Return to Transcripts main page

The Lead with Jake Tapper

Sources: Trump Admin. Close To Deciding On Charging James Comey; One Detainee Killed, Two Wounded At Dallas ICE Facility; FBI's Patel: "Anti-ICE" Written On Bullet Found At Scene; Rep. Kevin Kiley (R-CA), Is Interviewed About YouTube To Reinstate Accounts Banned For Repeatedly Posting False Claims About COVID-19 And 2020 Election; Trump Hangs Image Of Biden Autopen Signature In New "Presidential Walk Of Fame" At White House; Trump, Breaking With FDA, Says Don't Take Tylenol. Aired 5-6p ET

Aired September 24, 2025 - 17:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KASIE HUNT, CNN HOST: All right. Thanks for joining us on The Arena today. Jake Tapper is standing by for "The Lead." Hi, Jake.

JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: Hey, Kasie, how you doing? We'll see you back in "The Arena" tomorrow.

HUNT: Thank you. Have a great show.

TAPPER: Thank you.

[17:00:42]

JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: Could a political opponent of President Trump soon face federal criminal charges? And for what? The Lead starts right now.

Former FBI Director James Comey, a Trump political foe, will possibly face a federal indictment under Trump's Department of Justice. Just how soon those charges could come and for what? That's coming up. And brand new details about the deadly shooting today at a Dallas immigration facility in a sniper style shooting. The disturbing message written on a bullet casing as calls come quick urging political leaders tone down the rhetoric.

Plus, new presidential portraits unveiled today at the White House with a shocking trolley display in the frame for President Joe Biden.

Welcome to The Lead. I'm Jake Tapper. We're going to start with breaking news in our law and justice lead. Former FBI Director James Comey may, may be indicted soon. Sources tell CNN that President Trump's Justice Department is close to deciding on whether to charge Comey with lying to Congress.

The testimony in question happened on September 30, 2020, when Comey appeared before Congress to answer questions about his handling of the investigation into Russia's meddling in the 2016 election. You see him there. This was during COVID, of course, so he's doing it from home or from work. Under the law, prosecutors only have five years to the day to bring such a charge. If a grand jury does approve the case in the coming days, this would be one of the highest profile indictments in President Trump's second term.

And this comes after President Trump made blatant public directives to his attorney general, Pam Bondi, to prosecute his political enemies, including Comey. And of course, he fired a U.S. attorney for not bringing criminal charges against his opponents. CNN Crime and Justice Correspondent Katelyn Polantz and CNN Senior Justice Correspondent Evan Perez join us now.

So, Katelyn, what are prosecutors doing right now before they run out of time?

KATELYN POLANTZ, CNN SENIOR CRIME AND JUSTICE REPORTER: Well, to the best of our knowledge, they are getting ready to present a case to a federal grand jury in the Eastern District of Virginia. So that's part of the federal court system in Virginia where a lot has gone down in the past few days. What we do know about this is the contours of what has to happen between now and Tuesday. So we know that the prosecutors are looking at the possibility that James Comey lied to Congress, that's according to sources that Evan and I have. And we also know that that possible perjury charge, there's a deadline to bring it, because in the federal court system you have five years to bring a charge.

And that testimony Comey gave, it was on September 30th of 2020. September 30th, that's next Tuesday. And grand juries don't sit every day. What day will the Justice Department be able to go before a secret grand jury in one of the federal courthouses in the Eastern District of Virginia, today's a possibility, tomorrow, Monday, not a lot of time. And they will have to convince those grand jurors between 14 and 22 people to vote yes to indict Comey.

We know that there have also been several different investigations around Jim Comey over the years after he was the FBI director. A lot of scrutiny there. He's the person that Donald Trump was posting on social media about over the weekend saying, no talk -- all action, no talk, justice must be served. Mentioning what about Comey, this situation, we don't know the exact details of what this indictment will say, but we are waiting to see exactly what emerges out of the federal. TAPPER: So we don't know specifically what he's accused of lying

about?

POLANTZ: That's right.

TAPPER: That's interesting. And Evan, the Eastern District of Virginia, the U.S. Attorney's Office there, we've been talking about that since --

EVAN PEREZ, CNN SENIOR JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, we were talking about this just last week.

TAPPER: -- since Friday.

PEREZ: Yes.

TAPPER: Tell -- remind everybody.

