Return to Transcripts main page
The Lead with Jake Tapper
President Trump Distracting, Diverting Attention From The Epstein Files; Rep. Ro Khanna Pushes To Release All Epstein Files; Tulsi Gabbard Accuse Obama Administration Treasonous Conspiracy; Rep. Jason Crow (D-CO), Is Interviewed About Denied Entry Into An Immigration Detention Facility; Soon: Sentence For Former Police Officer Convicted In Federal Case Stemming From Breonna Taylor Killing; "The Cosby Show" Actor Malcolm-Jamal Warner Dead At 54. Aired 5-6p ET
Aired July 21, 2025 - 17:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[17:00:00]
KASIE HUNT, CNN POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT & HOST: The Coldplay frontman Chris Martin, giving concertgoers plenty of notice they might appear on the jumbotron after this moment I'm sure you've seen it from last week. Yup, this was the now former CEO of Astronomer and the tech company's head of HR caught snuggling, but not just snuggling, and diving out of the way, completely hiding. The CEO has since resigned. And I'm sure you've seen one of the many memes poking fun at the viral moment.
This one though, got to love it. Friday's Phillies game, the Phillie Phanatic caught cozying up to another mascot during the kiss cam. Jake Tapper is standing by for "The Lead." I mean, at least, Jake, the Phillie Phanatic was not cozying up with, you know, my Oriole Bird or something like that.
JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: It should have been with Mrs. Met to be honest. That would have made it --
HUNT: That would have been, yes. Just kiss --
TAPPER: But I mean, I -- obviously props to the Phillies for that gag. It was very funny. Thanks Kasie. We'll see you back in "The Arena" tomorrow.
HUNT: All right. See you soon.
TAPPER: Trump has a lot to say about a range of topics except for one. "The Lead" starts right now. Showing fake clips of President Obama in handcuffs, calling for the Washington Commanders to go back to the Redskins or else. Is Operation Change the Subject underway from the President of the United States? It sure feels like it as President Trump drums up new controversies, but avoids discussing his own connections to pedophile, sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein and the scandal around it.
Plus, a pilot's apology. Hear him describe steering a passenger plane away from a B-52 bomber as those on board share details of the mid-air scare.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNKNOWN: It was such a hard U-turn to where we were going kind of straight and then went pretty sideways.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
TAPPER: And what we're learning now about the shocking drowning death of Cosby Show actor Malcolm Jamal Warner while on vacation in Costa Rica.
Welcome to "The Lead." I'm Jake Tapper. We start with our "Politics Lead" in what might be called the art of the distraction. Six months into his second term, two weeks after the Justice Department announced there was no Jeffrey Epstein client list and nothing to see here, he died by suicide, creating an uproar, especially among members of the President's MAGA base.
Trump's Justice Department says it is, quote, "fully committed to transparency," unquote. Fully committed to transparency, except the transparency they're committing to deals with the Hillary Clinton e- mail investigation. They are committing to transparency with Hillary Clinton's e-mails. You heard me right.
Today U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi said she's honoring Republican Senator Chuck Grassley's request to release more information on the FBI's handling of the Clinton case. A distraction, perhaps, because the President's base has not moved on from the Epstein drama despite these comments today from the White House press secretary.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: The president is the creator and the leader of the Make America Great Again movement. It's his baby that he made and he knows what his supporters want. It's transparency and he has given them that on all accounts. No question is off limits here at this White House.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
TAPPER: This after President Trump spent the weekend on Truth Social with dozens of posts unrelated to Jeffrey Epstein. We should note even today in July 2025 it is still shocking that a sitting president of the United States continues to fill his days by trolling with content that is shocking and alienating and not at all connected to his job. Most of the posts attacking Democrats with wild accusations, including this meme styled after the Brady Bunch showing eight members of the Obama administration in prison attire and it says the Shady Bunch.
He also reposted AI generated video of President Obama getting arrested in the Oval Office. Trump's timeline also filled with clips from right wing outlets, praising those outlets coverage of Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard's latest report and criminal referrals to the Justice Department in which she accused Obama administration officials of committing treasonous acts when the spy agencies warrant of a Russian attempt to influence the 2016 election. We're going to have more on that later in the show.
