Return to Transcripts main page

The Lead with Jake Tapper

Trump Dodges on Appointing Special Counsel to Investigate Epstein, I Have Nothing to Do With It; Now, Senate in Vote-a-Rama to Formalize $9.4 Billion in DOGE Cuts. Trump: "Highly Unlikely" He'll Fire Fed Chair Powell; "American Idol" Supervisor, Husband Slain In Apparent Double Homicide. Aired 6-7p ET

Aired July 16, 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 ANCHOR: Welcome to The Lead. I'm Jake Tapper.

This hour, I'm going to talk with the House Democrat leading the charge to force the hand of the Justice Department to release whatever documents they have on now dead pedophile, sexual trafficker Jeffrey Epstein.

Plus, new details on a stunning murder, an American Idol producer and her husband tragically killed after a break-in into their Los Angeles home.

Also today, the opioid crisis in America, one city had 27 overdoses in a single day.

[18:00:04]

I'm going to talk with that city's mayor.

And breaking news on Capitol Hill Senate Democrats pushing back on the GOP efforts to seal the deal on federal cuts made by DOGE or the Department of Government Efficiency, first led by Elon Musk. This is about what's called the rescissions package. And the big question is, will funding for Burt, Ernie and Sesame Street get nixed in this vote?

The Lead this hour, President Trump says he will permit his Justice Department to release any more credible information about its investigation into Jeffrey Epstein, but he dodged a question on whether he would consider appointing a special counsel saying, quote, I have nothing to do with it. This comes as he is accusing some of his own supporters of being, quote, weaklings. He says they're falling prey to what he calls a hoax when it comes to the Epstein files, one that's being perpetrated by Democrats.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: I lost a lot of faith in certain people, yes, I lost, because they got duped by the Democrats.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: This drama comes amid blowback within Trump's MAGA base over the Justice Department's announcement last week that there was no Epstein client list and that it would not release any more documents about the probe but prominent Republicans throughout the country, including on Capitol Hill, notably House Speaker Mike Johnson, are signaling that they actually want more information disclosed.

And here's Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina on WBT Radio. He takes issue with President Trump contending that the Epstein case is, quote, boring.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. THOM TILLIS (R-NC): I have to disagree with the president. I don't think human trafficking of young teenage girls being exploited by billionaires on a private island is boring. I think it's despicable. And I believe that anybody who had anything to do with it or knowledge of it should be held accountable.

So, just release the damn files.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Just release the damn files.

CNN's Manu Raju is on Capitol Hill. Manu, I take it most Republicans on the Hill, or at least a sizable chunk, don't think that this is a hoax, as the president says.

MANU RAJU, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, there are a lot of Republicans who really were in line with where Donald Trump was as early as a few months ago, calling for the release of all this information. And they simply don't buy what the Justice Department is saying, that they don't have more information to release, certainly a client list, some question whether that actually exists. The Justice Department in a memo suggested that did not exist. Many Republicans simply don't buy that explanation.

But there is a divide, Jake, among Republicans, many of whom are though aligning with Donald Trump, including some in some prominent positions who do not believe there should be any further investigation into this matter.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. JOSH HAWLEY (R-MO): I think it's maybe a little difficult to believe, the idea that DOJ and the FBI who prosecuted cases relating to this don't have any idea who Epstein's clients were and that he had no record of it of the client. I don't know. I find that kind of hard to believe. I mean, my view is make public everything you can make public.

RAJU: Should the Judiciary Committee get this?

HAWLEY: Well, I saw that I never know how to pronounce her name, but Max -- his associate. I think she said that she would be willing to testify. I mean, why not? Why not put her under oath?

RAJU: Should you guys look into this Jeffrey Epstein matter, given how much controversy there's been?

SEN. JOHN CORNYN (R-TX): We trust you to do that.

RAJU: Should the House Judiciary Committee investigate Epstein?

REP. JIM JORDAN (D-OH): We are -- I have total confidence in the president and his team.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: And that last comment coming from the House Judiciary Committee chairman, Jim Jordan, who has not been shy about wielding his investigative power as chairman of that committee, but indicating they're suggesting at least that this would not be something that he would pursue.