PEREZ: Well, Erik Siebert was the U.S. attorney there. He was -- well, he was the acting U.S. attorney and he was picked by Donald Trump to run that office. And we know that one of the things that he's been investigating, not only Comey, but also the investigation into alleged mortgage fraud by Letitia James, who is the New York attorney general who brought the civil fraud cases against Trump and his company. Siebert and his prosecutors there were balking at that case in particular, which led Trump over the weekend to essentially lash out at Pam Bondi and at Siebert. He fired him on Friday and he installed on Monday Lindsey Halligan, who is one of his former attorneys.

[17:05:15]

And so she is now -- she took office on Monday, Jake, and she has now been seen in the last few days at the Justice Department. Surely this is among the cases that she's looking at to see when they could bring it. And as Katelyn points out, we don't know when they'll do it, but they certainly have to make a decision between now and Tuesday.

TAPPER: And Siebert, conservative --

PEREZ: Conservative.

TAPPER: -- had been bringing a bunch of immigration cases --

PEREZ: Pro-Trump person.

TAPPER: -- worked his way up through the -- the office of the U.S. Attorney's Office.

PEREZ: And his one sin, according to Trump, is that he had the support of the two Virginia Democratic senators, which is how it works, right?

TAPPER: Yes, but I think we -- we know -- yes, but we also know his real sin was he didn't bring charges, right?

PEREZ: Right. Exactly.

TAPPER: And -- and -- and his replacement, a former insurance lawyer --

PEREZ: Right.

TAPPER: -- and --

PEREZ: Was present when Mar-a-Lago was searched.

TAPPER: But very loyal.

PEREZ: Very loyal. Right. And the assumption is that she will likely do the things that Trump wants. I mean, that's why he wants her there.

TAPPER: Yes. All right, Katelyn and Evan, thanks so much. Joining us now, CNN Political Analyst and New York Times' Pulitzer Prize Winning White House Correspondent Maggie Haberman.

Maggie, what are your sources telling you about this, about these -- these potential charges against FBI Director Comey?

MAGGIE HABERMAN, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Look, Jake, this is something that, I mean, President Trump has made no secret. What I've been hearing from people privately is -- is what he's been saying publicly is that he wants to see James Comey prosecuted. There has been an effort to try to make that happen. There was resistance, I believe, and that's in some of the reporting that we're seeing now about going through with this because prosecutors just didn't believe that there was going to be enough to make a case on, or so we have been told.

Now to go ahead in spite of that is a risk because it's not really clear that you don't -- you're not guaranteed an indictment just because you go before a grand jury. And so we will see what this looks like if in fact they go ahead. Now, you know, as CNN's reporting shows, they are debating what to do. But again, Lindsey Halligan is President Trump's hand-picked person. He wanted her there.

He did not want Erik Siebert in that role anymore. He was not just Trump's pick, he -- he was his -- he was his person, it his office who -- who went ahead and backed him. And yes, Democratic senators were fine with him, but that got used against him by some of his -- Siebert's opponents and critics within the administration. So, this is something, again, we know that President Trump has been looking for this for many, many, many years, and I expect him to try to push this ahead as far as possible, but we'll see.

TAPPER: And just to be clear here, President Trump wanting a prosecution of James Comey, does it matter what the charge is, or he just wants his political enemies charged with something?

HABERMAN: Well, I think to prosecutors it matters. I mean, I don't think that the president is necessarily the closest observer of the criminal law, but I do think that for prosecutors, they realize there has to be a case that they can argue. We have seen other prosecutions in the Trump era, such as some that emerged from the Durham report, that did not end up in convictions, even though they ended up with indictments. So if there is a decision to move ahead with an indictment here with Comey, you know, then it would go to trial and then we would sit, presumably, and then we would see what that looks like.

There is also a world where there isn't necessarily an indictment returned. And so this is again -- and this is all, Jake, playing out so publicly in the press. This is also typically not what prosecutors want.

TAPPER: Some might argue, of course, a lot of Hillary Clinton supporters would argue that James Comey and his announcement just before the election that he was reopening the investigation into her. A lot of people think that -- that, including Hillary Clinton, think that James Comey is the reason Donald Trump won 2016 because of that announcement. He did reintroduce those charges against Clinton just days before the election, the investigation.

HABERMAN: Well, he -- yes, he reintroduced the fact that there was an issue about on -- on -- on a laptop related to e-mails that she had been sending. And, you know, it is certain -- there is -- it is certainly true that her folks believe that he is the reason that she lost. I think that her critics argue that there are -- there are a number of reasons that the election went the way it did. But regardless, yes, I mean, this is something that everybody can grab onto something and say they were harmed. President Trump has, you know, pointed to James Comey over and over and over again, in -- in part because his own decision to fire James Comey led to all kinds of other things after the fact.