In 2013, then-citizen Trump said that President Obama, quote, "Should not be telling the Washington Redskins to change their name. Our country has far bigger problems. Focus on them, not nonsense," unquote. And here we are, 2025, President Trump is now keenly focused on that nonsense. He is in fact requesting two professional sports teams, including the Washington Commanders and the Cleveland Guardians, change their names back, adding on Sunday, when it comes to the Commanders, he quote, "may put a restriction on them if they don't change the name back," and exhorting the Cleveland Guardians, formerly the Indians, to "Make Indians Great Again, MIGA."
He also posted this very random, uncaptioned three-minute video of people doing various stunts, despite what may seem like obvious efforts to change the subject. President Trump continues to keep the Epstein story front and center, whether or not he realizes it.
[17:05:00]
Today, the White House removed the "Wall Street Journal" from the press pool covering President Trump's upcoming trip to Scotland. That's because President Trump is suing the "Wall Street Journal's" publisher for $10 billion for publishing a purported 2003 birthday letter to Epstein's story. Trump denied writing that letter.
It's a case that if it goes to trial, it will mean many, many more news stories about Trump and Epstein in the days ahead, not to mention discovery. This is also the president's decision to seek to unseal grand jury testimony from Epstein's prosecution, which may not produce anything new for a long, long time, if at all. We're still waiting to hear whether a New York judge will consider the case after the Justice Department's late Friday filing.
Meanwhile, on Capitol Hill, some House Republicans have signed on to a bipartisan bill introduced by Republicans Thomas Massie of Kentucky and Democrat Ro Khanna of California to force Trump to release all federal records related to Epstein. The latest sponsor, MAGA firebrand Congresswoman Nancy Mace of South Carolina. Sources tell CNN House Speaker Mike Johnson does not plan on putting any such legislation on the House floor before the long August recess, which gives Trump some breathing room to continue his quest to shift the narrative.
Our panel joins us now. Thanks so much for being here everybody. Susan, let's start with you. Your column in "USA Today" is titled, "Trump's on a Roll, Why Isn't He Smiling? Answer Jeffrey Epstein." And you point out this Epstein story and his handling of it are overshadowing so many of his successes. The Build Back Better Act and -- not Build Back Better. I'm sorry. One Big Beautiful Bill and I got my -- I get my acronyms wrong. It used to be BBB.
SUSAN PAGE, WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF, USA TODAY: Yeah.
TAPPER: Then it became OBB.
MIKE DUBKE, FORMER TRUMP WHITE HOUSE COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR: Yes. This is OBB. TAPPER: Yeah, yeah. I'm sorry. The reset, the passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.
PAGE: Can you (inaudible).
TAPPER: No, it doesn't work like that. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act and other things that he succeeded at the rescission is in which he took away money for public television, public radio and foreign aid. Why do you think he is letting this happen?
PAGE: He's not letting it happen. It is happening and it's happening because of a muscle that he is the one who exercised it, which is the muscle of conspiracy theories that leaves -- and suspicion of the establishment to tell you the truth, which leaves him unable to convince his own supporters that there is nothing to see here.
They've been told for years by big MAGA voices that there was a lot to see with Jeffrey Epstein, a client list, powerful people being protected. And his followers and others are not quite ready to just take his word that that's not true.
TAPPER: And Elliot, as a former Justice Department employee, I was wondering what you thought of this new CBS/YouGov poll which shows 83 percent of polled Republicans said the Justice Department should release all the information it has on Epstein. That's far beyond the grand jury testimony, which if it released, it be very small slice of the pie. But there's no way it's all going to be released right?
ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: There's no way it's all going be released and there's no way that it will be satisfying to just about anybody. Let's be clear and reset what's actually in grand jury materials. It's usually just enough to secure an indictment and they were charged with trafficking -- sex trafficking or whatever else.
TAPPER: But this is just the two people, Epstein and Maxwell.
WILLIAMS: Sure. But even still, it's not that much information in terms of what people think they're getting. They think they will be getting a client list. They would think they would be getting all smoking guns of all sorts of who was piling around with Jeffrey Epstein. And that's simply not going to be in the grand jury records.
Now, again, these photographs or other notes or FBI files, certainly those could be released, but that would be a gross deviation from Justice Department practice. You would be revealing information about people who have been charged with crimes. You might be revealing information about victims, survivors of sexual assault, all these things is just a bad idea. So, one, people ae going to be disappointed and two, it just shouldn't happen.