Now, Jake, this all comes as there's been legislative efforts to try to press ahead to force release of these documents. One congressman, Democrat Ro Khanna, has pushed forward on this issue, but it has been blocked by Republicans, but there are some Republicans who are still trying to see if they can circumvent Republican leadership force a vote in the full House of Representatives. That one congressman, Thomas Massie of Kentucky, is trying to force this vote on the House floor. But he would need the support of at least four Republican members of the House to sign on with all Democrats to make the full House vote to release these documents. It's unclear if he's able to be able to get that or if GOP leaders will block that effort going forward.

TAPPER: All right. Manu Raju on Capitol Hill, thanks so much.

Democratic Congressman Ro Khanna of California joins us now from Capitol Hill. Congressman Khanna, thank you so much. What do you make of President Trump blaming Democrats for the Epstein files brouhaha, saying that it's your party perpetrating a hoax on unsuspecting Republicans?

REP. RO KHANNA (D-CA): Jake, this is the first time he is getting ratioed on Truth Social by his own base. His own base knows that's not true.

[18:05:]

He campaigned on releasing these files. And just to update Manu, because he always knows the details, but Thomas Massie has been texting me all day, we introduced this resolution together. He already has seven Republicans signed up as co-sponsors, and we're going to deliver all 212 Democrats. So, we already have the threshold to get a vote on this, and I expect that that count is going to continue to go up today and tomorrow.

TAPPER: And this is to force -- this is a discharge charge petition, right? It's going to force this bill onto the floor of the House. And then what does it say?

KHANNA: So it's both the discharge petition and the bill. The discharge petition is to force it on the House. The way it works is we -- Thomas Massie and I introduced it yesterday, it takes seven legislative days before you can actually go through the discharge petition. We're likely going to be in August recess. So, the reality is it probably will come up for a vote after the August recess.

And the bill says to release all evidence for the Epstein file. But it makes it clear that does not include any of the victim information. It does not include any child pornography. It gives the DOJ the ability to protect the victims, but to release all the other evidence and files.

TAPPER: So, here's the thing. I've been following this story now for years. It seems possible, if not likely, that the Justice Department and the various investigations, whether the U.S. attorney in Miami or the U.S. attorney in the Southern District of New York, or anyone else looking into this, might have found the names of very wealthy, powerful men that maybe availed themselves of women who were either underage or barely 18 years old, 19 years old, but they did not think it was prosecutable for whatever reason.

And sometimes, as you know, and this is not a perfect world in which we live, sometimes prosecutors make decisions like that because the accusers are, for want of a better term, young prostitutes, people who, you know, that the defense might have an easy time attacking on the stand, and so they just decide to not go through it. I'm not saying I like it, I'm just saying that that is a decision prosecutors made. Do you still think that those people's names should be released? Not the victims, not the prostitutes, not the former sex workers, et cetera. I'm talking about the businessmen that may have availed themselves of this horrific crime.

KHANNA: Jake, I do. You make the best argument substantively for cautioning on a release, and that is that DOJ policy has basically been don't leak things unless you're going to charge someone. And then policy as a general matter makes sense. You wouldn't want a Justice Department being politicized, releasing information about members of Congress or senators without charging them just to embarrass them. You can see how that really would be a bad precedent.

But this is an unusual case, and I think the president should say this has implicated so many people, some who were serving in government, some foreign leaders. There are questions about whether U.S. or foreign governments were involved. The attorney general now has said that there potentially could be a client list. I campaigned on the release, and we're going to make an exception in this case to restore trust and put everything out there, and trust the American people, not to judge people if they're innocent, but there should be a one-time exception, not a change in the DOJ rule.

TAPPER: I did not use the word innocent. I said people that were not prosecuted there, that does not necessarily mean innocent.

One last question, have you gotten any sort of understanding -- I know you work with a lot of Republicans, including Congressman Massie. Do you have any sort of understanding as to why the president has done such an about-face on this after literally campaigning on it last fall?

KHANNA: You know, I think the president just didn't realize, I mean, far be it for me for, to tell him about his own voters, but what a big deal this would be. And he has managed in the past to do an about face on other things. He said he would end the war on day one. He didn't. People gave him a pass. We can go on and on. The point isn't to point out where he is fallen short. And on this, I think he thought he'd get away with it. He'd say, okay, I campaigned on this. We gave it the old college cry, and now we're moving on, and his base would move on with him, like they have on almost every other thing.

