or secondary sanctions on countries that do trade in its oil. And if you are in Kyiv right now facing a daily, nightly barrage of drone strikes and missile attacks, it must seem like an eternity. There are other reasons too, firstly, expressed by Russian politicians that in 50 days, a lot can change on the ground in terms of the military, you know, situation. Russia could be in a much more advantageous position in 50 days from now than it is at the moment. Secondly, and perhaps most importantly, when it comes to President Trump, 50 days is an extraordinary long period of time. And I think there's a sense in Russia that within that period, the U.S. president could change his mind again about the country.
TAPPER: And, Matthew, Trump says he's not looking to deliver long range weapons to Ukraine in order to strike major Russian cities, but Trump's NATO envoy did not rule out providing offensive weapons. What are Russian officials saying about this whole line of discussion?
CHANCE: Yes. Well, I mean, this is something that I think the Russians are a bit more concerned about than the idea of sanctions. The Kremlin said it took the suggestion of supplying, you know, kind of offensive weapons very seriously from President Trump.
[18:05:06]
I mean, they will have been placated by the fact, you know, put at ease by the fact that President Trump has ruled out long range missiles and played down any sort of suggestion that they should be targeting here at Moscow and St. Petersburg, big major Russian cities, with those missiles. But, yes, I mean, it's certainly a concern.
It's not a question of, you know, whether the Russians would be concerned of it though. It's a question of whether that kind of suggestion from President Trump is going to have any impact on Russia's policy. Will it make Russia rethink its ability or its willingness to pursue its war? And there's no suggestion we're getting from Russian officials at the moment that anything President Trump has said is going to deflect the Kremlin from its military objectives in Ukraine.
TAPPER: All right. Matthew Chance inside Russia for us, thank you so much.
And Republican Senator from Utah John Curtis joins us now. He is on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Senator, thanks so much for joining us. Good to see you.
SEN. JOHN CURTIS (R-UT): Always great, Jake.
TAPPER: So, last week, President Trump confirmed he was going to restart the weapon shipments to Ukraine despite Secretary of Defense Hegseth apparently having paused the shipments without telling the White House first. You say you agree with the president's decision to restart, but, quote, I hope the administration will brief Congress on why these shipments were paused in the first place, unquote. Have you gotten an answer to that? Do you think Hegseth should testify?
CURTIS: Well, I think any time there's a question like this, the American people and Congress want answers. I haven't had a satisfactory answer. I think we're all pleased. Well, let me just say, the people I associate with are pleased that the weapons are going over there. And I think even more important, it's tied to a specific strategy. Let's get a ceasefire in 50 days. And I think one of the mistakes we've made in Ukraine in the past is we haven't been strategic about what we're sending over and what we're actually trying to achieve.
TAPPER: Do you want Hegseth to testify?
CURTIS: Oh, absolutely. Anytime there's a lack of information, like I say, it's not just Congress. I think the American people longed for that and want answers, of course.
TAPPER: So, in a story, first reported by the Financial Times, President Trump apparently asked about Ukraine's ability to reach, to strike major Russian cities, such as Moscow or St. Petersburg. And there were even follow up discussions about what long range U.S. weapons could be used for such a thing. The White House is insisting that Trump's words are being taken out of context. And this afternoon, President Trump reiterated Ukraine should not target Moscow. But what do you make of it all and should striking Moscow be completely off the table?
CURTIS: Well, if you go back to the beginning of this war and our involvement, I think one of the mistakes we've made is taking things off the table. All of us would like to fight an enemy that has restrictions, particularly dramatic restrictions. Remember a couple years ago, we wouldn't let any offensive weapons go over there.
TAPPER: Yes.
CURTIS: Well, how's Ukraine going to really fight that war? So, it's hard for me to say what we should do and what we shouldn't do, but simply from a strategic advantage, we shouldn't be talking about what we're not going to allow them to do publicly.
TAPPER: You had a chance to speak with Mike Waltz a few days before the confirmation hearing before the FOREIGN RELATIONS Committee earlier today. Did you get the chance to ask him about any lessons he learned from the Signal gate experience when he accidentally added Jeff Goldberg from The Atlantic to this chat on Signal where he and the Vice President and Pete Hegseth and others were talking about very sensitive, if not classified information?
CURTIS: So I didn't ask you that specific question, but the topic obviously came up. I think it's important to me, and I'll come back to this, it's important to Congress and the American people that when things like this happen that we have answers, the more transparency, the better.