TAPPER: If Comey does get indicted, would a charge alone satisfy Trump's crusade to go after his political opponents, or does he still want, as he -- as he noted in his public social media post to Pam Bondi over the weekend, he wants charges against Letitia James, the New York attorney general, against Senator Adam Schiff of California, I mean, it does seem as though his appetite when it comes to these things is insatiable.

[17:10:01]

HABERMAN: Yes. Look, President Trump has typically, over the long course of his life, his time in business, his time as a celebrity, his time in the White House, his time as a candidate has taken things as far as he can go. And I doubt that it would be, well, you know, I got this and now I'm going to move on. As you just said, you just listed a number of other targets, one of whom was being investigated, has been being investigated by the Eastern District of Virginia, Letitia James. And so this, you know, I don't expect this to then be now President Trump is going to move on.

He was quite clear -- he's not saying any of this. Again, there's -- there's not really an -- an -- an inside voice on this, Jake. I mean, the president was really clear about it over the weekend in a social media post that possibly was intended as a private message to Pam Bondi initially, but he -- you know, but it was -- it was public and he issued it again and then he -- and then he issued a support of her. But he also told reporters that she needs to act fast and he tethered it specifically to the indictments that he had faced. So there you go.

TAPPER: All right. Maggie Haberman, always great to have you. Thank you so much.

HABERMAN: Thanks, Jake.

TAPPER: Coming up next, that deadly shooting at an ICE facility in Texas. Authorities just revised the number of those killed as authorities described the shooting as a wakeup call when it comes to political rhetoric. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:15:08] TAPPER: Today's breaking news in our national lead, the deadly sniper attack on an ICE Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility in Dallas, Texas this morning. It killed one ICE detainee, left two others hospitalized. They are currently in critical condition we're told. The gunman killed himself, leaving behind a bullet sprawled, according to a social media post by FBI -- FBI Director Kash Patel with the message anti-ICE. Three sources familiar with the case tell CNN that the shooter has been identified as Joshua Jahn, 29 years old.

This is a story that obviously reaches far beyond these pictures of bullet holes in the windows of the ICE facility or the nuts and bolts of a homicide investigation in Texas. Whether it started with January 6, 2021 or the assassination attempts against President Trump, the United States does seem to be in another era of political violence.

Here's what we know of the motivations of the last three apparently politically motivated shooters. One, the assassination of Charlie Kirk on September 10th by a gunman whose mother, according to prosecutors, said the shooter, quote, "had become more political and had started to lean more to the left, becoming more pro-gay and trans rights oriented," unquote. To his dad, prosecutors said, the shooter, quote, "Accused Charlie Kirk of spreading hate," unquote.

Last Friday, September 19th, in Sacramento, California, drive by gunman fired into a local ABC TV station. This is a day after demonstrators had gathered at the station to protest Disney's suspension of Jimmy Kimmel's talk show. Prosecutors said Monday that the suspect had written notes in his car critical of the Trump administration and a calendar reminder on his refrigerator to, quote, "do the next scary thing," unquote.

And now today, Dallas, in the wake of today's deadly shooting, Vice President J.D. Vance led the administration charged condemning political violence and blaming it on Democrats.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

J.D. VANCE, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Political violence has gotten out of control in this country. We got to stop it. We got to condemn it. And that starts, unfortunately, at the very top of the Democratic Party.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: In Texas, Republican Senator Ted Cruz added this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. TED CRUZ (R-TX): Every politician who is using rhetoric, demonizing ICE and demonizing CBP stop.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: CNN's Ed Lavandera has more from the scene in Texas.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) ED LAVANDERA, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Federal law enforcement officials described the gunman as a sniper who shot three immigrant detainees in ICE custody. The attack happened just before 7:00 a.m. at an ICE field office in Dallas.

Denise Robleto was outside in a van waiting for her mother. She says her mother, an immigrant from Nicaragua, was checking in for an early immigration appointment. She showed us a video and we could hear slow, methodical gunfire as many as seven shots. Robleto said she could hear screams coming from the facility. Dallas police were called to the scene around 6:40 a.m. local time.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is going to be a sniper on top of the roof.

CHIEF DANIEL COMEAUX, DALLAS POLICE: DVD was quickly was able to locate the shooter who was deceased.

LAVANDERA (voice-over): Law enforcement officials say the gunman died of a self-inflicted gunshot wound.