TAPPER: Wait, I mean, obviously they should redact the names of the survivors. I don't think anybody disputes that.
WILLIAMS: But they're very, very precious few circumstances in which the Justice Department would release the entire file --
TAPPER: Right.
WILLIAMS: -- on any investigative battle --
TAPPER: Right.
WILLIAMS: -- let alone this one.
TAPPER: But it would give a lot of names of people that weren't charged with anything.
WILLIAMS: And that's --
TAPPER: That's the whole point of it, really.
WILLIAMS: It is, but that's anathema to sort of justice in a civil society. You don't release the names of people who've been investigated but not charged with crimes, even if they're rotten people who might have done bad things.
TAPPER: And obviously the victims and the survivors are the most important part of this, but there is the politics of this, of course. Democrat from California, Ro Khanna, who we just mentioned, he told "Playbook," quote, "He's now advising Democrats to hammer the issue ahead of the midterms by tying it to a broader critique of the Trump administration. Whose side are you on? Are you voting to protect rich and powerful men? Are you standing with America's children and the people?"
Speaker Johnson says, now, no matter what happens with this discharge petition, which means 218 members of Congress sign a petition and they force something onto the floor for a vote. Johnson says he's going to put it out -- put it off until after the August recess. Is that smart, you think?
[17:10:03]
DUBKE: It is going to be put off for after the August recess, regardless with the discharge petition, just because of the timing of everything.
TAPPER: Yeah.
TAPPER: So whether he has the vote now and it comes back up in September, they have the vote in September and it comes back up in October. I'm not sure that that really matters. In fact, that kind of drags it out even further. I -- you know, it's kind of like ripping off a Band-Aid. Let's go for it. Let's take it off.
Look, with Ro Khanna, he's doing what's good in politics, which is taking your opponent's strength and turning it against them. When you see numbers like 83, 87, I've seen other numbers in the 90s when you factor in independence, of Americans who want this information out there, that is what's facing the White House and what they're staring down. That's why he doesn't have the ability to turn his base against this, because it's almost universal that people want this information out. And what has been striking to me has been the difficulty of this White
House getting beyond this point of it. "The Wall Street Journal" gave him a gift the other day.
TAPPER: You didn't like that story.
DUBKE: No, I didn't like that story for a whole host of --
TAPPER: The letter that Trump did for the Epstein birthday, he denies doing it.
DUBKE: But the reason I didn't like it is because I thought a journalist who's going to accuse somebody of that in the press better have that evidence to show the individual. And as I understand it, the "Wall Street Journal" couldn't even show that the drawing or the note that they were reporting on it. To me, you know, I thought the "Wall Street Journal" jumped the gun, but it was a gift to the White House to be able to talk about something else and blame the media.
TAPPER: Sure and a unified MAGA for at least one minute --
DUBKE: It did for a day.
TAPPER: Yeah, for a day. The White House is now barring the "Wall Street Journal" from the press pool, the rotating group of reporters from this upcoming presidential trip, not because this individual "Wall Street Journal" reporter did anything wrong or wrote that story that Mike doesn't like. Because this reporter works for the "Wall Street Journal."
PAGE: Yeah. One of America's leading newspapers that happens to be owned by his former pal, his pal, maybe former pal, Rupert Murdoch. You know, this is like we're no longer shocked by things we used to find shocking. Before Trump, would have been shocking to exclude a "Wall Street Journal" reporter or another mainstream news reporter from a pool because they didn't like some negative story that was written about them.
So this is -- in this world of shocking things, it no longer ranks right at the top, but it is a change from how we have expected presidents to deal with the press corps that covers them.
TAPPER: Yeah. Well, I mean, I remember when I was -- I stood up for Fox when I was in the White House press pool --
PAGE: Yes, right.
TAPPER: -- back in 2000 whatever during the first Obama years. It doesn't seem like they have that kind of collegiality. I mean, it'd be great if the Fox people said we're not going to cover you unless you, you know, abide by precedent with the "Wall Street Journal." I guess it's not going to happen. Anyway, thanks everyone for being here.
President Trump also used Truth Social to rant about his administration's case in court today against Harvard University. He called the school anti-Semitic, anti-Christian, anti-America. The price the American public is taking as Trump keeps up this fight with this elite university.
