Return to Transcripts main page
The Lead with Jake Tapper
White House Threatens Mass Firings If Government Shuts Down; Some Top Danish Officials Blame Russia for Drone Airport Disruption; RFK Jr. Says FDA Will Study Safety of Abortion Drug Mifepristone. Source: Ex-FBI Director James Comey Indicted. Aired 6-7p ET
Aired September 25, 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, the response from Democrats today after the White House warned of widespread firings across federal government agencies if the two sides cannot reach a deal to keep the U.S. government open.
Plus, the puzzling calendar invite from Pete Hegseth, secretary of war, ordering hundreds of senior military officers down to Quantico, Virginia. The question is why. What CNN is learning about this meeting.
Also, that historic $2.5 billion settlement, the government accusing Amazon of deceptive practices to get more customers to pay for its Prime delivery service. So, might you be entitled to a refund?
New video of the latest drone disruption at a European airport as NATO allies begin to question whether Russia is to blame.
Our Lead tonight, the government shutdown standoff between Democrats and the Trump administration and Republicans is getting kind of ugly. The White House is now threatening permanent mass firings of federal workers if the government does shut down. President Trump and some Republicans are insisting this will all be the fault of the Democrats.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: Well, this is all caused by the Democrats. They asked us to do something that's totally unreasonable. They never change. They want to give money away to illegals.
This is what Schumer wants. This is what the Democrats want.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
TAPPER: What Democrats are asking for is for Republicans to agree to extend the enhanced Obamacare insurance subsidies that are set to expire at the end of the year. The subsidies currently reduce healthcare insurance costs for millions of Americans. But Republican Senate Majority Leader John Thune of South Dakota says the negotiations on that issue cannot and should not be tied to the government funding bill, which keeps the government open.
CNN's Arlette Saenz is tracking this tense standoff. And, Arlette, we're less than a week out from a possible shutdown. How are Democrats responding today?
ARLETTE SAENZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Jake, Democrats are digging in saying that this threat of mass layoffs won't change their strategy with the shutdown just five days away. They still want Republicans to come to the table to negotiate on extending enhanced Obamacare subsidies, which are set to expire at the end of the year. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries this afternoon held a press conference with reporters where he called this threat of mass layoffs an intimidation tactic, and said the Democrats won't budge. Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. HAKEEM JEFFRIES (D-NY): Donald Trump and the administration have been engaging in mass firings that we deem illegal throughout the year. We will continue to push back against any effort to undermine federal civil service protections that exist in the United States of America. As a negotiating tactic, our response to Russ Vought is simple. Get lost.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SAENZ: Now, it's not just Democrats expressing some concern with this OMB threat. Senator Susan Collins, the top Republican on the Senate Appropriations Committee, today, she said that she wants to see that short term funding bill passed, but that federal employees shouldn't be thrown into the middle of this fight. She said, quote, federal employees dedicate themselves to serving the public and they should not be treated as pawns amid a needlessly partisan impasse.
But right now, it is really unclear how the two sides can come to a resolution as a government shutdown is just five days away and this threat of mass layoffs just seems to really be hardening both sides.
[18:05:08]
TAPPER: What programs specifically are at risk of permanently shutting down, Arlette?
SAENZ: Well, that's the big question. The administration hasn't outlined exactly which programs would be targeted. What this OMB memo does is it asks agencies to look at what programs would have their funding lapse if an agreement is not reached to by Tuesday. Those programs would also need to not be able to have alternative sources as funding and not be consistent with President Trump's priority.
So, there're still a lot of questions about where exactly these reduction in force plans would fall, but it's just the latest effort of the federal -- of the Trump administration's efforts to pare down the federal government, something that has caused a lot of anxiety among federal work workers. And this threat of a shutdown, this threat of mass layoffs is just another layer that could add to federal workers' concerns.
TAPPER: All right. Arlette Saenz, thanks so much.
Joining us now to discuss, Republican Congressman Mike Flood of Nebraska. Congressman, good to see you. Thanks so much.
Do you support this push that we've heard from Russ Vought to permanently lay off federal employees during this potential shutdown?
REP. MIKE FLOOD (R-NE): Well, I support funding the government. I support passing the C.R. And I also think it's important to note what is in the C.R. that is so objectionable. That continuing resolution is essentially the Biden-Schumer Senate, House Republican budget that passed with 60 votes in the Senate. What is so objectionable about that? Last time we had this issue, it was March and Chuck Schumer did the right thing. And what happened to him? AOC said she's going to primary him. He lost 12 percentage points in his approval ratings. Chris Murphy said he is going to take him out as minority leader.