JOE ROTHROCK, FBI SPECIAL AGENT IN CHARGE: Early evidence that we've seen from rounds that were found near the suspected shooter contain messages that are anti-ICE in nature.

LAVANDERA (voice-over): FBI Director Kash Patel posted a photo of anti-ICE message written one of five unused bullets at the scene. Even though officials say this was anti-immigration officer attack, no ICE officials or members of law enforcement were hurt. But DHS officials say one immigrant detainee was killed and two other detainees were wounded. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security says the shooter fired, quote, "indiscriminately at the ICE building and at a van." The shots fired, according to law enforcement, came from an elevated position from a nearby building, similar to the shooting of Charlie Kirk just two weeks ago.

And the political nature of the engravings also draw comparisons to similar evidence found at the Kirk shooting scene. This shooting took place at an immigration facility where detainees are processed before they are transferred to a detention center.

JOSHUA JOHNSON, ACTING DIRECTOR, ICE DALLAS FIELD OFFICE: This is the second time I've had to stand in front of you and talk about a shooter at one of my facilities. And I think that the takeaway from all of this is that the rhetoric has to stop.

LAVANDERA (voice-over): Law enforcement and Republican officials blame the shootings on increasingly volatile political speech they say is coming from the far left. In a statement, DHS Secretary Kristi Noem said "This shooting must serve as a wakeup call to the far left that their rhetoric about ICE has consequences. Comparing ICE day in and day out to the Nazi Gestapo, the secret police and slave patrols has consequences."

[17:20:00]

CRUZ: Look, in America, we disagree, that's fine, that's the democratic process. But your political opponents are not Nazis.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

LAVANDERA (on camera): And Jake, here at the scene, we have seen law enforcement throughout the day paying a great deal of attention to this office building, two story office building across the street from the ICE facility. You can see the angle back into the area where the shooting happened and it's about 150 yards away to the ICE processing facility. And one of the things that investigators have been paying close attention to and searching is a car there, which we noticed on the side of a car it had a sign taped on it that read, quote, "radioactive fallout from nuclear detonations have passed over this area more than twice since 1951." We don't know for sure if that is the suspect's car, but we do know that FBI agents have been searching it intensely over the last few hours here, Jake.

TAPPER: All right, Ed Lavender in Dallas, Texas, thank you so much.

As Ed noted, this is the second shooting at a Texas immigration facility since just July. Does the current political environment make the job harder for the Department of Homeland Security which oversees these centers? Well, my next guest can speak to that, that's coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:25:22]

TAPPER: More now on our breaking news. Today's sniper attack on an ICE facility in Dallas, authorities say the gunman fired indiscriminately into the building from a nearby rooftop. One detainee was killed. Two others are in critical condition. We're told the shooter was found dead with a self-inflicted gun wound.

At least one bullet casing found at the scene had the words anti-ICE written on it. And joining us right now to discuss is Chad Wolf, was the acting Department of Homeland Security secretary during the first Trump administration.

Chad, thanks so much for joining us. So talk to us about the rise of political violence that we're seeing in this country recently.

CHAD WOLF, FORMER ACTING DHS SECRETARY: Yes, well, obviously a lot of that has been targeted over these last several months to both ICE officers and ICE facilities just there in Texas. There's been about four or five different incidents over the last several months. And if you know, if you recall, earlier this summer, probably about, you know, just a couple of miles away from the facility that was targeted today was also another shooting at an ICE facility. So I think what we've seen over time, and it's not just in the state of Texas, it's in other places around the country as well is a lot of -- a lot of these -- a lot of frustration and a lot of this targeted violence is being -- is being directed towards either ICE officers or ICE facilities, mainly because I assume they're very unhappy with the policy positions being taken by the Trump administration in enforcing that immigration law. TAPPER: Yes. And obviously violence is never the answer. But even beyond that, the decisions about these policies are not decisions being made by the individual ICE officers.

WOLF: Yes.

TAPPER: So FBI Director Kash Patel posted a picture on social media showing one of the unspent bullets found at the scene that had the words anti-ICE written on it. The post goes on to say, quote, "These despicable, politically motivated attacks against law enforcement are not a one off."

Do you think this attack is part of an organized movement or it's more what some people call stochastic terrorism, the idea of the demonization of a group by political leaders or -- or others resulting in organic but incited inspired acts?

WOLF: Yes. Well, it's a good question. I think that's what the investigation will eventually unfold. I will say that earlier reference I mentioned at an ICE facility there in North Texas, it was, and the North Texas and TIFA chapter, more or less was the result of or took place in that. Whether this individual is tied to that -- that group or not, I have no idea.