Plus, right now in Louisville, Kentucky, we're waiting to learn the prison sentence for a former police officer convicted in the 2020 shooting death of Breonna Taylor. We're going to bring you that when it happens. We're back in a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[17:15:00]
TAPPER: In our "Law and Justice Lead" today, a pivotal moment in the fight between higher education and the Trump administration. Today Harvard University took the Trump administration to court in its battle to restore more than $2 billion in federal funding to the university. The administration previously froze Harvard's money, saying it failed to address anti-Semitism on campus following the October 7th attacks.
Joining us to discuss William Jacobson, a law professor at Cornell University and a Harvard Law School graduate. Professor Jacobson, the Trump administration, as you know, terminated $2.4 billion in federal funding for Harvard, impacting more than 950 ongoing research projects towards things such as cancer prevention, Parkinson's research.
Today, the judge appeared to be favorable towards Harvard, and he questioned what the relationship between cutting funding for cancer research and ending anti-Semitism on campus was. Do you think Harvard has a legitimate argument here?
WILLIAM JACOBSON, CORNELL UNIVERSITY LAW PROFESSOR: Well, they've got a legitimate argument. I just don't know if it's going to prevail. Trump administration is arguing that in the fine print of the contracts with the grants, that they have the right to terminate contracts when they no longer align with administration priorities. So the question's going to be, do they have that legal right to do it?
So, yes, Harvard has arguments. They can say them with a straight face. But I don't know if they're ultimately going to prevail. Judge seems to be leaning that way from all the reports that I've seen that she is basically saying this is some sort of pretext. You're not really doing that. You're just punishing them. Violation of First Amendment sort of argument.
TAPPER: Do you think that Harvard sacrificed its independence by accepting the federal grants in the first place?
JACOBSON: Well, they certainly did, and that's what a lot of schools don't seem to want to accept, that when you take federal money, it comes with strings attached. One of those strings is you have to comply with the civil rights laws, and if you don't, you can lose your funding. But also, there's contracts that give you the grant, and you have to comply with the terms of the contracts.
Again, the Trump administration is claiming that the language in the contracts, that maybe the schools didn't read that carefully, gives them the right to terminate it. So yes, you give up your independence when you take federal money. Everybody knows that. Harvard's coming to grips with that.
TAPPER: Even if Harvard succeeds in this case, and that's a big if, because obviously I'm sure it will be appealed if Harvard does win this first round, could this sacrifice future federal funding, do you think?
JACOBSON: Yes, that's something that's not really talked about enough, is that all of these fights are taking place over current funding, money and contracts and grants that have already been given.
[17:20:02]
And I think there's a certain sympathetic aspect that certainly I feel for universities, where you take money, you build up overhead, you build up infrastructure, and then the government wants to take it away. But that's very different from future funding.
And I think Harvard's of the world, the Cornell's and the Columbia's and all the other places, they may win the battle over a particular brand. But there's no judge that's going to be able to order the Trump administration to give new funding. And these schools may find when the current funding runs out, even if they manage to keep it, that they're not going to get more funding. And Trump has already announced, Trump administration already announced no new funding for these schools. So they've got to weigh that risk against a possible short-term winning court.
TAPPER: President Trump's attacking the federal judge on Truth Social saying, quote, "The Harvard case was just tried in Massachusetts before an Obama appointed judge. She is a total disaster which I say even before hearing her ruling when she rules against us, we will immediately appeal and win," unquote. Ultimately, this is going to up in front of the U.S. Supreme Court don't you think?
JACOBSON: Well, it probably will, depends what the basis for the judge's decision is. This is the same judge, and I don't mean to disparage her, it's just an interesting historical note. This is the same judge who ruled in favor of Harvard in the affirmative action case and eventually was reversed by the Supreme Court.
So I think by all press accounts of people who've been in the courtroom, she seems to be leaning their way. But I think this is not necessarily a win for Harvard, and it might end up in the Supreme Court as to the terms and conditions under which an administration can pull funding.
TAPPER: Interesting. Professor William Jacobson of Cornell, thanks so much. it. Always good having you.
JACOBSON: Thank you.
TAPPER: Coming up next, the Department of Homeland Security has released a new video in the case of a border agent, off duty, shot in New York with the agency saying about what happened and the man accused of shooting that agent.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[17:25:00]
TAPPER: In our "Law and Justice Lead," as the Justice Department was asking a judge about releasing grand jury transcripts on Jeffrey Epstein and President Trump was filing his lawsuit against the "Wall Street Journal" for a story about Trump and Jeffrey Epstein, the director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard was releasing a report of her own on the 2016 election.