I think there's a lot of legitimate questions about just in government in whole, not just this administration, but, overall, is this something that has been going on?
TAPPER: The Signal chat. CURTIS: The Signal chat, right? Is it appropriate if we have boundaries around what type of information? And then at what point do you cross the line? I don't think that we have answers to that. And I think that this was an opportunity for us to better understand that tool, how it's used appropriately and when it's not used appropriately.
TAPPER: Here's an exchange between Mike Waltz and your Democratic colleague, Chris Coons of Delaware, earlier today.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MIKE WALTZ, FORMER NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER: System (ph) recommends ending encryption messaging on both government and personal devices.
SEN. CHRIS COONS (D-DE): For sensitive military --
WALTZ: Oh, of course. Of course, Senator. There was no classified information exchanged --
COONS: For sensitive military operation. This -- you were sharing details about an upcoming airstrike.
Was any disciplinary action taken?
WALTZ: From the White House Investigation, Senator?
COONS: Yes.
WALTZ: No. The use of Signal was and not only authorized, it's still authorized and highly recommended.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[18:10:02]
TAPPER: Did that satisfy you, that answer?
CURTIS: Well, as I understand it, there is a DOD investigation. And that's what will satisfy me when I get the answers to that.
I don't have the experience to know when that line was crossed. Obviously, there was a lot of information shared there that didn't sound appropriate and I would like to know that, as well as I think my colleagues and the American people would like to know that as well.
TAPPER: I guess, and this is more of a comment than a question, but I am wondering what you think, like, obviously, he messed up, he accidentally added a journalist to a signal chat, and, obviously, there are questions about whether Signal should be used for such sensitive conversations. People make mistakes where. We're all fallible. I don't understand this huge reluctance to admit that a mistake has been made when especially it doesn't appear as though there were any serious repercussions.
CURTIS: So, I served with Mike Waltz in the house for a number of years. I think I know him well and I know his character well. And I don't -- to me, this is not a character issue. I think there's an issue of not throwing my colleagues under the bus.
TAPPER: Yes.
CURTIS: And also an issue of, look, as long as this DOD investigation is going on, let's wait and let's get to the end of that and see what we have.
TAPPER: Yes, that's fair enough. I didn't even mean it applying to him, I meant to the administration writ large. It just does seem to be a refusal to ever admit when a mistake has been made.
Senator Curtis, John Curtis from Utah, Republican, thank you so much for being here. I really appreciate it.
CURTIS: Let's do it again.
TAPPER: President Trump was also asked today about transparency or the lack thereof in his administration's handling of the Epstein documents. Will the Trump administration ever release any of this evidence collected over decades on this now dead pedophile and predator? House Speaker Mike Johnson today raised some eyebrows with his take on it all. Hear his comment for yourself, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:15:00]
TAPPER: In our Politics Lead, just hours ago, House Democrats failed in a second effort to force House Republicans on the record to vote for releasing Epstein filed documents, this after President Trump today praised his attorney general, Pam Bondi, saying she, quote, handled it very well.
CNN Chief Congressional Correspondent and Anchor Manu Raju's live on Capitol Hill for us. Manu, what are Congressional Republicans saying about their vote against releasing this information?
MANU RAJU, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, this is a Republican Party that's badly divided about how to proceed here. They did vote against this procedural motion. Many of them said it was because it was a procedural issue, which is why they voted against it, but there are some who want absolutely nothing to do with this and are aligned with Donald Trump who wants to just move on, some of those don't want to investigate further. Some say they have confidence in Donald Trump's handling of this, like the House Judiciary Committee chairman, Jim Jordan, who would oversee any probe into this.
But then there are members on the right flank of the House GOP in particular who are demanding more information. And one of those members, Congressman Ralph Norman, did vote on a separate matter to advance a Democratic resolution that ultimately failed. They would've called for the release of this information involving Jeffrey Epstein.
I asked that congressman, Ralph Norman, about that vote.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RAJU: So, you were the one Republican yesterday to vote with the Democrats on this amendment on Epstein. Why?
REP. RALPH NORMAN (R-SC): Transparency, transparency.
RAJU: The president says it's time to move on.
NORMAN: That's fine. You know, that's fine. But I don't want to see him heard in this. And transparency is just the best way to go.