I think, again, that's what law enforcement will decide. Whether he was inspired to do a similar type of event, what exactly his motivations were, we don't know. Obviously, we have the shell casing. So, you know, I think we can -- we can kind of pretend or we can -- we can assume what that -- what his -- his motive was was very much anti- ICE and -- and the policies that they are pursuing. But it does speak to a larger trend, Jake, of -- of that, of -- of the violence against ICE, specifically, whether it's political in nature or it's ideological in nature, but it's going after federal law enforcement officers.

As you indicated, they don't make up these laws. They don't make these laws. Congress does and they enforce the laws. And so if there's a problem with the way in which you believe that ICE is enforcing immigration law, then it's really up to members of Congress to change their mission and change the nature in which they do their job.

TAPPER: Yes, in a completely nonviolent way. There are ways in this country for people to -- we have tremendous freedom of speech, we have tremendous freedom of assembly, there are ways to make your voices heard without resorting to violence.

Chad Wolf, thank you so much for your time. Really appreciate it.

WOLF: All right, thanks.

TAPPER: Is there a policy change now at YouTube? The plans to reinstate accounts once banned for what were called misinformation under the Biden administration. The complaints waged by the platform over this in a letter to House Republicans next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) TAPPER: In our tech lead today, YouTube says that it will reinstate some accounts that had been previously banned for, as they said at the time, repeatedly posting misinformation about COVID and the 2020 election. This move comes in response to Republicans investigating whether the Biden administration pressured big tech companies to restrict speech on their platforms, which is interesting obviously given the current administration's recent attacks on free speech.

Let's bring in Republican Congressman Kevin Kiley of California who is on the House Judiciary Committee. So Congressman, thanks so much for joining us. Alphabet Inc. which wrote the letter that's a collection of companies that most prominently includes YouTube and Google, and Alphabets send -- the council for Alphabets send a letter to the House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan and the Ranking Member Democrat Jamie Raskin and said that the Biden the administration pressured them to remove content that did not violate their policies. What specific content are they talking about?

REP. KEVIN KILEY (R-CA), JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: Well, it was a wide range of content a lot of it specifically concerning COVID-19. And so you've now had admissions from the leading tech companies, Alphabet as well as Facebook and Twitter X saying that we had this era of censorship in the United States where you had the federal administration that pressured and potentially coerced these platforms to take down content.

And it's especially bad when you think about where we were during the COVID pandemic especially in the beginning when folks are not allowed to go to work. You're not allowed to go to school. Legislatures and every unit of local government is shut down. The one way that citizens had to exercise their rights as citizens in a democracy was to post on social media. And you had the systemic effort by the government to stop them from doing so, to stop them from posting about one of the most consequential issues of the last generation, which is the government response to COVID-19. And in some cases, even censoring true information, like the origins of where the virus came from.

[17:35:35]

TAPPER: So some of the information, I -- I presume that the Biden administration justified this by saying that they were trying to keep harmful information that was false out of the public sphere. Is -- is that your understanding?

KILEY: That's probably what they'd say, but if so, they badly misfired because they ended up suppressing a lot of true information. And honestly, we don't really know what the consequences of that were. The fact that we had censorship around an issue of such transcended importance, maybe we would have responded to COVID a lot better if there had been a free and open debate around these vital issues.

TAPPER: We should note, of course, we did reach out to Google, which told us that they have nothing else to share. Beforehand, the company laid out its commitment to protecting free expression, access to a range of diverse viewpoints on -- on both health and political issues. Is the committee, are you satisfied with the response from these tech companies?

KILEY: I think that, yes, largely, the -- the message that we've gotten from them is the right one. And this is what Mark Zuckerberg said in his letter to the committee as well. Of course, we've heard a lot from X and Twitter on this topic, which is that the censorship was wrong, it shouldn't have happened, and that they've changed their policies to prevent it from happening again.

And you might argue, well, these companies, they shouldn't have given in to these demands, and they have themselves said, you know, that, yes, this pressure was wrong and censoring was wrong. But at the end of the day, it's not the CEOs of tech companies who take an oath to uphold the Constitution. You know, their responsibility actually goes to shareholders, and when they're seeing the pressure of government come down on them, then they might think that if they don't do as they're told, then that's going to have adverse consequences.