Gabbard claiming that right after Trump won the 2016 election, the Obama administration's national security team, quote, "manufactured and politicized intelligence," unquote. That, she says, laid the groundwork for the FBI's Russia investigation. Gabbard alleges a, quote, "treasonous conspiracy at the highest levels of government."
Her assessment appears to conflate conclusions by the Senate Intelligence Committee that Russia interfered in the 2016 election through various information operations, conclusions by the intelligence community in general, and simultaneous assessments by the intelligence community that concluded the Russians did not hack into any votes or change the outcome of the election.
In other words, there is the truth that Russia interfered but there is no evidence at all that Russia hacked into the election. Let's bring in Democratic Congressman Jason Crow. He's on the House Intelligence Committee. Congressman, this bipartisan senate report that I alluded to also concluded the Russia did interfere in the 2016 election. Russia wanted Trump from to win, but Gabbard said in her report referring to the Obama administration, quote, "Their goal was to usurp President Trump and subvert the will of the American people." What's your reaction to the report?
REP. JASON CROW (D-CO): Well, listen, what's actually going on here is pretty clear. You have Tulsi Gabbard, who's been out of favor with President Trump since the intelligence agency issued battle damage assessments of the Iran strike that were not consistent with what Donald Trump was saying. So she's been in hot water and been trying to get back into favor.
And then you have a president -- and President Trump who wants people to talk about anything, anything other than the Epstein investigation, which he is very, very clearly worried about, the release of the Epstein files. So what's happening is Tulsi Gabbard's trying to work his way back into the good graces of Donald Trump by fabricating this conspiracy theory. They try to placate Donald Trump. That's what this is all about.
TAPPER: I should note that I have reached out to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and made it clear that we'd love to have Director Gabbard on the show to talk about this conclusion that she reached. The Senate Intelligence Committee as you know, congressman, spent years investigating all this. At the end, they also pinned the blame on Russia, a bipartisan conclusion led by Republicans in the majority on the committee. The chairman, Marco Rubio is now Trump's Secretary of State. If Gabbard's claims and her prosecutorial referrals have any truth, why are we hearing about it now more than eight years after the fact, instead of during the first Trump administration?
CROW: Yeah, this goes back to what's actually going on here. As you pointed out, a full and thorough bipartisan investigation that occurred during the first Trump administration by Donald Trump's Secretary of State, National Security Advisor, now Marco Rubio. And they had a whole administration to address this, and they did, actually, and the findings are pretty clear and pretty bipartisan.
This is simply a distraction. They don't want people talking about the release of the Epstein files because Donald Trump is very, very worried about it. That is clear, which of course begs the question, why is he so worried about it? It makes me want to know, makes most Americans want to know. In fact, the overwhelming amount of Americans do want to actually know what's in those files. So they're trying to distract. But this is not without major risk. You know, listen, I was sent to war. in Iraq because of fabricated intelligence.
I was sent to war as were many Americans. We spent $3 trillion, 20 years fighting wars that started based on fabricated intelligence, and this can end very poorly. So anytime you politicize an intelligence infrastructure like Donald Trump and Tulsi Gabbard are doing now, there are very real consequences to it.
[17:30:21]
TAPPER: I want to ask you about your attempt yesterday to visit an immigration detention facility in Colorado, which you represent in the House. ICE denied your entry, tell us more about that.
CROW: Yes, so I attempted to conduct an unannounced congressional oversight visit to the detention center in my district, which is something that is specifically allowed under federal law. And the reason I know that is because I actually helped pass this law, because the last time I was denied entry to this facility was six years ago under the first Trump administration. And I said, this is crazy, a member of Congress should have access to a federal facility and her or his district.
So we passed a law that specifically says members of Congress have immediate access to these facilities without any notice having to be provided. The administration unlawfully denied me yesterday, which of course begs yet another question. Why does this -- why does this administration desperately want to impede congressional oversight? What are they hiding? We know there's a lot of abuses. We know there's a lot of violations of due process. We know they don't want people to know what's going on in these facilities.
TAPPER: What do you make the argument that your visit was unannounced, as you note, and also on a Sunday?