I think that the American people need to see what's in there. And that's not hard to understand.
REP. CHIP ROY (R-TX): I do think there needs to be more transparency. I do think that all needs to move forward. And I think the administration needs to address that.
RAJU: But you don't believe what the Justice Department is saying?
REP. TIM BURCHETT (R-TN): I don't know. No, I don't. I think I don't. I don't trust them.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
RAJU: And there may be some other efforts by those same Republicans to move ahead on any legislation to push for the release of this information.
Jake, earlier this afternoon, Congressman Thomas Massie, a Republican of Kentucky, is trying -- issued what's known as a discharge petition on Capitol Hill that would require a majority of members of the House to sign onto that effort to force a vote in the full House. That means four Republicans would've to break grants and join all Democrats in moving ahead. We'll see if he gets the requisite number of signatures to force that vote, Jake.
TAPPER: And, Manu, Speaker Mike Johnson is also calling for transparency.
RAJU: Yes, and this is a change. Just yesterday, I asked Johnson about this. He said he hadn't really gotten into this issue very deeply, but he was just deferring to the Justice Department and the White House's handling of this issue.
But he was speaking to a conservative podcaster earlier today, and he was asked about this and sung a different tune.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. MIKE JOHNSON (R-LA): She needs to come forward and explain that to everybody. I like Pam. I mean, I think she's done a good job. We need the DOJ focusing on the major priorities, so let's get this thing resolved. (END VIDEO CLIP)
RAJU: So, a different message than just yesterday, Jake, but it's uncertain whether the House Republicans will do anything to try to compel the release of this. The key chairman of the committees in both in the House and the Senate are not indicating any plans right now to investigate this matter.
TAPPER: Well, you got that discharge petition there that Congressman Massie put up there. All the Democrats have to do is sign it and get four Republicans.
Manu Raju on Capitol Hill, thanks so much.
Joining us now, Democratic Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, she represents parts of Southern Florida, not far from where the Epstein scandal began in 2005. Congresswoman, thanks for joining us.
So, I want to play part of the exchange after President Trump told the reporter that his attorney general, Pam Bondi, had told him, had briefed him, he was asked whether his name appeared in the Epstein files. Take a listen.
[18:20:00]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: These files were made up by Comey. They were made up by Obama. They were made up by the Biden -- you know, and we went through years of that, with the Russia, Russia, Russia hoax, with all of the different things that we had to go through, we've gone through years of it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
REP. DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (D-FL): What was your response when you heard that the secrecy and darkness, Jake, that has shrouded this case for decades continues and it continues for the various obvious reason is that there are people on that list.
And, you know, it's pretty well-known that Jeffrey Epstein was the president's buddy, but that there are people on that list that they don't want to have those names revealed. Just like, you know, when they settled the case in state court with misdemeanor charges and Jeffrey Epstein got the sweetheart deal of being able to, you know, have a work release, you know, prison time agreement that deprived the young girls who were abused by him, raped by his accomplices of the justice that they deserved.
And the law needs to be changed. I'm filing legislation that will change the victim's bill of rights so that that notification that didn't happen for those victims would never happen again.
But this list, this report, the documents that are being shrouded in secrecy need to be released. And I'm with Ralph Norman, my colleague. This needs sunlight and transparency, but you know, that's not what this administration is ever about.
TAPPER: Yes. I'm rereading Julie Brown's book, The Perversion of Justice, about the Epstein case, and it's so shocking the moment when the Bush Justice Department gives this sweetheart deal to Epstein, and he's basically charged with one count of prostitution and dozens of victims who are willing to testify against him are not even told that this is happening. And your legislation would change that? Are you teaming up with any Republicans so it actually passes.
SCHULTZ: I have been working with Republicans that are no longer in Congress and so we're working on, you know, getting an additional, another Republican to co-lead with me. And I'm -- Jim Sensenbrenner was my co-lead when he was in Congress.
And, you know, I'm hopeful that, you know, we can all agree that victim notification should take place no matter what court the settlement is agreed upon. And, I mean, this was a really serious breach. The charges were felonious, I mean, serious felonies. And it was actually Alex Acosta, if you remember, who was the U.S. attorney at the time. What did Donald Trump do? He didn't like make him hang his head in shame. He gave him the job of secretary of labor in his first administration.