But the reason they aren't is this goes to the core of why he ran, a fundamental disgust and disdain for powerful elite people who many Americans think they have too much influence in our government and have their thumb on the scale. And it goes to the heart of his populism. And that's why I think he's underestimated the anger in the base. It's the first time in Congress you have Republicans, even if they're not publicly disagreeing, privately disagreeing.

[18:10:01]

And I think ultimately he's going to have to release these files. I just don't see it being plausible that he's going to be able to continue without the release. They may not pass Massie and my bill, but he will be pressured to release these files.

TAPPER: All right. Congressman Ro Khanna, Democrat of California, good to see you, sir. Thank you so much.

KHANNA: Thank you.

CNN's Senior Political Commentator Scott Jennings is joining us now. Scott, what do you make of the president's Truth Social post this morning where he essentially says that anyone who wants more information on Epstein released is buying into a hoax and they're weaklings, and he doesn't want their support?

SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, I sense that he's frustrated. I mean, this is a president that I think rightly believes he's had the best six months he could have possibly had, and now he's got all these people that he thought were in his corner, you know, all over him over this issue, which, you know, necessarily takes attention away from economy or international affairs or the other things that he thinks he deserves their praise and support on. So, I sense frustration.

You know, there may be frustration with the way it's been handled internally. I don't know. I've also heard him say today that if there's credible information that can be released, it should be released. And so you can see him inching toward trying to bring some closure to this by getting his government to put things out if it is within the realm of the possible. So, mostly, I just sense frustration from a guy who thinks he's on a roll and yet, you know, this issue has popped up and has been a bit of a speed bump among his biggest supporters.

TAPPER: Right. But, obviously, the reason that this has happened is because, A, he and a number of people in his administration said that this information should be released, and then, B, a couple weeks ago, maybe like a month after Elon Musk claimed with no evidence that Trump is on the Epstein list, the DOJ just put out a statement basically saying nothing to see here, this case is closed. That's why this has happened. It's not a bunch of people conspiring to change the subject from the six months he's had. It's his own supporters.

I mean, I first became aware of this story as a, oh my God, the president's base is really mad at him about this DOJ letter. I mean, that's how I learned about it.

JENNINGS: Well, I also think he's frustrated with Democrats on it because, you know, he's basically had them on the ropes for the last six months. They haven't been able to deal with him politically, and now all of a sudden they have an opening. I mean, you just had Ro Khanna on. You can see he's full throttle on this. It's the first time Democrats recently have legitimately been able to, you know, drive a little bit of wedge between the president and some of his top supporters.

So, I'm sure, as a political matter, he has frustration that some of his top supporters are being used by Democrats as a cudgel against him, you know? So, again, I just -- I sense frustration. I don't know what he's going to do, and I don't know what they can do. It's opaque to me. My only political advice would be whatever you're going to do, do it fast, because this, you know, dripping, dripping, dripping. Just if you've got something, put it out. If you don't, explain why you can't in full and as transparently as possible, and do it as quickly as you can.

TAPPER: And just to remind folks, I mean, the person that really brought this issue to the fore was Elon Musk after Trump, and he had their falling out. Elon Musk talked about this list, about releasing all this information to Tucker Carlson in the last month before the election. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ELON MUSK, CEO, SPACEX: I think part of why Kamala's getting so much support is that if Trump wins, that Epstein client list is going to become public. And some of those billionaires behind Kamala are terrified of that outcome.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: So, that's Elon Musk saying one of the reasons that billionaires were lining up behind Kamala Harris was because they were afraid because Trump was going to release the list, and then he goes out there and says Trump's on the list. So, I mean, that's how this happened. JENNINGS: I know. And you were just talking to Ro Khanna about this. It's DOJ policy not to release information about people unless you plan to charge them. Now, Ro's willing to make an exception in this case because he thinks it's going to hurt Donald Trump politically to do that, but that's longstanding DOJ policy. It would probably be irresponsible to put people's names in the public domain if they didn't do anything wrong or if they're not going to be charged with a crime. So, I do think there are sensitivities here that the DOJ people have to sort out.

But I don't dispute you. The reason this is a big deal is because it was talked about by some of his supporters for a very long time. Now they're in power and, you know, sometimes heavy as the head that wears the crown and governing is different than campaigning.

TAPPER: Kentucky sound Scott Jennings, good to see you, sir. Thanks so much.

JENNINGS: Thanks.