Listen, they're just playing a game here. They can't look like they are giving in to anything that President Trump wants. But what we're asking for here is not unreasonable. It just says, let's extend this to November 21st and we will pass a budget then. All of this other stuff on the outside shouldn't surprise anybody. And, by the way, they know exactly what happens if we go into a government shutdown. Their nemesis gets all the power. Donald Trump gets all the power. That is not, you know, ultimately the way the system's supposed to work, but it works that way in a shutdown.
TAPPER: So, I don't think AOC directly challenged Chuck Schumer, although certainly there's a lot of speculation that she might, but here's the question for you. Is this really all only on the Democrats if President Trump says he's not even willing to meet with the Democratic leader, Schumer and Jefferies?
FLOOD: Well, I have to think that Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries have been meeting with John Thune and Mike Johnson. They've been offered something extremely reasonable, which the Democrats voted on before. And the term of the C.R. is not long. It's only November 21st.
Listen, I want to pass a budget that has the fingerprints of the Republican House, the Senate with 60 votes, which means we know it must be bipartisan. This is not an effort in reconciliation. I want to pass a budget. I want it to get 60 votes. Let's get to November of 21st. And we will have a conversation about those ACA tax credits. I know we will.
TAPPER: So on that subject, ACA tax -- the Obamacare subsidies is what -- how I'm going to refer to them. Just to play devil's advocate here, I have seen some estimates that they're around a hundred thousand Nebraskans who rely on those Obamacare subsidies, and I guess the Democrats are asking for this to be -- for these subsidies to be extended. Isn't it an issue that Republicans could solve now, instead of potentially letting it expire at the end of the year? I mean, I understand the principle of just passed this, et cetera, et cetera, but this is an issue you want to deal with. FLOOD: If we passed it this week, the Democrats would say, we're going too fast, this is reckless. To be honest with you, this is going to be a very complicated issue. This is going to be as complicated for Republicans and Democrats and anybody that cares about the federal deficit and anybody that cares about making sure that people who need healthcare and can't afford it can get it.
Listen, this ACA issue that was an outgrowth of the COVID deal and what President Biden did, it substantially increased spending. Now, I'm not saying that everybody receiving the --
TAPPER: Oh, there we go. Welcome to the wonderful era of video conferencing. Republican Congressman Mike Flood of Nebraska, thank you so much.
Coming up, mysterious drones, coming too close to airports in Europe. The growing suspicions that Russia might be to blame here.
And Secretary of War Pete Hegseth is ordering senior military officers down to Quantico. Why?
And heads-up for the East Coast and the Southeastern United States, watch out for these two tropical systems, one's a tropical storm. A new forecast on it's just coming in. We're going to bring it to you, coming up.
[18:10:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
TAPPER: In our National Lead, whether you call them the secretary of defense or the secretary of war, Pete Hegseth is calling hundreds of U.S. generals and admirals around the globe, away from their posts, to a mysterious meeting in Quantico, Virginia, next week. U.S. officials tell CNN the reason for this meeting is unclear. One official tell CNN. It's being referred to as the General Squid Games, which sounds terrifying.
People familiar with the invite say they've heard theories ranging from a group fitness test to a mass firing. This afternoon in the Oval Office, Trump suggested it would be at least partially tied to a review of military equipment.
In our World Lead, you're looking at what appears to be drones lighting up the sky over a Danish airport. This is the third time this week that unauthorized drones forced hours long airport closures in Europe. And some top Danish officials now say that Russia appears to be to blame. Others say it's too soon to tell.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PETER HUMMELLGAARD, DANISH JUSTICE MINISTER: Sabotage and cyber attacks and other forms of hybrid attacks have become an all too reoccurring part of European reality. The purpose is to stress test borders and create fear and uncertainty among the population.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[18:15:00]
TAPPER: In the last two weeks alone, Russia launched at least 21 drones into Poland, one into Romania, three Russian jets flew over Estonia without permission, and a Russian military aircraft flew low over a German frigate in the Baltic Sea. Norway says Russia has violated its airspace three times this year alone.
It's unclear if all of these were intentional, but to the country's bordering Russia intention not necessarily what matters. And we should note that almost all of these are NATO countries. And an attack on one is an attack on all, or so I'm told.
CNN's Natasha Bertrand is here. And, Natasha, Trump said this week he thinks NATO should shoot down Russian planes that violate their airspace. That, of course, would potentially be an act of war, potentially even World War III. How are NATO officials thinking about all this?
NATASHA BERTRAND, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: That really came as a surprise to several NATO officials that we spoke to, because as you said, it would be a major escalation, and it's something that not all NATO countries want. When you look at the U.S., Poland, the Baltic states, more recently the U.S. since President Trump said this, they are urging more aggressive action so that the Russians get the message and back off and stop violating these countries' airspace.