So, I mean, this is all, you know, a very buddy-buddy cronies covering each other and keeping all of this as under wraps as possible, but we need to change the victim's bill of rights in federal law to ensure that victims, no matter where these cases are settled, that they are able to be notified so that they can have their day in court and be able to speak out.
TAPPER: Over the weekend, you and a delegation of lawmakers toward the immigration detention center that Governor DeSantis calls Alligator Alcatraz. Immediately after you toured it, you called for it to be shut down. What did you see?
SCHULTZ: What we saw was humans caged, I mean, 32 detainees per cage, 8 cages inside a tent, really wall-to-wall people. But, you know, like this is an hour and a half into the Everglades, Jake, in the middle of a swamp with no infrastructure, everything has to be trucked in, $450 million a year, double the amount of funding for detainees normally. And the whole point of this is the stunt, the spectacle, and the, you know, abuse.
It was -- the temperatures inside were mid-80s. I brought a manual thermostat with me to measure the temperature. This is pointless, other than to distract from the fact that Donald Trump just took away healthcare from 17 million people, made the largest cuts to nutrition assistance in American history, and they want us talking about this and not that. And that's what this is all about.
TAPPER: The president said that this detention center in particular would hold some of the most vicious people, but a report by the Miami Herald found, quote, mixed among the detainees accused and convicted of crimes for more than 250 people who are listed as having only immigration violations but no criminal convictions are pending charges in the United States. SCHULTZ: That's right. We were given a sanitized tour, by the way. They wouldn't let us do an unannounced tour, which federal law that I passed requires them to. So, we're not really even certain. We're pretty clear we didn't see the conditions that are really going on there.
But, I mean, at the end of the day, this -- the purpose of this setup is to have the cruelty be the point.
[18:25:06]
And, I mean, they told us that every single person in there was at the end of their criminal procedure and were in the final stages of deportation. I imagine my shock when I woke up Sunday morning to one of my hometown papers, the Miami Herald, to find that most of the people have had no due process, aren't actually convicted of anything, and that essentially that they are, you know, warehousing people in cages just for the spectacle and the distraction. And it's an outrage, it's inhumane, and this place needs to be shut the hell down.
TAPPER: Yes. The Miami Herald's a great paper. If you don't subscribe to it out there, you should subscribe to it.
Debbie Wasserrman Schultz, the congresswoman, Democrat, thank you so much. I appreciate it.
SCHULTZ: Thanks, Jake.
TAPPER: President Trump wants one of his former personal attorneys to now be an appeals court judge, but more than 75 former judges are trying to stop that move. What's their argument? Well, we're going to hear it directly from one of the judges, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:30:00]
TAPPER: Back with our Law and Justice Lead. F you, that's what a whistleblower says, Emil Bove, said about court orders that would stop Trump's deportation agenda. It's his message to the court, allegedly, and it's alarming many members of the judiciary. More than 75 former federal and state judges are calling on lawmakers to reject President Trump's nomination of Emil Bove, his former personal attorney, to an appeals court judgeship.
In a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee, the judges say, Mr. Bove's egregious record of mistreating law enforcement officers, abusing power and disregarding the law itself disqualifies him for this position, unquote.
Joining me now, one of the judges who signed the letter, retired Judge Nancy Gertner of Massachusetts. Judge, thanks for joining us. What compelled you to sign onto this?
JUDGE NANCY GERTNER, RETIRED U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE: Well, this was -- this is an extraordinary nomination and I think that all of us felt that we had to speak up. You know, nobody is born a neutral. Everybody has to move to neutral. Nobody's born a judge. And usually when one goes to the bench from the Department of Justice or a prosecutor's office, you have spent your time showing people that you can be professional, that you can be dispassionate, that you can keep from weaponizing the Department of Justice. That's why there are so many prosecutors, former prosecutors on the bench.
With Bove, for him to have done what he did when he was within the Department of Justice speaks volumes about what kind of a judge he will be. So, one of the first things he did was to force out FBI agents and lawyers who had worked on the January 6th cases. It's hard to imagine how that was remotely legitimate. He played a major role in the in the effort to drop charges against Mayor Adams in exchange for Mayor Adams' cooperation with the Trump administration.
And so the other piece of this, which you just mentioned, which is the whistleblower who reported that when they were talking about court cases, he essentially said, you know, if the judges rule against him, F you.
So, the time when ought to have been the testing ground for a prosecutor to show his neutrality, to show his chops, Bove showed just the opposite.