TAPPER: We're standing by for a major vote on Capitol Hill that could end with Vice President J.D. Vance being forced to break a tie, as is the role of the vice president when it is 50-50. This measure is over what's called rescissions. It's federal cuts being recommended by DOGE. Access to public T.V. and public radio, possibly on the chopping block. We'll bring that to you next. I'm going to talk to a Senate Republican about the back and forth, playing out all day long on this issue of the rescissions package and budget cuts.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

TAPPER: And we're back with our Politics Lead. You are looking right now at what they call in the Senate a vote-a-rama. That's Republicans and Democrats voting over issue after issue after issue. In this one, Republicans are hoping to claw back more than $9 billion in funding that has already been appropriated at the behest of who else, President Trump.

The move brings the White House a step closer to making Elon Musk's DOGE, or Department of Government Efficiency, cuts official. This measure includes a major slash to foreign aid, including the U.S. Agency for International Development or USAID, as well as cuts to public broadcasting agencies, an amendment to try to save the money meant for public broadcasting services. NPR and PBS stations around the country was struck down in the last hour. Only one Republican senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, voted with Democrats to try to save that $1.1 billion in funding.

CNN's Brian Stelter is here to unpack what that means for viewers like you. Brian, how much do NPR, PBS and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, how much do they rely upon federal funding.

BRIAN STELTER, CNN CHIEF MEDIA ANALYST: Well, generally speaking, the smaller the local station, the more reliant it is on federal funding. Big city stations in metro areas will not go off the airwaves if they lose this federal funding, but smaller stations in rural areas, particularly in Republican strongholds and hard to reach areas, for example, in Senator Lisa Murkowski's Alaska, those stations could well go dark.

[18:20:13]

I've spoken with station executives who expect that will happen, not right away, but potentially in the months and years to come.

The public media system is complex. The money is sorted out in lots of different ways. But, ultimately, it trickles down to the local level and then back up nationally. So, some of the bigger stations will be just fine, although they will rely more heavily on viewer and listener donations in the future.

More broadly, Jake, we're seeing something break apart after decades of bipartisan consensus. When the public broadcasting was created in the 1960s, Republicans and Democrats were all on board. This was a bipartisan idea. But in recent years, that has fractured, and like so many other things, this has been nationally polarized, and that's where we are today with Republicans trying to shut down and zero out all the funding.

TAPPER: What kind of pushback from Democrats or independents or donors or viewers or listeners have these cuts received?

STELTER: Yes, there's definitely been an effort in recent months to mobilize NPR and PBS listeners and viewers getting them to call members of Congress, but, frankly, that's had little effect, right? The House very quickly pushed this along, and now it's the Senate's turn to finish this decisions process. You can see the messaging from Senator Chuck Schumer. I'll put his tweet up on screen. This is a map that Democrats have been showing all the local stations arguing that local news will suffer, emergency alerts will suffer. That's the message from Democrats.

Republicans are talking about a totally different topic. They're focused on alleged bias at NPR and PBS on the national level. Here's the Heritage Foundation saying, NPR and PBS are left wing propaganda factories. They're free to de-base themselves in that way, but they don't deserve a penny of taxpayer funding to do so.

So, as in so many different political arguments, you have two sides talking about two almost completely different topics, Republicans focusing on national alleged bias, Democrats worrying about local impacts. And soon we'll see what happens. Jake?

TAPPER: All right. CNN's Brian Stelter, thank you so much.

I want to bring in Republican Senator Roger Marshall from the State of Kansas. Senator, thanks for joining us.

So, how is this vote-a-rama moving along? Could you be on track when it comes to final passage of the rescissions, these DOGE cuts, for another vote that's 50-50 and Vice President Vance breaks the tie? SEN. ROGER MARSHALL (R-KS): Well, it's moving slowly and painfully, as these always do. I think it's going to be a late, late night. And, yes, I expect Vice President Vance to make an appearance tonight.

TAPPER: The cuts outlined in the package were handed down to the Senate. Not usually how this process works. I think the last time this happened may have been during the Clinton administration. Your colleague, Senator Murkowski, pointed that out on the Senate floor last night ahead of the procedural vote to begin. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. LISA MURKOWSKI (R-AK): We are lawmakers, we should be legislating. What we are getting now is a direction from the White House and being told this is the priority we want you to execute on it. We'll be back with you with another round. I don't accept that. I'm going to be voting no.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Even if you agree with the substance of the cuts, do you have any concerns here about the methodology, about the Senate, just kind of taking orders from the White House when it comes to what you guys are supposed to be doing, appropriating, legislating?