But then you have other countries that are urging a lot more caution, including Germany, Finland, the U.K. They're all saying, look. Russian pilots, they're really not well trained. They're not good at what they do. You know, there's bad weather. A lot of things could have contributed to them accidentally going into Estonian airspace. Then you have --
TAPPER: I mean, that's a lot of incompetence in one concentrated period of time.
BERTRAND: And I will say that the top U.S. general in Europe is very faithful that the Russian pilots are, in fact, that incompetent. He told a meeting of the North Atlantic Council earlier this week, which is the collection of all of the NATO members, that the Russian pilots are actually just that bad and they're just not well-trained.
So, there's a lot of questions here about intent, and that has given a lot of the nation's pause when they're saying, look, take your finger off the trigger. Let's be levelheaded about this so we don't fall into an escalation trap.
TAPPER: There's also a big difference between shooting down an unmanned drone and shooting down a jet with a pilot, not just because of the escalation, but also, you know, they then come fall down to the ground.
BERTRAND: Right, there are so many risks involved in taking down a jet. You have the potential that human beings obviously are going to get killed. You have the escort --
TAPPER: Not just in the jet, but on the ground, yes.
BERTRAND: Right, of course, because the wreckage could fall onto the ground, which is also a consideration with drones. They are very large. So, that's also part of this.
But, ultimately, I think, you know, each country is going to decide how they want to handle this. The question is, what kind of NATO assets are they going to ask to also be involved? And that's a question that they're grappling with now.
TAPPER: Russia just put out this video showing some of their fighter jets over what they call neutral waters. It's the same model of fighter jets that forced the U.S. to scramble F-16s when they flew into Alaska's air defense identification zone on Wednesday. Tell us more about that.
BERTRAND: Yes. So, this is for Russian aircraft, two strategic bombers and two fighter aircraft that flew inside Alaska's air defense identification zone on Wednesday. And this happens a lot. This happens pretty routinely. It's not U.S. sovereign airspace. It's international airspace. But still it's a zone where these aircraft need to identify themselves clearly to the United States.
And so the U.S. sent up their own fighter jets, sent up a surveillance aircraft, tankers, pretty big show of force, intercepted the aircraft, escorted them out of that area. But, you know, this is something that Russians do pretty routinely and the U.S. is always watching, but it's not necessarily seen by the U.S. as a threat. But still taken within the bigger picture of how the Russians have been acting in Europe, for example, and whether or not that's intentional, it's all just a bit murky about the message they're trying to send.
TAPPER: Sure, interesting that all this is happening after that Alaska Summit, which we can talk about at a later time.
Natasha Bertrand, thanks so much.
Also, in our World Lead, former French President Nicolas Sarkozy is heading to prison. A French court sentenced Sarkozy to five years in prison today after finding him guilty of accepting campaign cash from the Libyan government from 2005 to 2007. Libya at the time was led by Muammar Gaddafi. Sarkozy says the charges are retaliation and based on fake evidence staged by the, quote, Gaddafi Clan because of Sarkozy's 2011 call for Gaddafi to be removed while the Arab Spring protests exploded.
Sarkozy's brush with the French legal system may be a bit of a deja vu. He was found guilty of corruption in 2014 and convicted in a separate illegal campaign financing scheme just last year.
The breaking weather news, the late bloomers of this 2025 hurricane season, two tropical systems worth watching in the coming days. Who should be on alert? We'll tell you next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:20:00]
TAPPER: We have breaking news in our National Lead, new updates from the National Hurricane Center as we're tracking a rare and potentially dangerous weather phenomenon with two storms, two developing in the Western Atlantic. The phenomena is called the Fujiwara effect. That occurs when two storms interact. In this case, we have Tropical Storm Humberto, which is expected to reach hurricane status tomorrow, and a second weaker system closer to the East Coast that has the potential to grow into tropical storm Imelda.
Derek Van Dam is in the CNN Weather Center, is going to try to explain this all to us. And, Derek, what happens if the storms actually do meet?
DEREK VAN DAM, CNN METEOROLOGIST: Jake, that's the question, right? So, they have the potential to not only impact the future path but also the strength of these storms as well. You mentioned Fujiwara, the Fujiwara effect, the hot topic of the day, and it was actually theorized by a Japanese meteorologist with his last name of Fujiwara. He theorized that when two tropical cyclones got close enough to each other, they start to interact or dance around each other.
So, here's a better example of that. We have Humberto in the Central Atlantic, Imelda, future Imelda that's about to develop, and they're going to get very close to each other.