CROW: Well, that's the whole point, actually. The whole point of these unannounced visits and why we actually crafted the law the way that we did was because we learned over the last six years that when you announce visits, they dress it up, they clean it up. There's the whole dog and pony show. You get a very different look.
And a member of Congress says, hey, next week we're coming to visit you all. You get a very different look to what's going on. And that happens at military bases, that happens at VA hospitals, that happens at ICE immigration facilities. It just happens, right? So we actually crafted a law that said, nope, oversight is really important here. We're going to actually carve out a legal excerpt that says unannounced visits under law. That's why we did it.
And of course, that seems to be why this administration also wants to violate the law by not allowing us to do that because they don't want us to see what's going on.
TAPPER: Democratic Congressman Jason Crow of Colorado, thanks so much. Appreciate it.
Also in our Law and Justice Lead, any moment former Louisville, Kentucky, police officer Brett Hankison will be sentenced for his role in the shooting death of Breonna Taylor. Hankison was convicted on one count of abusing Taylor's civil rights last year after firing several shots through her bedroom window during a police raid. This is back in 2020. None of his shots hit her. It was gunfire from other officers that killed her. Let's bring in Jason Carroll. Jason, do we know what's happening right now in the courthouse?
JASON CARROLL, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Jake, as you know, cameras are not allowed in that federal courthouse in downtown Louisville, but what we have been hearing is the judge that's overseeing this sentencing, that is Judge Rebecca Jennings, she's been hearing from witnesses on both sides.
She's been hearing from those who've come forward to testify and -- and give their support to Brett Hankison. She's been listening to those people throughout the afternoon. She's also going to be hearing from those who are going to come forward and talk about how much Breonna Taylor meant to them. That is expected to be also this afternoon.
One of those people expected to speak to the court is Breonna Taylor's mother. So that is what's been going on this afternoon. Again, we've been waiting for this sentencing, waiting to hear what type of sentence the judge will issue here. As I'm sure you've heard, the DOJ has recommended that Brett Hankison serve just one day in jail, essentially serving no time for what he has been accused of here and what a jury found him guilty of.
And as you know, a jury did find him guilty of violating Breonna Taylor's civil rights. The DOJ then coming forward and pointing out that, as you mentioned, Brett Hankison did fire many shots that day back in March, more than 10 shots entering Breonna Taylor's apartment. But none of those shots actually struck Breonna Taylor. And it's for that reason, in part, the DOJ is recommending just one day, saying, in part, Hankison did not shoot Mrs. Taylor and is not otherwise responsible for her death, going on to say that counsel is unaware of another prosecution in which a police officer has been charged with depriving the rights of another person under the Fourth -- under the Fourth Amendment.
Now, in response to that, very quickly, as you can imagine, Jake, the family just heartbroken when they heard about what the DOJ was recommending here, saying, quote, this sets a dangerous precedent when a police officer is found guilty of violating someone's constitutional rights, sending it -- saying that it sends the wrong message in terms of a message that white officers can violate the civil rights of black Americans with near total impunity. And so this judge overseeing this has been hearing from both sides all afternoon, waiting to see what her final decision will be. Jake?
[17:35:19]
TAPPER: All right. Well, let me ask you, Jason, what -- what happened to all the other officers involved?
CARROLL: Well, there were several officers that were involved with that controversial no-knock warrant that night back on March 13th of 2020. Myles Cosgrove and Jonathan Mattingly, those were the two officers whose bullets struck Breonna Taylor. They have not faced any federal charges in connection with her death.
There were some officers were -- who were indicted with putting together, again, that controversial no-knock warrant. Their cases are still outstanding at this point. But what is so upsetting to Breonna Taylor's family is that none of the officers involved in this -- involved that no-knock warrant have been charged in any way with her death. Jake?
TAPPER: All right. Jason Carroll, thanks so much.
Some really sad news today about actor and musician Malcolm-Jamal Warner, probably best known as the character, Theo, from the sitcom "The Cosby Show." Jamal Warner drowned while on vacation in Costa Rica, his family says. What investigators are now telling us about his death, that's next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
[17:40:53]
MALCOLM-JAMAL WARNER, ACTOR: What is this?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
TAPPER: In our National Lead, that was Malcolm-Jamal Warner. He rose to fame as Theo Huxtable on "The Cosby Show." And we got sad news. He passed away on Sunday. He was only 54 years old. CNN's Elizabeth Wagmeister is in Los Angeles. Elizabeth, what happened?