MARSHALL: Look, I think the biggest problem that this country faces is our $37 trillion national debt that we're spending a trillion dollars a year on interest. If you think about where these cuts are coming from, USAID, our own government accounting, our own, IEG inspector general have said, look, that USAID is at systemic risk, that there's significant fraud, waste and abuse going on, that they don't really have an audit system. So we have identified with Congressional help and Congressional review significant waste and fraud.

Think about USAID. Just recently, a $500 million fraud scheme of bribes here in this country, overseeing those programs, in New Guinea, a hundred million dollars embezzlement issue, $50 million of waste on medical equipment in Zambia. So, the fraud, the waste, the abuse is out there. We need to do something, and this is some, I would say, low hanging fruit. I wish we had a bigger rescission package.

TAPPER: But isn't the ten-year projection for debt something like another $20 trillion even with these cuts. The idea that this is the solution way overstated that the real money is in Medicare, in the Pentagon budget, Social Security, places that it's much more politically difficult to really make the kind of spending cuts or tax increases that would seriously address the $37 trillion debt?

MARSHALL: Yes. Well, certainly Congress has a spending problem and we need to address that.

[18:25:00]

But I think that we want to be frugal with our money, that I was taught to be frugal, to be concerned with, it's other people's money, which is to take the very best care of it that I can.

I don't care how much debt we're in, or even if we had a surplus. I don't want to see waste and fraud like we've been seeing through USAID. I do think that both parties need to do a better job of working towards a balanced budget. Again, our national debt, the biggest problem our country faces long-term.

TAPPER: Also on the table's about $1 billion of funding for public broadcasting, NPR stations, PBS stations around the country. A lot of play people in rural areas there where there really isn't any news other than these stations are expected to be hit hard. This is a story in USA Today from your state about one such station, Smokey Hills, PBS broadcast to about 1.2 million Kansans across, 71 counties, and the general manager of the station says they use the federal funding, not for any national program, but to operate transmitters, cover salaries, create local programming in Kansas, like showing high school wrestling.

These are the same rural parts of your state that also have Kansans without access to broadband, Kansans who are struggling seriously with poverty. I'm wondering, are you concerned about that? Are you going to work with the state to fill any gaps that these cuts would leave when it comes to Kansas Public Broadcasting?

MARSHALL: Look, if there are any gaps, I think you're way overstating them. I know exactly where that radio station is. I can think of a dozen radio stations that are overlapping with that. In today's world, I haven't met a person lately that didn't have a phone and access to news and weather.

Look, in Kansas, it's not a matter of if, but when a tornado's going to hit your property. So, you know when the weather's coming and you're going to turn on your radio, your local -- you want a local television station probably with radar. And as far as an emergency's going off in the middle of the night, most of us in those areas have a special weather alert system that's going to wake us up as well.

So, I think that's way overstated. Look, if those stations want to stay open and they can make it, I wish them the very, very best. But, again, in the backdrop of a country that's taking in $5 trillion, but spending $7 trillion a year, I think that this is one of the niceties we can do without.

TAPPER: Yes. I mean, Smokey Hills PBS is a television station, not a radio station. But Republican Senator Roger Marshall of Kansas, thank you so much. I appreciate your time.

MARSHALL: You bet. Thank you.

TAPPER: Giving credit where it's due, just hours ago, President Trump's notable step towards fighting America's fentanyl crisis. Plus, one city's battle after 27 drug overdoses hit that city in a single day. The mayor's going to join us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:30:00]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: And this is not an autopen, right? That's for sure. That's great. Thank you very much.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Just a few hours ago, a major step towards combating America's fentanyl crisis, this one with bipartisan support, families by the president's side who have lost loved ones in the fentanyl crisis. President Trump today signed the Halt Fentanyl Act. Under this now law, all fentanyl-related substances, including copycat versions, go on a list of the most dangerous drugs. Anyone who possesses, imports, distributes or manufactures these substances is now subject to criminal prosecution at the same level as other schedule one drugs such as heroin or ecstasy.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: We'll be getting the drug dealers, pushers and peddlers off our street, and we will not rest until we have ended the drug overdose epidemic.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: This legislation made it to Trump with overwhelming support from Republicans and Democrats in the House and the Senate. Today, we're calling the fentanyl and opioid crisis, the Buried Lead because it falls under stories that we feel at The Lead here do deserve more attention than they're getting.