So the responsibility really lies with those in government who do take an oath to defend our Constitution and the First Amendment, and the fact that it was so systemically violated on an issue of such paramount importance. It's truly shocking that this occurred, and I think that, you know, we need to renew our commitment to protecting the First Amendment and building a culture around free expression in this country as well in response. But the steps that they've taken at these companies are a very important first step.

TAPPER: In the same letter, Alphabet noted, "it's unacceptable and wrong when any government, including the Biden administration, attempts to dictate how the company moderates content, and the company has consistently fought against those efforts on First Amendment grounds." Do you have any concerns, given what you have said, given what I just read from Alphabet, about what just happened with FCC Chair Brendan Carr announcing that he thinks local stations should be taking Jimmy Kimmel off the air, after which they did, and 20 percent of "ABC" stations didn't air Kimmel last night when it -- when it returned to air. Did that -- does that concern you at all?

KILEY: Yes, clearly the commissioner's, you know, made statements that he -- that he should not have, and -- and if -- if the power of government is being brought to bear in any way to try to restrict speech or to try to chill speech, that's a serious problem. I think there's some debate as to whether that is actually what happened here, or whether it was a business decision by "ABC" or by the local affiliates, but I think this is a principle that in every administration, Congress needs to be prepared to defend, is that, you know, for folks who are upset about conservative voices being censored, which should be all Americans, the answer is not to censor liberal voices. The answer is to disavow censorship across the board.

Censorship is a great evil that is a total disavowal -- disavowal of the values of the enlightenment and the principles of our Constitution, and so I think that needs to apply across the board.

TAPPER: I agree with you. I don't think there's much debate about what happened given the fact that after "ABC" returned Kimmel to air, President Trump went on Truth Social and decried it and said that they were going to possibly sue "ABC." I think it makes it pretty clear that this was not a business decision made in the middle of the week because of bad ratings, but we do appreciate your coming on. Congressman Kevin Kiley, Republican of California, thank you so much.

KILEY: You bet, thanks for having me.

[17:39:38]

TAPPER: Pettiness with a pen, full display at the White House. Wait until you see what was unveiled today at the People's House. Takes trolling to a presidential level, that's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

TAPPER: In our Politics Lead, the Trump administration unveiled a new presidential walk of fame at the White House today. Let's take a look. OK, we see portraits of past presidents. George W. Bush and Barack Obama, sure. There's Donald Trump, first term. And then, oh, instead of an image of President Biden, they put up a photograph of Biden's autopen signature. Our panel joins me now. Ashley Davis, thoughts?

ASHLEY DAVIS, FORMER HOMELAND SECURITY OFFICIAL, GEORGE W. BUSH ADMINISTRATION: It is kind of funny. I know my colleagues here may not think so, but I'm probably the only one here that's been to Mar-a- Lago. Am I right?

TERRY MORAN, JOURNALIST: I've been to Mar-a-Lago.

DAVIS: OK. But, you know, this is very similar to what they've done in Mar-a-Lago with the -- with the pictures that he has around the patio there. And so, I mean, obviously this is what he's trying to do. This is right -- I think this is right between the Rose Garden and the Oval Office. But the autopen, obviously it's a dig.

[17:45:06]

TAPPER: Yes, and I don't think anybody begrudges somebody doing a dig, but this is a little, this is quite an expensive dig.

AMESHIA CROSS, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: It's expensive, it's on the nose, but it's par for the course for Donald Trump. I think that he wants to remind himself, his cabinet, everybody who gets a look or a listen, that he believes that not only was former President Biden ill- equipped, but that he wasn't all there and that he wants to consistently remind him, because as much as we're talking about this, we're not talking about affordability, we're not talking about the Epstein files, and we're not talking about Trump basically saying that the entire U.N., yesterday in his very, very bombastic commentary against immigrants.

And I think that, you know, calling out the U.N. is going to, all the country's going to hell. There are various topics we could talk about related to Donald Trump that have absolutely nothing to do with autopen. We know that this is a man who embraces technology. Hell, he loves TikTok. He absolutely loves social media.

TAPPER: Yes.

CROSS: He's up tweeting and utilizing Truth Social all night long. But for whatever reason, autopen, which has been used by every president in the modern era, has become under fire just because it was Joe Biden.

TAPPER: It is kind of interesting this happens amidst this discussion about whether late night comedians are too mean.

MORAN: Why, you think he's trying to compete with Kimmel? Is that his gag today?

TAPPER: It's -- it's very -- it's very gag-oriented.