[18:25:06]
So, will they do this dance, this tropical tango? Well, the devil's in the detail. We do believe Humberto will be the larger, more powerful, more dominant storm, and with the Fujiwara effect, it actually can have the potential to slingshot future of future Imelda away from the southeast coast. That would be best case scenario.
But you think forecasting for one hurricane, Jake, is difficult enough. Think about forecasting for two, right?
TAPPER: What threat does this pose to people on the Eastern Coast of the United States?
VAN DAM: Yes, the billion dollar question. All season long, we have been protected by this area of high pressure, the Bermuda high helping recurve our tropical systems away from the East coast. But we've got a new player here with this particular system. So, future Imelda, which is 94L, has the potential to get absorbed by an upper level trough or an upper level low. So, that could help bring it into the coastline of the Carolinas.
Here's Humberto. Here's future Imelda. Look at how they evolve, Humberto a little slower. So, maybe that Fujiwara effect is not actually going to be influencing Imelda. That's what the latest computer models are showing us. Various models depicting a very similar consistent weather pattern and the potential here for a land falling, the first of the Atlantic hurricane season storm. That timeframe would be really Monday into Tuesday, perhaps impacts late as Sunday night as well. So, we need to monitor this very closely.
The computer models are getting better agreement. Again, here's Humberto, here's future Imelda. Exactly where that load develops, that is going to be critical whether or not it actually is a little further west or a little further to the east. So, lots to be ironed out here in the days to come. Jake?
TAPPER: All right. Derek Van Dam, thanks so much.
RFK Jr. just revealed that the safety of an abortion drug is now under review. Could its public access be questioned next? We're calling in a practicing OBGYN to weigh in on this one, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:30:00]
TAPPER: In our Health Lead today, days after claiming that Tylenol used during pregnancy can be directly linked to autism, a controversial claim that is not universally accepted, the Trump administration is now saying that they're going to review the abortion drug, Mifepristone.
In a new letter sent to 22 Republican attorneys general, HHS Secretary RFK Jr. says the FDA, the Food and Drug Administration, will study the safety and efficacy of the abortion drug.
Dr. Veronica Gillispie-Bell is an OBGYN. She joins me now. Thanks so much for being here. It's good to see you. I know you practice in New Orleans, but you're here today. Just the announcement of this study could raise some doubt among women over whether Mifepristone is safe. How safe is Mifepristone?
DR. VERONICA GILLISPIE-BELL, BOARD CERTIFIED OBGYN: So, we have over 20 years of data that shows overwhelmingly Mifepristone is safe. It is as safe as over the counter medications, but lots of data to support the safety.
TAPPER: During a Senate hearing on Capitol Hill earlier this month, RFK Jr. claimed without providing any details or evidence that the Biden administration had twisted the data when it came to the safety of Mifepristone to, quote, bury one of the safety signals, unquote. Do you have any idea what he's talking about?
GILLISPIE-BELL: I really don't. All of the data that we have shows that it's been safe. Again, it was FDA approved in 2020. And all of the studies, even a more recent study from 2024, with over 6,000 women, has shown the safety. And so there really isn't any other data to support his claims.
TAPPER: How could the safety study that RFK Jr. is doing, and we have no idea like who he's going to bring in, like I don't know if it's going to be the College of OBGYNs or, you know, some hotdog vendor down the street, but how could the safe study potentially impact access to the abortion pill? GILLISPIE-BELL: So, it depends on what the study is. And as you've said, we really don't know what he is meaning by study and if it's going to use the scientific rigor that we usually use to determine if something is safe or not safe. But, really, I think any studies or anything data that he reveals that would indicate that it's not safe really could threaten access.
TAPPER: Let's turn back to the acetaminophen and Tylenol announcement that the Trump administration made. What do you tell your patients, because obviously women who are pregnant often have headaches and fevers, and what do you recommend?
GILLISPIE-BELL: Yes, these are conversations that we are definitely having more often in the office now. I still adhere to the guidance from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, as well as the Society for Maternal Fetal Medicine, and I remind my patients that all the data shows that Tylenol is safe in pregnancy. There is no data that shows that it causes autism. And when I'm recommending Tylenol, it's usually for fever. It is for pain. And if we're not treating, especially fever, that is detrimental to the pregnancy.
TAPPER: But overuse of any drug, including Tylenol, could be bad.
GILLISPIE-BELL: Absolutely. So, we always recommend using the lowest dose for the shortest amount of time. It is a conversation that I have with my patients. But any medication, as you mentioned, if you're not using it as directed, there is potential for harm.
TAPPER: What was your take on the press announcement when President Trump was just saying over and over, don't take Tylenol, don't take Tylenol, don't take -- what did you think of all that?