The issue caught our attention most recently, in a big way. Last week when the city of Baltimore reported 27 people were hospitalized in a mass drug overdose event last Thursday, 27 people, one city, one day. The city's mayor is with me, Brandon Scott. Mayor Scott, thanks for joining us.

So, emergency teams learned of this widespread event after responding to just one call last Thursday morning. Tell us more about what happened.

MAYOR BRANDON SCOTT (D-BALTIMORE, MD): Well, listen, thank you Jake, for having me. This was a tragic incident and we are grateful and most importantly, Jake, that there were no fatalities. It's important for us to understand in this incident a few things. First, Baltimore and especially the communities like Penn North, where this happened, have faced the brunt of the opioid epidemic for decades. And second, the investments that we have been making to provide care and resources and bring community partners to the table are the reason why we're able to respond so quickly.

We know we are investigating obviously with throughout police department. They will lead that investigation into who put those drugs out and we will find those people and we will remove them via law enforcement from our community. But, secondly, we're going to continue to support that community. Because when you talk about overdose and opioids in Baltimore, it's very personal for me, having grown up here and seen and seeing people and lost people through this crisis myself.

TAPPER: So, your city's longheaded an opioid problem. In 2023 alone, Baltimore's Health Department reports that 921 people were lost to fentanyl-related deaths. That's tragic. What do you think is going on? And, obviously, this hits impoverished areas of the country whether, Appalachia or Baltimore. Tell us how you see this problem.

SCOTT: Well, I think that, listen, we have to -- if we're talking truthfully about the overdose and drug addiction problem in this country, we have to look back at the years of failed policy. We have to look at the years where we know that drugs were pushed into these communities and the ways that we looked at addiction.

[18:35:00]

I want to be very clear about this, Jake. If you are someone that is peddling drugs, a drug dealer doing harm, literally giving people things that you know will kill them, you need to be removed from that community and put in jail, full stop. But we also have to grow and evolve in our understanding of how to deal with addiction.

Growing up in the 90s and 2000s, we know that this country, we were treating people with that addiction illness, and that's what it is, an illness, as inherently criminal, and that was the wrong way to do that. That's why we're investing in harm reduction to help alongside our police investigation, to make sure that we're getting people the help that they need to help us continue to reduce overdoses in Baltimore.

I want to be very clear about those numbers. In 2023, we had 1,043 overdose deaths, and then we went down to 777 in 2024. That's a 25 percent reduction, and we have a long way to go. And when you do that work of investing in the communities the way that we have, and we also know, Jake, very clearly that big pharma played a role in. We have went out and sued big pharma and won over $400 million in restitution for the pills and things that were pushed into these communities that led to this crisis to just grow and blow up, not just in Baltimore, but all over the country.

TAPPER: Do you know where the fentanyl comes from when you work with DEA or other partners? I mean, is it coming from China? Is it coming from labs in Mexico? Do you know?

SCOTT: We're going to track this one down, but we know we've had it in the years that since fentanyl has really shown up and blown on the scene, we've had it come from all kind of places. And I think that's why we have to continue to work with our federal law enforcement partners and our local partners to make sure that we're doing our job here at the local level, that also we're working with our federal partners to close down how these dangerous substances are making it into our communities in the first place.

TAPPER: All right. Mayor Brandon Scott of Baltimore, good to see us, sir, thanks for joining us. As of today, a different mayor, New York City Mayor Eric Adams is facing a fifth lawsuit alleging corruption at the New York Police Department. This time why a former police commissioner is accusing him of running NYPD as a criminal enterprise.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:40:00]

TAPPER: In our Law and Justice Lead, New York City Mayor Eric Adams is facing a brand new lawsuit, the fifth one in two weeks, alleging that the NYPD he runs is corrupt. This latest lawsuit is filed by a former NYPD commissioner and it accuses Adams of running the NYPD in city hall as a, quote, criminal enterprise.

CNN's Gloria Pazmino is tracking this for us. Gloria, how is Mayor Adams reacting to all these corruption allegations amid his reelection campaign for mayor?

GLORIA PAZMINO, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Jake, it certainly is complicating what the mayor wants to be talking about right now, which is that murders and shootings here in New York City are way down, but instead, he's having to focus on responding to these allegations.