ELIZABETH WAGMEISTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: This is so, so sad, Jake. A true accident and sudden death. Malcolm-Jamal Warner drowned during a family vacation in Costa Rica yesterday. Investigators, they're saying that he was pulled out by a current. And beachgoers went to try to resuscitate him, but it was too late.
Now, so young, Malcolm-Jamal Warner, just 54 years old. He has an eight-year-old daughter, Jake. It is just so tragic. I spoke to a source this morning who did confirm this sad, sad news of his passing. And I just want to highlight what a phenomenal reputation he had in the industry. I spoke to someone this morning who worked very closely with him.
And, of course, they are absolutely heartbroken. They are shocked. His family is shocked. His fans around the world are shocked. But something that keeps coming up is just how wonderful he was to work with. And, Jake, I actually met him back in 2016 when he was promoting the show "The People versus O.J. Simpson." He played Al Cowlings in that, of course, who drove the white Bronco in that infamous scene. And he was just so lovely, Jake. So, truly, a life gone too soon.
TAPPER: And, obviously, he was best known as Theo on "The Cosby Show". But he went on to do other roles later in life. Not many child stars do. I know he also became a musician. What was his larger impact on the entertainment industry?
WAGMEISTER: You know, a huge impact on the entertainment industry, of course, starting with "The Cosby Show." And that, of course, is what he will be remembered most by. "The Cosby Show" was a true cultural force on American culture. Remember, Jake, this was a different time.
Today, everybody is watching Netflix and Hulu and watching their own shows on their own schedule. But when "The Cosby Show" was airing, everybody in America was watching it at the same time. You had tens of millions of viewers watching this.
So everybody knows who Malcolm-Jamal Warner is. Everybody felt like Theo Huxtable was their own brother. And it wasn't just those who watched it during "The Cosby Show's" run during 1984 to 1992, it was also future generations. I remember watching reruns of "The Cosby Show" on Nick at Night. So I watched this, and it was part of my childhood.
And you make a great point, Jake, that not many child stars are able to continue. But he did. He was a T.V. star most recently on a medical drama on Fox called "The Resident."
TAPPER: Yes, he was -- he was good on that. I saw him on that. He played this very arrogant physician.
WAGMEISTER: Couldn't be more different from him in real life, by the way.
TAPPER: Yes, yes. No, I met him once. He was a really -- he was a really nice guy. Elizabeth Wagmeister, thank you so much. Appreciate it.
Also on our National Lead, the FAA is now investigating after the pilot of a Delta Regional jet had to make a hard turn to avoid colliding with a U.S. Air Force B-52 bomber. The pilot apologizing to passengers in the moments after this close call saying the bomber was sort of coming at us in that quote. Nobody told us about it. CNN's Brian Todd reports.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: All right, here she comes, the veteran of a B-52 Stratofortress.
BRIAN TODD, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): A B-52 bomber flying over the North Dakota State Fair. But around the same time, a commercial plane full of passengers is trying to land at the nearby civilian airport.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: For those of you on the right-hand side, you probably saw the airplane kind of sort of coming at us.
TODD (voice-over): The pilot is almost chillingly matter-of-fact as he talks about the harrowing close call that just occurred.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It caught me by surprise. This is not -- not normal at all.
[17:44:59]
TODD (voice-over): The Delta Airlines regional jet operated by SkyWest Airlines on Friday flying from Minneapolis to Minot, North Dakota. The B-52 flyover was advertised for 7:40 p.m. local time, which was roughly the same time the SkyWest plane was landing. The fairgrounds just a half-mile from the civilian airport. The commercial pilot said the control tower told him to turn right, but that's when he says he saw the military aircraft.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The airplane that was kind of coming on a converging course with us. So, given his speed, it was the military. I don't know how fast they were going, but they were a lot faster than us. I felt it was the safest thing to do to turn behind him. So, sorry about the aggressive maneuver.
TODD (voice-over): This audio was captured by passenger Monica Green, who said the flight was getting ready to land when she felt the plane jerk.
MONICA GREEN, PASSENGER ON FLIGHT: But it was such a hard U-turn to where we were going kind of straight and then went pretty sideways. I'd be looking out the window and just see straight grass. I wouldn't be seeing the horizon anymore because we were so sideways.
TODD (voice-over): The video of the flyover appears to show a plane turning sharply in the distance. However, it's impossible to tell if this is the SkyWest plane. It's the latest of several incidents between military and civilian planes.