TAPPER: Yes.
GERTNER: And it seems to me that alone should be disqualified.
TAPPER: So, the whistleblower is named Erez Reuveni, I'm sure I'm mispronouncing that, who worked at DOJ for 15 years as a career attorney, and he says that Bovie said that the administration should consider telling the courts F you if they stopped the deportations. Attorney General Bondi says, quote, this disgruntled employee is not a whistleblower. He's a leaker, asserting false claims, seeking five minutes of fame, conveniently timed just before a confirmation hearing and a committee vote, unquote, kind of an odd allegation that he's seeking five minutes of fame considering he hasn't done any T.V. interviews at all. But what is your response to the attorney general?
GERTNER: Well, if he came out of the woodwork now because the boss that said the things that he reported, then that makes perfect sense, right? This was the moment to talk about what Bove was doing because he was about to be on his way to a lifetime appointment as a court of appeals judge. In addition, my understanding, again, based on the reporting is this is not the only whistleblower. There were others in the room and there are text messages which reflects some of the same thing.
So, this is an effort to basically, you know, disassociate themselves from really information that would have been disqualifying for any other candidate for judicial office, perhaps in the history of this country. So, I that's my answer to Pam Bondi.
TAPPER: Yesterday, Attorney General Bondi fired the top ethics chief at the DOJ. It's just the latest firing among what critics are calling an ongoing purge at the department. What do you make of the firings? GERTNER: Well, the firing -- those firings are basically, you know, the end of the civil service, is the end of the Department of Justice as a dispassionate, relatively neutral agency. I mean, she's clear that she wants only people who are loyal to Donald Trump. And, you know, that's part of the purge of people who worked on the January 6th cases, part of the purge of, I mean, the whistleblower who you mentioned, and I won't even try to pronounce his name, was the one who had admitted that Abrego Garcia was wrongly sent to El Salvador.
So, she's purging anyone who will, what, dare I say it, speak the truth.
TAPPER: Yes.
GERTNER: Anyone who will say, don't do that, anyone who will say, this is not what the Department of Justice is about, which makes it clear that she will be -- she is, in fact, a tool of Donald Trump, as would Bove be.
[18:35:11]
And a reminder to attorney General Pam Bondi, we would love to interview you sometime and have you come on the show and give your point of view of everything that we've been talking about all week.
Judge Nancy Gertner, thank you so much. I appreciate it.
Coming up next, opening arguments in the trial of a Colorado dentist who's accused of killing his wife by poisoning her protein shake. Up ahead, some of the damning evidence, including text messages, online searches on how to kill all human with arsenic. Oh boy, that's not incriminating at all. The line of defense from the suspect's attorneys, that's next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
TAPPER: Opening statements began today in the murder trial of a Colorado dentist who allegedly killed his wife by poisoning her protein shakes. Prosecutors alleged that James Craig used cyanide to poison his wife's protein shake so he could be with another woman, and later when he was in jail, allegedly tried to pay someone to kill the lead investigator on the case.
[18:40:00]
CNN's Whitney Wild has more.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
RYAN BRACKLEY, ASSISTANT DISTRICT ATTORNEY, DENVER: He went in that room to murder deliberately and intentionally end her life with a fatal dose of cyanide.
WHITNEY WILD, CNN LAW ENFORCEMENT CORRESPONDENT (voice over): Opening statements from the prosecution in the murder trial of Colorado dentist James Craig detailed the events the prosecutors say, led up to the death of his wife, 43-year-old Angela Craig.
BRACKLEY: The center of Angela Craig's life was trying to figure out what's wrong with her, why she feels dizzy, why she feels strange, why she feels lethargic, why she vomits, why she faints, why her kids had to find her fainted, why did she have to crawl across the floor one morning.
WILD: She died in a Colorado hospital in 2023 after being admitted multiple times in her last ten days for a variety of symptoms.
Prosecutors say James Craig wanted Angela gone, and his plot started shortly after he became emotionally involved with Dr. Karin Cain, who told ABC News he said he was getting a divorce and invited her to visit him in Colorado.
Feeling ill, Angela was fighting for her life.
BRACKLEY: Still searching for an answer, still frustrated, still scared, still wondering what happened to her and why she feels sick.
WILD: Even texting her husband, I feel drugged. He responded, just for the record, I didn't drug you.
Video shown in court shows the two at home in their kitchen.