MORAN: It is, it is. It shows me, you know, it's an administration of trolls led -- led by Trump, because we're a nation of trolls now. We're dunking on each other all the time. It's getting a little stale. The -- the -- maybe the coolest thing you could possibly do right now is something sincere.

TAPPER: It's not just show a little grace.

MORAN: Maybe.

DAVIS: I'm actually surprised, like, George Bush is there and Barack Obama. I mean, like, there's more that I figured that there would be other pictures as well.

TAPPER: So you're praising him for his admirable race?

DAVIS: Exactly. He only picked on one.

TAPPER: Right. It's also --

DAVIS: I am the Republican here, right?

TAPPER: No, it's OK. Remember Ed Martin? He was the D.C. U.S. attorney. His nomination was pulled because he couldn't get Senate confirmation. So instead of that gig, he's been given multiple roles at the U.S. Justice Department. He sent a letter last week to an FBI agent's attorney. This FBI agent had responded to the Sandy Hook massacre.

And in Martin's letter, he implied that this agent was under investigation because he participated in the defamation trial by the Sandy Hook families against Alex Jones, who put out hideous lies about the Sandy Hook massacre, which resulted in some of the families being harassed. I think at least one had to move because of all these people that said it was a false flag operation, all of Alex Jones' insane lies. And now Ed -- Ed Martin has retracted the letter. But still, what do you think?

MORAN: Well, it was grotesque lies, obviously, that were told about the Sandy Hook massacre. And this demonstrates that it's kind of -- it's a sloppy administration in some ways. It's like this -- this kind of stuff happens all the time. Oops, Kash Patel is out front of where the investigation of the shooting of Charlie Kirk is, has to roll it back. It is an -- it is an administration filled with people who have not held high office before. And it's hard to hold high office. And I think this is that kind of mistake.

TAPPER: Meanwhile, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is eliminating a decades-old advisory group, which previously gave recommendations for women serving in the military. The Pentagon press secretary says the group is, "focused on advancing a divisive feminist agenda that hurts combat readiness." We should note this group, since 1951, gave advice on how to support military women. It gave recommendations ranging from healthcare to domestic abuse support, to physical fitness assessments. Thoughts?

CROSS: I'm disgusted. I think that, you know, as somebody who comes from a long line and family of women who have served in the U.S. armed forces, when I see something like this, it tells me that there is a push to make the military unwelcoming for women. And for women who have made strides and advancements across all of the armed forces that have better served this country, that have made us safe, that have protected us in a variety of ways, but also at their own -- at their own miscibility in some cases.

And I say that because I think of all the women who have been sexually harassed. I think of the way that many of those cases have been sloppily held. I think of the way in which we had to have specific counsels because their stories were getting ignored. It matters to pay attention to the needs of women in the military because they want to serve. My niece just graduated high school a few -- a few months ago, she joined the U.S. armed forces two weeks ago.

TAPPER: Yes.

CROSS: She is now in the Air Force.

TAPPER: That's great.

CROSS: She was extremely excited to do it.

TAPPER: Congratulations.

CROSS: This is scary.

TAPPER: Yes.

CROSS: Thank you.

TAPPER: And it's very, I mean, the military is supposed to be apolitical and a lot of the women who joined the military, I'm sure are Trump supporters.

DAVIS: Oh yes, absolutely. But I actually dug into this today a little bit because I knew there was going to be, especially with Hegseth, there was going to be a lot of pushback. They are shutting it down, the 74-year commission or working group that it was. However, they are modernizing it and modernize it to include not just women, minorities, but to just to make it something that's not 74 years old. So I don't think it's completely going away. I think it's going away as is, but it's going to be under a different umbrella.

[17:50:16]

TAPPER: Well, I don't understand, to support men?

DAVIS: No, no, no. But just, they're not going to just support women or they're not just going to support African-Americans or not just going to support X, Y, and Z. They're going to make it under one big umbrella to make us have the best military in the world and have them all trained equally.

TAPPER: OK. Thanks to all of you.

DAVIS: You don't believe me, but --

TAPPER: I -- I think that women in the military face challenges that men in the military don't.

DAVIS: Yes. I don't know.

TAPPER: I say that as somebody who's covered the military now for decades.

DAVIS: OK, I get it. But as a woman, I feel that we should be treated as men are treated. And so I think that this disadvantages us.

CROSS: I feel like to the family of the late Vanessa Guillen, there is something to be said about making this type of move, especially making it right now.

DAVIS: Well, and -- and he's controversial about women in general. So that's also under the umbrella.

TAPPER: That's -- that's a whole other kettle of fish.