In March, a collision alert sounded in a Delta jet flying out of Ronald Reagan National Airport in Washington, as T-38 military jets flew over nearby Arlington National Cemetery.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Was there an actual aircraft about 500 feet below us coming off of DCA? TODD (voice-over): Those planes came within five seconds of colliding. And in January, a close call turned deadly when a military Black Hawk helicopter and an American Airlines regional jet collided near Reagan National Airport, killing 67 people.
TODD: Why are we still having so many problems de-conflicting military and civilian flights?
PETER GOELZ, FORMER NTSB MANAGING DIRECTOR: Well, there's enough blame to go around on both sides. The military could do a better job dealing with the civilian side of the equation, letting them know when they have special occurrences, when they've got missions that conflict into the civilian airspace. And on the civilian side, there is a shortage of air traffic controllers. The system is overstressed.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
TODD (on camera): The FAA now says it's investigating this incident. The control tower involved in Minot is not a tower operated by the FAA. It's operated by a contractor, Midwest ATC, who declined to comment on the incident to CNN. Jake?
TAPPER: All right, Brian Todd, thank you so much. Appreciate it.
The locals are pushing back about too many tourists overtaking their towns. You've likely seen the protests on your social media feeds. The message behind some of these demonstrations is next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[17:51:56]
TAPPER: Our world lead now, in an effort to fight what's called over tourism in Barcelona, Spain, the city is shutting two of its cruise ship terminals, the closure impacting Europe's busiest cruise port. It will take effect next year and brings the number of operational terminals in Barcelona down to five.
It's part of a wider effort to deal with the pressures of over tourism in the Spanish city where there's been an increase of local protests against mass tourism and overcrowding. Over tourism also causing strife in Mexico City where another protest against unaffordable housing and gentrification took place over the weekend. Many local residents say they're getting pushed out of their neighborhoods due to skyrocketing rental prices and an influx of remote workers from different countries.
CNN's Valeria Leon reports from Mexico City, where officials are looking at ways to prevent locals from being displaced.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
VALERIA LEON, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): In Mexico City, anger over housing costs spilled into the streets again Sunday. It was the second protest in less than a month, part of a growing movement against gentrification that's been building in the past year. Many came with signs blaming foreign money for driving up rents and pushing locals out of their own neighborhoods.
They suddenly can't afford to live in the area anymore, this man tells me. They have to move farther away to places that are even more vulnerable.
With housing out of reach for many Mexico City residents and a visible influx of tourists and digital nomads in some of the capital's most desirable neighborhoods, foreigners have found themselves in the eye of the storm.
We demand a law to defend our roots. A law that defends housing as a common good.
Protesters insisted the march was peaceful. We just want to express how we feel. We're not here to do anything wrong. We're here to prevent that.
But the contemporary art museum inside Mexico's most prestigious public university was vandalized. Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum condemned the violence.
For some actions we don't agree with and we will never agree with, Sheinbaum said. A small group, just a tiny part of one of the demonstrations, entered University City, broke the windows of a bookstore and burned books.
But these protests reflect more than a single march. The city's housing tensions have been escalating for years. Since the COVID-19 pandemic, thousands of foreign remote workers or digital nomads have relocated to Mexico City, pushing up demand for housing in some of the city's most attractive areas. And where demand is high, prices soar.
And as Mexico City prepares to co-host the 2026 World Cup, officials promise an inclusive event for all. But for many locals, the worry is that the event's global attention and investment could speed up the very changes they're protesting.
[17:55:02]
Valeria Leon, CNN, Mexico City.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
TAPPER: And our thanks to Valeria Leon for that report. My next guest represented one of the most prominent victims of the now-dead pedophile sex trafficker, Jeffrey Epstein. The mountain of evidence that the Justice Department has, likely, should a judge grant the request to release more than just the grand jury transcripts. I'll get this attorney's take next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[17:59:51]
TAPPER: Welcome to The Lead. I'm Jake Tapper. This hour, the White House is responding to questions tonight about why President Trump has not ordered the FBI to release the full Jeffrey Epstein files. Just as CNN is learning new information about the President's strategy in his $10 billion lawsuit over a story in The Wall Street Journal regarding a letter that he supposedly wrote in the Jeffrey Epstein birthday book, though the president denies that.