Now, City Hall told me earlier today that they believe they will respond to this in court, and that the allegations will ultimately be dismissed. Here's what this latest lawsuit alleges. This was filed by Thomas Donlon, the former interim police commissioner of the NYPD, and he says that Adams and top NYPD officials were essentially engaging in corruption, falsifying paperwork, promoting officers that did not -- that were not qualified to be promoted and that all of this was in violation of many of the department's disciplinary process.

Now, he also says that when he tried to bring all of this to the attention of the mayor, the mayor essentially ignored him. The lawsuit says in part, quote. Defendant Adams took no action in response. Instead, he condoned the misconduct and allowed the NYPD to function as a criminal enterprise.

Now, I should mention that Donlon had his own federal investigation while he was at the helm of the police department. You might remember that federal agents search his home at one point. He was eventually replaced by Jessica Tisch, who continues to be at the helm of the department.

Here's what City Hall had to say in response to this lawsuit filed today, as you said, the fifth in the span of just two weeks. They said, quote, these are baseless accusations from a disgruntled former employee who, when given the opportunity to lead the greatest police department in the world, proved himself to be ineffective. His suit is nothing more than an attempt to seek compensation at the taxpayer's expense after Mr. Donlon was rightfully removed from the role of interim police commissioner.

Now, Jake, I think what's important to highlight here is that all of this is coming to light just a day before Eric Adams is expected to get the endorsement from many of the law enforcement unions here in New York City. As you said, he is running for reelection as an independent.

Notably, the union that represents many of the city's rank and file officers will not be at that endorsement tomorrow, but, again, Eric Adams trying to keep the focus on the fact that the city is doing well when it comes to violence shootings and murders, but instead having to respond to these allegations of corruption. Jake?

TAPPER: All right. Gloria Pazmino, thanks so much.

A small business that's been around since 1993, likely knows a thing or two about changes in the U.S. economy, we're going to talk to its owners to talk about how they're dealing with 2025 and the tariffs and the instability. Our Business Leader series is next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:48:11]

JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: Brand new today, President Trump is denying reports that he's likely to fire the chairman of the Federal Reserve, Jerome Powell, anytime soon. This is just one day after new data showed the tariff driven inflation that Powell warned about might be starting to rear its head, which brings us to our "Business Leaders" series, where we talk to small business owners from coast to coast to see what the impact of the tariffs has been on their businesses.

Gambert Shirts has been manufacturing custom men's shirts and blouses in Newark, New Jersey, since 1933. 1933, and owner Mitch Gambert joins us now.

Mitch, how have the tariffs impacted the way that you source materials to make your shirts?

MITCH GAMBERT, OWNER AND CEO, GAMBERT SHIRTS: Well, first, Jake. Thanks for having me on.

The tariffs for the last three months, four months have right now have caused a lot of confusion to be perfectly honest, it's been hard to kind of settle on pricing to understand where we need to be with things. So, it's been kind of a little bit of a wait and see type of thing. We haven't been raising prices. Weve just sort of been eating what's going on at the moment until we really know where things land. So, it's caused a little bit of confusion for us.

TAPPER: Do most of the fabrics and materials come from abroad?

GAMBERT: Unfortunately, all of our trims and fabrics are produced offshore, primarily Europe and Asia. There's no domestic weaving, not in -- not in the scope of what we need here. So, everything we bring in is, in fact, imported except for our corrugated boxes are the only things that that we don't -- that we don't import.

TAPPER: So, there are no domestic alternatives for the kind of weaving that that -- and the kind of materials that you seek, there's no other option for you?

[18:50:06]

GAMBERT: Not in the scope of what we offer in our -- in our, our swatch line, which is what we present to our dealer base. There's about, on average, there's about 1,000 fabrics or so. At the height of our business, we're up to 2,500 skews. So that's a huge swath of numbers. And domestically here, most of the fabric that is produced here is for military or uniform quality. So that the men's we do tend to sell to a higher end consumer. So, the more luxury market is it's completely -- it's just nonexistent here in the states.

TAPPER: So, you've been -- I know a lot of small businesses have margins pretty small between 5 and 10 percent. And you said you've been eating the costs, but you obviously you can't do that forever. Are you going to have to raise your prices if things continue as they are?

GAMBERT: Well, we certainly are going to have to -- we've been making some changes, you know, raising prices will certainly happen. It's just kind of waiting to know where we need to raise them to.