GILLISPIE-BELL: It was a little difficult to hear, not only saying not to take Tylenol, but just telling women to tough it out. I think that that was really detrimental and a little bit offensive to women. When women are in pain and they are having fever and complications of pregnancy and reasons that they should take Tylenol, they shouldn't feel guilty for relieving their pain or taking these medications that we know are safe.
TAPPER: But, certainly, any woman who's pregnant, I mean, shouldn't take any medication without talking to her doctor.
GILLISPIE-BELL: Absolutely, absolutely. And these are conversations and decisions that should be made between patients and providers.
TAPPER: All right. Well thank you so much for being here. It's good to see you in person, Dr. Veronica Gillispie-Bell, OBGYN extraordinaire, thanks so much.
Next here on The Lead, the newest lawmaker headed to the House. We're going to speak with her about her big win in a special election.
[18:35:01]
Why her name alone could tip the scales on a critical issue before Congress right now.
Plus, the big business headline, getting all the clicks today, Amazon's been ordered to pay $2.5 billion in historic settlement over allegations that the company tricked customers into paying for its Prime delivery service. Could you at home, you, yes, you there, I'm talking to you, could you be getting a refund?
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
TAPPER: Our Politics Lead now, Democrats continue to whittle away at the Republicans' already razor thin majority in the House. Voters in Arizona, a special election, picked a Democrat in the Tuesday special election to fill an open seat, meaning that in party line votes, House Republicans can only lose two members and still be able to pass legislation. And, by the way, it's just days before a possible government shutdown.
Joining us now is the winner of Tuesday's special election in Arizona, Representative-elect at Adelita Grijalva, who easily won the seat held by her late father.
[18:40:02]
Congratulations. We should note once you're sworn in, you'll be the very first Latina to represent the state of Arizona in the House of Representatives, and you're filling the seat vacated after the death of your father. How are you and your family processing this moment? And I have to say also just my deepest condolences. I talked to your father a few times over the years, and he seemed like a lovely guy.
REP.-ELECT ADELITA GRIJALVA (D-AZ): Thank you so much. He was a lovely guy. He's great. And this whole process has been quite a roller coaster and we announced this campaign two weeks after my dad passed away where I couldn't think about him without tearing up. And, you know, here we are in this moment where we're breaking glass ceilings and making history.
And so I'm very eager to get to work. I'll be in D.C. on Monday. With the other Democratic members to caucus and, you know, we're ready to work and avoid this government shutdown.
TAPPER: So, you've said that one of your first official acts will be to add your name to the 217 signatures already on that discharge petition that will force a vote on the floor of the House on the Justice Department, releasing the Epstein files, redacting the names of survivors, of course. Why is that one of the first things you want to do?
GRIJALVA: Well, there has been so much interest in this issue and, really, there needs to be transparency and accountability to what is in those documents and justice for the victims, you know, and consequences for those who are implicated. And I can't sign onto anything until I am sworn in. And right now, we're in a little bit of, I guess, an uncertain time because we've just heard rumors about what this process and what's going to be happening directly. We haven't had a lot of communication with Speaker Johnson's office. TAPPER: Oh, my understanding is that he will swear you in as soon as Congress reconvenes on October 7th, and as soon as the paperwork arrives from Arizona. That's what I've been told.
GRIJALVA: Well, the paperwork arriving from Arizona or CD7 is six county districts. So, every county board of supervisors has to vote to accept the canvas. And I just think it's interesting that two Republicans, Representative Patronus and Fine in April's special elections were elected on April 1st and sworn in on April 2nd, just 24 hours after being elected.
You know, Representative Walkinshaw just two weeks ago was elected on Tuesday and sworn in the next day without official certification results.
TAPPER: Yes. I mean, all I can tell you is Congress --
GRIJALVA: That is why the rules are different.
TAPPER: Well, Congress is in a district work period right now because of the Jewish holidays. All I know is I've been told October 7th, Congress reconvenes. And as long as they have the paperwork, they're going to swear you right in.
We're in the middle of a government shutdown, of course, potentially. Democratic leaders say any funding agreements have to include protections for healthcare programs, including extending the Obamacare tax credits. What are you hearing from the people in Arizona? Do they think standing up for those Obamacare tax credits are worth risking a government shutdown?
GRIJALVA: Our communities want us Democrats to speak up for them and fight for them. And that's what we've heard and I've heard door-to- door overwhelmingly. They want us to advocate for ACA, for access, for rolling back any kind of, you know, balance of power right now. We are -- this is a co-governance model, but right now it doesn't feel that way. And that's what we're hearing. They want to see us fight for them.