So many of you have questions about taking Tylenol during pregnancy after that stunning announcement from President Trump. We're paging Dr. Sanjay Gupta to answer your questions.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

[17:55:38]

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Effective immediately, the FDA will be notifying physicians that the use of, well, let's see how we say that. Acetaminophen -- acetaminophen during pregnancy can be associated with a very increased risk of autism.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Acetaminophen, acetaminophen, acetaminophen. Doesn't sound like many conversations about acetaminophen had taken place before that announcement, at least not in front of the President. Should President Trump be the ultimate authority on this? The President's penchant for unscripted exaggerations has often caused confusion. His latest remarks on Tylenol seem especially egregious.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: Don't take Tylenol if you're pregnant, and don't give Tylenol to your child when he's born or she's born, don't give it, just don't give it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: The FDA guidance does not say don't take acetaminophen. It reads, "in the spirit of patient safety and prudent medicine, clinicians should consider minimizing the use of acetaminophen during pregnancy for routine low-grade fevers," and they urge individuals to talk to their physicians. Not nearly as extreme as what the President said. And more importantly, that's in line with the science.

The Trump administration based its recommendation in part on a recent study that analyzed 46 previously published studies. That review did find evidence of an association between exposure to acetaminophen during pregnancy and increased incidence of neurodevelopmental disorders in children. That review adds that the association was strongest when acetaminophen is taken for four weeks or longer.

It encourages pregnant mothers, as the label on every Tylenol package reads, "if pregnant or breastfeeding, talk to your healthcare professional before use." Let's page CNN's Dr. Sanjay Gupta to take your questions on this. He's gotten more than a few. Sanjay, Devin from Vancouver asks, do you believe the conversation should have been more targeted at pregnant women who may be accustomed to overusing Tylenol or acetaminophen?

DR. SANJAY GUPTA, CNN CHIEF MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, is the answer. And I'm so glad that this question was asked because I tend -- I think we tend to look at things as all or nothing here. You just heard the president saying, don't take it. But the guidance that came out from the FDA after that -- that press conference was basically the same guidance that people have heard for years, for -- for decades, in fact.

You know, Jake, we've been reporting on potential associations between acetaminophen and -- and autism for -- for some time. There have been these association studies and those are sort of signals. And then larger studies get done which don't show a cause and effect here, an association because of the Tylenol, because of the fever, because of infection, all those things play a role here.

One thing I just want to highlight, something you just said, when you look a little bit more deeply into these studies, like the study that came out of Norway, what they found was that the association between acetaminophen and autism was strongest when women had taken Tylenol for at least 29 days, about a month's worth.

But at the same time, the rest of that study showed that women who took Tylenol for one to seven days actually had a protective effect against some of these neurodevelopmental disorders. So that -- that's the nuance, Jake. It can actually be helpful if used the right way. TAPPER: Bill in Fairfield, Maine, wants to know what steps can be taken to minimize the risk of fever while pregnant.

GUPTA: Yes. So again, building on this association idea, is it the Tylenol? Is it the fever? Is it the infection? Infections typically cause fever, which may increase the need for Tylenol. Avoiding infections is probably the -- the biggest thing. No -- no surprise. There are certain types of infections which are more common during pregnancy, ear infections, gastrointestinal problems, things like that.

Keep in mind, when you look at that, that list of potential infections, women are typically immune compromised. Their immune system is actually weakened during pregnancy so that they can carry the baby without their body sort of attacking or rejecting the child. So as a result, they're more susceptible to infections. They got to be even more careful then not to develop fevers from those infections.

[18:00:03]

TAPPER: Megan in New Mexico asks Sanjay, what risks do fevers during pregnancy pose to the birthing parent and their developing baby?

GUPTA: It -- it is really important, especially during the first trimester, to -- to have what they call a normal thermic environment, meaning normal temperature sort of environment. A lot is happening with fetal development at that time if the temperature rises too high. And typically a fever, by the way, is over 101.5 degrees. But these studies looked at what happens if a fever reaches over 103 degrees and is not treated.

And what they find is that it can lead to birth defects because you don't have that normal thermic environment, that normal temperature environment at this critical time. So birth defects, cleft lip and palate, congenital heart defects, early labor and even miscarriage, they can all be a consequence of -- of untreated high fevers.

And again, keep in mind that first study out of Norway showed when you did appropriately treat the fever, and in that case with Tylenol, it was actually protective against those things. Jake?

TAPPER: All right, Dr. Sanjay Gupta, thank you so much.