BRACKLEY: And he gives her a smoothie that night before she goes to sleep.
WILD: The FBI lab found the drug, tetrahydrozoline found in eyedrops in a smoothie shaker from their home. And according to investigators, James Craig created a new email account at his dental office just weeks before his wife died. His computer at work showing searches like how many grams of pure arsenic will kill a human and top five undetectable poisons that show no signs of foul play. The prosecution alleging he also used the account to police orders for poisons.
BRACKLEY: Where can I buy arsenic.
WILD: Prosecutors say it arrived at the Craig home days before Angela was hospitalized.
James pleaded not guilty to first-degree murder and other charges.
ASHLEY WHITHAM, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: You can't consider speculation.
WILD: Craig's defense attorney saying she will show there's no actual evidence that James killed his wife.
WHITHAM: They never find any arsenic or cyanide.
WILD: And implying that Angela, a mother of six, was struggling and may have taken her own life.
WHITHAM: Angela was a very broken person.
WILD: She showed the jury surveillance video of Angela confronting her husband after Angela's first hospitalization.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Nobody in their right mind would ever think I would kill myself before I killed you. It's your fault they treated me like I was a suicide risk, like I did it to myself.
WILD: The defense attorneys saying investigators looked only for evidence that implicated him.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
WILD (on camera): Concerns about her suicide is obviously central to the defense case, Jake. The first two witnesses testified today. One of them was a physician who treated Angela Craig in the hospital. She says she did a suicide screening of Angela Craig and Angela Craig tested negative on that screening, Jake. She showed no signs that would have anyone concerned at the hospital that she was potentially considering suicide. Jake?
TAPPER: All right. Whitney Wild, thanks so much.
President Trump has said for weeks, there is no inflation today. He says, there's a little inflation. The new report today telling the real story on the U.S. economy and how much Trump's tariffs are to blame.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:47:06]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Inflation is dead. It's dead. We have no inflation. Think of it. Our stock market hit record highs. Everything is hitting a record high. We're really running good with no inflation.
We've had no inflation. All we have is we're making a fortune.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
TAPPER: In our money lead, President Trump claims that inflation is dead. New data out today tells a different story. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that consumer prices rose 0.7 percent last month, pushing the annual inflation rate to its highest point in four months, at 2.7 percent.
Many of those price increases, economists say, are in part because of President Trump's sweeping tariffs on imported goods, which brings us to our "Business Leaders" series, where we talk to small business owners coast to coast about Trump's tariffs. Some are in favor. Many tell us the impact has been overwhelming and bad for business.
Our business today is MinkeeBlue. MinkeeBlue is a line of organizational, travel and work bags with features for commuters. And founder Sherrill Mosee joins us now from the great city of Philadelphia.
And, Sherrill, how have the tariffs impacted your ability to keep your business growing?
SHERRILL MOSEE, FOUNDER, MINKEEBLUE: Yeah. Well, first of all, I want to say thank you so much for having me on. I started my business about 13 years ago, and really it was out of frustration. I basically was the bag lady struggling on the train with 2 or 3 bags. I had my lunch bag, my purse, my shoes, and a plastic grocery bag and I just wanted one bag where I could organize and separate everything in the bag.
And so, I came up with this idea for a shelf right in the middle of the bag. And I actually started working with the Department of Commerce to help me find us. Manufacturers who could make my bag. I was really adamant about making the bag in the U.S., but unfortunately it was very expensive.
During that time, the cost to make the bag was between $98 and $108, and then I would have to purchase the hardware and the materials overseas. So that pushed me into China. And I must say, I learned that 90 percent of handbags that are sold in the U.S. are made in foreign countries. And so, it's been really difficult dealing with the tariffs, trying to maintain production and all sorts of things at this time.
TAPPER: So if anybody watching right now, I just checked it out. MinkeeBlue, M-I-N-K-E-E, blue, the color blue -- blue.com.
Have you had to raise prices or is that something you worry you're going to have to do?
MOSEE: Yeah. When I first started the business, my -- the tariffs or the tax was at 17.6 percent. And then during the president's first term, that went up to 25 percent.
[18:50:05]
Now we've added on a 30 percent tariff.
So, what people don't understand is that in China, it stands at 30 percent. But for section 301, which includes all of -- or most of consumer goods, including handbags, its stacked on top of it. So not only am I paying 30 percent, I'm also have to pay the 25 percent from the first term. In addition to the 17.6 percent, which was the base term.