TAPPER: You're coming to Congress not just with deep divisions in the party structure and also the nation seemingly deeply divided in many ways, but also with the very scary backdrop of acts of political violence, whether January 6th or the horrific assassination of Charlie Kirk, and on and on. Did you have any moment of pause before deciding to throw your hat into the ring?
GRIJALVA: You know, I am from Arizona where Gabby Giffords was shot. And we have, you know, been in the middle of this sort of sense of concern every time we're having events ever since Representative Giffords was shot doing, you know, Congress on your corner.
And so we always have to think about that, absolutely. But I had to weigh the -- my strong desire to represent this community and be a voice for those who don't have one. And we're going to be as safe as possible. But it is -- nobody should be killed because of their political opinions. [18:45:00]
TAPPER: Yes. We saw this horrific act of violence just yesterday with an ICE facility in Texas. Fired upon with an ICE detainee, killed, two others injured.
It appears as though the shooter was anti-ICE. He wrote on the bullet anti-ICE. And we had a press conference earlier and we've heard a lot of law enforcement leaders and Republicans talking about bringing down the temperature, people not demonizing ICE.
What's your -- what are your thoughts on that?
ADELITA GRIJALVA (D), ARIZONA REPRESENTATIVE-ELECT: You know, I think ICE has to follow some basic rules and guidelines. And when you live in in a border community here, like CD-7, right around the corner where I get gas, I've seen two different instances of people get out of an unmarked vehicle wearing bulletproof vests with no insignia on the clothing, just all black and a mask and grabbing people literally out of the parking lot of a Circle K, and that is happening on a regular basis here.
And so, there is a lot of fear. I mean, we have people that are just being disappeared off the streets. And when there is no consequence, there's no due process, there's no explanation, no ability to communicate with your loved ones. That's a very scary situation to be in.
That does not mean that we should accept any kind of political violence, but understand the situation that we're in here in border communities.
TAPPER: Congresswoman-elect Adelita Grijalva, thank you so much and may your dad's memory be a blessing.
GRIJALVA: Thank you so much. I appreciate your time.
ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.
TAPPER: And we have breaking news for you, an update about former FBI Director James Comey. A source tells CNN that Comey has now, in fact, been indicted.
Let's get right to CNN's Katelyn Polantz.
Katelyn, what are you learning?
KATELYN POLANTZ, CNN CRIME AND JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: The former FBI Director James Comey, indicted by a grand jury today, a federal grand jury. We already have a statement, too, Jake, from the attorney general, Pamela Bondi, saying no one is above the law. Today's indictment reflects the Justice Department's commitment to holding those who abuse positions of power accountable for misleading the American people. We will follow the facts in this case.
Notably, she is not saying in that social media post just now that she is talking about James Comey. But this is what has been expected all day. Something that we were expecting. Prosecutors in the eastern district of Virginia to take to a grand jury, and they apparently have.
Our producer, Hannah Rabinowitz, at the Justice Department, she was able to confirm that not just has Comey been indicted, but there are two charges that he is going to be facing in federal court now, giving false statements and obstruction. We will have to see exactly what the details of that case are. Whenever there will be court documents available. We do not have those publicly available yet, but this is a monumental moment in the second presidency of Donald Trump, after the first presidency was clouded by much of Donald Trump's ire towards James Comey, the former FBI director, for his role in the FBI investigation and the Justice Department investigation of the Trump campaign. The 2016 Russia investigation.
So, this is now going to set off a whole new set of procedures, Jake. There's going to be not just a grand jury that is giving -- handing up this indictment and court documents that will show what the charges are. We are very likely going to be getting responses from Comey, if not today in court.
Very soon, there will be challenges made to this indictment, challenges that a judge will have to review. And potentially, at the end of the day, a jury would have to take a look to decide whether the former FBI director is guilty or not guilty. But this is quite a moment to be standing here and seeing that James Comey, after all of these years being the public spotlight for the 2016 Russia investigation, has been indicted by a federal grand jury after asked, be asked being asked by prosecutors in the Trump administration to bring this case.
TAPPER: And just to be clear, the two charges, as you said, as we understand it from our producer at the Justice Department, are lying to Congress and obstruction of justice. Is that right?
POLANTZ: As of right now, we understand they are giving false statements and obstruction of justice. But I'm very interested in seeing what those exact statutes are. So the justice department will have to say in that indictment, and the grand jury would have had to look at the specific criminal laws that could be charged here. And there's a whole host of laws related to false statements, perjury, as well as obstruction of justice or obstruction of Congress.
So we're going to see what the Justice Department still has to say, what the court papers would say exactly. And also, what behavior the grand jury looked at related to Comey that formed this indictment that may be in initial court papers, or it could be something coming out later.