I, you know, I can't do four different price increases over a six- month period because we're dealing with, you know, 400 retail sellers that that want to set their prices per season. So, you can't really change prices mid-season. So yes, ultimately, we will be forced to raise the prices.

TAPPER: If you could talk to President Trump or your lawmakers about this, what would you want them to understand?

GAMBERT: Well, the tariffs are important. I actually support the tariffs on a finished good product, not on the raw materials. So there needs to be a little bit of -- a little bit of a different approach to them. In my opinion. If they're trying to protect American manufacturers, they've got to help us be able to continue to bring in the materials we need to produce the products we make.

I'm all for increasing tariffs on finished goods. It's definitely not a fair playing field. We know that they only tariff the goods part of the invoice not the consulting services or the intangibles. So, there's a lot of unfair play there.

You know, the Big, Beautiful Bill package that they have with, you know, right off brand new factory or a build out on your factory. Thats great if there's cash flow. But you got to remember, we're coming off of the effects of COVID.

TAPPER: Yeah.

GAMBERT: A really disrupted supply chain. And, you know, war in Europe. So, these things are still affecting us. And banks aren't lending money. The government's not lending any money. And the only money out there is venture capitalists. And it's exorbitant rates.

TAPPER: Gambert Shirts, based in Newark, New Jersey. Mitch Gambert, thank you so much, sir. Appreciate it.

GAMBERT: Thank you very much.

TAPPER: Right now in Los Angeles, police are investigating the tragic murders of an American idol music supervisor. And her husband. We'll bring you the latest in that case, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:57:22]

TAPPER: Tonight, "American Idol" producers are mourning the loss of one of their own. A longtime music supervisor on the show and her husband were found dead in their Los Angeles home Monday in an apparent double homicide.

CNN's Josh Campbell has the details.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JOSH CAMPBELL, CNN SECURITY CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): A music supervisor on "American Idol" and her husband brutally slain in their suburban Los Angeles home.

The LAPD believes the attack was random, but homicide detectives are still investigating.

LT. GUY GOLAN, LOS ANGELES POLICE: A violent struggle ensued between them and the suspect, who was already inside their home.

CAMPBELL: Police were called to the home of Robin Kaye and husband Thomas DeLuca Monday after a friend requested a welfare check. Officers responded, breached a. Window and found their bodies riddled with gunshot wounds.

The gruesome discovery was made just days after police were called to the residence, following reports of a possible intruder.

AMEE FAGGEN, NEIGHBOR: My renter called 911 on Thursday because she saw somebody hopping the fence, and I have no idea if that was related or not. They came and left. The helicopters and police came.

CAMPBELL: Police now say the call was related and officers conducted an investigation.

GOLAN: They were unable to make entry onto the property due to it being highly fortified. However, they did do a flyover with the airship. There were no signs of forced entry or trouble at that time. They cleared from scene.

CAMPBELL: Police said Tuesday. The suspect, identified as 22-year-old Raymond Boodarian, burglarized the couple's home while they were away. Surveillance video showed the suspect in the home for about a half hour before Kaye and DeLuca returned, according to investigators. Police have not yet established any connection between Boodarian and the couple. ERIC PARTOVICH, NEIGHBOR: It just shows you, no matter how much

protection security you have here, if they want to get in, they're going to get in.

CAMPBELL: Kaye worked as a music supervisor since the '90s, most notably on "American Idol" for more than a decade.

"We are devastated to hear of Robin and her dear husband Tom's passing," the show said in a statement. "Robin has been a cornerstone of the Idol family since 2009, and was truly loved and respected by all who came in contact with her."

"American Idol" fans and neighbors are still in shock.

TIM PINGEL, NEIGHBOR: It's kind of upsetting, actually. So it happened that day. That's my reaction. I didn't. You're just giving me that news. Wow.

I talked to the police that day, and I kind of wondered why they left so fast. And I left thinking, okay, maybe it's not a big deal. But it apparently it was.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

CAMPBELL: Now, Jake, were learning that the attorney for the suspect hasn't been assigned yet, but he was arrested and charged last year for battery, as well as intending to commit a crime with the intent of terrorism. Those charges were later dismissed. Jake, a judge finding he wasn't mentally fit to stand trial.

TAPPER: Josh Campbell, what a shocking story. Thanks.

"ERIN BURNETT OUTFRONT" starts right now. I'll see you tomorrow.