So really, I'm paying 72.6 percent, which I cannot afford. I mean, that's just insane. So, I actually bought in a lot of inventory the end of last year. I am not doing production this year just because of the tariffs and the uncertainty is just really, really unable to plan anything out. And I just don't know what I'm going to do.
TAPPER: If you could talk to president Trump or for example, Senator Dave McCormick, your brand new senator who was with the president, I believe, in Pittsburgh on the other side of the commonwealth. If you could say something to them today about the tariffs, what would you say?
MOSEE: Yeah, I mean, it's really -- a few things that I would say, number one, eliminate the three -- Section 301, which has all of the consumer goods under it.
Number two is really to be honest about the tariffs. The countries aren't paying for the tariffs. The American people are paying for the tariffs. Businesses like mine are paying that tax. And in my case, it's 72.6 percent. Those are the things that I would say.
TAPPER: All right. Sherrill Mosee, thank you so much. Go Birds and go Phils.
You can find MinkeeBlue products online, minkeeblue.com.
Thank you so much, Sherrill. Good to see you.
MOSEE: Thank you.
TAPPER: Coming up next, the tech race and CNN's rare access inside a Chinese robot laboratory. See how the game of soccer could show us possibilities of artificial intelligence.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:56:24]
TAPPER: In our last leads now, an update on the story we told you of the Palestinian American beaten to death by Israeli settlers in the occupied West Bank last week. The U.S. State Department now says it is closely monitoring the investigation by local authorities into the killing of 20-year-old Sayf Musallet.
When asked why there is no U.S. probe, the U.S. State Department said locals, local officials usually take the lead when a U.S. citizen dies or is killed in a foreign country. The U.S. ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, says Musallet killing was a, quote, criminal and terrorist act and is calling for an aggressive Israeli investigation.
In our tech lead, Chinese robots are learning to play sports. But what exactly is the point?
Well, CNN's Marc Stewart has been given a rare access. Look into the lab of the Chinese tech firm specializing in robots used in sporting competitions. Marc examines now how Chinas bid to excel in the robotics sphere could revolutionize the robotics industry across the globe.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
MARC STEWART, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): This is where robots come to life. They mimic mankind, yet depend on these Chinese engineers to function. We were given rare access to this lab by tech startup Booster Robotics on the outskirts of Beijing. We saw how robots can be built to play soccer.
Look what happens when we try to make a goal. See, it sticks its leg out. Very much like a real life goalie would.
The robots can also play on their own, powered by A.I. as they did in a recent tournament live streamed across China. The technology is still a work in progress. The robots often lose balance and fall scooped away on stretchers. They look very much human-like in their movements.
CHENG HAO, CEO, BOOSTER ROBOTICS: Yeah, this is a new technology about imitation learning.
STEWART: Technology, the CEO thinks, can be used in everything from food delivery to factories, even help kids learn new languages.
This whole robotic push comes at a time when the Chinese government is making technology, including A.I., a national priority.
Already, China's proven innovator, as we've seen with EV. Now, it's looking to dominate the field of A.I. enabled robots. And the gap with the U.S. is widening, according to Morgan Stanley research.
What does this symbolize beyond the soccer field?
ALEX CAPRI, NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE BUSINESS SCHOOL: China is really pushing the envelope in all things leading edge technology. And there are so many practical and also strategic applications of A.I. and robotics combined.
STEWART: Here in China, we've seen robotics at work during our tours of factories and the Chinese military has shown off a robotic dog with an automatic rifle mounted on its back. The U.S. Air Force is utilizing similar technology.
On the turf, the focus is on innovation and attention.
HAO: We need to push the technology development. So, we need a real -- a real scenario to test our technology.
STEWART: Scrimmages on the soccer field that may help China to score further, as a global tech leader.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
STEWART (on camera): Like EVs, high tech products like robotics get support subsidies from the Chinese government. But this isn't just about making money in China. It may be a necessity. The population here is getting older and robots may be needed to do the work and to maintain productivity, Jake.
TAPPER: All right. Our thanks to Marc Stewart for that report. Appreciate it.
If you ever miss an episode of THE LEAD, you can listen to the show all two hours, whence you get your podcasts.
"ERIN BURNETT OUTFRONT" starts right now. I'll see you tomorrow.