But, Jake, these are serious charges. Perjury is a felony. I believe it carries a five-year maximum prison sentence. It is not something that the justice department takes lightly, and that a court also will not take lightly when looking at whether Jim Comey should go on to a trial.
TAPPER: All right.
[18:50:00]
Let's bring in CNN legal analyst Elie Honig.
And, Katelyn, when you get more information, obviously, you'll bring it to us.
Elie, it's a -- first of all, we should just take a moment to acknowledge the shocking nature of this moment in history. A former FBI director has been indicted for allegations of false statements and for obstruction. We also know that the larger context here is that President Trump instructed his attorney general to get his three political enemies, specifically prosecuted, one of them being James Comey. And that last Friday the Erik Siebert, the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, acting U.S. attorney was fired because of his concerns that he wasn't going to bring charges against either the New York attorney General Letitia James, or James Comey.
Walk us through the process. What does a U.S. attorney have to do to get an indictment?
ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Yeah, Jake. So, first of all, a couple of firsts here. This is the first time a former FBI director has ever been federally charged with a crime. And as you say, first time we've seen a president explicitly order his DOJ to indict a specific individual and then that be carried out.
So, there's a lot we don't know. Weve not seen the actual text of the indictment yet. But here's what we do know. In order to get an indictment, prosecutors have to present their evidence to a grand jury.
Now, this is a one-sided process. Theres no defense lawyer in the room. There's no judge in the room. The prosecutor presents evidence, usually through testimony of an FBI agent. And the grand jury has to find probable cause.
Now, that's a lower legal standard than prosecutors will have to show at trial. A trial will have to show proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Also, in a grand jury, you only need a majority vote of the grand jurors who are present. Whereas of course, at trial you need a unanimous vote.
So, it's a lower burden in the grand jury. The grand jury in the eastern district of Virginia has heard the evidence, and at least a majority of those grand jurors have found that there is at least probable cause. So that's not enough to sustain a conviction, but that is enough to issue the indictment. And that's where we are right now.
TAPPER: What do you make of the charges, the false statements and the obstruction of justice? Do you expect that the false statements are allegations that he -- that he did not testify truthfully before Congress.
HONIG: Based on the reporting, that would be my expectation. What I'm really interested to see is, is the obstruction, just the false statements sort of characterized in another way, or is the obstruction something different? So, in other words, you can charge someone as a prosecutor with false statements, and then you can pile on an obstruction charge, basically on the theory that by testifying falsely, you impeded an investigation, you obstructed justice.
So, I want to see, are they essentially redundant or is there something different to the obstruction? I don't want to speculate, but there's all sorts of other conduct beyond false statements that could satisfy an obstruction charge. So that's one of the things I'm going to be looking for as soon as we get this indictment in hand.
TAPPER: All right. Stay there.
I want to bring in CNN's Jeff Zeleny.
Jeff, I mean, hugely unprecedented to indict a former FBI director on charges like this by the justice department to say nothing of hugely unprecedented for a president to directly, publicly say, attorney general, I want this person prosecuted.
JEFF ZELENY, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Perhaps. Because of that, this is the least surprising thing of all. He directed his attorney general to do it along the way removed a potential roadblock to this. The U.S. attorney and the Eastern District of Virginia.
But, Jake, when you step back at this, this is just one more extraordinary episode in the long chapter between Donald Trump and James Comey. And if you think back before the Trump election, many Democrats blame James Comey, obviously, for helping to elect Donald Trump.
TAPPER: Hillary Clinton sure does.
ZELENY: She certainly does. And during that moment in the -- while we're seeing it right there, I remember that very, very well. Look at this uncomfortable interaction between the FBI director and the president there. The president leans in for a hug. He thought he was his guy. Well, that turned out not to be the case.
The president blames James Comey for the Russia investigation. He's never gotten over that. But this is the biggest example yet. And one of the most recent ones, probably not the last of the retribution that President Trump campaigned on.
And this is something that is really going to play out in an extraordinary way. The question is, though, this new U.S. attorney in the eastern district of Virginia, she's been a prosecutor now, I think, for like four days.
TAPPER: Yeah.
ZELENY: So how does this all unfold? We do not know. But this could resurrect James Comey. I guess his view how he's seen by some. But for President Trump, it's one more example of he's serious about prosecuting his enemies and the retribution campaign is extensive.
TAPPER: And Elie Honig walk us through what's going to happen next in this timeline. So, the indictment has gone down. We still haven't seen the legal papers. We still don't know what the allegation is. So, it's difficult for us to assess the quality of the charges. Although we do know that the previous U.S. attorney, who was fired last Friday, Erik --
[18:55:01]
ZELENY: Siebert.
TAPPER: Siebert, whose name -- Erik Siebert, who is a conservative U.S. attorney who is bringing all sorts of immigration cases and the like, his father-in-law is an advisor to the conservative governor, Glenn Youngkin, former vice cop, a respected conservative lawyer. He was fired. And one of the reasons we believe he was fired is because he would not bring these charges.
I mean, President Trump was pretty transparent about that. So now, Trump has put his hand-picked U.S. attorney in there. Acting U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan, who has no prosecutorial experience. She was an insurance attorney who then worked on the Trump defense during the classified documents case. She was in the White House working on trying to figure out what was too woke for the Smithsonian, and then, all of a sudden, finds herself in this job.
What happens now?
HONIG: So, the next step will be an in court appearance by Jim Comey. It will be an arraignment, probably in front of the assigned district court judge. It's a fairly routine procedure. He will they will make sure that he has counsel. I'm sure he will have counsel of his own. He'll be hell be advised of the charges.
He'll enter a plea, presumably, of not guilty. They'll set bail. He'll be released. They'll probably will be little or no bail.
But, Jake, I have to remark on this. I mean, the notion of Jim Comey, a guy who was the deputy U.S. attorney general, the number two person in the Justice Department. He was the U.S. attorney for the southern district of New York. He was the director of the FBI.
Having to sit at the criminal defendants table is a remarkable moment. I don't mean that in a positive or negative way, but it's a shocking moment. I say, look, I started at the Southern District of New York months after Jim Comey left. I don't know him well. I've only met him a couple of times, but he was revered within the Justice Department when I was there. I mean, he was seen as a giant, as somebody who had had an exemplary career.
Now he did things later that were more controversial around the 2016 election, but I'm sure it's going to be a shocking, humbling moment for Jim Comey to have to sit at that criminal defendant's table in a federal courtroom. TAPPER: How useful for his defense are President Trump's comments?
One of the things that's been so remarkable, remarkable about just the past week in the Trump administration is the open and brazen nature by which the president and his aides and appointees are calling for revenge against the president's perceived political enemies.
We saw Brendan Carr, the FCC chairman, calling on local affiliates, ABC affiliates, to tell Disney ABC they were no longer going to air "Jimmy Kimmel Live!" because they don't like the speaker. They don't like the speech.
Then, like, within days, President Trump openly firing a U.S. attorney who didn't bring these charges, bringing somebody in who has no prosecutorial experience, and openly telling his attorney general, I want these three political enemies indicted there. I'm paraphrasing, but they are all guilty as hell is not a paraphrase. He did say that.
HONIG: So, first of all, I promise you. Justice Department prosecutors will hate and regret the fact that Donald Trump sent out those Truth Socials because those statements by the president will absolutely be used by Jim Comey's defense team to argue for dismissal on the basis of selective prosecution. That is a defense. It is recognized. It's really hard to prove, because you have to prove that you were singled out for political purposes. People don't usually put their intentions in writing the way that Donald Trump has done.
So that will be a motion. I would look for Jim Comey's team to make that motion really quickly. And I think they've got a very good shot. I think they're going to get some traction given the overt statements. And the second point --
(CROSSTALK)
TAPPER: Before you get to your second point, let me just remind people he wrote this on Saturday night to the attorney general posted on Truth Social, quote, Pam, I have reviewed over 30 statements and posts saying that essentially same old stories last time. All talk, no action, nothing's being done. What about Comey? Adam Shifty Schiff, Letitia, I mean, Letitia James? They're all guilty as hell.
Now, we don't know if charges for Schiff and Letitia James are coming, but sources told CNN today the charges could be coming soon for another Trump opponent, former national security advisor John Bolton. Anyway, go back to what your second point you were about to make. I just -- I just want to remind folks of this uncharted waters in which we find ourselves.
HONIG: Well, that's exactly where I was going, Jake. I mean, I think it's worth reflecting. The Justice Department of the Trump administration have crossed a line here. They have done something that we've never seen before, which is an explicit order from a president. And you just showed the Truth Social to his attorney general, to his Justice Department, to go after, to criminally charge these people who I consider to be my political enemies.
And it's not just words, as you said, it was accompanied by action. The dismissal of Erik Siebert, a conservative career prosecutor who Donald Trump put in that place in the first place back in early 2025, and the replacement of him with Lindsey Halligan, unqualified political loyalist.
So, this is a dark moment for DOJ. Look, we have to wait and see how this indictment looks before we pass judgment on it. But there are a lot of indicators here that raise real cause for concern.
TAPPER: All right. Elie Honig, Jeff Zeleny, Katelyn Polantz, thanks to all of you.
Much more on the breaking news next with "ERIN BURNETT OUTFRONT", which starts right now. I'll see you tomorrow.
